//'/?, 2i 
 
 LIBRARY OF THE THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY 
 
 PRINCETON, N. J. 
 
 Presented by 
 
 , L_'2-7 6= 
 
 Section )/..>...\.3 
 
^-^ 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 
 in 2010 with funding from 
 
 Princeton Theological Seminary Library 
 
 http://www.archive.org/details/bookofprophetdan132zc 
 
THE BOOK 
 
 OP THE 
 
 PROPHET DANIEL 
 
 THEOLOGICALLY AND HOMILETICALLY EXPOUNDED 
 
 Dk. OTTO ^OCKLER, 
 
 PB0FE8S0B OF THEOLOGY IN THE CNIVEK8ITY OF GEEIFeWALD. PBUSSIA. 
 
 TRANSLATED, ENLARGED, AND EDITED 
 
 Bt 
 JAMES STRONG, S.T.D., 
 
 »ROPE880a OF EXEOETICiL TBEOLOOT IN DREW THEOLOOICAL SEMISAM, MiDISON; H. J. 
 
 NEW YORK: 
 
 CHARLES SCRIBXER'S SONS, 
 
 1899 
 
■atend according to Act of Congress, in the year 1876, taf 
 
 8CBIBNER, ARMSTRONG & CO. 
 IB the Office of the Librarian of Congress at WuhinBtoo. 
 
AUTHOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 In the following exposition of the Book of Daniel, the undersigned has occupied an exe- 
 getical and critical position, the peculiarity of wliich will probably not be overlooked, on a care- 
 ful comparison mth the views and methods of other recent expositors. Wliile he lias held fast tc 
 the authenticity of the book as a wliole, although it was difficult for him to change his formet 
 opinion respecting the composition of the book, that it originated during the Maccabsean age, 
 and to conform it to the results of the thorough investigations of M. v. Niebuhr, Pusey, Ziin- 
 del, Kranichfeld, Volck, Fuller, and othei-s, wliich demonstrated its composition during the 
 captivity, he is still ol)liged to retain liis former doubts with respect to tlic greater portion of 
 Chap. xi. ^particularly vs. .5-39). The reasons which determine him to this conclusion, are 
 certainly of an internal character only. They result in the conviction that a particularizing 
 prophecy, cmljracing the history of centuries, as it is found in that section, forms so marked a 
 contrast to everything in the line of specializing i)rediction that occurs elsewliere in the pro- 
 phetic literature of the Old Testament, that only the theory of an interpolating revision of its 
 prophetic contents, imposed on it during the period of the Seleucid persecutions, or soon 
 afterward, seems to afford a really satisfactory explanation of its paiticulars. Granted, that 
 In the face of tlie unanimous testimony of all the external witnesses to the integrity of tlie pro- 
 phet's text, the subjective nature of a criticism, such as is involved in this conclusion, may l)e 
 censured; granted, that it may be termed inconsequent, that the intimate unity of the well- 
 planned, well-adapted, and well-arranged work is thus broken through at but a single point ; 
 yet the analoyia visionis prophetic/B, whicli furnishes the motive for our decision, appears to us 
 to be no less a cert.ain, objectively admissible, and most weighty criterion in critical questions 
 like the present, than is the analorjia fidei in tlie domain of Scriptural dogmatics. Nor wag 
 the solution of the many difficulties that were encountered, as it resulted from the assumption 
 of an e.K eventu interpolation at a single point, permitted to restrain us from submitting tlie pro- 
 gressive results of our investigation to the careful inspection of Biblical scholare belonging to 
 wider circles, so far as the plan and design of the theological and houiiletical Bible-work 
 permitted such a course. [The American reviser has taken the liberty of combating the au- 
 tlior's view as to tlie interpolation of the passage in question.] 
 
 In llie treatment of a prophetic book like the one before us, it is evident that the homiletic 
 element must occupy a very subordinate place. Nor could it be a principal aim for an exegete 
 to obtain dogmatic results and modes of presenting them, from such a prophet as Daniel. 
 For this reason we have preferred to follow the example of one of our esteemed co-laljorers 
 (Dr. Biihr, in his exposition of the Books of Kings), and accordingly we have given the title 
 of " i?<^ (CO- fundamental principles related, to the history of salvation^' to the section ordinarily 
 devoted to that object, and in the same connection we have noticed the apologetic questions 
 that jjreseuted themselves, and also have indicated what was suitable for practical and homi- 
 letical treatment, in addition to the features designated by that heading. 
 
 We have devoted an especially careful attention, as in the case of our former exposition of 
 the Song of Solomon, to the history and literature of the exposition of tliis prophet, both as a 
 whole and with reference to its principal parts severally. Especially has the history of the 
 exposition of the difficult and important vision of the 70 weeks of years, ^chap. ix., 24-27,) 
 l.een sketched by us as thoroughly as was possiljle, more thoroughly, we believe, than in anj 
 of the recent and latest commentaries on Daniel. 
 
AtJTHOR'S PREFACE. 
 
 Of the most recent exegetical and critical literature on this projihet, it was unfortunately 
 impossible to notice two works that a|)|)earecl while this book was in press : the commentary 
 of Kt'il (in Keil and Delitzsch's Bible-work on the O. T.), and the monograph by P. Caspari 
 Znf Eiiifuhrmig in das Buck Daniel (Leipsic, Dorffling und Franke). 
 
 3Iay our attem])t to add a further new and independent contribution to the exegetical lite- 
 rature on the most mysterious and difficult of all the prophets, which has recently been enriched 
 by somewhat numerous, and in some respects not uuiniportant treatises, find that tolerant recep- 
 tion, at least on the part of Biljle students who share our views in substance, which it may 
 ai^propriately claim, in view of the unusual difficulty attending the execution of it<! object. 
 
 Db, zookler. 
 
 Oreijmald, April. 1869 
 
THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 INTRODUCTION. 
 
 § 1. The Book of Daniei,, Considered as a Protottpe op the Canonical Apocaltpss. 
 
 The peculiarities of the book of Daniel, which explain, on the one hand, its position in the 
 Jewish canon among the historical Hagiographa, and, on the other, its being classed in the 
 Septuagint, Vulgate, and Luther, with the writings of the greater prophets, Isaiah, Jeremiah, 
 and Ezekiel, are both internal and external. They arise chiefly from the circumstance that 
 the writer lived and wrought in Bahylonia, not as a member of the community of exiled Jews, 
 but as a naturalized Bal>ylonian at the court of Nebuchadnezzar and his successors — not, like 
 Ezekiel, discharging priestly functions among his people, but performing duty as an oflicer of 
 the state and chief of the Magi. He was thus jjossessed of honors and emoluments akin to 
 those of Joseph, his patriarchal prototype, at the court of the Egy|)tian Pharaoh ; but his 
 removal, at a later date, from his prominent position, and his death, not long after the over- 
 throw of the ChaldiBan dynasty by the Persians, prevented his exerting a decisive influence on 
 the welfare of his people. 
 
 The book of Daniel's prophecies owes its origin to a period of the deepest national misery of 
 the people of God — a time of the profoundest degradation and confusion, which linds its only 
 parallel in the condition of Israel, when, wholly separated from its native soU, it languished 
 in Egypt, the ignominious " house of bondage " and oppressive " iron furnace" (Deut. v. 6 ; 
 iv. 20 ; 1 Kings viii. 51 ; Jer. xi. 4) ; but this earlier period has its counterpart here, not only 
 retrospectively as regards the severity of the judgment and humiliation, but also prospectively 
 as respects the abundance of gracious visitation, and the wonderful displays of the Divine 
 powei'. love, and faithfulness. Both the humiliation and the glory present in the humiliation 
 are revealed in these prophecies. "Yhejirst or historical division of the book records chiefly the 
 miracles by which the grace of God was magnified in those who remained faithful during 
 years of apostasy, suffering, and banishment. The comfortless condition and utter degeneracy 
 of the nation are seen principally in the second part, the visions and prophetical pictures of 
 which describe the present and immediate future as a period of severe oppression, universal 
 apostasy, and unquestioned supremacy of the world-powers arrayed against God, at the close 
 of which period the Messianic lera of salvation is finally introduced. According to this 
 division the whole consists of two books — one of narratives (chap, i.-vi.), and the other ol 
 visions (chap, vii.-xii.) — which are about? equal in length. This circumstance forms a marked 
 peculiarity of Daniel, as compared with the other prophetical books of the Old Testament, 
 which sometimes interweave the historical element with the prophetical {e.g., Amos, Isa., Jer., 
 etc.), and at others, either reduce the former to narrow limits {e.g., Joel, Micah, Zechariah, 
 e'c), *r bring it into such prominence as to exclude the ofiice of the seer (.lonah). Tliis bal- 
 ance between narrative and prophecy, which exists only in Daniel, has its explanation in ta« 
 
2 INTRODTJCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 origiu of the book in a strange land and in a time of exile — circumstances which f orliade an 
 arrancremout in direct and perfect harmony with the form of prophetical literature in general. 
 These circumstances also serve to account for peculiarities in the language oi the book : for its 
 composition, to the extent of about one-half in Hel)rew, and the remainder (chaj). ii. 4 b.-cbap. 
 vii.) in the Araninean or Chaldee idiom, which gradually, and as a consequence of the Babylo- 
 nian captivity and of the Persian supremacy, bscam? the language of the Palestinian .Jews, i- 
 due solely to its origin, not only in a time of exile, but among the scenes of the exile, and ai 
 the court of the barbarous conquerors. The historical book of Ezra, which ap])earcd immedi- 
 ately at the close of the exile, is the only one of the Old-Testament Scriptures which shares 
 this peculiarity of language, while the prophetical Ijooks {e.g., Jeremiah, which originated at 
 the time of the exile and when its author was in constant intercourse with the Babylonians), 
 merely contain isolated ArauiJEan words or paragraplis (see especially Jer. x. 11). 
 
 The peculiar literary traits and theological contents of this book, especially in its second or 
 prophetical part, likewise find their explanation in its origin among the scenes of the cap- 
 tivity. The prophecies of Daniel, conveyed generally in the form of dreams and visions, and 
 nowhere enforced l)y inspired addresses or exhortations, and concerning themselves chiefly, if 
 not exclusively, with the fate of the all-controlling world-power, on the one hand, and, on the 
 other, with the final triumpli of the Messianic kingdom of God, are thus distinguished from the 
 earlier proiihetical \vritings by peculiarities which mark the book as the pattern for the so- 
 called apocalyptic prophecies. In ordinary proijhecies the people of God had usually occupied 
 the foreground of vision, while the world-powers by which they were threatened, were only 
 noticed incidentally, and made the objects of "burdens" or threatening prophecies, as iso- 
 lated representatives of the sjjirit that opposes God. Daniel, on the contrary, takes his posi- 
 tion in the heart of that world-power, whicli had overthrown and subjugated all tlie nations 
 of the East, and among them the chosen race. From this point of vision he foretells the rise 
 of a new world-kingdom, which shall destroy the present empire, to be followed, in turn, by 
 another and still greater power, and so on to the end, when an eternal kingdom of truth and 
 righteousness shall be established on their ruins, by the direct interference of the God of heaven. 
 The result of all earthly development, and the succession of judgments visited on the enemies of 
 God's people, closing with the Messianic or general judgment, form the subject of this pro- 
 phecy; and the grandeur of its field of vision, compassing all liistory and embracing the 
 world, together with tlie visional clothing of its teaching and the profound symljolism of its 
 eschatological descriptions, constitute the features v.hicli stamp it as an apocalypse, in distinc- 
 tion from all earlier piophecy. Within the Old Testament, this form of prophetical writing 
 is ai)proached by the closing chapters of Ezekiel (xl.-xlviii.), but it is directly represented 
 only in tlie former half of Z^chariah (chap, i.-viii.), where the model found in Daniel was 
 probably copied. In the New Testament it is found, if we except certain brief sections in the 
 Qosjjelsand Paulina epistles (the eschatological discourse in Matt, xxiv., xxv., and parallel pas- 
 sages, and 2 Thess. ii.), only in the Revelation of St. John, which is a direct copy and con- 
 tinuation of the prophecies of Daniel. 
 
 Th 'S ' peculiarities, as numerous as they are api)arent and significant, exjjlain why the booh 
 of Daniel was separated [in the Hebrew Bible] fiom the other prophets and ])laced among 
 the Hagiograplia, when the Old-Testament canon was formed. Its internal features, consist- 
 ing in an embrace of all history with an eschatological aim, joined to a visional and symboli- 
 cal dress, which stamp it as the model of all Biblical (and extra-Biljlical or apocryjjhal) apoc- 
 alypse, would not of themselves have compelled such a separation ; since many of the later 
 propVietical writings display clear transitions in matter and form to the field of apocalypse, 
 and permit tlie distinction between this ri))est fruit of Scriptural jjrophetical development 
 and propliecy in the narrower sense, to appear as the result of the gradual growth. The decisive 
 reason for the disposition made of this book, must be found in its peculiar division into 
 historical and prophetical parts, and in its composition in Hebrew and Aramaic. This 
 npp^ars with irrefragal>le certainty from its assignment to a place immediately before Ezra, the 
 only other book in tlie canon which frames in Chaldee a section of considerable extent between 
 the Hebrew portions of its text. 
 
DA>'IEL AS A PROTOTYPE OF THE APOCALYPSE. 
 
 An additional circumstance, wliith may have contributed to placing the present book amonj; 
 the Hagiographa, was the [presumed] reiHsiim of its prophetical portion, apparently by a pioun 
 seer of Maccabrean times, who sought to establish as exact a relation as was possible betweet 
 the prophecy and its historical fulfillment, as observed by him. This later revision, whicl 
 affected especially the contents of chapters x.-xii., will be considered below, in connection 
 with the question of genuineness and integrity. 
 
 Note 1. — With reference to the circumstanceg of the times — so deplorable in their condition 
 and yet so full of displays of Divine grace and wonderful providences — to wV ic-h the book of 
 Daniel owes its origin, HaveiTiick. in the introduction to his commentary (page 16 et seq.), is 
 especially thorough and instructive. He justly disputes the opinion of Winer, de Wette, Lee 
 (Jiidische Oeschichtf, p. 188), and others, according to which the situation of the captive Jews 
 was not one of especial hardship. " Tlie shame there inflicted on Israel was not exactly insig- 
 nificant, when it could ins|3ire pious and faithful men with a holy revenge, and lead them to 
 invoke the Divine indignation on their tormentors ! Remember the 137th Psalm and the 
 audacious desecration of the Temple vessels by Belshazzar, as Dan. v. records, which lead to the 
 conclusion tliat such conduct was of frequent occurrence. Even martyrs to the truth, cheer- 
 ful and undismayed while testifying that Jehovah alone is God and none beside Him, are 
 revealed in the history of Daniel and his friends (Dan. iii. and vi.) ; to which event the obser- 
 vation and experience of the wise preacher perhaps refer, when he remarks that ' there is a 
 just man that perisheth in his righteousness' (Ecc. ^ii. 15).* When we consider the internal 
 state of the nation in this period, we find further abundant reason for complaint, because of 
 Israel's sin and misery. Ezekiel addressed the people with earnest censure, because they 
 listened to his words, but refused to ol)ey them, when he condemned their ways (Eze. xxxiii. 
 30, sq.), in which they dishonored God among the heathen, and continued to murder, work 
 abomination, and violate chastity, until men asked. 'Are the.se the people of the Lord, that 
 are gone forth out of His land*' (xxxiii. 20; xxxvi. 20, 21; cf. chap, xxxiv.). Wliere, 
 indeed, could greater opportunity l)e found for indulgence in heathen customs by the Israel- 
 ites, who were at all times excessively addicted to idolatry, than in Baliylon, which was 
 notorious as the home of luxury and idolatry ? Hence, we must deplore the profound sense 
 of sin, and of being forsaken liy God, which is so clearly revealed, not only in the destruc- 
 tion of the temple, and the expulsion of Israel from the holy land, but also in the lack of 
 prophecy (cf. Sam. ii. i) ; Psa. Ixxiv. 9) ; and which finds its most striking exjiression in the 
 prayer of Daniel, uttered before the Lord in the name of the people, toward the end of the 
 captivity.! \ diffurent class, who preferred the cunditiim of the exile to the hairy garment 
 of the prophet and the rigorous serTic:e of .lehovah, would doulitless enjoy their situation. If 
 there were no other proof of this, it would appear from the fact that many preferred to remain 
 in Babylon at tlie close of the exile. But the fate of these apostate souls, who. by the Divine 
 decree, were at tliis exact juncture separated and cast out as dregs from the healthy and 
 pious portion of tlie nation, was none the less deplorable on that account." . . . Further, 
 page 20 : '• But the wretched and outcast nation was, and still continued to be, the j>ea]ile oj 
 His covpnant, and, therefore, despite their low est.ite. the elect and favorite nation of the Lord. 
 They were not merely to contiime until the days of tlieir great destiny were fulfilled, but, for 
 Jehovah's sake, they were to be glorified among the heathen. As, therefore. He had always 
 afforded tliem miraculous aid in seasons of great tribulation, so extraordinary signs and events, 
 that transcended the ordinary course of nature, now occurred and secured the good of Israel 
 while they alarmed the Gentiles ; but at the same time these pointed forward, without exception, 
 to the future realization of the great pl.an of salvation, whose end is the redemption of sinful 
 man . . . Prophecies and wonders were the gracious means with which Jehovah overwhelmed 
 Israel and compelled it. to abide l:>y Him, but through which, also, the determined apostates 
 who would not turn to God, were finally cut out, so that a purified people, which agreed in 
 confessing Israel's God at least in outward form, could return to the land of its fathers," etc. — This 
 view of the time of Daniel and its significance, which is held by orthodox exegetes, with few 
 exceptions (see particularly Auberlen, Drr Pruphet Daniel, etc., 2d ed., p. 26 et seq.) is rejected 
 
 * [Theae arguments of Hiivemick, however, are not in point to show the general oppression of the Jews m the latter 
 portion of the Babylonian exile. The treatment of the three Hebrew children, and at times of Daniel himself, are only 
 occasional and exceptional instances of Orienbil despotism, when aroused by opposition to an arbitrary and universal edict, 
 as the immunity and even honors following evince. The book of Esther contains an apt commentary on these capricious 
 Ticissitudes. The reference to the passage in Eccles, is particularly inapposite, as that book belongs to the Solomonic age.] 
 
 t [On the contrary it appears that the chastisement of I-rael by the captivity, became, as it was intended to be, an 
 •ffcctual cure of oatward idolatry. The very sight of the abomin.ations practised by their heathen captors, seems, as in the 
 case of similar close cintact with polytheism in Egypt, to have thoroughly d'sgusted and warned them from ail such ten- 
 dencies. The prayer of Daniel, alluded to by the author, is only a general confession of the pwit sins of the nation, for 
 which the e.'cile, now drawing near its close, is recognized as the iust oenaltv. The passages in Ezekiel have a much ear Un 
 •tate.l 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 by rationalists, inasmuch, as has already bren remarked, they do not admit that Israel's con- 
 dition during tlie captivity was especially deploralile and fallen, noi- acknowledge the histori- 
 cal character of the narratives respecting the wonderful displays of Divine power and grace, 
 which are recorded in this l)ook. And yet another collection of prophecies, whose jrigin in 
 the time of the exile and at Babylon is considered by rationalistic critics to be an .ncontro- 
 veitible fact, substantiates the view in question concerning the conditions of the time whicli 
 underlie our book, in all its bearings, and in many respects, even in its smallest details. The 
 second part of the prophet Isaiah — wliether with the modem critics, we consider it as the 
 '■ Pseudo-Isaiah " or " the exilian Isaiah," or admit its genuineness and therewith its 
 thoroughly prophetic character — describes the condition of the exiled nation in Baljylon, as 
 well as the striking contrast between their religious and national ruin and wickedness, and the 
 miracles by whicli the grace of God was magnified in them, in precisely the same colors as does 
 the book of Daniel, and therefore serves to e.staljlish the authenticity of the contents of this 
 book in an impressive manner. Isaiah's lamentations because of the turning of many to idola- 
 try (chap. xlvi. 6, etc. ; Ivii. 5, etc. ; Ix. 3, etc.) ; because of umighteousness, wanton revelry, 
 and violence (chap. Ivi. 11; Iviii. 2, etc. ; lix. 3, etc) ; because of the discouragement and 
 lack of faith among even the best of the exiles (chap. Ix. 27 ; xlix. 24 ; li. 12, etc. ; xlv. 9, 
 etc. ) and on account of the rebellious disposition and insolent .stul :il)omness of the masses (xlviii. 
 4. 8. 10; Ixiii. 17; Ixiv. 7, etc.) — all these merely recapitulate in detail what is briefly com- 
 prehended in Daniel's priestly confession and penitential prayer in the affecting language of 
 bitter lamentation.* Furthermore, the manner in which the deutero-Isaiah refers to the mar- 
 vellous power and majesty of -Jehovah, as revealed in wonderful signs of every sort (chap. xliv. 
 6 ; xlv. 11), in multitudes of ])rophecies and promises that have been realized (cha]). xli. 21 et 
 seq. ; xliii. 9 et seq. ; xliv. 7 et seq. ; xlv. 19, 21 ; xlvi. 10; xlix. 3 etscq.), and in the humili- 
 ation and destruction of heathen idols and their worshippers, touches closely upon the corres- 
 ponding descriptions in both parts of Daniel, the historical as well as the prophetical and 
 symbolical (see especially chap. ii. 47 ; iii. 28 ; iv. 31 et seq. ; vi. 27 et seq. ; vii. 13 et seq. ; 
 is. 24 et seq.). The relations of God's people to tlieir heathen oppressors and their gods, on 
 the one hand, and to their covenant God, Jehovah, and His displays of grace and promises 
 of deliverance, on the other, are described by I)oth ])rophets with substantially the same re- 
 sult ; and there remains only this difference, that the mode of statement employed by Isaiah, 
 accords with the older usage of spoken and written prophetical language, while Daniel illus- . 
 trates the fate of kingdoms in the present and future from a decidedly apocalyptic point of 
 view. The following note treats specifically of this important difference between our prophet 
 and liis earlier predecessors. 
 
 Note 2. — The relation of Daniel, as the original representative of Scriptural apocalypse, to 
 the earlier prophets, is considered in an especially instructive manner by Auberlen {Der 
 Prophet Daniel, etc., \>. 2 sq.): "The prophets generally occupy an intro-Israelitish stand- 
 point, from whence they view the future of God's kingdom. The congregation of His people 
 constantly occupies the foreground with them, and the world-j)owei's enter their range of 
 vision only as they interfere in the present or immediate future of God's people. . . . The 
 contrary holds with Daniel. Himself separated fiom the lioly land and nation, and living 
 and discharging duty as a high official at the Babylonian and Persian courts, he presents the 
 development of the world-power at the outset as the cliief object of his prophecies, and the 
 kingdom of God is relegated significantly to the background. If the other prophets glance 
 occasionally from their post in Zion to the south, the north, or the east, as one or another 
 world-kingdom is presented to their vision, Daniel, from the heart of the world-power, over- 
 looks its entire development, and not until his glance has penetrated through all its changing 
 forms does he rest in Zion, recognizing her affliction and punishment, but also her triumph 
 and exaltation. The prophecies of Daniel no longer relate merely to single and contempora- 
 neous world-kingdoms of greater or less importance; but rather the p_eriod of universal mon- 
 archies has Ijegun. which rise in succession to universal conquest, and in whose deportment 
 the worldly principle that opposes the reign of God is revealed in steadily-increasing power 
 and hostility. Intimately connected with this is the further peculiarity of Daniel, that his 
 prophecies contain a much greater wealth of historical and political detail than those of all 
 other prophets. AVhile prophecy generally, viewing the near and tlie distant in perspective, is 
 accustomed to regard the entire future from an eschatological point of view as the coming of 
 the kingdom of God, Daniel, on the conti-ary, sees spread before him substantially the future 
 history of the world which must transpire before the advent of the kingdom. Hence results 
 ihe special form of prophecy which is peculiar to him alone. If this were in any case a his- 
 tory of the future, it would be with so him." The idea, that the notice in detail of the several 
 
 * [The passages of Isaiah here cited depict in part the idolatry of the heathen, with which the chosen n-ition arc con- 
 trasted, and in part the degeneracy of the prophet's countrymen in his own day. for which the captivity was lo be a punish 
 meiit. Few, if any of them, necessarily imply anything more than tha^ discouragement, which a long delay of the promised 
 deliverance would naturally engender. 1 
 
DANIEL AS A PROTOTYPE OF THE APOCALYPSE. 
 
 features of progress iu tlie future development of the world- power and its relations to Gud's 
 people, is a final chief jicculianty of Daniel's prophecies, is based principally on the contents 
 of chap, xi., which Auberleu regards as written throughout by Daniel and soon after the 
 captivity. We Ijelieve ourselves warranted in holding a different \-iew respecting this 
 chapter, which is the chief support for the assumption of a continued series of tlie must 
 special predictions, and therefore prefer to accept a revision in the time of Antiochus 
 Eiiiplianes, by a pious apocalyptic investigator. Hence we charge the thorough description 
 of the kingdoms of the Seleucidse clown to tliat tyrant, to the account of the modifying 
 agency of this interpolator. We are not led to this view, either by a preconceived opinion 
 that the Spirit of prophecy is incapable of jjroducing such special predictions, or by a one- 
 sided reference to the analogy of the remaining |>roplietical books of the Old Testament, 
 which contain no such detailed descriptions of the future ; but the decisive circumstance 
 which arouses our suspicion concerning the assumption that Dan. xi. is throughout and 
 in all its details a proper prediction, and which even directly forbids it, is the fact tliat the 
 Revelation of St. John, besides our book the only independent and more comiirehensive produc- 
 tion of tlie canonical apocalypse, eivru where presents only ideal pkUires •>/ the future. We 
 admit that the propliet, borne liy the Spirit of prophecy, would, at tlie point in question, 
 receive many surprisingly exact disclosures respecting the future history of tlie God-opposecl 
 world-power and its hostility towards the people of God, because we regard Daniel, the " vir 
 desiderioruni"' (chap. x. 11 ). as pre-eminent in zeal and successful effort, among the Old-Testa- 
 ment prophets who, according to 1 Pet. i. 11, searched "what, or what manner of time the 
 Spirit of Christ wliicli was in them did signify." But precisely because he was only a 
 searcher of the future and could lie no more than this, we are compelled to reject everything 
 that transforms his prophecy irom a Divinely insjiired picture of the future into a detailed 
 and painfully exact history of the future, and we therefore charge this portion to the account 
 of the reviser. Daniel is and remains for us a " prophetic light for tlie times devoid of 
 revelation, during which Israel was given into the hands of the heathen," a "light that was 
 designed to illumine the night of five liuudi"ed years from the Cajitivity to Christ and the 
 destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans, for the understanding ones iu Israel" (Auberlen, 
 p. 80); liut we cannot assume that the clear prophetic light which emanated from him was 
 intended to penetrate to the smallest comers aAl most gloomy recesses of the history of God's 
 people which was. for him, yet future.* But if we can assent to Auberlen's description of 
 the canonical apocalypses as prophetical disclosures, intended to "serve the congregation of 
 God's people as lights during the times of the Gentiles (Luke xxi. 24) in wliicli there is no 
 revelation," only on the condition that we conceive their light iu an ideal sense, and as corre- 
 sponding to the fundamental law in the Divine revelation of gradual and mediate disclosure, 
 we are none the less compelled on the other liand to reject decidedly a special feature, 
 admitted by Liicke, Hilgenfeld, and others, into their conception of the idea of apocalypse, 
 a conception which otherwise conforms approximately to that of Auberlen. We refer to the 
 idea of p««i«Zf)«ym/?^, concerning which hiXcke {Einleitung in die Offenharung Johannis und 
 die soyenannte apolcalyptische Literatur, 2d ed., p. 47 sq.) asserts that it is necessarily connected 
 with the other two distinguishing features of apocalyptic propliecy, its eschatological. and its 
 comprehensive character that covers all history, since only later WTiters wlio cunningly related 
 the prophecies to the past and invented additions to the older prophets, were capable of such 
 all-embracing vision. The oiie-sidedn&ss and rashness of this assertion likewise appear from 
 the mode of origin and the literary peculiarities of the Revelation by St. .lohn, this most 
 important and significant of apocalypses, against which no more unjust criticism can be 
 offered than that of a pseudonyraic origin; and not less from the notorious authenticity of 
 the former half of the book of Zechariah (chai). i.-viii.), the remaining apocalyptic composi- 
 tion that has been admitted to the Old-Testament canon, and which may be regarded as the 
 earliest imitation of Daniel. We can yield our assent to the charge of forgery as regards this 
 form of writing, in so far only as it applies to the apocryjilial apocalypses, and are therefore 
 in accord with Hilgenfeld (Die jadische Ap^dalyptik in ihrer (/eschichtlirhen Enticicklung, IS.^i?, 
 p. 5 sq.) — -whose view diverges somewhat from that of Liicke — -no further than as he excepts 
 the Joliannean apocalypse from the canon of Liicke, which stamps pseudonyuiity as the 
 invariable mark of a|)oc;dyptic literature ; but to this exception we add the two apocalypses 
 of the canimic'.tl Old Testament, f For tlie more special consideration of the relations of 
 
 • [To those far removed from all inlluence of the prevalent rationalism of German criticism, the insidious tincture oi 
 which, notwithsL-indrng the authors disclaimer, is evident in his conclusion on this point, the ascription of any portion 
 of the book of Deniel to a later nameless writer on such purely subjective grounds, must appear altogether gratuitc us. 
 The business of the interpreter is. not to prescribe what God was likely to cause a prophet to predict, but to accept and 
 expound accordingly what historical and substantial testimony has delivered to us as the actual words of prophecy. 
 There is no more evidence of a pseudo-Daniel than of a pseudo-Isaiah.] 
 
 t [The inconsistency of the author's position here is palpable, if we correctly apprehend his somewhat involvej state- 
 ment of it. The Revelation of St. John, if not the apostle's, if of course under a fictitious name, and the 11th chaptei 
 if Daniel, if not that prophet's, is equally pseudonymical, whoever may be conceived as the int. -polator. The distlnotloa 
 OB this reei-ect betw-een a whole work and a part only ifi too nice to esctipe the odium of a **piou£ fraud."] 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Daniel to the apocryphal and pseudepiifraphical apocalj-pses. ^Yllicl) -svere mainly framed on 
 its model, see below, § 11.* 
 
 Note 3. — With respect to the Chaldaic idiom in Dan. ii.-vii., wliich we represented above 
 as a principal reason for leading the fiamers of tlie canon to assign to Daniel a place anions 
 the Hagiographa, and in the immediate neighloorliood of Ezra, we remark in general, (1.) that 
 this dialect, wiiich gradually l)ecame the current language of tlie Palestinian Jews, was the 
 eastern-Arama-an or Babylonian, a purely Shemitic idiom, which, as the ivrpiilar tongue of 
 the Babylonians, must be carefully distinguished from the C^~r3 "i"'.!';, mentioned in Dan. i. 
 4, the latter l)eing the cmiH language of Nebuchadnezzar and the Chalda?an dynasty, and 
 comi>rehending numerous Aryan or Turanian elements. This follows from Dan. ii. 4 : Isa. 
 xxxvi. 11 ; and Ezra iv. 7, where documents and speeches in this dialect are designated a3 
 such by the term tT'O'^S (Luther [and English version]: " Syriac," rather ^i/'o/naicj, while the 
 "tongue of the Chaldeans" (DiTC3 b) mentioned in Dan. i. 4 is not again referred to, and 
 is clearly distinguished from the ordinai-y Aramcean language as a peculiar dialect, cunent 
 among the warrior and priestly caste then dominant in Babylon (possibly identical with those 
 perpetuated in the Assyrio-Babylonish cuneiform inscriptions) by the manner in which it is 
 there introduced ; for Daniel and his conii)anions would hardly haveljeeu obliged to undergo 
 a regular course of instruction in the common Aramaean or Bal)ylonian language, as it should 
 be called, instead of Chaldee, which is less exact. Compare Ijelow, on chapter i. 4. (2.) 
 The Aramaean of chapters ii.-vii. includes numerous Heliraisms, as the Hel)rew of the remain- 
 ing chapters Clialdaizes many expressions ; a circumstance tliat can hardly lie explained, 
 except on the supposition of an intermingling of both dialects in the popular language, which 
 may have l:)egun at the time of the frequent Assyrian invasions, at iirst among the ten tribes, 
 and later gradually extended also to Judali, and to which the strongly Aramaizing Hebrew 
 of the prophet Ezekiel, most intimately related to the Hebrew of Daniel, bears testimonj'. 
 (3.) The co-existence of the Hebrew and Arama?an, as dialects spoken and understood by the 
 people, is substantiated further by the circumstance that our author could venture to express 
 most of his narratives and predictions in tlie latter tongue ; a feature that is i'e]jeated only in 
 the book of Ezra, which was written a centurv later, wliile Isaiah (nearly two hundred years 
 before Daniel) admits no Aramaic expressions into his text in a passage which would havR 
 afforded a suitable opportunity (chap. xxx\a. 11 ; cf. 2 Kings xviii. 26j, and even Jeremiah 
 contents himself with employing a brief Aramaic sentence (Jer. x. 11 ; compare the use of 
 single words iii Aram, in earlier books, e.g., Gen. xxxi. 47; 2 Kings v. 12). (4.) The 
 Aramaic idiom of Daniel corresponds closely to that of the book of Ezra and of Jer. x. 11, 
 both in its grammatical and its lexical features. Its wealth of older words {e.g., rr^C-itd 
 instead of the later nCE, ^nib:; for the later "iss'b?, "'nirinp, for the later K"i.^, CSEi t^b 
 for the later l^pB, ■'■n-bsp'iB, for the later "]? b? ''^S, ^bi: for ~v^~"?i<, etc.) and its general 
 grammatical peculiarities (where the forms, llib, 12b, instead of the ajipareutly more ancient 
 CnD, t:3, which are found in Ezra, form the only exceptions) create the impression of a 
 much higher antiquity than is represented by the otherwise closely related Chaldee of the 
 Targums. which were composed about the beginning of the Christian a!ra. (.5.) Of the 
 seven notorious Pareeeisms, or words derived from the Persian, which are found in tli« 
 Aramaic portion of our book, only '<7.'?' occurs in the Targums, while it has two others (C3r;!? 
 and niTpri";!) in common with the Chaldaizing Hebrew of the book of Esther and the Chaldeei 
 of Ezra, and a fourth (^?^3) occurs at least in the Chald. Ezra. There is thus in this respect 
 also a more remarkable lingual relationshij) between Daniel and Ezra, than l)etwcen them and 
 the Clialdee Targums, and the jjosition assigned to our book between Esther and Ezra on tlm 
 forming of the canon, is fully justified by this consideration. We shall endeavor to show, iu 
 connection with the question of genuineness, that the weight of these lingual peculiarities, 
 which point so decisively to the composition of this hook cluring the period immediately ])re- 
 ceding and following the captivity, is in no wise diminished by the occurrence in its Chaldee 
 text of several phrases evidently derived from the Greek. We were only concerned in this 
 connection, to show tliat the lingual peculiarities of the book formed a principal motive for 
 its collocation witli tlie Hagiographa, instead of its lieing placed in the series of prophetical 
 books. Compare Hengsteiil)erg, Die Avthfiitie des Daniel, etc.. ]). 297 scj. ; Havernick, Ein- 
 leilung ins A. T., II. 2, 482 et seq. ; Ziindel, Kritisclte Unterauckuugen iilier ilie Ahfassungszeit 
 
 • [Anbcrlen (Daniel and Revelatton, Clarke's ed.. p. 77 eq.) notices several other "materialistic rtiffcrences between the 
 Apocalypse of the CM nnd of the New Testament,"' Rowing more or less directly out of the dilTereiit position occupied bj 
 the people of God at their respective times. Tho.se who have insisted that the Antichrist of llie one is necessarily the 
 Antichrist cf the other, have therefore interpreted the symbols as having precisely the same significauce, have undulj 
 9T«rlooked these differences in the standpoint and design of the two prophet&l 
 
PERSONAL RELATION'S OF THE PROPHET. 
 
 des Buelies Danid, p. 239 et seq. Concerning its place after Esther and Ijoforc Ezra, compare 
 in addition, Delitzscli, Art. " Daniel," in Herzog's Uml-EncycJ., III. 273 : " The Ijook of Daniel 
 stands between Esther and Ezra. l)ecanse Esther, for a sufficient reason, is the last ot the five 
 Megilloth (festival volinnes), and because the yrincqinl contents iif Daniel helonf/ to tlie time 
 before Ezra and Xeliemiali." zVccordingly, this Ijook was regarded as belonging among the 
 historical Hagiograplui (in view of its really historical character throughout the first half), 
 and it was placed at the head of these books, because of its lingual relationship with Ezra, 
 and also because of its pre-eminently holy and inspired character. This arrangement is not 
 chronological, indeed, for in this respect the Chronicles should precede, and Daniel, Ezra, 
 Nehemiah, and Esther follow in their order. But considerations of a diffei'cnt natiu'e pre- 
 vailed, on the whole, in the collocation of these final constituents of the Old-Testament canon. 
 The following section will illustrate one of the leading considerations which enable us 
 definitely to understand the jjositiou of this book, in connection with its remarks on the call 
 of Daniel to the ijrophetic office. 
 
 § 2. The PEnsoN.\L Rel.\tions op the Prophet. 
 
 The name Daniel (is':~, cha]). i. 6; also defective. ixJT in Ezek. xiv. 14. 20; xsviii. 31, 
 which signifies '• judge of God, judge who pronounces judgment in the name of God," * 
 belongs to two persons besides our prophet in Old-Testament history, of whom one was a son 
 of David (1 Chron. iii. 1), and the other a Levite of the house of Ithamar. The latter flour 
 ished but little later than our proi)het, according to Ezra viii. 2 ; Neh. x. 7, and has, on that, 
 account, been identified with him by the Septuagint in the ajjocryjihal additions to the book 
 of Daniel, as well as by several recent critics. The difference in time is, however, too con- 
 siderable to admit of this oi)iniou ; and the fact that among the contemporaries of the priest 
 Daniel were found a Mishael (Keh. viii. 4), Hauaniah. and Azariah (Neh. x. 3, 24), must be 
 regarded as a mere accident, from which, in view of the notorious frequency of these names, 
 the conclusion cannot be drawn, that the Daniel of our book, together with his three pious 
 associates, arc the creatui'es of a fictitious collocation and ijre-dating of those persons, who 
 lived almost a century later (compare the arguments against Bleek in note 1). 
 
 According to chapter i. 3, Daniel seems to have been of royal descent, and thci-eforc born 
 at Jerusalem. The passage in chapter ix. 24, however, will hardly serve in proof of this 
 (Ilarenl)erg and other cxpositore), since .lerutalem nnght have been termed the " holy city " 
 by Daniel, even if he belonged to any other city or tribe of the holy land, f He was, at any 
 rate, af high birth, and, together with three other noble Jewish youths, was in early life 
 transported to Babylon in the first deportation under Jehoiakira, in order to become a page 
 at the Chalda^un court. J Here their Hebrew names were changed for others of Chaldsean origin, 
 and Hananiah received the name of Shadrach, Jlishacl that of Jleshach, and Azariali that of 
 Aljednego, while Daniel was known as Belteshazzar ("^KHKCZa). This name, if exi)lained 
 solely according to the Shemitic analogy, seems to be synonymous with " Beli princcps." or 
 '■ princeps, ciii Belus favet "("iHwia), and therefore likewise indicates the princely rank of 
 Daniel. Tliat he bore in addition the probably Persian name of Sheshhazzai; by which 
 Zcrubliabel was known at the court of Cyrus (Ezra i. 8), rests on an unsupported Rabbinical 
 tradition, which is found in Rashi and several later writers, and which seems to Inive grown 
 out of a false etymological interpretation of -^-^z'Si'Z as = "who was in six-fold tribu- 
 lati(ra." 
 
 Tlie instruction in the wisdom of the Chaldee magians and in the manners of the court, 
 which Daniel received in Babylon under the supervision of the chief eunuch, Ashpcnaz, did 
 
 * So Gesenius and Dietrich, in the Hamlwurterb 'icli ^ explain, in connection with many older expositors, while FflrsI 
 interprets the name by '■ jutlge through God." and a majority render it " God is my jadge" (e.f?., Hiivemick, with refer- 
 ence to Gen. XXX. fi). or also, '■ God is judge " (c.ff., ileinke, Die messianischen Weixmfftijigen, etc., iv. 1, 1(37). 
 
 t The Jewish tradition found in Tseudo-Epiphanius, De vtt. propliet.^ c. 10, which locates the birth-place of Daniel 
 cf BeflePoptu Tfl ai'ttiTipa iT^rjaiov lepouiraA^^, or. by another reading (preferred by Relnnd, Palaest.^ p. <J94j. it 
 Bedepwv Tfj avitiTepa, is of no historical vaUio, and perhaps originated in the desire to place the birth of the prophft, who. 
 on the authority of Ezra. viii. 2, was held to be a Levite, in a Lcvitical city (see Josh. xxi. 22). 
 
 X ["The history of that period, in Kings and Chronicles, seems to warrant the supposition that the Jewish lads in que* 
 lior. were liostagnf!, who were drawn from the upper classes of society at Jerusalem, in order to secure the quiet and sub 
 mission of th Jewish king and his nobles in their tributary condition." — StWM'C] 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 not prevent him from observing the injunctions of the Mosaic law in regard to food an^ 
 drink, with conscientious care, and from astonishing the officials who had him in charge by the 
 almost miraculous eifects produced in his appearance through this ascetic course, in which hi) 
 three friends [participated (chap. i. 8-1 Oj. But marked as were these eifects of his piety, his 
 fame was increased still further by the extraordinary proofs of his piudence, wisdom, and 
 learning, which he manifested at an early period, especially in the interpretation of dreams, 
 visions, etc. This extended his reputation beyond the bounds of Babylon before he had 
 attained maturity, and must even have made his name proverbial among liis countrymen at 
 least, as designating a marvel of wisdom. * Only thus can we explain the fact that Ezekiel, 
 his contemporary, although consideral)ly older in years, refers to Daniel in several passages 
 of his prophecies (which were brought to a close in B. C. 572, that is, about the middle of the 
 captivity), as a model of pious wisdom, and in two instances classes him with Noah and Job, 
 the great wise men of antiquity (Ezek. xiv. 14, 38 ; xxviii. 3 ; compare note 2). 
 
 That Daniel was not merely trained under the oversight of the chief eunuch, or chief palace 
 official ("prince of the eunuchs") of Nebuchadnezzar, but also himself became a eunuch in 
 the proper sense, and was trained in tliat capacity, is an ancient Jewish tradition, which 
 appears to rest on a combination of Dan. i. 3 et seq. with the prophecy of Isaiah to Hezekiah 
 (Isa. xxxix. 7. where ;-o^nc ■"'"* held to designate actual eunuchs). It is, however, without 
 any historical sujiport, either in the book of Daniel itself, or in other Old-Testament records; 
 and Ezek. xiv. 20 seems even to directly contradict this tradition, since it ascribes sous and 
 daughters to him, as it does also to Noah and Jolj. But it could not be otlierwise than wel- 
 come to the asceticaUy disposed Jews of later times, as well as to many church fathers and 
 Roman Catholic expositors, to discover in Daniel a eunuch, even though an involuntary one, 
 and an example of pei'petual virginity. Hence the Targums report this tradition (on Esther 
 iv. 5, in connection with the mention of Hatach, the Persian eunuch wlio was appointed to 
 serve Esther), as do others of the more ancient rabbins (Pseudo-Epiphanius, Vitte PropJiet., c. 
 10, ijv dvrjf) (Tilj(ppwv Cj(TT€ dnKftv Tous *Iovfiaious flvtii aTrdbotrrti). Of later ral^bins, €.g., Rashi ad 
 Dan. i. 21 (liut not Ibn-Ezra, ad Dan. i. 3) ; of cliurcli fathers, Origen {Horn. iv. in Ezech. ), 
 Jerome {Ade. Jovin. i. 1 ; C'omin. in Jes. xxxix. 7 ; in Dan. i. 3), Jolm Damascenus (De fide 
 orthod. iv. 25) ; of later Roman Catholics, Cornelius ii Lapide, Huetius. and otliers, hold to 
 tliis tradition. [It is also strongly confirmed by the well-knoT\Ti usages of Oi-iental courts, in 
 which eunuchs are admitted to privileges allowed to none others, especially in jjersonal offices 
 near the king. Haman, indeed, A-as not of this class in the book of Ezra, but Nehemiah was 
 doubtless such in the Persian court. In the light of this circumstance, the dietetic regimen 
 imposed upon Daniel and his three companions had a sanitary reason, and their voluntary 
 temperance may actually have had a good effect during their period of convalescence after 
 the operation. The reference to Daniel in Ezekiel does not so explicitly allude to children as 
 to invalidate this conclusion, being merely an implication of kindred.] 
 
 After three years of training and instruction, in wliich early period tlie apocryplial narrative 
 in the interpolated Daniel of the Septuaginl places the celebrated decision in favor of 
 Susannah, who was unjustly condemned to death, as an instance of the extraordinary wisdom 
 of the youtlilul prophet, Daniel and his three companions entered on their duties at the court 
 of Nebuchadnezzar, t Through the miraculous aid of the enlightening grace of God, he was 
 
 * [''The reader will recall some points of close analogy between Daniel and Joseph, Both were captives ; each lose in 
 n foreign kingdom to the same rank of prime minister, by the same qualities of personal character — sterling integrity, 
 nnselfirth devotion to their work, great business capacity, and unfaltering faith in God. Each became, under God . a patrou 
 and protector to liis snfTenng people. To each was given of God extraordinary prophetic powers, which served to raise 
 him to general notice and confidence, and manifestly in the case of Daniel, served to exalt the God of the Hebrew race 
 highly ili the convictions of the monarchs under whom he sen'ed. Each was able to distance and confound all the pr& 
 tenders to snpeniatnral knowledge, of whom there were many both in Egypt and Babylon." — Cotctrs.] 
 
 t [" This custom of taking young men of the finest parts from a captive or subject race to fill responsible positions abont 
 the king has prevailed in many desjxjtic governments, and is essentially the usage of the Turkish empire to this day. It 
 finds its motives (1.) In the fact that such monarchs need men about them of the very first abilities : l2.) In the diiflcuity 
 they wonld eTperience in getting young men of such ability among their own people, who might not, by virtue of tteir 
 (ocial position or cjr.nections, become dangerous to the throne." — CowUJt,] 
 
PERSONAL RELATIONS OF THE PROPHET. 
 
 enabled to interpret a remarkable dream of the king, in consequence of which he was pro- 
 moted to the royal favor, as was Joseph at the court of Pharaoh, until he became the most 
 influential official in the province of Babylonia, and chief of the caste of magians (chap. ii. 
 48 et seq. ). He appears to have occupied this important position until the close of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar's reign, although the narrative of the persecution of Daniel's friends and fellow- 
 worshippers, contained in chap, iii., and that of his interjiretatiou of Nebuchadnezzar's 
 second dream and of the madness of that king, which is found in chap, iv., warrant the 
 opinion that his glory was not without an occasional Ijut transitory eclipse in tlie course of 
 that protracted jieriod. 
 
 Under Belshazzar. the son and (possibly not immediate, but rather third or fourth) successor 
 of Nebuchadnezzar, Paniel regained the royal favor and influential position of which he had 
 been temporarily deprived. After having been entirely forgotten, he succeeded in interpret- 
 ing an extraordmary appearance whieli had alarmed the king, but the prophetic meaning ol 
 which, relating to his approaching overthrow by the Persian world-power, none of th« 
 magians were able to reveal. The great honors with which Belshazzar rewarded him imme- 
 diately before his fall (enrobing in purple, placing a chain of gold about his neck, and 
 proclaiming him the third ruler in the kingdom) remained to liini under the first Medo- 
 Persian ruler, Darius the Mede (Cyaxeres). This monarch appointed him one of the three 
 princes who were placed over all the one hundred and twenty governors of his kingdom ; 
 and he even thought to place him over his whole realm (as minister of state or grand-vizier) 
 chap. vi. 1-4. For this reason, the other princes and governors, moved with envy, sought to 
 destroy Daniel by bringing his steadfast adherence to the faith of his fathei's into conflict 
 with the established religion of Pereia, or rather with an extraordinary decree of the king, 
 which provided that during the space of one month the honor of Divine worship should be 
 rendered only to him, the ruler of the kingdom. As Daniel pei-sisted in the regular discharge 
 of his religious duties, and, according to the custom of jjious Jews, offered prayer at an open 
 window, and witli his face turned toward Jerusalem, three times in each day, he became 
 subject to the fearful penalty imposed by the king, of being devoured by lions. The 
 wondrous care of God, however, preseiwed him unharmed through the night which he spent 
 in their den, and, in consequence, he rose still higher in the favor of the king, while his 
 accusers were thrown into the den, and perished by the deatli they had designed for him. 
 'U'hen Cyrus assumed the sole government over the Medo-Persian world-kingdom, after the 
 two years' reign of Darius the Mede, the dignities and honors of Daniel were continued to 
 him. He therefore survived tlie expiration of the Babylonian Captivity and the beginning 
 of Israel's return to the holy land (see chap. i. 21), which ensued on the accession of that 
 king, "the anointed of the Lord" (Tsa. xlv. 1); and although the book of his prophecies 
 recorde nothing of his agency in restoring his people to their Land, his indirect influence was 
 probably not unimportant. The closing series of his prophecies (chap, s.-xii.), which disclose 
 the future history of Israel down to the erection of Messiah's kingdom on the ruins of 
 tlie world-powers, testify that in spirit he cherished a warm symjiathy for the physical and 
 moral welfare of his people. 
 
 He died probably soon after receiving and recording these final revelations, which he 
 himself places in the third year of the reign of Cyrus; but when, and under what circum- 
 stances, his death occurred is unknown. The attempts to state his circumstances at the close 
 of life, together with the time and manner of his death, which are found in Jewish and 
 Arabic authors, and also in church fathers, are based on empty traditions whicli are wholly 
 without support. We class among these the statement of Josephus {Antiq. Jud: x. 11, 7) that 
 Daniel immortalized himself as early as the reign of Darius the Mede by building a splendid 
 royal castle of marble at Bcbatana, which was still standing and in the charge of a Jewish priest 
 in the rime of Josephus ; * also the Jewish-oriental legend, perhaps derived from Dan. i. 21, 
 and Ezra viii. 2, concerning his return to Palestine among the first exiles under Zerubbabel 
 (D'Herbelot. Bthl. Orient., p. 283) ; further, the statement of Pseudo-Epiphanius, that he died 
 
 • Cf. Jerome, Comment, in Dan. viii, 2, where the erection of this palace iB erroneously transferred to Stua. 
 
10 IKTRODTTCTION TO THE PROPHET DiNIEL. 
 
 at Babvlon and was buried in the royal tomb ; the statement, perhaps, of later origin, but 
 more widely circulated than the one last mentioned, which is held by Abdul-faraj and Benj. 
 of Tudela. that he died in Shushan — a tradition ujion which rests the still practised adoration 
 of the reputed tomb of the projihet in that city, in which Jews and Christians are said to par 
 ticipate, as well as Moslems (see Ausland, 1853, p. 960) ; and finally the Romish tradition, 
 w'hich is to the effect that Daniel died as a martyr, and which commemorates him on the 21st 
 of July (cf. Stadler and Heim, Vollst. IleiUgen-Lexikon, vol. i., p. 722 ss.). 
 
 The above historical notices concerning Daniel show, that by reason of his relation? to the 
 Babylonian, and later to the Medo-Persian dynasties, as well as on account of his growth to 
 maturity and continued dwelling and labors in a foreign land, he occupies an entirely excep- 
 tional position among the Old-Testament prophets — a position that makes it seem really 
 doubtful whether the prophetic office was his proper and chief vocation. In any case, he 
 appears as much a Chaldiean wise man as an Israelitish prophet, and thus intervenes between 
 the Old-Testament prophetism and the position of the Divinely enlightened seers among the 
 nations that bordered on Israel, who were supematurally chosen to l)e the beard's of Messianic 
 I)rophecies, as in the case of Balaam in the time of Sloses, and the Eastern magi on the 
 threshold of New-Testament times. For this reason chiefly, it would seem, he was regarded 
 by the framers of the canon as not belonging to the class of prophets in the narrower sense, 
 but as more directly included among the writers of the Hagiographa (compare note 3). 
 
 KoTE 1. — Bleek, in EinUitung ins A. Test, 2d ed., p. 610, remarks with reference to the 
 persons mentioned in Ezra viii. 2, and Neh. viii. 4 ; x. 3, 7, 24, under the names of Daniel, 
 Mishael, Hananiah, and Azariah : " This coincidence of names with those of the heroic 
 believers represented in our book may be accidental, but nevertheless is remarkable, since it 
 exists -n-ith reference to the entire four, and the names Daniel and Mishael occur but rarely 
 elsewhere. The time, indeed, in which the four contemporaries of Ezra and Nehemiah flour- 
 ished is later than that of Daniel and his friends, as about 160 years elapsed between the 
 third year of Jehoiakim and the reading of the book of the law by Ezra; but still, it is not 
 unreasonable to suppose that the composer of this book (who, according to Bleek, lived and 
 wrote in the time of the Maccabees, about B. C. 167) borrowed the names of his faithful 
 heroes from those four men. We cannot tell whether a more intimate acquaintance with their 
 history and experience in Babylon led him to select their names." (Similarly De Wette, 
 Einleitunij ins A. T., p. 360 et seq.) To us the supposition of Bleek seems about as vague a 
 combination as the familiar attempts of Strauss to find in the names of Gospel history, Jacob, 
 Joseph, Mary, and Elizabeth, mythical reproductions of the corresponding names in the 
 primitive Scripture history, or to find the origin of the historical Lazarus in the Gospel of St. 
 John, in the purely imaginary person of this name in the parabolical narrative found in Luke 
 xvi, 19 et .seq. [Lehen Jesu, etc., 1864, p. 477 et seq.). The impossibility of identifying the 
 four ctmtemporaries of Ezra with our prophet and his friends appears from (1) the fact that, 
 according to Dan. i. 31, which passage could not possibly have been known to the mythical 
 writer, Daniel lived only to the beginning of the reign of Cyrus; (2) that the names Azariah, 
 Daniel, and Hananiah, which are enumerated in Neh. x. 2-28, among the great numl)er of 
 names of leaders, priests, and Levitcs, who engaged to observe the law, became so unimpor- 
 tant and are so widely separated that only the most reckless arbitrariness or chance could 
 associate them precisely as intimate companions, who filled a distinguished position at the 
 royal court of Babylon as wise men and confessors ; (3) that the name Mishael (Neh. viii. 4), 
 in the list of those who stood on the left hand of Ezra while he read the law, occupies a nc 
 less isolated position ; (4) that the identity of Daniel, of the sons of Ithamar, who is men- 
 tioned in Ezra viii. 2, with the ])riest or Levite of the same name, who is noticed in Neh. x. 
 7, is, at any rate, extremely doulitful, since their surroundings are wholly dissimilar; (.5j that 
 what is recorded in chaps, i. and iii., particularly the report concerning the Baliylonian 
 names conferred on them (chap. i. 7) bears too thoroughly the stamp of historical reminis- 
 cence to admit of the hypothesis of a later invention, for the purpose of exalting those 
 obscure names, which were almost forgotten among the number of names in the book of 
 Nehemiah. 
 
 Note 2. — Tlie three- fold reference of Ezekiel to Daniel has been regarded by many modern 
 critics as irreconcilable with the historical existence of a magian and prophet of this name, 
 since in two instances (chap. xiv. 14, 20) Ezekiel places Daniel ))etween Noah and Job, and 
 since he clearly seems to treat him as a personage belonging to the earliest antiquity in 
 those ])assages as well as in cliap. xxviii. 3. On this account, they have either questioned the 
 genuineness of these passages in Ezekiel {e.g., Bernstein, in Tzschinier's Aiialelten, i. 3, p. 
 10), or given up the historical character of the exilian Daniel, and considered him a 
 
PERSONAL RELATIONS OF THE PROPHET. 11 
 
 purely poetic invention like Job, or a wise man belonging to the patriarchal or primi- 
 tive period of Israelitisli history. The latter hypothesis especially has been received 
 with favor, and has Ijeen variously developed by Bleek, Hitzig, Ewakl, and Bunsen. 
 According tj Bleek (in Sclileierm. u. Liicke's Theolog tucker Zeitschri/t, III. 1822, p. 283 et 
 seq., and in Einl. ins A. T., p. 608 et seq.), we are not led by the manner in which 
 he is mentioned to think of a person who shared in the Babylonian captivity with 
 Ezekiel, but much rather, to conceive of a long-familiar personage of primitive times, 
 who was historically connected with events in the experience of Israel, or, which is more 
 probable, since we know no more concerning him, who was like Job, a mere product of 
 the poetic fancy. From the manner in which Ezekiel refers to him, it is barely con- 
 ceivable that he should have been, as the Daniel of our book is represented, a Jewish 
 exile and contemporary with Ezekiel." De Wette {Einl. ins A. T., p. 361) and Von 
 Lengerke (Das Buck Daniel ausgel., p. xciii. et seq.) likewise limit the choice to either a 
 " man belonging to the gray antiquity" or to a purely imaginary personage. Hitzig, on the 
 other hand, regards tlie Daniel of Ezek. xiv. as not, indeed, created by the writer, like Job, 
 but still as the '■ child of tradition " like Noah and !Melchizedck, and finds an intimate cor- 
 respondence, amounting almost to identity, of our Daniel with the mysterious royal and 
 priestly personage of the latter, who is assumed to be a junior contemporary of Noah — a 
 relation which exists especially in respect of his name { Jki:i, " divine judge," nearly synony- 
 m9us witli piili;;?:, '• king of righteousness." KurzgeJ'. exeget. Handbuch zu Daniel, p. viii.). 
 Ewald, again (Die Pnpheten des Alien Bundes. vol. il.. Appendix, p. 562 et seq), considers 
 the Daniel mentioned by Ezekiel as having Ijeen descended from one of the ten tribes, and 
 as liaviug lived and proijhesied at the heathen court of Nineveh, a hundred years before the 
 Babylonian Captivity. To this particijiator in the Assyrian captivity were attril;uted pro- 
 phetic oracles respecting the world-kingdoms, by an unknown Jewisli author of the times of 
 Alexander the Great or the earliest Seleucida;, which were modified by a later writer, in the 
 time of Antiochus Epipiianes, from whom tliey received their present form. liunsen {Gott in, 
 der Oeschir/it-', I. 514 et seq.) agrees in the main with the first part of this hypothesis. The 
 historical Daniel lived at the royal court in Nineveh soon after the deportation of the Israel- 
 ites by Slialmaneser ; the fantastic representations of animals on the palaces of Nimrud and 
 Khorsabad, whicli have become known to us through the researches of Botta and Layard, 
 -erved as models for his visional descriptions of the world-kingdoms under the form of 
 various imaginary animals, in cliapters vii. and viii. ; and the originator of the present book 
 transformed the prophet of Nineveh by mistake into a Babylonian. Compare below, § 4, 
 tiote 1. Two earlier opponents of the genuineness of this book, Bertholdt and Kirrass, 
 endorse the opinion of Ewald and Bunsen, that Daniel was a real person of historical times ; 
 but instead of assigning tliis wise man, wliom Ezekiel celebrates, to an earlier age, they make 
 him the contemporary of tliat propliet, living at the court of Babylon. The author of this 
 book, who belonged to a mucli later period, and derived his entire knowledge of Daniel 
 from Ezekiel. merely clotlied him in a mythical dress, etc. (Bertholdt, Daniel, etc., I. p. 7; 
 Einleit. ins A. T., y. 15(J6; Kirmss, Commentatio historico-critica exhihens descriptioneni et 
 ei'.nsurdin recent iortim de Daniel libra opinionum, Jen. 1828, p. 59 et seq.) ; in like manner 
 also Winer in tlie RealuxJrterb., Art. "Daniel " (I., p. 247;. 
 
 The more recent defendeis of the genuineness of Daniel's prophecies are in immediate cor- 
 respondence with the arguments raised l)y these latter critics in support of tlie possibility of 
 Oaniers contemporary existence with Ezekiel, despite the peculiar manner in which he is men- 
 tioned in Ezek. xiv. and xxviii. Hengstenberg especially iDie Authentic des Daniel, p. 70 et 
 *eq.) shows in a most discerning way that the chronological difficulty is of no importance, 
 tince Daniel must hace been thirty years uld when Ezekiel xiv. was composed, and since the 
 rewards and honors conferred on him by Nebuchadnezzar must have been receiced at least ten 
 years be/ore that period ; and furtlier, that the book of Daniel itself (in such passages as chap. 
 i. 17, 20; ii. 47; iv. 5; v. 11) testifies to the extraordinary and early-developed wisdom, by 
 which this pious youth was distinguished, and with reference to which Ezekiel was already 
 enabled to point the contemporary king of Tyre to him as a model of exalted wisdom and 
 Divine illumination (chap, xxviii. 8). Tlie position assigned to Daniel between Noah and 
 Job in chapter xiv. 14 and 20, proves nothing whatever concerning his patriarchal age; 
 rather. Joli is placed at the end of the series because he was a less suitable example for the 
 immediate purpose of Ezekiel, than Noah and Daniel, the preachers of righteousness in the 
 midst of a godless world. In general agreement with this view of Hengstenberg are, 
 Havernick (Komm. zu Ezechiel, p. 206 et seq. ; Neue Untersuchungcn iiber Daniel, p. 23 et seq. ; 
 Einl. ins A. T., ii. 2. 455), Kliefoth {Das Buck Ezethiels ubersetzt und erkldrt, p. 177 et seq. ; 
 and Das Buck Daniels, \i. 31 et seq), Delitzsch (in Herzog's Ucal-Encyli.. s. v. Daniel), and 
 Zilndel (Krit. Untersuchungcn, etc., p. 258 et seq.). These later apologists, however, justly 
 declare Hengstenberg's explanation of the circumstance that Daniel is placed between Noah 
 and Jol) to lie inade juate, and therefore endeavor to find a more apijrojjriate explanation of 
 this fact, whieli at tlie first Uush seems so strange. Havernick and Kliefoth assume a chmax: 
 " Noah saved himself and his family; Daniel was still able to provide for his friends, chap. 
 
i2 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 ii. 17, 18 ; Job, despite his uprightness, could not even save his children." Delitzsch explains 
 'Ate arrangement of names by assuming thatEzekicl '' mentions first a righteous man belonging 
 to the ancient world, next, a righteous man belonging to the present world, and lastly, a 
 righteous man who belongs to tlie ideal world ; " for Job is "presented to the eyes of Israel 
 as a righteous man only in the book of Jolj, which, altliougb not without a historical basis, is 
 not historical, but rather poetical and didactic." Finally, Zundcl seeks to explain this 
 .irrangcment of names by the observation, that Daniel occupied a " thoroughly analogous 
 Central and universal position among his contemporaiies," so to speak, as a mediator between 
 Gc-d and His people, by virtue of which, as formerly did Noah and Job, he presented his 
 ujiriglitness and piety before God, in a reconciling and atoning way, when His anger was 
 aroused because of the sins of His people. None of these attempts at explanation are entirely 
 satisfactory to us ; but that of Delitzsch seems to be the most adequate and plausible, because 
 the most simple and unconstrained. But may not euphonic considerations have contributed 
 to the arrangement of the three names n:, bsf:! and 21^8, in like manner as such considera- 
 tions appear to have j^revailed in other enumerations of proper names ? e. g., of the three sons 
 of Noah (Gen. vi. 9 ; ix. 18, etc.). among which Ham, although the youngest of the three, is 
 always placed before Jajjlieth ; of the three daughters of Job (Job xlii. 14). etc. As examples 
 of the neglect of chronological order in the enumeration of names, compare, in addition, 
 Ecdes., chap, xlix., where Josiah, Jeremiah, Ezekiel, Zerubbabel, Joshua, and Nehemiah 
 (vs. 16-20) are placed before Enoch, Joseph, Selh, Sliem, and Adam; also Heli. xi. 82 
 ((Tideon, Barak, Samson, Jephthah, David, Samuel) ; Jude v. 9 et seq. (Moses, Cain, Balaam, 
 Korah, Enoch); Matt. xvi. 14 (John the Baptist. Elijah, Jeremiah). The last of these 
 examples is especiall}' instructive, since it shows that living persons might be classed with 
 l>i rsons of similar character belonging to the earliest antiquity without any regard to chrono- 
 lo!.ical sequence. [The fact that Daniel is thus associated by Ezekiel, a nearly contemporary 
 wiiter, witli an undoubtedly historical personage, Noah, has alw.ays been held to be a strong 
 pi oof of his actual existence. The same holds true of Job, as mentioned in the same connec- 
 tion. Compare James v. 11. Indeed, the introduction of a purely mythical name in such a 
 matter-of-fact connection would be irrelevant and nugatory.] 
 
 Note 0. — On the peculiarity of the ])roplietic character of Daniel, as constituting a principal 
 reason for referring this Ijook among the Hagiographa, see Delitzsch, p. 272: "'The book of 
 Daniel was placed among the Hagiograjjlia, because he was not a prophet hy virtue oj' his offite 
 arid calling, although, like David and Solomon, he jjossessed the gift of prophecy." Origen 
 I'emiirks correctly : '" Non si quis projjhetat, ideo propheta est. Ac profecto si quis propheta 
 est, is quidem prophetat, sed vero qui prophetat, non continuo etiam est propheta." The 
 genuineness of the book is therefore not compromised by its position among the Hagiographa.* 
 t'ompare also Auberlcn, Daniel, jj. 30 et seq. : " We may also refer to his instruction in the 
 wisdom of tlie Chaldaean Magi ; for the Holy Scriptures show that the mysterious knowledge 
 and arts of the heathen were not an empty boast, e. ;;., in the case of the Egyjjtian sorcerers 
 v.lio opposed Moses. The wise men who were led by the star to seek after the new-born king 
 of the Je\vs, were such Chaldee Magians, which clearly shows that they were not deprived of 
 all truth, and ia connection with which we may even inquire whether a tradition may not have 
 hetn transmitted among them which had enumated from Daniel, their chief, who had received 
 such remarkaljle disclosures concerning this king of the Jews, reaching even tf) the time of 
 his appearing ? The circumstance, that in his youth he was instructed during three 3-ears in 
 this wi.sdom of the Chalda^ans, doubtless had the effect on the prophet himself, to develop 
 the pro|)hetic tendency which was natural to him, and to make him at home in these mysteri- 
 ous regions (chap. i. 4, 5, 17). It must have afforded him an education similar to that which 
 Moses derived from his training at the Egyptian court, or that drawn by the modern tlieolo- 
 gian from the study of philosophy. He learned, however, nothing of importance from the 
 Chaldeans, but rather soon excelled them all ten-fold in wisdom." Furtlier, compare the 
 same, page o4 et seq., where, conforming to the Uabljius, the isolated position of Daniel, the 
 apocalyiitist, among the other Old-Testament prophets, is explained and interpreted to mean 
 that while he did not possess the nK^CJ ni*i or pro|)er jjrophetic S])irit, he nevertheless 
 partook of the ""pil ni^ or " Holy Spirit," which was shared also by the remaining writers 
 of the Hagiographa, for which reason his proper place was among this class, and not among 
 t)ie prophets. Com|jare also the definitions which are quoted in that connection fiom Witsius 
 (Daniel was endowed with the gift of prophecy indeed, liut not with the prophetic office) ; 
 Irom Bengel (Daniel was "the politician, chronologer, and historian among the prophets"); 
 and from M. Baumgarten (Daniel was " the official seer ot Jehovah in the world-kingdom "). 
 — See infra, § 6, note 1. 
 
 • Kliefoth (Das Biich DanteU. p. 48) assents to this, and observes, thHt in addition to the fact that, "according to hii 
 t'fllee Daniel was not a prophet, but an officer of the state." " his book contained prophecies concerning the world-power,'' 
 fcnd fuither, thai, " in view of its historical matter, his book is a historical document for the period during wiiich Israrf 
 
CONTENTS AND FOlllI OF DAXIELS PROPHECIES. 13 
 
 § 3 Contents and Form of Daniel's Pkophecies. 
 
 The Jirst or historical division (chap, i.-vi.) of the two which compose our book according ^ 
 to § 1, p. 1, has already, so far as its principal features are concerned, been analyzed in the 
 preceding paragraph, which narrates the leading events of the prophet's life in exact chrono- 
 logical Older. The second or prophetical division (chajj. vii.-xii. ) contains the prophetic 
 elements of the book, but not so exclusively as not to interweave occasional historical and 
 biographical notices with its predictions (see especially the mention of Daniel's illness, chap, 
 viii. 27 ; of his fasting, mourning, and prayer, chap. ix. 1 et seq. ; x. 2 ct seq. ; of his \-isiou3 
 on the banks of the Tigris, chap. x. 4 et seq. ; xii. 5). Nor are prophecies entirely wanting 
 in the historical division; for besides the interpretation of the dream relating to the lycan- 
 thropy of Nebuchadnezzar (in chap. iv. 16-24), which is equivalent to an actual prophecy or 
 special prophetical prediction, and also besides the interpretation of the mysterio\is writing 
 on the wall of Belshazzar's banquet-hall, which likewise testifies to Daniel's prophetic endow- 
 ments (chap. V. 17-28), the leading features of the narrative in chapter ii., relating to the 
 interpretation of Nebucliadnezzar's first dream by Daniel, form a prophecy of the specifically 
 apocalyptic kind in their reference to the history of kingdoms and of the w'orld. The great 
 image composed of gold, silver, brass, iron, and clay, the so-called image of tfie monarchies, 
 together with the stone that destroys it, which were seen by Nebuchadnezzar in his dream, 
 and afterward by the prophet, in a night vision, were interpreted by Daniel by vdrtue of 
 Divine inspiration, to signify a succession of world-kingdoms that should precede the king- 
 dom of Messiah or of God, commencing with the reign of Nebuchadnezzar himself. The 
 golden head of the image represented the existing kingdom of Nebuchadnezzar with its 
 exalted power and greatness. Upon it should follow a second and inferior kingdom, and a 
 third, that should bear rule over all the earth with the power and hardness of Ijrass ; after- 
 wards a fourth, strong as iron, which should crush and destroy all things ; and finally a 
 divided kingdom, partly of iron and partly of clay, i. e.. partly strong and partly brittle, 
 which, tliough seeking to coml)ine its several parts, should yet fail to develoj) into a united 
 whole. In the time of this divided kingdom, God Himself would establish a kingdom on 
 the earth, which, like the destroying stone, should overturn and crush all the world-kingdoms 
 in order to flourish on their ruins forever (chap. ii. 37-4-5).* 
 
 * [Keil ( Commentary on Daniel, Clarke's tr., p. S4) ingeniously traces the logical position of the chapters in this 
 ttistorical portion as follows. He regards chaps. ii.-iii. as comprising, after the introductory chap, i., xheflr»t part of the 
 book, containing " the development of the world-power,"' and remarks that " this part contains in six chapters as many 
 reports regarding the successive forms and the natural character of the world-powers. It be^ns (chap, ii.) and ends (chap, 
 vii.) with a revelation from God regarding its historical unfolding in four great world-kingdoms following each other, and 
 their final overthrow by the kingdom of God. which shall continue for ever. Between these chapters (ii, and vii.) there 
 are inserted four events belonging to the times of the first and .second world-kingdoms, which partly reveal the attempts 
 of the rulers of the world to compel the worshippers of the true God to pray to their idols and their gods, together with 
 the failure of this attempt (chaps, iii. and vi. ), and partly the humiliations of the rulers of the world, who were boastful of 
 their power, under the judgments of God (chaps. iv. and v.), and bring under our consideration the relation of the rulers of 
 This world to the Almighty God of henven and earth and to the true fearers of His name. The narratives of these four 
 events follow each other in chronological order, because they are in actual relation t)ound together, and therefore also the 
 occurrences (chaps, v. and vi.) which belong to the time subsequent to the vision in chap. vii. are placed before thia 
 vision, so that the two revelations regarding the development of the world-power form the frame within which is con- 
 tained the historical section which describes the character of tha world-power." The second part of the entire book, as 
 distributed by Keil (chaps, viii.-xii.). is designated by him as "the development of the kingdom of God" — thus con- 
 tra.sted with the world power of the former section. This latter part Keil analyzes as follows ; "This part confciins three 
 revelations which Daniel received during the reigns of Belshazzar. Darius the Mede, and Cyrus the Persian, regarding 
 the development of the kingdom of God. After de,«:ribing in the first part the development of the world-power and ite 
 relation to the people and kingdom of God from the days of Nebuchadnezzar, its founder, down to the time of its final 
 destruction by the perfected kingdom of God, in this second part it is revealed to the prophet how the kingdom of God 
 entered against the power and enmity of the rulers of the world, and amid severe oppressions, is carried forward to final 
 victory, and is perfected. The first vision, chap, viii., represents what will happen to the people of God during the 
 developments of the second and third world-kingdoms ; the second revelation, chap, ix , gives to the prophet, in an.swer to 
 his penitential prayer for the restoration of the ruined holy city and the desolated sanctuary, disclosures regarding the 
 whole development of the kingdom of God, from the close of the Babylonian exile to the final accomplishment of God's 
 plan of salvation. In the last vision, in the third year of Cyrus, chap, x.-xii., he received yet further and more special 
 revelations regarding the severe persecutions which await the people of God for their purification, in the nearer futnrf 
 under Antiochus Epiphanes, and in the time of the end under the last fi-te, the Antichrist" (p. 28-3).] 
 
I4 INTRODIJCTION TO THE PEOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Tliis prophecy, which is interwoven with the first or historical part, is closely related to the 
 first prediction of the prophetical part (chap, vii.), and indeed is identical with it in purport. 
 This latter prophecy is also a dream-vision with a succeeding Divinely- disclosed inteqjreta- 
 ' tion, but revealed originally and solely to Daniel. The succession of the four woi-ld-kingdoms 
 ■which began with that of Nebuchadnezzar, is in this instance represented by four beasts 
 which rise in succession from the sea : a lion with eagle's wings and the heart of a man, a 
 bear with three ribs in its ravenous jaws, a leopard with four wings and four heads, and a 
 fourth terrible monster with iron teeth and ten horns, three of which were plucked up by the 
 roots, and re])laced by " another little horn " with human eyes and a mouth that spoke pre- 
 sumptuous blasphemies (chap. vii. 2-8). The fourth of these kingdoms is now descriljed 
 somewliat differently, and more particularly, as a fearful reign of tyranny, which devoured 
 the earth and destroyed and ruined all things, and from which should proceed in succession 
 ten kings, who are symbolized by the ten horns. Three of these kings are to be superseded 
 by the final monarch, who is represented by the " little horn," and whose madness and blas- 
 phemous presum2)tion exceed that of all who have preceded him, so that he speaks blasphemy 
 against the Highest, makes war upon the saints of God, and aims to set aside the law and the 
 holy seasons. The sufferings of the people of God at the hands of this tyrant are limited to 
 three and a half years, at the end of which Divine judgments shall be visited on him thiough 
 one like the Son of man, who comes with the clouds of heaven, and to whom is committed 
 an everlasting dominion over all nations. 
 
 The second prophecy of the second part (chap, viii.) also stands connected in its subject 
 and purport with the image of the monarchies, whose middle and lower parts it develops and 
 illustrates more fully. Under the figure of a contest between a ram and a he-goat, it describes 
 the overthrow of the third by the fourth world-kingdom, together with succeeding events 
 down to the Slessianic judgment. A ram with two horns, of which the taller appeared last, 
 pushes fiercely towards the four quarters of the earth, until a he-goat with a notable horn, 
 coming from the west, smites him to the ground, and breaks his two homs. Next, the great 
 horn of the victorious goat is broken, and rejjlaced by four other notable ones, toward the 
 four wiiids of heaven. Out of one of these comes forth a little horn, which increases mightily 
 toward the south, the east, and Judrea, grows even to the host of heaven and its prince, 
 desecrates the sanctuary, and interrupts the offering of the daily sacrifice during a period of 
 2,300 evenings and mornings (i.e. 1,150 days, or three and a half years), vers. 3-14. The 
 angel Gabriel interprets this vision to the prophet, and applies it to the Medo-Persian empire, 
 which should be overthrown by the fourth world-power, founded by the king of Grsccia 
 (Alexander the Great), and also to the four more important kingdoms of the Diadochi, which 
 should arise out of the Greek world-monarchy, on the early death of its founder. One of 
 these latter kingdoms (that of the Seleucidse) should become especially hurtful to the people 
 of God and His sanctuary, through the craft and audacity of one of its rulers, until finally 
 the breaking of tliis offender " without hand," i. e., by the interference of a superior power 
 should come to pass. [For a comparative table of all these prophecies see § 10, Note 3; and 
 for a refutation of the " year-day " hypothesis on which the application of the fourth king- 
 dom exclusively to Papal Rome rests, see § 10, Note 4.] 
 
 A third vision (chap, ix.) is vouchsafed to the prophet in connection with his meditating on 
 the meaning of the seventy years, which Jeremiah had predicted should elapse before the 
 rebuilding of Jerusalem. While addressing Jehovah in fervent penitential prayer, in con- 
 nection with his meditations, and beseeching Him to forgive the sins of His people, and to 
 turn away His fury from Jerusalem (vers. 3-19), the angel Gabriel discloses to him the mean- 
 ing of Jeremiah's prophecy. The soventy years are to be understood as seventy weeks of 
 Tears. Four hundred and ninety years were detennined, in order to atone fully for the sins 
 of the people, and to reanoint tlie Most Holy of His temple. The first seven of the seventy 
 weeks of years were to include tlie period between the utterance of Jeremiah's prophecy and 
 the " anointed prince" (Cyrus) ; in th^ course of the sixty-two weeks of years that should 
 follow, the city (Jerusalem) was to bj rebuilt, but in troublous times. The last, or seventieth, 
 week of years should begin with the " cutting off of an anointed one," after which the peoplf 
 
CONTENTS AND FORM OF DANIEL'S PROPHECIES. 15 
 
 and their sanctuary were to be devastated by the armies of a tyrant, and the customary offer 
 ing of the sacred sacritices and oljlations to be interrupted during the half of a week (evidently 
 during the latter half of this final 'week of years), until, in the end, ruin should overtake thr 
 destroyer * (vers. 21-27;. 
 
 T\xe^ filial vision (chaps, x.-xii.) contains the most thorough and detailed description of the 
 developments of the future. After three weeks of fasting and mourning, an angel, whose 
 clothing and appearance were wonderful (chajj. x. 5-11), appeared to the prophet on the 
 banks of the Tigris, and gave him an account of tlie contests which he was compelled tc 
 enter into with the " princes," or angelical protectors of Persia and Grsecia, and in which he 
 ■was aided only by Michael, the angel of God's people (chap. x. 12-xi. 1). To this account he 
 added a representation, full of life and minute detail, of the immediate future, and extending 
 to the time of the tyrannical oppressor of God's people, who has already been frequently 
 described. In this connection he dwells especially upon the conflicts of the kings of a 
 Bouthern kingdom (Egypt) and a northern kingdom (Syria), which were to constitute the 
 principal states that should arise from the ruins of the fourth (Greek or Macedonian) world- 
 power (chap. xi. 2-20), and more than all, on the insolent, audacious, and blasphemous 
 deportment of the last king of the northera realm, who should ultimately come to a terrible 
 end, after inflicting the most horrible abominations on the holy nation, their sacred city, and 
 its sanctuary (chap. xi. 21-45). After unparallelled tribulation and afBiction, deliverance 
 and salvation should come to Daniel's nation, in connection with the resurrection of the dead, 
 which should lead to tlie exaltation of the righteous, but consign the ungodly to everlasting 
 punishment (chap. xii. 1-3). f After the angel has directed the prophet to seal the prophecy 
 to the time of the end (ver. 4), he supplements it by a final revelation in regard to the dura- 
 tion of the period of severe affliction before the introduction of Messiah's kingdom, which is 
 fixed at 1,290, or, conditionally, at 1,335 days (vs. 7-12). The whole closes with the 
 counsel of the angel to tlie prophet, to wait patientlj- until the end of all things, and until 
 his resurrection to eternal life. 
 
 The arrangement of the four prophecies of the second part is strictly chronological, so that 
 the order of their succession is parallel with that of the actual events in Daniel's life, as 
 recorded in the first part. The first vision appeared to him "in the first year of Belshazzar" 
 the king, in the form of a dream, which he at once recorded in writing (chap. vii. 1) ; the 
 second, in the third year of the same reign, "in the palace of Sliushaii, in the province of 
 Elam, by the river of Ulai," — wliere the jjrophet in his exaltation at least believed himself to 
 be (chap. viii. 1, 2) ; the third, in the first year of the reign of Darius the Mede, hence soon 
 after the overthrow of Belshazzar (chap. ix. 1, 2; cf. v. 30; vi. 1); and the fourth, " in the 
 third year of Cyrus, king of Persia,'' on the 24th day of the first month, while the prophet was 
 on the banks of the Tigris, after completing his fast of three weeks (chap. x. 1-4 ; cf. xii 5, 
 6). The first vision is included in the Aramaic portion of the book ; the three others, like 
 chap. i. and the opening verses of chap. ii. (vers. l-4a), are recorded in Hebrew. 
 
 In a formal point of view, the marked difference Ijetween the prophecies of the second part 
 and those of the first is to be noticed, namely, that in the latter instance the interpretation of 
 the wonderful and prophetic appearance of the vision in Nebuchadnezzar's dream (chap, ii.), 
 and of the mysterious writing, !Mene, Mene, Tekel, etc., at the banquet of Belshazzar (chap, v.), 
 was imparted to tlie prophet immediately through tlie Divine Spirit, and without the agency 
 of angels ; while in each of tlie four prophecies of tlie second part angels are employed, eitlier 
 to reveal the purport of the visions seen by Daniel while awake or dreaming (as in the case of 
 the first two, chap. vii. and viii.), or to convey direct disclosures relating to the future, 
 without any pre^^ous symbolical vision (as with the final prophecies, chap. ix. and x.-xii.). 
 The prophet, however, is the only narrator, even when he recapitulates (as is the case especially 
 in chap. X. 20-xii. 4) the extended remarks of the angel, his celestial teachers and inter- 
 preters. The epistolary form of narration which occurs once in the first part, chap. iii. 31-iv. 
 
 * Id Bitpport of this statement of the contents of chap. ix. 22-27, and especially of the verse last mentioned, com^«n 
 the exegetical renftrks on that pas.sage. [For counter arguments, see the additions thereto.] 
 t [See, however, the exegetical remarlE8 on this last particular.] 
 
16 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 34 (but which is not rigidly adhered to in that connection, sin:e Nebuchadnezzar, the writei 
 of the letter under our notice, is referred to in the third person, in chap. iv. 25-30), is not 
 found in the second part. 
 
 Note. — In opposition to the division of the contents of this book into historical and 
 prophetico-visional parts, which we have adopted, Auberlen (p. <58), and ir. connection with 
 him Keil {Eiiil. ins A. T., 2d ed., p. 389 et seq.), and also Kranichfeld {Uns Buck Daniel, p. 2 
 et seq.), contends that chap. vii. should be included in the tirst part. The reasons adduced 
 by the last mentioned exegete, as '" material " in contrast with ours as merely " formal," are, 
 first, the prophetico-visional elements which enter also into the first part, and particularly into 
 chap, ii., and secondly, the identity of language in chap. vii. with chapters ii.-v., which 
 forbids a ■n'idcr separation between chapters vi. and vii. as contrary to the intention of the 
 author. But the visional constituents of the first part are extremely meagre when compared 
 with the far greater proportion of the narrative elements in this division ; and the chrono- 
 logical diifcrence between chapters vi. and vii. is decidedly more important than the affinities 
 of language between chap. vii. and the five chapters that precede it. The dream-vision 
 recorded in chapter vii. dates back to the reign of Belshazzar, the last (or one of the last) of 
 the Baliylonian kings, wliile the historical contents of the preceding chajiter belong to the 
 Medo-Persiau jjcriod ; hence the time of chapter vii. and also of chap. viii. corresponds to 
 that of chapter v., while chapter vi. is contemj)orary with chapter ix. Since the general 
 arrangement, both of the pre-eminently historical chajjters of the first part, and of the chiefly 
 visional contents of the second, is strictly chronological, the distribution of the entire book 
 into the categories of history and prophecy seems to have been the leading idea by which its 
 editor (whom we regard as identical with its author) was governed, while the identity of 
 language in chapter vii. and the preceding chapters sinks into a merely accidental feature. 
 The following section may serve to show the most probable explanation of this feature. For 
 the 2>re3eut, we are only concerned to show that the arrangement adopted hy us, even if 't 
 were based more on a formal than a material principle, conforms fully to the idea and design 
 of the writer, and is therefore with justice retained by a majority of modem expositors— even 
 by Zundel (p. 39 et seq.), Reusch (Eiitl. ins A. T., 3d ed., p. 109), and others. 
 
 § 4. Unity of the Book of Daniel. 
 
 The integrity of this book may be conclusively shown, despite the occasional attempts 
 essayed by recent critics to represent it as a compilation of several historical and prophetic 
 fragments of various origin ; for, as has been shown in § 3, the contents of the two principal 
 divisions form a harmonious and closely-connected whole, which must have emanated from a 
 single author. This author is frequently designated as one and the same person — as Daniel — 
 particularly in chap. vii. 1 ; xiii. 1 ; ix. 3 ; x. 1 ; xii. 4 ; and he is mentioned either in the 
 third person (chap, vii. 1 ; x. 1) or in the first (chap. vii. 2 et seq. ; x. 2 et seq.). The same 
 interchange of the first and third persons is found elsewhere in writings of the Old Testament 
 that have emanated from a single author, e.g., Isa. vii. ; xxxvi.-xxxix., etc. The fact that 
 Daniel is mentioned exclusively in the third person throughout the first six chapters is suffi- 
 ciently explained by the historical and descriptive character of this first main division, which 
 merely reports occasional expressions by Daniel, of greater or less extent (e.g., chap. ii. 15, 20, 
 23, 30; iv. 16 et seq. ; v. 17 et seq. ; vi. 22 et seq.), but generally represents other persons as 
 Bpeaking and acting. The absence from this part of the formula, "I, Daniel, saw," or "I, 
 Daniel, said," could only hold as an argument against the unity of the book, in case other 
 discrepancies and contradictions of importance existed Ijetween the contents of the two parts. 
 Such contradictions, however, do not occur. It is not impossible to reconcile chapter i. 21 
 with chapter x. 1, or chapter vi. 1 with chapters ix. 1 and xi. 1, etc., as the exposition of those 
 passages will show in detail. The historical part is rather connected with the prophetical in 
 manifold relations, and their chronological parallelisms especially bear the marks of design 
 on the part of the composer. The series of remarkable events in his life, which are first 
 recorded, is designed as a historical introduction, or scaffolding, for the prophetic visions 
 which follow. But within the historical part itself, chapter i. is intimately connected, as an 
 introduction, with the five chapters that follow. Daniel's prophetic power and skill in inter- 
 preting dreams, are remarked in chap. i. 17, 20, evidently with reference to the tests to which 
 they were to be exposed, chap. ii. 4, 5. The mention of the three friends in chap. L C et seq. 
 
XmiTY OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 17 
 
 paves the way for the narrative respecting tlieir official stations and confessorship (chap. ii. 
 49 ; iii. 1 et seq.). The statement that Nebuchadnezzar removed the sacred vessels of the 
 temple from Jerusalem is a preparation for the history of their desecration by Belshazzar 
 (chap. ii. 5 et seq.). 
 
 Nor does the diversity of language, as between the Chaldee of chapters ii.-vii. and the 
 Hebrew of the remaining chapters, involve a multiplicity of authors; for, aside from the fact 
 that a transition from the Hebrew to the Chaldee, exactly similar to that in Dan. ii. 4, occurs 
 in Ezra iv. 7, the idea of a variety of authors becomes impossible in view of the intimate 
 relation of the Hebrew chapter i. to the succeeding Aramaic sections, which has just been 
 noticed. The last (chap, vii.) of the Aramaic portions, again, is so closely connected in its 
 leading features with the Heljrew sections that follow — and especially with chapter viii. which 
 is introduced by the indication of time, in a manner entirely analogous to chap. vii. 1 — that 
 the discrepancy of language in this case also appears evidently as a feature of secondary 
 importance. The contrast between the use of the Hebrew in the introductory and the five 
 closing chapters, and of the Chaldee in chapters ii.-vii. can appear as other than accidental, 
 only as the latter sections seem to have been reduced to writing at an earlier period than the 
 former. They were probably recorded during tlio Chalda?an supremacy or immediately after- 
 ward, whereas the Hebrew sections tliat enclose them were probably added at a considerably 
 later date, and in the time of the Persian rule. This liypothesis (first assumed l)y Kranich- 
 feld) of a gradual completion of the book, or of tlie framing of tlie Clialdiuan sections, which 
 originated during the exile proper, between the Heljrew portions, chaps, i. 1-ii. 4 and viii.-xii., 
 that date in the Persian period, is favored by the note in cliap. i. 21, which implies the later 
 composition of the introduction, but more especially by the circumstance that the Chaldee 
 fragments, without exception, convey tlie impression that they were recorded in the style of 
 chronicles, immediately after the events transjiired to which they relate. They also seem to 
 indicate that the author employed this language for such journalistic minutes, as being more 
 familiar, in view of his culture (compare § 2), while he adopted the Hebrew at a later 
 period, perhaps because he had in the meantime acquired a sufficient readiness in its use, or 
 because the different circumstances of the times subsequent to the captivity might lead him 
 to regard the sacred language of the law and the earlier prophets as more appropriate for his 
 purpose of instructing and edifying his theocratic comijatriots. We therefore assert the 
 integrity of this book with reference to all its leading divisions, and as being the work of a 
 single author ; but in the closing section of the second part, in the especially detailed piophe- 
 cies of chapters x.-xii., we detect tlie hand of a later interpolating reviser of the time of 
 Antioclius Epiphanes, for reasons wliich liave been generally indicated (§ 1, note 2), but the 
 more detailed elaboration of wliich must be reserved for the exposition (see especially on 
 chap. xi. vs. 5 and 40, etc.). Such interpolations are apparent more iiarticularly in chapter 
 xi. 5-39 {e.g., vs. 5, 6, 8, 14, 17, 18, 25, 27, 30-39). 
 
 Note 1. — J. D. Michaelis, Bertholdt, and Eichhom (at least in the earlier editions of hia 
 Einhitung). among those who reject the integrity of this book, find a considerable uunil>er of 
 independent compositions contained in it, which are said to have been written at different 
 times and by various authors. Of such compositions Michaelis enumerates eight. Eichliom 
 ten (in vol. III. of his Hehriiisrhe Projiheten, p. 428 et seq., at least five), and Bertholdt nine. 
 The latter refers the first (chap, i.) of these " Daniclana," as he calls them, to the time of 
 Artaxerxes Longimanus ; the second (chap, ii.) to that of Ptolemy Philadelphus ; the third 
 (chap. iii. 1-30) to a somewhat later date; tlie fourth (iii. 31-iv. 34) to the age of tlie first 
 Asmon.Tans ; the fiftii. sixth, and seveutli (cliaps. v.-viii.) to tlie same period, under Antiochua 
 E|)iphaues ; the eiglith fcliaj). ix.) by a priest at Jerusalem, to a date but little later ; and the 
 ninth (chap, x.-xii.) to a still later time. The composers of the later sections are said gener- 
 ally to liave known the earlier writers, and to have continued their work, in which effort they 
 even imitated their predecessors in the use of single words and phrases. But despite tlieir 
 care numerous contradictions crept into the separate parts, so that, for instance, cliap. i. 21 is 
 opposed to X. 1 ; chap. i. 1, 5 to ii. 1 ; chap. ii. 48, 49 to v, 11-14, etc. (Bertholdt, Daniel i. 
 93 et seq.). The impropriety of such a mutilation of Scripture was soon undei-stood, and wa? 
 pointed out. with convincing arguments, especially liy Bleek (in Schleiermacher's Theol. Zeit- 
 tehrift, 1822, No. 3, p. 241 et seq.; compare his Kinleitung ins A. T., p. 585 et seq), 
 2 
 
18 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Havernick {Eiid. II. 2, p. 443 et seq.), and De Wette {Eirdeitung in das A. T., § 25Cj. Hence 
 Eichhorn, in the third and fourth editions of his Einleitung, contented himself with the 
 assumption of merely two authors, of wliom the one composed chap. ii. 4-vi. 29, and the 
 other, chap, vii-xii., together with the Hebrew introduction, chap. i. 1-ii. 3, in each case 
 long after the captivity. The two-fold authorship is also asserted by Sack {Christl. 
 Apohgetik, 1829), Herbst (Histor.-Jcrit. EM., published by Welte, 1840 and later, ii. 2, § 34), 
 r. S|)eil (Zitr Echtheit des B. Daniel, in the Tub. T/ieol. Qiiartal-Schrift, 1863, p. 194J, Reusch 
 {Eiid., p. 110), and several others, inasmuch as they regard the visional part of the book, 
 beginning with chap, vii., as genuine, but claim that the narrative of Daniel's life and of the 
 circumstances of his time, contained in chap, i.-vi., was added by a later hand, and based 
 upon a revision of certain genuine memoranda, which were left by the prophet at liis death. 
 Hence, we are to distinguish between genuine originals, written by the prophet himself, and a 
 .ater compilation which belongs to the Maccabfean period or to the age immediately preceding, 
 and in which the author possessed the skill to imitate the prophet's mode of thought and 
 expression, thus producing the impression of a united apocalyptic whole. Such an origin of 
 the book cannot be branded as wholly impossible ; but the impression of closely connected, 
 systematic, and designed unity which it makes, in respect to both its form and matter, appears 
 to favor the view stated above, by which the first and second editor constitute a single person- 
 age, identical with the prophet Daniel, and by which the whole appears as the work of one 
 mind, despite its gradual production in the period immediately before and after the close of 
 the exile (compare the following note). 
 
 Three additional hypotheses concerning the origin of the book deseiTe attention, which 
 like\\nse proceed on the assumption of a two-fold authorship, or of a distinction between a 
 genuine original and a later interpolating revision, but which differ greatly among themselves. 
 According to the editor [Lange] of tliis Bihh-worh (Einl. in das A. 2\, in the remarks ))relimi- 
 nary to the exposition of Genesis, vol. I., p. 38 [of the Am. ed.]), the book, which otherwise 
 originated entirely with the captive prophet Daniel, received two extensive additions in its 
 fin.al sections, at the hands of an aj30calyptist cf the Maccabsean period, who was led to make 
 these interjiolations in view of the severe trials of the time. These additions comprise chap. 
 X. 1-xi. 44, and xii. 5-13; hence the predictions which relate specially to Antiochus Epiphanes 
 and his time, and which bear pre-eminently the stamp of vatieinia ex erentu. The professed 
 interpolation of 2 Pet. i. 20-iii. 3 from the epistle of Jude, which the editor has endeavored 
 to establish, iu vol. I. of his Oeschichte des nposU'lisclien Zeitedters (p. 152 et seq.), more thor- 
 oughly than this asserted addition to Daniel, is adduced as an analogous instance ; but it 
 does not seem to be sufficiently demonstrated, despite the manifold advantages it would afford 
 to the apologist. We are obliged to prefer the view of a mere interpolating revision of chap- 
 ters x.-xii. by a pious apocalyptist of the Asmonsan period, and to hold to the jirobable inser- 
 tion of several brief passages, which cannot in our day be clearly distinguislied. instead of 
 accepting the introduction of the lengthy section, chap. x. 1-xi. 44, together with that in cliap. 
 xii. 5-13. A later inventor of the entire prophetic imagery of chapters x. and xi. would dis- 
 jjlay an incredible talent in his imitations of the prophet's literary style. jMoreover, the writer 
 of Ecclesiasticus (about B. C. 180) seems to have recognized passages like chap. x. 13, 20, as 
 original with Daniel, and to have imitated them as such ; also the Septuagint. See below 
 § 6, note 2, and compare tlie exegesis of the chapters in question.* The view of Ewald (Die 
 Pmp/iete./i des A. Bds., 1st ed., II. 562 et seq.) is peculiar. According to him, the prophet 
 Daniel lived at the heathen court of Nineveh as early as the Assyrian captivity, about B. C. 
 700. A .Jewish contemporary of Alexander the Great invented prophecies relating to the 
 world-kingdoms, and attrilnited them to this wise man of the Assyrian period, while another 
 Jew, living iu the time of the Maccabees, added further embellishments to the book as he 
 found it. Somewhat more definite and thoughtful is Bunsen (Gott in der Geschicht-e, I. 514 et 
 eeq.). The Daniel of Assyrian times, who lived at Nineveh under Pul and Sargon, about the 
 middle of the 8th century B. C. left behind him figurative prophecies concerning the destruc- 
 tion of Asshur (the winged lion) by the Babylonian empire (a devouring bear ; cf. chap. vii. 
 2 et seq.) ; these ancient oracles, together with legendary records concerning the personal for- 
 tunes of Daniel, and particularly his deliverance from the den of lions, were transmitted, either 
 verbally or in writing, until a writer of the Maccabsean period gave them their present form, 
 in connection with which work, however, he committed the grave historical error of transfer- 
 ring the prophet to the period of the Babylonian captivity, and of substituting the Babylonian 
 monarchy for the Assyrian, and the Medo-Persian for the original Babylonian (cf. above, § 2, 
 note 2). Neither Ewald nor Bunsen are able to furnish any j)ositive proof in support of these 
 strained, artificial, and fantastic views. The assertion that the later Jewish writers constantly 
 substituted Babylon for Asshur is entirely arbitrary and incapable of proof; and the removal 
 of Daniel to " the great river which is Hiddekel " can no more he. considered a mere echo of 
 the history of Daniel in Nineveli. tlian tlie imaginary winged creatures witli human visages 
 
 * [We dhall there endeavor to ebow that all these suppoBitionB of any interpolation whatever are gratuitous and unsup 
 rorttd.] 
 
UNITY OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 19 
 
 can be regarded as dark allusions to the colossal statues on the palaces of Nimrud. In our 
 exposition of the related passages we will aim to show that both these features may be 
 adequately explained on the assum])tion of a Babylonian career in the case of the prophet. 
 Bunsen, however, appears to have subsequently given up his arbitrary view, in favor of the 
 general pseudo-Daniel tendency-hypothesis (see the prefaces in vol. I. of his Bibelwerl; p. liv.) ; 
 while the view of Ewald appears unchanged in the recent 2d edition of his Projtheten del 
 Alten Bundes (vol. UI. p. 312 et seq.)- 
 
 Note 2. — In support of the opinion laid down in this section, that the book was composed 
 at different times by Daniel himself, compare Kranichfeld, I)as Buck Daniel {Einl., p. i) : 
 " For the rest, the Chaldee fragments in their present state, without an incorporated introduc- 
 tion and conclusion, cannot in themselves have foimed a separate work. Their formal and 
 abrupt character produces rather the impression of an occasional composition in the mannei 
 of a diary, which was undertaken at different times, and perhaps in connection with corre- 
 sponding events of the exile in the Chaldsean period, while the conception of the Hebrew 
 introduction may have fallen, agreeably to the remark in chap. i. 21, in the time of the Persian 
 supremacy. Presuming the genuineness of the book, the overthrow of both the Chaldiean and 
 the Persian dynasties in Babylon would therefore have occurred between the composition of 
 the several Chaldee fragments and that of the Hel>rew section, chap. i. 1-ii. 4 ; and a very 
 different condition of affairs, having an es])ecial significance for Israel, would meanwhile have 
 been introduced. This would also be sufficient to account for the choice of the Hebrew dress 
 chapters viii.-xii., and, in general, to establish their subsequent composition, which is now 
 more than ever a question of interest." Compare the same writer, p. 53 et seq. : " The com- 
 position of the Chaldee fragments accordingly b"longed to a time in which the heathen 
 oppressors as such, and the measures of the heathen tyranny, were everywhere prominent ; and 
 it is natural that a theoci'atical writer of this period should fi.x his gaze on these features, and 
 clothe his narrative in a form likely to be effective among the Chalda;an population, and ser- 
 viceable to oppose their hostile and insolent measures, as well as that he should attempt this 
 in the Chaldoean language, which was current among the oppressors. * Witli the close of the 
 exile a new range of visicm opened before the theocrat. The oppressive tyranny which was 
 before his leading thought, is no longer prominent in that character ; the hitherto passive 
 people of the theocracy is now roused to a more active concern for its national interests. 
 Appropriate as was the Chaldee tongue before the dawning of the new period, tlie language 
 of ills people and of the fathers, which the writer employs, in conmion with tlie prophets after 
 the exile, to convey his su|)])lemental and additional matter, is no less appropriate after tii»t 
 period has begun. With his attention fixed U|)on his people, the prophet now gave its final 
 and united form to his book, dunng the fijst year of the sole reign of Cyrus, as has been 
 noticed above. The Chaldee portions, which were composed during the captivity, and whose 
 form was due to that circumstance, received their place in the book in connection with this 
 final revision ; and there was no reason why the existing Chaldee material should bo rendered 
 into Hebrew for the benefit of his compatriots, who wnre familiar with the language of Baby- 
 Icin, especially as the Chaldee dress itself contributed not a little to the vivid representation of 
 the circumstances described." 
 
 We accept, in all its essential features, this hypothesis respecting the composition of out 
 liook as being highly probable and attractive ; f but instead of finding in a designed reference 
 to the Chaldfean oppressors the motive which induced the prophet to compose in Aramaic the 
 portions (chap, ii.-vii.) belonging to the e.xile, we would adopt the more simple and natural 
 view, that during tliat period he was accustomed to employ the Chaldee tongue, with which 
 he was chiefly familiar ; and that, in his written productions especially, he availed himself of 
 its use. to the exclusion of all others. This docs not iuvolve the admission that he may not 
 already at that time have acquired, by means of rending and stvdy, that marked familiarity 
 with the sacred language and literature of his people, which chap. i. 17, 20 (cf. with i. 4) 
 seem to imply. In this connsction we would also venture the supposition with respect to the 
 " occasional journalizing notes " of events belonging to the Chalda?an (and Median) period, 
 as found in chap, ii.-vii., that Daniel employed with design the chronicling style of the older 
 
 * [On the contrary, such a stat« of opprepsion, if it existed at the time (of which there is no evidence), would have ren- 
 Icred the foreign t«ngue odioup, and therefore been the strongest possible reason for avoiding it. Such was certainly tta 
 elTect at a later date, when Antiochns sought to introduce the Greek language and customs. In the Roman period, too, 
 «-e know that the comparatively mild rule of the conquerors made the Jews only cling the more tena nously to " tk£ eacied 
 tongue." at least for all their religious works.] 
 
 t [We beg leave, however, to dissent almost entirely from Kranichfeld's views on this head. A far more natural and 
 Bufficlent reason for the insertion of the Chaldee portions of the book is found in the fact, stated or implied in their respec- 
 tive contents that they were extracts, taken verbatim and as snch from the Babylonian state records. The supposition 
 that the whole book was originally written in Chaldee, and these parts alone left nntranslnted. ia destitute of a jiarticle of 
 ccnfirmation, either in the narrative, the style of the composition, or the usage of the contemijorary Jewish writers. 
 EspeciiiUy the insinuation that Daniel was so ignorant of his mother tongue, that he was obliged to learn it in m&Um life 
 by a slow and imperfect process, as the author a few sentences further on presumes, is contrary to oU the probabilitiee in 
 Uie case.] 
 
so INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 prophets, which regarded all the facts to he related from a strictly theocratical point of view, 
 and by which their supernatural features were rather intensified and idealized, than simplified 
 and reduced to sober events of common occurrence. Compare § 9, Note 1. 
 
 § 5. Authenticity of the Book. 
 
 a. Review of the Attacls on, and Defence of, its Genuineness. 
 
 The most ancient assailant of the genuineness of Daniel's prophecies of whom we have a 
 certain knowledge, was the Neo-platonic Porphyry (died A. D. 304). In his fifteen booka 
 " against the Christians," which are known to us only through Jerome so far as they contair 
 attacks on this book, he contends for its composition in Maccabsean times, and for the forged 
 character of its prophecies as mere vaticinia ex eventu* It is uncertain whether Jewish rabbins 
 who o])posed Cln-istianity were his predecessors and instructors in this assertion, or not. A 
 passage in the Talmud, which attributes the "recording" of several books of the Old Testa- 
 ment, and among them Daniel, to the members of the Great Synagogue beginning with Ezra,! 
 affords uo support to the opinion that the authenticity of the book was denied in pre-Christian 
 times in Jewish circles, since that " recording" is doubtless not to be understood in the sense 
 of an original composition, but rather as a renewed recording on the authority of an exact 
 tradition, or rather, of a new inspiration. The entii-e statement is, therefore, merely an empty 
 legend of the sort which is represented by the Jewish tales concerning the marvellous repro- 
 duction of the Pentateuch by Ezra, the origin of the Septuagint, etc. The statement of Isidore 
 of Seville (died A. D. 636) that " Ezekiel and Daniel are said to have been written by certain 
 wise men " J points back to the same muddy Jewish-rabbinical source. The " T\-ise men " in 
 this case can scarcely be other than the men of the Great Synagogue, and their " writing " of 
 the books of Ezekiel and Daniel cannot designate a forgery in any sense, but must be explained 
 as in the Talmudic tradition referred to. In short, the older period exhibits no definite 
 instance of the rejection of the authenticity of this prophetic book beyond the solitary one of 
 Porphyry ; and only the immediate ojiponents of this writer, as Methodius, Eusebius of 
 Ca»sarca, ApoUinaris of Laodicea, or church fathere of the age next following, were engaged in 
 the defense of the genuineness of the book, while refuting his objections. 
 
 In tlie 17th century the opponents of its genuineness became somewhat more numerous, but 
 tlicir olijections were at first without any scientific value. Spinoza {Tractat. theol.-polit., x. 130 
 et seq.) lield, that only chap, viii.-xii. were genuine ; chap, j.-vii. might originally have 
 formed component parts of the annals of the Chaldisan reigns, which, together with the final 
 fix e chapters, wei-e probably collected and published by a later hand. Hobbes (Leviathan, c. 
 33) doubted whether Daniel himself or a subsequent writer had recorded his projjhecies. Sii 
 Isaac Newton ( Ohservations upon the prophecies of Daniel and the Apocalypse of St. John, I. p. 
 10), whose view was followed, in the main, l)y Beausobre (Remarques sur le N. Test., I. p. 70), 
 tliought that " the last six chapters contained prophecies composed at various times by Daniel 
 himself, while the six former ones were a collection of historical essays by other authors." 
 By this, however, he did not intend to attack the credibility or the inspired character of the 
 book ; on tlie contrary, he declai'ed splemnly that " whoever rejects the jjrophecies of Daniel, 
 does as much as if he undermined the Christian religion, which, so to speak, is founded on 
 Daniel's prophecies of Christ." If he regarded the first six chapters as not the work of Daniel, 
 it was not because he objected to tlie wonders recorded in them, as Ziindel thinks (Eritische 
 Untersnchnngen, etc., p. 2), but Ijecause he believed that their mode of presentation indicated 
 one or several authors other than Daniel. It was different, however, with Collins, the deisti 
 
 • Jerome, Comm. in Dan. Pt-ophet. : *^ Contra prophetam Danietem scripnit Pojpftyriu.'i, nolenn ewm ab ipso, cuius 
 tnitcriptus ett nomine, esse compositum, seti a quodani, qui temporibUK Antiochi Epiphanvi fuerit in .Juda'a : et non ta7n 
 Dauielem Ventura diTi^se, quam ilium naraxse pr<vteiita. Denique quicquid usque ad Anliochum dixerit verttm kistoriam 
 contlnere, si quid autem ultra opinatus est. quia futura nescierit, esse mentitum.^^ 
 
 t Baha Itathra, f. 16 : " Viri Sijungnqit ntagmp sn-ipserunt K. N. D. O., quibus liierts signijlcnntur libri Ezechitlis, 
 dundt^rlm pruphetamni minoruni, Danietis et Estfiert^." 
 
 X Tpidore. OHf/f/., vi. 2 ; ^* Ezecfiiel et Daniel a viris quibnsdam sapieutihus scripti esse perhibentur."'' Cf . Hen^tenberjj, 
 Die Authentie des Daniel, etc., p. 3, where the opinion of Bortholiit (Eiut. ins. A. T., iv. 16Ub), tbut a doubt uf the Kenuine 
 nc«« rt Daniel is here implied, is reiectcd, and certainly with justice. 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 21 
 
 cal contemijorary of Newton, and -with the somewhat older Jewish atheist Uriel Acosta (about 
 A. D. 1600), who denied the credibility of the book together with its genuiileness, but with a 
 bungling criticism that is wholly involved in the prejudices of naturalistic dogmatism.* 
 
 Among the representatives of German rationalism, Semler contented himself with a very 
 general denial of the inspiration of the book of Daniel, for the reason that he " could discovei 
 no such benefit in it as God always designs to secui'e to man when he employs very peculiar 
 means for that end " (Freie Untersuchuag des Kanon, HI. 505). Michaelis and Eichhorn, while 
 contesting the integrity of the book (see above § 4, note 1), endeavored to establish the genu- 
 ineness of at least the last chapters. Eichhorn did not venture to assert the Maccabsean origin 
 of the whole book (in the 3d and 4th ed. of his EinJeitung), and consequently its forged 
 character, until Corrodi had declared it to be wholly the work of an impostor of the times of 
 Antiochus Epiphanes, f in his FreimiUkigen Veriuchen uher verschiedene in Tlieologie und hihl. 
 Kritih einsehlagende Oegenstdnde. Bertholdt now followed with his sujjer-ingenious mutilat- 
 ing hypothesis, which was wholly based on the assumption of forgery (cf. supra), and later, 
 Griesinger, Gesenius, De Wette, Kirmss, Redepenning, Von Lengerke, Knobel, Hitzig, Stiihelin, 
 Ililgenfeld, and others. { The greatest scientific ability and judgment in contesting the 
 authenticity of this book, but, at the same time, in breaking the force of the assaults on its 
 integrity, made by Berflioldt and Eichhorn, was displayed by Bleek. § The more recent 
 deniers of the genuineness of the book, with but few exceptions, agree with him in giving up 
 its historical character to a greater or less extent, and in assigning it to the Maccabsan jjeriod, 
 and regarding its prophecies as vaticinia ex eveiitu — hence, in holding essentially the same 
 critical position which was occupied by Porphyry. The grounds on which their assertions 
 are based are partly internal and partU' external in their nature. They are drawn in part from 
 the place of the book in the canon and its relation to the later Jewish apocryphal literature, 
 and in part from its peculiarities of language, the asserted mythical character of its historical 
 part, the chronological difficuldes which it is said to present, and the apocalyptical character 
 of its prophecies. In the following section we shall engage in a more detailed examination 
 of these arguments, and in that connection find opportunity to become acquainted with the 
 substantial and enduring services of the more recent defenders of the genuineness of the book. 
 Among tliem belong, of Protestants, Liiderwald, Stiiudlin, Beckhaus, Hengstenberg, Haver- 
 nick, Keil, Auberlen, Delitzsch, Ziindel, Volck, Kranichfeld, Pusey, Fuller, and others ; of 
 Roman Catholics, .Jalin, Hug, Herbst, Scholz, Speil, Reusch, and others. !| 
 
 * Cf. Wolf. Libl. BebraicOy II., p. 161 : Bertholdt, ae cited above ; and especially as affecting Newton's position on the 
 
 qnestion of Daniel, the instructive article " Is. Newton "' by B t, in Jlichaud's Biographie univeraeUe, torn. XXX., p. 
 
 397 Es. 
 
 t Cf. also Beleurhtnng der GescMchte des Kanon, I. 75 et seq. ; and Kritiache Geschichte des Chiiiasmus, I. 247 et seq., 
 by the same author. 
 
 t Griesinger, Xeue Geschichte der Attf^dtze im Buck Daniel, 1S12: Gesenius, Atlgem. Literaturzeituiig, 1S16. Xos. 5T 
 end SO ; De Wette, Eiuteicung inJt. A. T., ^ 255 et seq. ; Kirmss, Commeutatio historico-crilica, exhibens descriptionem el 
 cemura-n recenttiim de Dantelit libra opintonum, Jena. 1850; Redepenning, Theol. Studien und Krinken, 1833, p. S.31 ei 
 Beq. : 18.35. p. 1R3 et seq. : Von Lengerke, Das Bitch Dtrniel, 1S35 ; Knobel, Prnphetiamus der Hebrder, II. 389 et seq. ; 
 Hitzip. Knr-cgef. ereget. Handbitchzu Daniel, 1850: Suihelin. Spesielle Einleitung in die kanrm. BB. des A. Test., 1SG2; 
 Hilpenfeld. Die jiidiKhP Apokaluptik, 1S57. Compare also Dillmann, Veber die Bildnng der Sammlung heiliger Schrifteti 
 A. Tests., in the Jaftrbiicherfiir deutsrhe Theologie, 1858, p. 458 et seq. ; Kahnis, Lather. Dagmatik, I. p. 369 et seq, ; Th. 
 N'Jldeke, Dlealttestamentl. Literntur in einer Reihe von Avfsiilsen dargestellt (Leipsic. 1868). p. 216 et seq. ; R. Baxmann, 
 Ueber das B. Daniel, Studien und ICritlken, 1863, p. 452 et seq. {against Ziindel) ; and Davidson, Introd. to the Ola Test., 
 vol. III., p. 200 ss. 
 
 § reber Terfasser und Zweck des B. Daniel, in the Thenl. ZeitschHfl of Schleiermacher, De Wette. and Liicfce. 1822, III. 
 171 et seq. Further, Die Messianischen Wetssagungen im Buche Daniel (Review of Auberlen's work) in the Jahrbilclier 
 far deulsche Theologie, 1S60, I. ; and Einl. ins A. T., | 254 et seq. 
 
 I Liiderwald. Die sechs ersten Kapitel Daniels nach historiscJun Grilnden gepruft, Helmstadt, 1787 (against Eichhorn, 
 let ed.) ; Stiiudlin. Prii/ung eintger Meinungen tiher den Vrsprnng des B. Daniel, in den Xeuen Beitnigen i>ir Erliiuter 
 ung der Propheten, Gottingen, 1791 (specially against Corrodi) ; Beckhaus, Die IntegrUat der prophetischen Schriften, p 
 279 et seq. : Hengstenberg, Beitr. zur Einl. I. ; Die Autheruie des Daniel und die Integrittlt cles Sacharja, Berlin, 1&31 ; 
 Hivemick. Eommentar iiber d. Bxich Daniel, 18.32; Neue krit. Untersuchung fiber d. Buck Daniel, 1838; Einleitung im 
 A. T.. II. 9. p. 444 et .seq. ; Keil, Einl. % 1.35 et seq. ; Anberlen. Der Prophet Daniel und die OJTenbarung Johannis. Basis. 
 18S4 : 2d ed.. 1857 : F. Delitzsch. in Herzog's Real-Encycklop.. .\rt. Daniel (III. 271 et seq.) ; W. Volck. Vindicim Danieilax, 
 Dorpat, 1866 ; David Ziindel. Kritische Vntersuehnng liWr die Abfnssung.izeit des Burhes Daniel, Basle, 1S51 ; Kranich. 
 tald. Der Prophet Daniel. Berlin. 1868, p. 6 ot seq.; E. a Pusey, Daniel th£ prophet, Oxford, 1S64; J. XI. Fuller, jln mm» 
 
22 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 § 6. Authenticity of the Book (Continued), 
 b. Examination of the bxteknal reasons against the genuineness of Daniel. 
 
 Among the external grounds on which opponents are accustomed to contest tlie origin ol 
 (tie book with Daniel, its position among the Hagiograplia, in the third and last part of the 
 Hebrew canon, generally forms tlicir chief reliance. That this fact, so suspicious at first sight, 
 is by no means inexplicable, but rather has its adequate explanation in the peculiar prophetic 
 character of Daniel and his writings, as well as in the composition of the book, partly in 
 Hebrew and partly in Chaldee, has already been shown (§ 1, particularly notes 2 and 3, and 
 also § 2, note 3). We confine ourselves in this place to the suggestion tliat possibly the times 
 of severe trial and of conflict with anti-Christian powers, which the prophet of the exile fore- 
 told to his people, might seem to the scribes of the centuries succeeding the cajjtivity to pre- 
 sent too great a contrast to the subjects of the other prophets, who dwelt chiefly on the 
 prospects of deliverance that should come to the people of God ; and that, consequently, they 
 hesitated to acknowledge the full canonical value of this book, — in like manner as they ques- 
 tioned the canonical autliority of Ecclesiastes during an extended period, through the influence 
 of their optimistic hopes for the future (compare note 1). The book, however, is classed with 
 the other three greater prophets in the Septuagint ; but the conclusion that it originally 
 occupied this position in the Hebrew Bible as well (so Herbst, Speil, and others contend) does 
 not necessarily follow. Rather, the framere of the Hebrew canon seem to have attached 
 greater importance to the literary and lingual peculiarities of the book than to anything else, 
 and, for this reason, to have regarded its separation from the prophetical literature in the 
 narrower sense, as necessary, however much they might recognize in it the genuine work of a 
 prophet living under the exile.* 
 
 That the Ijook was in fact so recognized appears highly probable, in view of the manifold 
 references to its declarations in the later prophetic writings and in several of the Old-Testa- 
 ment apocrypha. Among the prophets after the captivity, whose reference to Daniel is utterly 
 denied by Bleek, Zechariah at least seems to betray an acquaintance with the prophecies of 
 Daniel, Iiis apocalyptic model and predecessor, particularly in the vision of the four horns 
 (chap. ii. 1), and in that of the four chariots (chap. vi. 1), which are referred by several 
 expositors to the four world-kingdoms of Daniel ; further, in chajj. xi. 8, where the three 
 shepherds, who should be cut off in one month by the Lord, are possibly a symbolizing of the 
 first three world-kingdoms of Daniel, and of their overthrow in rapid succession (compare 
 
 on the authenticiti^ nf the hooJ: of Daniel^ Cambridere, 1864. J. Jahn, Euil. ina A, Tes;., II. 624et seq. ; L. Hug, Ze/;«c/>n/< 
 fir das ErzhPit/Dim Freilmrg, VI. 150 ; Herljst, Elul. mil Zumlz by Welte, II. 2, p. SO et seq. ; Scholz. Einl. III. 489 et 
 peq. : S[)eil. De libri Ditnielifs aiithentia, Oppolii. ISfiO, and Zur Ecfuheit des B. Daniel, in the Tub, Theot. QuartalHchrifty 
 1863. p. 101 et seq. ; Reusch, Einl., 3d cd.. p. Ill et seq. 
 
 * [We may remark here, once for all. that a simpler reason for the position of Daniel among the Hagiographa rather 
 than among the Prophets, seems to be the fact that the author was not a prophet in the strictly technical sense of the 
 ter.Tl : i.e., like John the Baptist (John x. 41). he wrought no miracles, and his predictions were not directly inspired, but 
 only given mediately through angels or dreams, like those of Joseph (Gen. xli. 15, 16). Keil thus expresses it: "The 
 place occupied by this book in the Hebrew canon perfectly corresponds \vith the place of Daniel in the theocracy. Daniel 
 did not labor, as the rest of the prophets did whose writings form the class of the Xebiy'tn, as a prophet among his people 
 in the congregation of Israel, but he was a minister of state under the Chjildiean and Medo- Persian world-rulers. Although, 
 like David and Solomon, he possessed the gift of prophecy, and therefore was called itpo^tJttj? ( Sept. Josephns, N. T.), yet he 
 was not a i<''~r. i.e., a prophet in his official position and standing. Therefore his book, in its contents and form, is differ- 
 ent from the writings of the Nebty'iv. His prophecies are not prophetical discourses addressed to Israel or the nations, but 
 Tlsions, in whii h the development of the world-kingdoms and their relation to the kingdom of God are unveiled, and the 
 historical part of his book descrihos events of the time when Israel went into captivity among the heathen. For these 
 rejvons his book is not placed in the class of the Nebiij'tn, which reaches from Joshua to Malachi. — for these, according tc 
 tte \-:ew of him who arranged the canon, are wholly the writings of such as held the prophetic office, i.e., the office requir- 
 ing them openly, by word of month and by writing, to announce the word of God, — but in the class of the Kethubin, which 
 comjirehends sacred writings of different kinds, whose common character consists in this, that their authors did not fill the 
 propnetic office, as, e.g., Jonah in the theocracy ; which is confirmed by the fact that the Lamentations of Jeremiah are 
 comprehended in this class, since Jeremiah uttered these Lamentations over the destruction of Jerusalem and Judah not 
 a^ a prophet but as a member of that nation which was chastened by the Lord" (Cointnentari/ on Dan., Introd., p. 39, 30^ 
 EillDl). tS.).] 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE BOOK OF DA>"IEL. 23 
 
 Dote 2). Among the. Apocrypha — aside from uncertain analogies, such as exist between 
 Wlsd. v*17 and Dan. vil. 18, 27; Wisd. xiv. 16 and Dan. iii. — at least 1 Mace. i. 57 (" Aboni 
 inatlon of desolation," cf. Dan. ix. 27) and ii. 59 et seq. (the deliverance of Hananiah 
 Mishael, and Azariah from the fiery furnace, and of Daniel from the lion's den ; cf . Dan. iii. 
 16 et seq. ; vi. 21 et seq.), and still more the book of Baruch, may be regarded as unquestion- 
 able witnesses for the canonical dignity of our book in pre-Maccabaean times. Tlie analogies 
 to the prayer of Daniel (Dan. ix.), which the latter l)ook presents in chap. ii. (especially vs. 6, 
 
 11, 15, 19), and its references to Nebuchadnezzar and to "Belshazzar his son," in chap. i. 11, 
 
 12, are the more important and unquestionable as proof, because the Hebrew original, which 
 we are compelled to receive, indicates with tolerable certainty the origin of this book in pre- 
 Maccabfeau times, and probably as early as the fourth century B. C. Under these circumstances, 
 the fact that Ecclesiasticus, whose Hebrew original likewise indicates its composition before 
 the period of the Maccabees, contains no definite allusions to Daniel, and especially that his 
 name is not mentioned in its enumeration (chap, xlix.) of Israel's great religious heroes, which 
 includes Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and the twelve minor prophets, is of no considerable importance. 
 This feature may be regarded as ])urely accidental, and the rather, as the immediate context 
 (chap. xlix. 13 et seq.) mentions Zerubbaljel, Joshua, and Nehemiah among the great men of 
 the time immediately after the exile, but omits tlie name of Ezra; as many of the prominent 
 champions of Israel are not included in tlie remarkable list beginning with chap, xlv., e.g., 
 Joseph, Gideon, Samson, Jehoshaphat, etc. ; and finally, as tlie silence of Ecclus. in regard to 
 Daniel " is more than balanced by his mention in Ezek. xiv. and xx^aii." (Reusch, p. 112 ; cf. 
 Bupra, § 2, note 2). Moreover, the words iKaaToi (iva. KaTtcrriafv fjyovfiffov in Ecclus. xvii. 17 
 probably contain an allusion to the angelology of Daniel, and are to be explained in accord- 
 ance with Dan. x. 13, 20; xii. 1 (Havernick, £1)1!. II. 2, p. 451). Concerning the SyhiUine 
 Oracles as an esjjecially important source of proofs for the authenticity of Daniel, see 
 note 3. 
 
 Tlie passage in the Jewish Antiquities of Josephus, Book XI. chap. 8, which relates that, 
 among othei-s, the prophecies of Daniel were shown by the Jewish priests to Alexiinder the 
 Great, on the occasion of his visit to Jerusalem, and that he was greatly pleased by the oracle 
 respecting tlie overthrow of the Persian dynasty, which so clearly referred to him, might con- 
 stitute an important testimony for the genuineness of this book, or for its origin during the 
 exile ; but many embellishments and internal improbabilities seem to lower the value of this 
 tradition to a degree that forbids the definite conclusion that the statement concerning the 
 book of Daniel is to be included in the genuine liistorical kernel of this incident, the essential 
 truth of which, however, is indicated by various considerations (e.g. the noteworthy and cer- 
 tainly historical statement that, at the request of the high-priest, Alexander granted immunity 
 from taxation to the Jews during every seventh or fallow year). So much the more decisive 
 is the testimony of the Kew Testament in support of the inspired character of the book and 
 of the prophetic dignity of its author, which occurs in the familiar reference of Our Lord to 
 Daniel ix. 27, in his great eschatological discourse (Matt. xxiv. 15 : vrm ovv Xhjjrf to ffSiXvyi^a 
 
 rfji tprj^oifreoii to pr)^fp dla AavirfX rnv tt ft n(}) tj to v fVros- fV roVo) dytca — 6 dvayLvuiaKoiv 
 i/ofirco, etc.), and which is paralleled by other unmistakable allusions to Daniel's expressions 
 in the discourses of Our Lord. Among these we reckon the constantly rejieated designation 
 of himself as " the Sou of Man," the adoption of which phrase from Dan. vii. 13 is open to no 
 serious objection, while its identity with Daniel's SjS ^3 is unmistakaljly revealed, especially 
 in prophetic descriptions, such as Matt. xix. 28 ; xxiv. 30 ; xxvi. 64. The prophecy concern- 
 ing the resurrection of the good and the evil, in John v. 28, 29, like\>'ise, is clearly based on 
 chap. xii. 2, 3, of this book. Among the numerous allusions to our prophet which are found 
 in the writings of the Apostles, we instance merely 2 Thess. ii. 3 et seq. ; 1 Pet. i. 10-12 (cf. 
 Dan. iii. and vi.), and the Apocalypse, which latter book is based throughout on the prophe- 
 cies of Daniel, and therefore vouches, with its entire contents, for the Divinely inspired and 
 canonical character of this book. 
 
 Note 1 .— Kranichfeld, p. 8 et seq., explains in a striking manner to what extent the peculiar 
 
£4- INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 theological, or rather eschatological, character of Daniel's prophecies may have been influential 
 in retarding their admission into the canon during the pre-Maccabsean period : " The proph- 
 ecies of Daniel, in contrast with the oracles of earlier prophets, foretell a period of severe 
 tribulation iu the future, which the sufferings of the exile have not warded off; and they pre- 
 dict this far more constantly, positively, and directly than does the book of Zechariah, or any 
 prophecy of the pel iod succeeding the captivity, the aim of the latter being chiefly to comfort 
 and encourage the returned exiles in their discouraging circumstances. There was thus a 
 Bufficitnt reason, in the character of the book itself, to warrant its being received with caution 
 by the age succeeding the exile, and even to justify the temporary ignoring of its claims ; for, 
 on the one hand, it contradicted the sentiment of that age, which indulged in exalted hopes 
 of deliverance based on the older prophecies, and, on the other, it had emanated from one who 
 was not even a prophet by a specific call. A similar treatment appears to have been accorded 
 to the book of Ecclesiastes during an extended period, which likewise resulted from its con- 
 tents, although differing extremely from those of Daniel. In the Asmonsean period, however, 
 the impression produced by the religious and political events which illustrated its projihecies, 
 secured the book a ready reception into the canon, although it was excluded from the second 
 part of ^he sacred writings, which had proliably been closed for centuries, and was limited by 
 traditional usage. This simple explanation, which removes every difficulty in relation to the 
 l>lace of the book in the canon, is not contradicted by the remark of Josephus {Contra Apion, 
 I. S) concerning the closing of the canon in tlie time of Artaxerxcs, which is, in the main, 
 correct. That statement, as Keil correctly observes (Einl. § 154), refers to the time of the 
 composition of the sacred wntings, in hamiony with the fact that neither Ecclesiasticus nor 
 1 Maccabees (which were composed only two centuries before Christ) found a place in the 
 canon; but it does not preclude the subsequent conclusion of the collecting and receiving into 
 the third section of the canon of older sacred writings." Similar views are advanced, so far 
 as the last question is concerned, by Hengstenberg, Beitr. I. 23 et seq., and Ziindel, Krit. 
 Uniersuchnngen, p. 196 et seq.. 214 et seq. Also compare below, § 10. 
 
 Note 2. — Among older expositors, Jerome, Abarbanel, Kimchi, and Drusius, refer Zechari- 
 ah's visious of the four horns (ii. 1), etc.. and of the four chariots (vi. 1 et seq.), to the world- 
 kingdoms of Daniel, as do Baumgarten {Kdclitgesichte dfs Sachnrja), Ziindel (Kritisc/ie Unter- 
 suchungen, 249), Pusey (Daniel, p. 357), Fiiller, Kliefoth, and W. Volck (Vindiciw, Daiiielicas, 
 p. 3 et secj.), among modems; while Kohler (Nache-rilische Prophiten, ii. 1) and a majority of 
 later expositors deny the fact of such a relation. Koliler, however, {ihid., II. p. 138) agrees 
 with Von Hofmann, Elirard, Kliefoth, Ziindel, and Volck (I. c, p. 26) in referring the "three 
 sliej)herds," Zech. xi. 8, to the first three world-kingdoms, and assumes, in addition, a relation 
 of the prophecy against Javan, Zech. ix. 13, to Dan. viii. 8 et seq. But the correspondence of 
 these latter passages, if it is to be accepted at all, is of minor importance, because the chapters 
 Zech. ix.-xi. jjossibly originated with a prophet Zechariah, who flourished before the exile, 
 and therefore may be older than the Daniel of the captivity. Compare, however, the argu- 
 ments adduced to the contrary by Hengstenberg, Beit): I. 366 et seq. ; also by the editor of 
 this Bible-work, in vol. I. of the Old Test., p. 44 [Am. ed.]. 
 
 Note 3. — In relation to the references in Ecclesiasticus to Daniel, see Ziindel, p. 188; and 
 the same, p. 191 et seq., concerning the much clearer and more important references in the 
 book of Barueh. where the opinion of Dillmann, as stated in his essay on the formation of the 
 Old-Test, cnnon {Jahrhh. f. deutsche Theol, 1858, p. 480), is quoted: " The book of Barueh, 
 by no means a contemptible after-piece of prophetical literature, may have been in circulation 
 in its Hebrew form as early as the fourth century B. C. ; " and where, at the same time, it is 
 shown most clearly that the pseudo-Baruch was undeniably acquainted with the book of 
 Daniel, and imitated many of its features, particularly the prophet's prayer, Dan. ix. Heng- 
 stenberg, p. 288 et seq., Havemick, Einl. II. 2, 459 et seq., and Pusey, in his Commentary, p. 
 370, show that the echoes of this liook found in 1 Maccabees (which are so clear and unmis- 
 takable, that scholars like Bleek, De Wette, and Grimm [on 1 Mace. i. 57] have acknowledged 
 this occurrence) are entitled, despite the composition of the book toward the close of the 
 second century B. C, to rank as indirect testimonies for the origin of Daniel prior to the 
 Asmonaian period. Concerning Ecclus. and its omission of Daniel from the i'tivtit Traripaiv, 
 chapters xliv.-l., see Havernick, p. 451 et seq. ; Herbst, Einl. II. 2, 88; Keil, Einl., p. 452; 
 Hengstenberg, p. 21 sq. ; Ki-auichfeld, p. 10, etc. Some of these writers, however (e.g., 
 Havemick, Keil, Hengstenberg, together with Brctschneider and otliers), go too far when they 
 reject the passage, chap. xlix. 12, as not genuine, and thus exclude all mention of the twelve 
 minor projjhets as well ; for there is no sufficient reason to sU3i)ect that verse on critical 
 grounds (cf. Bleek, Einl., p. 589). It has been pointed out. especially by Havernick (Einl. 
 1. c, p. 457 et seq.) and Ziindel (p. 173 et seq. ; ef. p. 140 et seq.), that the Alexandrian ver- 
 sion of the Old Testament in general, and of Daniel in jiarticular (cf. infra. § 11), which 
 jjroliably origin.ated in the second century B. C, reveals many traces of the existence of onf 
 prophetical book prior to the Maccabtean age; that, for instance, its rendering of Dent, xxxii. 
 8, vrt thfutfji^^if u inl'WTn^ l^vTj, tcTrjotv bpia ii^vuv Kara apt-i^uov fljj^/w?' i?fo(', seems to rest on Dan. 
 X 1-^ 20. like the ruMamffe. Ecclus. ivii. 17, which is cited above; and that citations from its 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 25 
 
 version of Daniel occur in the first booli of Maccabees (1. 57), as well as in the SiVjylliue 
 oracles (iii. 396, 613, etc.) ; facts tliat argue with great force the origin of this Greek version 
 in tlie Asnion;ean period, and tlierefore, at the very time to which the negative criticism 
 assigns tlie original Daniel itself. The testimonies drawn from the Apocryplia are, -ndth rare 
 exceptions, surpassed in importance and evidential force by the agreement of the Sibyllines 
 with Daniel, since tlie unanimous consent of competent scholars, such as Bleek, Liicke, Fried- 
 lieb, and otliers, ascriljes the composition of the portion of the Oracula tSibyllhia in question 
 (lib. III., V. 35-746) to an Alexandrian Jew, and dates it in the first Iialf of tlie second cen- 
 tury, or, more probably, about 100 B. C. The correspondence of many of these verses to 
 passages in our prophetical book, or rather in its Alexandrian version, cannot be questioned; 
 and the suppositioB ventured by Bleek, that both (pseudo-Daniel and the pseudo-Sibyllines) 
 sprang from a common source of a more ancient time, is merely an arbitrary evasion to hide 
 his embarrassment. Compare SibylL, lib. III., v. 396 ss. : 'Pi^av lav ye 6i6ovT, >r-' «ii noipm $finTo- 
 
 '/.oiyo^, 'Ek 6tKa drj Kepdrijv irapa 6fj ipvrov u?.'/.o tpvTevact ttal t6t£ dij 7rafia<i)v6/i£vov KEpa^ 
 
 apict, with the Sept. at Dan. vii. 7, 8, 11, 30; — also Sihyll.. III. 613: T^avra 6i cv^nOTpa aal ndvra 
 KaKojit ava-'Ariaii, with Sept., Dan. vii. 23, 24. 
 
 Note 4. — Hengstenberg (p. 258 etseq., 277etscq.) is especially thorough and profound in his 
 examination of the testimony of Christ and the apostles, and of Josephus in A)it., XI. 8, 5. He 
 may attempt too much in seeking to establish the historical character of all the details connected 
 with the perhaps somewhat legendary narrative respecting the incident by which Alexander 
 became acquainted with Daniel's prophecies ; but his statements convey the decided impres- 
 sion that the narrative in question is not a pure invention ■vvithout any foundation in fact. 
 He quotes, on page 288, the significant judgment of H. Leo respecting the credibility of this 
 account (as expressed in his VorUsu/igen iiher die Geschichte des jiidUch-eii Volis, p. 200, which, 
 as is well known, breathe anything rather than a believing spirit): "The entire narrative 
 contains nothing that is really improbable. An armed resistance on the part of the high-priest 
 would have been madness ; he may therefore have gone out to meet Alexander in peace. It is 
 also well known that Alexander sought to impress the Asiatic world with tlie belief that he was 
 in league with the gods of the nations whom he had conquered. It has been considered 
 improliable that Alexander should not liave hastened from Gaza directly to Egypt ; but to go 
 from Gaza to Egypt by way of .Jerusalem involved at most an additional journey of a few 
 days, and Jud;iea was not a point to be disregarded in an expedition to Egypt. It would be 
 unwise to leave this mountain region in the rear, in the possession of an enemy." See also 
 Ziindel, p. 238 et seq., where the hypercritical objection of Hitzig, "The book was not pro- 
 duced, and 'if it had existed at the time, it would certainly have been shown" {Ueidelherger 
 Jahrh., 1832. II., p. 235), is justly regarded as an indirect testimony for the trustworthiness of 
 the account by Josephus. 
 
 § 7. Authenticity op the Book (Continued). 
 
 c. Examination of the intern.vl reasons against its genuineness, and moi'e particularly of 
 those derived from peculiarities of langiinge and style. 
 
 It has already been repeatedly shown that the lingual structure of this book — the transition 
 into Chaldee, chap. ii. 4, the essential identity of this idiom with the Chaldee of Ezra, the 
 Hebraisms and Parseeisms contained in it, and finally, the marked Chaldaizing tendency of 
 the Hebrew poi-tions, similar to the style of Ezekiel — that all this corresponds fully witli the 
 assumption of an author who flourished at the Chaldsean court of Babylon, and who was of 
 Jewish birth, but educated in the customs and wisdom of the Chalda?ans (see § 1, note 3, and 
 § 4, note 2). It is only necessary, in this connection, to refer to the Greek expressions, which 
 have been regarded as proving the later origin of the work in an especially decisive way. 
 Bertholdt was still able to enumerate ten such expressions, but the more recent ojiponents of 
 the genuineness of the book find the number reduced to three or four, as the result of a care- 
 ful word-criticism. All of these are names of musical instruments, such as miglit easily have 
 been introduced at Babylon by commercial intercourse, even prior to the exile. They com- 
 prise the terms V^;n3DB=:i/'a/.77)fK0i', nVB>aiD = CTiy/i4wW«, Di'n.n"'ip = Mi9n/j;r, and 8<r3p= (TO/i/irK;?, 
 all of which occur in the history of Daniel's friends and the fiery furnace (ch.ap. iii. 5, 7, 10, 
 15). But even among these the third is possibly of Oriental origin, and the last almost cer- 
 .tainly so. The aa/i vki/ or CaiiuvKi/ (also 'la/iivKy) of the Greek was, according to AtheniEua 
 (Deipnosoph. iv. 183; xiv. 634), a Syrian invention, and the Shemitic «2aa (related to "^^O^ 
 "to interweave") se ms therefore to be the primitive form, from whii h the Gr;ecizcd atr //iat, 
 « derived, m*""';; may possibly be the Persian Si-tareh, " six-stringed," and may stand 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 related to 'niSapi^, which is to be derived from the same source, as a sister rather than as a 
 mother. Pareau, Hengstenberg, Havemick, Haneberg, and others, have even attempted to 
 trace the two remaining terms to a Shemitic source, and have accordingly derived ""^^ciio 
 from r]^D, " a reed, and V''^'^^ from OB, " a hand," and "ir:, " to leap " (therefore, " strings 
 that are plaj'ed by hand "). But excessive difficulties stand in the way of such an etymology, 
 particularly the Greek sound in the endings of the two words (pnr^wC seems to be singular 
 rather than plural), and the circumstance that m/Kpuvla, if not fa'/XTtpiov, occurs in the classics 
 as the name of an instrument, as may be seen in the passage Polyb. Fragm., 31, t. 4, and as 
 may be concluded from the Italian designation of the bagpipe, znmhogna er sampogna, which 
 is proljably derived from that source. On the other hand, the assumption that the instruments 
 of the Greeks were in use among the Chalda>ans early in the sixth century B. C, or even in the 
 seventh and eighth, involves no difficulty whatever. It would seem strange, rather, if no traces 
 of commercial intercourse with the Greeks at about the middle of the sixth century B. C. were 
 found in Babylon, the primitive "city of merchants" (Ezek. xvii. 4, 12; of. Josh. vii. 21), 
 since the Assyrian kings Esar-haddon, Sargon, and Sennacherib were involved in either 
 friendly or hostile relations wth the Greeks of Asia Minor, as early as the eighth century B C. 
 Further, "Javan" is mentioned in tlie cuneiform inscriptions of Sargon among the nations 
 who were tributary to Assyria ; according to Strabo, xiii. 3, 2, a Greek, the brother of the 
 poet Alcajus, served in the armies of Nebuchadnezzar as a mercenary, or, more probably, as the 
 leader of a band of Greek mercenaries ; the Ionian philosopher, Auaximander, displays con- 
 siderable knowledge of the Orient in his map of the world, which was prepared in the same 
 period ; and finally, commercial relations of considerable importance were maintained be- 
 tween the lands of the Euphrates and the Greek colonies of Asia Minor, certainly in the eighth 
 century B. C, and possibly, through Phoenician channels, as early as the days of Homer (see 
 notes 1 and 2). 
 
 It appears, therefore, that no unanswerable objection against the origin of this book during 
 the period of the captivity can be established on the ground of its peculiarities of language; 
 nor do the remaining literary peculiarities, such as the method in which the prophet refers to 
 himself and his personal relations, afford the slightest reason to doubt its composition by 
 Daniel. "The honorable references to Daniel (chap. i. 17, 19; v. 11 et seq. ; vi. 4 ; ix. 23; 
 X. 11) are analogous to many expressions employed by the Apostle Paul concerning himself, 
 e.g., 1 Cor. xv. 10 ; 2 Cor. xi. 5 et seq. ; xii. 2 et seq. ; and they are necessary, either to com- 
 plete the historical representation, as in the case of the predicate ' greatly beloved,' applied 
 to him by the angel in chap. ix. 23 ; x. 11, or in the honorable mention of his name to Bel- 
 shazzar by the queen, chap. v. 11, 12 ; or they belong to 25assages which aim to honor God, 
 who had endowed his servant with miraculous wisdom (i. 17 et seq. ; vi. 4). Consequentlj', 
 they contain no trace of Pelagian self-laudation which could militate against the opinion that 
 the book which bears his name was composed by himself " (Keil, Einl., p. 452 sq.). — Nor 
 does the religiously moral deportment of the prophet, as it is described by himself in this 
 book, afford a proof in any other direction against its composition in the period of the exile. 
 His custom of observing three seasons of daily prayer, as mentioned in chap. vi. 11, his fre- 
 quent fasts (chap. ix. 3 ; x. 3, 12), and the strict abstinence from profane food of himself and 
 his youtliful friends (chap. i. 8 et seq.), do not necessarily indicate a period sul)sequent to the 
 exile, and even as late as that of the Asmouaeans, as is abundantly shown by passages lika 
 Psa. Iv. 18 ; Ezra viii. 21 ct seq. ; ix. 3 et seq. ; Nell. i. 4 ; ix. 1 ; Zech. vii. 3 ; viii. 19 ; Hos. 
 ix. 3, 4; Ezek. xxii. 26 ; xliv. 23; xxxiii. 25, etc. His dogmatic position no more requires an 
 explanation based on the condition or experiences of God's people after the exile, than such 
 ascetic habits, or the exalted value, which, according to chap. ii. 18; ix. 3; x. 2 et seq., he 
 attaches to prayer and intercession, oblige us to regard him as involved in the narrow-minded 
 legal and work-righteous conceptions of tlie latgr .ludaism. His description of the Messiah 
 and his kingdom — in contrast witli the apocryphal literature of the period after the captivity, 
 from which Messianic ideas and hopes are almost entirely wanting — is intimately related to 
 the predictions of the older prophets, and especially of Isaiali (cf. Isa. ix. 4 et seq. with Dan. 
 vii. 13 sq.). The relation between the expected founding of Messiah's kingdom and the gen- 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE BOOK OF DAXIEL. 27 
 
 eral resurrection of the dead, ■which he indicates in chap. xii. 2 et seq., corresponds to tka 
 older prophetic descriptions in Isa. xxiv. ; Ixvi. 22-24 ; Ezek. xxxvii., but finds no analogy in 
 the later apocryphal literature, unless we except 2 Mace. vii. 9 et seq , which passage, however, 
 is probably based on Dan. xii. as its model. Nor does the angelology of the book present 
 any specific feature which points to a period later than the exile ; much less does it indicate 
 that its teachings result from the influence of the religious thought of Persia on Judaism. 
 Rather, they are closely related, on the one hand, to the angelology of Ezekiel and Zechariab 
 fcf., e.g., Ezek. ix. 10 ; also i. 26, and Zech. i.-vi.), and, on the other, they are rooted in the 
 much older views and experiences of the time before the exile ; e.g., the idea of protecting 
 spirits of single states is founded in Isa. xxiv. 21 ; that concerning princes of the angels 
 (chap. X. 13, 20 ; xii. 1), doubtless in the familiar account in the book of Joshua respecting 
 the "captain of the Lord's host" (Josh. 14). Therefore, in this direction also, the literary 
 character of the book reveals nothing that indicates an anti-Daniel or a pseudo-Daniel (cf. 
 note 3). 
 
 Note 1. — Delitzsch observes, p. 274, on the relationship of the Hebrew of Daniel to that of 
 Ezekiel, that '•the Hebrew of this book is closely related especially to that of Ezekiel, whose 
 book may b;'. and doubtless is, included among the D^-tO in chajj. ix. 2 ; and it is a surpris- 
 ing accident that it conforms somewhat to Habakkuk also, whom tradition associates with 
 Daniel."' The following expressions are adduced in support of the former correspondence, Ijy 
 Haveinick {N. Irit. Vnterss., p. 97 et seq.) and Keil {Eiul., p. 446) : the vocative n^N 1?, chap, 
 viii. 17 ; ~nt, brightness, xii. 3, cf. Ezek. viii. 2; -^n, to render liable to penalty, i. 10, and 
 2in, debt, Ezek. xviii. 7 ; 3r3 for IpO, x. 21, cf. Ezek. xiii. 9 ; C'^'^S =12b, s. 5, cf. Ezek. ix 
 8, 3; 3?~S, royal food, i. 5, and 33, food, Ezek. xxv. 27; bio, polished, x. 6, cf. Ezek. i. 7, 
 etc. With reference to the relation of the Aramaic of Daniel to that of Ezra, and to the 
 Chaldee of the Targums of a later age, consult Havernick and Keil, as above, and cf. supra, 
 § 1, note 3. It is the peculiar merit of Pusey to have established, in his profoundly learned 
 commentary, tlie high antiquity of the Chaldaism of Daniel, in compari.son with that of the 
 Targums and the rabbins, by his examination of numerous individual forms, and especially 
 of the many asserted Hebraisms of this book. 
 
 Note 2. — On the question whetlier the musical instruments of the Greeks may have been 
 known to the Babylonians, and even to the Assyrian;?, consult Delitzsch, p. 274 ; Auberlen, 
 p. 12 et seq. ; Kranielifeld, p. 48 et seq., and the passage cited by the two former from Joh. 
 Brandis, JJiher den filstur. Gewinii ana der EnUifferung der assyrischen Inschriften, 1856, p. 1 
 et seq., where the observation is made, in relation to the commercial intercourse of the ancient 
 Greeks, that " the extended commerce of the Greek colonies would frequently lead their mer- 
 chants to Assyrian countries, since they penetrated even to the inhospitable steppes ou the 
 Dnieper and the Don. Their niost important enterprises were probably connected with the 
 Assyrian provinces of Asia Minor, and above all with the countries on the coasts of Pontus 
 and alung the Jlediterranean Sea, doubtless including Lydia also, where the Assyrian .suprem- 
 acy seems to have been maintained during more than five hundred years, and almost to the 
 close of the eighth century B. C. These nations must also have met in Cyprus, where the 
 Greeks traded at an early period, and where the Assyrians had firmly established themselves. 
 We aie obliged to be content with a supposition that Greeks came as far as Assyria proper, in 
 the capacity of merchants ; but Greek soldiers certainly accompanied Esar-haddon, the first 
 among the Assyrian rulers to form a corps of mercenaries (Abydenus inEuseb., Chron. Armen., 
 ed. Aucher I., p. .53). on his marches tlirough Asia," etc. Comijare also the interesting work 
 by Brandis, Z*!!* Hum-, Mass- vnd Gewichtsweaen in Vorderasun his mif Aleinndfr d. Gr., 1867. 
 Respecting the Greeks as the musicians kut' (^•ix'i'' iu the world, see Auberlen, as above : 
 " Attention may also be directed to the fact that the Greeks, as the patrons of art, occu- 
 pied a position in the ancient world similar to that conceded to the Italians in the modem; 
 and how many are the musical terms which we Germans have adopted from the Italians ! 
 Poetry and music flourished at fir.st precisely among the Greeks of Asia Minor, and prior to 
 the nintli century B. C, about the middle of which Homer lived there, according to the not 
 improbable statement of Herodotus (II. .53). Greek artists were employed by the Lydians. 
 among whom music was likewise cultivated, so that the Greeks adopted the Lydian key from 
 them. But Lydia was not merely dependent on Assyria to a greater or less extent, down to 
 the close of the eighth century, but afterward maintained intimate relations with Babylon," etc. 
 Concerning the \//iiXt^()ioi' or Pesantrrin. com'pare, in addition, tlie remark of Kranielifeld : " It 
 may be oliserved. iu relation to the oljjection that the \j/iiATr')/ii..i/ is mentioned only by latei 
 writers among the Greeks, that tho argumcntum cr silentio raised, on tliat ground, against the 
 earlier existence of that instrument, is sutficiently met by the probable representation of a 
 
28 INTRODUCTION TO THE PEOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 yj/nXrrjpioi' on the monuments of Sennacherib, cf. Layard, Nineveh and Bahylon, c. 20, p. 454, 
 The persons who there welcome tlie Assyrian leaders with dances, songs, and plays, are pre- 
 ceded by five musicians, three of whom carry harps ■with many strings, a fourth has a double 
 flute, and the fifth is furnished with an instrument which Layard comjjares to the Santer oi 
 Egypt = p^riJDD (Gresenius, Thes., p. 1116). It consists of a number of strings which are 
 stretched on a resonant frame, and corresponds to the description of the psalterium f urnisbed 
 by Augustine (on Psa. xxxii.)." 
 
 Note 3. — -With reference to the feasibility of reconciling the religious-ethical representations 
 of this book with the hypothesis of its origin during the captivity, see Heugstenberg, p. 137 
 et seq. ; Hiivernick, Neiie l-rit. Unterss., p. 32 et seq. ; and Oehler in Tholuck's Litfrarischer 
 Ameiger, 1843, Nos. 49 and 50, and particularly p. 888 et seq. The dependence of Daniel's 
 angelology on that of Zoroaster has been frequently asserted, since it was first stated by 
 Gesenius, Bertholdt, Winer, and others ; but Martin Haug, of Bombay, decidedly advocates 
 the opinion, in his Essays on the Sacred Language, Writings, and Jieligioti of ths Parsces (Bom- 
 bay, 1862), that the religious development of Judaism was independent of that of Parseeism, 
 without, on that account, attempting to deny to them a common source, as an explanation of 
 their manifold analogies (compare Ausland, 1862, p. 937 ; 1865, p. 1079 et seq.). The simple 
 circumstance that a scholar so thoroughly acquainted with the Zend religion and literature, 
 should hold to this opinion, may serve as a warning to receive with caution such views of 
 their relations as are al>ove referred to. The opinion of Max JluUer, as expressed in his 
 philosophical meditations on religion {Chips from a German Worlshop, London, 1867), 
 agrees fully with tliat of Haug ; while E. Renan {De V Origine du Language, p. 230 ; Vie de 
 Jesus', p. 15 s.) and Fr. Spiegel (Genesis und A-oesta, in Ausland, 1868, No. 12 et seq.) assert a 
 direct adoption from the religious writings of the ancient Persians of many theological and 
 angelological conceptions by the later Judaism after the time of the Achremenidoe. Ililgen- 
 feld also (Das Judenthxim im persischen Zeitalter in the Zeitschrift/ur icissenschaftl. Theologie, 
 
 1866, No. 4, p. 398 et seq.) and Alex. Kohut, JJeher die jiidische Angelologie und Ddmoiwlogie 
 in ihrer Ahhiingigheit vom Parsismus (taken from the Zeitschrift der deutsrh-mvrgenl. Gesellsch., 
 Vol. IV., No. 3) Leipsic, 1866, advocate the same view. But the sober investigations of men 
 of the most diverse tendencies agree in reaching substantially the same result, namely, proving 
 that at most a few names of angels remain to a profounder and more unprejudiced criticism, 
 as elements of the Jewish angelology which are really derived from Parseeism, and that even 
 these names are not chiefly of Aryan, but of Shemitic and even genuinely Heljrew origin — as 
 is especially true of those found in Daniel (Michael and Gabriel). Compare Heuss (Histoire 
 de la theologie Chretienne au Sieel-e apostolique, I., 93 et seq.), Dillmann (Jahrhh. fiir de.utsche 
 Theologie, 1858, p. 419 et seq.), Hiivernick (Vorll. iiher die Theologie des A. Ts., 2d ed., pub- 
 lished by H. Schultz, p. 92 et seq. ; 118 et seq.) ; Hofmann (Schri/theweis, I. 281, 291 et seq.) ; 
 A. Kohler (A'achexilische P-opf<eten, II. 2'd et seq.); Haneberg (in Reusch, Theol. Literaturhl., 
 
 1867, No. 3, p. 72). See the exegetical notes on chap. viii. 10, 15, and compare the instructive 
 treatise of Erich Haupt, UeJier die Beriihrungen des A. Ts. mit der Religion Zarathustra''s 
 (Treptow on the Rhine, 1867), which argues positively against the adoption from Parseeism of 
 any religious conceptions whatever in the canonical portions of the O. T. 
 
 § 8. AtJTHENTiciTT OF THE BooK (Continued), 
 d. Examination of the internal evidences against its genuineness, iased on HiSTORiCAIi 
 
 DIFFICULTIES. 
 
 The charges raised against the book of Daniel, on the ground of asserted contradictions of 
 the accounts of extra-biblical history respecting the Babylonian and Medo-Persian kingdoms, 
 are either Uistorico-social in their nature, or politico-historical. They relate either to the 
 antiquities of those kingdoms, or to their chronological relations and changes of dynasties. 
 
 1. The former class of difiiculties, namely those affecting the social progress and customs of 
 the times, lie within the domain of the history of civilization and morals. They arise from the 
 deportment of Neb\ichadnezzar and Belshazzar toward the oneirocritical magicians on the one 
 hand, and toward Daniel on the other (chaps, ii. and v.) ; further, from the colossal size and 
 ugliness of the image which was to be worshipped, and from the cruelty of the punishment 
 im))osed on the friends of Daniel, because of their refusal to obey the decree which required 
 such worship (chap, iii.) ; from the lycanthropy of Nebuchadnezzar, as not substantiated by 
 extra- biblical historians (chap, iv.) ; from the alleged incredibility of the statement that king 
 Darius issued a decree ordaining that divine honors should be paid exclusively to him ; and 
 from the assumed funnel-like shape of the lion's den into which Daniel was thrown (cliap. vi.) 
 All of these difficulties are merely such in appearance. An observer who understands the 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 29 
 
 spirit of the aucient as ivell as the niodeni Oriental despotism (of w.iich the case of Theodore 
 o.f Abyssinia, with his whims and fluctuating views, may serve as a late example), and esp& 
 cially who at the same time remembers the tendency of the Babylonian and Medo- Persian 
 rulers to syncretistic arbitrariness and mingling of religions, will not deem it strange that 
 Neljuchadnezzar should address to his magicians the unreasonable demand, not merely to 
 interpret his dream, but even to recall its contents, which wore forgotten by him, and that ha 
 should condemn them to death when they failed to satisfy his demands, while he rewarded 
 Daniel, who accomplished the task, with the highest honors and emoluments. Such an obser- 
 ver will not be surprised to find the king, in chap, iii., directing a monstrous idolatrous 
 demonstration against the God of Daniel and his friends, and consigning the latter to so 
 glorious a martyrdom; nor to behold, in chap, v., the striking contrast between the blas- 
 phemous insults and excesses of Belshazzar at the first, and the favor afterward bestowed by 
 him on Daniel ; nor yet, in chap, vi., the similar change in the disposition of Darius as 
 revealed in his conduct. That, Ijy Divine retribution, the arbitrary and passionate temper of 
 Nebuchadnezzar should develop into madness, and result in the infliction, during several 
 years, of a mental disorder of the most terrible nature, is no more surjirising than are any of 
 tlie various cases of lycanthropy recorded in the annals of psychiatry, among whicli that of 
 the Armenian king, Tiridates III., is the most familiar and historically important. Traces of 
 this awful episode in the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, although not found in other historians of 
 aucient times, may yet l)e shown with sufficient clearness in the Babylonian Berosus and in 
 Abydenus (see note 1). With regard to the less important details which have e.xcited criti- 
 cism, as being legendary or at least suspicious, it may be observed that the description of the 
 idol in the plain of Dura (chap. iii. 1 et seq.), which reached a height of sixty cubits, cor- 
 responds substantially with the descriptions transmitted through other channels of uncoutli 
 colossal images, such as the coarse and excessively fanciful art of ancient Oriental heathendom 
 was accustomed to erect to the honor of its gods. The non-appearance of Daniel and the 
 other magians before Belshazzar (chap. v. 7) is sufficiently explained by the Oriental custom 
 of removing the priests from oflice with every change of rulers. The decree of Darius, limit- 
 ing the ascription of divine honors during an entire month to himself (chap. vi. 8 et seq.) 
 agrees fully witli the statements of Herodotus, Xenophon, and Plutarch, respecting the deify- 
 ing of kings among the ancient Medes and Persians. And finally, the designation of the lion's 
 den by 313 or Sail (chap. vi. 8, 18) does not necessitate the view that it was "a funnel-shaped 
 cavern or cistern," since the term in question is applied in the Syriac, not merely to dungeons, 
 but also especially to the dens or cages of wild beasts (cf. the exegetical remarks on the 
 several passages cited in tliis connection). 
 
 2. The following difficulties and alleged contradictions or anachronisms belong to the 
 domain of political history and chronology : 
 
 (1.) According to the statement in chap. i. 1, that "In the third year of Jehoiakim came 
 (SI) Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem and besieged it," our book seems to 
 place the first siege and cajiture of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar as early as the third year of 
 Jehnidlcim. This contradicts Jer. xxv. 1, 9 (cf. xlvi. 2; xxxvi. 9), where the arrival of 
 Nebuchadnezzar before Jerusalem appears to be placed in the fourth or even the fifth year of 
 Jehoiakim's reign ; and it also conflicts with Dan. ii. 1, where the second year of Neljuchad- 
 nezzar is given as the time in which Daniel interpreted the monarch's dream, and thus 
 attained to great distinction, whereas the conquest of Juda-a and the transportation of Daniel 
 and his friends, together with other prisoners, to Babylon, and the instruction of the Hebrew 
 youth (according to chap. i. 5, 18) during three years in the wisdom of the C'haldteans, all 
 transpired several years before. The only adequate solution of this two-fold difficulty is 
 found in the hypothesis, that Dan. i. 1 does not relate the arrival of Nebucliadnezzar before 
 Jerusalem, Init merely his departure for that place, or the beginning of his march (^Tg as in 
 Jon. i. 3; cf. Gen. xiv. .5; xlv. 7; Dan. xi. 13, 17, 38); and also that the designation of 
 Nebucliadnezzar as king, in chap. i. 1, 3, 5, is to be regarded as proleptical, his position at 
 that time l)eing that of a military leader and representative of his father Nabopolassar, while 
 his accession to the throne was delayed about two years later. From this hypothesis result* 
 
30 IXTEODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 an mterval of more than three years between the removal of Daniel to Babylon, and hil 
 elevation to the headship of the magian caste (see note 2). 
 
 (2.) According to chap, v., Belshazzar seems to be the successor, or, at least, one of the 
 successors, of liis father Nebuchadnezzar on the throne of Babylon, while ver. 30 represents 
 liim as the last ruler before the introduction of the Medo-Persian dynasty. The extra-biblical 
 authorities, however, mention four kings of his family who succeeded Nebuchadnezzar (Evil- 
 nierodach, Neriglissar, Laborasoarchad, and Nabonidus), none of whom bears the name of 
 Belshazzar. Of the two methods possible for the solution of this difficulty, the one identifies 
 Belshazzar with Evil-merodach, and the other with Nabonidus. The former is the more 
 probable one, because the relation of chap. vi. 1, to v. 30 by no means requires that the sub- 
 jection of Babylon to the Medo-Persians should have iminediattly followed on the death of 
 Belshazzar ; and further, because Nebucliadnezzar is mentioned as the father of Belshazzar in 
 chap, vii., while the profane sources call Evil-merodach a son of Nebuchadnezzar, but not 
 Nabonidus, the last Chaldsean king (see note 3). Moreover, the two years of the reign of 
 Evil-merodach, mentioned in Jer. lii. 31, may be easily reconciled with the statement in Dan. 
 viii. 1, that a vision was seen by Daniel "in the third year of Belshazzar; " for it might be 
 said that Belshazzar-Evil-merodach reigned two years even if he lived until about the middle 
 of his " third year." * 
 
 (S.) It is said that chap. vi. 1 implies that the monarch who overthrew the Chaldsan 
 dynasty, and established the Medo-Persian rule in Babylon, was not Cyrus, but '• Darius the 
 Mede." But since, according to chap. \\. 29 (cf. i. 21), the author had knowledge of Cyrus 
 as the successor of this Darius, there can be no doubt that by the latter name he designates 
 the Cyaxeres II. of Xenophon, who was the son of Astyages and uncle of Cyrus, and conse- 
 quently the sovereign whose reign, according to ^schylus, Xenophon, Abydenus, and Jose- 
 phus, intervened between the last Jlcdian king Astyages and the founding of the Persian 
 AcViaemenideau dynasty by Cyrus. It follows, that the narrative of Herodotus, which relates 
 that Cyrus defeated his Median grandfather Astyages near Pasargarda;, and became his imme- 
 diate successor, has its source in an inexact or incomplete tradition, from whence the father of 
 history derived his facts in relation to the Persian as well as the Babylonian kingdom (see 
 note 4). 
 
 Note 1. — With reference to the mention of diseases and the actual occurrence of lycan- 
 thro|iy. compare generally Bartholinus, De morJiis hiblicis, c. 13 ; Rich. 3Iead, Mfdica sacra, 
 c. 7; J. n. Miiller, Diss, de Nihiichndnfznris fjeTatiofxpoiaft ad Dan., c. iv.. Lips.. 1747; Freind, 
 Historia tucJic, p. 380 (where the imjjortant testimony of Oriljasius, physician to the emperor 
 Julian, is given, showing the occurrtnce of this disease in his time) ; Forcstus, Obserrationes 
 
 • [A better Polution of the difficult}- is proposed by R^iwlinson {Herodotus, i. 494, Am. ed.), as being suggested by the 
 recently discovered inscriptions on the Babylonian monuments. "According to Berosus, Nabonadius was not in Babylon, 
 but at Borsippa, at the time when Babylon was taken, having fled to that comparatively unimportivnt city when his .army 
 was defeated in the field (ajnid Joseph,. Contra Apinji, i. 211. He seems, however, to have left in Babylon a repre.senta- 
 tive in the person of his son. whom a few years previously he had as.sociated with him in the government. This prince, 
 whose n.'ime is read as BU-shnr-uzur, and who may be identified as the Belshazzar of Daniel, appears to have taken the 
 command in the city when Xabonadius throw himself for some unexplained reason into Borsippa. which was undoubtedly 
 n strong fortress, and was also one of the chief seats of Chaldiean learning, but which a.ssuredly coulti not compare, either 
 for macnificence or for strength, with Babylon, and Belshazzar, who was probably a mere youth, left to enjoy the supreme 
 power without check or control, neglected the duty of w-atching the enemy, and gave himself up to enjoyment." '"Two 
 difficulties stand in the way of this identification, which (if accepted) solve one of the most intricate problems of ancient 
 history. The first is the relationship in which the Belshazzar of Scripture stands to Nebuchadnezzar, which is throughout 
 represented as that of son (verses *?, 11. 13, 18. etc.) : the second is the accession immediately of ' Darius the Mede.' With 
 respect to the first of these, it may be remarked that although Nabonadius was not a descendant, or indeed any relative of 
 Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar may have been, and very probably w-as. Nabu-nahit. on seizing the supreme power, would 
 naturally seek to strengthen his position by marriage with a daughter of the great k;ng, w-hose son, son-in-law-, and grand- 
 Ron had successively held the throne. He may have taken to wife Neriglissar's widow, or he may have married pome other 
 daughter of Nebuchadnezzar. Belshazzar may thus have been grandson of Nebuchadnezzar on the mothn-'s .fUle. It IB 
 Bome confirmation of these probabilities or possibilities to find that the name of Nebuchadnezzar w-as used as a family 
 name by Nahn-nahit. He must certainly have had a son to whom he gave that appellation, or it would not have been 
 4Psi:mod by two pretenders in succession, w-ho sought to personate the legitimate heir to the Babylonian throne." Th« 
 •ccond obje<-tion, respecting the immediate succession of " Darius the Mede." is elsewhere considered, and api'lies not par- 
 ticvlarlf to this identification.] 
 
AUTHENTICITY" OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 31 
 
 medic, X. 15 ; Welcker, AUgem. Zeitschrift fur Psychiairie, vol. EX., No. 1 ; Trusen, SitUn, 
 Get/rihtche, und Kranl-heite u der alien Hehrder, 1853; Reil, Ehapsodien iiber die Anwendang 
 df.r psydiischeii Kurmethode aiif Geisteszerritttungen, pp. 296, 336 et seq. Tlie last work con- 
 tains many iiiterestmg examples of insanit}', in which the patients believed themselves trans- 
 formed into d'ists. wolves, bears, cats, etc., and were able to imitate the calls of those animals 
 with surprising^ exactness. Important historical examples of this character are : Ljcaon 
 (Pausan., VIII. 2; Ovid, MeUim., I. 210); king Tiridates IIL of Armenia, the persecutor of 
 Greo-ory the illuminator about A. D. 300 (Moses of Chorene, Hist. Armetiiaca, 1. III., ed. 
 Whiston, p. 256 et seq. : M. Samueljan, Bekehrvng Armeniens durch Gregor. lUumhiatvr, nach 
 nationaJ-historischen Quellcn hmrb., Vienna, 1844 ; S. C. Malan, The Life and Times of S. Greg- 
 ory the lUuminatoi; the Fminder and Patron Saint of the Armenian Church, I'ran^at&lfrorn the 
 Armenian, London, 1868; — cf. the Basle Missions-Magasin, 1832, p. 530); Latronianus, a per- 
 secutor of Christians in the time of Diocletian, who was temporarily bestialized because of liia 
 cruelty (see the acts of the martyrs, s. vv., Epictetus and Astion_, in the Acta Sanct, Jul., T. IL 
 p. 538) ; Simon of Tournay. an Aristotelian philosopher in Paris about A. D. 1200 (who is 
 said to have received a roaring voice like a beast, in punishment of a blasphemy publicly 
 uttered against Christ, Moses, and Mohammed ;• see Qc\\i-'6ck\-i, Eirchengesch., vol. XXVI., p. 
 380) ; Simon Brown, an Englisli dissenting minister, 1733 (who, while in a melancholy state 
 of mind, believed liimself, during a considerable period, to be changed into a beast, although 
 in other respects he was rational and in the possession of his faculties : see Stiiudlin and 
 Tzschirner, Archiv, etc.. vol. III., p. 562 et seq.); a prince of Conde, who at times believed 
 himself transformed into a dog (Scliubert, Symholik des Traums, 3d ed., p. 166) ; an English 
 boy at Norwich, .about A. D. 1603, whose disease assumed the form of lycanthropy (Reitz, 
 Historic der Wiedergehorenen, II. 56 et seq.). Compare also the fabulous accounts of were- 
 wolves, i.e., persons who rage witli wolfish cruelty and rapacity against their fellow men, in 
 Gorres, Die Christ!. Mystik: vol. IV. 2. p. 472 et seq. ; also Waitz, Anthropologie der Natur- 
 Tolker, vol. II., p. 180, concerning the belief of the African nations in the disease maraflnus, 
 i.e., lycanthropy. Among the profane testimonies to tlie lycanthropy of Nebuchadnezzar, 
 that of the inscripticms on tlie Babylonian monuments (which, so far as they date back to that 
 king, indicate the interruption of his great l)uilding enteri^rises during a considerable period ; 
 see Rawlinson, Bampton Lectures, V.. p. 166 and p. 440, n. 29), is not sufficiently positive and 
 clear. The statement of Berosus (in Josejihus, Contra Apion. I. 20) : t\atlav)(ii&'ivu<Toimi ^liv otv 
 
 ^era rn itfj^na'int rov npftfLp-qfifVov Tfi-)^ov*:, ("/iTrffrwv eti dpjjtoaTialf, p.fT7]X\ii^(iTO Tnv jiinv, 
 
 ^€ii(ia-iKfVK(os (TTj Tecra-fpaKiivTii Tpia. is likewnse very indefinite, and leaves room for the opinion 
 tliiit it refers to a disease not at all unusual in its character, whicli immediately preceded the 
 death of Nebuchadnezzar (although tlie mention of the appuimia which preceded his death can 
 hardly be accidental and without significance with Berosus, whose narrative in other cases is 
 always as concise as possible. Cf. Kranichfeld on the )jassage, p. 204 et seq.). The C'hald.'ean 
 tradition concerning the wonderful close of Nebuchadnezzar's life, as reported by Abydenus 
 (in Eussb,, Praqiar. Bcaiig.. IX. 41 ; cf. Chron. Annen.. I., p. 59), contains, on the other Imnd, 
 a positive tdthough frequently clouded and distorted testimony to that fact. It states that 
 Nebuchadnezzar, after concluding his wars of conquest, " ascended to the summit of his royal 
 palace, where he was seized by one of the gods " iwn, liwi/ins fTri rn ^no-iXijiV?, Karairxrftfirt ifw 
 ortoi S^). " With a loud voice he said, • I, Nebuchadnezzar, foretell j'our misfortune, which 
 neither Bel, my ancestor, nor the queen Beltis, can prevail on the fates to avert ! The Persian 
 mull' shall come, being in league with your own gods, and shall bring you into bondage ; the 
 Mede. tlie pride of the Assyrians, shall lie his helper'. Would that a whirlpool or a flood 
 (:(ii,)D3f^ii' Tii-.i r) SriXa.rrrafi might sweep him previously away and utterly destroy him I Or 
 that, at any rate, he might be driven by other ways through the desert, where tliere are neither 
 cities nor human patlis. but where only wild beasts and Ijiids roam about — that he might 
 wander in solitude among rocks and precipices ! And would that I had met a better end 
 before this knowledge was imparted to nie ! ' After this prophecy he immediately became 
 invisible" ('O nev 'ifinriirus nmnixpniJ-" rirptifiiTTn). We have here, clearly, a specifically Chal- 
 diean version of the same tradition, whose original form appears in Dan. iv. The prophecy 
 respecting the impending overthrow of the Chalda-an kingdom appears to have been taken 
 from the mouth of the Hebrew prophet, and ascribed to the great king himself, as being sud- 
 denly overwlielmed by the gods (as a "30^, cf. Jer. xxix. 20; 2 Kings ix. 11). The banish- 
 ment of the king wliile controlled by a bestializing mania is represented as a mysterious dis- 
 apiJearance ; and the popular tradition seeks to escape the typical allusion to the humiliation 
 and punishuient of the proud Cliald.'ean kingdom, which is conveyed in that iusanitj' — in that 
 disgraceful, though temparary, degradation of its ruler, by invoking the fate which actually 
 came upon Nebuchadnezzar, on the head of the Mi-do-Persian, tlie hated national foe. The 
 popular wit of the ancient Orient.als, which deliglited to ridicule Cyrus as the n€^lI>r)t >}iiioi/or 
 (cf. Herodotus I. 55. 91 ), may have been not altogether without influence in bringing about 
 this peculiar perversion, or rather reversal, of the original prophec}', as is suggested by a com- 
 parison of Abydenus, .as quoted above, with Dan. v. 21 (T"~"15, "a wild ass"). Compare 
 
iJ2 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Hengstenb., p. 107 et seq. ; Havemick, Neve hrit. Uiiterss., p. 52 et seq. ; Kranichfeld, pp. 203- 
 J09 ; Pusey, p. 294 et seq. 
 
 Note 2 — The most simple solution of tlie historical difficulty in chap. i. 1, and that which 
 uas the greatest exegetical support, has been indicated above. It may \>e found in Perizonius, 
 OrigiiKS JEijyptincm et Baliylonica, II., p. 430, and more recently in Hengstenberg, p. 54 et 
 «oq. ; Delitzscb, p. 275; Keil, EinL, § 133, p. 440; and substantially, in Kranichfeld, p. 16 et 
 4eq. (but cf. infra. No. 2). It regards the verb sia as not designating the arrival of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar before Jerusalem, but as merely indicating his departure from Babylon (for the feasi- 
 oility of this inter j)retati on cf. tlie proof-texts cited above, to which may be added Num. 
 vxxii. 6; Isa. vii. 24; xxii. 15, and many others ; see Gesenius and Dietrich under si2, No. 
 Si. Further incidents in the campaign, whose beginning is thus indicated are: the victory of 
 Nebuchadnezzar over Pharaoh-Necho near Carchemish, or Circesium, on the Euphrates (an event 
 which, according to Jev. xlvi. 2, transpired in the course of thefmirth year of Jelwialim) ; the 
 |)ursuit of tlie defeated Egyptians by the Chalda;ans in a southerly direction f Jer. x\\\. 5 et seq.) : 
 the arrival of the ■s'ictor before Jerusalem, and the taking of the city, which followed soon after- 
 wards (2 Kings xxiv. 1 et seq. ; 2 Cliron. xxxvi. 6 et seq.), and probably near the close of the fourth 
 year of Jehoiakim, with which was connected the first deportation of captive Jews, and of a por- 
 tion of the vessels of the temple, to Babylon. In the following year, and some time after the 
 departure of the ChaldsBans, the fast was proclaimed, of which Jeremiah remarks (xxxvi. 9) 
 th^t it was oljserved in the ninth month of tlie fifth year of Jehoiakim. It may therefore, in 
 analogy with Zech. viii. 19, be regarded as an annivei'sary of mourning, commemorative of 
 the fall of the city in the preceding year, instead of being considered a prophylactic, peniten- 
 tial fast, designed to secure deliverance from the impending danger of Nebuchadnezzar's 
 arrival, and thus as similar to those described in Joel i. 14; 2 Chron. xx. 3, 4, etc. (as Hitzig, 
 Schmeidler. and others, hold). This simple and natural comljination of events is contradicted 
 by no statement whatever, in relation to the history of Jehoiakim and his time, wliether found 
 in this or auy otlier prophetical or historical book. The passages Dan i. 2 and 2 Chron. 
 xxxvi. 6 (Heb. text) do not actually state that Jehoiakim was carried to Babylon by Nebu- 
 chadnezzar after liis capture of Judoea; but if tliis were the case, their statements would by no 
 means conflict witli the account in 2 Kings xxiv. 1, according to which Jehoiakim became 
 the triliutaiy of Ncl^uchadnezzar during three years after his first subjugation, and afterwards 
 revolted from him anew. Neitlier the brief sketch in Chronicles, nor tlie subject of Daniel, 
 which is not specially concerned mth the fortunes of that king, would require the mention of 
 the return of Jehoiakim to his capital soon after his transportation (see on chap. i. 2) ; and in 
 \'iew of his undecided character, his revolt, after three years of vassalage, may be readily 
 acce|5ted, despite the fact that he had felt the proud Chaldsoan's power but a few years before. 
 Nor will it be surprising that 2 Kings xxiv. 11 et seq. relates another taking of Jerusalem and 
 deportation of many Jews so soon after the first as the reign of king Jehoiachin or Jeconiah, if we 
 regard this sc-cond deportation (6-7 years later than the first ; cf. 2 Kings xxiii. 36, with xxiv. 8) 
 as the punisliment which Nebuchadnezzar was compelled to inflict on the Jews, because of Jclioi- 
 akira's revolt, but which was not executed until some time after it was decided on, and thus 
 affected the son and successor, before he had attained his majority, instead of crushing the father 
 (cf. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 8-10). Finally, the designation of Nebuchadnezzar as I'ing while engaged in 
 his campaign against Neclio and the allied Jehoiakim (Dan. i. 1), — while the successful inter- 
 jiretation of the dream by Daniel, which transpired, according to chap. ii. 1, in the second 
 year of that monarch's reign — must date at least three years later, involves no contradiction 
 whatever, if we regard tlie title in the first instance as proleptical. There would Ije no impro- 
 priety in apjilyiug it to him as joint ruler with his father and leader of his armies, even 
 during the life of Nabopolassar, — especially if we remember that Berosus (in Josejihus, 
 contra Apiiiii.. I. 19) makes Nebuchadnezzar to achieve his great victories over the "satraps'' 
 of Egypt. Ccele-Syria, and Phoenicia, before tlie death of the aged Nabopolassar, and to has- 
 ten to Babylou to assume the sole government, only after receiving the tidings of his father's 
 death (B. C. 60-5 or 604, and soon after the first capture of Jerusalem). Jer. xxv. 1, also, in 
 harmony with Dan. i. 1, when correctly understood, represents the fourth year of Jehoiakim 
 as the first of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, inasmuch as he regards the leader of the C'halda>aiis as 
 the king of BabyltJU after his victory over Necho, whether he might be for the time the com- 
 mander-in-chief and co-regent, and also the prospective successor to the throne, or not. But 
 a comparison of Jer. lii. 31 with 2 Kings xxv. 27 shows clearly that this jirophet was by no 
 means unacquainted with the correct chronology of Neliuchadnezzar's reign (beginning with 
 the death of Nabopolassar). This method of reconciling Dan. i. 1, with all the remaining 
 data afflicting the chronology, is so satisfactory in all respects, that we are led to reject every 
 other combination as decidedly as we do the course of the negative criticism which finds the 
 statements of this book in general to conflict with history, and which, therefore, despairs 
 cpeiiially of being al)le to reconcile the jiassagc chap. i. 1 with the statements in Jeremiah, 
 Kings, and Chronicles (Bertholdt, Kirniss, Blcek, De Wette, Hitzig, etc.). Among the method?' 
 of arrangement whicli differ from ours we reckon : 
 
 (1.) The account of Josephus {Ant., X 6, 1), which, in view of 2 Kings xxiv. 1 et seq 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 33 
 
 idmits indeed tliat Nebuchadnezzar possessed all the territory west of the Eu])hrates after his 
 victory over Necho, but fixes the conquest of Judsea fully three or four years later (in the f<th 
 year of Jehoiakim) ; a perversion of history that resulted probal)ly from a misundei-standing 
 of Jer. xxii. IS. 19, and against which Keil and Thenius fon 2 Kings in many places), Hitzig, 
 Graf, Hasse (D'' ^'rima JVebuchndnezaris adv. Hierosol. erpeditiom, BonnK, 1856), and others 
 have justly declared themselves. 
 
 (2.) The view of Kraniclifeld, who does not date the capture of Jerusalem three or four 
 years after Nebuchadnezzar's victory near Carcheraish, but still one year later, or " not earlier 
 than the ninth month of the fifth year of Jehoiakim," because that author believes himself 
 compelled to regard the fast mentioned in Jer. xxxvi. 9. as having preceded the fall of the 
 city ; a hypothesis which is opposed by the fact that it fixes the transportation of Daniel and 
 other Jewish youths to Bal>ylon, and the beginning of their three years" course of instruction 
 in the wisdom of the Chalda?aus. l)efore the capture of Jerusalem — thus involving an inherent 
 improbability, and conflicting directly with Dan. i. 2 et seq. (cf. the exegetical remarks on 
 that place). 
 
 (3.) The assumption of Kleinert (in the Dorpnter theolog. Beitragen. II. 128 et seq.) ; Hoff- 
 mann (Die 70 Jiihre des Jeremia nnd die 70 Jahrwochen Daniels, Nuremberg, 1836, p. 16 et seq. ; 
 Weixsniivmi und ErfiiUung, I. 297 et seq.), Hiivernick {Neuelrit. Unterss., p. 62 et seq.), Oehler 
 (in Tlioluck's Literal: Anzeiger, 1849, p. 395 et seq.), and Ziindel (p. 20 et seq.), that Jerusalem 
 v.as taken 1iy Nebuchadnezzar a year before the battle of Carchemish. What Keil hag 
 remarked {Eiiil., § 133, p. 440) will suffice to refute this view: "This combiuaticm is unten- 
 able, because it cannot be reconciled with Jer. xxv. In that passage the fourth year of 
 Jehoiakim is mentioned, beyond the possibility of being mistaken, as marking an epoch for 
 the theocracy and for all the nations of Western Asia, in which the Lord would bring 
 Nebuchadnezzar and all the triljcs of the north against Jerasalem, that the land of Judfea 
 might become a wilderness and its inhabitants, together with all neighboring nations, be sub- 
 jected to Babylon during seventy years (chap. xxv. 9-11). So emphatic a prophecy in the 
 mouth of .Jeremiah would be utterly incomi)rehensible, if .lerusalem had l)een taken by 
 Nebuchadnezzar and Jehoiakim Ijeen made tributary a year previously, while in the fourth 
 year of .Jehoiakim. which the prophet so strongly emphasizes (xxv. 3 et seq.), nothing of 
 moment had trauspiied, and even later in the reign of Jehoiakim nothing had occurred 
 beyond his revolt from the Chaldteaus some years afterward, by which he became involved in 
 hostilities with Imnds of Chaldieans, Syrians, Moabites, and Ammonites (2 Kings xxiv. 2). 
 But this view becomes wholly untenal)le from the consider.ation that, at a time when the 
 Egyptian king, who had advanced towards Carchemish at the l)eginning of Jehoiakim's 
 reign, was douljtless in possession of that fortress, Nebuchadnezzar could not jjossibly pass by 
 this ho.stile force and proceed to Jud;Ba, while exposing Babylonia to so powerful a foe. But 
 had this been possible, and, incredible as it is, had it actually occurred, it is certain that 
 Pharauh-Necho would not have permitted him quietly to operate in tlie rear of his array and 
 overcome Jehoiakim his vassal ; nor would Neliucliadnezzar, after conquering .Jerusalem, have 
 returned to capture Carchemish and defeat his principal enemy, instead of proceeding to 
 Egy]3t, and making an easy conquest of the country, which was deprived of its defenders. 
 But aside from this, the method under consideration is irreconcilaljle with the extracts from 
 Bjrosus furnislied by Josephus (Aid. X. 11, 1 ; contra Ap., I. 19)." Views exactly similar are 
 expressed Ity Hitzig, p 3, and Kraniclifeld, p. 17 et seq. 
 
 Note 3. — Is the Belshazzar of chap. v. the same as Evil-merodach, the son and immediate 
 successor of Nebuchadnezzar, or is he identical with Na!>onidus, the last Baliylonian king 
 prior to the Persian invasion i The latter alternative, which is advocated Ijy Jerome ( Cumm. 
 in Dan., V. 1) and more recently by Hengstenljerg, Haverniek (in his Commentary), Aul)erlen, 
 Keil, and in substance also by Pusey (with the distinction, however, that he considers 
 Belshazzar as the son and co-regent of Nabonidus), is sui)|)orted (1) by the fact that accord- 
 ing to Herodotus, I. 191, and Xenophon, Cyrop., VII. 5, 15 et seq., Babylon was taken by the 
 Persiaus while a luxurious Ijanquec was in progress, and (2) l)y the circumstance that Herodo- 
 tu.s, I. 188, calls Labynetus (=Nabonidus) a sou of NeJiuchadnezzar. with which the introduc- 
 tion of the queen-mother in chap. v. 10 (i)ossibly the Nitocris of Herodotus, or the Amuheer 
 of Alexander Polyhistor), and the express mention of Nel)uchadnezzar as the fatlier of Bel- 
 shazzar in chap. v. 11, would seem to corrtsjiond. But the following considerations militate 
 against this view, and favor the alternative which identifies Belshazzar with Evil-merodach : 
 (1) Both the Babylonian historians, Berosus (in Josephu.s, Ant., X. 11, 1, and contra Apion., 
 I. 20) and Al)ydenus (in Euscb., Piivpar. Ei:. IX. 41, and Chron. Arm., p. 28, ed. Mai) agree, 
 in contrast with Herodotus, in representing Nabonidus, the last Babylonian king, as a usurper 
 and throne-robber of non-royal descent, wlio conspired with a numl)er of others to deprive 
 Lal>orasoarchad, the youthful grandson of Nebuchadnezzar, of his tlirone and life, and who 
 afterward fell into the hands of tli : Persians, not at the taking of Babylon by Cyrus during a 
 royal lianquet, but some time after the capture of his capital. Tliey relate tliat, having been 
 defeated in the open field, he threw himself into the fortress of Borsippa, where he capitulated 
 to Cyius after the fall of Babylon, by whom he was exiled to Carmauia (or, as Abydenud 
 3 
 
INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 states, he was made governor of that province). That these traditions of Berosus and Aby- 
 denus by no means owe their origin to a boastful tendency, representing the Chaldfean national 
 interests in a one-sided manner, but as certainly comjjrehend a part of the truth, as do tha 
 accounts of Herodotus and Xenophon, has been shown by Kranichfeld, as cited above, in the 
 clearest and profoundest manner.* The identity of Daniel's Belshazzar with Evil-merodach 
 is confirmed (2) by the repeated mention of Nebuchadnezzar as his father (;««, chap. v. 11, 13, 
 18, 22), which could, in every case, be applied to a more distant relationship, e. ff., grandfather 
 and grandson, only by a forced interpretation ; f and further (3) by the circumstance that, 
 according to Berosus (Josephus, as above), Evil-merodach also died a violent death, having 
 been murdered Ijy his brother-in-law Neriglissar (cf. Dan. v. 30). No arguments against this 
 identification can be drawn (a) from the relation of Dan. v. 30 to vi 1 — since these passages 
 are not necessarily connected (see exeget. remarks) ; nor (?/) from Dan. viii. 1 , where a " third 
 year of Belshazzar is mentioned, while Berosus and the Ptolemaic canon limit the reign of 
 Evil-merodach to two years — since these latter authorities may have slightly postdated the 
 years of that reign, i.e., may have included the first year, as being incomplete, in the reign of 
 Nebuchadnezzar ; and in fact the canon of Syncellus appears to assign three years to the reign 
 of Evil-merodach ; nor (c) from the prophetic descri])tions in Isa. xxi. 5, and Jer. li. 39, which 
 predict that Babylon should fall in its dissipation, but by no means assert that it should meet 
 this fate while a bancjuet or carousal was in progress ; nor finally (d) from Jer. lii. 31, and 2 
 Kings XXV. 27, where the immediate successor of Nebuchadnezzar is called Evil-merodsch, as in 
 profane authorities ; — for the anomalous name in Dan. v. may be readily explained on the ground 
 of the very general custom of Oriental sovereigns to bear several names (cf M. v. Niebuhr 
 Gesc/(. A.^iiiirs villi BaheJs. p. 20 et seq., where reference is made to Sargon = Shalmaneser, | 
 Asshurdanipal=Kineladan, and many others), and nothing is more probable than that Evil- 
 merodach bore, in addition to his projjer name, a title containing the name of the god Bel, 
 which title was similar to the appellative that Daniel himself, according to chap. i. 5, was 
 compelled to assume. And it is jirobable that the prophet designedly avoided the real name 
 of the king, when writing of Evil-merodach. on account of that homonymy (see on chap. v. 1 
 and 12). Beyond this, tlie fact that the name Belshazzar occurs as belonging to Chaldfean 
 kings is substantially established l)y the notice deciphered on the cylinders of Mugheir by 
 Oppert and Rawlinson, which refers to a " Belsarussur, son of Nabomit or Nabumtuk" (see 
 Zeitschrift der deutsch morgenl. OeseUsch., viii. 598; Athenmim, 1854, p. 341); although the 
 identity of this Belsarussur with the Belshazzar of Daniel, which is asserted by Rawlinson and 
 Pusey '{Daniel the PnqihH, p. 403), appears to be highly improbable, since this son of Naboni- 
 dus cannot 1)e shown to have been either of royal rank nor descended from Nebuchadnezzar. 
 Tliis method, which identifies Belshazzar with Evil-merodach, is supported by Marsham 
 {Canon e/inin., p. 596 et seq.), Hofmann (Die 70 Jnhre des Jeremia, etc., p. 44 et seq.), Hiiver- 
 mck (Neue h-it. Unterss. ,' p. 71 et seq.), Oehler (in Tholuck's Anzeiger, as above, p. 398), 
 Hupfeld {E.Tereitiit. Eerodot., spec. II.. Rintel, 1843, p. 46), Schulze (Cyrvs der Grosse, in the 
 Stiul. u. lirit., 1853. No. 3), 51. v. Niebuhr {Geschkhte As.w.rs vnd Bcdiels, Berlin, 1857), 
 Rockerath (B/W. Clmviologie, MvnsteT. 1865, p. 123). Ziiudel (Krit. fTrato'ss., p. 29 et seq.), 
 Kraniclifeld (p. 24 et seq.). Fuller (Der Pro/diet Daniel, p. 12), A. Scheuchzer {Assyrische 
 Fumehiini/en, in Heidenheim's Vierteljnhrsscfiri/t, etc.. Vol. TV., No. 1), Kliefoth (j>. 146 et 
 seq.), and others. § 
 
 *" - « 
 
 • Sec espocially p. 35 et seq. : " The remarkable incident of the mysterious writing (chap. y. B et seq.1, wliich raised 
 Diiniel to he the third ruler over the kingdom, and which of itself wouid have aroused attention and excited remark, the 
 interpretation which con)iected two events as contemporary, and the fact that some of the events foretold in the mysterious 
 nriting actually came to pa«B the same night— all these taken together might, in the course of time, give rise, even among 
 the natives, to the legend that the remaining facts contained in the writing and its interpretiition transpired in that night a3 
 well : and this might occur still more easily among foreigners, in view of the clouded form which the tradition would naturally 
 assume among them, as. e.g.. in the case of the Persians. Whether the recollection of the writing and interpretation were 
 presented or not v/oiild probably not modify the legend. In this way the Persian and Median tradition might easily con- 
 ceive of the natural son of Nebuchadnezzar, who was murdered in that night, as being also the last Chaldsean king, and 
 could therefore designate him by the name AaPiinjTO?, which is found to correspond with the name of the last king in Berosus 
 _Na/3<)i'w|Sos. In addition to the name which Herodotus gives to the king in question in agreement with Berosus, stich a 
 confusion of two distinct facts by the tradition is confirmed l>y the circumstance that these authors. In contrast with Xeno- 
 phon, speak of a battle which preceded the taking of Babylon, and further, that Herodotus does not allude to the presence 
 of Xabonidus, nor to his death, on the occasion of the fall of the city— thus agreeing with Berosus, who relates that that king 
 had retreated towards Borsippa. Thus the facts in relation to the fall of the Chaldajan dynasty, as they are preserved in 
 Berosus. were thrown together and commingled with the statements of Daniel, concerning the wonderful writing (in which 
 the cud of the king and of his empire were co-ordinated) ; and this cloudy tradition is before us in the accounts of Herodo- 
 tus and Xenophon, while the correct account, as it is given in Dan. v., forms the transition from the sketch in Beror.l^ 
 t.i the form which It assumed in Herodotus and Xenophon." 
 
 t [Yet this usage of ;s for /t^re/iillier is a very common one. as any Hebrew Lexicon will show,] 
 
 t [The cuneiform inscriptions show that Sargon was Shalmaneser's son an.l successor.] 
 
 i [It is beset, however, \vith many insuperable difficulties, the chief of which are cited and but Impertectlj met In the 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 35 
 
 Together with the hypothesis of Pusey, already referred to, we are compelled to reject that 
 indicated by Hofmann {Die 70 Jahre, etc., p. 44; and adopted by Delitzsch (p. 278; and by 
 Ebrard (Die Offenh. Joh., p. 53), which identifies Belshazzar with Laborasoarchad, the nephew 
 of Evil-raerodach and son of Neriglissar (and by descent from him, or rather from his consort, 
 the grandson of Nebuchadnezzar). This tow Itecomes untenable, because it is opposed by the 
 expression, "Nebuchadnezzar, thy father" (1]^:s), in chap. v. 11, by the brief reign of the 
 child Laborasoarchad, extending, according to Berosus, only over nine months (cf. with this 
 Dan. viii. 1), and finally, by the impossibility of substituting Nebo-Shadrach for Laborasoar- 
 chad, and Bel-Shadrach for that; for, according to Isa. xlvi. 1, Bel and Nebo are not the 
 same, but different divinities. 
 
 Note 4.^The identity of Darius the Mede (chap. vi. 1) with the Cyaxares of Xenoplion, the 
 son of Astyages and father-in-law of Cyrus, as well as his co-regent for a time, may be still 
 more positively established than that of Belshazzar (chap. v. 1) with Evil-merodacli. Even 
 the cj-itical opponents of this book generally acknowledge the reign of such a Cyaxares, aa 
 intervening between the Median Astyages and the Persian Cyrus, and thereby recognize the 
 truth of Xenophon's account, despite its being found in the CyrQp(Bdia — a work which so 
 largely bears the character of a romance (Bertholdt, Gesenius, Von Lengerke, and even Hitzig ; 
 also Holtzmann, in tlie Deutsch-niorgenl. Zeitschr., VIII. 3, 547, etc.). Tlie existence of thia 
 second Cyaxares, as the immediate predecessor of Cyrus, is attested, not merely by numeroua 
 statements in the Cyropmlia (I. 4, 7 ; 5, 2, 5 ; III. 3, 20; VIIL 5, 19; 7, 1), but also by 
 .dischylus in his Ilfpixai, v. 762-63 : MgSot yap ijv 6 npiiTos ^yfnoiK iTTparoii (Astyages), '.\X\o£ 
 
 6'eVctyou Tral? (Cyaxares) ToS' f^yoi/ ^t/u(re TpiTos S'dn avTov Kvpos^ ev8mpti)ViivT}pj etc., unti 
 
 by Abydenus, in Euseb., Prwp. Evang., IX. 14, where the prophecy of Nebuchadnezzar concern- 
 ing the fall of Babylon as quoted above (Note 1), declares with reference to Cyrus, tliat " the 
 Mede, the pride of the Assyrians, should be his helper " (m Sq (rwoiTios earai MqSijs, to 'A(T(Tvpiiav 
 aijxrjpa), and in addition, by Josephus {Ant., X. 11,4), wlio states that the Greeks gave " another 
 name " to the son of Astyages — the Darius of Daniel — which was doubtless Kun|dpi;t, as trans- 
 mitted by Xenophon. Nor can the circumstance that Herodotus does not mention this Cyaxares, 
 and makes Cyrus the immediate successor of his grandfather Astyages, reflect doul^t on the exist- 
 ence of this intervening king, since the remark of Gesenius {Thesaur., p. 330) holds good of 
 Herodotus as a writer of the earlier Assyrio-Babyloniau and Medo-Persian history: '^ Solere 
 Herodotum j)rmtennissis mediocribus hominibus ex longa rerum sorie nonnisi unum alterumve 
 inemorare reliquis emirientiorem, ut aliuwie constat et ipsa Babyloniai historia docet, ex qua 
 Uhius Nitocris reginm mentionem injicit, reliquos rcges usque ad Labynetum, ne Nehuchadnezare 
 quidem excepto, silentio transit." The only real ditSculty connected with the identification of 
 the Median king in chap. vi. and the Cyaxares of the Cyropmlia consists in the name Darius 
 (^^'^"1'^) given to the former. It is to be oljscrved, however, in relation to this circumstance : 
 
 (1.) In general, the hearing of two names is no more remarkable among the Ancient Median 
 and Persian kings, than among the Assyrio-Babylonian ; for the two-fold language and litera- 
 ture which all these nations employed promoted the use of various names to designate one 
 and the same person, as did also the custom of coimecting honorable appellatives with the 
 proper names of kings and other eminent persons ; cf . note 3. 
 
 (2.) The names Ol"nT = old Persic Ddrjawus, and Kva^dpr]s = the Pers. or Med. Unakshi- 
 Uira. appear to be related in one sense, inasmuch as the former seems to be synonymous with 
 '• liolder, or governor" {ep^eiris, sceptrum tenens), and the latter with "direct," or "actual 
 ruler," and the one to be of Persian origin, tlie other of Median (Delitzsch, p. 278). 
 
 (3.) Both names, and especially the latter, appear to have been stereotyped royal honorary 
 titles, and, accordingly, to have been conferred on various persons ; for 
 
 (a.) Cyaxares I., the father of Astyages and ally of Nabopolassar and conqueror of Nineveh 
 (639-604), bore this name. 
 
 (b.) Consequently it must have descended to Astyages himself ; for, according to Dan. ix 
 
 1, the father of Darius the Mede was named Ahasuerus, the Hebrew fomi of which, Ei"n™n»' 
 
 "I — ;» 
 is analogous in sound with the Persian Uvaksfuttara, and also with the Greek Kva^iipris. But 
 further 
 
 {c.) Cyrus himself appears occasionally to have borne the name of Cyaxares or Uvakshatara 
 as an lionorary title; for, according to Holtzmann {Deutsch-morgenl. Zeitschrift, as above), an 
 old Persian cuneiform inscription contains tlie names Cyrus {Qurus) and Uvakshatara in 
 immediate consecution : " Ego Cyrus CyriMii'es," wliich may l)e synonymous with " Ego Cyrus 
 imperator^' (cf. Niebuhr, Gesch. Ass. und Bib., p. 214, note 4), but can scarcely be rendered 
 by ''Ego Cyrus Cyaxeres, se.jUius," as Holtzmann suggests. Finally, 
 
 (d. ) The name Cyaxares corresponds also to Xerxes, as is indicated by the Pers. form 
 Kslijdrcha or KshjArsha, an abbreviation or contraction of Uvakshatara ; also by the Hebrew 
 
 foregoing discussion. The hypotliesis has far le^ to recommend it than the identltication of Belshazzar with Naboaadllu*f 
 »CD — Bfilsaruzur of the Ascriptions. See foot-note at the end of No. i above.] 
 
56 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Ci'^'irnK ; aud since a Persian king is designated, in Ezra iv. 6, by the latter name, who can 
 hardly be any other than Cambyses, in view of the chronology ; and further, since the Ahasu- 
 erus of tlie book of Esther is the same as Artaxerxes I. Longimanus (instead of Xerxes, ag 
 most moderns since Scaliger hold), according to the opinion which prevails in the Stptuagint, 
 Josephus. and the ancients generally, and wliich lias not l)een refuted,* we may regard the 
 name Cyaxares-Xerxes as being in fact a standing title, which descended from the last Median 
 kings to all the Achaemenians. Similarly, the early Median kings seem generally to have 
 borne the name Ajis-Dahaha or Ashdah/ik (i.e., di-agon) since both Deioces, who founded 
 Ecliatana about 700 (Herod. I. 102), and Cyaxares I., who, according to Bero.sus and Abydenus, 
 w-as also called Astyages {i.e.. Ashdahak), and also Astyages, the father of Cyaxares XL, were 
 designated Ijy this title. The descent of names to others also finds its parallel among the 
 rulers of other ancient Oriental kingdoms, e.g.. of Armenia, Cappadocia, Pontus, and even 
 among the Egyptians after Ptolemy (cf. Niebuhr, as above, pp. 32, 44, etc.). It might possi- 
 bly l)e shown that the name Darius (Darjawus) belongs to this class of standing royal titles 
 among tlie Persians, from the designation of the golden coins of that kingdom as Darics. 
 This designation dates back, indeed, to Darius Hystaspis, according to Herodotus, IV. 166, but 
 according to Suidas, Harpocration, and the scholiast on Aristophanes' Ecdesiaz., it traces its 
 origin " to an older king of that name " — who, however, is not necessarily the same as Daniel's 
 Darius-Cyaxares (as also the reference in the Chron. Armen. of Eusebius, p. 58: "Darius rex 
 d-e regionc dfpiilit aliquantulum,^' need not be applied to the Darius of this book). But in any 
 case, it is clear from what has been stated, that the difference between the names Cyaxares and 
 Darius does not compel us to assume a difference between the persons who are thus designated 
 by Xenophon and Daniel, and that all other views become superfluous in proportion as the 
 identity of the two becomes j)robable. Of such we mention that of M. v. Niebuhr (pp. 91, 
 223), which identifies Darius, Dan vi. 1 et seq., with the last Median king Astyages, who is 
 said to have subjugated Babylon after the death of Belshazzar or Evil-merodach, and to have 
 been deprived of his Median kingdom in the follomng year by Cyrus, so that Babylon again 
 Ijecame independent ; that of Kleinert (in the Dm'}). Beitriige), which assumes that Darius the 
 Mede was a natural son of Cyaxares I., and younger brother to Astyages, while Cyaxares II. 
 was his nephew and shared in his government ; and that of Schiilze {Cyrus der Ch-osse, in the 
 Stud. u. IlI-U., as above, p. 68.5), which is also favored by Zundel (p. 36 et seq.), by which 
 Cyaxares IL, who is held to be identical with Darius the Mede, was not the sou, but a younger 
 brother of Astyages, and therefore a son of Cyaxares I. (Ahasuerus, Dan. ix. 1), whom Xeno- 
 phon erroneously transformed from a Cyaxarides into an Astyagides, by which error the great- 
 uncle of Cyrus was converted into his uncle. The correct view is advocated Ijy Josephus 
 (supra), .Jerome on Dan. vi. 1, and among modems, Offerhaus {Spicilegia histor.-chrunolog., lib. 
 ni., Gron., 1739, p. 20.5 ss.), Jehring (Bihliotheka Bremensis, VIII. 580 ss.), Gesenius ( jf'tea'.;?'., 
 L 349 et seq.). Winer {Reaho., I. 250), Hengstenberg (p. 48 et seq.), Havemick {Comm., p. 203 
 et seq. ; Nene Irit. Untersa., j). 74 et seq.), Keil (p. 457), Delitzsch (p. 278), Krauichfeld (p. 39 
 ct seq.), Auberlen (pp. 16, 212), Fliller (p. 141), and Kliefoth (p. 160 et seq.).t In relation to 
 the passage, chap. vi. 2 (tlie 120 satraps of Darius), which apparently conflicts with the view 
 advocated above, see the exegetical remarks on that place, where also the effort of Ebrard 
 [Die Offeiih. Johannes erHart, p. 55 et seq.), and several others, to identify Darius with the 
 N"abonidus of Berosus will be sufficiently considered. 
 
 § 9. Authenticity op the Book (Concluded). 
 
 e. Examination of the inteun-^l reasons against its genuirteiuss, which are hased, on its 
 
 sim.^CLES and prophecies. 
 
 The narration of miracles and prophecies by Daniel is no more irreconcilable with the view 
 that the book originated with him than are the historico-chronological difficulties which are 
 asserted to be insuperable ; for 
 
 (1.) The miracles recorded in the first part, and particularly the preservation of the three 
 men in the flames of the fiery furnace (chap, iii.), the appearance of the mysterious hand upon 
 the wall (chap. v. 5), and the deliverance of Daniel from the den of lions (chap, vi.), present 
 no features whatever whicli fundamentally distinguish them from other miracles of the Old- 
 Testament stage of revelation, or which mark them as the invention of a lati;r period. On 
 
 • [But this identification of the Ahasuerus of EHther with Arta-ter-xes Longimanus instead of Xerxea is beset with so 
 many <lifficulties that it is now almost universally rejected.] 
 
 t [On the ^ound of the superior authority, however, of the other Greek hisforians over the single testimony of the 
 romance of Xenophon. this identiticatiun of " Darius the Mede" with Cyaxares II., or even the existence of the latter, i* 
 still strongly coutested by many writers on classical history, who do not seem to allow the passage in Daniel sufficient 
 weight in the discussion.] 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 31 
 
 the contrary, the principal periods of Old- Testament development in its eariier stages, and 
 especially the Mosaic period and that of Elijah and Elisha, that is to say, the primitive stages 
 of the legal and prophetic periods, abound with incidents of a still more extraordinary cliar- 
 ftcter, e.g., the passages through the Red Sea and the Jordan; the pillar of cloud and of 
 fire; the writing of the law on tables by the liand of God (Ex. xxxi. 18 ; xxxii. 10) ; the con- 
 suming of Nadab and Abihu by fire from the Lord (Lev. x. 1) ; the feeding of Elijah at the 
 brook Cherith by ravens (1 Kings xvii. 4); the destruction of Ahaziali's captain and his fifty 
 in the presence of Elijah (2 Kings i. 10 et seq.); EUsha's raising of the dead and providing 
 of food ; the floating iron in the Jordan, etc. If the Divine economy of revelation required 
 such miracles for the founding of tlie theocracy, for the attestation of its principal I)earers 
 and supportere, and for the inauguration of the prophetic institution, why sliould it not 
 require them at this juncture, when the continuation of the theocracy was endangered by an 
 oppressive heathendom, wliich was to be feared tlie more, because of its sensual, luxurious, 
 and syncretistic character, and when a large portion of the people had yielded to these evil 
 influences to an extent that threatened the utter absorption of the worship of Jehovah by the 
 conglomerate religions of Babylonia and MedoPersia ? The critical epoch at the close of tlie 
 captivity required — with an urgency almost equal to tliat which existed in the opening period 
 of the Old Covenant — that Jehovah should display his power in the face of tlie proud world- 
 kingdoms and tlieir scornful rulers, who laid claim to Divine honors and even to deification, 
 and that He sliould thus at once confirm the tottering faith of His followers by appearing as 
 the same faithful and living God of the covenant, and crush the insolent daring and silly 
 superstition of tliose tyrants, by demonstrating His right to rank as the King of all kings, and 
 as the Lord of heaven and earth. Wonders of a similar character, although not so striking 
 and extraordinary as those in Daniel, had been wrought by the principal rei)resentative of the 
 prophetic otBce, as early as the age of Isaiah and Hezekiah, while Shalmaneser and Sennach- 
 erib were bringing like oppression and temptations to bear on the faithful ones among the 
 people of God (e.g., the retrogression of the shadow on the dial of Ahaz ; the healing of 
 Hezekiah, etc.). Toward the close of the exile such Divine self-attestations were repeated, 
 but in increased measure ; and the agent was again the leading prophet of the time, wlio thus 
 became the analogue and successor of Isaiah. These facts will be the less surprising when we 
 reflect that it was now important to make a profound impression, not only on the mcmbeis of 
 the theocracy, but likewise on their oppressors, the heathen rulers ; an impression such as the 
 miracles of Moses were designed to produce on Pharaoh, and such as actually was produced 
 in the case of the ChaldsEan and Medo-Persian antitypes of Pharaoh — unless, indeed, the 
 statements relating to repeated acts of homage rendered to Daniel's God by Nebuchadnez- 
 zar and Darius (Dan. ii. 46 et seq. ; iii. 28 et seq. ; iv. 31 et seq. ; vi. 29 et seq.), and also 
 that concerning the public recognition of the supreme divinity of Israel's God l>y Cyrus in 
 the edict of liberation (Ezra i. 1-4), which is supported by other historical authorities, are to 
 be remanded to the realm of myths and fables — a conclusion which, in the latter instance, 
 only the most radical hyper-criticism could reach. This comparison with the Mosaic period 
 affords the only valid basis on which to form a proper estimate of the age of Daniel, with its 
 peculiar national conditions and its miracles, since the sufferings and trials of that period, 
 which assailed the faith of God's children and threatened the further existence of the theo- 
 cratic community, were met, like those of the captivity, on foreign, soil, in the liouse of bond- 
 age and the land of misery. The sufferings, together with the inducements to idolatry, of the 
 time of the Judges, were experienced by Israel on its own domestic soil ; the afllictions of the 
 period subsequent to the exile, e.g., in the times of Ezra and of the Maccabees, likewise befell 
 God's people while dwelling in the land of their fathers, and for that very reason were less 
 dangerous to their religious and national life, than were the sufferings during either of those 
 seasons of tribulation and persecution, which were undergone in " a strange land " (Psa. 
 cxxxvii. 4). It is, therefore, decidedly impertinent and unhistorical to allege, as do the oppo- 
 nents of the genuineness of this book, that it owes its origin solely to a sujjposed analogy 
 between the periods of the captivity and of the Asmonseans, and to ascribe to this invented 
 Daniel the design of exhibiting the humiliations experienced by Nebuchadnezzar and Darius 
 
38 EfTEODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DAJJIEL. 
 
 Medus, in consequence of the Divine miracles and of the gracious strength and unyielding 
 firmness of the theocratic witnesses to the truth, as a warning to Antiochus Epiphancs, the 
 imitator of the religious tyranny of those monarchs. A certain typical analogy between 
 Nebuchadnezzar and Antiochus may readily be granted ; but the fundamental difference, or 
 rather contrast, between these two peiiods of persecution, that Israel suffered during the one 
 while in captivity, and during the other while domiciled on its native soil, is none the less 
 apj)arent. The inaljility of Israel to resist the oppressoi-s with armed force, and also the 
 necessity for God to interfere with his wonder-working power, resulted inmiediately from the 
 conditions of the foiTuer instance; while in the latter case the nation could struggle for its 
 country, its sanctuary, and its faith, and therefore required no other miracles than those of 
 warlike enterprise and of devoted courage that even courted martyrdom, such as are described 
 in the Maccabosan books (see note 1). 
 
 (2.) Nor can the prophecies contained in this book be made to serve as witnesses against its 
 geuuineness ; for, despite their visional form throughout (which, however, they bear in com- 
 mon with the former half of Zechariah, with numerous portions of Ezekiel, and even with 
 extended sections of older prophetic books, e.g., Amos, Isaiah, etc.), they exhibit the general 
 characteristic features of Old-Testament prophecy everywhere, since they relate to the condi- 
 tions and requirements of the time, are steadily possessed with the idea of the triumjA of 
 God's kingdom in its conflict with the world-powers, and develop this conflict in harmony 
 with its growing intensity down to the time of the final Messianic triumph and judgment, in 
 descriptions that become moi-e and more minute as they progress. Tlie book dcscriljes this 
 Messianic period during which the Deliverer is to appear, as immediately connected with the 
 resurrection of the just and the unjust to their final judgment (chap. xii. 1-3) ; and it assigns 
 that event to a time that follows closely on the death of a raging Antichrist, whose descrip- 
 tion seems to be largely met in many traits belonging to Antiochus Epiphanes (see chap. xi. 
 21-45). But it does not follow from this that its author was a contemporary of that king, 
 who described the historical events from the captivity to his time in the style of prophecy ; 
 since tliis feature is merely another illustration of the general law of prophetic visional per- 
 spective. At tlie farthest, certain of the more detailed predictions of the section (chap. x. and 
 xi.) relating to the develo))ment of the world-powers after the fall of the Persian kingdom, 
 might, as has already been observed (§ 1, note 3, and § 9), be regarded as the later additions 
 of an apocaljjjtist living in the time of Antiochus, who sought to give a more definite form 
 to tlie propliecy of Daniel. Aside from these external and unessential singularities, there is 
 included in the |)rophetic contents of the book nothing connected with the development of 
 the world-kingdoms until the advent of the Messiah, that might not have been foreseen and 
 predicted l^y a Divinely-enlightened seer in the closing period of the captivity. Although 
 such a seer had witnessed the su2)planting of but one great world-kingdom by another, and 
 although the extended range of observation which he enjoyed might leveal in the more dis- 
 tant political horizon liut a single additional power in the progress of develo] mtnt ; still 
 nothing is easier to conceive than that, by the enlightening influence of the Holy Spirit, a 
 long succession of world-monarchies, previous to Messiah's kingdom, should open to his 
 vision, and that he should symbolically represent this succession of jjowers by certain figures 
 taken from the ]jroducts of Babylonian and Medo-Persian culture and art, as in the visions of 
 chap, vii.-x. Nor do the attempts to reach a more exact chronological exposition of the 
 development represented by the succession of these kingdoms, which are found more especially 
 in the last four chapters of the book, involve any feature that does not suggest a parallel, 
 on the oue hand in the earlier prophets (e.g., Isa. vii. 8 ; xxiii. 15 ; Jer. xxv. 11 et seq. ; xxix. 
 10), and on the other, in the mathematical studies of Babylonian astronomers, and the 
 attempted application of these to (astrological) calculations of the future. Tlie inclefinite 
 character which probably attached to these symbolico-chronological descriptions of the future 
 in their oiiginal form, did not correspond to the historical succession of events as such, and 
 may have been now and then removed by the hand of the later reviser in order to give place 
 to features harmonizing more exactly with the facts. But, upon the whole, even these chap- 
 ters contain far more prophecy of an ideally descriptive character than of detailed historical 
 
AUTHENTICITr OP THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 39 
 
 prediction, calculated to excite the suspicion of a composition subsequent to the event; aud 
 the book, therefore, bears the character of a work whose origin during the captivity, and whose 
 inspired i^rophetic nature are decidedly more probable than itg forged and simulated compo- 
 sition in the Maccabjean age. Especially is the mention by Peter of an anxious looking for 
 the period in which the Messiah should appear (1 Pet. i. 10-13), as a characteristic of the 
 inspired prophets of the Old Covenant, more directly applicable to this work than to any 
 other prophetical book in the canon (see notes 3 and 3). 
 
 Note 1. — In relation to the miracles of the time of Daniel, as demanded by the oppressed 
 condition of Israel ("see § 1, note 1), and especially the remarks of Havemick there quoted, 
 compare further, Havemick, Neue krit. Unterss., p. 8.5: "Without such a revelation of 
 Jehovah, the theocracy would have been involved in heathendom, or absorbed by it. Jeho- 
 vah's signs and wonders showed, despite the presence of the powerful world-kingdoms, that 
 He stillwas the King of kings, and through them the question of the continued existence of 
 the theocracy was really decided." See ibid., p. 87, for the fact that the Asmona;au period, on 
 the contrary, was diaracterized by an ahsence of miracles : " In the Maccalisean period the for- 
 saking of tiie nation by God was manifested precisely in a manner that excluded miracles. 
 The dead form remained to the people in petrified traditions ; Init the freshness and life of 
 the old theocratic and prophetic spirit was wanting. This consciousness (that the ancient, 
 prophetism with its miraculous power must first be revived) fiAds expression in the monuments 
 of that time with sufHcient clearness. The fii-st Ijook of Maccabees has not a single reference 
 to miracles ; the disheartened age cannot even expect them," etc. See, further, Kranichfeld, 
 who observes, in correspondence with the parallelism above establ'shed between tlie miracles 
 of Daniel and those of Moses and Elijah, " Precisely the periods oi an especially hopeless con- 
 dition of tlie theocracy are found to present suitable conditions for the intervention of the 
 Scriptural miracle, designed, as it is, to strengtlien the theocratic consciousness." The asser- 
 tion of Hitzig, that a susceptihiUty of the human mind and disposition for tlie usual influence 
 of especially wonderful events, i.e., a faith in them, could not have been developed during 
 the ' night of the exile," is without either historical or psychological support. If tlierc was 
 ever a night of discouragement for Israel, it was in tht circumstances of the Egyptian period, 
 as descril)ed in Exod. vi. 9, 12 ; yet that period contained the germ of a far-reaching exalta- 
 tion of faitli and trust, such as is frequently found in intimate connection witli resignation and 
 a gloomy sense of both outward and siiiritual oppression. The 137th Psalm, as an example 
 of the actual current of theocratic thought, may serve to indicate, that during the " niglit of 
 the exile" as well, complaints and tears might consist with an iutenuii profound and glowing 
 excitation which longs for the Divine Deliverer. It has already been renuirked tliat the 
 descriptions relating to the circumstances of the captivity, in the second part of Isaiah's pro- 
 phecies, represent an a])i)arently hopeless demoralization of the religious and national spirit as 
 coexistent with the strengthening and elevation of the theocratic consciousness by means of 
 miracles. The extent to which the i)rophetic office of Ezekiel — the prophet of tlie opening 
 period of the captivity — corresponds, in view of the conditions of the time, and of his per- 
 sonal traits, with that of Daniel, the j)ropliet of the closing period, and also the significant 
 contrast lietween them, are remarked by Havernick, as cited above : " While the duty of influ- 
 encing the captives during the exile through the ward is devolved mainly on Ezekiel, everything 
 in the position of Daniel unfolds a different field of activity, viz. : to defend the rights of the 
 people of dod in their relations to the lieatlien. This peculiar duty constituted a man of 
 action (like Moses, Elijah, etc.), who opposed the superior Divine wisdom to the confused 
 wisdom of men, and Ijrought the deeds of victorious kings into contrast with tlie more pow- 
 erful energy of God. His relation to Ezekiel is therefore complementary, and thus becomes 
 a truly glorious testimony to the grace of God," etc. Keil, pp. 459, 4G1, shows the injustica 
 of the charge occasionally raised against the author {e.g., by 'V'on Lengerke, Dati.. p. LXII.), 
 that he is guilty of a " useless expenditure " or " needle.ss accumulation " of miracles. As 
 the really miraculous is confined to the three wondera mentioned in chapters iii., v., and vi., 
 there can be no reason for tlie assertion of such an accumulation of wonders or rage for mira- 
 cles on the part of the author, especially wlien compared with the far greater numl^er of the 
 miracles of Moses or Elisha. But it has already been observed in § 4, note 3, as a character- 
 istic peculiarity of Daniel's method of narration, that he does not avoid the recognition of the 
 Divine power and grace, as displayed in miracles, but rather avails himself of every oppor- 
 tunity afforded hy his experience to call attention to the baud of Providence, and to place fhe 
 events of his time in the light of a childlike believing and theocr.actical pragmatism. It must 
 be reserved for the detailed exposition of the historical part to illustrate more specifically tliia 
 peculiarity, in wliich the Ijooks of Esther and of Chronicles likewise participate, and whicli 
 we would characterize as tlie throeratic chronicling style of the captivity and the succeeding 
 period (see tlie observations on chap. iii.). 
 
 Note 3. — In opposition to the assertion of Liicke, that the apocalyptic character of oui 
 
iQ INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 book as a prophecy, necessarily involves its pseudonymy, see above, § 1, note 2. It is impor- 
 tan',, in view of the assertion by Bleek {EM., § 259), that •' the especially definite character 
 of the predictions extends precisely to tlie time of Antiochus Epiphanes, and no farther," to 
 observe the many obscure, indefinite, and ambiguous features which are found in the prophe- 
 cies in the second part of the book, and which indicate with eutficient clearness that the 
 position of the writer was that of a seer who looks forward, and whose descriptions are there- 
 fore only ideal, instead of that of a prophetic historian who recalls the past. Compare Kran- 
 ichf eld, p. 58 : " The prophecies of the book of Daniel, in their descriptions, are never inde- 
 pendent of the course of history as such, and nowhere bear the character of absolute, 
 unconditioned, and therefore miraculous predictions. They do not contain a single paragraph 
 (?) which, when viewed entirely ai)art from its fulfilment, might not be considered as merely 
 the independent development of a theocratical thought, or complexity of thoughts, founded 
 on historical facts. For this reason detailed descriptions of the course of future events are 
 met with which do not fully correspond to the actual history ; and this is as readily conceiv- 
 able as it is natural. The critics have no difficulty about explaining away such differ- 
 ences, which become especially prominent on a comparison of the description of the last 
 heathen kingdom and its final conformation in the rimes of the Seleucidie and the JIaccahees 
 (chap. X. and xi.) ; and the product of such arbitrary interpretation is ranged with the remain- 
 ing occasional correspondences of the projihecy with the course of history, which are natural, 
 because they have their basis in religious and ethical truth. The resultant caricature of Scrip- 
 tural prophecy, similar to that presented in the later so-called apocalyjjse of Judaism, the 
 Jewish Siliyls, the book of Enoch, the •ith book of Esdras, thus, in the end, becomes a certain 
 prize." The opinion here expressed is correct in all its essential features, and will bear modi- 
 fjring only in the single statement relating to the alleged unexce])tionally ideal character of 
 the descriptions of the future, contained in chapters x. and xi. We regard it as exceedingly 
 proljable that in this connection, but only here, occasional vatirinia ej; eventu were interjjolated 
 by a later hand, and doubtless Ijy a theocrat of the time of Antiochus Epijihanes ; for the 
 congruity between the prophecy and the facts by which it is fultUled, is frequently more 
 apparent than the fundamental" law of Old-Testiiment prophecy appears to warrant (cf. § 1, 
 note 2). None of the special predictions which are usually cited as being analogous to Dan. 
 X., xi. — whether Isa. vii. 8 (possil>ly an interpolated passage), Isa. xiii. 1-14 ; xxi. 1-10 ; Jer. 
 XXV. 11 et seq. ; xxix. 10; or Ezek. xxiv. 2.5-27, etc. — do, in fact, compare with Dan. xi. in 
 point of remarkable and often directly particularizing correspondence between prophecy 
 and fulfillment: cf. Auberlen, p. 71 et seq. ; Hengstenberg. p. 173 et seq.* Tlie decidedly 
 eschatological character of chap. xii. 1 et seq., may be insisted on, as a special argument 
 against the assertion that the book was written from the point of view which ijrevailcd in the 
 Maccaboean age, and that, more particularly, its final chapters were composed •■ immediately 
 after the death of Antiochus Epiphanes became known " (Bleek). That passage does not 
 merely assign the beginning of the future Messianic period to the rime immediately following 
 the death of Antichi-ist (xi. 45), but also its close, and may therefore have originated with a 
 prophet belonging to an earlier age, who saw the anti-christian tyrant as a vision of the dis- 
 t.ant future (cf. similar perspective descriptions of the future, following upon gloonVy prophe- 
 cies of evil, in Amos ix. 11 et seq.; Mc. vii. 12 et seq.; Isa. xi. 1 et seq., etc.), but can 
 hardly have emanated from a designing forger of the troul)led times of the Asmonaeans. To 
 employ this passage as a proof of the origin of the book under Epiphanes, or to postpone the 
 composition of the closing chapters, x.-xii., until even after the death of that tyrant, is to 
 manifest a gross misapprehension of the nature of Messianic prophecy — its complex and 
 apotelesmatic character, its necessary co-ordinating of the near and distant future in perspec- 
 tive vision (cf. Delitzsch, p. 286). Compare infra, on chap. vii. 8; ix. 24 et seq. ; and see 
 the exegetical remarks in general, which may serve to explain in detail how difficult it is to 
 adapt this book to the Maccabsean period, in the character of a pseudo-prophetical work. 
 
 Note 3.— With reference to the difficult, but, for the exegesis of this book, exceedingly 
 important question, " Which world-kingdoms of the last pre-Christian time correspond to the 
 four characteristic figures of Daniel's monarchies (chap. ii. 31 et seq. ; vii. 2 et seq.) ? " we 
 t>ffer the preliminary remark, that the interpretation by which the fourth kingdom represents 
 the Roman supremacy — an interpretation which was accepted by Josephus and a majority of 
 the church fathers, and which has become traditional and is in almost universal favor — does 
 
 • [We need hardly point out to the student how purely conjectural and subjective is this supposition of the interpola 
 tion of certain parte of these wonderful prophecies, nor how fatal to the genuineness of the book ae a whole Is such as 
 fclmission. FtilHru In uno,/alsus in omnihjui. Who is to draw the line of distinction between the authentic and the 
 •pnrious parts t None is apparent in the text, and if interpreters are allowed to pick and choose for themselves what they 
 sonceive it lUely that God would have revealed, and what they may be free to attribute to later hands, the whole ground 
 Is virtually conceded to Rationalism. The true explanation of the minuteness of the prophecies in chap. xi. of Daniel lie« 
 In their intimate connection with the ntarer future of the chosen people, and the fact that Antiochus Epiphanes, being th« 
 Bist /orefi't persecutor of the Jewish religion as such, is set forth as the type of all coming Antichrists,] 
 
AUTHENTICITY OF TflK BOOK OF DANIEL. 41 
 
 not to us seem to meet the sense of the prophet.* Nor can we, with Ephraem Synis, Hitzig, 
 Ewalcl, Delitzsch, and otlieis, find in this fourth kingdom the Macedonian or Grecian emjjirt 
 of .Alexander the Great, t'vjether zcith the kingdoms of the Diadochi, which s))rang from it ; but 
 instead, tlie divided nature of tlie fourtli kingdom (chap. ii. 41) appears to us to symbolize 
 oiilp the on]|jire of the Greek Diadoclii after Alexander, while the kingdom of Alexander him- 
 self must be considered as the third. See above, § 3 [also § 10, Notes 3 and 4] ; and compare 
 the exegesis of chap. ii. 40 et seq. See ibid, in relation to the number /"o!<r and its symbolical 
 meaning as applitd to the world-kingdoms. Meanwhile compare Krauichfeld, p. oT : ''It is 
 an unquestionable peculiarity of Daniel that he attempts to cover this period by four of such 
 kingdoms ; l)ut the general application l)y the Hel^rews of the numl>er four to extensions of 
 time or sprxe is equally unquestioned fcf. tlie four winds, Dan. vii. 2; viii. 8 ; the four quar- 
 ters of the i.eavens, four ages of the world, four principal metals, etc.). If we therefore con- 
 sider the composer of the book to have been a person who estimated the political condition 
 of his time and its consequences understandingly and naturally, and at the same time clung 
 decidedly and immovably to his faith in the realization of the Messianic hopes which rested 
 on previous piophccies. it will be evident that the Messianic period would present itself to his 
 mind as connected with the fourth, i.e., extreme development of heathen supremacy, which 
 was so signilicaut to the reflections of a scholar as such; and this conception would be as 
 natural as that, for instance, of Isaiah and Jeremiah, in whom the predominance of religious 
 and theocratic tliought, together with the corresponding subordination of political inteivsts as 
 such, produced an association of the Messianic period \vith the fall of Babylon," etc. See the 
 same author, p. 58, in relation to the peculiarly definite character of the chronological predic- 
 tions of Daniel : " There is not a single prediction relating to a definite point of time, in tlie 
 prophecies of Daniel, which is not the expression of an idea that would be perfectly intelligible 
 til a theocratic contemporary of the writer. The matiner in which he determines a point of 
 time might, indeed, seem to be somewh.at peculiar ; but this consists merely in the astronomi- 
 cally arithmetical men.virement of a current condition of time, which reminds us of Baljylon, 
 the cradle of astronomical as well as astrological definitions, and which, by its union with the 
 thoroughly Babylonian feature presented in the use of animal symbols, and with the gro- 
 tesquely descrijitive style of the naiTative in general, harmonizes with the Babylonian origin 
 of the book.'" 
 
 § 10. Design of the Book op Daniel. 
 
 According to the opponents of the genuineness of this book, who assign it to tlie M.acca- 
 bsean pcriodj its author aimed merely to exhort and comfort, and even invented the contents 
 of the first or historical part for this puqiose. Botli the narratives relating to the heroic faith 
 and steadfastness of Daniel and his friends, when exposed to the threatenings and jjci'secu- 
 
 * [Dr. Pnsey, the latest scholarly advocate of this reference of the fourth kingdom to Rome (pagan rather than papal), 
 offers the following special considerations in its favor {p. 69 et seq.); 1. '*Even an opponest (De Wette, in the IJatl. 
 Encykl. s. v. Daniel) has said, ' It is in favor of this interpretation [of the 4th empire as Roman] that the two feet 
 of iron can be referred to the eastern and western emperors,' " But so is the 3d empire described by the plural '* breast* 
 (",Tl~rT) and arms," where the Medo-Per?ian coalition affords but a faint parallel. 2. **The ten horns are explained 
 to be kings or kingdoms which should issue out of it. 'And the ten horns out of (i.e., going forth from) this kingdom 
 are ten kings that shall arise.* Throughout these prophecies the king represents the kingdom, and the kingdom is con- 
 centrated in its king. The kings, then, or kingdoms, which should arise out of this kingdom must, from the force of 
 the term as well as from the context, be kings or kingdoms which should arise at some later stage of its existence, not 
 those first kings without which it could not be a kingdom at all." The force of this reasoning is somewhat difficult 
 to perceive, and its whole validity is destroyed by the Masoretic accents of the text quoted, which should be translated 
 th-.i3: '* The ten horns [are] the kingdom thence, [namely] ten kings [that] shall arise.*' 3. "These ten horns or king- 
 doms are also to be contemporaneous. They are all prior in time to the little horn which is to arise out of them. 
 * Another shall arise after them, and is diverse from the rest.' Yet the ten horns or kingdoms are to continue on 
 together imtil the ele-.-enth shall have risen up : for it is to rise up among them and destroy three of them." The incon- 
 clusiveness of this argument is palpable. Antiochns certainly was later than his predecessors, but of the same line, 
 and he displaced three of them. The correspondence is as perfect as could be desired ; far more so than on any other 
 BChemc. 4. "The period after the desrructiDn of that power [the eleventh horn], and of the whole fourth kingdom which 
 i:; to perish with him, is indicated by these words : ' And the rest of the beasts (the other kingdoms), their dominion was 
 t.aken away, yet their lives were prolonged on ' to the time appointed by God. The sentence seems most naturally t« 
 relate to a time after the destruction of the 4th empire ; for it continues the description." This was exactly true of the 
 Maccabasan deliverance, which for the first time effected the independence of the Jews from Antiochus. who was but the 
 sequel and climax of the long subjugation ever since the captivity. If the theory in question has no better support than 
 t^cse ai-gnraents, it is weak indeed. Its main prop, as to pagan Rome, is the superficial resemblance in the eiTtent and 
 power of the latter — whic'n is at once dissipited when the prophecy is viewed from the sfmd-roint of the Jewish martyrs ; 
 and as to jytpal Rome, its great bulwark is the year-for a-day interpretation, with the ov-rthrow of which it atteilj 
 falls. The subject is argacd at length by Dr. Cowlea, Commentary on Daniel, p. 354 et seq.] . 
 
42 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 tions of the Babylonian tyi'ants, and the apocalyptic visions of the second part, were designed 
 to admonish the compatriots and contemporaries of the writer to " emulate these men in theii 
 tuiconquerable faith, as shown in their public and disinterested confession of the God of theii 
 fathers, and to remind them that this only true God would, at the proper time, know how tc 
 humble and destroy those who, like Antiochus Epiphanes, should exalt themselves against 
 Him in their reckless pride, and should seek to cause His people to renounce His service, as 
 well as how to secure the final victory to his faithful and steadfast adherents " (Elock, Eixleit., 
 p. 602). The book, if really composed in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes, would certainly 
 correspond to this design but imperfectly. The hortative and typical bearing of many of its 
 marvelous narratives upon tlie sufferings, temptatious, and religious duties of Israel in a later 
 age, would not have been at all understood. Nebuchadnezzar, Behhazzar, and Darius would 
 hardly have been recognized as types of that Seleucidian tyrant, since their relations to the 
 theocracy were wholly different from his. The latter aimed at the complete extirpation and 
 annihilation of the worship of Jehovah, and would never have consented to even a temporary 
 recognition of tlie supreme power and majesty of the Covenant God of the Old Dispensation, 
 such as was secured from each of those rulers ; and the cordial relations whicli Daniel main- 
 tained throughout the exile towards the Chaldean and Medo-Persian heathendom, as chief of 
 the Magian caste, and as an influential political officer and confidential adviser of their 
 heathen rulers, would certainly have exerted a forbidding influence on the narrow-minded, 
 illiberal, and fanatically-inclined Jews of Maccabaean times, instead of encouraging them, 
 quickening their faith, and inspiring them with the zeal of martyrs. With the exception of 
 three men in the fiery furnace, not a single really suitable example would have been presented 
 to tlie martyrs of this period for their encouragement and comfort, while, at the same time, 
 the prophetic portions of the book would have been burdened with much that was superfluous, 
 obscure, and incomprehensible, and therefore with much that contradicted its design (cf. the 
 note 1 below). 
 
 On the other hand, everything reveals a definite plan, and is adapted to a practical end, 
 which is easily apprehended when it is examined from the position of the nation during the 
 exile and immediately afterward. The Chaldee fragments, chap, ii.-vii., which were recorded 
 first, are seen in this light to be a collection of partly narrative and partly prophetic testi- 
 monies to Jehovah, as the only true God, in contrast with the vain gods of the Babylonians. 
 These fragments were designed to strengthen the 'faith of the captives, and this design is 
 indicated by the unvarying manner in which each section closes, viz. : by an ascription of 
 praise to Jehovah, which generally falls from the lips of ond of the heathen sovereigns himself 
 (see chap. ii. 47; iii. 28 et seq. ; iv. 34 ; v. 29 ; vi. 26 et seq. ; vii. 27). The Hebrew text was 
 v,ompos<'d somewhat later, and was designed directly and solely for Israel, which appears, no"' 
 only from the absence of doxologies expressive of the triumph of the faith in Jehovah ovei 
 the woi-ship of idols, at the end of the several paragraphs, but also from tlie fact that, asidt 
 from the historical introduction to the book as a whole (chap. i. 1-ii. 4), it contains only 
 I)rophecies, which are, moreover, exclusively of a comforting nature. They are designed "t& 
 comfort the Hebrew people in the trying political circumstances under which they are either 
 newly engaged in arranging their affairs in Palestine, or arc still languishing in the laud of 
 the exile. In x\q\\ of the fact that to the human understanding the duration of this trying 
 condition is unkuowu, they present the assurance that the continued and increasing tribula- 
 tions, which must keep pace with the moral corruption of heathendom, are designed by Ood 
 Jor the purifying of tlie faithful (cf. chaj). xi. 35 ; xii. 10), and cannot he imposed a single day 
 hej/oiid what lie has determined''' (Kranichfeld, p. 60) ; and with a view to afford a still more 
 effectual comfort and encouragement, they contain repeated references to the Messianic period 
 of salvation (chap. ix. -2.5 et seq. ; xii. 1 et seq. ; cf. vii. 13 et seq.), that long predicted glorious 
 conclusion at which the history of God's people must arrive after passing through many pre- 
 vious clouds and sliadows, and which contains in and of itself the assurance that Israel shall ht 
 taoed out of every affliction, however great. 
 
 From their connection with these comforting prophecies, the older records relating to the 
 marveloiis displays of Divine power and grace as -w-itnessed by Daniel and his companions 
 
DESIGN OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. i3 
 
 r.'ccive an additional significance, as examples tending to encourage, comfort, and quicken 
 the faith of Israel in succeeding ages, and serving, especially in the more sad and troublous 
 seasons, as shining way-marlis and guiding stars through tlie dark niglits of a condition -n 
 which God had apparently forsaken them, although they were originally recorded for a dif- 
 ferent situation. This comforting tendency of the book, however, did not reveal itself fully, 
 until, as has been shown elsewhere (§ G, note 1), almost three hundred and fifty years after the 
 captivity, the religious tyranny of the Seleucidse brought the full measure of the sufferings 
 predicted by Daniel to l)ear upon Israel. In consequence, this prophetical book, which up to 
 that time had perhaps been partially misconceived, or at least misunderstood and undervalued, 
 attained its rightful position in the public mind ; for the sufferings of the time revealed not 
 only the marked keenness of vision displayed by the Divinely-enlightened seer, but also tlie 
 fullness of consoling power contained in his wonderful narratives and visions. The Macca- 
 bsean period served, therefore, to fully demonstrate the practical design of the book, and 
 thereby to solve its prophetical riddles, to bring to view the depths of wisdom which underlie 
 its meditations on the relations of the world-powere to the kingdom of God, and to secure 
 permanently to its author the honorable rank of the fourth among the greater jjrophets. 
 
 Note 1. — Havemick, Eiid., 11. 488, shows in a striking manner, the untenable character of 
 the assumption that the book is a fiction of the Maccaba;an age, invented to serve a purpose, 
 especially in view of the marked difference between the religious and political circumstances 
 of that time and those prevailing in the captivity: "How marked is the distinction between 
 >he heathen kings of tliis book and Antiochus Epiphanes ! Collisions with Judaism occur, 
 indeed, but how different is the conduct of Nebuchadnezzar, Belshazzar, and Darius the 
 Riede, in relation to the re^rognition of Judaism and its God ! Where is the evidence in tliis 
 tase of a desire to extirpate Judaism, or to inaugurate a formal persecution of the Jews, suth 
 as entered into the designs of Antiochus. There can hardly be two things more dissimilar 
 *haii are the deportment of a Belshazzar or Darius and that of the Soleucidian king." Com- 
 pare page 487: " That Daniel, togetlier with his companions, receives instruction in the lan- 
 guage and wisdom of Chalda^a, that he even ajjpcars as the head of the Magian caste, and 
 jears a heathen name, fills political positions at heathen courts, maintains relations of intimate 
 friendship witli heathen princes, and even manifests the wannest interest in them (cf. iv. 16) — 
 idl these are traits in tliorough harmony witli the history, and corresponding to the circum- 
 rtances resulting from the captivity, but not according with the rigid exclusiveness of the 
 Maccabsean period,"' etc. Cf. Ilerbst, Ehthit , II. 2, 98 ; Ziindel, p. 60 et seq. ; Pusey, p. 374 
 i^t seq. 
 
 [Note 2. — We introduce here, as an appropriate connection, some valuable remarks from 
 Keil's Commentary on Daniel (Clark's ed., Introd., § ii., p. 5 et seq.), on DanieVs place in the 
 'listory of the hinfidom- of Ood, so far as these relate to the chosen people of Israel. "Tlie 
 lestruction of the kingdom of Judah and the deportation of the Jews into Babylonian caj)- 
 fivity, not only put an end to the independence of the covenant people, but also to the con- 
 linuance of that constitution of the kingdom of God which was founded at Sinai ; and that 
 
 Qot only temporarily t)ut forever, for in its integrity it was never restored 1'ie 
 
 oholition of tlie Israelitish theocracy, through tlie destruction of the kingdom of Judah and 
 (he carrying away of the people into exile by the Clialdicaus, in consequence of their con- 
 tinued unfaithfulness and the transgressicm of the laws of the covenant on the ])art of Israel, 
 n'as foreseen in the gracious counsels of God ; and the perpetual duration ef the covenant of 
 grace, as such, was not dissolved, but only the then existing condition of the kingdom of 
 3ud was changed, in order to winnow that perverse people, who, notwithstanding all the 
 chastisements tliat had hitherto fallin upon them, iiad not in earnest turned away from their 
 idolatry, by that the severest of all the judgments th.at had been threatened them; to exter- 
 minate by the sword, by famine, by the plague, and by other calamities, tlie incorrigible mass 
 of the people ; and to jjrepare the better portion of them, the remnant who might repent, as a 
 holy seed to whom God might fulfill His covenant pronii-ses. Accordingly the exile forms a 
 great turning-point in the development of the kingdom of God which He had founded in 
 Israel. With that event the form of the theocracy established at Sinai comes to an end, and 
 then begins the period of the transition to a new form, which was to be established by Christ, 
 
 and has actually been established by Him The restoration of the Jewish state 
 
 after the exile was not a re-establishment of the Old-Testament kingdom of God. T\Tien 
 Cyrus granted liberty to the Jews to return to their own land, and comii.anded them to rebuild 
 the temple of Jehovah in Jerusalem, only a very small band of captives returned ; the greater part 
 remained scattered among the heathen. Even those who went home from Babylon to Canaan 
 were not set fiee from subjection to the heathen world-power, but remained, in the land which 
 
44 
 
 HARMONY OF DANIEL'S PROPHECIES OF THE 
 
 HiBTOBY. 
 
 L Babylonian Empire. 
 
 Chap. II. i 
 
 31 Thou, O kine. 
 sawest, uod behxld; 
 » {Treat im^e. This 
 great imapi;. whose 
 
 Thi^ is depicted at its acme under Nebuchadnezzar, who at-jbriKhtness .rtw ex- 
 taineii the iinivei^sal sovereignty of AVestem Asia and Egypt, icellcni, stood be- 
 Griffios or winged lions are a common emblem on the Assyr- ^^''^ **'5^' ^^^ ^^^ 
 
 ^ ■' form thereof u^as 
 
 terrible. 
 
 32 This imace'a 
 head was of fine 
 gold; 
 
 ian !-culptures. The empire subsequently degenerated, and, 
 at the sjime time, became more civilized. 
 
 II. Persian Empire. 
 
 The original element was Media, where bears abound. Persia 
 was the hi^^her horn and more elevated side. The three ribs 
 are probably Lydia, Assyria, and Babylonia, which were sue 
 ce=^ively absorbed by Cyrus. He was victorious in every di- 
 rection except eastward. The king-? following him were 
 Cambyse:^; '1. Smerdis; 3. Darius liystaspis; 4 Xerses, who 
 first exerted all his resources against Greece. 
 III. Mac^doniiin Empire. 
 
 Copper denotes the mercenary Greeks. The leopard repre- 
 sents their slyness and pertinacity. The four wings are indie 
 ative of doubly velocity. Alexander marched with unexam- 
 pled rapidity. He was the sole ruler of his dynasty. His do- 
 
 ClIAP. II. 1 
 
 37 Thou,Okmp,«rtakiDK' 
 of k'Migs : for the Uod of 
 heaven hath loven thee a 
 klnph'in , power, tuid 
 strent;lh,Hnd jjlorj. 
 
 3.> And whereS'iL'ver the 
 childreu of men dwell, the 
 beasts of the tield and the 
 fowls of the hesTcn hiith he 
 II into thine hand, and 
 huth made ihee ruler over 
 them all. Thou art tliis 
 head of gold. 
 
 his breast and bis 
 arms of silver. 
 
 his belly and his 
 lliigba of brass, 
 
 minions were diWded, shortly aiter his premature death, be- 
 tween, 1. Ptolemy, in Kgypt and the Mediterranean coast ; 2, 
 St'leucuj, in Asia ; 3. Lysimachus,in Thrace ; 4. Cassauder, in 
 Greece. 
 
 IV. Sfjrian Monarchy. 
 This was of a mongrel character, the"^ native Oriental ele- 33 Hislepofiron, 
 ment corresponding to the clav, and the foreign Greek to the *i'^ feet part of iroc 
 iron These were combined iii all sorts of affinities. The ten andp"tcf i^ay- 
 toes m:iy symbolize the numerous satrapies which fell to the 
 ehare of Seieuciis. This dynasty is depicted as fierce, from 
 contrast with the lenient governments pieceding, and especial- 
 ly from its iotolerauce towards the Jewish religion. 
 
 \.' Sdencxts Nicator was orig^inally Ptolemy's general at 
 Eabvlon, but soon managed to secure not only the entire Kast, 
 but also the province of >yria [including Palestine). 2. Anii- 
 orhirs Sii'rr was engrossed with subduing the Gauls. 3. .471- 
 lin-hvR '/Vnvj.s madt- pence with Ptolemy Philadelphus by mar- 
 rvin_' Bfrr.nice.hig daughter; but soon repudiated her in favor 
 of Lat'xlic-^. liis former wife, who revenged herself by poisoning 
 him and killing her rival with her infant. 
 
 Berenice's brother, 
 Ptolemy Euergetes. avenged her death by invading Syria, car- 
 rying away immenae spoiL 
 
 4. SrleticitR Callinirns attempted 
 to retaliate by attacking the Eg\-ptlan provinces [translate, ver. 
 '.t. "And he (the king of the north) shall come into the king- 
 dom of the king of the south"], but was forced to retire with 
 defeat, ft. SeU-iiciix Cfrfiunuf^ his son, renewed the attempt, 
 hut W.1S -"lain ; and hin brother, 6. Antiochm the G'rcaf^ push 
 e.l the campaign to the border of ICgj'pt. 
 
 This roused Ptolemy 
 Philopntor, who aspembled an aimy, with which he totally rout- 
 ed Antiochus at Gaza; but he then concluded a truce with 
 him 
 
 Bpoil: 
 
 Fourteen years afterwards, AntiochuH returned with the 
 of Uh liuateru campaigns to renew hid deeigns against 
 
 39 And after thee Efaall 
 rise another klDgdom io 
 t'ehor to thee, 
 
 cuAP. vn. 
 
 2 Daniel sfoke and said, I 
 saw in uiy vibioo by niclit, 
 and, behuld, the four winds 
 of the heaTcD strove upiju thd 
 trreal &ea. 
 
 d And fonr great beasU 
 came up from the&ea,diveise 
 one from another. 
 
 i 4 The first was like s Hon, 
 .and had eagle's wings : 
 
 I beheld till the wings there- 
 of were plucked, and it waa 
 lilted up from the earth, and 
 made stand upon the feet aa 
 a man, and a man's heart 
 was given to it. 
 
 S And behold another beast, 
 a second, like to a bear, and 
 it raised up itself on one aide, 
 and it had three ribs in the 
 mouth of it between the teeth 
 of it: and they said thus unto 
 it, Atiae, devour much fleab. 
 
 and another third l:incdom 
 of brass, which shall bear 
 rule over all the earth. 
 
 6 Afler this I beheld, and lo 
 another, like a lenpard, which 
 had upon the back of it four 
 wings of a fowl ; the beast 
 had also four heads ; and do* 
 minion was given to it. 
 
 40 And the fonrtb kingdom 
 ihall t>e strong as iron ; for- 
 ismuch as iron brenketb in 
 pieces and subdueth all 
 ffiinQs: and as inm that 
 breaketh all these, shall it 
 break in pieces and bruise. 
 
 41 And whereas thou saw- 
 est the feet and toes, part of 
 potters' clay, and part of 
 iron, the kingdom shall be 
 divided ; but there shall be 
 
 it of the strength of the 
 iron, forasmuch as thou saw- 
 est the iron mixed with miry 
 clay. 
 
 And as the toes of the 
 feet tf«i-f part of iron and 
 part of clay, so the kingdom 
 shall be partly strong and 
 partly broken. 
 ^i And whereas thou saw- 
 est iron mixed with miry 
 clay, they shall mingle 
 themselves with the seed 
 of men : bnt they shall not 
 cleave one to another, even 
 03 iron is not mixed with 
 clay. 
 
 ^ After this I saw in th9 
 night visions, and behold a 
 fourth beast, dreadful and 
 terrible, and strong exceed- 
 ingly ; and it had great iron 
 teeth : it devoured and brake 
 in pieces, and stamped the 
 residue with the feet of it : 
 and it was diverse from all 
 the beasts that were before 
 it; 
 
 and it had tea huiatt 
 
FOUR GREAT ORIENTAL KINGDOMS. 
 
 45 
 
 Chap. ^^I. Cuap. VIL 
 
 17 Thest great 
 betists. wnich 
 four, art four kintrs, 
 whiei shall arise 
 out of the earth 
 
 19 Then I wonM 
 know- the truth of 
 the fourth hi-ast, 
 which was diversi.' 
 from all the others, 
 exceedinirttreailful, 
 whi^setteth irerff 
 iron, nnO hirt nnils 
 (■/■brass; wAiVA (l^^- 
 voured, (jrak« in 
 pieces, and Blnmiied 
 the res:dat: with ois 
 feet. 
 
 23 Thns he said, 
 The fourth beast 
 sbal) be the fourth 
 kingdom ui>on 
 
 eirth. which shall 
 bf diverse from all 
 kin^dotnB,aud§hall 
 devour the w 
 earth, and shall 
 trend it down, and 
 break it is pieces. 
 
 Cbap. \TIL 
 
 Chap. Vm. 
 
 3 Then I lifted op mine eyes, and mw, an3, 30 The ntm which 
 behold, there stood before' the ri\'er a ram thou sawest having 
 which had fin? horns : and the firo horns irtre (i«> horns are the 
 hich ; but one va* higher than the other, kings of Media and 
 
 and the higher came up last. 
 
 4 I saw the mm pushing westward, and 
 northward, and southward : so that no bea&te 
 might stand before hini,neithertma<Afr« an^ 
 that could deliver out of his hand ; but he did 
 according to his will, and became great. 
 
 5 And aa I was oonsidering, behold, a he- 
 goat came from the west on the face of the 
 wholee&rth.nntl touched not the ground : and 
 the gnat idcf a notable horn between his eyes. 
 
 6 And he came to the ram that had fm> 
 horns, which I had &een standing before the 
 river, and ran unto him in the fnr^' of his 
 power, 
 
 7 And I saw him come close unto the ram, 
 and he was moved with choler against him, 
 and smote the ram, and brake his two boms : 
 and there was no power in the ram lo etand 
 before him, but be cast him down to the 
 ground, and stamped upon him: and. there 
 was none that could deliver tb« ram out of 
 hia hand. 
 
 8 Therefore the he-^at waxed very great : 
 and when he was strong, the great horn was 
 
 ikcii ; and for it there came op four nota- 
 ble o&ca toward the four winda of heaven. 
 
 Persia. 
 
 1 And the rnogh 
 goat it the king of 
 Grecia ; and the 
 Igreat horn that 
 between his eyes ia 
 the first king. 
 
 ?2 Now that be. 
 ing brok«n, where- 
 as four stood ut) for 
 it, four kiiiguoi 
 shall eland up o 
 of the nation, b 
 not in his power. 
 
 Chap. XL 
 
 2 And now wiU I shew thee the tmth. Beheld, 
 there shall stand ud yet three kitijrs in Prrtia; 
 and the fourth ahalj be iiar richer than tkey all : 
 
 and by his strength through bis riches he shall 
 stir op all against the realm of Grecia, 
 3 And a mighty king shall stand up. thot shall 
 rule with gr«at dominion, and do according to bjfl 
 wUL 
 
 20 And of tho ten 
 boms that ictrt in 
 bis head, 
 
 ?4 And the ten 
 homs out of this 
 kingdom art 
 
 :s that shall 
 arise: 
 
 4 And when be ehall stand up, hie kingdom, 
 shall be br^'ken.and shell be di\nded tcwura the 
 four winds of heaven : and not to his posterily, 
 nor according to his dominion which he rulea; 
 for his kingdom shall be plucked op, even for oth- 
 eia beeides thofie. 
 
 5 And the king of Qie south shall be Ertrong, ant 
 ime of his princes ; and he shall be strong above 
 bim, and have dominion ; his dominion aall it a 
 great dominion. 
 
 6 And in the eod of years they shall join tliem- 
 eelves Logeiher ; for the king's daughter of the 
 sonlh shall rouie t"the king of the north to mnke 
 an agreeuient : bat she shall not retain th« power 
 of the arm ; neither shall he stand, nor his nrin : 
 but she shall be given up, and they that hrouglix 
 her, and bethnt begat her, and helJiat strenglb- 
 ened her in Oitaf times. 
 
 7 But out of a branch ofher roots shall oiM stand 
 up in his estat«i, which ehall <-onie with tin «rn;v, 
 and shall enter int«i the fortress of the king i l tf.e 
 north, and &baU d^al against them, and shall pre- 
 vail. 
 
 S And shall also rarry captiyes into Eg^■pt their 
 gods, with thoir primes, and with their precioua 
 ressels of silver and of gold ; and he shall (on- 
 limie irtortf years than the king of the north. 
 
 9 So the king of (he south shall come into hii 
 kingdom, and shall return into his uivn land, 
 
 10 Bat his sons shall be stirred up, and shall as- 
 semble a multitude of great forces : ami ■mr i^liiill 
 certainly come, find overflow, ami pajs ll, rough 
 then shall he ret^im, and be stirriAi up. ttru lo 
 bis fertress. 
 
 11 And the king of the :so(ith ehall be moved 
 ijth choler, and shaJl come forth and fight with 
 
 him. *i-tn with the king of the north: nnd he 
 shall Set ft'rth a great multitude ; but the multi- 
 tude shall ho given into liis hand. 
 
 12 Ami when he hath tiiheu uway the multi- 
 tude, his heart shtill be lilted up; and he shall 
 cast down many u-n thousands : but be shall not 
 be strengthened by it. 
 
 13 For the king of the north shall return, and 
 shall set forth a multitude greater than the for- 
 mer, and shall certainly come after certain yeara 
 with a great aruiy ai.d with much richee. 
 
46 
 
 HARMONY OF DANIEL'S PROPHECIES OF THE 
 
 the Egyptian provinces, and, witti the assistunce of a party of 
 the Jews, lie defeated the I'gypti.in general at the ^.mrces of 
 the J'>nlan, be-ieged and capiured the reuminder of the Egyp- 
 tian force in Zid-.n, and t:ot full jHise^^.-^ion of Palestine He 
 now roncludo<i a holl-.w alliance with Pt..leiiiy Kpiphane?, giv- 
 inghim his dauu'hter(Jleopatra,withtlie Palestinian provinces 
 as a d"wiy, h«iping Hi'it ■'''"' would fav..r his ptirpL).-es, an ex- 
 pectation in which he wag ultimately di^-appointed. lie then 
 
 turned his amis against the Greek colonies of Asia Minor and 
 the .I'.gBean till checked by the Romans under ^cipio, who com- 
 pelled him to sue for peace on the iwist humiliating tenui'. He 
 wa^ killed while attempting to plunder a temple in his own 
 dominions. 7. Selrttcti-s l'hUopa>or was engrossed with efforts 
 to raise the enormoii.s tine imposed by tlie Romans upon his 
 father as the nrice of peace, and was at length assassinated by 
 his minister, S. IJclmdortis^vrho held the throne a short time, 
 although. 9. Dmin-trius Soler, son of the last king, was right- 
 fully heir, and, 10. Piolerny PhiUniu-tnr was entitled to the 
 Palestinian provinces by virtue of his mother's dower right. 
 
 11. Antiochus KpiruANF8,biotherofSeleucus, artfully and 
 quietly secured ihy succession, expelling Heliodorus, and ig- 
 noring the claims of his nep*iews Demetrius and Ptolemy. 
 (Daniel styles him ^' vile," in contrast witli his surname '■*'il- 
 lu^irious," and notes the Helleniziug cormptions of his reign 
 in Judaea, as detailed below.) The guardians of the latter 
 
 prince resenting tIiL=. a struggle ensned, in wtiich Antiochus 
 twic ■ defeated the Kgyptians in a pitclied battle on their own 
 borders. He then pretended to make a trnce with them, but 
 only used it as a cover for entering Egypt with a small force, 
 and seizing quietly upon the capital and other points. On his 
 
 return from his second campaign into Egypt, he endeavored to 
 carry out the schem.- of introducing Greek customs among the 
 Jews, In a third campaign he continued his successes, and in 
 a fourtli he was likely to capture Alexandria and reduce the 
 wliole Egyptian power, wlien he was peremptorily ordered to 
 de^i?t by the Romans. On is way Ivome he vented his cha- 
 
 grin af tin's fnterference upon the unhappy Jews, in whose 
 quarrels lie meddled, deposing the hij,'h-priest, aboli-hing th 
 wacriticiai offering-', interdicting the ritual, and bitterly per.^e- 
 eu ting all whurefus^-d to apostatize to puganism. 'I'lie Temple 
 remained closed to all but heathen victims for three years and 
 a lialf (t290^days), and was shortly afterwards lededicated on 
 Dec. *25, U.C. Iii5(makiiig 1335 days), six and a half years ('2300 
 days) from the first act of piofanation in the removal of the le- 
 gitimate pontiff Antiocliurt's disregard for even the native 
 deitie* is evident from his renewal of bis father's attempt to 
 plunder the temple of the Syrian Venus. Vet be made the 
 most violent efforts to introduce the worship of Jupiter Oapi- 
 toliauB. 
 
 CUAP. II. 
 
 Cii.vr. II. 
 
 cuAp. vn. 
 
 8 I considered the 
 horns, and, bebolil, 'and o/ the otBef 
 thert came ui:^which came ap, ajid 
 auioaglheni anoth- before whom three 
 little horo, W- fell ; even (/ that 
 fore whom there horn that had tye3, 
 ere three of theiand a mouth that 
 fir&t horns plucked spake ven," ^eat 
 up by the roots : things, whose look 
 and, tehold, in this troa more stout tliaa 
 hom leere eyes like his fellows, 
 the eyes of man, 
 da mouth speak- 
 ing Te^t things. 
 
 34 Thon sawestj 
 till that a stone 
 was cut out with- 
 oQt hands, which 
 smote the imacre 
 upon his feet that 
 ice of iron and 
 
 , , an brake 
 them to pie ^. 
 
 35 Then was the 
 iron, the rUy. the 
 
 ■», the silver, 
 and the gold, bro- 
 ken to pieces to- 
 irether. and became 
 like the chaff of the 
 summer threshinp- 
 "oors; and the wind 
 carried them away 
 that no place was 
 found for them 
 
 The remainder of his refgn is obscure, mving to the 
 nearly total los? of the ancient records concerning it. We have 
 therefore but slight intimations of the final expedition against 
 Egypt, etc., referred to by Daniel as being so successful. It 
 Vi ceitain, however, that the last art of his reign was a cam- 
 paign iu the north-eastern provinces, and tlmt he perished 
 misi-rnhly (one account says as a raving maniiicl as he was 
 hastening to the support of his generjiI»*,who had been defeated 
 by the Jewish patriots and zealot^. The Maccabee-* had raised 
 ttie sttndard of civil and relipioiis liberty in Jii-'a*!, and, after 
 a long and severe stm^gle, tlie Jews frcured tlieir independ- 
 ence. This they lY-tained for a century, n period of <rri-rtt po- 
 litifil and «pintiial prosj>prity in g-neral, which Daniel and 
 the other prophet!* sttpak of in such glowing temra n^ being in- s"""'*^ ^^ imnce 
 tro.luctory to the Messianic times, the Gospel ^'kingdom <rf|['^'""'"^ " J^m 
 Heaven," never to end. L"the wholl^rth] 
 
 nnd the otone thnt 
 
 44 And in the 
 davs of these kinjrs 
 shall the God of 
 heaven set up a 
 kiiig-dom which 
 shall never be de- 
 stroyed ; and the 
 kingdom shall not 
 be left to other peo- 
 
 Ele, but it shall 
 reak in pieces and 
 consume all these 
 kinpdoms, and it 
 shall stmd firever. 
 45 Fonisinuch as 
 thou sawest that 
 the stone was cut, 
 outnfthemonntain; 
 without hands, and' 
 that it brake ir 
 pieces the imn, thi 
 brass, the clay, the' 
 silver, and the irold.' 
 the [Treat God hath 
 made known to iht 
 kin^ whnt shall 
 come to pas^ here- 
 after : and thf 
 dream is certain, 
 and the interprets' 
 tioD ( 
 
 11 I beheld then, 
 because ol'the voice 
 of the preat w.-rda 
 
 hich the horo 
 spake, 
 
 9 I beheld till the I beheld even till 
 throne:^ were ciibt'tbe beast waaslaii), 
 donii, and the An- luid his body de- 
 lient of days did stroyed, and civen 
 sit, whose t'cnaeutito the burning 
 white as snow, flame. 
 
 and the hair of his 
 head like the pure 
 wool : his throne 
 wa» like the fiety 
 llaine, and h 
 
 12 As concerning 
 the rest of the 
 beasts, they had 
 their dominion tak- 
 away : yet their 
 
 vheels aa buminc livtrs were prolone- 
 
 fire. ed for s season and 
 
 K' A fiery stream 
 
 issued aud 
 
 forth from before 
 
 him : thousand 
 
 thousands 
 
 tered unto him, and 
 !ten thousand times 
 
 ten thousand stood 
 
 before him : the 
 Ijudinnent was set^ 
 
 and the hooks were 
 
 opened, 
 
 13 I saw in the 
 nicht visions, and. 
 heho!d,OTif like the 
 Son of man came 
 with the clouds of 
 heaven, and came 
 to the Ancient of 
 days, and they 
 brouirht him near 
 before him 
 
 14 And there was 
 piven him domin^ 
 ion, and clory, and 
 a kingdom, tSat all 
 people, nations, and 
 lansiiaees should 
 serve him ; hia do- 
 minion IS an ever- 
 lasting 
 
 H But the saints 
 . of thf Moat Hieh 
 
 h shall not i)iss ahal' take the kine- 
 
 iivav.-n.lhiftkinT-Mom. =nd posses* 
 )mi' that whic'l|the kinedom forfv 
 shall not b3 de-'er. even farever 
 stroyed. |sod e^er. 
 
FOUR GREAT ORIENTAL KINGDOMS. 
 
 47 
 
 Chap. VII. 
 
 Chap. VIII. 
 
 and another ihall 
 riae niter (hem \ 
 and he shtUl W- di- 
 verse from theiirsl, 
 and he shail Bubdue 
 three kin^. 
 
 9 An-l out of one 
 of them came forth 
 u iitilu horn, whichi 
 ivc^ed excetdin^r 
 prcjit. tonnrd tht 
 south, rjid toward 
 the cost, and to-j 
 ward the plea&ant 
 land. 
 
 1 1 And it wn.ted 
 (Treat, even to 
 host of heavi 
 and it csst down 
 tome of the host and 
 of the cLirs to the 
 ground, rr.d stamp- 
 ed ujion them. 
 
 &1 I beheld, and 
 the &aui« bom 
 mude war wit)i the 
 saints, and nrt-vail- 
 ed n;niinst tlit-oi -, 
 
 -.'5 And he shull 
 •peak tfreul w>>ri!s 
 aiTtiinst the Mcst 
 HiL'h, and hIimU 
 wear out the stiints 
 of the Moat Hi::h, 
 and think to (himire 
 times ""•• ""ws : 
 and tney snail be 
 E'lven into blehainl 
 until a time and 
 timed and the di- 
 viding of time, j 
 
 22 Until the An-j 
 cient of days came, 
 and judf^Dent wju 
 given to the a;iiiils 
 of the MoBt Hit-h; 
 and the time came, 
 that the saints yos-' 
 9e»ned thekinudiiiii, ' 
 
 •2f, But the jii.lir- 
 nieiit shall sit. :i.id 
 thev shall t.tke 
 away his dominion. 
 to consume -"nd In 
 destroy- it unto the 
 «nd. 
 
 11 Yea. he mnjnil- 
 Bed /..';-..#// even to 
 ttie i>rriiiL. t.f the 
 ,hu£(, and Ijv him 
 [the daily a<i^ri»f 
 was taken aw«v. 
 landthevlsceolhii 
 ■Btnctuorv was cast 
 jdown. * 
 
 . 12 Ai'il ahost was 
 ipiven /itm mrainst 
 the daily tarrijiee 
 hy reason of trans- 
 frression. and it cast 
 down the truth to 
 the irround ; find it 
 jiractiseil and [>ro3- 
 .j.iTeil. 
 
 i 13 Then I heard 
 one saint spenkinr. 
 and anothT saint 
 »iid unto that cer- 
 tnin .viint which I 
 spake. How long! 
 sfia/l he the vision' 
 ronrernivj the dai- 
 ly wrrrftV*. nnd the 
 trnnazression of. 
 HeS'>l,''!ioTi. to cive 
 ho'h the <>anctuarv 
 ond the host to he 
 Iroddpn under foot ? 
 
 U And he sHid 
 t'ntn t 
 
 tho. 
 
 nUndlhr* 
 
 hundred daya; then 
 shall til" STnrtiinrj' 
 be cIeao:;ed. 
 
 5* And the kini 
 doni and dominioE 
 and the preatneaa 
 of the kingdom un- 
 der the whole heav- 
 en, shall he eiven 
 I" the perrle of i lip 
 s-'nt* of the MoM 
 Hlffli, whose kinp- 
 doii it an everlnj 
 inc kinertom. and 
 all dominion" 'hall 
 aerveandobey hin 
 
 CUAP. XI. 
 
 14 And in those times there shall many stand ap 
 against the king of Uie south : also the robbers of thy 
 uefjple shall exalt themselves to estMblisb the vision*; 
 bat they shall tail. 
 
 15 So the king of the north shall come, and cast up n 
 mound, and take the most tenced i-itie:s: uud the arms of 
 the south shall not withstand, neither his chosen peo- 
 ple, neither shall thert Ik amj strength to wilhstana. 
 
 l(i But he that cometh against him shall do according 
 to his own will, and none shall stand before him ; and 
 he shall stand in the glorious land, whith by his hand 
 shall be consumed. 
 
 17 He shall also set his face to enter with the strength 
 of his whole kingdom, and upriirht one^ with h: 
 thus shall he do: and he shall pre him the dnnghter 
 of women, corrupting her: but she shall not stand on 
 hit aide, neither be for him. 
 
 18 After this shall he turn his face unto the Isles, and 
 shall take many : but a prince for his cwn behalf shall 
 cause the retroach otTered by him to cease : without his 
 own r^roacli he shall cause it to turn upon him. 
 
 ID Then he shall turn his face towaril the fort of hit 
 own land: but he shall stumble and fall, and not be 
 found. 
 3(1 Then shall stand up in his estatp a raiser of taxes 
 in the glory of the kingdom : but within few days he 
 shall be destroyed, neither in anger, nor in battle. 
 33 And in the lat-| ■>! And in his estate ^hall stand up a vile iHiTflon, to 
 l«r time of their whom thev shall not give the honor of the kingdom : 
 kingdom, when the bm he shall come in peaceablv, and obwin the kingdom 
 transgressors are by llatteries. 
 
 como to the full, a jjo And with the arms of a flood shall they he over- 
 king of fierce • oun- flown from before him, and shall be broken ■ y*a, also 
 ton.ince, and under- the prince of the covenant. 
 
 stjinding d:!rk sen- 03 And after the league uiade with him he shall 
 tcnces, shall stand dereitfullv: for he shall come up, and shall become 
 up. strong with n small people. 
 
 24 He shall enter peaceably even upon the fattest 
 places of the province ; and Ke shall do that which his 
 fathers have not done, nor his fathers' fathers ; he shall 
 scatter among them the prey, and spoil, and riches 
 yea, and he shall forecast bis devices against the stron; 
 Dolds, even for a time. 
 
 25 .\nd he shall stir up his power and his courage 
 against the king of the south with a great army ; and 
 the king of the aoutn shall be stirred up to l>Hltli 
 a very great and mighty army ; but he shall not 
 stand ; for they shall forecast devices against h 
 
 26 Vea. they that feed of the portion of his meat shall 
 destroy him, and his army shall overflow : and many 
 shall fall down slain. 
 
 27 And both these kings' hearts slialthe to do mischief, 
 and they shall speak lies at one table; hut it shall not 
 prosper : for yet the end shall he at the time appointed. 
 
 2^* Then shall he return into his land with great rich- 
 es : and his heart s/iall be against the holy covenant ; 
 and he shall do irf-h/it*. and return to his own land. 
 
 29 At the time appointed he shall return, and come 
 toward the south ; hut it shall not be as the former, or 
 as the latter. 
 
 30 For the ships of Chittiin shall come against him 
 therefore he shall he grieved, and return, and have in 
 dignation agninst the holy covenant : so shall he do; 
 he shall even return, and have intelligence with them 
 that forsake the holy covenant, 
 
 94 And his power :>,\ And aims shall stand on his part, and thev shaM 
 shall he m-ghty. pr,||ute the sjincturv of strength, and shall lake awav 
 but I'Ot by his own the dailv tarriiife, and they shall place the ahominn'- 
 jww.r andheshall tiun that maketh desolate. 
 
 destroy wonderful-] 33 And such as do wickedly asainst the covenant shall 
 ly. and shall pros- he corrupt hv flatteries : but the people that do know 
 per. and practise, their God shall be strong, and do exf'/.-itn. 
 and shall destroy, Xt And thev that understand among the people shall 
 t'je inightv and tie instruct manv : vel tlipv shall fall bv the sword, and 
 holy people. iby flame, bv cnptivilv. and hv ppoil, manv dnvs. 
 
 25 And throueh| 34 Sov when tbev shall fall, thev shall be holpen 
 his policy also he with a little help: but manv shall cleave to them with 
 shall cause craft to flatteries. 
 
 prosperinhishaiid:] 35 And'«n»* of them of understanding shall fall, to 
 and he shall mng-,try them, and lo puree, and to make r/.^m white, even 
 nify hinistlf in his to the time of the end : because i( in vet for a time ap- 
 heart.and hy peacelpninted. 
 
 shall destroy many , 35 ^nd the king shall do according to his will; and 
 ho shall also stand |he shall exalt himself, and marnify himself above ev- 
 ■■•• against the ,.r-^- ^.^d^ and shall sjieak marvellous things against the 
 God of gods, and shall prosper till the indignntion he 
 accomplished : for that that is determined shall be 
 done. 
 37 Neither shall he regard the god of his fathers, nor 
 the desire of women, nor regard anv god : for he shall 
 but he shall he bro- niflfriifv himself above all. 
 
 ken without hand. ;yi But in his estate shall he honor the God of forces : 
 26 And the vision and a god whom hrs fathers knew not shall he honor 
 of the evening and jwiti, poM. nn<l silver, and with precious stones, and 
 the morning whichlpieaannt thinga. 
 
 "'"" *""'' •■ *""■ " W Thus shall he do in the most strong holds with a 
 sfrwnse god, whom he shall acknowledge and Increase 
 w th glory ; «nd he shall cause them to rule over many, 
 and shall divide the land for gain, 
 4ri And at the time of the eml shall the king of th.- 
 south push at him: and the king of the north shall 
 come against him like a whirlwind, with chariots, and 
 with horsemen, and with manv ships ; and he shall cn- 
 t*"r into the rountries. and sha!^ overflow and pass over. 
 
 41 He shall nnter also into the glorious land, and many 
 ftntnlrifn shall be overthrown . but these shall escape 
 out oi his hand, rvn Ednm, and Moab, and the chief 
 of the children of Ammnn. 
 
 42 He shall stntch forth his hand also upon the coun- 
 tries : and the I"nd of Etrvpt shall not escape. 
 
 A% But he shall have power over the treasures of gold 
 and "f «iU-er. and overall t^f pmclous things of Egypt : 
 and the I.i'^vans nnd the Fthiopinns ^haJl hr at his steps. 
 
 44 But ti'iinffB out of th- east and ont of the north 
 shall trouble him: therefore he shall go forth with 
 ■TTf.it fiirv to destroy, and utterly to make awiv manv. 
 
 45 And he shall p'-nt t^-e tihi^rmrles of hTs pnln're 
 hetH-e»n the se^S in the c'orioufi holv mctint.«'n ; yet b« 
 shall come to his end, and none shall help him. 
 
 Prince of princes ; 
 
 told i 
 
 wherefore shut 
 
 thon up the vinion ; 
 for it »hall be for 
 many days, 
 
 Cbap. XII. 
 
 CuAP. XIL 
 
 1 And I heard the 
 man clothed in lin- 
 en, which wadnpoii 
 the waters of tie 
 river, wln;n hehebl 
 up his right hanil 
 and his left ham' 
 unto heaven, and 
 swnre by him thrt 
 liveth forever, that 
 it thaUbe for a time, 
 times, and a half: 
 and when he shall 
 have accomplished 
 to scatter the pow- 
 er of the holy peo- 
 ple, all these things 
 eboll be finished, 
 
 10 Many shall be 
 purifiid, and made 
 whiti.-, and iritid ; 
 but Ihuwicked shall 
 
 iikedly : nnd 
 none of the Milked 
 shull uni'.erstand ; 
 but the wise shall 
 underEt'ind. 
 
 11 And from the 
 time that the daily 
 Mcrirfcc shall Le 
 taken away, and 
 the abomination 
 that moketh deso- 
 late set up. there 
 shall be a thousand 
 two hundred and 
 ninety days. 
 
 12 blessed ix he 
 that waiteth. and 
 Cometh to the thou- 
 sand three hundred 
 and five and thirty 
 days. 
 
4-8 INTRODUCTION TO THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 
 
 the Lurd had given to their fathers, servants to it. Though now again the niincd walls of Jeru- 
 salem and the cities of Judah were restored, and the temjjle also was rebuilt, and the offering 
 up of sacritice renewed, yet the glory of the Lord did not again enter into the new temple, 
 ■which was also without the ark of the covenant and the mercy-scat, so as to hallow it as the 
 place of His gracious presence among His people. The temple worshi]) among the Jews after 
 the captivity was without its soul, the real presence of the Lord in the sanctuary ; the high 
 priest could no longer go before God's throne of grace in the holy of holies to sprinkle the 
 atoning blood of saciifice toward the ark of the covenant, and to accomjilish the reconcilia- 
 tion of the congregation with their God, and could no longer find out, Ity means of the Urim 
 and Thumim, the will of the Lord. When Nehcniiah had finished the restoration of the walls 
 of Jerusalem, jjrophecy ceased, the revelations of the Old Covenant came to a final end, and 
 the period of expectation (duiing which no propliecy was given) of the promised Deliverer, of 
 
 the seed of David, began If the prophets before the captivity, therefore, connect 
 
 the deliverance of Israel from Babylon, and their return to Canaan, immediately with the set- 
 ting up of the kingdom of God in its glorj', without giving any indication that between the 
 end of the Baljylonian exile and the appearance of the Messiah a long period would inter- 
 vene, this uniting together of the two events is not to be explained only from the perspective 
 and apotelesmatic character of the prophecy, but has its foundation in the very nature of the 
 thing itself. The jjrophetic jjerspective, by virtue of wliich the inward eye of the seer beholds 
 only the elevated summits of historical events as they unfold themselves, and not the valleys 
 of the common incidents of histoi-y which lie between these heights, is indeed peculiar to 
 projihecy in general, and accounts for the circumstance that the jnophecies as a rule give no 
 fixed dates, and apostelesmatically bind together the points of history which ojjcn the way to 
 the end with the end itself. But this formal jjeculiarity of prophetic contemplation we must 
 not extend to the prejudice of the actual truth of the prophecies. The fact of the uniting 
 together of the future glory of the kingdom of God under the Messiah with the deliverance 
 of Israel fi'om exile, has perfect historical veracity. The banishment of the covenant people 
 from the land of the Lord, and their subjection to the heathen, was not only the last of those 
 judgments which God threatened against His degenerate people, but it also continues till the 
 pei-verse rebels are exterminated, and the penitents are turned with sincere hearts to God the 
 Lord and are saved through Christ. Consequently the exile was for Israel the last sjjace for 
 repentance which God in His faithfulness to His covenant granted to them. Whoever is not 
 brought by this severe chastisement to rei)entance and reformation, but remains opposed to 
 the gracious will of God, on him falls the judgment of death : and only they who turn them- 
 selves to the Lord, their God and Saviour, will be saved, gathered from among the heathen, 
 brought in within the bonds of the covenant of grace through Christ, aud become partakers 
 of the promised riches of grace in His kingdom."] 
 
 [Note 3. — As a conspectus of Daniel's entire series of projjhecies respecting the world-king- 
 doms, showing their complete harmony and mutual illustration, as well as their exact accord- 
 ance with history, we insert (on pages 44-47) a table of all the passages, taken from M'Clin- 
 tock and Strong's Cyclopadia, s. v. Daniel.] 
 
 [Note 4. — Dr. Cowles, in his Commentary on Daniel (N. Y. 1871), devotes an Excursus 
 (pp. 4.59 sq.) to the consideration of that theory, generally called the " year-for-a-day " view, 
 which results in applying the prophecy of the fourth kingdom of Rome, and especially the 
 Papacy. His arguments are perfectly conclusive to candid minds. As the work is easily 
 acce.ssible we forl^ear to quote or abridge his remarks. See further the exegetical observations 
 on the passages where the dates are given.] 
 
 § 11. The Alexandbiak Version of the Book of Daniel, and its Apocrtphal addi- 
 tions. 
 
 The Alexandrian translation of this book was, during a long time, supposed to be no more 
 in existence, because the church, as far back as the time of EusebiMs of Csesarea and Pamphy- 
 lius, had adopted the version of the Jewish proselyte Theodotian, which was considerably 
 more exact and free from errors.* The genuine Se])tuagint text of Daniel was not published 
 iintil 1773, when Simon de Magistris, a Romish priest of the oratory, published it from a 
 Codex Chiaianus. The editions by J. D. Michaelis (1773-4) and Segaar (1775) served to 
 farther introduce and midtiply this version. H. A. Hahn finally published a truly crirical 
 edition (1845), for which he had availed himself of a Syriac-Hexaplarian version published 
 in 1788 by Cajetan BugatI, from a Codex Ambrosianus. This hexapla offers a Septuagint 
 
 • Of. Jerome, Comm. in Dan. It., 16 ; " Septuagtnta hoc omnia nescio qna ratiotie pre^terierunt. Undejndicio mxigii- 
 Irorum Enle^iit eililio eorum in hoc volumine npudiata est el Thtodotiontt cutgo legttur, qua: ec Hebrxo et cnteri* 
 trantiutvribus aongruitj'^ 
 
ALESANDKIAN VERSION OF THE BOOK OF DANIEL. 40 
 
 text corrected after Theodotian, as Origen had prepared it for his Si'xnpla, while the text edited 
 after the Cod. Chisianus represents the genuine and unadulterated language of the Alexan- 
 drian version, as it had stood in Origen's Tetrapla beside the unchanged text of Tlieodotian 
 (cf. Delitzsch, p. 286). 
 
 The Alexandrian version of this book probably originated before, or at any rate about, tlie 
 middle of the second century before Christ, and therefore at the time in which the opposing 
 criticism finds the Hebrew original to have been written (cf. § 6, note 3). The numerous 
 departures fiom the original which this version presents, and which consist in the change of 
 ■words and phrases {e.g. I. 3, 11, 16; II. 8, 11, 28; VIL 6, 8, etc.), in part of abbreviations 
 and omissions {e.g. III. 31 et seq. ; IV. 2-6 ; V. 17-25 ; 26-38), and finally, also in extensions 
 of the text {e.g. FV. 34 ; VI. 20, 22-29), are by many critics traced to a Hebrew or Chaldee 
 text diverse from the original, upon which this version is based {e.g. Michaelis, Bertholdt, 
 Eichhorn). But they owe their existence, more probably, to the labors of the translator, since 
 they are merely interpretations or paraplu'ases, designed to clear uj) the text, to indicate the 
 connection, or to simplify or intensify the wonderful (cf. Haveniick, Kommentar, p. xlvii et 
 seq. ; De Wette, Einl, § 258 ; Keil, § 137). 
 
 Nor do the longer interpolations inserted into the book of Daniel, in both tlie Alexandrian 
 and Theodotian's versions, and generally bearing the name of (ipocryphul additions to Daniel, 
 contain any feature that could compel the assumj^tion of a Hebrew or Chaldee original on 
 which they are based. Their lingual features testify rather to an original composition in the 
 Greek (particularly the paronomasias or plays on Greek words, which were remarked by Por- 
 phyry, — sucli as axlfoi, axintiiL-nfilvoi, njiinii, whicli can scarcely be traced back to Hebrew paro- 
 nomasias that were copied by the translator *), which is therefore accepted by Micliaelis, De 
 Wette, Bleek, Hiivernick, etc., while other critics contend that these fragments were wholly, 
 or in part, translated from a Hebrew or Aramaic original. (The latter include not merely 
 Roman Catholics, as Dereser, Welte, Haneberg, Reusch, but also Protestants, among whom are 
 Bertholdt, Eichhorn, DeKtzsch [De Jlahacuci prophetw vita atque a:tate, 1844, p. 52 et seq.], 
 Fritzschc [Exeget. Handhuch zu den Apol-ryphen, I. Ill et seq.], Zlindel, etc.) This hypothesis 
 of a Shemitic original may l)e justified, at most, with regard to two of these additions (the 
 prayer of Azariah, and the song of the three children), but not with reference to the two that 
 remain. These latter fragments (the history of " Susanna and Daniel," and that of " Bl'1 and 
 the dragon ") bear a decidedly legendary character, being designed to glorify Daniel, and 
 involving many improbabilities, and even impossibilities. They are therefore regarded, and 
 with justice, as being of still later origin than the other component parts of the Greek Daniel. 
 In the Alexandrian version they compose the closing sections of the book (chapters xiii. and 
 xiv., by the modem arrangement of chapters), but are introduced vrith formulas {e.g. chap, 
 xiv., or Bel and the dragon, with the puzzling superscription: «'« t^; Trpoc^jjTfioj 'AuGaKoifi vioi: 
 'Iijuoi ex tr)i tpvXrjs Afiit), the peculiarity of which is of itself sufficient to indicate their origin 
 subsequently to the time of Daniel, whether an otherwise unknown prophet jjseudo-Habakkuk 
 be regarded as their author, or their origin be ascribed to one or several Jewish or Hellenistic 
 writers. In Theodotian's translation these additions are organically incorporated with tlie 
 Book of Daniel, Susanna being placed before Chap. i. as belonging to the history of the 
 prophet's youth — the '• prayer of Azariah " and the " song of the three children " being 
 inserted between vs. 23 and 24 of chap. iii. (similar to theii' position in the Sept.), while only 
 " Bel and the dragon " is consigned to the end of the book after chap. xii. 
 
 The question relating to the time and place in which these apocryphal fragments were com- 
 posed cannot be solved, and we can only venture the supposition that the four emanated from 
 different authors. This appears in the case of tlie " prayer of Azariah " and the " song of 
 the three children" (chap. III. 24-45 and 51-90), from the circumstance, that in the former 
 (v. 38) the temple is represented as destroyed and its services as havmg ceased, while the othei 
 
 • Jerome, Comm. in Dan. Praph. : *' Sed el hoc uo/i^e (tebemu-i, inter ceetera Porpftyriuni de Danielis libra nobis oftfi- 
 cere, idt-ircn ilium (ippni'ere eonjlrtnm, nee haberi apitd Jfebr<ros. sed Grtfct sermnnis esse comnientum : quia in Sitwm 
 nie fabuUl contiueatiir, dicenie Itnniete adpresbi/teros, airh tou tT\ivov (T\i<TaL, KaX aTro toO ;7pti'ou jrpitrat. qnam et:inioU> 
 ffiam inagis Gvceco sermoni convenire quain Jfebi'tro, cni et Eusebius et Apollinaris pari sententia responderunt : 
 SusanntT BeUsqne, et Draconis fabulasjion contineri tn Sebraico, sed partem esse prophetice Habacuc Jllii i/e«M," etc 
 
 I 
 
5(> INTRODUCTION TO THE PEOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 fragment presumes the existence of botlx these institutions (vs. 54, 84 et seq.). Of the two 
 remaining additions, that relating to Susanna (possiljly containing a grain of historical truth 
 belonging to the age of the canonical book of Daniel) seems to have been composed at an 
 early day, and without any reference to the canonical Daniel ; while " Bel and the dragon,'' 
 or the '■ Prophecy of Habakkuk, the son of Jesus, of the tribe of Le^^," appears to have been 
 written, with special reference to Dan. vii., by a Palestinian author of a much later time. All 
 of these apocryphal appendages to the questions relating to Daniel furnish a very important 
 testimony in attestation of the superior historical rank and genuine prophetical character of 
 the canonical Daniel, inasmuch as their artificial stamp and legendary tone present a contrast 
 to the far more sober and credible contents of that book, analogous to the familiar contrast 
 bet\veen the apocryi^hal and the canonical Gospels, which serves so strongly to endorse the 
 credibility of tlie latter. These remarks will also apply to the contrast between Daniel and 
 the pseudonymous apocalyj)ses of the last Jewish, or pre-Christian age, e.g. tlie " Sibylline 
 Oracles," Enoch, and the "Fourth Book of Esdras," whose partial dependence on our book 
 has already lieen considered (§ 6, especially note 3), and which are unquestionably the earlier 
 or later products of an apocalyptic and simulated authorship, like that of the unknown origi- 
 nators of the additions to our book. 
 
 Note. — In relation to the apologetic importance of the ajjocryjAal supplements to chap, 
 iii. 13 and 14 in the Greek Daniel, compare Delitzsch. p. 186: "How favorable is the testi- 
 mony for the historical and prophetical character of the canonical book, which results from 
 its contrast with these apocryphal legends 1 " — and also Ziiudel, p. 187: " These apocryphal 
 additions to Daniel therefore, did not all originate at the same time, or in the same place : 
 Imt one appeared on Grecian. (?) soil, another on Palestinian, and a third perhaps on Babylo- 
 nian. Tlicy were translated before they were received hy the Septuagint (witht)ut exception ? 
 — see above) ; and prior to their reception, they had been partially gathered, and ascribed to 
 a s])uriuus Habakkuk. ... If Daniel, tlierefore, was not composed until B. C. 168, how 
 could the ti-anslation in question, together with these additions, have existed as early as B. C. 
 130 '. Even though an unusually rapid formation of legends l)e assumed, from the oldest, 
 relating to Susanna, to the latest ail's otj ruiv rijiiii/ 7tui.huv, how is it possible to conceive the con- 
 trast between the original work and the oldest forgery, as developed within the limits of a 
 single generation I And from tlie earliest forgery again, down to the latest, would not a con- 
 siderable contrast have arisen here, e.g. between tlie «po'ifv;^i} and the aiVfoij ? . . . And 
 beyond this, their being translated and collected ! All these considerations compel ua to 
 assume a jieriod, covering many gcneratkiu.'i, between the origin of the bool- of Daniel and its 
 Alexandrian version.''^ — See ibid., p. 134 et seq., and especially p. 137, on the relation of the 
 Jewish aporahjpses of the ])re-Christian period to Daniel : " A pre-Christian, or, upon the 
 whole, a jjrogressive development, cannot be asserted in connection with these apocalypses ; 
 for, with the exception of the Sibyllines, none of them was sufficiently important to give rise 
 to imitations. They did not spring from each other, but are co-ordinate, and the only con- 
 nection among themselves consists in their imitating the earlier prophets, and in their tendency 
 to describe the facts of history in an ajjocalyptie manner. But on the other hand, nearly all of 
 them contain imitations of Daniel. The " Book of Enoch " treats of the interjjretation of the 
 number seventy in his seventy regents ; Esdras's eagle with wings and feathers is evidently the 
 fourth [? first] beast of Daniel; and the person who incessantly inquires why the covenant 
 peojjle is afllicted, is merely a copy of Daniel while mourning liecause of tlie delay in the ful- 
 filment of projjhecy (chap. ix. and x.). The numbers of Daniel in chap. viii. are almost com- 
 pletely restoied in the Ascensio Jesajoe, which also paints the coming of the Lord with Daniel's 
 colors," etc. 
 
 The apocryphal additions to Daniel are found also in the ancient Coptic version, which is 
 not -n-ithout importance for textual criticism. They have been published by Henry Tattam, 
 in vol. II., p. 270 ss. of his Prvplieta majores in lingua yEgyptiucm dialecto Memphitica s. 
 Co2>tica (Oxon, 1852). 
 
 § 12. Theological and Homiletical Literatitbe on Daniei. 
 
 I. Ancient Period. — 1. Christian expositors. (1.) Church fathers : Hippolyti Commenlar. 
 in Danielis et Kehiiehadnezaris visionum solutio7ies (capp. 7-12), editus e cod. Chisiano in Dan- 
 idem sec. LXX. interpretes, Roma;, 1772 (see also the fragment in Greek of a commentary on 
 Daniel in the 0pp. nippolyti. cd. J. A. Fabricius. Hamb., 1716). EjAnTmi Syri Cominenlar. 
 in Dan., in his 0pp. Gr. et Syr, ed. Assemaui, Rom., 1740 ct seq., torn. II., p. 203 et sen. Hiero- 
 
THEOLOGICAL AXD HOMILETICAL LITERATURE OF DANIEL. Oi 
 
 nymi ExpLiruitio in Danulem prophetam, in his Opp. ed Vallars., Vanet., 1768, torn, v., p. XL 
 rheodoreti Commentar. in visianes Danulia propheta [Tno/ivr^fia tij raj opuotij roii npop/jroL' 
 SavtTj-K), in his Opp. ed. Schulze, Hal., 1768 et seq., t. IL, p. II., p. 1063 ct seq.* Polycluouii (a 
 Drother of Theodore of Mopsuestia) Commentarius in Danielem, in A. Mai, Nova Collect, I. B, 
 p. 155. [Chrysostomi Interpretatio in Danielem, in liis Opp. vi. 228 et seq.] (2.) During the 
 middle ages: 3 oa.c\\\m Ej^oaitio in iJaHteZ., Venet., 1519. Thomas Aquinas, Comm. in Dan- 
 iel., separ. ed. Paris, 1640. [Rupertus Tuitiensis, In Danielem, liber i. (in his Opp. i., 520 et 
 seq.) Albertus Magnus, Comment, in Danielem (in his Opp., p. 8 et seq.)] 2. Jewish expositors 
 (Rabbins) : R. Saadia Hag-Gaon (t 924), in the RabUn. Bibles by Bomberg (Venet., 1526 et 
 seq.) and Buxtorf (Basil, 1618). Rashi {i.e. R. Shelomoh ben-Jizchak, f 1105), ihid., and also 
 in J. F. Breithaupt's Commentt. It. S. Jarchi in Propfih., Joh, et Psahnos in Lat. vert., Goth. 
 1713. Ibn-Ezra (f 1167), in the Rahhiii. Bibles. Abarbanel (t 1508), nj'v:;-; i?-;??; {i.e. " wells 
 of salvation," Isa. xii. 3), Neap., 1497; also Arasterd., 1617, 4. R. Joseph Teitzack (about 
 1500), B"'"?t;D 03^ (pauis absconditus, Prov. ix. 17 — a commentai^ on Daniel and the 5 Megil- 
 loth), Venet., 1608, 4. R. Mosheh Alshech (about 1560), lIT^'n r;-^2n (Cant. U., 1), Zaphat, 
 1508 ; Venet., 1592. R. Shamuel b.- Jeh. Valeri (16th cent.l, ns:bb liin (\isio temporis statuti), 
 Venet., 1586. R. Joseph ben-D. David ben-J. Jachim (usually Jacchiades, t 1559), Paraphra- 
 »is in Dan. proph., Heb. et Lat., ed Const. L'Erapereur, Amstel., 1633, 4to ; [new ed., by Philipp- 
 son, Dessau, 1808, 4to and 8vo. Jud. Low Jeitteles, a Heb. Commentary on Dan., Ezra and 
 Neb., Vienna, 1835, 8vo.] 
 
 n. Modern period. 1. Protestant expositors, (a) lu the 16th century: IjUiher, Der Prophet 
 Daniel deutsch, Wittenb., 1530, 4 (dedicated to duke John Fred.) ; Vorrede Sber den Proph. 
 Daniel, nebst Auslegung des XI. und XII. Kap., Wittenb., 1546, 4; Disputation icier den Ort 
 Dan. iv. 34 ; — the three works collected under the title Auslegung des Proph. Daniel, in vol. 
 vi. of Walch's ed. Melancthon, Comment, in Daniel, proph., Vitemb., 1543, 8 (in his Opip., torn. 
 [I., p. 410) ; [^Exposition of Daniel, gathered out of P. Melancthon, by G. Joy, Geneva, 1545, 
 lOmo, Lond., 1550, 8vo] ; in German, by Just. Jonas, 1546. Joh. Draconitis Cummeiit. in 
 Daniel, ex Ebrao versum, cum oratione in Danielem, Marburg, 1544, 8. Victorin. Sti'igel, 
 Danielis prop)hetm concio, ad Ebraicam et Chaldaicam tieritatem recognita et argumentis atque 
 icholiis illustrata. Lips., 1505, 1571. Joh. Wigand, Explicatio brevis in Danielem, Jen., 1571. 
 Nik. Selnekker, ErH. des Proph. Danielund der Offenbarung Johannis, Jen., 1567, 160S. Phil. 
 Heilbrunner, Danielis piroph. naticinia in locos communes theologicos digesta et qiutstionibus 
 methodice illustrata, Lauing., 1587. J. Qicolampadius, In Danielem II. II., omnigena et ubstru- 
 riore cum Ebrceorum turn Grcecorum seriptorum doctrinarej'crti, Basil., 1530, 1543, and often, 
 L Calvin, Pradectiones in Danielem, a Joa. BudjEo et Car. Jonvillaeo coUectoe, Genev., 1563, 
 1576, and often (also in his Opp., torn, v., Amstel., 1667 [Commentary on Daniel, tr. by T. 
 Myrcs, M.A., Edinb., 1852, 3 vols. 8vo.]). Fr. Junius, Erpositio proph. Danielis, a Jo. Gru- 
 tero excepta, Heidelb., 1593; Goncv., 1594. Rob. Kollock, Comin. in libr. Dan. prnphetci', 
 Edinb., 1591 ; Basil, 1594 ; Gen., 1598. Hugh Broughtim, Danielis visiones Chahhiiae et 
 EbrcEce, ex originali translatte et illustratce, London, 1596 (Engl. ed. [also in Worl's, p. 164 
 et seq.]), Basil., 1599 (Lat. ed. J. Boreel). A Polanus a Polansdorf, In Danielem prophetam, 
 visionum amplitudine difficillimum, vaticiuiorum majestate augustissimum, commentarius, in quo 
 logica analysi et theologica e/c^easi, tradita in publicis prcelectionibis in vetusta Basileensi acade- 
 mia, totius libri, ad hoc avum calamitosum saluberrimi, genuinus sensus et multiplex usus osteif 
 diiur, Basil., 1599, 1608. 
 
 (b). In the 17th century: S. Gesner, Daniel proplieta disputationihus XII., et prefationt 
 ehronologica hreviter explicatus, Vitemljerg., 1601, 1607, and often. Polyc. Leyser, Commenta- 
 rius in Dan. cap. I.-VL, Francof. et Darmst., 1609 et seq.f J. C. Rhumelius, Libei- Danielit 
 paraphrasi recensitus, Norimb., 1616. Mart. Geier, Prcelectlones academics in Danielem proph., 
 
 • The fragments of several other patristical expositors of Daniel, e.ff. Ammonias, Polj-chronius, Apolllnaris, Eudoxius, 
 may be found in the commentary of H. Broughton, mentioned below (Dantelts vMona Cliald. et Bibr., Basil., 15a9), is 
 connection with the expositions of Hippolytus and others. 
 
 + This worlv of Leyser's has been published in six ports under various titles : (1) Scholia Babyiuuica, h. e. eccltitiastian 
 rvmmentationes in cap. I. Danielis. Francof., 1609 ; (2) Colossus Bahylonicus qiialuor mundi monarchias reprasentant, 
 §. ecct. expo6itio cap. If. Danielis, Darmst., 1609 ; (3) Foi'itax Babylonica, sincere retigionis coft/essoris probans, «. Mel, 
 
52 INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DaNIEL. 
 
 Lips., 1667 and often. Abrah. Calov, Annotata Anti-Grotiana in Jeremiam et Daniele n proph., 
 Vitemb., 1664. A. Varenius, Collegium canonicum quatuor novissimoriim V. Ti. prophetarum, 
 Danielis, Haggmi, Zacharm, Mahichice, Rostochii, 1667. G. Meissner, Der Prophet Daniel, 
 sowoJd gescheheiie Dinge ausredend, als hanftige weissagend, durch kurze Anmerhiingen erldutert ; 
 ■with a preface by J. Fr. Mayer, Hamburg, 1695, 13. J. H. Alsted, Trifolium propheticwn, 
 i.e. Cant. Canticor. Salom., prophetia Danielis, Apocalypsis Joannis, sic explicantur, ut series 
 textM et temporis prophetici, e regione posita, lucem menti et consolationem cordi ingcrant, Her- 
 born, 1640. Constantin L'Empereur (Professor controversiarum Judaicarum at Leyden, 
 t 1648), Paraphrasis Jos. Jachiadm in Danielem cum versione et annotationihus, Amstcl., 1633 
 (see supra I., 2). Tliom. Parker, Eipositio msionum et prophetiarum Danielis, Lond., 1646. 
 J. Cocceius, Comment, in Danielem, Lugd. Bat., 1666. H. Wingendorf, Prophetia Danielis 
 paraphrasi reddita et cum prof anm historim momimentis collata, Lugd. Bat., 1674. J. H. Jung- 
 mann, Propheta Daniel novo modo et hactenus inaudito reseratus, etc., etc., Casselis, 1681. 
 Baltli. Bekker, Uitlegginge van den Propli£t Daniel, Amsterd., 1688, 1698. 
 
 (c). In tlie 18tli century: J. Musaius, Sclwlm propheticas contintLatce, ex pralectionihus in 
 prophetas Danielem, Micham, et Joelem collects, ed. J. E. de Scliulenberg, Quedlinb., 1719. 
 Chr. Bened. Michaelis, Adnotationes j>TiHologico-exegetiaE in Danielem, Hal., 1720 (also in Vol. 
 in. of the Annotait. uberioi'es in Hagiogr.). J. W. Petersen, Sinn des Oeistes in dem Propheten 
 Daniel, Frankfort a. M., 1720. J. Koch, Entsiegelter Daniel, d. i. richtige AvJlOsung der siiinmt- 
 lichen Weissagungen Daniels, nach ihrem wahren Inhalt, unzertrennl. Verhindung, einhelligen 
 Ahsicht, vnd genauen, sogar anf Jalire und Tage mit der Chronologie zutreffenden Zeitrechnung 
 aiif den Mcssiam, Lemgo, 1740. M. Fr. Roos, Auslegung der Weissagungen Daniels, die in 
 die Zeit des Neuen Testaments hineinreichen, nebst ihrer Vergleichung mit der Offenh. Joh. naeh 
 der BengeVschen Erklarung derselben, Leips., 1771 [in English, by G. Henderson, Edinb., 
 1811, 8vo.]. J. Chr. Harenberg, Aiifklarung des Buclies Daniel aus der Orundsprache, der 
 Geschichte und iibrigen rechten Hiilfsmitteln, zum richtigen Verstand der Sdtze, zur Befestiguny 
 der Wahrheit, und zur Erlauung durch die lieligion, Blankenburg and Quedlinburg, 1773, 2 
 parts. Chr. S. Beuj. Zeise, Ueherselzung und Erlddrung des Buches Daniel, Dresden, 1777. 
 J. D. Liiderwald, Die seeks ersten Kapitel Daniels, nach historischen Griinden gepriift und 
 herichtigt, Helmstadt, 1787. J. C. Volborth, Daniel avfs neiie aus dem Hebrilish-Chaldaischen 
 iibersetzt, und mit hurzen Anmerlcungen filr unstudirte Leser und Nichttheologen begleitet, Han- 
 over, 1788. C. G. Thube, Das Buch des Propheten Daniel, neu iibersetzt und erlclart, Schwerin 
 and VVismar, 1797. Wm. Lowth, Commentary upon tJie prophecy of Daniel and the twelve 
 Minor prophets, Lond., 1726, 2 vols. Isaac Newton, Observations upon the j/ruphecies of Daniel 
 and the Apocalypse of St. John, Lond., 1738, 2 vols, (a posthumous work, published six years 
 after the death of the author; afterwards published in Latin by W. Siidemann, Amstel., 1737, 
 and in German, with notes, by C. F. Grossmann, Leips., 1765.— Cf. supra § 5.). H. Venema, 
 Dissertationes ad vaticinia Danielis emblematica, cap. II., VII. et VIII. de quatuor orientis 7-egnis, 
 ordine sibi successuris et quinto Messi<B ; in quibus ilia nmd vid demoustraiitur et illustrantur, 
 aliisque prophelis lux affunditur, Leovard., 1745. The same. Comment, in Dan. cap. XI. 4-XII. 
 3, ibid., 1 752. R. Amner, An essay towards an interpretation of the prophecies of Daniel, Lond., 
 1776 ; also in German, Versuch iiber die sdmmtliehen Weissagungen Daniels, nebst Anmerlcungen 
 liber die beriihintesten Erhldrer derselben, von Rich. Amner, Halle, 1779. T. Wintle, Daniel, 
 An improved version attempted, with a preliminary dissertation and notes, critical, historical, and 
 explanatory, Lond., 1792. 
 
 (d;. In the 19th century : Leonh. Bertholdt, Daniel aiis dem Hehrdish-Aramdisclten neu 
 ubersetzt und erkldrt, mit einer vollstdndigen Einleitung und einigen historischen u. exegetischen 
 ExkuTsen, 2 parts, Erlangen, 1806, 1808. G. F. Griesinger, Neue Ansichi der Aufsdtze im Buch 
 Daniel, Stuttg. and Tiiljingen, 1815. E. F. C. 'Ro&iiTimxi\l&: Danielem Lat. vertit et annotation 
 perpetua illustravit (part X. of the Scholia in V. T.), Lips., 1832. H. A. Ch. Hiivernick, 
 B'omrnentar iiber das Buch Daniel, Hamb., 1832. Cas. v. Lengerke, Das Buch Daniel, Kon- 
 
 eyp. cop. Iff. Dan., Francof. , 161U ; (4) Cedrua Babylonica, potenten docentt humtlitatem et deteatuns snperoiam, 9. eccl 
 txp. call. f^'. />««., Francof.. 1610 ; (5) Epuluin Babyloiilciim, in quo canate interitus tmperlorum et regnoruin spectanda 
 5ft ontloH proponnnlur, a. eccl. exp. cap. V. Dan.. Darmst., IfitO; (ti) Aula Perslca, patendena pie-tale.ni ab invidta aulica 
 premi, aed iiequaquam opprtmi, a. eccl. exp. cap, Vf, Dan., Darmst., 1610. 
 
THEOLOGICAG AND HOMILETICAL LITERATURE OF DANIEL. 53 
 
 igsb., 1835. F. J. V. D. Maurer, Commentar. gramm. ci'it. in V. T.. vol. II, fasc. 1 (Ezcch. 
 et Dan.), 1836. F. Hitzig, Kurzgefasates exeget. Handhuch zum A. T. ; lOtb pamphlet. Dot 
 Bueh Daniel, Leips., 1850. C. A. Auberlen, Der Prophet Daniel und die Offenharung Johannii, 
 in ihrem gegenseitigen Verhdltniss hetrachtet und in ihren Hauptstellen erldutert, Basle, 1854, 
 1857 [in English, by Rev. A. Sophir, Edinb., 1856, 8vo.]. J. M. Gartner, Erkldi-ung de* 
 Pi'vpheten Daniel und der Uffenharung Johannis, sowie der Weissagnng von liesekieVs Gog, in 
 genauer Uehereinstimmung mit den Haxijiterscheinungen der Welt- und KircJiengeschichte seit der 
 Oriindung des hahylonischen Weltreichs, 600 v. C'hr., his aiif unsere Zeit und his zur Wiederlcunft 
 Christi um das Ende unserea Jahrhunderts ; 6 numbers, Stuttgart, 1863 et seq. Rud. Kian- 
 ichfeld. Das Buck Daniel erkldrt, Berl., 1868. Kliefoth, Das Buck Daniels iihersetzt und erHdrt, 
 Schwerin, 1868. Ad. Kamphausen, in Bunsen's Bihelwerk, 6 half vols., 1st half, Leips., 1867. 
 H. Ewald, Die Propheten des Alien Bundes, 2d ed., vol. 3, Gott., 1868 (tlie first ed. con- 
 tained merely a monograph exposition of chap. ix. 24-27 — see infra). E. B. Pusey, Lectures 
 on Daniel tJie Prophet, Oxford, 1864. [Fuller, Erllarung des P. Daniel, Basle, 1808.] 
 
 (2) Roman- Catholic expositors since the Reformation. Arias Montanus, Comment, in Dan., 
 Antwerp, 1562. Hector Pintus, Comvientarii in Danielem, Lamentationes Jeremiw et Nahrim, 
 (?/i-i;io» ti<i«<?s, Coimbra, 1582 ; Venet, 1583; Colon., 1587. Bened. Pcrerius, Commentar ionan 
 in Danielem proiyh., II. xvi., Rom., 1586; Lugd., 1588; Antv., 1594. Casp. Sanctius, Com- 
 ment, in Dan. j'roph., Lugd., 1612, 1619. Joh. Maldonatus, Comment, in Jerem., Ezech., Dan., 
 Leyd., 1011 ; Par., 1043. Jacob Veldius, Comment, in Dan. jtroph. cum Chronologia ad intel- 
 ligenda Jeremim, Ezech., et Dan. vaticinia, Antv., 1603. Fabricius Paulitius, Comm. in Da?i., 
 Rom., 1625. Ludov. ab Alcazar, Comm. in varios locos I. Dan., Lugd., 1631. Cornelius a 
 Lapide, August. Calmst, and Dereser-Scholz in their comprehensive Bible-works. G. K. 
 Mayer (Prof, at Bamberg), Die messianiscjien Prophezi^n des Daniel, Vienna, 1866. 
 
 MoxoGRAPns. — For the critical and apologetical literature, or the principal monographs 
 aiming ':o attack or defend the genuineness of the book (Bleek, Kirmss, Havernick, Hengstcn- 
 berg, Ziindel, Fuller, Volck, etc.), see supra, § 5. 
 
 Exegetical monographs : H. Venema, Disseftationes (see supra, II. 1 c). Thomas Newton, 
 Ahhandlungen uher die Weissagungcn, weJche merhroUrdig erfiiUt sind und-noch his avf den 
 heiitigen Tag in Erfiillung gehen ; from the English, Leips., 1757 (containing, on p. 304 et 
 seq., an apologetical discussion of tlie visions concerning the world-kingdoms, chap. 11. and 
 VII., which is directed against Collins, Grotlus, and others). J. G. Scharfenberg, Specimen 
 animadversionum, quihus loci nonnulli Danielis et vett. ejus interpretum, prcesertim Gi'fccoriim, 
 illustrantur et emendantur, Lips., 1774. S. Th. Wald, Curarum in historiam textus Danielis 
 specim. I., Lips., 1783. Compare the essay by the same : Veber die arabisclie Uebersetzung de» 
 Darnel in den Polyglotten, in Eichhorn's Repert. fur hihl. u. morgenl. Literatur, part XIV., 
 Leips., 1784. Laur. Reinkc, Die messian. Wcissa-gungen bei den grossen und lieinen Propheten 
 des A. T., vol. iv. 1, p. 167 et seq. (cliietly an exposition of chap. ix. 24-27), Gicssen, 1862. 
 H. Ewald, Die P-opheten des Alien Bundes, 1st ed., Stuttgart, 1841, vol. II.. appendix (likewise 
 confined to the exposition of chap. ix. 24 et seq.) J. Chr. Hofmann, Weissagung und Erfiil- 
 lung im A. und iV. T., I., p. 276 et seq., Nord., 1841. The same. Die 70 Jahrc Jeremias und. die 
 70 JaJirwochen des Daniel, Nuremberg, 1836. K. Wieseler, Die 70 Wochen und die 63 Jahrioochen 
 des Propheten Daniel, Gotting., 1839. The most complete record of the older exegetical litera- 
 ture on Dan. ix. 24-27, or on the 70 weeks of years, may be found in Abrah. Calov's Bihl. 
 illustr., tom. I., p. 119 et seq., and in his mouogra])]), De LXX. septimanis myst^erium, Vitemb., 
 1063. Compare also Bertholdt, Daniel, etc., vol. II., p. 563 et seq. ; Danko, Ilistoria revela- 
 tionis divines Novi Testamenti, p. Ixxiii. et seq. ; Rauke, as above, p. 211 et seq., and also 
 Reusch, Die patristischen Bereclmungen der 70 Jahrioochen Daniels, in the Tiibinger Theol. 
 Quartaischrift, 1868, No. IV., p. 535 et seq. [See also the monographs cited by Danz, Worter- 
 mich, s. V. ; and Darling, Cyclopmlia, ad loc] 
 
 [III. Additional exegetical works on Daniel in the English language. 1. Commentaries on 
 the entire book : A. Willett, A Six-fold Commentary on Daniel, etc.. Loud., 1010, fol. E. 
 Huit, The whole prophecies of Daniel explained, etc., Lond., 1643, 4to. T. Parker, The Visions 
 aiid prophecies of Daniel expounded, etc., Lond., 1646, 4to. H. More, Exposition of the Prophet 
 Daniel, Lond., 1681, 4to ; the same. Answers to Remarks, ibid.. 1684, 4to ; the same. Supple- 
 
54: INTRODUCTION TO THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 meiit and Defences, ibid., 1G85, 4to; the same, Notes on Daniel and the Apocalypse, ibid., 1085, 
 4to. Auon., The visions and prophecies of Daniel expUibud, etc., Lond., 1700, 12mo. E. 
 Wells, The Book of Daniel explained, etc., Lond., 1716, 4to. R. Amner, An Essay toimrds tht 
 interpretation of Daniel, etc., Lond., 1776, 8vo. J. H. Frere, A combined mew of the prophecie4 
 of Daniel, Eadras, and St. John, etc., Lond., 1815, 8vo. W. Girdlestone, Observations on the 
 visions of Daniel, etc., Oxf., 1820, 8v<>. J. Wilson, Dissertations on the hook of Daniel, Oundle, 
 1824, 8vo. F. A. Coxe, Outlines of lectures on Daniel, 2d ed.. Lend., 1834, 12mo. T. Wintle, 
 An imjyroved Version of Daniel, with Notes, Lond., 1836, 8vo. L. Gaussen, Lectures on tlie 
 Book (f Daniel, Lond., 1840, 12rao. C. P. 3Iiles, Lectures on Daniel, Lond., 1840-41, 2 vols., 
 1 2rao. B. Harrison, Prophetic Outlines of the Christian Church, etc. (Warburtou Lectures), Lond ., 
 1849, 8vo. M. Stuart, A Commentary on the Book of Daniel, Andover, 1850, 8vo. A. Barnes, Notes 
 on Daniel, N. Y., 1850, 12mo. J. Cumming, Lectures on the Book of Daniel, Lond., 1850, 8vo. 
 W. Ramsay, Exposition of the hook of Daniel, Lond., 1853, 12mo. J. Bellamy, New Transla- 
 tion of the hook of Daniel, etc., Lond., 1863, 4to. W. Shrewsbury, Notes on the hook of Daniel, 
 Edinb., 1865, 8vo. P. S. Desprez, The Apocalypse of the Old Test, Lond., 1865, 8vo. H. 
 Cowlcs, Ezekiel and Daniel, rcith Notes, N. T., 1867, 12mo. AV. H. Rule, Historical Exposition 
 of the Book of Daniel, Lond., 1869, 8vo. (adopts the year-day theory, and applies the little horn 
 to the papacy). W. Kelly, Notes on the Book of Daniel, Edinb., 1870, 12mo. C. F. Keil, The 
 Book of the pjrophet Daniel (being part of Keil and Delitzsch's Commentary on the Old Testa- 
 ment), Edinb., 1872, 8vo., from the German. L. Strong, Lectures on the Book of Daniel, Lond., 
 1872, 8vo. Prof. Gaussen, The Prophesies of Daniel Explained, translated by Blaekstone, 
 Lond., 1873, 8vo (makes the fourth kingdom Rome). 
 
 3. Monographs. — T. Bnghtmnn, Exposition of the last part 'of Daniel, Lond., 1644, 4to. Ab- 
 onymous, An Essay on Scripture Prophecy, s. 1. [probably Lond.], 1724 (makes the fourth beast 
 Rome). Z. Grey, Examination of Sir Isaac Newton's Ohservations upon Daniel, etc. (treats only of 
 the special points named in the title), Lond., 1736, 8vo. 6. Burton, An Essay on the Numbers of 
 Daniel and St. John, Norwich, 1766-68, 2 vols., 8vo. Anon., Seven projfhetical periods, etc., 
 Lond., 1790, 4to. G. S. F.aber. Dissertation on Daniel's 70 Weeks (makes them extend from 
 the 17th of Artaxerxes to the 15th of Tiberius), Lond., 1811, 8vo. See also his Sacred Calen- 
 dar of Prophecy, Lond., 1838, 3 vols. 8vo., in which he argues at length for the year-day 
 theoiy. E. Irving, Babylon and Infidelity foreimmed, etc. (adopts the year-day theoi7 with 
 its consequences), Glasgow, 1826, 3 v(j1s. 8vo. ; ibid, 1828, 8vo. J. Tyso, An elucidation, etc., 
 shoicinff that the Seventy Weeks have not yet taken place, Lond., 1838, 8vo. J. Farquharsou, 
 Illustrations of Daniel's last vision and prophecy, Lond., 1838, 8vo. N". S. Folsom, Interpreta- 
 tion of the prophecies of Daniel (against Millerism, and of course rejects the reference of the 
 fourth kingdom to Rome), Boston, 1843, 12mo. L T. Hinton, Prophecies of Daniel and John 
 (applies the third empire to the Turks, and the fourth to Rome). St. Louis, 1843, 12mo. L 
 Chase, Remarks on the Book of Daniel (applies the " little horn " exclusively to Antiochus Epiph- 
 anes), Boston, 1844, 12mo. G. Junkin, The Little Stone of the &'?■<■«« ///wc^e (interprets the 
 "little horn" of the Papacy), Phila., 1844, 8vo. T. R. Birks, The two later visions of Daniel 
 (makes the fourth kingdom Rome), Lond., 1846, 12mo. S. Lee, Events and Times of the Visions 
 of Daniel and St. John (makes the "little horn " exclusively heathen Rome), London, 1851, 8vo. 
 A. M. Osbon, Daniel verified in History, etc. (makes the fourth kicgdom Rome), N. Y., 
 1856, 13mo. J. Oswald, The kingdom which shall not he destroyed, etc. (makes the fourth king- 
 dom Rome), Phila., 1856, 12mo. S. Sparkes, A Historical Commentary on Daniel xi. (adopts 
 the year-day theory, and applies the whole chapter to modem times), Binghamton, 1858, 8vo. 
 W. R. A. Boyle, The Inspiration of the Book of Daniel (applies the fourth kindom to the 
 Roman Empire), Lond.. 1863, 8vo. S. P. Tregclles, Remarks on the Visions of Daniel, etc. 
 (rejects the year-day theory with its conclusions), Lond., fifth ed., 1864, 13mo. R. Phillips, 
 On Daniel's Numbers, Lond., 1864, 12mo. L. A. Sawyer, Daniel with its apocryphal additions 
 (a new translation), Bost , 1864, 12mo. R. A. Watkinson. The End as foretold in Daniel, 
 etc. (adopts the year -day theory), N. Y., 1865, 12mo. F. W. Bosanquet, Messiah the Prince, 
 Lond , 1866, 8v(i. H. W. Taylor, The Times of Daniel (adopts the year-day theory), N. Y. 
 1871, 12mo. H. Loomis, T^c Great Conflict (makes the little horn the Papacy), N. Y., 1874, 
 12mo.l 
 
THE 
 
 BOOK OF THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 FIRST (HISTORICAL) PART. 
 
 Chapters I.-VI. 
 
 1. Introduction. The Early H'Mory of Danid and his Tliree Associates. 
 
 I. 1-21. 
 
 1 In the tliircl year of the reign of Jehoiakitn king of Judah came Nebuchad- 
 
 2 nezzar king of Babylon iinto Jerusalem and besieged it.' And the Lord gave 
 Jehoiakim kins; of Judah into his hand, with [and] pavt oithe vessels oittte house of 
 God, which [ami] he carried [them] into the land of Shinar, to the house of his god ;' 
 and he brought the vessels into the treasure-house^ of his god.' 
 
 3 And the king spake* unto Ashpenaz the master' of his eunuchs, that he should 
 bring [to bring] certain oi the children of Israel, and of the king's seed," and of the 
 
 4 princes ;' children' in whom was no blemish, but [and] well-tavoured," and skilful'" 
 in all wisdom, and cunning "in knowledge, and understanding '" science, and such 
 as had ability " in them [in whom xoas ability] to stand in the king's palace, and 
 whom they might teach'* the learning " and the tongue oi the Chaldseans. 
 
 5 And the king appointed them a daily provision'" of the king's meat," and of 
 the wine lohich ho drank; so nourishing [, and to make grow] them three years, 
 that [; and] at tlie end thereof they might [should] stand before the king. 
 
 6 Xow [And] among these [them] were of tlie children of Judah, Daniel, Hana- 
 
 7 niah [Chananyah |, Mishael, and Azariah ; unto whom [and to them] the prince 
 of the eunuchs gave [assigned] names : for he gave [and he assigned] unto Daniel, 
 tlie name of Belteshazzar ; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach ; and to Mishael, of 
 Mesliach ; and to Azariah, o/' Abed-nego. 
 
 S But [And] Daniel purposed in" his heart that he would not defile himself with 
 the portion of the kmg^s meat," nor [and] with the wine w/n'c/t he drank : there- 
 fore [and] he requested of the prince of the eunuchs that he might not defile 
 
 9 himself Now [And] God had brought [gave] Daniel into favour and tender 
 
 10 love " with [before] the prince of the eunuchs. And the prince of the 
 eunuchs said unto Daniel, 1 fear my lord the king, who hath appointed your 
 meat [food] and j'our drink : " for why should he see your faces worse liking 
 [more gloomy] than the children" which are of your sort ?" then shall [, and 
 should] ye make »ie endanger my head to the king? 
 
 1 1 Then [And] said Daniel to [the] Melzar, whom the prince of the eunuchs 
 
 12 had set over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah: Prove thy servants, I 
 beseech thee, ten days ; and let them give us pulse to eat,"^ and water to drink. 
 
 13 Then [And] let our countenances be looked upon before thee, and the counte- 
 nance of the children ' that eat of the portion of the'king's meat;" and as thou 
 
 14 seest [shalt see], deal [do] with thy servants. So he consented [And he 
 
 15 hearkened] to them in [as to] this matter, and proved them ten davs. And at 
 the end of ten days their countenances appeared [countenance was seen to be 
 good] fairer and [the\- were] fatter in [of] flesh than all the children' which did 
 
>(j • THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 16 eaX the portion of the king's meat." Thus [And the] Melzar took away th* 
 portion o/' their meat," and the wine thatX\\Q.y should drink and gave them pidse.'' 
 
 17 [And] -4«_/bc these four children,' God gave them knowledge and skill in all 
 learning " and wisdom : and Daniel had understanding in all visions [every 
 vision] and dreams. 
 
 18 Now, [x\nd] at the end of the days that the king had said' he should [to] 
 bring th^Mu in, then the prince of the eunuchs brougiu them in before Nebuchad- 
 
 19 nezzar. And the king communed [spake] with them: and among them all 
 was found none like Daniel, Hananiah, JMishael, and Azariah : therefore 
 
 20 [and] stood they before the king. And in all matters [every matter] of wisdom 
 and understanding, that the king inquired of them, [then] he found them ten . 
 times better than " all the magicians ''* and astrologers " that viere in all his 
 realm. 
 
 21 And Daniel continued " even unto the first year of king Cyrus. 
 
 GRAMMATICAL AND LEXICAL NOTES. 
 
 [* n"ibS 12*1. and pressed upon it, namely, with the usual military appliances. — ' T^H'TX, fti5 gods, probablj 
 referring to the Babylonian polytheism, in contrast with the true God above, CTibsP. — ' ISIH T.^Si store-houM, 
 some room connected with the temple of Belns.— « IXIK'S], and said, in the Chaldaizing sense of commanded.— 
 s -~., chief, principal or head man.— « ~~i;?2~ S'^'- seed of the ktngdom, namely, of Judah.— ' a"'^B'^B~» '*< 
 lu/bles, a Persic word denoting the aiistoovcy. — s n*^~b''» youtlts, or lads, between infancy and adolescence. — ' "^^1^3 
 ns"'^, good of appearance, i.e., hand.iome.—'« ^'^^"'^i intelligent, i.e., of quick natural parts.— " '"'> knmcing, 
 i.e.. by acquired information.— >' 1:1::?;, considerate, i.e., of attentive habits.—" ns, vigor, i.e., physical strength, 
 and perhaps including mental energy.— * OTsiblt «'"* "> '«"^'* """"• '•«•• "=*"^ **™ ^ ^^ instructed. This clauB« 
 is to be connected in construction with the preceding S"^3nl;, ver. 3.—" ICC. tool; i.e., the formularies or written 
 mysteries.—" i?3i^3 Ci"' SjI- a word (or matter) of a day in its doy, a regular ration from day to day.— " 33rB) 
 delicacy, a Tersian word denoting luxurious rfnnd-s'. — '» ;5 aC'^1, oss^ned wpoii, r.c, imposed this as a consciem- 
 tioiis duty.—" a~'3n"'i mercies, i.e., kind consideration of his scruples.— '° naifir?;, is regarded by the Gram- 
 marians as an instance of an epenthetic i in the sing., or perhaps an older foi-m of the construction in which the final ,1 
 has given place to a cognate letter.—-' D;b"'3;< according to your circle, i.e., in point of age and rank. There is, 
 however, iMssibly an allusion to their emasculated condition. Eunuchs are constantly represented on the Aiwyrian monu- 
 ments as being "of fuller habit th.in other men.— =' n;:!*:i a^J!l:i~— j?;, of the se«i-fruits, and u:e icill surely eat. 
 I.e., eiclnsively vegetable diet.— »' ;7 "TJ"' "lb?> <«" hands (parts) abore, ten-fold superior to.— '• CSy"!! i« 
 generally explained by the lexicographers as derived from 'syi', a style, hence scribes, the Magian ieiioypafi-iiartlt. 
 Perhaps it signifies horosconists.—''^ a*E™'s. from tl'Jlt, to whisper incantation, hence are magician.': in the broad 
 gcnce. -* in"*!! teas alive and influential in that official capacity.] 
 
 ers (cf. 3 Kings xsiv. 1 ; xxv. 1 ; Ezra ii. 1 ; 
 
 V. 12. etc.). Jeremiah (sxT. 1; xxxix. 1, 11; 
 
 xliii. 10) and Ezekiel (xxix. 18) have -I'JSi^^rii:. 
 
 which corresponds more exactly to the older 
 „. , , J . rendering NabukutJiirr-tt.vir, as found in the 
 
 rei^ of Jehoiakim. "ft e have already shown, , B^bvlonian cuneiform inscriptions, and also to 
 in the Introd.. § 8, note 2, that this does not t^e "nearly identical Persian form Nabuklmd- 
 conflict with Jcr. xxv. 1, 9.— Came Nebuchad- , ,.„ , ^.^^^^^ occurs at Behistun (see Oppert. 
 nezzar, king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem, and 1 jj^^^.^^ .j^.,, _ jggj_ p 4^,5. ^^.j^^fHt^ ^n Mhnpo- 
 besieged it, i. e. , he departed for Jerusalem, m ^^.^^^ .^ ^ 35-. ^^ ^ -jj^^ ^^^^ certainly compre- 
 order to besiege it; he began his expedition j^^^^ ^^ j^^ ^^^ element, the name of the 
 asrainst Jerusalem, which resulted m the siege „, , , ■, ,- , nr <--- t 1 ■ 
 
 o! that citv. For the view that His is here to i Chaldtean god Aebo, =. Mercurj- ( -,, Isa. xIm. 
 
 ESEGETR'AL REMARKS, 
 
 Verses 1, 2. The trnmportation to Babylon, by 
 Kehiirhadiiezzar. — In the third year of the 
 
 be takeu-in the sense of ••departing," see the 
 Introd., g 8, 2. a. — Instead of i? 1?^, to straiten, 
 besiege, we generally find elsewhere "'?^!' with 
 the dative, e. g., Deut. xxviii, 52; 1 Kings viii. 
 37, —The form of the name "■is^":-:: is the 
 
 1), and it seems also to include the terms kadr, 
 "might," and !ar = ~~, '•prince" (compare 
 Gesenius, Thcsaur., p. 890; Oppert, 1. c). The 
 name is rendered with either n or /• by Greek 
 authors; for whUe Strabo (15. i. 0) writes No- 
 iini,ntSi)unopni, Berosus (in Josephus contr. Ap., i 
 
 one in general use among the later Hebrew writ- I 20, 21) has Na.i»tvv«Wucro/'o,, and the Sept. 
 
CHAP. I. 1-21. 
 
 57 
 
 JiaSoi'xoSovoaop. Instead of ~?''-.lr''"-!i liow- 
 erer, our book elsewhere has uniformlj' ^2:", 
 omitting the euphonic « ; cf. -3, chap. iii. 25 i 
 vii. 15, instead of s^n. chap. iu. 6. 11, etc. ; iv. 7. 
 
 [According to Ptolemy's chronological cuiwii 
 of the reigns of the Babj-lonian lungs, Nebu- 
 chadnezzar became king near the close of B.C. 
 605, whereas his expedition in question, falling 
 in the third year of Jehoiakim, occurred late in 
 B.C. (iOT, and the capture of the city, in Jehoia- 
 kim's fourth year, fell about the middle of B.C. 
 006. It appears, however (Josephus Aiilig. 
 X. 11, 1), that his father, Nabopolassar, during 
 his ovm lifetime, and near the close of his 
 reign, had sent him to repel Pharaoh-Necho at 
 Carchemish, and on his way back, Nebuchad- 
 nezzar captured Jerusalem, as related by Daniel. 
 WhUe he was engaged in this campaign, his 
 father died, and he hastened back to Babylon in 
 order to assume the reins of government. By the 
 Jews, therefore, his reign is naturally reckoned 
 from the date of this conquering expedition, 
 although he did not actually become full king 
 at Babylon till a year or more later. J 
 
 Terse 3. And the Lord gave . . . into his 
 band, i.e., into his power. Compare Gen. ix. 3, 
 20; Ex. iv. 31; 3 Sam. xviii. 3; also Ps. xcv. 7, 
 etc. The designation of Jehovah simply as 
 '• Lord " C;"'!*) is not confined to later writers, 
 e. g., Ezra x. 3; Neh. i. 11, but occurs as early 
 as Gen. xviii. 37 ; Judges xiii. 8 ; Psa. xvi. 3 ; 
 XXXV. 2:j, etc. — Jehoiakim, king of Judah. 
 Jehoiakim reigned eleven years, according to 2 
 Kings xxiii. 'Hi ; 3 Chron. xxxvi. 5, while the 
 conquest by Nebuchadnezzar here referred to 
 can hardly have taken place later than the 
 fourth year of this reign (see Introd. § 8, Note 
 2, and particularly what is there remarked in 
 opposition to Kranichf eld). Hence it is impossi- 
 ble to consider the passage before us as describ- 
 ing a conquest which put an end to the rule nf 
 Jehoiakim, but rather an event which resulted 
 in his becoming the va.ssal of Nebuchadnezzar ; 
 or, more correctly, of Nabopolassar, who was 
 yet living. Similarly, what follows does not 
 assert an actual banishment of Jehoiakim, but 
 merely his temporary removal to Babylon, and 
 perhaps not even this. — And a part ot the ves- 
 se s of the house of God, i.e.. of the sacred 
 vessels of the temple, which are again men- 
 tioned in chap. v. 2 et seq.* — CiSpO, instead of 
 which several manuscripts have P^i?'? (cf. Theo- 
 dotion's ctJtu fitp.i',-), is compounded of ri^j5 
 
 "end," and the preposition T?, and, therefore, 
 its literal meaning is " from the end," " on ex- 
 piration," in which sense it occurs in vs. 5, 15, 
 and lb of this chapter. In this place, where it 
 serves to designate a quantity instead of denot- 
 ing time, it evidently expresses the idea of an 
 integral part, a considerable part, like the Chal- 
 dee r^p y^ in chap. ii. 42, and like riSp": 
 
 * ["Dnniel ib cnxefiil to say (with historical Accuracy) 
 that at this time the king of Babylun took away only a part 
 of the vessels of the t<-mple. ilany more were taken ilnriiig 
 the ..horl rei'jn of Jeconiah (see '2 Kings xxiv. l-*!), and yet 
 tocQe were left behind even then, to be taken at the final de- 
 etniction of the city in the reign of Zedekiab ( Jer. xxrii. 
 ■lt-ii)."—CowUf.} 
 
 in Neh. vii. 70. In explaining this meaning it 
 is not necessary to assume (with llitzig) that 
 ~^p may here be equivalent to '"a part," for 
 the word bears this sense iu no other instance. 
 The word, rather, indicates that the store iu 
 question, from end to end, has contributed a 
 share, and throughout its extent some portion 
 has been taken away. Hence ''from the end of 
 the vessels of the temple " signifies merely a 
 portion of all its vessels. Cf. Kranichf eld on this 
 passage ; Gesen. -Dietrich 8. v. ~^?. [Furst, 
 however (Heb. Lex. s. v.), adopts the simple ex- 
 planation that '^^p'3 is merely an alternative 
 form of r^^p, and this is certainly corroborated 
 by the form P2p^i^, chap. i. 18, where two pre- 
 positions cannot be tolerated.] This view is also 
 essentially established by 3 Chron. xxxvi. 7 : 
 
 Which he carried into the land of Shinar ; 
 
 rather, " And he caused them to be brought to 
 the land of Shinar," — to Babylonia, which pro- 
 vince is here called by the ancient name that 
 occurs outside of Genesis (see Gen. x. 10; xi. 
 2 ; xiv. 1), only in the elevated language of the 
 prophets, e.g., in Isa. xi. 11; Zech. v. 11. — The 
 suffix in CS^;^] "and he caused them to be 
 taken away," can hardly be taken (as do Hiivem. 
 and others) as referring exclusively to the 
 sacred vessels, the mention of which immedi- 
 ately precedes this sentence ; for the following 
 words refer to them again, and tHus distinguish 
 them as a particular of the collective object of 
 the verb stn^.n. * We are not obliged, however, 
 to include the king Jehoiakim among those who 
 were carried away with the sacred utensils ; for 
 while the narrative in its progress postulates the 
 presence in Babylon of Jewish youths belong- 
 ing to llje royal and to noble families, it never 
 implies the presence of the king himself (cf. vs. 
 3, G ; also v. 13) ; and while it is related in 2 
 Chron. xxxvi. B, that Nebuchadnezzar bound 
 Jehoiakim " in fetters, to cany him to Babylon," 
 it is not expressly stated that he executed that 
 purpose. The Sept. {kiu tojjotv airui ii \a'/\(ii^ 
 irahu: nai ai-fiyayei^avTov t'lr Ba0v''.(',tva) first imposed 
 this sense on the passage, because they felt com- 
 pelled to assume an actual deportation of Jehoi- 
 akim. followed by his return to Jerusalem at 
 a later period — an opinion which w;,'is shared by 
 the writer of the 3d Book of Esdras and the 
 Vulgate, and by several rabbins of the Jliddle 
 Ages, e.g., Ibn-Ezra. WhOe the passage before 
 us does not directly contradict this assumption, 
 which represents the fate of Jehoiakim as very 
 similar to that of Manasseh (3 Chron. xixiii. 13), 
 it does not necessarily compel its adoption. 
 
 * [Stuart, on the contrarj*, insists that the following clause 
 compels us to understand the same object of Si'^Znin both 
 cases; but he overstrains the particle PX by the ren- 
 dering *' tfte ftaitie." The English Auth. Version interprets 
 in a similar manner. But the latter clause certainly implies 
 a distinction lietween the objects carried away, some of which 
 were deposited in a prtrticuLir s(iot. The author is, there- 
 fore, correct in understanding the usfuK'iaits of the king to 
 be included generally under the mention of hi= name, bat 
 I not himself particularly ; he is inconsistent, however, a little 
 I farther on, as we shall see, in destroying the whole founda, 
 I tion of this distinction, in the interpretation of the laat 
 clause of t^e vetEe.] 
 
58 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Jehoiakim may be included among the trans- 
 ported Jews who are designated by the plural 
 suffix in cs«"~"'1 ; but, on the other hand, the 
 suffix may, in addition to the temple-vessels, 
 simply designate a band of noble Jews, whom 
 the conqueror carried away as hostages, and to 
 which the youth referred to in v. 3 et seq. be- 
 longed — hence those D"'"I1iT^, whose presence 
 may be gathered from the coUective singular 
 m^n^, to which reference has already been 
 made (Kranichfeld ; cf. Ibn-Ezra, Maldonat, 
 Geier, and others ; also Bertheau in Kurzge- 
 fasatcs exig. HandbucJi zur Chronik,^. 4^7). — 
 To the house of his god — rather " to the dwel- 
 ling-place of his gods." l^ribs'tTia is probably 
 to be regarded as in opposition with T"!*? 
 "^".2 ; for the sacred vessels of the temple at 
 Jerusalem, as has been shown, formed only a 
 part of the object in CS^:";! ; and, besides, if 
 n"nb!< r^a in this place were iutended to desig- 
 nate the temple of Nebuchadnezzar's god (or 
 gods), usage would require the particle J^ 
 in order to manifest the object towards which 
 the motion is directed (see Gen. xxxi. 4 ; Isa. 
 xxxvii. 33 ; Zech. xi. 13). The correct view is 
 stated by Hitzig and Kranichfeld. who refer to 
 Hos. viii. 1 ; ix. 15 ; Ex. xxix. 45 ; Num. xxxv. 
 3, etc.. in support of the tropical signification, 
 which takes j-^2 iu the sense of "land or dwel- 
 ling-place." [Keil, however, shows the inaccu- 
 racy of this criticism, on grammatical grounds. 
 Moreover, in this way the distmction evidently 
 intended between the different classes of objects 
 tran.sported, is wholly taken away ; the persons 
 were merely removed to Babylon, but the uten- 
 sils were lodged in a heathen temple, as they 
 before had belonged to Jehovah's. The parallel 
 history. 2 Chron. xxxvi. 6, 7, states all this 
 explicitly. Daniel here merely rehearses the 
 facts in a general way, but is nevertheless care- 
 ful to mention the disposal, both of the captives, 
 of whom he was himself one (chap. ii. 25), 
 and the vessels, which afterwards became so 
 important in his narrative (chap. v. 2, 23).] 
 Whether the genitive l^H-^ be translated "of 
 his gods" (cf. chap. ii. 47; iii. 29 ; iv. 6, 15) or 
 "of his god," is unimportant. In the lat- 
 ter case, the reference is to Bel, the chief 
 divinity of the Babylonians ; cf. Isa. xlvi. 1 ; 
 Jer. 1. 2; Ii. 44. — And he brought the ves- 
 sels into the treasure-house i i his gods (or 
 "his god," viz.: Bel). On ^:f i!< ri-":!, treasure- 
 house yn^nipvAaKtnv^ compare Mai. iii. 10; Neh. 
 xiii. 5, 12, 13, where the treasury of the second 
 temple is the subject of remark. There is no 
 contradiction between this passage and chap. v. 
 2 et seq. where the sacred vessels are profaned 
 by Belshazzar, and thus appear to have been 
 stored in his palace. Belshazzar was not Nebu- 
 chadnezzar, and it is conceivable that the son 
 could trample in the mire what his father and 
 predecessor had valued and reserved (cf. Ephr. 
 Syr. on this passage). Nor is there a contradic; 
 tiou of 2 Chron. xxxvi. 7 ; the statement in that 
 passage: "And he put them in his palace" 
 
 act than the one before us ; [or rather, perhaps, 
 iS'^n is then used La its frequent signification ol 
 temple, as all the older versions render, and the 
 suffix " /ijs " designates it as that of his favorite 
 deity]. 
 
 Verses 8, 4. The selection of youthful Jews of 
 noble rank for sercice at the royal court. And 
 the king spake unto (commanded) Ashpenaz, 
 the master of his eunuchs, 'r?''?^, a name, 
 whose formation is very similar to that of 
 T:3'i'X, Gen. x. 3, but not to be identified with 
 it on that account (as Hitzig suggests) without 
 further inquiry. It appears to be of Indo-Ger- 
 manic origin, and, according to Rodiger, is com- 
 pounded of the Sanscrit oqea, "horse," and 
 nasa, "nose." It is, therefore, equivalent to 
 "horse-nose."— n"'C'i"iD ai_, the chief of the 
 eunuchs (Sept. apxievvovxnc, ; Vulgate, prcepon- 
 tus eunuchorum), an important and influential 
 officer of the palace at Oriental courts, as may be 
 shown from the position of the Kislar-Aga at 
 the Turkish court in our day. However, neither 
 he nor his subordinates are to be regarded as 
 actual eunuchs, but rather as ordinary chamber- 
 lains (Luther: " oberster Kammerer"). Com- 
 pare Gen. xxxvii. 3U ; xxxix. 1, 7, where 
 Joseph's master at the court of Pharaoh 
 is called n''~C, although he was married; 
 also 1 Sam. viii. 15; 1 Kings xxii. 9; xxv. 19, 
 etc., in all of which the rendering of O^^O 
 by "chamberlain" or court-official is adequate. 
 However, the subordinates of Ashpenaz, men- 
 tioned in the passage under consideration, may 
 be regarded as actual evmuchs (as also those in 
 Esth. i. 10, 12, 15; ii. 3, 14; iv. 5), without 
 necessitating the conclusion that Daniel and his 
 associates also became eunuchs, on their being 
 placed under his super\ ision. Only a grossly 
 carnal conception of the facts narrated in this 
 chapter, and of Isaiah's prophecy, Isa. xxxix. 
 7 (where ciO likewise means [or may mean] 
 an official generally) could lead to this opinion, 
 which is entertained by a number of Jewish and 
 older Christian commentators, e.g., Josephus, 
 Antiguit., X. 11 ; the Targum, on Esther iv. 5; 
 Rashi, on Dan. i. 21 ; Origen Ilinnil. iv. on Ezek. ; 
 Jerome, ailr. Jovin. i. 1 ; and Job. Damascenus, 
 Ve fide orthod. iv. 25.* It is not even possibla 
 to argue from the relations of Daniel to the 
 master of the eunuchs, as indicated in this pas- 
 sage, that the prophet always remained un- 
 maiTied (as Pseudo-Epiphanius i'c I'j't. prrophet., 
 c. 10, Cornelius a Lapide, Huetius, and others, 
 suggest). See the Introd. , g 2. — 1 hat he should 
 bring certain of the children of Israel — i. e. , to 
 choose of the children of Israel, viz. : of the 
 Jews, who had been carried to Babylon as hos- 
 tages, cf. V. 2. The more comprehensive phrase, 
 "the children of Israel," is justified by the fact 
 that the theocratic state under Jehoiakim in- 
 cluded all of the tribes of Benjamin and Levi, 
 and at least fragments of several other tribes, 
 especially of Simeon (2 Chron. xv. 9), in addi- 
 
 * [Rather, a strictly literal interpretation of Isa. .xxxix, 7. a3 
 well as all the probabilities and analogies of the case, requii eg 
 this view, which the majority of cummentatora have accord- 
 ingly taken. The case of Joseph's master afford.s no diffi- 
 culty, for eunuchs of high rank are often ii-arried (cf . Kcclus, 
 XX. 4; xxv. 20); indeed the Fupposition of hlB impoteno* 
 affords some explanation of his wife's solicitation of Joseph.) 
 
CHAP. I. 1-21. 
 
 59 
 
 tion to the leading tribe of Judah. — And of the 
 king's seed, and ol the princes— rather, "of 
 
 the royal seed, as well as of the number of 
 nobles." Instead of this correlative view of the 
 two "'s — the only correct view — which is found 
 in Von Lengerke, and in Hitzig, and others, 
 Bertholdt. without reason, adopts the designa- 
 tive (eit/ur—or), while a majority, including 
 Havemick, take the first 1 (before y^l, which, 
 however, is wanting in several of Kennicott's 
 and De Rossi's manuscripts. — but the authen- 
 ticity of which is not, on that account, to be 
 questioned) in the sense of "and indeed," 
 "namely," — hence as marking the use of an 
 emphatic apposition. Our view is supported by 
 parallel passages, such as chap, vii 20; viii 13, 
 etc. — The term S^':ri"^Sn, "nobles," "mag- 
 nates." which occurs only here and in Esth. i. 
 3 ; vi M, seems to be borrowed from the Persian, 
 and to be equivalent to the Pehlevi pardom, 
 "the first." "the noble;" cf. the Sanscrit 
 pi-athrniui, Zend frnthema, Greek -/lurcf. Its 
 derivation from the Greek -jionuoi, essayed by 
 Bertholdt, as well as the opinion which pre- 
 vailed among older expositors, that the word is 
 of Hebrew origin, and perhaps related to mc, 
 invalidt, are to be decisively rejected. The cor- 
 'esponding term in Hebrew is DiJ"'!^, the strong 
 or powerful ones: Ex. xv. 15; Ezek. xvii. 13 > 
 2 Kings xxiv. 1.5. — Verse 4. Children in 
 whcm was no blemish, i.e., no physical fault ; 
 bence. of faultless beauty ; compare 2 Sam. 
 liv. 25. (Cf. the form -rs'a in the Kethib in 
 this place with Job xxxi. 7.) Corporeal sound- 
 ness and a handsome form were considered in- 
 •lispensible among the ancient Orientals (cf. 
 Ourtius. vi. 5, 29), for those who were destined 
 ifor court service, — a view which is still shared 
 »)y the Turks; see Ricaut IJegcnitdrt. Zustaiid 
 
 lies turk. Rtklies, i. 13. — The indefinite Q"'7f". 
 does not admit of a definite conclusion respect- 
 tog the age of the j'ouths, and particularly of 
 Daniel. The remark in Plato, Alcib. i. g 37, 
 .however, according to which the training of the 
 Persian youth by the -ai('in)uyn\ Sam'/.cim began 
 irith the 14th year, has a certain importance for 
 speculations on this question, which is enhanced 
 Dy the statement of Xenophon, Ci/n>j). i. 2, that 
 Qone of the io'/Jm might enter the service of 
 the king before they attained their 17th year. 
 What is said in v. 5 concerning a period of 
 three years during which Daniel was in training, 
 corresponds remarkably with these statements. 
 — bMlfuI in all \risdom. The intellectual 
 qualifications are immediately connected with 
 the physical. Havemick, Hitzig, and others, 
 are correct in taking fi'SC?? in the sense of 
 " discerning, understanding," rather than 
 "versed, or experienced," — as denoting apti- 
 tude rather than habitus. " mzZTl, as ^~ mdi- 
 cates, is the objective wisdom, which is dis- 
 played in the various fields of knowledge, and, 
 according to v. 17, is contained in books" 
 (Hitzig) — hence scientific, as distinguished from 
 the purely practical wisdom, which elsewhere is 
 generally referred to. — Cunning in knov/ledge, 
 and understanding; literally " knowing know- 
 ledge" (tlJ~ ''f,'^.'') and "understanding 
 
 thought" (''7'? TrD- On J"!)? "thought" 
 (elsewhere "knowledge"), compare Eccles. x. 
 20, and on both phrases compare chap. ii. 21 ; 
 Neh. X. 29. — And such as had ability in them 
 to stand in the king's palace, literally "who 
 had power (Hs, here [perhaps] abilUy, talent ; 
 compare viii. 7 ; xi. 15) to stand in the king's 
 palace " (^ban i2^n2 -;>:_'':,— for which "i?.? 
 
 n: is not to be substituted^. " To stand in 
 the king's palace " is the same as "to stand be- 
 ford the king" (cf. Gen. xviii. 8 ; xli. 40 ; Deut. 
 i. 38, etc.), i.e., to await his commands, to serve 
 him. See below, v. 17, and compare the absolute 
 C^I^J"", tlte servant.^, in Zech. iii. 7 ; also Esth. 
 V. 2. — And whom they might teach the learn- 
 ing and the tongue of the Chaldaeans ; liter- 
 ally, "and to teach them the learning," etc. 
 2~12,ri depends on the verb I^S'] v. 3, and 
 is co-ordinate with St'^ni in the same verse, as 
 the preceding athndch indicates — --ied, "writ- 
 ing," does not in this place denote the art 
 of writing, but the learning of the Chaldaeans ; 
 compare "lEB-^S v. 17, which can only be equi- 
 valent to aS teor/w'7!^, "all literary knowledge." 
 Further, f ~C3 "ilTj can hardly signify the 
 Aramaean idiom which begins with chap. ii. 4, 
 but designates the original Chaldee, which was 
 of Japhetic origin, or tinctured with Japhetic 
 elements — as Michaelis, Bertholdt, Winer, Hii- 
 vemick, Lengerke, Hengsteuberg, and others, 
 hold.* Tliat the noble Jewish youths should 
 be compelled to learn the Aramsean dialect, 
 which, according to 2 Kings xviii. 20 et seq. 
 (Isa. xxxvi. 11). was the oflScial language both at 
 the Assyrian and the Babylonian courts, admits, 
 indeed, of an easy explanation ; since the Jews 
 of that time were but slightly acquainted with 
 that dialect (cf. 2 Kings, in the above mentioned 
 place), and since youth especially, of whatever 
 rank, could not have been instructed in this 
 language, which was indeed related to the 
 Hebrew, but was nevertheless a foreign tongue. 
 The view which identifies the " tongue of the 
 Chaldaeans" with the official Aramsan of the 
 court, is untenable because of the circumstance 
 that the latter is introduced in chap. ii. 4 by the 
 term ~~?p~St (cf. Isa. xxxvi. 11; Ezra iv. 7), 
 and is thus clearly distinguished from the ordi- 
 nary language of the C'l'^'S. (See notes on 
 that passage, and compare Introd. § 1 , note 3. ) 
 Verse 5. The prcmitioii for tlie selected youth, 
 and their training. And the king appointed 
 them a daily, etc. "Them," i.e., those who 
 should be selected, but whom the king did not 
 yet know. n'Q, to ordain, appoint, a.':iiignare, 
 compare v. 10.— i'3'i''3 Bi^ 131, literally, 
 "matter of the day in its day," i.e., a daily 
 sujyply, or ration. Compare Jer. Iii, 34, where 
 the same expression is used with reference to 
 the daily food of the captive Jehoiachin ; also 
 Ex. V. 13, 19 ; Lev. xxiii 7, etc.— Of the king's 
 meat, — of which, according to Oriental custom. 
 
 ♦[others, however, miiintaill that it was of Hainitic affia 
 ity. The subject of the origin of the C^TTS is very diJB 
 cult. See the note u\ Keil ad loc.] 
 
GO 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 not only noble guests (cf. Jer. as cited above), but 
 also all the servants and officials were accustomed 
 to partake, compare 1 Kings v. 2, 3 ; and con- 
 cerning the custom in question at the Persian 
 court, see Athenajus, iv. 10, p. 09; Plutarch, 
 frobl. vii. 4. — ^^r? "meat," really delicacies, 
 luxurious food, is of Persian origin, — a com- 
 posite word formed out cf brig, " tribute " (cf. 
 Sanscrit b/uign, "allowance," "ration"), and 
 the preposition paiti, "towards, to," ( = Sans- 
 crit })riiti, Greek irporl, 77/jor)— and hence is 
 equivalent to " apportioned food," which sense 
 is also expressed by the Sanscrit pratiihaga, 
 which designates the daily proportion of fruits, 
 flowers, etc., required by the rajah in his house- 
 hold. Cf. GUdemeister in the Zeitschrift fur 
 Kunde ffe« Morgenl-andts. iv. 214. — And of the 
 wine which he drank, properly "of the wine 
 of his drinking," his banquet. I'P^'? is to be 
 taken in the singular in this place, as well as in 
 vs. 8 and 10. — So nourishing them three years, 
 rather, "and (commanded) to instruct them 
 three years" — properly "educate," "bring up" 
 [but literally, " to make great "—perhaps refer- 
 ring primarily to their physical culture] . The 
 infinitive cb^3i^ with a copulative i certainly 
 does not depend on "i^S'T in v. 3; but rather 
 is to be regarded as governed by ^1?'p., from 
 whose signification the idea of commandiyig, 
 (rrdaining, is zeugmatically derived. Compare 
 ~}n in V. 11; also Jonah ii. 1.— That at the 
 end thereof they might stand before the king, 
 i.e., after the three years had expired. "To 
 stand before the king" is "to serve him," cf. v. 
 3. ['• SUindiiig was the position of waiters in 
 readiness to do their master's wUl." — Stvart.] 
 
 Verses 6, 7. T/ie names of Danid and his 
 associates, and their changing. — Now among 
 these we: e of the children of Judah, hence, 
 belonging to the most prominent tribe, after 
 which the entire nation was usually called, even 
 at that early period. The four youths are here 
 shown to be Jewish =^^ri~Q (v. 3) ; but it does 
 not follow from this passage that all of them, 
 and Daniel in particular, were, in addition, of 
 royal family (n:^;^- :?-ira. V. 3).* The royal 
 descent of Daniel can only be conjectured; that 
 Zedekiah was his father, as is stated by Jose- 
 phus, is a mere supposition. Compare Introd. g 
 2, where the names Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, 
 and Azariah have been sufficiently considered 
 (cf . also not.- 1 to that g). Verse 7. Unto whom 
 the prince of the eunuchs gave (other) names, 
 rather, " and the prince . . . gave them." The 
 changing of names as a sign of entrance into 
 the condition of subjection to a ruler, is a fre- 
 quently attested custom of Oriental and classical 
 antiquity. Compare Gen. xli. 45 (Joseph); 2 
 Kings xxiii. 34 (Eliakim); 2 Kings xxiv. 17 
 (Matthaniah = Zedekiah); the re-naming of pupils 
 
 •[Mnch IcBs does it follow " that the other youths of noble 
 descent, who had been carried nwiiy along with them, be- 
 longed to other tribes" (Keil ad loc.), for ras the some com- 
 mentator immediately adds ). "the names of Daniel and his 
 three companions only are mentioned, because their history 
 recorded in this book brings them specially under our 
 not ice.'l 
 
 by their preceptors, e.g., 2 Sam. xii. 25 (Solo 
 mon = Jedediah); Mark iii 16 ( Simon = Peter) ; 
 and respecting this custom among the Greelu 
 and Romans, Theodoret, on our passage ; Chry- 
 sostom, 0pp. V. 286, etc. ["But whUe the 
 kings referred to only had their paternal names 
 changed for other Israelitish names, which were 
 given them by their conquerors. Daniel and his 
 friends received genuine heathen names in ex- 
 change for their own significant names, which 
 were associated with that of the true God." — 
 Keil.\ For he gave unto Daniel the name of 
 BelteshazzEr, etc. ; rather, " and he called 
 Daniel Belteshazzar." The four new names of 
 the youths doubtless contain, without excep- 
 tion, a reference to the divinities of Babylon. 
 This is apparent in the name "i?**!?^?? ('^f* 
 chap. iv. 5), — with which the royal name 
 ISXC'ba is probably identical— whether, as a 
 majority hold, we find the name of the god ;a 
 in it, and explain its composition perhaps by 
 Beli princeps (which the expression of Nebu- 
 chadnezzar himself in chap. iv. 5 seems to 
 endorse), or prefer Hitzig's more artificial in- 
 terpretation =:P«W tscMcara, " nourisher and 
 devourer," i^; "25 likewise (for which the 
 scriptio plena, chap, iii, 29, is S«i3: 5) is cer- 
 tainly equivalent to "adorer of Nego," which 
 divinity is probably not the same as Nebo ( Saadia, 
 Hitz., Kranichf., and others), but a reptile god, 
 and perhaps the familiar dragon of the apocryphal 
 book Bel and the Dragon — since the comparison of 
 the Sanscrit naga, serpent, with this name, 
 which was first essayed by Rodiger, affords a 
 more likely conception than the transmutation 
 of 2 into 3. But '^^"r\ which may be identical 
 with "^^in, Zech. ix. 1 (cf. Kohler, Sachnria, 2d 
 pt, p. 18) also seems to designate a divinity, and 
 possibly, in case it is based on the root -nn or 
 -ITn, "to move in a circle," the sun-god. "r""2 
 may be the same as the Sanscrit meschach, 
 " stag," and therefore denote a god likewise 
 belonging to the siderial domain ; whether th« 
 sun-god be again intended, as Hitzig supposes, 
 must remain doubtful (but see Hitzig on this 
 place). 
 
 Verses 8-10. Daniel's request, and the refusal 
 of the master of the eunuchs to entertain it. But 
 Daniel purposed in his heart. So the A. V 
 and Luther, Uterally, but less agreeable to the 
 sense of 13"? 3? ^'r-'l than " he was con- 
 cerned," as Bertholdt properly renders it. That 
 he would (better "should ") not defile himself 
 with the king's meat. The Sept. renders 
 5tOr" sb "ICS by o-^rur M n>ia:riin/; cf. 
 a'Ain}rifiaTa, Acts XV. 20. The reason for the 
 refusal of the Jirc, i-^-, the ordinary food of 
 the king, as weU as of the wine from his table 
 (cf. v. 5), by Daniel and his associates, arose 
 doubtless from the heathenish custom of conse- 
 crating each meal, by offermg a portion to the 
 gods.* In order to prevent their being involved 
 
 •[That the special reason for their abstinence was not 
 the Levitical distinction of "clean" and "unclean" 
 animals, is evident from their rejection of the wme like- 
 wise which the Mosaic law allowed. In addition to thf 
 reason assigned by our author, we suspect some samtarj 
 
CHAP. I. 1-21. 
 
 GI 
 
 in idolatry by partaking of food which had been 
 thus dedicated to the gods (cf . 1 Cor. x. 18-20), 
 they avoided especially those kinds of food 
 which were commonly oifered to the gods, hence 
 those piepared from llesh, wine, or flour. The 
 Tegetables, such as pulse, cabbage, etc., of 
 which alone they were willing to partake, were 
 indeed also prejjared by the heathen cooks of 
 the king, and were even unclean in themselves, 
 as having been grown on heathen soil (Am. vii. 
 17 ; Hos. ix. 9, 4); but, since oflferings or liba- 
 tions were never taken from them, they were 
 not specially sacred to the gods, and hence, 
 might be used by pious Jews, without any 
 essential defilement of conscience, Compare 
 Havemick and Hitzig on this passage, and 
 against Vou Lengerke especially, who thought 
 to find here the v",""''"''/." 'pooii, 2 Maec. v. 27 ; 
 and, therefore, a proof of the composition of 
 the book in the time of the Maccabees ; see 
 Havemick. JV'ti/c krit. Unters., p. 47. ["Dan- 
 iel's resolution to refrain from such unclean food 
 flowed from fidelity to the law, and from stead- 
 fastness to the faith that • man liveth not by ' 
 bread only, but by every word that proceedeth 
 out of the mouth of the Lord' (Deut. viii. 3)." 
 — Kril] Verse 9. Now God had brougijt 
 Daniel into iavor and tender love with the 
 prince of the eunuchs; literally, "and God ! 
 gave into favor . . . before the prince," etc. ; 
 ~~~i '~: is exactly the Greek hSuwi' ti,- t'/'o- 
 Kru "cvn.iuor (Theodot. ). On this subject compare 
 Gen. xxxLX. 21 ; also Xeh. i. 1 1 ; 1 Kings viii. 50. 
 — Versa 10. I fear my lord, the king, etc. The 
 prina? of the eunuchs does not, in these words, 
 positively refuse the favor which Daniel seeks, 
 but intimates that in order to avoid the royal 
 displeasure, he must render at lea.st a formal 
 and apparent obedience to the command he had 
 received ; aside from this, he shows his readi- 1 
 ness to exercise every possible forbearance j 
 towards his wards. The remark in verse 9 that 
 God had brought Daniel into the favor of the 
 prince is, therefore, by no means in conflict 
 with the tenor of this reply. — For why should 
 he see, etc. The .same turn as in Cant. i. 7, i 
 where the poetical ~"^'r stands for Ti"S« 
 '"''??, and where, similarly, the question ex- 
 presses the sense of an emphatic negation (cf. 
 2 Chron. xxxii. 4; Ezra vii. 23). — Your faces 
 worse liking, etc. -"?".T, properly "««(/, low- 
 ering, of a peevish appearance " (Gen. xl. G ; cf. 
 ^"??. xl. 7), here implying a meager and decayed 
 appearance, exactly like the Greek mi'^puTrd,-, 
 Matt. vi. IG. ['■ ^;B is to be understood before 
 3'""'''. according to the compnratio decnrtata 
 frequently found in Hebrew ; cf. Psa. iv. 8 ; 
 xviii. 34. etc."— A'( (•;.]— Then shall ye make 
 me endanger my head to the king j properly, 
 " and ye shall endanger." sr^^rr; [and ye cause 
 (<■' f<J>'fr'if- a Chaldaizing Piel from;:|n], is co- 
 ordinated with ~?<"':''., and like it depends on 
 
 ~"^ ""'t-'?^ ; therefore: "for why should he 
 aee . . . and ye endanger my head," etc. On 
 
 cause, ar:.^ing fr.-ni an ap!>rehensinn of the stimulating 
 effect of the highh-seasoned fooil, especially if they were 
 imdcr surgical treatment.) 
 
 the phrase " to endanger the head," compare 
 Iliad, iv. 162, a~nr}oai g'w KKpa'Af]^ and the Ger- 
 man, ^'den Kopf iienrirkeii." 
 
 Verses 11-lG. Danitfs abstemiouxness, and iU 
 consequences. Then said Daniel to Melzar. 
 "^?r?~, as the prefixed article shjws, is not a 
 proper name, but an appellative, and probably 
 designates an official. It can, however, scarcely 
 mean a pedagogue or president of alumni, as 
 Hitzig suggests, but rather a "butler" or 
 "steward," as appears from the nearly identical 
 Persian mekor, "vini princeps" (according to 
 Haug a compound word from the Zend, madhu 
 =u{tiv^ "drink," and fara^^Kapa, "head"); 
 compare aiJ,\iriyiii/.nor, John ii. 8, 9), — [and 
 npcri, Isa, xxxvi. 2]. Verse 12. Prove thy 
 servants, I beseech thee, ten days. The 
 number ten, which was constantly employed as 
 a round number (ci. verse 20; Zech. viii. 23; 
 2 Kings XX. 8, et seq. ; and generally my I'heo- 
 logia NaturalU^ i. 713 et seq.), was the more 
 suitable in this case, as it was " sufiiciently 
 large to leave traces of the change of food in 
 the appearance of the young men, yet not too 
 great for a mere experiment" (Hitzig). — Give 
 us (only) pulse to eat. Concerning CsSt, tege- 
 tables, pulse, see on verse 8. — Verse 13. And as 
 thou seest, deal with thy servants; i.e., ac- 
 cording to the result of thy observations. On 
 rs^ri with ?.s«>e, see Ewald, Lehrbiich, % 224, c. 
 — Verse 15. Fatter in flesh. The youth them- 
 selves, and not merely their faces, are the sub- 
 jects of this predicate; for neither Sri'HI': 
 nor 13"'»-i'3 can be regarded as plurals. The 
 plural 5i»n>2 can nowhere be poiuted out, and 
 finds no support in Ecc. xi. 9 (cf. the exegetical 
 notes on that passage, and also Hiivemick on 
 Daniel, p. 30). — Verse 1(5. Thus Melzar took 
 away the portion of their meat, and the wine 
 that they drank; better, '-and the steward 
 (henceforth) took away their appointed food 
 and wine.' '^^''^. is "not introductory, but in 
 connection with the participle expresses the 
 duration" (Hitzig). The continuation of their 
 treatment on this wise by the steward is re- 
 marked in order that the improvement in the 
 condition of the youth, already mentioned as 
 apparent in verse 15, may be more strikingly 
 brought out.— On the question whether the 
 narrative aims to represent this fact as miracu- 
 hua, as well as concerning its ethical importance, 
 see the dogmatico-ethical considerations [below]. 
 Verse 17. The great endowments of Danid and 
 his companions. — As for these four children, 
 God gave them knowledge and skill, etc. ; 
 properly, "And God gave . . . to these four,'' 
 etc. Luther's rendering, "And the God of 
 these four gave them," is inexact. On the pre- 
 cedence of the remote object in the nominative, 
 followed by a personal pronoun in the dative 
 (here onb), compare the examples adduced by 
 Ewald, § 309, a, b.— In all learning and wis- 
 dom. — 1E0, as in verse 4, " literary knowledge, 
 acquaintance with literature, erudition" (Theo- 
 dotion, ypaunnriK)/). — And Daniel had imder- 
 standing in all visions and dreams. It was. 
 
62 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 therefore, his acquaintance with oneirocritics 
 that disting-uished him above his companions, 
 who must also be regarded as wise and highly 
 cultured. This was clearly a miraculous gift, 
 which was intimately connected with his X"!""/^" 
 iTi«i0iiTthvi\ but must not be confounded with it ; 
 for the skill to interpret the dreams and visions 
 of others, is certainly different from the gift of 
 seeing prophetical dreams and visions in person. 
 Still, as the second half of the book shows, the 
 possession of the latter faculty by our prophet 
 presumed the existence of the former ; just as 
 in the New Testament the divinely-bestowed 
 power to interpret tongues and prove spirits 
 goes hand in hand with the power to speak in 
 tongues and prophesy, in the case of the truly 
 great bearers of the Divine Spirit, e.g., St. Paul 
 (1 Cor. xiv. 6 et seq.), St. Peter (Acts v. 3; viii. 
 20; X. 10, etc.).— liTn-ira 1^:n is the same 
 construction as in verse 4 : n?3rn";33 D^i^3— Oi 
 compare Ewald, § 217, 2. ;■;, however, does 
 not belong only to liT~, but also to "iabri] 
 following. "All visions and dreams" are all 
 possible ones, of every imaginable kind. 
 
 Verses 18-20. Favorable issue of their ex- 
 amination before the king. Now at the end of 
 the days. Von Lengerke's rendering, " and 
 toward the end of the time," is incorrect. — 
 ^'*^?~?, "to bring them," viz.: into the pres- 
 ence of the king. Hence not the same as »^n~ 
 in verse 3.— The prince . . . brought them in 
 before Nebuchadnezzar. Tliem—uot merely 
 the four (verse 17), but, as may be inferred 
 from ver. I'J, all those Israelitish youths, verse 
 1 o. — And among them aU was none found like 
 Daniel, etc., either in physical beauty, or in 
 marked mental excellencies. — Therefore stood 
 they before th3 king, i.e., they became his 
 servants. " T?" is inceptive ; they entered the 
 royal service, and continued in it afterwards " 
 (Hitzig). — Verse 20. And in all matters of 
 wisdom and understanding; literally, "the 
 discernment of wisdom" (~;'3 ~'?t"; some- 
 thing like CBCK) rpn, Num. xxvii. 11 ; cf. Psa. 
 Iv. 24). "'p^n. however, is here, as in verse 4, 
 employed exclusively in the sense of objective 
 irist/om, which is essenti.ally the same as science ; 
 while ~:''3 is " the subjective interior of this 
 wi.sdom, the mind which shines through it." 
 ^9" is here equivalent to a special point, matter, 
 object ; cf. Psa. xxxi. ; Judg. xix. 24 ; Jer. 
 xliv. 4, etc. — That the king inquired of them. 
 -13.3, not '^■J3.^"'. The perfect refers hack to 
 the examination instituted by the king, verse 
 19, not forward to later questions, which he 
 addressed to them. — Found them ten times 
 better. Compare Gen. xxxi. 7, 41 ; Lev. xxvi. 
 2<i; Zech. viii. 23; Ecc. vii. 19. — Tnan all the 
 magicians and astrologers that -were in all his 
 realm; rather, "than all the learned (in litera- 
 cure) magicians that were," etc. C^:3r"}n, by 
 reai-on of the probable derivation of the word 
 from "7"?, stylus, represents those who are 
 Tersed ra writings, scribes (scarcely persons who 
 
 are clever, discerning, as Hitzig prefers, becaus* 
 of its assumed derivation from the Zend 
 khratuinat, the Rabbinical Tpcnip). The 
 learned Egyptian priests were designated by 
 this term (Gen. xh. 8, 24; Ex. vii. 11, 22, 
 etc.), while Herodotus (ii. 30) calls them 
 lepoy/iau/iareic, and the Sept. sometimes terms 
 them ifr/yt/Tal (Gen. xli. 8, 24), and again 
 oixpiarai (Ex. vii. 11). Unlike chap. ii. 2, 27 ; iv. 
 4, etc. , where the Chartummim are mentioned 
 as a special class beside the Ashaphim nnd other 
 wise men, tlie word, though not connected with 
 the following, serves in this place merely to en- 
 large the conceptif.a of the predicate. C^C i2!«, the 
 more special term designates (in virtue of the 
 undeniable samentss in sense of its root njj 
 with cisi:; and C|"i':) "breathers, whisperers," 
 i.e., conjurers, who murmured their magic 
 formulas in an aspirated whisper. Whether 
 they are to be specially regarded as "snake- 
 charmers " must remain undecided, in view of 
 the fact that the relation of this word to the 
 term iin-i- is not established, and is possibly no 
 more than an accidental similarity in sound. 
 Compare, on the other hand, the Arabic 
 naplmtha, "to breathe mysteriously on coiled 
 knots" (Freytag, Lexic. Arab. s. v.). 
 
 Verse 21. Preliminary conclusion of the intro- 
 duction. And Daniel continued (thus) even 
 unto the first year of king Cyrus. ~"~, which 
 is neither to be identified with, nor exchanged 
 for rr^n (the latter is advocated by Kirmss and 
 Hitzig among others, who substitute ''^y_ for 
 "''??''). expresses, in connection with "5, the 
 sense of attaining to. or of existing until the in- 
 auguration of an event. But " to live until the 
 first year of the reign of Cyrus " is by no means 
 equivalent to dying in that year. In this case 
 the passage would contradict the statement 
 found in chap. x. 1, and, therefore, would be in 
 evidence against the original unity of this book 
 (compare Introd. g 4). It is clear that the par- 
 ticle Tj; in this place does not refer to the close 
 of the prophet's life, but simply designates a 
 highly important period of time, up to which he 
 lived and approved himself as the possessor of 
 the exalted gifts of wisdom, prophecy, and in- 
 terpreting dreams (verse 17). The special 
 mention of the first year of Cyrus as such a 
 period, " ha.s, on the one hand, the objective 
 reason that a really new a;ra, for the Jews 
 especially, and one to which the most remark- 
 able prophecies (Isa. xliv. 28; xlv. 1) referred, 
 began with him ; and, on the other, the subjec- 
 tive reason, that this sharp separation into great 
 historical periods is general in Daniel, and, in 
 addition, that a longing for the deliverance of 
 his people must be regarded as a controlling dis- 
 position of his nature " (Hiivernick). Compare 
 Hengstenberg (Beitr., p. 65, 314 et seq.), and 
 Maurer on this passage, who regards "? """11' 
 etc., correctly, as simply .showing that Daniel 
 lived through the whole period of the exile aa 
 a highly esteemed wise man at the Chaldajan 
 court.* We need not, however, adopt Ewald'e 
 
 *[*' Compjire the analogous statement, Jer. i. 2etseq,, that 
 Jcrem.ah pruphcbieU iu the days of Jos'ab and Jchoiakljx. 
 
CHAP. 1. 1-21. 
 
 63 
 
 view, who assumes that the words ~?^n "l^ra 
 have beon lost after ;j{"':~ ; "Thus Daniel lived 
 at the royal court until," etc.. with which he 
 connects the ventviresome hypothesis that Dan- 
 iel and his companions dwelt in a separate 
 building of the palace, which was sjiecially 
 intended to serve as " the royal academy (!)." — 
 The Hebrew form of the name ™^13 evidently 
 corresponds better with the ancient Persian in 
 the cuneiform inscriptions (Qufun, Quriis), than 
 the Greek Krfm-. Its interpretation by "sun," 
 which is found as early as Ctesias (Plut. Artax. 
 i. p. 1012) and in the Etyaot M. (cf. the San- 
 scrit ««/•«, surja ; Zend hrare; modem Persian 
 khur). is not entirely certain. See the ZeiUchrift 
 far Kujuk des Morgeid. vi 153 et seq. ; 350 
 ct seq. 
 
 ETHICAL DEDUCTIONS CONNECTED WITH THE 
 SCHEME OF REDEMPTION, .\POLOGETICAL 
 REMARKS, AND HOMILETICAL HINTS. 
 
 1. The dogmatic and ethical significance of 
 the early history of Daniel and his companions 
 consists chiefly, and it may even be said ex- 
 clusively, in the proof of resolute faith and 
 obedient devotion to God, which they displayed 
 by abstaining from the ro.val provision at the 
 Babylonian court. Our admiration is not en- 
 listed in behalf of the abstinent diet, the fast- 
 ing, the mortification of self, on the part of these 
 youth, but finds something grand and morally 
 important in the active trust in God, and the 
 faithful obedience to God, that are displayed in 
 those self-denials. They did not abstain from 
 the use of the delicacies of the royal table, dur- 
 ing the whole period of their training, from a 
 spirit of desperate ascetic bravado, or because of 
 a super-legal dread of God's creatures, which, 
 in themselves, are not objectionable (1 Tim. iv. 
 4) ; nor yet because, like the Buddhists of India, 
 the.v scrupled to destroy animal life in any form ; 
 but from the truly religious motive of remain- 
 ing faithful and devoted to their covenant God 
 Jehov.ih (see above, ver.se 8i. and to avoid their 
 being implicated, to any degree whatever, in the 
 idolatrous practices of their heathen masters. 
 Their iib.stemiousne.ss has, therefore, essentially 
 the same ethical value as that of the Rechabites, 
 who refused to drink \vine. from motives of reli- 
 gious obedience to the vow of their ancestor iJer. 
 XXXV.); or. as the conscientious abiding of the 
 Nazarite by his sacred vow. which imposed 
 similar denials on him. and which might cover 
 the whole period of life (Samson, John the Bap- 
 tist), or a definite time of longer or shorter 
 duration (St. Paul, Acts xxi. 24 et seq. ; Aquila, 
 Acts xviii. 18). A further analogy to the course 
 of these youth in Babylon will be found in the 
 case of the Jew^ at Rome, whom Flavins Jose- 
 phus mentions in chap. 3 of his autobiography. 
 Our wonder and em^ilation are not excited in 
 any of these instances by the avoiding of certain 
 indulgences, but rather, b.v the disposition of 
 faithful submission to the wholesome discipline 
 of God. This it is, that marks their course as 
 the effect of a strong, rather than weak faith, 
 
 to the end of tiio eleventh yeiir of Zedekiah, although his 
 book contains prophecies also ^f a date subsequent to the 
 taking of Jerufialei „" — Ktil.} 
 
 which thus becomes an example for the Chris- 
 tians of all ages. Several of the older expositors 
 already recognized this, on tlie whole, although 
 their extravagant estimate of the value of ascetic 
 self-denial of any sort, prevented them from 
 reaching a really unprejudiced and truly evan 
 gelical conclusion upon the subject. On the 
 request of Daniel to Melzar, verse 12, to prove 
 him and his companions during ten days with 
 pulse and water, Jerome remarks, that it was a 
 striking evidence of his faith: " In^eredibilii 
 fldei magnitudo non sdum sibi corpulentiam 
 poUiceri esu vUioris dbi, sed et tempiis statuere. 
 Non est ergo temeritath, sed fidei, ob quam 
 regtas dopes contempserat." Similarly Theo- 
 doret on that passage : Ovdev ry' fi^ ^edv'Tzicrsui^ 
 iCX^'pOTEpov^ Kui 6f^ TovTo TroX}^axo^^v Kal aAAa;^;(ii?rw 
 f(Trt jUrti^fiv, oiix fjKiGTa dh kol en tuv tov •&£/j:r£<riob 
 ^avti/7. pr/fidruv to yap Trcarevaat rs koI ^ap'p7,aat^ 
 u~ "7/r ^€ia~ p0777/~ aTzoAnvG^Tat^ Kal fiij kc-diui' 
 
 ev-p€—taT£po~ Kal TrepiKa/./Jcrepo' tpavrjacrai 
 
 Kal pflsuv ttoItjv fvGef^Eia~ v:TepSo?-r/T KaraXeirrEi, — 
 Among later writers, see especially Melancthon, 
 who remarks correctly : " Danielis temperentiam 
 fuisse opus coitfessionis, et quidcm hanc absti- 
 nentiiim pr<eceptnmfuissc lege Dei, non humnnii 
 traditioiiibus. Ergo abstinebat JJaniel, lit tes- 
 tnretnr se non abjicere doctrlnnm, in qua sola 
 exstabat verbum Dei, et ahhorrere ab alia- 
 rum gentium traditionibus ; " also Calvin, who 
 remarks on the words of Daniel, verse 11 et 
 seq. : "' Tenendum est etiom iUud, nempe non 
 lemere, riequ-e proprio motu hire di^dsse, seti 
 instincUi ipiritus Sancti. Fuixset enim non 
 solertin, sed temeritas, si Daniel siM fabricasset 
 hoc wiisilium, et non fuisset certior f actus a 
 Domine defelici evenlu Xon. est igitur dubium, 
 quia hoc Imbuerit ex arcana reeelatione, fdiciter 
 et ex roto eessurum, si permitteret minister 
 ipsum et socios read leguminibus." And fur- 
 ther: ^' Sciamui, hoc esse verum experimenlam 
 finigalitatis et temperentit, si possimus esurire, 
 ubi Deus nos ad inerpiom et egestatem crtgit, 
 immo etinm si sponte possvmus abjicere delifias, 
 qutf nobis essent ad mannm, sed nostro exitio. 
 Nam hie subsistere in leguminibus et aqua esset 
 valde frivolum, quia major interdum in em- 
 perentia se prodit in leguminibus. quam in 
 optimis quibusque et lautissimis dbis." Note 
 further, what Chr. B. Michaelis says con- 
 cerning the contrast, indicated in verse 13, 
 between the majority of the youth designed to 
 be pages to the king, who partook unhesitat- 
 ingly of the prescribed fare, and the strict 
 abstinence of Daniel and his three friends : "' Hi 
 ergo, licet et ipsi Judeei essent (verses 3, 4, 6), 
 tamen in observanda lege dieina minus religiosi 
 fuerunt. Tanto laitdibilior fnit Danielis socio- 
 rumque ejus pietag et in patria rdigione con- 
 stantia." 
 
 2. The course of the self-denying youth will 
 also appear as an effect of faith, from what is said 
 in verse 15 respecting their surprisingly robust 
 and handsome appearance. Whether this con- 
 sequence of their vegetable diet is to be regarded 
 as something miraculous, or as a purely natural 
 result, may be questioned. The phenomenor. 
 cm hardl.v pass for absolutely miraculous ; for 
 the traveler Chardin, in a manuscript remark 
 on that verse, observes, " 1 have noticed that the 
 Kechichs (i.e., monks) have Ijy far a fresher and 
 more healthful color than others, and that the Ar- 
 
bi 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 menians and Greeks, though they frequently fast, 
 appear healthy, lively, and handsome " (com- 
 pare Bunler. in RosenmuUer's Alt- u. Xmi-Mor- 
 gerdiind, iv. 340 ; also Banner, Observations in 
 the East. i. 357 ) ; and it is conceivable that an 
 unrestrained indulgence in luxurious food might 
 rather detract from the beauty of the remaining 
 youths, than enhance it, especially if it were 
 accompanied by the debaucheries and excesses 
 which are so common among the pages at 
 Oriental courts (Liidecke, Bexchreibiing des 
 iiiyk. Reichs. i. 52 et seq. ; Hiivemick, Koonment., 
 p. 37). Still, there is something extraordinary, 
 indicative of Divinely supernatural co-operation, 
 in the fact that at the end of three years the ap- 
 pearance of Daniel and his companions excelled 
 that of all the other youths in fullness and 
 beauty, and not less in the additional fact that 
 they excelled these latter in point of intellectual 
 qualities and scientific acquirements. Cf. 
 Hiivernick. ' ' At the same time, it would be par- 
 tial to ignore the Divine assistance ; it was God 
 who enabled his servants to find favor with their 
 overseer, who gave them progress in Divine 
 wisdom and under.standing, and who did not 
 forsake them in this instance. Only by this 
 reference to God, which is certainly found in 
 our narrative, can the believer comprehend its 
 true bearing. Hence it is unwise, and the mark 
 of a merely carnal exposition, to become in- 
 volved in far-fetched and physiological explana- 
 tions and calculations, such as are found in 
 Aben-Ezra, no less than to ignore the Higher 
 power, from which come all good and perfect 
 gifts." 
 
 3. As an iipologetic'd question of some impor- 
 tance, it must be remarked that what is related 
 in this chapter concerning the abstinence and 
 strict observance of the law at the heathen court 
 of the Chaldajan king, by Daniel and his associ- 
 ates, is but poorly adapted to stamp the narrative 
 .as a fiction of Asmonaian times, in which the 
 author seeks to beget trust in God on the part 
 of his readers (Hitzig), or to warn them against 
 partaking of unclean food (Bertholdt. Von Len- 
 gercke. etc.). The pious Jews of the MaccabEean 
 period not only scrupulously avoided the flesh 
 which was sacrificed to idols by their heathen 
 oppressors, but everything that emanated from 
 them, even to their arts and sciences. Daniel, 
 Hananiah. etc.. are. on the contrarj-, represented 
 as "distinguished adepts in all the wisdom of the 
 Chaldajans. and at the same time, as filling 
 ofticial stations at the court of the Babylonian 
 
 king, or even as members of the order of tha 
 
 magi (cf. chap. ii. 13, 48 et seq.). But while 
 this latter feature shows a striking resemblance 
 between the experience of the leading character 
 and that of Joseph in Egypt ; while especially 
 the patronage of the youth Daniel by the prince 
 of the eunuchs, as well as his high endowment aa 
 an interi)reter of dreams, reminds us strongly of 
 Joseph ; we are yet compelled to reject the 
 opinion that the whole is merely an artificial 
 copy of the early history of that patriarch, 
 because nothing is recorded, either of an ascetic 
 refusal of food or drink on the part of Joseph, 
 nor yet of his being trained with especial refer- 
 ence to service at the court of Pharaoh, or of a 
 careful instruction in foreign wisdom and learn- 
 ing. With respect to the latter point, indeed, 
 Moses, rather than Joseph, would serve as an 
 example (see Acts vii. 22). Compare also Jerome 
 (on verse 8) : " Qiii de mensa regis et de vino 
 potus ejvs non tiilt cmiiedere, ne poUuatui\ 
 vtirjne sisciret ipsam sajyicntidm ntque dvctrinam 
 Bdhyloniorvm esse peccatmn. nunrjunm acqid- 
 esceret discere, quod non licebnt. Discvnt au- 
 tem non ut segvantw; sed vt jtidicent atqne 
 convincant. Qumnodo si giiisjmtm ndversiia 
 mathemdticos relit seribere imperitus uai)nfin-or, 
 risui patent, et adrersum pMlosophos disjnitniis, 
 si ignoret dogmata pldhtsophorum. Discvnt 
 ergo ea mente doetrinam Clialdreanim, qua et 
 Moyses o^nnem supientiam ^Sgyptionim didi- 
 cerat." 
 
 4 The nomiletical treatment will, of course, 
 seize on the chief and fimdamental ethical prin- 
 ciple of the section, as indicated above, under 
 1, without regard to subordinate details. Thus, 
 perhaps : " Not dainty food, but the blessing of 
 God develops beauty and strength. All wis- 
 dom, even in worldly concerns, is a gift of God, 
 and the fear of the Lord is the beginning of thi.i 
 wisdom also" (Starke, after the BiU. Tiibing.). 
 — Or : " Man shall not live by bread alone, but 
 by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth 
 of God" (Deut. viii, 3 ; Matt. iv. 4).— Or : " It is 
 a good thing that the heart be established with 
 grace; not with meats" (Heb. xiii. 9), etc. 
 Compare Melancthon : " Uanid in aula neo 
 mixix nee contemptu, nee illecebris roliiptatem ant 
 poteiiti(f victus est, vt deficeret a rero cvUn. 
 Hanc conntantiam paud imitnntur, sed qui 
 itnitantur /labebunt ingentin preemin corporalia 
 (t spiritualia. sieiit inqiiit teiias : GU/i-iJicante* 
 me glorificabo, etc. (3 Sam. ii. 20)." 
 
 The vision of the monareMes, or Nebuehadnezzar^s dream concerning the four irorld-kingdoms, 
 and its i)iterjirttation by Daniel. 
 
 U. 1-49. 
 
 And in the second year of the reign of Xebucliadnezzai-. Nebuchadnezzar 
 
 dreamed dreams, wherewith [and] his spirit was troubled,' and his sleep brake 
 : from liim.' Then [And] the king commanded ' to call the magicians, and tlie 
 
 astrologers, and the sorcerers, and the Chaldneans, for to shew [tell] the king 
 I liis dreams. So [And] they came and stood l)etbre the king. And the king 
 
 said unto them, Ihave dreamed a dream, and my spirit was troubled ' to know 
 
 the dream. 
 
CHAP. n. 1-49. <55 
 
 4 Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriac [Aramaic], O king, live 
 forever! tell thy servants the dream, and we will shew the interpretation. 
 
 5 The king answered and said to the Chaldseans, The thing [word] is gone 
 from me : if ye will not make known unto me the dream, with [and] the inter- 
 pretation thereof, ye shall be cut in pieces,' and your houses shall be made a 
 
 fi dunghill [sink]. But [And] if ye shew the dream, and the interpretation 
 thereof, ye shall receive of [from before] me gifts and rewards [largess], and 
 great honour : therefore shew me the dream and <Ae interpretation thereof. 
 
 7 They answered again, and said. Let the king tell his servants the dream, 
 
 8 and we will shew the interpretation of it. The king answered and said, I know 
 of certainty that ye icoxdd gain the time, because ye see the thing [word] is 
 
 9 ofone from me. But [, that] if ye will not make known unto me the dream, 
 "there is but one decree for you ; for [and] ye have prepared lying and corrupt 
 words [a lie and a corrupt word] to speak before me till the time be changed ;' 
 therefore tell me the dream, and I shall know that ye can shew me the inter 
 pretation thereof. 
 
 10 The Chaldeans answered before the king, and said. There is not a man upon 
 the earth'' that can shew the king's matter : therefore there is no king, lord, nor 
 ruler, that asked such things [a matter] at any magician, or astrologer, or Chal- 
 
 1 1 dajan. And it is a rare thing [And the matter] that the king requireth [asketh 
 is weighty] ; and there is none other that can shew it before the king except 
 the gods, whose dwelling is not with flesh. 
 
 12 For this cause the king was angry and very furious, and commanded 'to 
 
 13 destroy all the wise men of Babylon. And the decree went forth that [, and] 
 the wise men should be slain [were about to be killed] ; and they sought Daniel 
 and his fellows to be slain. 
 
 14 Then Daniel answered with' counsel and wisdom to Arioch the captain of the 
 
 15 king's guard," which was [who had] gone forth to slay the wise men of Babylon : 
 he answered and said to Arioch the king's captain. Why is the decree so hasty 
 
 16 from the king ? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel. Then [And] 
 Daniel went in, and desired of the king that he would give him time, and 
 that he would shew [even to show] the king the interpretation. 
 
 IT Then Daniel went to his house, and made the thing known to Hananiah, 
 
 18 Mishael, and Azariah, his com)ianions ; that they would desire [even to request] 
 mercies of the God of lieaven [the heavens] concerning this secret, that Daniel 
 
 19 and his fellows should not perish with the rest of the wise men of Babylon. Then 
 was the secret revealed unto Daniel in a night-vision. Then Daniel blessed the 
 
 20 God of heaven [the heavens]. Daniel answered and said, Blessed be (/(e name 
 of God 'for ever and ever [from everlasting and to everlasting] ; for wisdom 
 
 21 and might are his.'" And he " changeth the times and the seasons : he removeth 
 kin£;s, and setteth up kings ; he giveth wisdom unto the wise, and knowledge to 
 
 22 thein that know understanding. lie " re vealeth the deep and secret ?/n»^s.- he 
 
 23 knoweth what is in the darkness, and the light dwelleth with him. I thank 
 thee, and praise thee, thou God of my fathers, who hast given me wisdom and 
 might, and made known unto me now " what we desired of thee : for thou 
 hast )ioiv made known unto us the king's matter. 
 
 24 Therefore Daniel went in unto " Arioch, whom the king liad ordained 
 [apj)ointed] to destroy the wise men of Babylon : he went and said thus unto 
 him, Destroy not " the wise men of Babylon : bring me in before the king, 
 
 25 and I will shew unto the king the interpretation. Then Arioch brought in 
 Daniel before the king in haste, and said thus unto him," I have found a man of 
 the captives [children of the captivity] of Judah that [who] will make known 
 
 2G unto the king the interpretation. The king answered and said to Daniel, 
 whose name vxis Belteshazzar, Art thou able to make known unto me the 
 dream which I have seen, and the interpretation thereof? 
 
 27 Daniel answered in the presence of [before] the king, and said, The secret 
 which the king hath demanded [asked], cannot the wise men, the astrologers, the 
 magicians, the soothsayers, shew [the wise 7tien. . . .cannot show] unto the king ; 
 
 28 Init [yet] there is a God in heaven [the heavens] that revealeth secrets, and 
 
 5 
 
06 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 maketh known to the king Nebuchadnezzar what shall be in the latter days 
 [what is it that shall be in the end of the days]. Thy dream, and the virions 
 
 29 of'tliy head upon thy bed, are these [is this]; {an for thee, O king, thy thoughts 
 caine into thy mind upon thy bed what should come to pass [what it is that 
 shall be] hereafter; and he that revealeth secrets niaketh known to thee what 
 
 30 shall come to pass [what it is that shall be] : but [and] as for me, this secret 
 is not revealed to me for anij wisdom that I have [is in me] more than any 
 living, but for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation [but in 
 order that the interpretation may be made known] to the king, and that thou 
 mightest kuow the thoughts of thy heart:) 
 
 31 Tliou, O king, sawest, and, behold, a " great " image. This great image, 
 whose brightness was excellent, stood [a great image — this image was large, and 
 its brightness excessive — rising] before thee," and the form thereof was terrible. 
 
 32 This image's head [This was the image : Its head] was of fine " gold, his breast 
 
 its breasts] and his [its] arms of silver, his belly [its bowels] and his thighs 
 
 33 [its thighs] of brass [copper], his [its] legs of iron, his [its] feet part [of them] 
 
 34 of iron and part [of them] of clay. Thou sawest till that a stone was cut out 
 without hands, which [and it] smote the image upon his [its] feet, that were 
 
 Uo of iron and clay,^° and brake them to pieces [crushed them]. Then was [were] 
 the iron, the clay, the brass, the silver, and the gold, broken to pieces together," 
 and became like </;e chatf of [from] the summer threshing-floors ; and the wind 
 carried them away, that [and] no place was found for them : and the stone 
 that smote the image became [was for] a great mountain, and filled the whole 
 [all the] earth. 
 
 36 This is the dream ; and we will tell the interpretation thereof [its inter- 
 pretation we will tell] before the king. 
 
 37 Thou, O king, art a king of kings [the kings] : for the God of heaven [the heav- 
 ens] hath given thee a [the] kingdom, [the] power, and [the] strength, and [the] 
 
 38 glor}'."^ And wheresoever the children of men dwell [in every /)foce thaX the 
 sons of man are dwelling], the beasts [living thing] of the field, and the fowls 
 [bird] of the heaven [heavens], hath he given into [in] thy hand, and hath 
 
 39 made thee ruler [rule] over them all. Thou art this [the] head of gold. And 
 after thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to [earthward from] thee, and 
 
 of brass,^' M'hich shall 
 a kingdom the fourth] 
 
 another third kingdom [a kingdom the thii-d another 
 
 40 hear rule over all the earth. And the fourth kingdom 
 shall be strong as iron : forasmuch as iron breaketh in pieces and subdueth all 
 things [the whole] ; and as iron that breaketh all these, shall it break in jneces 
 
 41 and l)ruise. And whereas thou sawest the feet and [the] toes part [of them] 
 of ])0tter's clay and part [of them] of iron, the kingdom shall be divided [a 
 divided kingdom it shall be] ; but [and] there shall be in it of the strength of the 
 
 42 iron, forasmuch as thou sawest the iron " mixed with mii-y clay. And as the 
 toes of the feet tvere part [of them] of iron and part [of them] of clay ; so the 
 
 43 kingdom shall be partly ^' strong, and partly [part of it shall be] broken. And" 
 whereas tliou sawest iron mixed with miry clay, they shall mingle themselves 
 with tiie seed of men [man]; but [and] they shall not cleave one to anothei 
 
 Ai [this with this], even as iron is not mixed with clay. And in the [their] days 
 of these kings shall the God of heaven [the lieavens] set up a kingdom, which 
 shall never be destroyed ; and the kingdom shall not be left to other [another] 
 jieople, hnt it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms, and it " shall 
 
 45 stand for ever. Forasmuch as thou sawest that the [a] stone was cut out of 
 the mountain without [upon not with] iiands, and that it brake in pieces the 
 iron," the brass," the clay," the silver," and the gold ;" the great God 
 hath made known to the king what shall come to pass hereafter [what it is that 
 shall be after this] : and the dream is certain, and the interpretation thereof 
 sure. 
 
 46 Then the king Xebuchadnezzar fell upon his face, and worshipped Daniel, and 
 commanded that they should offer [to ofler] an oblation and sweet odours unto 
 
 47 him. The king answered unto Daniel, and said. Of a truth it is that your God 
 is ''" a God of gods, and a Lord of kings, and a revealer of secrets, seeing [that1 
 
CHAP. 11. 1-49. 
 
 67 
 
 48 tliou couldest reveal this secret. Then the king made Daniel a great man " and 
 gave him many great gifts, and made him ruler over the whole [all the] 
 province of Babylon, and chief of the governors over all the wise mere of Bah- 
 
 49 ylon. Then [And | Daniel requested of the king, and he set Shadrach, Meshach, 
 and Abednego, over the aflairs of the province of Babylon ; but [andj Danio' 
 iat in the gate of the king. 
 
 GKAMMATICAL AND LEXICAL NOTES. 
 
 I* DSSfl"!! beat itself to and fro^ was agitated with conflicting thonghts and feelings. — ' "^^^5 nr^nl, wox 
 become upon him^ a Chaldaizing sense of the verb, like our colloquial "was all over with him". — ' 1?3H"T» said^ in 
 the Chaldee sense. — * "l^lS^rit^ ^"^JS^r?, bits ye shall be made, i.e., "chopped into mince meat; " probably a Bnbj- 
 lonian form of punishment li^e "killing by inches." — * K_3ri*I37' ^^ turned, i.e., pass by. — ' fi<riwS'^j the dry ground^ 
 an emphatic term for the world. — ' S'^rrii returned in answer. — ® K'nSO» the executionerti, such being in Oriental 
 courts an important part of the royal body-guard. — ' Nribfi^, the God, like C^Hifcin* i.e., the true God. — i* rlj'^'l 
 H"^n, for (I Bay) his it is, i.e., each of the preceding qualities. — ** H^H^) is emphatic, and He, The pronoun is under- 
 stood with the following clauses. — *' ^5^1 and now ; the position makes these terms emphatic ; g. d., at once, promptly 
 in this emergency. — ' ^ ^j7, upon, seems here to denote the abruptness of the interview, q. d., came upon. — ^* ^2*inP"iN» 
 the deprecatory form, mayest thou not destroy: — '* The 1^ following is expletive, like on before direct quotations. — 
 " in, one, i.e., a single one, standing alone and conspicuous. — *^ H^5®i huge or colos&al ; a different and stronger 
 term than the "^ immediately following. — '^ "nb-pbi in front of thee : a stronger term, like the Heb. na^thanQ^p, 
 so frequently used in the conte.xt, — '" 2t3) good, i.e., pure. — ''^ KDDm KbT^B, the iron and the clay, i.e., th» 
 materials just described. The art. is emphatic, as in the following verse. — '* mnS, like one thing, all at once; denot* 
 ing suddenness as well as simultaneonsnoss. — ^^ With these epithets compare the similar terms in the (spurious or late) 
 doxology at the close of the Lord's Prayer. — ^^ itwH^ is rather copper, the simple metal ; for zinc, which is a component 
 
 of brass, was anciently unknown.— '* Jtbl^B* The article here, though present, as in all the preceding verses, should 
 
 not be expressed in English, as it merely indicates the material.— ^^ fSl? " T^J tnpart (lit. from the end); a different 
 
 expression from the partitives elsewhere used in this connection.—" The 1 connective is wanting in the text, but 
 U supplied in the Masoretic margin.—" The H"irT, It, is emphatic=««ej^.— '" The S'lh is an emphatic copula=fte i«. 
 
 _a» -I3T bs'^:nbi Ht. magnified Daniel, i.e., promoted him.] 
 
 EXEGETICAL REMARKS. 
 
 Verses 1-3. Nebuchadnezzar demands ten in- 
 terpretation of 7m dream by the Magi. And 
 in the second year of the reign of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar, i.e., in the second year of his sole 
 reign, which, as remarked in g 8, note 2, of the 
 Introduction, must have commenced some time 
 after the fourth — perhaps in the sixth — year of 
 the reign of Jehoiakim. The time, therefore, 
 is about four years Later th.an that mentioned in 
 chap. i. 1, and soon after that designat<3d in 
 chap. i. IS. The three ye.ara of the training of 
 Daniel and his companions had expired, perhaps 
 by only a few weeks or months, and their recep- 
 tion into the number of the royal officials, as 
 well as among the magicians, in the broader 
 sense of the term, was" of recent occurrence, 
 when the remarkable event transpired which is 
 here recoi-ded, and which raised the four Jews 
 to a far more exalted position in the royal favor. 
 There is, therefore, no conflict, either with 
 those passages of chap, i nor with Jer. xxv. 1, 
 where " the first ye.ar of Nebuchadnezzar," does 
 not designate the first year of his sole reign, but 
 of his joint rule. Compare Hengstenljerg, p. 60 
 et seq. , who is correct, in opposition to those 
 who find here essentially a chronological error 
 I Berth., Bleek, H:tz.,eto.); and also, as com- 
 
 pared with the less suitable modes of reconcil- 
 iations attempted by several, e. g.. Wieseler (i)i« 
 70 WoeJicn, etc. , p. 8 et seq. ), who places the 
 event narrated in this chapter before the expir- 
 ation of the three years of Daniel's training, and 
 therefore >c/w?'e chap. i. 18-20, thus regarding 
 it as a supplementary attestation and illustration 
 of the statement in chap. i. 20 (also Fuller, p. 
 33etseq. ); Havemick 'Neiie krit. Unters., p. 
 04), who places the facts stated in chap, i; 1 et 
 seq. altogether at the beginning of the third 
 year of Jehoiakim, and assumes in addition, 
 that Nebuchadnezzar became king a whole year 
 later; from which it follows that .38-r!l) months 
 may have elapsed between the taking of Je- 
 rusalem and the transportation of Daniel (chap, 
 i. 1 et seq.), and the time of Nebuchadnezzar's 
 dream. Ewald's opinion that '^~^'.} has been 
 lost from after 3"'.Pi"", which would give the 
 ticelfth instead of the second year of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar, is likewise superfluous. * — The copula in 
 
 * [It would be very natural for a Jewish writer. look 
 ing at events from the Palestinian point of view, as 
 Jeremiah, to date occurrences at'corlini? to the actual 
 arrival of Nebuchadnezzar as apparent sovereign in 
 SjTia. although in reality only a viceioy in place of 
 his father. A precisely parallel reckoning occurs in 
 Luke ill. 1. with reference to the associate instead ol 
 the sole reign of Tiberius, as chronologcra are now 
 
68 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 ■r r:™r- probably indicates that verses 1-ia 
 were written immediately after chap. i. and 
 doubtless for the purpose of connecting this in- 
 troductory section more closely with the Chal- 
 daic fragment, chap. ii. 4A-49. which, together 
 with the narratives in Chaldee that follow, may 
 have already existed in manuscript form. Com- 
 pare the Intr. § 4 — Nebuchadnezzar dreamed 
 dreams. ["It has justly been regarded as a sig- 
 nificant thing, that it was Nebuchadnezzar, the 
 founder of the world-power, who first saw in a 
 dream the whole future development of the 
 world-power (and even its final overthrow) .... 
 This circumstance also is worthy of notice, 
 that Nebuchadnezzar did not himself under- 
 stand the revelation which he received, but the 
 prophet Daniel, enlightened by God, must in- 
 terpret it to him." — Keil.] The plural ri?;":n 
 is used in this place with reference to the 
 several contents of the dream, which, according 
 to ver.se 31, comprises a number of scenes : (1) 
 The sight of the great image ; (2) its destruction ; 
 and iM) the growth of the stone which caused 
 its ruin, until it became a gigantic mountain. 
 The dream thus manifested its confused, my.ste- 
 rious character, that dissolved into indefinite- 
 ness. The plural may, therefore, with a certain 
 propriety be taken as a plural of unlimited uni- 
 versality, which serves to prepare the way for 
 'he singular that follows in verse 3, in so far as 
 rt designates the whole of the confused and com- 
 plex nature of the dream, among whose visions 
 the image of the monarchies and its fate, 
 were prominent in importance and in the im- 
 pression they produced (cf. Hiivem, and Maur. 
 on the passage). The rabbinical interpretation, 
 which refers the plural to the dream and its 
 explanation, is certainly to be rejected {e. //., 
 Jos Jacchiad.) ; and also the unauthorized iden- 
 tification of r-.'ibn with =i:n (Sept., Vulg., 
 Luther, etc. ; and also Hiivernick, who endeavors 
 to define this as & pl:',rul of iiifcusity. support- 
 ing his view by a comparison with rii?:~n, Prov. 
 i. 21); ix. I. which is certainly not plural). — 
 Wherewith his spirit was troubled. Verse 
 3, and also Gen. xli. 8 (where the awaking of 
 Pharaoh from his dream is described) employ 
 the Niphal "'ET!! in the same sense that the 
 Hithpael in this place bears, viz. : as indicating 
 the alarm of one who has been frightened by a 
 dream; compare Psa. Ixxvii. 5, ■'F'3"p; "J am 
 BO troubled " (properly, " I am bruised, beaten," 
 cuiitiindor). and also the Greek miinT-tviini. 
 " The Hithpael intensifies the conception of inter- 
 nal disturbance contained in the Niphal, so that 
 it implies that its outwjird expression could not 
 be mist.iken " iKraniohf.). — And his sleep 
 brake from him." or "and his sleep was over 
 for him." So, properly, the Sept., Vulg., Lu- 
 ther, Berth., etc., and, in general a majority of 
 e.xpositors, On the Niphal iTn\ in the sense of 
 being;w.'<!: or completed, compare chap. viii. 27, 
 and especially Jlic. ii. 4. The phrase " His 
 Bleep went from him" (chap, vi Ii); Est. vi. 
 
 pretry well iiL'i\'e'-U Daninl on tile other baud, writing 
 a* r.nbyluii. altlio it^h by cnnrtfsy he applies the generiil 
 title "kii'.K" to Xebuchailnczzar. while yet but niluputy. 
 l^ exact iu his stuteiiient of the reara of the reicn 
 Uwlt.l *" 
 
 1) conveys a somewhat different idea. T'byi 
 "over him," or "for him," expresses, as fre- 
 quently with conceptions of emotional activity, 
 the .sense of the dative in a more circumstantial 
 and emphatic manner; cf. chap. iv. 24; vi. 19; 
 X. 8, and see Geseniu.s' T/ie-wurvs, p. 1027, 3, e. 
 Hiivernick renders it incorrectly : " His sleep 
 came on him heavily ;" for the statement that 
 the king was greatly troubled does not admit of 
 the other, that a heavy plumber had seized on 
 him. Rather verse 3 shows clearly that the 
 desire to recall his dream, hence such an effort 
 to recollect as would necessarily banish sleep, 
 formed the real cause of his disturbance. — On 
 the phenomenon that Nebuchadnezzar should 
 have a dream of prophetic significance, and then 
 forget it (with reference to many of its details, 
 if not entirely) consult the dogmatico-ethical 
 considerations. No. 1. — Verse 2. And the king 
 commanded to cetll the magicians, etc. This 
 is exactly similar to Gen. xli. 8, to which record 
 the writer seems designedly to have conformed 
 in expression. Of the four classes of wise men 
 here remarked (■^"p"'2n> verse 27), the Chartum- 
 mim and Ashaphim have already been mentioned, 
 chap. i. 20 (see on that place). The BICE:?:, 
 
 mentioned as a third class, are clearly " enchan- 
 ters;" cf. q',23 (properly "to mutter words of 
 
 incantation ;" Sept. , ifiapimKeicn-l^ai) 2 Chron. 
 xxxiii. 6, and CiO^C (dapuakdr) Ex.vii. 11 ; Deut. 
 
 xlviii. 10. The term designates, in correspond- 
 ence with its harsher formation, a stronger and 
 more passionate mode of incantation than ci',:;k 
 — an app.trent and observable enchantment, aa 
 distinguished from the mere breathing of magi- 
 cal formulas. The further mention of the D''Ti;2i 
 
 Chaldasans, in connection with the Chartum- 
 mim, etc., and therefore, as a special class of 
 wise men coordinate with the others, involvea 
 no abuse or carelessness of expression . but rather 
 corresponds fully with the statement of Hero- 
 dotus (I. 181), that the Chaldieans were the 
 priests.of Bel, and with that of Diodorus (11.24), 
 that the Babylonians termed their priests Xn/- 
 (!aZo(. Those designated in this place as f'lwS 
 are therefore the sacerdotal wise men (ct.Hesy- 
 chius, s. V. Xa/i\aioi, where the Chaldaeans are 
 distinguished as a yivoQ Mn-.i,iv), who, it is pro- 
 bable, were specially occupied with astronomy, 
 the aboriginal science of the nations about the 
 Euphrates and the Tigris, whose founder was 
 supposed to be Belus, the chief divinity of the 
 Chaldieans (Pliny, //. N., vi. 30: ^' Bdim — inven- 
 tor siderrdis scientiiv"). As astronomers, they 
 were probably classed with the nsstrthr/crs, the 
 "C'^^i who are mentioned in connection with 
 them in chap. iv. 4; v. 7, 11, and instead of 
 them in verse 27 of this chapter (see on that 
 passage). The nationality of these Chaldieans 
 was clearly different from that of the great 
 mass of the Babylonian populace ; for while 
 these, the original inhabitants of Shinar, were 
 pure Shemites, the former had adopted ra.any 
 Aryan elements into their language and customs. 
 The Chaldaians. after inhabiting Babylonia for 
 centuries, as a kind of priestly ca.ste, attained to 
 political supremacy through Belesys or Nabopo- 
 lassar, whom Diodorus, II. 36, designates aj 
 
CHAP. II. 1-49. 
 
 69 
 
 e-rrc(7Ti^6raTov rdv hpeuv oOf "^aSv/uvmc na/.ovct 
 Xa/.rfaiOT'r, hence through one of their superior 
 priests (about B. C. 637). They retained this 
 pre-eminence imtil the taking of Babylon by 
 Cyrus, hence, about a century ; but this prob- 
 ably did not exclude the primitive Babylonian 
 priesthood from its place beside the sacerdotal 
 class of the dominant nationality, either in re- 
 gard to office, or to consider.ation. Thus we may 
 explain why the Chaldeans are only co-ordinate 
 with the other classes of magicians in this place 
 and in the passages of chap. iv. and v. which 
 have been mentioned, and also understand the 
 fact that the official language (according to 
 verse i) was not the Chaldee, but continued to 
 be the Aramtean (primitive Babylonian). The 
 Chaldteans, Nabopolass.ar and Nebuchadnezzar 
 did not, therefore, found a one-sided, intolerant, 
 sacerdotal dynasty ; they had rather, so far as this 
 was possible, become thorough Babylonians,or, in 
 other words, Aramaeans. The Chaldaeans, howev- 
 er, must have formed the jwt.iur pars of the whole 
 body of the wise men ao the court, for no other 
 supposition will explain why the entire corps are 
 designated sometimes as 3"'l'i'2~, and at others 
 as I?5 ''?;''3~, in the following account (verses 
 4, a, 10, cf. verses 11, 12. etc.). Compare Hitz. 
 and Kranichf. on this passage, and see infra, on 
 verse 4. — For to show the king his dreams. 
 All of the four classes of wise men just men- 
 tioned were therefore to co-operate in interpret- 
 ing the dream, " because in this important mat- 
 ter the facts and opinions were to be settled 
 by various methods, and possibly, to be placed 
 on record. The several classes of wise men 
 supplemented each other on such occasions, and 
 assisted each other mutually by their peculiar 
 methods. Thus, the priests might propitiate 
 the gods and invoke tlieir aid, by sacrifices ; the 
 conjurers might contribute to the increase of 
 prophetic ability, as might also the enchanters, 
 e.g., by the use of narcotics, etc. In this way 
 the Egyptian wise-men were constantly em- 
 ployed in individual cases as a ci'aryjuc, accord- 
 ing to Diodoriis, II. 30." (Kranichf. ) — Verse 3. 
 My spirit was troubled to know the dream. 
 A constr. pragmin.s. which signifies, " My spirit 
 bas become troubled (cf. on verse 1), and desir- 
 ous to know the dream " The king clearly 
 desires to have his dream rehearsed, and not 
 merely to learn its meaning. The words 
 ftiinT.S Tf "li may certainly imply the latter, 
 but it appears definitely from verses o et seq. , 9 
 et seq. 26, .and 3(5, that he is more immediately 
 concerned to recover the dream itself. The 
 reason was, without doubt, that he had really 
 forgotten it, or, as is frequently the case with in- 
 tricate dreams, many of its particulars had 
 escaped his memory, and he retained only a 
 general untlefined impression of having seen 
 something fearful, monstrous, and alarming, in 
 his dream. A total forgetting of the dream 
 cannot be supposed in this case, since it was not 
 possible for the king to be so greatly troubled 
 as to lose his sleep about a dream which he had 
 forgotten entirely (verse 1). Nor can it be as- 
 sumed that he really recollected the dream, and 
 had merely pretended that he no longer remem- 
 bered it (R. Gaon in Ibn-Ezra, Hengstenberg, 
 Hiivemick) ; for the writer would hardly have 
 
 left unnoticed a representation of this nature, 
 which aimed to test the magicians ; and, in ad- 
 dition, the rage of the king, as described in 
 verse 12 et seq,, is too furious to be pretended. 
 [On the other hand, Keil justly contends (with 
 the majority of interpreters) that he had not 
 essentially forgotten his dream. "It is psy- 
 chologically improbable that so impressive a 
 dream, which, on awaking, he had forgotten, 
 should have yet sorely disquieted his spirit dur 
 ing his waking hours. ' The disquiet was 
 created in him, as in Pharaoh (Gen. xli, ), by the 
 specially strikhig incidents of the dream, and 
 the fearful, alarming apprehensions with refer- 
 ence to his future fate connected therewith ' 
 (Kran. ). According to verse 9, Nebuchadnezzar 
 wished to hear the dream from the wise men 
 that he might thus have a guarantee for the 
 correctness of the inter^jretations which they 
 might give. He could not thus have spoken to 
 them if he had wholly forgotten the dream, and 
 had only a dark apprehension remaining in his 
 mind that he had dreamed. In that case he 
 would neither have offered a great reward for 
 the announcement of the dream, nor have 
 threatened severe punishment, even death, for 
 failure in announcing it. For then he would 
 only have given the Chaldaeans the opjjortunity, 
 at the cost of truth, of declaiing any dream 
 with an interpretation. ' The Magi boasted 
 that by the help of the gods they could reveal 
 deep and hidden things' (Hengst. )." It is very 
 probable, however, that while the king retained 
 a lively recollection of the main features of the 
 dream, he might have forgotten some of the 
 particulars, which, if rehearsed again, he would 
 be able to recognize. This justifies the whole 
 proceeding.] 
 
 Verse 4. The rfply of t!ic mirt/iriiin.^. Then 
 spake the Chaldaeans to the king in Syriac, 
 i.e., Aramaic. 'T'r';?^, the Aramaic dialect of 
 the Babylonians, which was still prevalent at the 
 court of the Chaldaean rulers, Nabopolassar, Ne- 
 buchadnezzar, etc., and which was distinguished 
 from their Chaldee idiom, including numerous 
 non-Shemitic elements, by its purelj- Shemitic 
 character, and especially by its near relationship 
 to the Aramiean of the Syrians. Hence, the Sept. 
 and Theodotion translate Iv/nr^r', the Vulg. 
 Hyrinee, and Xenophou (Cymp. VII. o, 31) states 
 directly that the Babylonians spoke Syriac. The 
 reason for Daniel's express statement that the 
 Chaldasans addressed the king in .\ramaic (note 
 the verb "^31, corresponding to the adverb ; cf. 
 Isa. xxxvi. 11) consists simply in the fact that he 
 desired to call the attention of his Hebrew 
 readers to the contrast between the nationality 
 of the 3"''^23, i.e., the majority of the wise 
 men who were summoned before the king, and 
 the purely Shemitic language, which they were 
 obliged to employ (cf. on verse 3). It is wrong 
 to look for tlie reason of their use of Aramaic, 
 with Palmblad, Havernick, and others, in their 
 desire to hide the confession of their ignorance 
 from the turbd ad.itiintinin. This might rather 
 have been accomplished by the use of Chaldee, 
 while the Aramaean was familiar to all present 
 as the language of the court and nation. Cora- 
 pare supra on chap. i. 4, and also the correct 
 remark of Fuller (p. 37) : " While the language 
 
70 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 of the ChaldiEans was the langunge of science. 
 this (the Aram.) was the Inngxinge of popuhtr 
 intere<iin-si." — O king, live for ever. This was 
 an introductonr formula of the address to the 
 king (cf, chap.'iii. 9 ; r. 10; vi. 7, 22). attested 
 as a general Oriental formula of greeting by 1 
 Sam. X. 24 (Saul) ; 1 Kings i. 31 (David) ; Neh. 
 ii. 3 (Artaxerxes) ; ^lian, V. H., I, 31 (^nci'/tv 
 '\pvn:tp^7i, rli a'lijvor Baai'/.Fini^) ; Curtius. Ii., VI. 
 6 (Alexander the Gr.); Judith xii. 14 (Holofer- 
 nes.i. — On the Keri ""IJ'T, and similar omis- 
 sions of 1 in the Keris. verse 26; iv. 16; v. 
 10, etc., see Hitzig and Kranichf. on this place. 
 Verses 5. 6. Itenticed demand by the king, 
 connected with a utern menace. The king . . . 
 said to the Chaldaeans, St^^liira'". The uncon- 
 tracted form S<^S1U.'3, a stat. emphat. plwi:, 
 from "I'lH'iaJS, lies at the foundation of this 
 Kethib, as well as of the Keri "ST'.^'S; ; compare 
 Winer. Grnmm. de-s bibl. tiiid targum. Chal- 
 daUvn.. S 32. No. 3. — The thing is gone from 
 me, rather, " the decree is made known by me," 
 i.e., it is my settled purpose, I say it with all 
 emphasis. The words S*'^!?* ''V? T-r should 
 probably be rendered in this way, as Hitz. and 
 Kranichf. suggest; for (1) this view only is con- 
 sistent with the repetition of the formula in 
 verse 8, as well as with the parallel C^"J3 ''ItZ 
 ore, chap. iii. 29 ; iv. 3 ; (2) »~m, which is 
 found only here and in verse S, is most readily 
 explained by comparison with the Persian mda 
 or (izttiida, which is found in inscriptions, and is 
 equivalent to pubUcalion, science, what is 
 known; (3) the rendering which makes ttux 
 correspond to '*^"P, "^k^'P', "standing fast" 
 (PSsh. . Ibn-Ezra, the rabbins in Saadia, Winer, 
 Hengstenb. ). which is closely related to the one 
 under consideration, is untenal.ile from the fact 
 that an assurance of the fixed and in-evocable 
 character of the royal decree would here be out 
 of place, and that an identification of the rootirs 
 with the Araljic ntzadu, "to be firm," seems 
 rather precarious ; (4) the identification of its 
 with ;ts». ubiit (verses 17, 24 ; vi. 19, 20), from 
 which arises the sense, "the word has gone out 
 from me" (Gesen. , Havem., Von Lengerke, 
 etc. ) is opposed by the extreme improbability 
 that the two forms are identical in meai.ing, 
 since an Interchange of ^ and i is exceedingly 
 rare, and especially because Daniel always em- 
 ploys the form with v in other places ; (.5) 
 finally, the view, "the word has escaped my 
 recollection," which was formerly common, and 
 which is found as early as Theodotion and the 
 Sept. iCAjd. C'hii.) (li /ojo,- a~' i/mv imtari), the 
 Vulgate {sermo recimt a me), Luther, Dereser, 
 and others, but « hich here, and much more in 
 verge 8. contradicts the whole context, and does 
 not consist with the only admissible sense of 
 nrbp = word, command, is wholly untenable ; 
 for the term nowhere in this chapter, not even 
 in verse 23. signifies the dream of the king, but 
 always his decree, his demand. [Moreover, 
 " the punctuation of the word S'llst is not at 
 all that of a verb, for it can neither be a parti- 
 ciple, nor the 3dpers. prajt. fern." (Keil), but it is 
 
 the fem. of an adj. "l^N, or (as Fiirst thinks), 
 an adverbial form of the same. The mean- 
 ing firm, however, which the author rejects, 
 seems to us more suitable and better corn 
 borated than any other.] — Ye shall be cu; 
 in pieces, liain "lUTS- ^ be made pieces 
 (Sept. iha/ispii^cc-Hai • cf. /^Oi iro/fiv, 2 Maco. i. 
 16, and A,i;t;ro/;m', Matt. xxiv. 51) ; a cruel 
 punishment in vogue among nil the nations of 
 antiquity, and especially among the Chalda^ana 
 (Eze. xvi. 40 ; xxiii. 47) ; compare chap. iii. 29. 
 — And your houses shall be made a dunghill. 
 Similarly chap. iii. 29, and also Ezravii. 11, where 
 the form 13^3 is used instead of Daniel's "1]^" 
 This term, derived from the Pael ;)13 = IS?, to 
 soil, defile, indicates the extremely disgraceful 
 nature of the threatened penalty; the hciuses 
 are to be changed into dunghills, by being lazed 
 to the ground and covered with animal and 
 human ordure — just as Jehu turned the temple 
 of Baal into a sink. 2 Kings x. 27. See the 
 proofs of the frequent use of this method of 
 disgrace and punishment in the East, adduced 
 by Havemick. — Verse 6. Te shall receive of 
 me gifts and rewards, and great honors; 
 rather, "great treasures." The second of the 
 terras here employed, "?!?;, " reward " (compare 
 the plural V2T::. "gifts," chap. v. 17, and the 
 Tnrg. Jonath., Jer. xl. 5; Deut. xxxiii. 24) is 
 satisfactorily explained by its derivation from 
 TT;, and specially from a Palpel form '?!?' 
 fiiciiltates suas contemsit, prodegit. It is not 
 necessary, therefore, to refer with Berth., 
 Eichhom. etc. , to the Greek loiiia/ja in its eluci- 
 dation, nor with Hang (in Ewald's Jahrb. d. 
 bibl. Wissenschaft, 1853, p. 160). Gesen. -Dietr., 
 etc., to institute a comparison with the old 
 Persian ni-bag-td, " presentation," nor, above 
 all, with the Sanscrit nanuis, "present, gift," 
 as Hitzig attempts. Ewald prefers "Syr'., ^^^ 
 the translation of this term by official stations, 
 or promoting to office (for which he refers to the 
 old Persic and also to chap. v. 16)— which, 
 however, is opposed to the entire body of exe- 
 getical tradition, — Therefore shew me the 
 dream, etc. 1"b, tlieref/re (composed of the 
 demonstrative adverb 1~ and the preposition 
 b), is found in this signification in verse 9, 
 and chap. iv. 24, and in the Hebrew of Ruth i. 
 1 3. On the other hand it signifies ' ' but rather " 
 in verse 30, and " but " in Ezra v. 12. 
 
 Verses 7-9. Repeated refvsnl of the Chaldceans, 
 and rcneiced threatening of the king. They 
 answ^ered again. ri:^:ri, an adverb from I'^Pi 
 "the second one," chap. vii. 5. — And we will 
 shew the interpretation, irinn: n^-.|:c^. The 
 form nywQ is not to be changed into """S, aa 
 Hitzig suggests, but must rather be regarded 
 simply as a Hebraized stat. emphat. for s-r 2, jfst 
 aa (verse 5) ~^^'r is used for ^\'^'^ (verse 8, 
 etc.), or "ars (chap. v. 7, 15) instead of 
 Stars (ibid., verses 8, 16, etc.). Whether the 
 Hebraizing orthography apparent in this and 
 
CHAP. II. 1-49. 
 
 other similar instances is to be placed to the 
 account of Daniel, and to be considered as a 
 peculiar feature of the Chaldee in his time 
 (Pusey, Daniel, p. 46). or whether it originated 
 with later transcribers of Daniel's text, cannot 
 he definitely decided ; compare Kranichf. on 
 this passage. — Verse 8. I kno\^ of certainty. 
 n^S'^ 1?:, equivalent to QT-p 1^, ex verilate, 
 assuredly, verse 47. — That ye would gain the 
 time; literally, ''that ye ^wre/dwe time " (Sept. 
 and Theodotion : Kaipbv iiayo/ia^ere) ; compare 
 t^ayopa^ta^ai vov Kaipov^ Eph. V. 16 ; Col. iv. 15 ; 
 also tempus emere, Cicero, Ven: I. 3. The 
 time, i.e., the favorable juncture, the oppor- 
 tuuitas, which the magicians sought to buy, i.e. , 
 to improve, consisted in the fact that the king 
 had forgotten hia dream ; they aim to improve 
 this circumstance in such a way a.s eventually to 
 avoid the interpretation altogether.* Their 
 design is therefore properly "to gain time," 
 to postpone the decision. Thus Gesen., De 
 Wette, Von Leng., Hiivernick, and still earlier. 
 Luther, are correct: "That ye seek delay." 
 Entirely too artificial is the view of Hitzig and 
 Kranichf.. that the favorable circumstances, of 
 which the magicians hoped to avail themselves, 
 con.sisted in the king's desire to learn the inter- 
 pretation of the dream ; and that they specu- 
 lated on this desire, in the hope that the king 
 might ultimately be persuaded to disclose to 
 them the dream, etc. — Because ye see that 
 the thing has gone from me ; rather. " that my 
 decree is published," i.e., because ye observe 
 that I am in earnest about the command ; com- 
 pare verse 5. "''1 ir;p"b3 does not, in this nor 
 any other place, not even in chap. v. 23, signify 
 "despite that," as Hitzig suggests, but "be- 
 cause," properly "because that," prajiterea 
 quod. The king evidently aims to point out the 
 motive for the 'artful temporizing and delay of 
 the magicians, namely, the menace with which 
 he has intimidated and frightened them. — Verse 
 9. But it ye will not make know^n . . . the 
 dream. I" ^1, Heb. CN irs. (/iiodn The ^li 
 properly "since," "therefore," takes up the 
 subject of the preceding conditional clause, 
 and pl.aces it in emphatic correlation to that 
 clause (Kranichf. ). — There is but one decree 
 for you; i.i., one and the same sentence of 
 condemnation shall come on all of you (Vulg. 
 correctly, una est de vobin senteiUia ; cf. Luther, 
 "so ergeitt das Recht iiber euc/i"). r~, the 
 sentence of condemnation in this passage, is 
 clearly the same in substance as H3'3 in verses 
 5 and 8; the suffix plainly indicates this 
 /lirr'1, "your sentence," i.e., that which comes 
 upon you, which concerns you). Von Leng. and 
 Hitzig (following Theodotion) are wrong : ' ' But 
 one thing forms your object," ye entertain but 
 one design ; for r~ never designates a subjec- 
 tive personal opinion or aim, but rather always 
 
 * [But it is difficult to see how the supposed circumstance 
 that the king had fonjaittn the dream can here be called 
 
 *' a favorable i/»ie.'' 5<"IX here is evidently to be taken 
 
 in the sense <>f delat/. The Ma'jians are charged with 
 trying to poBtpon** the matter indefinitely, by the plea of 
 requirintt the statement of the dream by the king himself, 
 which they presume cannot be done.] 
 
 an objective norm, which is binding on the indi- 
 vidual. — For ye have prepared lying and 
 corrupt words to speak before me. ~Z~2, 
 "falsehood," and nrTl'i', properly, "corrup- 
 tion," "baseness," are in apposition with "?'?• 
 The entire object is, however, placed before tha 
 infinitive l^'*?? which governs it, on account 
 of emphasis; compare verse 18; iii. 16; iv. 15. 
 — The principal verb is "I^Pp^iTn in the Kethib, 
 the Aphel of l^T. This form, which does not 
 occur in the Chaldee or Syriac, but is found in 
 the Samaritan, expresses the sense of " conspir- 
 ing" which is here required, as weU as the 
 Ithpa. l^ri;^'?!'? substituted for it in the Keri 
 (cf. the cviiiiirsxii: of Theodotion and the corn- 
 posueritis of the Vulg.). — Till the time be 
 changed, i.e., untU by the aid of some hoped- 
 for circumstance ye ascertain something more 
 definite concerning the subject of the dream : 
 or, also, until my anger ceases, and I withdraw 
 the demand altogether. — And I shall know- 
 that ye can show . . . the interpretation 
 thereof. The future ~::^n~K' expresses the 
 idea of ability, competency ; compare Winer, 
 Gramm., ^ 44, 3, c. (p. 107). 
 
 Verses 10, 11. The magicians attempt to eMah- 
 iijih their declaration respecting the impiossihiUty 
 rif gratifying the Icing's de.firr. Therefore there 
 is no king, lord, nor ruler, that asked such 
 things; rather, "since no great and mighty 
 king (ever) asked," etc. '^'1 b2p";3 is to be 
 taken here, as in verse 8, in its usual sense of 
 "since," not as drawing a conclusion, in the 
 sense of " wherefore, for which reason " (Gesen., 
 Von Leng., etc.). It does not, indeed, adduce 
 the actual re.a.son for the assertion that no one 
 could satisfy the royal demand ; but it refers to 
 the subjective ground that in all human experi- 
 ence, no king, however great, had imposed such 
 a demand. Compare the similar ^woiifit'o a pos- 
 teriori, or a gnorismate, in the familiar passage, 
 Luke vii. 47. — The predicates C-S'ii Z~ are not 
 empty titles after the manner of the Orient 
 (Berth., Von Leng., Hav. ), but imply that while 
 the most extreme demands might be expected 
 from precisely the mo.st powerful kings, never- 
 theless, etc — Verse 11. Except the gods, 
 whose dwelling is not (to be found) with flesh, 
 or "with men." "'I??, fleali, indicates the frailty 
 of created man, encompassed by earthly limita- 
 tions, as contrasted with the uncreated and 
 divine, which is not confined within these per- 
 ishable bounds ; compare Isa. xxxi. 3 ; Jer. 
 xvii. 5; Zech. iv. 6; Job v. 4; also John i. 14; 
 1 Tim. iii. 16, etc. The Chaldajans include 
 themselves in the term flesh, in order to refer 
 excusingly to their imperfection and the limita- 
 tion of their knowledge, as in no wise deserving 
 of censure. — The fact that the dwelling of the 
 gods is not with men, prevents such inter- 
 course with them, as would admit of man's in- 
 struction in their superior knowledge. This ia 
 certainly a truly heathenish, but not a specifi- 
 cally Babylonian thought (as Hiivemick sup- 
 poses). Von Lengerke's supposition that the 
 king must already at this juncture have re- 
 
THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 marked the prophetic rank of Daniel (cf. Ex. 
 viii. 15) is too far-fetched. On the other hand, 
 the appeal of the wise men to the gods, becomes 
 significant for the progress of the scene, as it 
 might suggest to the king the consideration, so 
 damaging to themselves, that the gods could 
 not conceal their superior knowledge of impor- 
 tant secrets from them, of all others, who were 
 professional priests, in case they were not pre- 
 tended, but real priests of the gods. In other 
 words, the appeal of the magicians hastens the 
 denunciation of the sentence with which they 
 had been threatened. 
 
 Verses 12, 13. The decree fm' the execution of 
 the apjxyinted penalty. And commanded to 
 destroy all the wise men of Babylon ; natur- 
 ally only those belonging to the capital city, 
 who alone are to be regarded as summoned 
 before the king (verse 2) ; not tho.se of the whole 
 realm, nor even of the province of Babylon 
 (verse 49 ; iii. 1). Those remaining magicians, 
 or wise men. who were not inhabitants of Baby- 
 lon itself, fonned, according to Strabo xvi. 1; 
 Pliny. H. N. vi. 26, separate colleges, e.g., in 
 Borsippa, Urchoe, Hipparenum. They differed 
 ia certain principles and customs from the 
 Babylonian coUige, as well as from each other, 
 and therefore, could not be held directly re- 
 sponsible for a mistake or a crime committed by 
 theb- colleagues in the capital. — Verse VS. And 
 the decree went forth. ^'1, the decree in 
 proper form, the firman (cf. ''o;//n, Luke ii. 1); 
 compare verse 9 — That the wise men should be 
 slain. TJEpra N'^7;''3n'l probably expresses 
 no more than this ; the form of the imperf. 
 partio. Vitspr?: seems to be used as a gerun- 
 dive, "they were (persons) to be slain, devoted 
 to death ;" or — of which, however, there is no 
 other example — the ^ coupled with the participle, 
 seems exceptionally to express the sense of de- 
 sign: ''sapieiites ut interticerentur " (cf. Kran- 
 ichf. and Maurer on this passage, the one of whom 
 prefers the former explanation, and the other the 
 latter). The execution of the sentence is not to 
 be regarded as having actually begun,* as ap- 
 pears sufficiently from what follows, especially 
 in verses 14 and 24 (contra Hitzig, etc.). — And 
 they soustht Daniel and his iellow^s to be 
 slain ; evidently because they were regarded as 
 belonging to the Vp'Sn or C^3': in the 
 
 broader sense, which could only be the case 
 after they had passed the examination before 
 the king mentioned in chap. i. 19 — hence, after 
 completing the three years of their training. It 
 follows from this that the event here recorded did 
 not tran.spire during that period (cf. on verse 1), 
 as Wie.seler holds. At the same time the state- 
 ment before us indicates that Daniel was not 
 entirely unknown to the king at this time, as 
 might appear from verse 25 et seq. The fact 
 that Daniel and his three fellows had not ap- 
 peared in person before the king, but were 
 sought for, is easily explained by the considera- 
 
 • [Kl'U, however, insists that this mnst be the meaning of 
 the pashive participle here, and renders "the woric of put- 
 ling to death was begun."' This is a strnining of the sense. 
 Tlic execution being ordered, and preparations going on for 
 It ; it waB regarded as virtually, but not actually in pro- 
 gress.] 
 
 tion that Nebuchadnezzar did not, by any meana^ 
 summon all connected with the class of magi- 
 ans in the capital before him (cf. verse 2, 
 where Luther's " all star-gazers and wise men" 
 is decidedly inexact), but assuredly only tba 
 presidents of the several chief classes, the nota- 
 bles and representatives of the whole body. — 
 On the apologetical significance of the circum- 
 stance that Daniel and his companions seem, in 
 this place, to be at least connected or affiliated 
 with the order of magians, if not formal mem- 
 bers of it (as Von Lengerke, evidently going too 
 far, supposed) see above, Uogm.-eth. considera- 
 tiona on chap. i. , and also Kranichf. on this 
 passage. 
 
 Verses 14-16. Daniel prevails on the king to 
 delay the e.xecution of the sentence. Then Dan- 
 iel answered with counsel and wisdom to 
 Arioch, etc. -?^1 i^'^^y, counsel andicindcnn, i.e., 
 words of counsel (cf. ~S5 Isa. xi. 2 ; Jer. xxxii. 
 19, etc.) and of wisdom, namely, as concern- 
 ing the difficult position in which he was placed 
 with the rest of the wise men, and in regard to 
 the proper way to relieve the difficulty (C5t?, 
 ratio, similar to chap. iii. 12). On -"^n "to 
 reph." compare chap- iii. IG; Ezra v. 11. The 
 connection -72 Z''" reminds us of C^'U ^S^"-'^' 
 
 Prov. xxvi. 16. — Thename '^i'^",'? occurs as early 
 as Gen. xiv. 1 , as the name of a king of Ellasar. 
 The leading element in its composition seems 
 to be n^is, ■'"IS = Sanscrit arja, " lord," and, 
 possibly, it may even be directly identified with 
 the Sanscrit drjaka, " venerabilis." This per- 
 son was, therefore, a noble, of decidedly Indo- 
 Germanic race, filling an important office at 
 Nebuchadnezzar's court. His title X^nae"1_, 
 chief of the slaughterers (i.e., the execution- 
 ers), is the Shemitic designation of the 
 same official who was known in the Ro- 
 man empire as the Prwfectuit prwtoris, 
 and in Turkey bears the title of Kapidsjii-pasha, 
 hence a chief of the life or body guards. Be- 
 sides the execution of capital punishments, 
 warlike functions, up to those of a commander- 
 in-chief, might occasionally be devolved on this 
 officer, as appears from the instance of Nebuzar- 
 adan, 2 Kings xxv. 8 et seq. The office existed, 
 however, even at the court of the Egyptian 
 Pharaohs (see D'HSan Ti", Gen. xxxvii. 36 ; 
 xxxix. 1 ; xl. 3etseq. ). His extensive influence 
 at the Chaldfean court is indicated elsewhere 
 than here (see especially the predicate " the 
 powerful one of the kmg," S3i??3-'T ND'^d 
 verse 15), in 2 Kings viii. 10 ; Jer. xxxix. 
 9 et seq,; xl. 1 et seq.; xli. 10; xliii. 6; 
 Iii. 12 et seq. — Verse 15. Why is the 
 decree so hasty from the king? — rather, "why 
 this furious decree on the part of the king?" 
 or literally, "why the decree which furious 
 from before the king?" ncsn.-?;, the parti- 
 ciple of ^pin^' which, according to the Targ. 
 Prov. vii. 13 ; xxi. 29, is equivalent to '5r!' 
 " to rage," is here in the stat. abnul. irstead of 
 eniphat., just as the Hebrew participle when is 
 apposition is sometimes without the article, e.g , 
 
CHAP. II. 1-49. 
 
 73 
 
 Cant xiL ; Am. ix. 12 ; Jon. iv. 17. Some, 
 as Havemick, and others, prefer to translate 
 "hurried," " hastj," in analogy with chap. iii. 
 29, where ns^rr; seems to bear that sense (?) ; 
 but the ancient versions support the rendering 
 *' furious, raging" (Sept. rrtHfiu^^ Theodot. iit'a- 
 iSvc, Vulg. cniddis), and the entire situation 
 substantiates this meaning. — The writer, how- 
 ever, does not mention everything that Daniel 
 must have said to Arioch on this occasion ; but 
 rather contents himself with faintly indicating 
 that only which seiwed to manifest his counsel 
 and wisdom. The author employs an abbrevi- 
 ated style, as in chap. i. 9. 10 (see on the place); 
 he is not. therefore, to be charged with incon- 
 gruity (Hitzig), nor is the point in question to be 
 strained by an artificiallj* interj>olating exegesis, 
 and perhaps (with Kranichf. ) to be regarded as 
 particularly surprising and remarkable. — Verse 
 Itj. And Daniel went in, namely, to the king 
 in the palace (cf. 3 Sara. xix.O), naturally not 
 until announced by Arioch (cf. verse 25^ for 
 none were admitted to the kings of the E.ast 
 without such announcement, see Esther iv. 11 ; 
 Herodotu.s, I., 99; III.. 110, 118. Hence, another 
 abbreviating statement by the author, as also in 
 what immediately follows. — That he would 
 give him time, and that he would show the 
 king the interpretation — and naturally, first of 
 all, the contents of the dream itself. He hopes 
 that God will impart both to him, during the 
 respite that is to be granted. In the construction 
 SSb'ab ~^]nrib S*"™?'' the copula is explicative, 
 "and indeed, to," etc., or " namely, to," etc. 
 The change of construction here is analogous to 
 that in chap. i. 5, where the verb 1^?1 first 
 governs a simple accusative of object, and after- 
 ward a telic infinitive clause with V (C^'iail). 
 
 Verses 17-19. O'td rerenh the secret to 
 Diiniel. Then Daniel went to his house — 
 evidently because the king had granted the 
 desired respite, which must be assumed in verse 
 li>, without further question. This favor will 
 not seem strange, nor inconsequent (Hitz. ), 
 when we reflect that Daniel and his three 
 friends bad secured the favor and good-will of 
 the king but recently, on the occasion of their 
 first appearance in his presence (chap. i. 19 et 
 seq. ). None were better adapted to soothe the 
 angry king and olitain at least a postponement 
 of the impending jiunishment, than the hand- 
 some and richly endowed Hebrew youth, who 
 had already made so favorable an impression on 
 the monarch, and who probably would have ar- 
 re.ited the publication of the decree of punish- 
 ment,had he been among those magians that were 
 summoned before the king, according to verse 
 2 ; compare on verse 18. — Daniel's house may 
 probably be considered as an ofiicial or 
 servant's dwelling, as well as the houses of 
 the other wise men mentioned in verse 5 ; 
 and moreover, as the context shows, as a 
 residence which he shared with his companions, 
 Hananiah, etc — Verse 18. To desire mercies 
 of the God of heaven ; more accurately, " nnd 
 indeed in order to implore mercies." The clause 
 ''.??'?? V^QIl depends on the last preceding 
 verb 5~in. "he Made the fiing known to them;" 
 
 I hence the construction is the same as in verje 
 16 b. The design of the Jlin was to imprjss 
 I the exigency on tlie prayerful consideration of 
 his friends, and, in fact, a united prayerful con- 
 sideration in which Daniel himself participated 
 (cf. verse 23). That the execution of the 
 design to pray is not expressly mentioned, 
 and that we have merely Daniel's offering 
 of praise after the secret has been Divinely 
 imparted to him, instead of the suppli- 
 cation of the friends, are additional illus- 
 trations of the abbreviating style with which 
 our chapter abounds 1 cf. verses 14 and 16). A 
 New-Testament parallel is found in the Johan- 
 nean narrative of the raising of Lazarus, John 
 xi. 40, 41 et seq., where the supplication of 
 Jesus is likew\pe omitted, and only his thanks- 
 giving after his grayer is heard, is recorded. — 
 The designation of Jehovah as the "God of 
 heaven," which occurs as early as Gen. xxiv. 7, 
 is very general with Old-Testament writers 
 after the captivity, probably in contradistinction 
 from the custom of the Asiatic Orientals of 
 deifying the several stars or zodiacal regions ; 
 cf. verses 19, 44; Neh. i. 5 ; ii. 4 ; Ezra i. 2 ; 
 vi. 10 ; vii. 12, 21 ; also the related phrase 
 " King of heaven," chap. iv. 34 (A. V., verse 37), 
 and r^ri'acjTt/i; oiyj.ai'ui', 2 Mace. xv. 23. In general 
 see Havemick, Theologie dcs Alteii Texfnments, 
 'id ed.. p. 49. — Verse 19. Then was the secret 
 revealed unto Daniel in a night vision. 
 »;^-'.b-^'i Hitri, a« well as nb-:b n:T?n, job 
 
 iv. 13, is probably not a dreamvmon, but a 
 vision generally, and properly a vision seen 
 by night. On the influence of night to promote 
 the higher range and prophetic elevation of 
 spiritual meditation, by which it readily arrives 
 at visions, consult Tholuck, Die Projiheten nnd 
 Hire Weisangungen, p. 52. — Compare also the 
 dogmat.-eth. deductions, No. 2 [below]. 
 
 Verses 20-23. DanieV s praise and thanksgiv- 
 ing. Hitzig observes correctly, "The leading 
 thought which Daniel wishes to express is 
 placed first, verse 20 a ; next the exclamation 
 is justified in b. by the attributes which belong 
 to God, and in verses 21 and 22, by the manner 
 in which they are displayed ; finally, verse 22 
 shows why Daniel felt a desire to utter the spe- 
 cific thought of verse 20 a. Those attributes 
 themselves, verse 20 4, return in verse 23 as 
 belonging to Daniel, conferred on him by God ; 
 and thus the prayer is rounded into unity." 
 — [Daniel answered and said, "The word 
 n:" retains its proper meaning. The revelation 
 is of the character of an address from God, 
 which Daniel answers with praise and thanks to 
 God." — Keil.] — Blessed be the name of God 
 for ever and ever. The form S!)i7?i like the 
 related VH?. II"""-?. is to be explained, either 
 by assuming that the particle 3 used as a con- 
 junction (that) has excluded the prefix ^ (Ge- 
 senius. Abhandlung ziir hehr. Gramm., p. 180- 
 194), or that the preformative ^ passes over into 
 V, as in the later Syriac it passes into i (Beer, 
 In.tcriptivnes et papyri ret. Semitici^ I., 19 et seq.; 
 Maurer, Hitz , Kranichf., etc.). The latter as- 
 sumption seems the more trustworthy. On tha 
 phrase, " for ever and erer" (from eternity to 
 
THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 eternity) compare the eimilar doxologies, Psa. 
 rli. 14; c%i. 48. — For wisdom and might are 
 his. This is almost verbally the same as Job 
 xii 13. The "''^ in S*"n n""''! is an emphatic 
 repetition of the former conditional "l. — Verse 
 31. He changeth the times and seasons. 
 Theodotion and the Sept. correctly render 
 Katpjts- Kul ^^'poi'oiT, for which Acts i. 7 ; 1 Thess. 
 V. 1, have the inverse order. T15 is time in gen- 
 oral ; X?\, the determined time, the appointed 
 period or point of time. Both terms are also 
 connected in chap. vii. 12. The thought that 
 God determines and conditions the change of 
 times refers, like the following ( " he removeth 
 kings, and setteth up kings"), to the prophetic 
 subject of Nebuchadnezzar's dream- vision, which 
 had just been revealed to Daniel. — He giveth 
 wisdom unto the wise, and kno\(rledge to 
 them that know understanding. Although 
 . Daniel includes himself among these wise and 
 understanding ones, and even has special refer- 
 ence to himself while mentioning them, he 
 utters no offensive sentiment, but expresses 
 essentially the same thought as St. Paul when 
 he writes, "By the grace of God I am what I 
 am "( 1 Cor. XV. 1 0). He traces the wisdom and 
 understanding with which he had just been en- 
 dowed back to its Divine source, and places 
 himself, as the bearer of such wisdom graciously 
 bestowed by God, in contrast with the heathen 
 magians, who are without it. — Verse 23. He 
 revealeth the deep and secret things, etc. 
 Compare 1 Cor. ii. 10 ; iv. 5 ; Psa. cxxxix. 12. 
 — And the light dwelleth with him, has made 
 its abode with him, as a visiting personage of 
 celestial race ; compare the Johunnean ianiiiuaev 
 : r i/uii' of the Logos, as well as what is stated in 
 Prov. viii. 30, respecting the Divine wisdom. 
 S~w (for which, with Hitzig, we are perhaps to 
 read '*~'4') 's often used in the Targums instead 
 of n^: or p'f. Instead of the Kethib S^V"". 
 illuminatio, intellectual light, the Keri has 
 ■"T'i":, physical light (compare perhaps Psa. 
 civ. 3 ; 1 Tim. vi. 16). The Kethib, however, 
 Ls sustained by the corresponding Syriac word, 
 and .ilso by the form ^"^"^Hj, chap. v. 14. — 
 Verse 23. God of my fathers. Daniel addresses 
 Jehovah in this manner, because in contrast 
 with the idols of the heathen, he has just re- 
 vealed himself again as the same true God, who 
 was known to the patriarchs of his nation. — 
 Who hast given me wisdom and might ; i 
 namely, wisdmn in regard to the under.standing 
 of the king's dream and its interpretation, and 
 strength with reference to the danger of impend- 
 ing death, which he was enabled boldly to face. 
 — And hast made known unto me now. 
 "I't^. the Chaldce ~~^'"!, ''and now," connects 
 the requisite special proof with the general 
 statement just made. On the etymology of 
 "-• probably a contraction of T!l?3, "at the 
 time," .see Gesenius, s. v. 
 
 Verses 24-20. T/ie annoimcing nf Daniel to 
 the king. Therefore Daniel went in unto 
 Arioch. ,y shows the direction, like the He- 
 
 brew bs ; cf. chap. iv. 31 ; vii. 16. The He- 
 brew, however, also employs 3? occasionally in 
 this sense, e.g., 2 Sam. xv. 4. — He went and 
 said thi.s unto him. The ^y, "he went in." 
 which is cut oif by the insertion of a lengthened 
 clause, is resumed by ^I** in an anacoluthic 
 way. — Verse 25. Then Arioch brought in Dan- 
 iel before the king in haste. n,r;2r'~3, 
 "hastily," properly, " in hasting;" cf. chap. iii. 
 24 and liiT'^3, Ezra iv. 23, which has the 
 
 same meaning. — The form i5"C which occurs 
 also in chap. iv. 4; vi. 19, neutralizes (hke 
 3''i:6!, verse 9) the harshness of the Daghesh 
 (required by the omission of a radical) by the 
 substitution of an epenthetic ; ; cf. Winer, § 19, 
 1. In sense b^-.'j does not differ from b"n 
 verse 24. Concerning Arioch as the ticiQj'jf/l.fi's- 
 of Daniel, see on verse 16. — I have found a 
 mztn of the children of the captivity of Judah 
 (margin), i.e., of the Jewish captives. Arioch 
 here certainly speaks of Daniel as wholly un- 
 known to the king, but this is sufficiently ex- 
 plained by the conceited pride and sovereign 
 contempt, with which he, the dignified Indo- 
 Germanic (verse 14) minister of police, believed 
 himself compelled to look down upon the poor 
 Shemitic prisoner. The etiquette of the Baby- 
 lonian court, so to speak, and particularly of its 
 military or police division, forbade the leader of 
 the body-guard from recognizing Daniel as one 
 known to the sovereign. The compCer can, 
 therefore, by no means be charged with men- 
 tioning in this place what contradicts his former 
 statements, and especially with having already 
 forgotten the fact recorded in verse 16 (Hitz., 
 Von Leng. ). The manner in which, for instance, 
 David is introduced as a shepherd totally un- 
 known to Saul and Abner, 1 Sam. xvii. 38, 55, 
 might much more readily lead to the conclusion 
 that the narrative there did not originally con- 
 sist with that recorded in 1 Sam. xvi., which 
 had brought David into closer relations with 
 Saul at an earlier period (cf. even Keil, on 1 
 iSam., p. 129 et seq., who admits the strangeness 
 of this contradiction). The marked difference 
 between the discrepancy in that case and the far 
 lighter one in the passage under consideration, 
 shows of itself how little reason there is to 
 assume a multiplicity of compilers, or even a 
 
 want of skill on the part of the sole author 
 
 Verse 26. The king answered and said to 
 Daniel, whose name ivas Beltesbazzar. This 
 Babylonian name, which the king himself had 
 caused to be conferred on Daniel (chap. i. 7), 
 would naturally be the only one to claim the 
 notice of Nebuchadnezzar. — ["The question. 
 Art thou able ? t. e. , ' Hast thou ability ? ' does 
 not express the king's ignorance of Daniel's per- 
 son, but only his amazement at his ability to 
 make known the dream, in the sense, 'Art thou 
 really able ?' " — Keil. ] 
 
 Verses 37-30. Introdvcteny to t/te ttatement 
 and inierirretntion of the dream. The secret 
 . . . cannot the wise men, the astrologers, 
 the magicians, the soothsayers, show unto the 
 king. (On rt:D» and T'^rl'^. ■*• ^^- " astrol- 
 ogers " and "magicians," see on chap. i. 20.) 
 
CHAP. II. 1^9. 
 
 Concerning the T'T^, "star-gazers," who are 
 for the first time expressly mentioned in this 
 place, see notes on verse 2. The word (from 
 ~T3, "to cut in," "incise;" cf. ~~ll^,, chap. iv. 
 14) primarily denotes "deciders," viz. : deciders 
 of fate, dispensers of decisive oracles concerning 
 the fortunes of men, hence aHrdogers. Com- 
 pare chap. iv. 4 ; V. 7, 11 ; also Isa. xlvii. 13, 
 from which passage it appears that the office of 
 the Babylonian astrologers was not confined 
 merely to horoscopy, but extended to every 
 kind of fortune-telling founded on the study of 
 the stars. The Vulg. haruspices is incorrect ; for 
 the signification of the Hebrew (and Arabic) 
 ~}3, " to cut in pieces," is foreign to the Aram. 
 "IJJ ; and haruspicy as a specifically priestly 
 function would seem rather to belong to the 
 Chaldaeans.^Ver.se 28. But there is a God in 
 heaven that revealeth secrets. These words 
 imply the total inability of the heathen gods as 
 well as of their priests and wise men, to reveal 
 secret things ; compare Isa. xli. 22 etseq.; xliii. 
 8; xlviii. o. etc.; Am. iii. 7; Hos. xii. 11. — 
 And maketh known to the king Nebuchad- 
 nezzar — though thiit monarch is a heathen; 
 compare the instances of Pharaoh (Gen. xx. 3 et 
 «eq. ; xli. 16 et seq. ), Balaam (Num. xxii. et 
 ■eq.), the E.astem Magi (Matt. ii. 1 et seq.). 
 The 1 in ~~^~': is explicative or particularizing, 
 't serves to introduce the transition from the 
 ifeueral truth to the special case in question. — 
 What shall be in the latter days, r-i-insa 
 ^'yZ^^ = Heb. =";^n r^nnsa, is neither, di- 
 rectly and without qualification, ''in the last 
 time " (Hitzig), nor yet "in the course of time, 
 in the future" generally (Maur., Hiiv.^ but, as 
 everywhere in the prophetic language of the Old 
 Testament (not e.xcepting Gen. xlix. 1 ; Num. 
 xxiv. 14), "in the Messianic future," — in the 
 future theocratic period of salvation. Kranich- 
 feld remarks correctly : " The writer at the out- 
 set of his prophetic announcement characterizes, 
 by the use of s'^-ii r'Tist", the whole matter 
 ts in relation to the Messianic destiny of his 
 people." — Thy dream, and the visions of thy 
 head. "^r^"}. ''".'n (cf. chap. iv. 2, 7, 10; vii. 
 I ) here designate the dream- vi.sions of the king, 
 not because they were begotten by his he.ad or 
 brain it a purely subjective manner, but because 
 God had originated them in connection with the 
 meditations of his head. The phrase is synony- 
 mous with "thy dream," and with the latter 
 forms a hendiadys, by virtue of their connection 
 by T ; the plural is used because the king had 
 seen a multiplicity of dreams (cf. verses 1, 2), 
 but is subordinated to the singular ■^jQin as the 
 leading conception, so that the following n3T 
 K^r is exclusively conformed to this ; cf . Winer, 
 § 49, G. — Verse 29. As for thee, O king, thy 
 thoughts came into thy mind (marg. '• came 
 np ") upon thy bed, i.e., presented themselves, 
 uncalled for as it were ; — a strikingly expressive 
 personifying phrase. On the form ^pis com- 
 pare chap. iii. 8; vi. 13; Ezra iv. 12.— The 
 r?"'"'?'^, ''thoughts," are by no means to be di- 
 
 rectly identified with the ' ' visions of thy head " 
 in the preceding verse ; they are, rather, merely 
 the psychical substratum of those visions, the 
 natural soil, as it were, from which the Divine 
 communication sprang forth during the dream 
 (correctly Ephraem, Maurer,Von Lengerke,Kran- 
 ichf.). The -^laab '3i^J-l at the close of th» 
 following verse, again, are probably something 
 different from both the iiji^y-i here mentioned, 
 and from those "visions of the head," They 
 are, most likely, as the context indicates, the 
 di.squietiug thoughts which occupied the king 
 after his dream, according to verse 1 (cf. chap. 
 V. 6). The pronoun of the second person r;B3S 
 (for which the Keri substitutes the later form 
 ^:K), which precedes in the nomin.-itive absolute, 
 is repeated by the suffix in '^!'3'i~3''i, in a man- 
 ner similar to that by which the introductory 
 absolute n:si, "and I," is resumed by "0, in 
 the next verse ; cf. the same construction, chap, 
 i. *7. — Verse 30. Not for any wisdom that I 
 have more than any living. This denies 
 every human agency in the imparting of such 
 superior knowledge to Daniel, and at the same 
 time refers to the design which governed it, con- 
 cerning which the latter half of the verse is 
 more explicit. — But for the intent that the in- 
 terpretation may be made known to the king 
 (margm); properly, "that they should make 
 known to the king." The indefinite, impersonal 
 plural 115-lin-| (Winer, § 49, 3) was probably 
 used with design, that the person of Daniel 
 might be as Kttle conspicuous as was possible, 
 in accordance with the thought in the former 
 half of the verse. Compare also chap. iv. 28. 
 
 Verses 31-3.5. The mbject of the dream, 
 and, more immediately, the general description, 
 in verse 31, of the imnne obsirred by the king. 
 Thou, O king, rawest, and behold a great image. 
 "Sawe.st," — literally, " wa,st seeing," wast in the 
 condition of one who beholds a vision ; cf . Winer, 
 §47, 1.— ^b^^, "behold," isa modification of 
 11^ (chap. vii. 5, 6), which, according, to some, 
 = the imperative ;)ht, "behold," but seems ra- 
 ther to be a pronominal form from the demonstr. 
 "^^ — ^s* i see Hupfeld in the Zeitschr. fur 
 Kiinde des Morgenl., II., 1.33,163. The Talmud 
 generally substitutes "'"H for either of these 
 forms.— The "image" (=b?). as the context 
 shows, designates a statue in the human form 
 an lii'Vi/nr ; also, in chap. iii. 1; cf. Isa. xliv. 
 13.— This great image, whose brightness 
 was excellent. In the Chaldee the words 
 "this image great and its brightness magnifi- 
 cent" are inserted as a parenthesis into the sen- 
 tence, " and behold a great image stood before 
 thee." The exceeding brightness of the image 
 results naturally from the metals which compose 
 it. — The form (rather " appearance ") thereof 
 was terrible ; this on account of its brightness 
 as well of its greatness ; compare Cant. vi. 4. — 
 Verse 32. This image's head was of fine gold. 
 Literally, "this image, its head," etc. The 
 position of the absolute **'?"?? ^<1^ at the begin- 
 ning of the sentence, is similar to verses 29, 30, 
 
76 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 and verses 33 J, 37, 42, etc. — The stat. constr. 
 CSI) ought properly to be repeated before ''1 
 the sign of the genitive ; cf. vii. 7. 19 ; also Psa. 
 xlv. 7; Ezra x. 13, etc. — Verse 33. His legs 
 of iron. On T'Cl^i "shanks," compare Cant. 
 V. 1.5. — His feet part of iron and part of clay j 
 literally. " of them of iron, and of them of clay." 
 In the Kethib the masculine suffix is appended 
 to the partitive l^i V"''? > liten-ise in verses 
 41 and 43. The Keri employs, in each of these 
 cases, the form Vi^ which the fem. b?"! might 
 lead us to aspect, but which must probably be 
 regarded as an easier reading. The masculine 
 suffix in "T^r^' like li'2n in verse 34, for ex- 
 ample, and like the suffix i-j,i in chap, vii 8, 
 19, must either be regarded as a common gender 
 (Hitzigi. or these masculine forms must be ex- 
 plained by a more general conception of the 
 subject, or by one modified according to the 
 sense, — in this case by transferring the thought 
 from the figure to the fact to which it relates, 
 i.e., the conception "foot" to the other idea 
 " kingdom," which is symbolized by it (so Kra- 
 nichf., following Ewald, LeJirb.,-p. 784, § 318,a). 
 — Verse 34. TUI that a stone was cut out. 
 Naturally a stone that lay on the side of a 
 mountain, from whence it rolled. This stone 
 enters suddenly and unannounced into the trans- 
 action ; as often happens in dreams. — With- 
 out hands, i.e., without human, but solely 
 through a supernatural and Divine agency ; com- 
 pare vii L 25, n^ 2???i also Job xxxiv. 20; 
 Lam. iv. H; Heb. ix. 11. — Verse 35. Then was 
 the iron, the clay, etc., broken to pieces to- 
 gether. ^pT instead of ^p'1 ; the lengthening 
 of the preceding vowel compensates for the 
 -^"i'- forte. The impersonal subject in the 
 plural ("they broke in pieces," cf. verse 30) 
 refers to the invisible supernatural powers, who 
 effected the appearance of the stone itself and 
 the consequent destination. The several compo- 
 nent parts of the image, iron, clay, etc.. are in this 
 place recited from below upward, because the 
 stone smote and crushed the feet first. — And be- 
 came like the chaff of the summer threshing- 
 floors; hence were totally demolished, annihila- 
 ted without leaving a vestige. Compare Hos. xiii. 
 3 ; Mic. iv. 13 ; Isa. .xli 15,16 ; Ivii. 13; Psa. i. 4; 
 XXXV. 5; Job. xxi. 18.--And the slone be- 
 came a great mountain. •^^~, moiiiitdiii, is the 
 Heb. -j^, ruck. On the hyperbolical phrase 
 "to fill the whole earth" (not merely "the 
 whole land." as Van Ess, and others) compare 
 John xxi. 25, and also the apocryphal parallels 
 in Fabric, Cod. Apocr. N. 7'., I., 331 seq. The 
 exaggeration, however, holds with regard to the 
 figure only, not to the symbolized reality, see 
 verse 44. 
 
 Verse 36. Transition, to the interpretation of 
 the ilrciim. We will tell the interpretation 
 thereof to the king. 'Tf*.'- in the plural, is 
 used because Daniel classes himself among the 
 worshippers of Jehovah, all of whom, as such, 
 have access to the mysteries of Divine reve- 
 lation. It is therefore an expression of modesty, 
 similar to that contained in verse 30. [Daniel 
 leems specially to refer to hia three companions, 
 
 who had been associated with him in prayer fol 
 the Di\'ine aid in recovering and expounding 
 the dream, verses 17, 18, 23.] 
 
 Verses 37-45. I'he interpretation. — Thou, O 
 king, art a king of kings. S'^rbo Tji?:, the gen- 
 eral title of Oriental sovereigns, e.g.. accord- 
 ing to the cuneiform inscriptions, among the 
 Persians (cf. Ezra vii. 13); among the Ethio- 
 pians of modem Abyssinia (Inscr., 5138) ; 
 and especially among the Babylonians ; com- 
 pare Ezek. xxvi. 7, where, as here, Nebu- 
 chadnezzar is termed a king of kings. For the 
 rest, the form "Thou, OKing" is taken np 
 again below, in verse 38 b, by S^n np:H ; for 
 which reason S«'^?bO T[b)p is reaUy to be re- 
 garded as in apposition, and the period extended 
 to the close of verse 38 ; for verse 37 b {'■'^, to 
 V"-^"'.) ^ merely a relative clause, and verse 
 38 a ('i'^'.^jI to TinbiB) is a parenthetical sup- 
 plement to it.*— The God of heaven hath 
 given thee a kingdom (or domimon), power, 
 and strength, and glory. For the connection 
 of the relative "'T with the pronoun of the 
 second person '^b, compare, e.g., Ecc. x. 16. On 
 the idea, chap. iv. 19; v. 18.— Verse 38. And 
 wheresoever the children cf men dwell, etc. 
 On ^""-1^1, "and wheresoever," compare the 
 essentially equivalent "'CSta, Judg. v. 27 ; Euth 
 i. 17; Job xxxix. 30. The inserted adverbial 
 ;3 strengthens the idea of the relation, as in 
 "1 brp-bS, etc.— Instead of T'^H'l "dweUing" 
 (part of -,?,•:: ; cf. the Heb. -i-^, " race, genera- 
 tion ") the Keri has here and in chap. iii. 31 ; iv. 
 32 ; vi. 26. V^"^", which form is usual in the 
 Targums. — Beasts of the field and fowls of the 
 heaven. This mention of the animals as also 
 subject to the great monarch, serves to enforce 
 and strengthen the corresponding statement 
 with reference to men ; similarly Jer. xxvii. 6 ; 
 xxviii. 14 — which passages Daniel probably had 
 in view; also Bar. iii. 16; Judith xi. 7, etc. — 
 [" Nebuchadnezz.ar's dominion did not. it is true, 
 extend over the whole earth, but perhaps over 
 the whole ci\-ilized world of Asia, over all thn 
 historical nations of his time ; and in this sensn 
 it was a world-kingdom, and as such, ■ the pro 
 totype and pattern, the beginning and primary 
 representative of all world-po%vers ' (Klief. )." — 
 Keil. " That this method of describing exten- 
 sive dominion was common to the Shemitic 
 dialects, is evident from Gen. i. 26 ; Psa. viii. 
 0-8; comp. Heb. ii. 7. 8." — .Siimrt.]— Thou art 
 this head of gold. [In S^n np:K the »^T is 
 an emphatic copula, as in verse 47. " It carries 
 a kind of demonstrative force with it, like that 
 of the Greek nirn-, and is equivalent to I'hou 
 art the very or that same." — Stuart. Strictly, 
 
 *[Keil takes the wime view of the cr>nstmction. Commeii- 
 tAiry, p. 104. The rendering of the whole clause would then 
 lie as follows; *'Thon, O Kinp, the kinp of kings (for the 
 God of heaven hath given to thee the kingdom, the power, 
 and the strength, and the glory: and wherever the suns t.f 
 nmn dvve.I. the lleil^<t of the field, and the fowl of the 
 heavens hath he given into thy hand, and hath mule the< 
 ruler over ihent allj — thou art the baud of gold."'] 
 
CHAP. II. 1-43. 
 
 77 
 
 the clause might be rendered, " Thou art it, the 
 head of gold," and this wonJd yield the exact 
 force of the expression. ] ReadHCS"; the form 
 nrx"; lor H'.l'N"', em Hitzig prefers) seems to 
 have been taken from verse .32. StUl, rwri 
 verse 20, might perhaps be adduced in support 
 of this readmg; see Hitz. on the passage. — The 
 reason why Daniel designates Nebuchadnezzar 
 himself as the golden head, instead of his king- 
 dom, lies simply in the fact that the first (even 
 though he were yet co-regent with his father 
 Nabopolassar ) gave to the Chaldasan empire its 
 glory and world-wide greatness and importance ; 
 80 that he could not only be considered the 
 founder of this first world-monarchy, but might i 
 also, in a measure, be identified with it. Espe- ■ 
 cially might this occur in the address of a , 
 speaker, who would ex-officio be compelled to 
 magnify his fame, because he stood before the 
 king in person, and in the presence of his court, i 
 How easily our author could identify a realm | 
 (^zb?!) with its sovereign C^??) is shown by 
 chap. vii. 17, where "four kings" is almost e.\- j 
 actly synonymous with "four kingdoms." — 
 Verse S'J. And after thee shall arise einother 
 kingdom inferior to thee. 5*".^ probably does i 
 not signify "earthward, toward the earth," as 
 is generally assumed; nor can we, with the 
 Keri, consider 5~» as an adverb.* It may be 
 taken instead, as a easvn adterbialis from 
 5T5 ( = Heb. i?"f"), "a low object," — analo- 
 gous to the adverbial S*??, " above, upward," 
 from I>, "height," chap. vi. 3; and as there 
 lina^ SiiS signifies " higher than they, above 
 them." so here "^J^p ''f "l** may mean " below, 
 inferior to thee." The characterizing of the 
 second kingdom as inferior to the first, which 
 Nebuchadnezzar represented, does not. however, 
 relate to its external power; for it is cer- 
 tainly also conceived of as a world-controlling 
 kingdom, a universal monarchy, as appears 
 abundantly from chap. vi. 26. Its inferiority to 
 the former kingdom can only consist in a lower 
 standard of morals, as also the third and fourth 
 kingdoms can only be regarded as below their 
 immediate predecessors in an ethical sense, but 
 not physically or politically. This follows with 
 the utmost clearness from the descending grada- 
 tion of gold, silver, brass, and iron, as compared 
 with he increasing magnitudes of the corre- 
 sponding parts, the head, breast, belly, and legs 
 of the image, a thought which lies at the 
 foundation of the whole description (cf. on verse 
 40, and especially Dogmat. -eth. deductions. 
 No. 3). Considering all this, it seems decidedly 
 Kupertluous and inappropriate to refer the second 
 kingdom to Belshazzar, as the successor of Ne- 
 buchadnezzar, and reserve the third for Medo- 
 Persia ( Hitzig, Heidelberg. Jahrh., 1832. p. 131 
 fE., and Redepenning, Stud, und Krit., 1833, p. 
 863). The suffix in '^7v? and in '^:'3 does not 
 
 *[Yet the author's explanation below amounts to this 
 
 Intorprctation of fci"*^^. which is substantially adopted 
 
 bj Geeenius and Fiirst as being the most natural and 
 ■groea ^le to the foim of the word.] 
 
 at all compel us to assume that only Nebuchad- 
 nezzar's reign is designated by the golden head; 
 and that therefore the breast of silver must re- 
 fer to his successor on the throne of Babylon- 
 Daniel probably conceived of the first and second 
 kingdoms as monarchies under the rule of a suc- 
 cession of kings, as well as the fourth (see 
 verses -43, 44) ; and the courtesy simply, which 
 he was obliged to observe toward the great 
 monarch who was personally before him, led 
 him, in this and the preceding verses, to mention 
 Nebuchadnezzar only as the representative of 
 the first kingdom (see above). — And cmotber, 
 third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule 
 over all the earth. Its ethical inferiority to 
 both its predecessors is indicated by the brass, 
 while the relative clause »J1»t-br2 obin ■'T 
 (compared with verse 38 a) seems to imply that 
 the extent of its power should even exceed 
 theirs. It may be remarked, in passing, how 
 clearly this indicates the Macedonian world- 
 monarchy. — Verses 40-43. The fourth kingdom, 
 corre»}wnding to the fourth bensl, chap. vii. 7 et 
 seq. , and like it signifying the divided G^reek 
 supremacy under the successors of Alex, the great. 
 The fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron. 
 On the relation of the form S*;^^r1 in the 
 Kethib, which is analogous to the usage of the 
 Syriac, to the purer Chaldaic Keri ~^<y■'S■^ (here 
 and chap. iii. 2.5; vii. 7, 23), see Kranichfeld on 
 the passage. The following explains the mean- 
 ing of the predicate "strong as iron. — Foras- 
 much as iron breziketh in pieces and subdueth 
 all thingsj rather, " crusheth all things." 
 ^■^ b:p"b3 is clearly not to be taken in its 
 usual signification, "since," but comparatively, 
 "Justus;" compare chap. vi. H. The opinion 
 that it stands here in its usual sense as = be- 
 cause (Kranichf. , etc.), is oppo.sed by the 
 Athnach imder the preceding Stbl"]E3, which 
 shows that " to break in pieces and crush every- 
 thing " is not merely stated to be a constant pro- 
 perty of iron, but has its application to the 
 nature of the fourth kingdom. [Red labors at 
 length to sustain this iUatire rather than Ulustra- 
 tire sense of ""I Zi;?"-2, but the arguments on 
 both sides are very trivial, and the difference is 
 not important.] — As iron that breake'.h in 
 pieces all these, shall it break in pieces and 
 bruise. The rr-iJi-^T sbT-.2r^ is no "offen- 
 sive and dragging repetition of the already 
 completed comparison," but rather serves to 
 powerfully emphasize the iron-like destructive 
 character of the fourth kingdom. The hardness 
 and firmness of iron, however, and still more its 
 solidity and durability, are not involved in the 
 comparison, so much as its destructive power, as 
 appears from the multiplication of verbs that 
 express the idea of destroying {'r>'\r[, to diride. 
 bTn, to crush, j;^, to break in pieces- -the first 
 and last of which are repeated). Vbs'bS, 
 " all these," an individuahzing resumption ol 
 the more general sbs, does not belong to the 
 relative clause JJ-^.);— 'T HbT-iCri (Kranichf), 
 but to ?1~1 P~P, which verbs would otherwise 
 stand too disconnected at the close of the verse. 
 
iS 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 There is nothing suspicious in the fact that, by 
 this construction a breaking to pieces of "all 
 these," — i.e., the materials already mentioned, 
 gold, sUver, etc. — by the fourth kingdom, is 
 stated ; for it does not assert the destruction of 
 all former kingdoms m such, but only the in- 
 creasing diminution and shattering of their poli- 
 tico-ethnological material The passage thus 
 merely represents, in general, the separating and 
 destructive influence which, naturally to its own 
 injiiry, emanates from the fourth kingdom. 
 The way is thus paved for the description which 
 follows, of the divisions, internal confusion, and 
 weakness of that kingdom (verses ^\-i'A). — Verse 
 41. And whereas thou sawest the feet aai toes, 
 part of potter's clay. I'i"?'? as in verse 33. 
 The addition of inS"'^, " of the potter," to 
 
 ^pn> "clay," strengthens the conception of 
 weakness and lack of power which is implied in 
 that term. The same idea results from the 
 genitive combination St:"'13 C]Cn, " miry clay, 
 potsherds." which occurs at the end of the 
 verse ; it designates the finished work of the 
 potter (Vulg. testa), which, as sherd, is capable 
 of being easily broken. — The kingdom shall be 
 divided, i. e. , a kingdom that contains in itself 
 the principle of an increasing disruption and 
 self-division. The dual number of the legs, 
 which might have been made to indicate such 
 division (especially if the colossus were con- 
 ceived as standing with widely-extended legs), 
 is, evidently, not regarded by the composer. 
 Nothing but the mixture of iron and clay forms 
 the symbol of division in his view ; and this 
 mixture, according to him, pertains only to the 
 feet, and does not extend to the legs, which are 
 represented in verse 33 a, as composed entirely 
 of iron. This indicates that the division, al- 
 though its principle was inherent in the iron- 
 kingdom (see on the preceding verse),* should 
 only be thoroughly manifested, and its ruinous 
 consequences become apparent in the course of 
 the development of thi.s kingdom ; facts which 
 were verj- fuDy realized in the history of the 
 Macedonian empire after Alexander, whose rulers 
 endeavored to maintain the unity of the realm 
 down to the battle of Ipsus. although engaged 
 in many conflicts and bloody quarrels with each 
 other, and which only, from the period of that 
 event, permanently dissolved into a number of 
 kingdoms (originally four, from which, how- 
 ever, a constantly increasing number of smaller 
 independent states was developed). Compare 
 infra. — But there shall be in it of the strength 
 of iron. Luther renders "of the iron's pltint," 
 corresponding to StSS"': in the Targums, and to 
 the Syr. nezbeto (of. also Theodot. inrii rfjc pit^T/r, 
 and Vulg. : de plantaris). But S*"'??? is pro- 
 bably derived from -2"; in Pa. " to fortify, 
 strengthen," — and therefore to be rendered 
 firmness, strength (cf. -"'2'^, firm, certain, vs. 
 ti and 45 ; also chap. iii. 24 ; vi. 13, etc.), rather 
 than from -?:, to plant. — Verse 42. And as the 
 
 toes of the feet -were part of iron, and part ol 
 clay. The nominative which precedes is really 
 disconnected (cf. verse 32), but. since it is in 
 comparison with the latter half of the verse, 
 "as," or " just as," it may properly be supplied. 
 The composition of even the toes out of the fatal 
 mixture of iron and clay, indicates the weakness 
 of the feet which support the great colossus, 
 despite the fact that iron enters into its con- 
 stitution throughout, as a principal element. 
 i That Daniel, while mentioning the toes, already 
 refers to the ten kings of the Seleucidce, who 
 are represented later I chap. vii. 7, 24) as the ten 
 horns of the fourth beast, cannot be certainly 
 shown. At any rate, he follows this thought no 
 further, as will be seen from the fact that while 
 he mentions the toes, he does not premise their 
 tenfold number (cf. Hitzig on this passEige, 
 against Hengstenb., p. 211. The latter clearly 
 forces the symbol of the toes too far). — So the 
 kingdom shall be partly strong, and partly 
 brittle (margin). Concerning r^p ■?:, "chiefly, 
 partly," see on chap. i. 2. — Verse 43. They shall 
 mingle themselves 'with the seed of men; i.e., 
 the several kingdoms, or rather their rulers, shall 
 seek to establish harmony by means of marriage 
 and voluntary relationship (hence in this way of 
 sexual propagation). * On the expression, com- 
 pare Jer. xxxi. 27 ; on the subject, chap, xi 6 
 et seq. and 17, where the prophet enters more 
 fully into the subject here referred to, of the 
 adoption of the marriage policy, and of its 
 failure. — But they shall not cleave one to an- 
 other, even as iron is not mixed w^ith clay ; 
 properly, "does not mingle itself with clay." 
 The reflexive Ithpaal of -"" designates the 
 process of mixing or uniting itself, whde the 
 Pael, employed above in verse 41 b, expresses a 
 passive sense. This involves the idea that the 
 elements of iron and clay might be externally 
 mixed, but could not be internally united, 
 because their qualities do not blend, i.e., they 
 contribute nothing themselves to their coherence 
 and permanent union. — Verses 44, 4.5. I'lu fifth, 
 or Messianic kingdom. And in the days of 
 these kings ; hence, while these kings, the 
 Seleucidse, Lagidse, and the other Diadochi, are 
 still reigning ; and therefore not without being 
 involved in strife and conflict with them : cf. 
 b, and chap. vii. 13, 2.5 et seq. ; viii. 10 et seq. ; 
 ix. 24 et seq. — Shall the God of heaven set up 
 a kingdom. On "God of heaven," compare 
 on verses 18 and 37. The highest and only true 
 God appears there as the originator and supreme 
 lord of fill kingdoms (cf. verse 21 ) ; but this fifth 
 and last kingdom alone, is, in the fuU sense of 
 the word and with unqualified truth, a kingdom 
 of specifically divine and heavenly character 
 This implies its miraculous origin as well as its 
 never-ending duration. — The kingdom (rather, 
 "its dominion"!) shall not be left to other 
 
 * [" 3bC alwayB in Hebr., nnd often in Chald.. sipnifies 
 thf unnatural or violent division arising from inner UOtnar' 
 miini/ III- illKcurJ : i:f. Gen. x. a"i: Psa. iv. 10 : Job xxx-iTli. 
 25; and LeriK' , C'lald. Worlerb.. s. \.—Kell.l 
 
 * [Keil, however, contends, with Klicf., that the mixina 
 is not solely nor properly on the part of the kings, but ii 
 only spoken of the vain efforts of the heterogeneous elementB 
 of the fourth kingdom to coalesce bj* juxtaposition or even 
 by intermarriage among themselves, 'i he general char 
 
 acter of 1*il")"n?C, and especially the fact that 'to gubjea 
 
 for it is expressed in the text, favor the opinion that both 
 references are intended, namely, to the rulers a-s well as the 
 people.] 
 t [The authorized rendering, however, is correct, if, wit* 
 
CHAP. n. 1^9. 
 
 79 
 
 people. This had occurred at the end of each 
 of the former kingdoms ; compare Ecclus. x. 18. 
 The ce.ssation of such transfers of dominion cir- 
 cumscribes the idea of eternal duration in a re- ; 
 alizing manner. The term ^-?P in ""'l-r?^ j 
 is evidently no longer used in the same sense as I 
 before, but signifies "dominion," "govern- 
 ment." The suffix does not refer to the God of i 
 heaven as the founder of the kingdom (Theodo- 
 tion, ;) lianu-tin avroij, but to the kingdom itself, j 
 — It shall break in pieces and consume all 
 these kingdoms. IlOri is literally, " and bring j 
 to an end " — annihilate them. The Divine king- 
 dom is not merely to destroy the fourth world- 
 kingdom, but also the three that preceded it, 
 inasmuch as all had been incorporated with the 
 former ; which is sho\vn by the figure of the 
 stone that crushes the legs of the colossus, and 
 thereby destroys the whole image. All these [ 
 kingdoms are thus described as arrayed in hostile [ 
 opposition to the divine kingdom, and as objects 
 of its destructive influence ; but this does not 
 prevent the existence of certain gradations in I 
 their hostility to God and in their untheocratic 
 tendencies; nor that, for instance, the golden 
 head (Babylon) and the breast of silver (Medo- 
 Persia) show greater favor and ethical approxi- 
 mation to God's people, than the brazen 
 belly, etc. Compare supra, on verse 39 — Verse 
 45. Forasmuch as thou sawest that the stone 
 was cut out of the mountain, etc. "'T b^p'iS 
 is employed here as in v. 40, in a comparative 
 sense, like "'r?^?, "accordingly," or "foras- 
 much." From this usage results a closer con- 
 nection of the former half of this verse (as far as 
 '*r^ni) with what precedes it. The somewhat 
 loosely connected and abrupt position which the 
 second period, beginning with 2"i ^^^t, is thus 
 made to occupy, need not deter us from this 
 construction (against Hitzig and Kranichf.), 
 which was employed by all the old translators 
 (and also by Luther, Dereser, Von Leng. , Maur., 
 etc.). — On the subject compare Matt xxi. 44; 
 Luke XX. 18, where Jesus clearly refers this 
 Messianic prophecy to him.self and his kingdom. 
 — The (rather "a"j great God hath made 
 known to the king, etc. " A great God," says 
 Daniel, because he desires to refer to the infinite 
 power of that God, who is not only able to dis- 
 close wonderful revelations respecting the 
 future, but also to bring his promises to pass. 
 The mode of expression is not exactly poetical, 
 as Kranichfeld supposes, but generalizing. But 
 compare S«3"! S^nj*^, with the article, Ezra v. 8. 
 [On the contrary, Keil more justly remarks, 
 "That ;i .Tj^jt means, not 'a (undefined) great 
 God,' but t/ie great Ood in heaven, whom Daniel 
 had already (verse 28) announced to the king as 
 the revealer of secrets, is obvious." The sign 
 
 most editions of the Masoretic text, we read nn^3b?a^, as 
 
 the emphatic sraie simply ; but if with others, we read 
 
 nrt^S^^I, as the stijrixed state, we mast translate its 
 
 realm or dominion. We may adduce, as an objection to 
 
 'he latter, such a variation in the sense of n^D^TS in the 
 
 lame verse, as well ait the unusual and somewhat tauto- 
 ofdcal application of the pronominal suffix to ita own noun 
 as an antecedeut, i,^., tfic kingdom'^ kingdom.] 
 
 of definiteness (us the art. in Heb.) is omitted 
 on the general principle that the construction 
 by a qualifying adjective renders the term suffi- 
 ciently definite, inasmuch as there could be no 
 doubt what deity is referred to.] — What shall 
 come to pass hereafter. M;"! '''l.ns, "after 
 this, hereafter," refers specially to the time of 
 Daniel and Nebuchadnezzar ( cf . v. 29 ), and not 
 merely to the incident in the former half of the 
 verse, as Hitzig contends, in order to find here 
 an additional trace of the composition of this 
 book in Maccabsan times. — And the dream is 
 certain, and the interpretation thereof sure. 
 This is an emphatic affirmation at the close of 
 the truly prophetic character of the dream and 
 of the interpretation that had been submitted. 
 The predicate 2''2'^ with 6<'9rn hardly refers, 
 as Kranichfeld supposes, to the fact that the 
 king had forgotten the particulars of his dream, 
 and now recovered them accurately and per- 
 fectly. It is better to hold, in harmony with 
 the preceding context, that Daniel aims to set 
 forth the trustworthiness and prophetic force of 
 the dream, as he afterward certifies the correct- 
 ness of the interpretation by T?'^C"?> " faithful, 
 trustworthy." 
 
 Verses 4(5-49. T/ie influence of Daniel's inter- 
 preUition. Then the king Nebuchadnezzar fell 
 upon his face, and worshipped Daniel. Evi- 
 dently T?P does not here signify a mere 
 —poaKivr/aic, such as was sometimes offered to 
 men (cf. Gen. xxxiii. 7 ; 2 Sam. xxv. 23 ; 1 Kings 
 i. 16; Est. iii. 2), but rather a properly divine 
 adoration (/ar/jfia), as is shown by the connected 
 religious acts of sacrifice and burning incense. 
 This he offers to Daniel as a great prophet of 
 the highest God (see v. 47), and not because he 
 considered him a god in human form, as the in- 
 habitants of Lystra regarded Paul and Barnabas 
 (Acts xiv. 13 et seq. ). For this reason the course 
 of Daniel is unlike that of the apostles on the 
 latter occasion. He no more rejects the homage 
 of the heathen king, than did the high-priest 
 Jaddua. when Alexander the great bowed him- 
 self to the earth before him, in order to honor 
 the God of Israel (Josephus, Anti. XI. 8, 5) ; at 
 any rate, he has not definitely recorded that he 
 protested against it and pointed from himself, 
 the human instrument, to his God — which 
 might, however, be explained on the ground of 
 his abbreviating style (cf. on v. 15 et seq.). 
 [We must not forget that Daniel had already ex- 
 plicitly disclaimed before the king the posses- 
 sion of supernatural powers as of himself (verse 
 36), and had repeatedly ascribed foreknowledge 
 to God alone (verses 28, 45). ] The opinion of 
 Geier, Calov, and others, that Nebuchadnezzar 
 merely worshipped in the presence of Daniel, 
 without addressing his homage to the prophet 
 ( — as if 3 T30 were synonymous with DTp ), 
 must be rejected ; and no less the assertion of 
 Hitzig, that the objective aim of the Maccabaean 
 compiler is again betrayed in this instance, by 
 the "highly improbable behavior of the 
 king" (! V).* — And commanded that they 
 
 * Porphyry early took offence at this passage, but hifl 
 objection was properly dispatched by Jerome in a pointed 
 manner: '^ Hunc locum calumirutiur Forphyriua, qitM 
 
50 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 should ofifer an oblation and sweet odours 
 unto him. "CD, in the Pael ' ' to pour out, deal 
 out, lihare " (not " to dedicate, offer," as Hitzig, 
 with au unnecessary reference to the corre- 
 sponding Arabic verb, prefers), is zeugmatic in 
 this place, and relates not only to the bringing 
 of the f'H^rs, "meat-offering," which included 
 an aotuaHi'Aacc, but also the "p'7n''3, 8.«.,sweet- 
 smelUng savors, offerings of incense, which 
 were connected with all meat-offerings. The 
 offering of incense, therefore, which was really 
 implied in the nn:!a (Lev. ii 1, 15, etc.), is 
 again explicitly noticed, in like manner as the 
 r"t3f3 is specially mentioned beside the ni; and 
 the "H?'?, in Ex. xxx. 9. On the term Hini; 
 (literally " satisfaction, pleasantness "), here 
 used eUiptically without Hi-i, which is con- 
 stantly joined to it in the Hebrew (cf. Ezra vi. 
 10, Cbaldee text), see Gesenius-Dietr. in the 
 Hnndicijrterbi/ch, — The tropical conception of 
 the offering of sacrifice and incense as a purely 
 civic testimonial of honor (Bertholdt) is de- 
 cidedly improper, and leads to a rationalizing of 
 the passage hostile to both the language and the 
 context. Compare the well-known Persian 
 custom of offering sacrifices to kings as the repre- 
 sentatives of Ormuzd, which is mentioned in Cur- 
 tius, VIII. .5, 6 ; VI. 6, 2 ; Arrian, VI. 27 —Verse 
 47. Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of 
 gods. On CICp'Ifp see above, on v. 8 ; compare 
 Dio'pa, Judg. ix. 15 ; also Jer. xxii. 13.— "iT 
 stands emphatically before the remark, similar 
 to liTi in the Greek, but has greater significance 
 than the latter. "God of gods" does not, in 
 the mouth of the heathen Nebuchadnezzar, 
 designate the only true God (Von Leng.), but the 
 mightiest of all gods. The phrase here ex- 
 presses a different sense from chap. xi. 3(3 ; Psa. 
 cxxxvi. 2; Deut. x. 17. — Verse 48. Then the 
 king made Daniel a great man. ■'3"1 the Pael 
 of "3"', " to become great" (chap. iv. 8). hence, 
 " to make great, exnltare." [" It is more fuUy 
 defined by the following clauses. " — Keil.\ — And 
 made him ruler over the whole province of 
 Babylon ; not as Von Leng. supposes, over the 
 whole kingdom, but simply over the province, 
 '<;"'l':, therefore, as in chap, iii 2. The be- 
 stowal of a formal governorship or satrapy is 
 not implied in the verb ♦-brst here, or in v. 38. 
 What really was conferred on the prophet, was 
 probably merely a decisive influence over the 
 administration of the province of Babylon, as is 
 illustrated by v. 49. [StiU this civil appoint- 
 ment, in distinction from the literary or profes- 
 sional one immediately added, was tantamount 
 to an official position as recognized vice-regent 
 ever the province in which the capital was 
 situated.] — And chief of the governors over all 
 the wise men of Babylon. l^:3D"'i still 
 
 tmmquam superttUHmwi rex capuvum adoraverit : quasi 
 noil et J.yraouen ith Hiffnoruvi magnitudinem Paulo et 
 It'll nabfv ntiliierbu hoHlas immolare. Krrm- ergo Gen- 
 titium^ qui omnt quoil supra se e^t DeoH putaJit, Scrip- 
 lur<K nou debet iviputare, qum iiinpUcUer re/ert univerta 
 V^im /letita Hunt.^* 
 
 depends on riKbzn, which verb therefore zeng. 
 matically designates, first his elevation to politi- 
 cal power, and then to the dignity of chief priest. 
 150 (related to i^zc, periclitari, tentare, in the 
 Heb. vtiUtati esse, offlcia praestare ; cf. ItCi 
 minister) is equivalent to ' ' business-manager, 
 president, overseer;" a T':3y~n is therefore a 
 superintendent or chief prefect, and the "Eab- 
 Signin over all the wise men of Babylon " ac- 
 cordingly seems to have been identical with the 
 3a"i'1 or "chief magian " mentioned in Jer. 
 xxxix. 3. On the probable identity of the terms 
 TiaiSn and t3-'3n: and the relation of both to 
 ^"'Ir?, see above on v. 2. — Verse 49. Then 
 Daniel requested of the king, and he set, etc. 
 ■^i^l properly, " and (so) he set ;" for t must be 
 joined to the imperfect, in order to express the 
 sense of "that " (Winer, § 44, 4). X^S therefore 
 signifies an effectual asking in this passage, a 
 prevailing with the king. — Over the affairs of 
 the province of Babylon, sri"';!', "man- 
 agement of business, administration " (of. fil^S 
 Tlj^n, 1 Chron. xxvi. 30). The effect of this 
 " placing over the administration of the pro- 
 vince of Babylon," was, evidently, to include the 
 three friends of Daniel among the "D^cbc ^3 
 "^-'I'Pi chap. iii. 2, whatever may have 
 been their official title. But their elevation to 
 the rank of Shiltonim to the king involved no 
 receding on the part of Daniel from the political 
 dignity conferred on him, according to v. 48 
 (Porphyry. Berth., Hitz., etc.). It rather serves 
 to illustrate the powei-ful influence of the new 
 roj'al favorite and councillor. But Daniel was 
 only this, not an actual chief satrap of Babylon, 
 to whom the three friends might have been sub- 
 ordinate. See V. 48, and compare chap. iii. 12, 
 which clearly indicates that Daniel did not 
 belong to the number of prominent civU 
 functionaries of the province of Babylon. 
 [On the contrary, the passage here referred to 
 only shows that Daniel's three friends were, as 
 here stated, the persons directly responsible for 
 the civil functions in a certain district ; evi- 
 dently as subordinates under some single higher 
 officer, who in this case could be no other than 
 Daniel himself — a personage too high for direct 
 impeachment by these officious underlings.] — ■ 
 But Daniel sat in the gate of the king, i.e., 
 within the boimds of his palace, at his court. 
 Compare Tji^jn 15a Est. ii. 1, 9, 21 ; iii. 2 et 
 seq. ; also ai !ri'/.oi (of the Medo-Persian court), 
 Cyrojmdia, VIII. 1, and the Turkish "Porte," 
 — and generally, Eosenmiiller, Altes 11. Neue.i 
 Morgeidand, III. 399 ff. Incorrectly Bertholdt 
 and Gesenius (Jes<ims. i. G97), "He became iu- 
 tendant of the royal castle," — on which Hiiver- 
 nick remarks, with justice : " It is hardly con- 
 ceivable how such nonsense could be imputed to 
 our book." [" The chief ruler of the province 
 had a number of v-ajixoi, nnder-nfficen. in the 
 province for the various branches of the govern- 
 ment. To such offices the king appointed Dan- 
 iel's three friends at his request, so that he 
 
CHAP. II. 1-49. 
 
 81 
 
 might himself be able as chief ruler to reside 
 continually at the court of the kin g ." — Eeil.] 
 
 ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAJi PRINCIPLES RELATED 
 TO THE HISTORY OF SALVATION, APOLO- 
 GETICAL REMARKS, AND HOMILETICAL SUG- 
 GESTIONS. 
 
 We are compelled, in view of the great im- 
 portance of the image of the monarchies for a 
 correct estimate of the Messianic and practical 
 bearing of all that follows, to separate our dog- 
 matical and ethical observations on this vision 
 into several sections. Accordingly, we treat 
 first of its form ; next of the ciirumstnitces of the 
 times, which afforded suitable analogies for its 
 prophetico-historical composition ; in the third 
 place, of the symholwn of the image as a whole ; 
 fourthly, of the interpreUition of the four world- 
 kingdoms, and especially of the second, third, 
 and fourth ; and finally, of the relation of the 
 prophetic vision to the history of the founding 
 and development of the Messianic kingdom — the 
 whole to be followed by practical homiletical 
 remarks. 
 
 1. Tlie fyrm of Nehuchaiinez!ar' » vision is 
 distinguished from that of almost all the other 
 prophetic visions of the Old Testament, by the 
 peculiarity, that it is a dream-vision, under 
 which mysterious form its highly important pro- 
 phetic contents are revealed first to a powerful 
 henthea monarch. The dreams of certain 
 heathen princes of patriarchal times, e.g., of 
 Abiraelech, Laban, and Pharaoh (Gen. xx. 3 ; 
 xxxi. 2-1; xli. 1 et seq. ), present the only anal- 
 ogy to this fact, so far as they were divinely 
 occasioned, and had a direct reference to the 
 fortunes of God's people. But their contents 
 lack the rich, lively dramatic and symbolic char- 
 acter of this vision ; and in the double dream of 
 Pharaoh, the single instance where this approxi- 
 mately exists (Gen. xli.), we miss the far-reach- 
 ing vision that covers all history, and the wealth 
 of Messianic references, by which the dream- 
 vision under consideration is so remarkably dis- 
 tinguished. The ob.servation of Hiivemick 
 (Komm., p. 43 et seq.) respecting the dreams of 
 heathen persons in the Scripture history, al- 
 though instructive and worthy of approval in 
 other respects, has only a partial application in 
 this case : ' ' We often ( ?) make the observation 
 in the Scriptures, that whenever it became 
 necessary to magnify the theocracy and the 
 kingdom of God on earth — which could only be 
 aided to accomplish its final destiny by means 
 of miracles, — and %vhenever the welfare of the 
 faithful required a special interference, revela- 
 tions were imparted to heathen and unbelievers, 
 and generally by means of dreams. Compare 
 Gen, XX. 3 (where it is expressly stated, with 
 reference to Abimelech, '131 3-n;t< 8<;"''')i 
 xxxi. 24; xli.; Judg. vii. 13, 14. At the 
 same time, the Scriptures assign as the reason 
 for such revelations the Kuhjtctire aim, ' to with- 
 draw man from his purpose, and hide pride from 
 man,' Job xxxiii. 17. This Divine purpose was 
 directly favored by the solemn awe with which 
 the heathen world regarded dreams (unipoi Seim, 
 }rti't-iu~Tnr), US is proven by the characteristic 
 aud probably proverbial expression of Homer : 
 Kdl yap -' bvap in Adi cartv l^ll. I. 63) ; of. further, 
 6 
 
 II. II. 26 et seq. ; Odys. VI. 13 et seq. ; xxiv. 
 11, 12; Herod. VII. 16; also Knapp, Scripta 
 varia arg., p. 103 ss. ; Bosenmiiller, ^4. u. iV. 
 MargeiU., III. 33 et seq. ; Jahn, I^inl. i)is A. T., 
 II. 391 et seq." — An instructive article in the 
 Evangel. Missions-Magazin, 1863, No. 1, which 
 was written by Ostertag and entitled Der 
 Traum und seine Wirknug in der Heidenwelt, 
 treats of the important part which dreams 
 continuaUy play in the religious life of heathen- 
 dom, aud more especially, when it is aroused and 
 influenced by Christian missionary efforts. Cf. 
 also Delitzsch, Bibl. Psycholog ie, § 14, p. 283 et 
 seq. , and SpUttgerber, SMif iind Tod, neist den 
 damit ziisammenMngenden Erscheinungen des 
 Seelenlebens (Halle, 1806), p. 144 et seq. The 
 two latter distinguish more carefully than 
 Hiivemick, in the above passage, the dreams 
 inspired merely by conscience and those of a 
 divinely caused and presaging ch.iracter, which 
 were more frequent within the domain of 
 heathendom, from the dreams of revelation in 
 the proper sense, whose occurrence was mucti 
 less common among gentile nations, being gen- 
 erally limited in the Old and Xew Testaments 
 to the people of God. Among the former class 
 they reckon, e.g., the dreams of Pharaoh ; among 
 the latter, the dreams of Nebuchadnezzar, in 
 chap. ii. and iv. of our prophet. 
 
 The important circumstance must be observed, 
 in this connection, that Nebuchadnezzar's 
 dream-vision relating to the four world-king- 
 doms was evidently imparted to this heathen 
 monarch while in a state of violent and guilty 
 terror, but in so confused and indefinite a form 
 as to exceed his understanding, and as even to 
 prevent a clear reproduction of its nature by 
 the unaided efforts of his memory. In both re- 
 spects he was compelled to seek the aid of an 
 Israelitish prophet, as au instrument of the only 
 true God to make known the purport of His 
 revelation (cf. supra, on vs. 1 and 3). This 
 feature is certainly remarkable, but by no 
 means incomprehensible. The heathen experi- 
 enced but a single impulse in the ditection of 
 prophecy ; the clearly connected description and 
 analysis of the image of the future which he 
 had seen were reserved for the spiritual art of 
 the theocratic seer. The startling impression 
 which had been made on the mind of the king 
 while dreaming, by the appearance of the bright 
 colossus, its sudden fall, and its total destruc 
 tiou and annihilation predominated to an extens 
 that destroyed his recollection, and left him, ou 
 awaking, with a mere sense of having seen 
 something highly important and of great signi- 
 ficance for his own future and for that of his 
 kingdom. It was natural that this should at 
 once give rise to the wish to recall the vision 
 clearly, in o:der to ascertain more fully what it 
 might portend ; and that this desire should 
 finally excite such alarm as to banish sleep. His 
 condition is not without many parallels in the 
 history of man's spiritual life. The Egyptian 
 ruler had, indeed, retained the contents of his 
 prophetic dreams, and required Joseph for the 
 purpose merely of interpreting their meaning ; — 
 in connection with which the much less start- 
 ling character of the dreams must be regarded. 
 But in more recent times many instances have 
 been recorded, in which significeint dreams were 
 forgotten, — either whoUy, or so far as details 
 
THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 were concerned, — while they left a powerful im- 
 pression in the mind of the dreamer (cf. Reitz, 
 Hiitorie der Wiedergeborenen, I., p. 132 et seq. ; 
 Schubert, SymboUkdes Traums, p. 211 [3ded.] ; 
 by the same, Geschickte der Sede, II., p. 94 et 
 seq. ; Splittgerber, as above, p. 118 et seq.). 
 And the ancient Roman poet Attius (Cicero, de 
 diciiiitat., II. 21) has at least described the alarm 
 produced, on the sudden awaldng of the subject, 
 by an impressive dream, in a manner which 
 thoroughly recalls the behavior of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar as described in this chapter : 
 
 ** Rex ipse Pricnmuf sonuiio mentis metu 
 
 Percul^un, curia sumpttts suspirantibu9 
 
 Exuacrificaiiat /losliis balayttibus. 
 
 Turn cojijectorem pofttutat^ pacem petens^ 
 
 Ut se edoceret^ obsecrans Apollinem, 
 
 Quo sese veritmt tanUE sortes itomnium.^ 
 
 In view of all this there is nothing in the ex- 
 ternal form and dress of Nebuchadnezzar's vision 
 that removes it materially beyond the influence 
 of conditioning circumstances, such as are else- 
 where apparent in the surroundings of projihetic 
 dream-visions. Consequently the credibility of 
 the narrative cannot be assailed on psychologi- 
 cal grounds, nor on any other ; and the attempt 
 of Von Lengerke. Bleek, Hitzig, and others, to 
 Ktamp it as an imitation of the history of 
 Pharaoh and Joseph, designed to encourage and 
 strengthen the faith of the Israelites in the time 
 of Antiochus Epiphanes, must especially be re- 
 jected, as being decidedly arbitrary, since the 
 peculiarities in the conduct and character of 
 Nebuchadnezzar by far exceed the traits he 
 manifests in common with his precursor 
 Pharaoh, and also with his alleged imitator 
 Antiochus, 
 
 2. In regard to the points of connection w/iicfi 
 existed in tlie state of the uorld for the prophetic 
 image of Nebuchndnesznr' s drenm, see Kranich- 
 f eld's observation on v. 10 : "It is not recorded, 
 as being unessential, how much information, in 
 regard to his spiritual state at the time of the 
 dream, the king imparted to the wise men, nor 
 yet how much they were able to apprehend 
 themselves in view of the political aspect of the 
 times. The historical point of departure for the 
 knowledge of the dream as a revelation, is found 
 in a consideration that must pre-eminently con- 
 cern a king as such, at the beginning of a newly- 
 founded realm, and in the presence of a power- 
 ful and threatening contiguous state, viz. : the 
 •(uestion respecting the fate of his dynasty and 
 •if his kingdom." Cf. page 120 : " But the politi- 
 cal constellation, even in the early years of 
 Nebuchadnezzar's reign, was not of a nature to 
 •>revent the writer from recognizing a powerful 
 rival of the Chaldsean empire in the Median 
 kingdom. Isaiah and Jeremiah had already 
 pointed to the nations of the north, or specifi- 
 cally to Persia (Elam) and Media as the executors 
 of the judgment that should come upon Babylon, 
 cf. Isa. xiii. 17 ; 21, 2 ; Jer. 1. 3, 9. 41 ; 11. 11, 28.— 
 Above all. Media stood as a powerful rival to the 
 Chaldsean kingdom upon the historical arena, at 
 the time of Nebuchadnezzar's entrance. The 
 Medes were allied with the Babylonians in the 
 destruction of Nineveh, and in that joint under- 
 taking of an earlier period were already able to 
 render powerful a.ssistance ; there are even in- 
 dications that on that occasion the Babylonians 
 saw the direction of their military enterprises 
 principally in the hands of the Medea. They 
 
 shared with the Babylonians in the poiseBsioD 
 of the Assyrian empire — the latter taking the 
 western portion, while the former claimed chiefly 
 the regions east and north-ea.st of the Tigris. 
 How greatly Nebuchadnezzar was obliged to 
 dread the power of his neighbor is shown by hii 
 fortifications in the north, which were begun 
 soon after his accession to the throne, and prose- 
 cuted with vigor during the greater part of his 
 reign (cf. Xiebuhr, GescJi. Assurs und BabeU ji. 
 218 et seq., p. 223); an Elamitic-Median WiU 
 against Babylon appears to have transpired a« 
 early as the 11th or 12th year of his reign." — If 
 to these observations on the relations of Babylon 
 to Medo-Persia, we add the remarks of the same 
 exegete in relation to Javan, i.e.. Greece, which 
 was looming up in the distant political horizon 
 of Nebuchadnezzar, and remember, that his 
 western rival and probable successor to the 
 power and greatness of Medo-Persia might be 
 well known to a Chaldfean king about B. C. flOO 
 — since Sennacherib had already been engaged 
 in a warm contest with an army of Greek mer- 
 cenaries in Cilicia, about a century before ; 
 since further, such mercenaries were accus- 
 tomed to serve in the Assyrian armies from the 
 time of Esar-haddon. and in the Egyptian from 
 the time of Psammetichus, and since the Lydian 
 kings were involved in exhaustive and bloody 
 wars with the loniaus, Dorians, and iEolians of 
 Western Asia from about B. C. GIO (see Ilei'od., 
 1.6; II, 152, 163, 169; Abydenus, in Euseb. 
 Armen. ed. Anchor, I. , p. 53 ; Berosus, Frarpn. 
 hist. Gracw, II., 504 ed. Sliiller ; — cf. supra, 
 Introd. § 7, note 2), — it will be evident that all 
 the conditions were present which could possibly 
 be required for the originating cf a dream- 
 vision, by which a Chaldsan monarch about B. 
 C. 600 was forewarned of the future overthro%v 
 of his dynasty through the agency of warlike 
 neighboring states. More than an external his- 
 torical occasion or impulse for the dream- vision, 
 was not probably derived by the king from the 
 peculiar state of existing political affairs. All 
 that bear-i a really prophetic character in his 
 vision is to be traced back to the direct agency 
 of God, which was able to construct a majestic 
 and united vision of the deepest prophetical sig- 
 nificance, out of the extremely sporadic and im- 
 perfect natural materials that were provided in 
 the range of the king's political observation. 
 Left to himself, Nebuchadnezzar, whether awake 
 or dreaming, could merely have originated cer- 
 tain presentiments, or combinations of political 
 wisdom, which at the best, must remain mere 
 images of the fancy, or acute speculations. If 
 his dream became a picture of the future that 
 embraced the world and displayed the pro- 
 foundest prophetic truths, a vision that was 
 "certain, and the interpretation thereof sure" 
 (see above, v. 45), this was entirely owing to the 
 all-enlightening and revealing influence of the 
 Divine Logos (John i. 9), who sought to glorify 
 Himself and His prophet at the court of the 
 powerful heathen king, in order thereby to 
 I kindle a shining light of Messianic consolation 
 ! for His faithful ones of that age, as well as for 
 those of the still darker periods of the future. 
 Cf. infra, Ethico-fundamental principles, et',-., 
 on chap. viii. , No. 3. 
 
 3. 7'he symbolism of the image of the mon- 
 archies in general, namely, the succession of the 
 
CHAP. 11. 1^9. 
 
 four metals, gold, silver, brass, and iron, as 
 also the distribution of these metals over the 
 several parts of a colossal idol or statue in the 
 human fonn, the contrast between the brittle - 
 ness and weakness of this image and the world- 
 filling greatness and solidity of the stone which 
 takes its place, etc. ; all these, like the funda- 
 mental conditions of the vision itself, may find 
 their point of departure, or so to speak, their 
 root, in certain relations and estimates of the 
 time that naturally prevailed in Nebuchad- 
 nezzar's kingdom, while the peculiarity of 
 their arrangement is doubtless, as before, to 
 be traced back to the revealing influence of 
 God. An underlying natural basis cannot be 
 mistaken. 
 
 a. In the symbolizing of a succession of four 
 world-kingdoms by a connection of four metals 
 of steadily decreasing value. "A comparative 
 view of the idea of a separation of the course of 
 temporal development into four world-periods, 
 which occurs elsewhere also, is instructive in 
 this connection. We meet it in the Indian 
 transformations within the limits of the four 
 Yuys, in the Graeco-Roman conception of four 
 metallic aons (the ages of gold, silver, etc. i, and 
 al.so in the Parsee idea of four trees that have 
 sprung from a single root, composed respect- 
 ively of gold, silver, steel, and iron.* Hesiod 
 indeed, destroys the number four, by introduc- 
 ing a fifth kingdom between the kingdoms of 
 brass and of iron, which is not of metal, and thus 
 corresponds, in a measure, to the Messianic 
 kingdom of Daniel, namely, the (hKuiortpor koI 
 u/jf»jr, iif iin' J t I'of of the heroes ; but irrespective 
 of this feature, the constant and decided com- 
 bination of the idea of world-periods with the 
 precise number /o«r, remains a noteworthy fact. 
 And although the correspondence that has been 
 indicated, for instance, in the case of Ovid as 
 coming under the influence of Greek concep- 
 tions, must in all probability be regarded as 
 based on that idea, and moreover, although the 
 Persian idea of the four metallic trees, which 
 has been referred to, may not have been unin- 
 fluenced by the representations of Daniel, — it 
 will still be apparent, that the natural applica- 
 tion of the number four to the ages of the world 
 rests upon a profounder reason that inheres in 
 the nature of things, and evidently, upon a 
 natural and simple association with t/te four 
 itagts of human life. This connection of the 
 
 * Cf. WoUheiin da FonBeca, Mi/tkologie des Alten [tidlen, 
 p. 2ti et seq. ; Hesioii. 'Epya ko.\ ijtiepat. 106 ss. ; Ovid, 
 Mttain. I., yy ss. : and in relation to the old-Persic doctrine 
 of four nges of the world, especially Qenesis arid AvftvUt in 
 Aunlnnd, 18H8, Noft. 12 and 28. and also DelitzHch. Art. 
 Danitl, in Hersog'a Reat-Eitcyklofi , p. 276. According to 
 the two latttT. the book Baltnuui Je^ht, for instance, con- 
 tains the following remarkable statement of the myth re- 
 spectinK the fo-ar a^jes of the world: "... Zerdusht de- 
 manded immortality fi-om Oi-muzd. then Ormuzd showed to 
 Zerdusht the all-embracing wisdom : whereupon he saw a 
 tree having such a root that four trees had sprung from it, 
 one of gold, another of silver, another of steel, and the 
 fourth of iron. . . . Ormuzd said to the holy Zerdusht : i 
 * The root of this single tree, which thou hast seen (is the , 
 world), and these four trees are the four times which shall i 
 come : thia golden one, when I and thou entertain each 
 other, and Csta.sp-Shah accepts the law. and the body of 
 the Deos is broken and they conceal themselves : this silver 
 one is the reign of the royal Artashir : the steel one is the 
 rule of Anosheveran Chosru, the .son of Kobat; that of 
 iron the evil reign of the Deos'"' (on which, according to 
 the Parsee teaching, the time of the Saviour Sotiosh is finally 
 to follow). 
 
 number four with the periods of human lite is 
 especially easy in Daniel, since the four phases 
 of development are illustrated by the image of 
 man, as a personification of heathendom" 
 (Kranichfeld, p. 118 et seq.). To what extent 
 the application, in this case, of the idea ol 
 four ages of the world to the succession of 
 Asiatic monarchies, is to be placed to the ac- 
 count of the natural or politicaJ meditations of 
 Nebuchadnezzar, and how far it is of superna- 
 tural suggestion or positively revetiled, cannot, 
 of course, be definitely decided, espeeially in 
 view of our extremely fragmentary knowledge 
 respecting the scope of religious thought and 
 the philosophy of human life among the Baby- 
 lonians. 
 
 b. The comparison of the suoces-sive kingdoms 
 with the several parts of a colossal human or idol 
 image is also probably based on some heathen 
 mode of conceiving nni representing things, with 
 which the dream-originating Divine principle of 
 revelation may have connected itself. Daniel 
 himself, indeed, indicates nothing whatever, 
 either in his recapitulation of the dream or in 
 the interpretation, that can show that the form, 
 size, and natural dignity of the several paxt« 
 (head, breast, belly, legs), contained any special 
 symbolical reference to the character of the 
 four world-kingdoms ; and any attempt to con- 
 struct such relations between the image and the 
 objects symbolized is exposed to the danger of 
 being involved in useless inteqnetations and 
 idle pastimes, as may be seen in many older ex- 
 positors, and even as late as in Starke (on vs. ^9 
 and 41). But at any rate the size and position 
 of the various parts merit consideration as a 
 tertium cmnpar., so far as the first kingdom, 
 which is represented by the head, as the highest 
 and most important, but also the smallest organ, 
 may be conceived of as intensively more, but 
 extensively less considerable, than the succeed- 
 ing ones ; as also each successive organ may 
 signify an aggregation of peoples or states icf. 
 supra, on v. 39), which becomes steadily more 
 worthless and degraded, from an internal (ethi- 
 cal) point of view, but as regularly increases in 
 size and extent. In one re.'pect, therefore, 
 namely, so far as the decrease of internal moral 
 worth (or dignity, according to the theocratic 
 standard) among the four successive kingdoms 
 is concerned, the symbolism of the various 
 bodily parts yields the same result as that of the 
 metals ; whUe in another respect it leads to a 
 contrary result, inasmuch as it repre.sents these 
 kingdoms as constantly extending their lioun- 
 daries. 
 
 c. The final consideration, — whether the 
 mysterious stone, that descends from the moun- 
 tain and shatters the metallic image, represent- 
 ing Messiah's kingdom or the fifth world-mon- 
 archy, also contains features that may be traced 
 back to the religio-political ideas of the ancient 
 Babylonians, or whether, on the other hand, 
 this closing incident of the whole vision must be 
 regarded as purely supernatural in its character, 
 — can hardly lead to. a definite conclusion. 
 Some approach to Messianic ideas and expecta- 
 tions, however, may have been contained in tht 
 religious estimate of the world current among 
 that people, as well as in that of the Per.sians, the 
 Greeks (compare what was remarked above con- 
 cerning Hesiod and the Zoroastrian myth of the 
 
P4 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 four trees), the ancient Germans and Scandi- 
 navians, etc. The stone that crushes the image 
 of the monarchies or world-periods may, there- 
 fore, have been a conception talien from the 
 Chaldajan or Babylonian circle of ideas, similar 
 in its nature and tendency to those remarkable 
 mythological approximations to the fundamental 
 dogma of Christianity, which have justly been 
 characterized as " mythological foreshadowings 
 of the great truth : ' The word was made flesh ' " 
 (Kahnis, Lutkerische Do(jmatik,\\\. 334; cf. v. 
 Osterzee, Das liild Chriati nuch der Hchrift, p. 
 C9 et seq. ; J. P. Lange, Dai Apostolische 
 Zeitalter, I., p. 237 et seq.). 
 
 4. T/ie hittvrical interpretation of the four 
 kingdoms, or the application of the image of the 
 monarchies to the facts of history in detail, in- 
 volves no really serious difficulty upon the sym- 
 bolic principles that have been established, in 
 view of the definite statement by the prophet in 
 verses 37, 38, by which the golden head desig- 
 nates the Chaldcean empire of Nebuchadnezzar. 
 The three succeeding kingdoms may therefore be 
 discovered, without leaving room for doubt. They 
 necessarily represent the three phases of devel- 
 opment in the great Oriental universal monarchy, 
 which followed next after the ChaldiEan period ; 
 for the prophetic horizon, whether of the king 
 or Daniel, did not embrace the Occident. The 
 four workl-kingdoms are developed without 
 exception on one and the same geographical 
 stage, on the soil of the Orhin wientulis^ thus 
 harmonizing with the Biblical representation 
 under the symbol of a siityle colossal human im- 
 age ; and the only world-kingdoms of the 
 Orient that arose after the overthrow of Babylon, 
 and that equalled it in importance, were the 
 Medo-Persian founded by Cyrus, and the Mace- 
 douiau-Hellenistic. originated by Alexander the 
 .Great, the latter of which passed through two 
 stages, viz.: the period of its undivided existence, 
 and that of its constantly increasing division and 
 disintegration under the post-Alexandrian Dia- 
 dochi. These two, or, by a more correct enumer- 
 ation three, final forms of the Oriental universal 
 monarchy, are represented with the utmost 
 clearness by the silver breast, the brazen (copper) 
 belly, and the nether extremities which are at 
 f rst of iron and then of intermingled iron and 
 clay. The breast of silver designates the Medo- 
 Persiau kingdom, which first succeeded the 
 golden head, or Babylon. It does not signify 
 Media simply, for (1) at the time when the 
 Median king Cyaxares (= Darius the Mede, see 
 Introd. g 8, note 4) and his nephew and son-in- 
 law Cyrus overthrew Babylon, the Persian tribe 
 had already Vjecome so prominent within the 
 Median realm as to warrant the designation of 
 the whole kingdom by the names of both tribes, 
 the Median, which was formerly predominant, 
 and the Persian which had now become its 
 equ.ol. (2) Daniel accordingly refers to the whole 
 \i'orld-kingdora which succeeded Babylon as a 
 kingdom of " the Modes and Persians" (chap. 
 V. 28 ; ef the exposition of that passage), and 
 even in the section relating to the reign of 
 Darius the Mede (chap, vi 9. 13, IG) he desig- 
 nates the religious code, which was in force 
 throughout the kingdom, as "the law of the 
 Medes and Persians." thus characterizing it as 
 a sacred ordinance that rested on the common 
 Consent of both the nationalities that had 
 
 united under a single government. * (3) In exact 
 correspondence with this is his representation 
 of the Medo-Persian kingdom, in chap. viii. 
 under the figure of a wai'like ram, and his desig- 
 nation of a succession of two dynasties — a 
 Median and a Persian — simply by the growth of 
 two horns from the head of the ram, of which 
 the smaller comes up first (verse 3 ; cf. verse 20). 
 (4) Consequently, the instances in which he 
 distinguishes Darius, or Cyrus, or succeeding 
 kings, by the titles, respectively, of "king of 
 the Medes," or "king of the Persians," must 
 be regarded as referring, not to a diversity of 
 realms, but simply to a difference of tribal re- 
 lations among these rulers. (5) Further, the 
 vision of the four successive beasts, which ia 
 described in chap. vii. and which is doubtless 
 parallel to that of the four elements in the im- 
 age of the monarchies, does not accord with the 
 a.ssumption, on which the second beast, a carni- 
 verous bear, represents the kingdom of the 
 Medes, while the third, a leopard with four 
 wings, designates the Persian monarchy, which 
 fact was scarcely distinct from the former (see 
 infra on that passage). (G) Nor does Zech. vi. , 
 which is an alleged parallel to the vision before 
 us, warrant a conclusion in favor of the opinion 
 that distinguishes between the Median and Per- 
 sian kingdoms ; for the red, black, white, and 
 grizzled, and bay horses, mentioned in that place, 
 do not designate various lands or kingdoms any 
 more than do the horses with simOarly varied 
 colors, which are introduced by the same pro- 
 phet in chap. i. 7 et seq. (see Kohler, Die Nach- 
 exilischen Prophetea ii. ], 09 etseq, , 189 etseq.). 
 (7) Finally, no conclusion in favor of the 
 Median hypothesis can be deduced from the 
 remark by Daniel in verse 39 a, that the sec- 
 ond kingdom should be inferior to that of 
 Nebuchadnezzar ; for an ethical inferiority of 
 the Persian kingdom to that of the Clialdae- 
 ans might be readily asserted from a theocratic 
 point of view, inasmuch as it clearly displayed 
 a greater moral and social depravation under its 
 later kings, than the former. Only Cyrus ex- 
 celled the Chaldaean rulers in friendly and bene- 
 volent conduct toward the theocracy, while hia 
 immediate successors, Cambyses and Pseudo- 
 Smerdis, treated the people of God with greater 
 severity than had any Chaldsean king whatever 
 (cf. also the sufferings inflicted on the Jews by 
 Xer.\es, according to the book of Esther, and 
 also by Artaxerxes I., according to Ezra and 
 Nehemiah). 
 
 But if, in view of these considerations, the 
 
 • The force of the expression "the law of the Metlcs and 
 Persians" (0"lD^ '^T?3 n)) in chap. vi. as an evidence 
 
 of the union of the two neighlioring Iranian nations in a 
 single state as early as the ])eriod of the Chalda-an su- 
 premacy, and perhaps earlier still, haa been recognized, 
 e, g., by Kranichfeld, despite his preference for the inter- 
 pretation which refers the second world-kinfrdom to Media, 
 and the third to Persia. In a note on page 19'^ et setj. hi 
 contests the assertion of Von Lengerke.that this formula real- 
 ly originated aft«r the time of Cyrus, and is therefore i 
 gross anachronism in the mouth of Daniel, by arguing 
 that the union of the two peoples in a single n:ition. or 
 at least under a singje government, dates considerublj 
 beyond the time of Cyrus, and accoidingly. that an e.x- 
 clnsively Median realm was never in e.vistcnco. The con- 
 formity of this view to the actual historical development 
 of the ancient Iran is shown by Nicbuhr, Ge^rh. AtnuiJi 
 una Babelt, p. 1S6 ; cf. Spiegel In Autiana. 186B, p. 3St 
 ct seq. 
 
CHAP. II. 1-49. 
 
 second kingdom of the image of the monarchies 
 represents Medo-Persia, there can be no further 
 douht as to the interpretation of the third, 
 which is symbolized by the brazen belly. It 
 must necessarily designate the Macedonian 
 icoiid-kingdom of Alexander the Oreat, whose 
 grand and rapid introduction, as if borne on the 
 wings of the tempest, is represented in the 
 parallel vision of chap. vii. by the figure of a 
 leopard with four wings, but which receives 
 consideration in this case (chap. ii. ), only so far 
 as its ethical and religious inferiority in relation 
 to its predecessors is concerned, and as the re- 
 mark that it should "bear rule over all the 
 earth " (verse 39 b) characterizes its external 
 greatness. The kingdoms of the Hellenistic 
 Uiadochi. which arose from the universal mon- 
 archy of Alexander the Great, cannot be included 
 in the third or brazen kingdom, since they pre- 
 sent a picture of internal disruption, such as is 
 clearlj' symbolized by the fourth monarchy of 
 Daniel. The nether extremities of the colossus 
 only, which were at first (in the legs) of iron, 
 but afterward (in the feet and toes) a mixture 
 of iron and clay, can be made to harmonize with 
 the period of the Diadochi. In their interpreta- 
 tion, the legs, which are yet of iron, will prob- 
 ably refer to the time during which the im- 
 mediate succes.sors of Alexander endeavored at 
 least to maintain the unity of the realm, despite 
 their incessant quarrels and bloody conflicts, — 
 hence down to the battle near Ipsus (B. C. 323- 
 301); while the feet, which are in part of iron, 
 and in part of clay, represent the succeeding 
 state of growing dismemberment and hostile di- 
 visions (in which the kingdom of the Seleucidfe 
 in Syria, and that of the LagidiE in Egypt, were 
 alone able to maintain, during a considerable 
 period, a position of commanding power) ; cf. 
 above, on vs. 41-43. That this torn and cor- 
 rupted state of the post-Alexandrian Hellenistic 
 empire, so analogous to a putrefying gigantic 
 carcass, and also that the vain attempts to heal 
 the sores by means of intermarriages among the 
 contending princely families, etc. , should be al- 
 ready described and prefigured in the visions of 
 a Chaktean king about B. C. 600, can, of course, 
 find an explanation only in the direct operations 
 of the Divine Logos, by which the future is re- 
 vealed (cf. No. d). To base these features on a 
 reference to the historical condition of Hellen- 
 ism during the Chaldaean period, to its internal 
 divisions and incurable discords, which were, at 
 that early day, as apparent as was their warlike 
 bravery, and further, to the custom of political 
 marriages among princes, which was already 
 frequently observed (Kranichfeld), seems inade- 
 quate, and involves the danger of an exagger- 
 ated naturalizing of the prophetic process in 
 question. Nor can the custom of political mar- 
 riages be shown to have existed in the time of 
 Nebuchadnezzar among the Greeks (with whom 
 we have chiefly to do, in this connection), al- 
 though it prevailed in Medo-Persia and Egypt. 
 Finally, the fourth kingdom was, at an early 
 period, made to signify the Roman universal 
 dominion, so that its first stadium of unimpaired 
 strength (the legs of iron) represented the period 
 of the republic and the first emperors, and the 
 second, divided and powerless stage (the feet of 
 iron and clay) referred to the later empire, or 
 even to the middle ages and more recent times 
 
 (in which, according to Anberlen's exposition of 
 V. 43, the German and Sclavic nationalities 
 were intermingled with the Roman) ; but this 
 interpretation is opposed by many considera- 
 tions. (1) It ascribes a range of vision over the 
 future to the dreaming king and the prophetic 
 interpreter, which lacks every support based 
 on the actual condition of the times, since, as is 
 well known, the greatness and world-historical 
 importance of Rome were unknown until four 
 hundred years after the captivity. Unlike the 
 sections of the prophecy which relate to Persia 
 and Javan, this would have no foundation it 
 existing relations, but rather, would be of an 
 abstractly supematnral character. (3) The 
 S"ri3 mentioned in Chap. xi. 30, although al- 
 ready identified with the Romans by the Sep- 
 tuagint and the Vulgate, must rather bo re- 
 garded as a race of Oreek islanders, in view of 
 the constant usage of the word elsewhere in the 
 Old Testament, and more especially, because 
 there is no indication of the identity of these 
 Chittim with the fourth world-kingdom, either 
 in chap, xi., or elsewhere. They are simply 
 noticed in that connection, like the northern 
 and southern kmgdoms, as a constituent part of 
 the Javanic or Hellenistic empire. (3) Thesym- 
 bohc details comprehended in the fourth or 
 lowest world-kingdom according to Nebuchad- 
 nezzar's vision — the legs of iron, the feet and 
 toes part of iron and part of clay, etc. , appear 
 natural and suitable when applied to the 
 development of Hellenism after Alexander, and 
 particularly in the era of the Seleucidie and the 
 Ptolemies, while they lead to re.sults of a more 
 or less arbitrary character, with every attempt 
 to demonstrate the Roman hyi)othesis ; e.g., the 
 view of Buddeus, Hengstenberg, and others, by 
 which the two legs of iron designate the eastern 
 and western empires after Honorius and Ar- 
 cadius, and that of Cocceius, which regards the 
 iron and the clay as indicating the separation of 
 the Roman power into a spiritual and a material 
 kingdom (papacy and empire), etc. (4) That 
 the collocation of the world-monarchy of Alex- 
 ander and the kingdoms of the Diadochi aa 
 forming one and the same ^--'r< ^ position that 
 becomes necessary on this view, although sup- 
 ported by chap. viii. 21 (where a grouping into a 
 T;") n~v?a has actually come to passi, is yet 
 shown by chap. xi. 4, to be decidedly opposed 
 to the real meaning of the prophet (cf . 1 Mace. 
 (i. 1 and 7 et seq.). (5) Finally, the figure of a 
 stone, that destroys the image, is positively false 
 as a representation of the triumph of Christian- 
 ity over the world-power, if the Roman power 
 be regarded as the fourth and final phase of the 
 development of the latter; for this was not 
 overthrown and destroyed suddenly and at a 
 blow by the kingdom of Christ, like the statue 
 by the stone, but instead, it incorporated Chris- 
 tianity with itself, and continued, as Christian- 
 ized Rome, to bear rule over the earth during 
 more than a thousand years. It might, there- 
 fore, be more properly identified vrith the stone, 
 than described as a potency inimical to it; but 
 it can, in any case, find no place in the series of 
 preMessianic world-kingdoms that were hostile 
 to His reign. [To these arguments we add the 
 marked coincidences bstween the several visiom 
 
THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 of Daniel respecting these four great world- 
 powers, as exliibited in the harmonic table in- 
 serted in the introduction ; and we call especial 
 attention to the almost perfect parallel between 
 tlie two '■ little horns " in each case. Now as one 
 of these is admitted on all hands to refer to Auti- 
 ochus Ejjiphanes, the other, if identical, is, of 
 course, a constituent likewise of the Syrian 
 empire of the Seleucida;, as the fourth Oriental 
 monarchy. The discrepancies alleged by Keil, 
 p. -08 et seq. , as arguing a different interpreta- 
 tion of the little horns respectively, wUl be duly 
 noticed in the exposition of the passages them- 
 selves. J 
 
 For these reasons we adopt that exposition of 
 the four kingdoms which .Bertholdt {Diinid, I. 
 192 et seq. ) has recently advocated with penetra- 
 tion and fairness, after Polychronius, Grotius, 
 Tossauus, Zeltner, and others, had asserted its 
 principal features. We differ from Bertholdt, 
 however, in failing to deduce anything that 
 argues the composition of Daniel's prophecy in 
 the period of the Seleucidce and Asmonaeans, from 
 the reference of the feet of iron and of clay to 
 the times of the later Diadochi, since, as will 
 be shown more in detail hereafter, we regard 
 the reference of passages like chap. vii. 8 et 
 seq. ; ix. 24 et seq. to Antiochus Epiphanes as 
 not conflicting with the authenticity of the 
 book. We accordingly reject the following in- 
 terpretations, which differ from ours in various 
 particulars : 
 
 {ft. } That of Bunsen (cf. Introd. § 4, note 1), 
 which applies the golden head to Assyria, in har- 
 mony with the alleged original interpretation by 
 Daniel, the breast of silver to Babylon, the 
 brazen belly to Media, and the iron legs to 
 Persia, but which is thus guilty, not only of a 
 direct coutradiction of v. 38 ( " thou art this head 
 of gold "), but also of a misconception that con- 
 flicts with history, in relation to the intimate 
 connection, and even essential identity of the 
 kingdoms of As.syria and Babylon, which could 
 never have been contrasted as gold and silver, 
 or the lion and the bear (cf. chap. vu. 5 
 et seq.)* 
 
 (*. ) That of Hitzig and Redepenning (see 
 above, on v. yO n). which refers the head and 
 breast to Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar, as the 
 only Babj-louian kings whom the author is said 
 to have known and which is therefore, at least, 
 a partial reproduction of the scheme formerly 
 attempted by the Swede, H. Benzel {Diiarrt. de 
 quKtuor orliis monarchiis, 1740), and by Haren- 
 berg, Dathe, and Hezel, to personify the four 
 
 * Cf. Ziindel. Krit. UnterxK., p. 82; and generally as re- 
 spects the continuity of the Assyrian and Babylonian em- 
 pires and their inseparable connection in point of nationality, 
 lelii^ion, and civilization, see the valuable sketch of the 
 i-esult.s achieveii by the latest efforts of Assyriologi.sts ; 
 yintve tl BabylvJit. in the I^evite det deiix Momien^ ISfiS, 
 March 15, by Alfred Maury. The old-Babylonian fChal- 
 diean). the Assyrian, and the later Babylonian empires, 
 are iu fact but three successive phases of the development 
 of one and the same world-kinpdom, despite their changes 
 of dynasties and capitals, iis also the Median, the Persian 
 (.\chaemenidian), the I'arthian, and other kingdoms, are 
 successive phases in the manifestation of a single national 
 empire on Iranian soil. Cf. U. Kawlinson. The Five Gyeut 
 
 M'iHuri:li.leii of thK E(t>,lern M'orld, in- tlie Hii-tonj 
 
 of CliahU'i, Atini/ri'i, Batif/lnit, Mtdiit, and I'erxia, London, 
 IbtjT, 4 vols. Also A. Scheuchzer"s Asti/ri'^che Fi ruclmii- 
 oen in M. Heidenheim'a Deittuc/ie Vlevtdr^tritchrtft fiir 
 e'iul.-lhtul. Fursclwna, Vol. IV.. No. •) (Jtetj), p. 4 etaeq. 
 
 kingdoms (regard' ng them as metonymies foi 
 four Babylonian kings). 
 
 (c.) The view of Ephraem Syrus, Venema, 
 Eichhom, V. Lengerke, Bleek, de Wette, Kirmss, 
 Hilgenf eld, Delitzsch, Kranichf eld ( and condition- 
 ally, i.e., so far as it conforms to the views undet 
 a and b, also of Ewald, Bunsen, and Hitzig), 
 that the head represents Babylon, the breast 
 Media, the belly Persia, and the legs Greece and 
 the Diadochian kingdoms (see for the contrary, 
 above. No. 4). 
 
 {d.) The " orthodox " view, which refers the 
 first three kingdoms to Babylon, Medo-Persia, 
 and Greece, but the fourth to Rome and the 
 states which have sprung from it since the 
 empire ; early represented by Josephus {Ant. x. 
 10, 4), by a majority of church-fathers — e.special- 
 ly by Jerome, Orosius, and Theodoret; also by 
 all the expositors of the Middle-age church after 
 Walafrid Strabo, and by a majority of modems, 
 of whom we mention Buddeus (Hist, eccles. p. 
 ii. sect. 5, p. (519 ss.), Joach. Lange, Starke, 
 Zeis, Velthusen (Ammadpersiones ad Dan. 11. 
 27-45 ; Prag, 1783), Menken (Das Monarchien- 
 hUd, Brem, and Aurich, 1809), Hengstenberg, 
 Hiivemick, Caspari (Die vier daitiel. Weltmonar- 
 chieii, iu the Zeitschrift fiir lut/i. Theologie und 
 Kirche, 1841, No. 4), Hofmann ( Weissaguiig 
 und Erf iiUung, 1.276 et seq.), Keil (Einl. ins 
 A. T. § 134, p. 443, [also in his Cuninientary on 
 Daniel]), Gausaen {Daniel le Pri/p/iete, 2d. edit. 
 18 JQ, I. 250 ss.), Auberlen {Daniel, etc., p. 42 et 
 seq.), Ziindel (Kiit Unterss. etc., p. 74 et seq.), 
 Kliefoth, Fliller, Gartner (in their expo.sitions), 
 Pusey (p. 58 ss.), Volok (Vindicia Dan., p. 7 
 ss. ), [and the monographs added in the Intro- 
 duction]. — For the history of this orthodox- 
 churchly interpretation of the image of the mon- 
 archies in older times, see Antirjucn et pervul- 
 gat(^ de guatu&r Monai-chiis senteiitiw plenior et 
 uberior ansertk, auct. J. G. Jano, 1728 (also iu 
 Breyer's Histor. Magazin, vol. I., p. 114 et seq.); 
 and in relation to its influence on the conception 
 and representation of universal history during 
 the 16th and 17th centuries, see Meusel, Bihlio- 
 t/ieca kistorica, vol. I., pt. 1, p. 176 ss. * 
 
 * [Justice to this popular view of the fourth kingdom of 
 Daniel's prophecies, which applies it to the Roman empire, 
 I either as a pagan or a papal tyranny, seems to require a 
 statement here of the principal arguments in its favor. 
 Other considerations will be examined, as well as some of 
 these more in detail, in the exposition of the passages under 
 which they arise. 
 
 1. The prominence of the Roman dominion, as being the 
 only really world-wide government after that of Ale.xander, 
 certainly lends great probability to its selection as the cul- 
 mination of the previous world-monarchies in comparison 
 with the territorially insignificant realm of the Seleucida;, 
 But this argument seems to us to be neutralized by indica- 
 tions in the text itself, especially the fact that Daniel's pro- 
 phecies in this matter are bounded by the Orient as to their 
 arena of dominion, the chosen people of God and their local 
 heritage being the .stand-point from which their influence is 
 measured. The Jews diil not come into any se\ere contact 
 with Rome till after the dawn of the Messianic era, and (iis 
 the author observes above) Rome itself did not then succumb 
 under the collision. 1'he note of time ** in the days of these 
 kings'' (ver. 441 cannot be pres.sed into a corroboration of 
 this synchronism, for then it would co\ er the whole range 
 of the j>revious dynasties likewise (see the exposition of thiil 
 verse). But a most decisive prohibition of the allusitn tc 
 Rome appears in the continual degeneration of the succes 
 sive empiies from the head downwards, till the fourth i; 
 deteriorated into a base metal and even a maudlin alloy, it 
 is true the epithet " strong as iron " well applies to ftume, 
 but it attjxined its culmination both of force and culture 
 under the early emperors, and there was no subseq'iem 
 change of government in its decay corresponding to the dis- 
 tinction between the unadulterated metal of the legs and thf 
 
CHAP. II. 1-49. 
 
 bi 
 
 5. The rehition of the image of the monar- 
 diies^ when correctly interpreted, to the ?iisto7'y 
 
 crumbling mixture of the feet and toes. In the case of the 
 SyroGreek monarchy, on the other hand, all these particu- 
 lars have their exact counterpart. 
 
 2. The difficulties attendant upon the effort to identify 
 with the history of the Seleucid succe5;sion the particulars 
 elsewhere given in connection with the fourth empire, es- 
 pecially the list of ten kings and the fall of three of them be- 
 fore the successful one (chap. vii. 24) have been urged in fa- 
 vor of the "ortho<iox " view. But the Roman interpretation, 
 on the other hantl. seems to be beset with equal if not great- 
 er difficulties in this point, as will be seen in the exposition 
 of that passage. Chap. xi. of this book is acknowledged on 
 all hands to be a detailed account of the dyn:isty of the Se- 
 leucidae, showing that the prophetic ken had it prominently 
 in view; and the little horn of the he-goat (chap. viii. 9) is 
 generally admitted to be AntiochuR Epiphanes. It is there- 
 fore hard to resist the conclusion that the little horn of the 
 fourth beast (chap. vii. S) is the same king, and the fourth 
 section of the colossal image (chap. ii. 40 et eeq.) the same 
 dynasty. The characteristics make the parallel complete. 
 
 3. The violent persecution experienced by the saints 
 mder Roman power, particularly in the days of papal su- 
 premacy, has l>een especially thought to justify this scheme 
 oi interpretation. But it must lie remembered that the 
 Seleucidse were the tirst kings who really oppressed the peo- 
 ple of God on account of their religion, and the efforts of 
 Antiochns to exterminate their faith were of the most extra- 
 ordinary character, not exceeded by the vinilence of the 
 Inqu.siti'ju itself. Moreover, the attempt to apply the pro- 
 phecies in queistion to both pagan and papal Rome, wenkens 
 the force of the whole intei-pretatinu. The effort t^) find in 
 the pope, as such, an emphatic and direct fulfillment of the 
 '■ little horn" is indeed sustained by the striking analogy of 
 blnap/iemous atrocity, but fails to find an equal agreement 
 with many other features of the picture, e.ff., the ■' mingling 
 •,hemsidves with the seed of men " (chap. ii. 43 ; absolutely 
 *orbidden by the celibacy of the pontiffs and clergy), the 
 yrigin in dynastic and territorial revolution ("the sea," 
 chap. vii. 3, and "earth," chap. v.i. 11), the pointed refer- 
 ence to the Mosaic cultus and temple (chap. viii. 11), and 
 the whole tenor uf the overthrow by civil and military con- 
 vulsion (chap. xi. 40 et seq.). We may als<j adduce the 
 gross incongruity of representing any branch of the Chris- 
 tian Church, however corrupt, under these heathen symbols, 
 and a-* the final foe of God's people. 
 
 4. The marked simiUiriry between the visions of Daniel 
 snd those of John in the Revelation, extending to details of 
 phraseology as well as of emblem, has naturally led to the 
 beUef that they coincide in application. This however, in 
 a superficial view of th'-ir import. In the New Testament 
 we everywhere find the symbols and even the terms of the 
 O. T. used conventionally with a different application and 
 in a wider sense. Thus, in our Lord's eschatologiciil dis- 
 course (Matt, xxiv.), the symptoms of the dissolution of Ju- 
 flaism are made prcinonition=i of the end of all thinirs; the 
 whole of Ezekiel's wail over the queen of ancient commerce 
 (chap, xxvii.) is transfi-iTed alni'^st literaUy to the apocalyp- 
 tic overthrow of the later mi^tre-sof the world (Rev. xviii.) ; 
 the verj' names, Babylon. Gog. etc.. iire applied tf> new- 
 places and persons, just as Sodom. Esypt, Zion, etc., had 
 long been current with a metaphorical meaning. It is a 
 gi'i-at mistake, however, t** infer that these N.-T. adapta- 
 tions ot tyjie-s and imager}' and language, familiarly drawn 
 from the O. T., necessjirily denote the same objects or 
 rvent*. They are rather related as common types uf some 
 recuiring Antichrist, as extensions of one general world- 
 pover ever inimiciil to the cause of spiritual religion. To 
 identify them is to destroy the significance and beauty of 
 the conventional signs by which they are expressed. The 
 shallowness of this method of exposition, as applied to St. 
 John's Ap:>calypse, has been demonstrated by the futile 
 attempts to make them quadrate with the facts of his- 
 tory. 
 
 5. Lastlj-. the periods assigned in Daniel for the fulfill- 
 ment of the various prophecies, are appealed to in support 
 of their application to Rome. This seems to us, on the 
 c intrary. a fatal argument against the view in question. 
 It is true the same numbers are often used by the Reve- 
 lator for the length of "the t.mes and &easona" prefigured 
 in his visions, but we have never yet seen any satisfactory 
 adjustment of them to the history nf the Roman empire or 
 th? papal church. We are stronu'ly inclined to that view 
 which regards them as being conventionally adopted by St. 
 John as representations of longer or shorter periods of 
 indefinite length. But in Daniel they unquestionably de- 
 n Jto tletcrmiuate spaces of time, and "for that very reason 
 — as they are all periods of comparaiively l)rief extent ( some 
 three and a half years, with the exception of the notable 
 terra of 7U weeks, or rather hebdomads ; see the exposition 
 of that passage)— they must be limited by the history of 
 
 of tJie founding of Chi^^tiaaity^ must be found, 
 in view of the foregoing- considerations, in the 
 assumption that the destroying stono represent? 
 the kingdom of Christ at the time of its intro- 
 duction on the historical arena, while the 
 growth of the stone until it fills the earth, in- 
 dicates its gradual extension over all the coun- 
 tries of the earth. The fulfillment of this 
 closing incident of the prophetic vision as a 
 whole, is therefore not confined exclusively to 
 the initial period of the history of Christianity 
 — as if the stone represented the pre-Messianic 
 Israel, or any other historical agency prepara- 
 tory to the advent of Christ ; nor is it to be re- 
 ferred entirely to the future of Christianity — as 
 if the destruction of the colossus of world-powers 
 had not yet transpired, and the overthrow of the 
 fourth monarchy were reserved for the final 
 judgment or some other eschatological event. 
 The descent of the stone and the overthrow of 
 the image were rather realized in the historj' of 
 salvation, when Christ, the stone that was re- 
 jected by the builders, ground His enemies to 
 powder, and became the elect and precious 
 comer-stone iu Zion, upon which all the foes of 
 God's kingdom are henceforth to fall, and by 
 which they are to be shattered and put to 
 ahame (Matt. xxi. 43-44 ; 1 Pet. ii. ()-8 ; 
 cf. Isa. viii. 14 ; xxviii. 16). This closing- 
 scene of the vision is in the course of being 
 steadily and increasingly fulfilled, inasmuch 
 as, on the one baud, the destruction and dis- 
 solution of the world-powers, and on the other, 
 the growth of the stone into a mighty mountain 
 that fills the whole earth, are yet far from their 
 Divinely appointed goal — however surely the 
 world, together with Satan, its head, may have 
 been long since judged in principle bj" the Spirit 
 of Christ, and however clearly the only true God, 
 who is declared in Christ, may have demon- 
 strated, in a certain measure, his nature as the 
 all-supporting rock, from all eternity in the con- 
 gregation of His faithful ones (as the " Rock of 
 Israel." Gen. xlix. 34; Deut. xxxii. 4 et seq., 
 
 the Antiochian jier^ecution and the Maccabfean revolution. 
 The only escape fritra th.s conclusion is by a report to «hat 
 is termed the " year-f or-a-day hypothesis," which consists in 
 understanding the dayR in each of the periods in question 
 as put for so many years. It is sufficient to suy of this .some- 
 what popular and certainly convenient theory, that it is a 
 conjecture devoid of countenance in Scripture. True, the 
 prophets occasionally make a 1 tciTil daj- the type of a literal 
 year, but they never do so without immediately adding the 
 explanation, for the express purpose of preventing such n 
 generalization of the rule. Besides the passages in Gen. i. 
 5 et seq. ; ii. 4 : 2 Peter iJi. S (which would prove too 
 much), the only instances of this usage adduced are Num. 
 xiv.:^; Ezek. iv, 1-b; Dan. ix. :i4 (but this is not in point); 
 Rev. ii. 10 (but here the appl.cation is a pure assumption) ; 
 Rev. xi. 'J-11 (an equally imaginary case) ; Rev. xi. 2, 3, au<l 
 xii. 6, 14 (to include which is a simple petitin princi)}ii); 
 Ri'v. XX. 6 (a rather difficult case — think ot a millennium of 
 ytio.OOO years!). See the exhaustive list by Dr. Pond, in 
 the ^fetll. Quar. Hev. for Jan., 1874, p. llli sq. ; where the 
 learned writer argues that if one part of a vision be a sjTn- 
 bol so must the rest, e.g., if the locusus in Rev. ix., be sym- 
 bolical (which is probably true only so far as they are a 
 type of ruin in general, not any particular form or agency), 
 so must the nccompanying number be ; ergn, the "5 months" 
 of ver. 5 must denote 150 jcars — just as if the number 
 might not be symbolical of an indefinite period, as it no 
 doubt is. We conclude, therefore, by reiterating that no 
 clear instance can be .idduced of the use of a "day" in Scrip' 
 tural prophecy for an exact year,w/iere the ty!)ii:al charac- 
 ter of the lime in not immeJiniely exjjrensed as being lim- 
 ited to thiit particular ca.se. much less is there any iutima- 
 tiim that such a rule is to apply to prophecy in general. To 
 admit such a principle in Biblical interp rotation is to ftbfto- 
 don all precision in the nsc of languagu.] 
 
ts 
 
 THE PROPHET DAIilEL. 
 
 Isa. XXX. 29 ; xliv. 8 ; 1 Sam. ii. 2, etc. ; cf. 
 the " rock of strength," Isa. xvii. 10 ; " rock 
 of eternities." Isa. xxvi. 4; " rock of refuge," 
 Psa. xciv. 22, etc.). — Here again we are com- 
 pelled to reject several partial conceptions : 
 
 (it.) The identification of the stone or fifth mon- 
 archy with the Roman dominion (Grotius), which 
 clearly leads to an improper naturalizing of the 
 pass.ige, so far as it confines itself simply to the 
 earthly relations of the historical Roman empire; 
 hut which certainly includes an important meas- 
 ure of truth in so far as it regards the Roman 
 world-power as a Divinely chosen and sanctioned 
 bearer and promoter of the royal Messianic cause 
 at the stage of its introduction (cf. supra, No. 4). 
 
 (I).) The one-sided and exclusive reference of 
 the stone to the people of Israel (older Jewish 
 expositors ; Porphyry ; — see, on the other hand, 
 Jerome on the passage) . 
 
 (c.) That interpretation of the stone by which 
 it symbolizes merely the person of the Messio/i, 
 as distinct from the kingdom founded by Him 
 (Cosmos Indicopleustes, and several rabbins, as 
 Saadia, Ibn-Ezra, etc. ; and, after them, especially 
 J. Clir. Beermann. De monarchia qnnrtn, in his 
 Meditntt. xiolitic(f. 10T9, where he submits an in- 
 terpretation of the several kingdoms that is 
 otherwise entirely correct ; cf. Bertlioldt, as 
 above, p. 215 et seq., in relation to Beermann, 
 and partially against him). 
 
 (rf. ) The reference of the stone, not to the 
 first, but to the second advent of Christ, and al- 
 so to the erection of the Apocalyptic millennium, 
 which is said to constitute the " fifth monarchy," 
 according to the true and actual meaning of the 
 prophet. This view was held by the Chiliasts 
 (Enthusiasts, Anabaptists) of the 16th and 17th 
 centuries, and especially by the fanatical sect 
 of Quintomonarchists or Fifth-monarchy men in 
 England at the time of Cromwell (see Weingar- 
 tcn. Die Rfrolutionskirchen Engliin<U, Berlin, 
 1868, p. 180 et seq.); also by several recent ex- 
 positors of a subtile-chiliastictendency, especially 
 Anberlen (p. 42 et seq. ; 248 et seq. ; — in opposi- 
 tion to him see Kranichfeld. p. 118 et seq.). Sev- 
 eral earlier exegetes of pietistic-chiliasticor theo- 
 sophic temper, e.'j., Joach. Lange, Starke, M. Fr. 
 Roos, Mencken, etc.. contented themselves with 
 finding a prophetic reference to the millennium in 
 the final destiny of the stone, hence in its de- 
 velopment to a greatness that fills and controls 
 the earth, whicli is entirely admissible in view 
 of the above. 
 
 (i. The practical and homiUtical treatment of 
 this chapter will dwell predominantly on either 
 its historical or its prophetic features. The 
 leading subjects for consideration will be either 
 the answer to Daniel's jirayer and his jiromo- 
 tion above the heathen wise-men. or the tri- 
 umph of the kingdom of God over the world- 
 powers. 
 
 a. The former theme is immediately connected 
 with the subject of the preceding chapter, since 
 Daniel's jiromotion and honor were merely ad- 
 ditional fruits of the faithful obedience, which 
 had already in that connection been pr.aised as 
 the source and basis of his greatness. Especially 
 suitable texts may be found in the prayer of 
 Daniel and his friends, vs. 16-23, and in the 
 closing verses 46-49. Compare Calvin's obser- 
 vation on V. IC : " ViVteftus, quo coiisilU), et qua 
 tti>im Jiducin Daniel poHuincenl, 'einpus sibi 
 
 dari. Cormlium hoe fiat ut Dei gratiam implo- 
 raret , . . . Non duUmn eH, quin sperarerit 
 Daniel, quod adepttcs eM, nempe somnium regis 
 sibi reDelatum iri. Exponit ergo sociis suit, ut 
 simid postulent misericordiam a Deo." Also 
 Chr, B. Michaelis on the same passage : " Dan- 
 iel eadem fide, qua postmodum ova leonnm ob- 
 strinxit (Heb. xi. 3), hie solutionem somnii, quod 
 necdumnonerat, NebucJuidnezaripromittit, certus 
 jam de exauditione precum, qu/u super hoc re ad 
 Deuni fusurus erat (Jas. i. 6)."— On v. 19 cf. 
 Jerome: ^'■Somnium regis suo discit somnio; 
 immo et somnium et interpretationem ejus Dei 
 revelatione cognoseit. quod dcemones ignwabant, 
 sapientia saieuli scire non poterat. Unde et 
 Apostoli mysterium, quod cnnctis retro genera- 
 tionibus fuerat ignotum. Domino revelante cog- 
 noscunt (Eph. iii. 5)."*— On v. 22 see Starke : 
 "If many things in the Word of God are too 
 deep and hidden for thee, the fault is not in the 
 Word, but in thyself. Beseech God to enlighten 
 thy dark heart, and thou shalt understand the 
 depths of God's Word with ever-increasing clear- 
 ness." — Notice also the evidence of Daniel's pro- 
 found humility and modesty in v. 23 J: Thou 
 " hast made known unto me now vJiat v.e desired 
 of thee ;" on which Jerome (and after him 
 Theodoret, Calvin, etc.) correctly observes; 
 " Quod guatuor rogant, uni ostenditur. vt et 
 arrogantiam fugiat. ne solus impetrasse rideatur, 
 et agat gratias, quod mysterium smnni solus 
 audierit.^^ — In treating the closing paragraph, 
 vs. 46-49, notice particularly that it is a heathen 
 ruler, a worshipper of idols, who is compelled 
 to exalt and glorify Daniel and his God. Calvin 
 (on V. 47) : '• Profani homines interdum rapiiin- 
 tur in admiration em Dei, et tunc large et prolixe 
 fatentur, guicguid posset requiri a veris Dei 
 cultoribus. Sed iUud est momentaneum : deinde 
 interea manent impliciti suis supeistionibus. Ex- 
 torquet igitur illis Deus rerba, gmim ita pie 
 hquiintur, sed inlus retinent sua mti(i,ut facile 
 postea recidant ad pristinos mores, quemad- 
 modum memorabile exemphim. postea sequetur. 
 Quicguid sit. voluit Deus ore prof am regis ghriam 
 suam promulgari. et ilium esse pi-acone^n sua 
 potentio' et sui mnninis." 
 
 b. With regard to the prophetic contents of 
 Nebuchadnezzar's dream as brought out in Dan- 
 iel's interpretation, vs. 37-44, Melancthon justly 
 comprehends that the political element must in 
 this connection be decidedly subordinate to the 
 religious and Messianic factor, and observes: 
 '■ Ueeo enarratio non tantum est politica de im- 
 perils, sed prabet etiam ocaisionem Danieli con- 
 ciiinandi de toto regno Christi, de novissimo 
 jiidicio, de causa peccati, de redemptione et in- 
 stauratione liumani generis ; cur sit tanta mundi 
 breritas ; quale sit futurum perpetuum regnum, 
 utrum ill hac iwtura immunda vel alia ; qtialis sit 
 futurus Redemtor, et qumnodo ad hoc regnum 
 perceniatur. Jia hwc brecis narratio eomplectitur 
 sutnmam Ecangelii.''' — Cf. Calvin (on' v. 44) : 
 
 * TertulIian'R assertion {dejfovn., c. 7). with reference to 
 vs. 1-19. that Daniel and his friends fasted during three 
 days, and that for this reason their prayer was heard, has 
 its foundation in the fact that he (or ratlier the pre-Jero- 
 Diian Latin version of the Bible used by him) f.ill,,wed an 
 ancient ascetic interpolation of the passage, «hich is still 
 found in the Septnagint : <eat iropijyyetAe vntm^av Kd\ ht-r^trtv. 
 Kai Ti/xuptaf frjnjo-ai.— Cf. the similar ascetic exten.slon 
 which the passage 1 Cor. vii. 5 experit-nced at an eirly day, 
 by the interpolation of the words r^ in^irttla before rji 
 
 TliKKltVxi- 
 
CHAP. m. 1-30. 
 
 89 
 
 " Summa igitur est: quamris visuri sint Judcei 
 potentU&ima imperia, qua malum et terrorem 
 ipsis incutiant., immo reddaiit fere attonitos, 
 Uimen nikU in iUis fore stabile rel Jinnum, quod 
 scilicet cfnitraria sint regno fUii Dei. Atqui male- 
 dictionem denuntiut Jesaias (c. Ix. 12) omnibus 
 regnis, qua non sortierint ecdesiee Dei. Quum 
 ergo omnes iUi monarchce diabolica audacia erexe- 
 rint cristas adeersus JUium Dei, oportuit deleri, 
 et in iUis consjticuam fieri Dei maledictionem, qum 
 Tutbetur apud prophetam. Sic ergo contririt 
 
 Christtu omnia mundi imperia. Hortatur 
 
 propheta (Psa. ii. 13) omnes reges terra, ut 
 mcuUntur FUium. Quum neque Bahylonii, 
 neqiie Persm, neque Macedones, neque Romani 
 Christo sese subjecerint, immo omnes suas vires 
 eontulerint ad ipsnm oppugnandum et fuennt 
 Jwstes pietatis, opportuit deleri a Christo regno, 
 .... Neque etiam liic Daniel ea tanturn 
 attinyit, gum patent oculis hominum, sed altius 
 attoUit mentes nostras, nempe ut sciamus, non 
 alibi veram fulturam, in qua quiescamus, posse 
 reperiri. quam in imo Christi (1 Cor. iii. 3). 
 Extra Christum ergo prouuntiat quieqiiid splen- 
 d^ris et potentiee est in mundo et opulentia et ro- 
 boris, hoc esse aiducum et inralidum et nuUius 
 momenti." — Starke (after Geier, on t. 44) : "All 
 the kingdoms of earth are subject to change, 
 
 but Christ's kingdom shall endure for ever, and 
 no violence can accomplish its overthrow " 
 (Matt. xiv. 19).— Id. (on v. 37 et seq.) : " If 
 God foreknows so exactly all changes in the 
 world-kingdoms, and if He governs them all by 
 His wisdom, should He not know the changes 
 which are to transpire in His church ? Should 
 He not control them for good ? " (Matt. x. 29, 
 30). — Menken {Das ilona rchienbUd, p. 83): 
 " The object for which God created the world, 
 and the end for which He governs it, is the king- 
 dom of God. The kingdom of God is the in- 
 visible root which holds and sustains the world- 
 kingdoras. the invisible power which smites and 
 destroys them. Their more or less intimate 
 connection with the kingdom of God decides the 
 duration, the importance, the significance of 
 world-kingdoms. The fate and the history of 
 all the kingdoms of earth, that have no impor- 
 tant connection with the kingdom of God, or no 
 connection at all, would be of no value. What- 
 ever may be their history, it is always unimpor- 
 tant, because they exert no influence whatever, 
 or at best a very limited influence, upon the 
 postponing or hastening of the final development 
 of things, upon the supplanting of the world- 
 kingdoms by the kingdom of God." 
 
 9 
 10 
 
 11 
 
 3. The test of the faith of DanieCs Hiree friends in the fiery furnace. 
 Chap. III. 1-30. 
 
 1 Nebuchaihiezzar tlie king made an image of gold, whose [its] height was 
 threescore cubits, ««(/ the breadth thereof [its breadth] six cubits: lie set it up in 
 
 2 the plain of Dura, in the province of Babylon. Then [And] Nebuchadnezzar 
 the king sent to gather together the princes [satraps], the governors, and the 
 captains [pashas], the judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sheriffs 
 [lawyeis], and all the rulers of the provinces,' to come to </te dedication of the 
 
 3 image which Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up. Then the princes, the gov- 
 ernors, and captains, the judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sherifls, and 
 all the rulers of the pirovinces, v:e.re gathered together unto the dedication of the 
 image that Nebuchadnezzar the king/(fK/ set up ; and they stood \were standing] 
 
 4 before the image that Nebuchadnezzar ha<l set up. Then [And a herald cried 
 aloud [with might], To you it is commanded [lit. they are saying], O Uit. The] 
 
 •'> people, nations [nations, peoples], and languages,^ That at what time the time 
 that] ye hear [shall hear] the sound of the cornet [horn], flute, harp, sackbut, 
 psaltery, dulcimer [symphony], and all kinds of music, ye fall down and 
 
 6 worship the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king hath set up: and 
 whoso [Zti.who that] falleth not [lit. shall not fall] doionund worshippeth, shall the 
 same hour [lit.m it the moment] be cast into </(e midst of a [or, the] burning 
 
 7 fiery furnace [lit. o\Qn of fire the blazing]. Therefore at that [lit. in it the] time, 
 when [lit. as that] all the people heard [nations were hearing] the sound of the 
 cornet, flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and all kinds of music,' all the people, the 
 nations, and the languages, fell [were falling] down and worshipped [worshippinir] 
 
 8 the golden image that Nebuchadnezzar the king had set up. Wherefore at 
 that time certain Chaidjeans [tit. men Casdim] came near and accused the 
 Jews. They spake [vjere answering], and said [were saying] to the king 
 
 Nebuchadnezzar, O [lit. The] king, live for ever. Thou, O king, hast made a 
 decree, that every man that shall hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, 
 sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer, and all kinds of music, shall fall down and 
 worship the golden image; and whoso falleth not down and worshippeth 
 
00 THE PROPHnr DANIEL. 
 
 12 that he should be cast into the midst of a burning fiery furnace. There are 
 certain Jews, whom thou hast set over the aifairs [work] of the province of 
 Babylon, Shadrach, Mesliaeh, and Abed-nego: these men, O king, have not 
 regarded thee [set account upon thee] ; they serve not thy gods, nor worship 
 
 13 the golden image which thou hast set up. Then Nebuchadnezzar, in his rage 
 and fury, commanded [said] to bring [cause to come] Shadraeh, Meshach, and 
 Abed-nego. Then they brouglit these men [these men were brought] before 
 
 14 the king. Nebuchadnezzar spake, and said unto them, Is it true [o/' purpose], 
 Shadraeh, Meshach, and Abed-nego ? do not ye [, ^^rt^yedo not] serve my 
 
 15 gods, nor worship the golden image wliich I have set up? Now, if ye be ready, 
 that at what time [the time that] ye hear the sound of the cornet, flute, harp, 
 sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer, and all kinds of music, ye fall down and wor- 
 ship the image which I have made, loell ; but [and] if ye worship not, yc shall 
 be cast the same hour [moment] into the midst of a burning fiery furnace ; and 
 
 16 who is that [he] God that shall deliver you out of my hands? Shadraeh, Me- 
 shach, and Abed-nego answered and said to the king, Nebuchadnezzar, we are 
 
 17 not careful [needing] to answer thee [return thee answer] in this matter. Hit 
 be so, our God [If it be that our God] whom we serve, is able to deliver us 
 from the burning fiery furnace; and he will deliver us out of thy 
 
 18 hand, O king.' But [And] if not, be it known unto thee, O king, that 
 we ivill not serve [are not serving] thy gods, nor worship tlie golden image 
 
 19 which thou hast set up. Then was Nebuchadnezzar full of fury, and <Ae form of 
 his visage was changed against Shadraeh, Meshach, and Abed-nego: therefo^-e 
 he spake, and commanded that they should he.at [to heat] the furnace one seven 
 times more than it was wont to be heated \lit. above that any one was ever seen 
 
 20 to heat it]. And he commanded the most mighty men \lit. men, heroes of might] 
 that were in liis army to bind Shadraeh, Meshach, and Abed-nego, and [so as] to 
 
 21 cast them into the burning fiery furnace. Then these men were bound in their 
 coats [shirts, or trowsers, or mantles], their hosen [coats, or tunics], and their 
 hats [cloaks, or turbans,] and t\ie\v other garments, and were cast i«to the midst 
 
 22 of the burning fiery furnace. Therefore, because [lit. from that] the king's com- 
 mandment [word] VMS urgent, and the furnace exceeding hot, the flame of tlie 
 
 23 fire slew those men that took u]) Shadraeh, Meshach, and Abed-nego.' And 
 these three men, Sliadrach, Mesliaeh, and Abed-nego, fell down bound into the 
 
 24 midst of the burning fiery furnace. Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonished, 
 and rose iq^ i" baste, and spake and said unto his counsellors. Did not we cast 
 three men bound into the midst of the fire?' They answered and said unto the 
 
 25 king, True,' O king. He answered and said, Lo, I ' see four men loose [loosed], 
 walking in the midst of the fire, and they have no hurt [harm is not with them]; 
 and the form [appearance] of the fourth is like the Son of God [a son of the 
 
 26 gods]. Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to <^e mouth [door] of the burning fierj 
 furnace, and S])ake, and said, Shadraeh, Meshach, and Abed-nego, ye servants 
 of the most high God, come [go] forth, and come hither. Then Shadraeli. 
 Meshach, and Abed-nego, came [went] forth of [from] the midst of the fire. 
 
 27 And the princes, [the] governors, and [the] captains, and the king's counsellors, 
 being gatliered together, saw [or, were gathered and saw] these men, upon [over] 
 whose bodies the fire had no power [did not rule], nor was a [the~\ hair of their 
 head singed, neither were [had] their coats changed, nor the smell of fire had 
 
 28 passed on tliem. Tlien Nebuchadnezzar spake and said. Blessed he the God of 
 Shadraeh, Meshach, and Abed-nego, who hath sent his angel, and delivered his 
 servants that trusted in him, and have changed' the king's word, and yielded 
 their bodies, tliat they might not serve or worship any god except their oivn 
 
 29 God. Therefore I inake a decree [And fiom me is a decree made]. That 
 every people, nation, and language, which [shall] speak anything amiss '° against 
 the God of Shadraeh, JMesliach, and Abed-nego, shall be cut [made] in pieces, 
 and their h(mses " shall he made a dunghill [or, sink] ; because there is no other 
 
 80 god that can deliver after [like] this sort. Then the king promoted Shadraeh, 
 Meshach, and Abed-nego, in the province of Babylon. 
 
CHAP. III. 1-30. 
 
 di 
 
 CRITICAL NOTES. 
 
 1 [These are apparently t<^hnical tenna for various classes of officers, who are carefully distinguiahed and graded, and 
 may be represented as follows : 
 
 i Satraps, | I Provinces. 
 
 I. -^ PmfeLt^, J- Governmental, ■< DLstricts. 
 
 J ( Metropolis. 
 
 II. 
 
 I. 
 
 ") Treasurers, 
 \ Judges^ 
 
 Courtly, 
 
 i Executive. 
 "if Financial. 
 -,_ J Judges^ (. r I J ^^ ^^^ bench. 
 
 ^^^* 1 Lawyers. \ ^^'' "} At the bar, 
 
 IV. — Superintendenfs. — Functional — General.] 
 ^ [There is in these three terms likewise cleiu*ly a gradation downwards: ncUion$^ tribes^ dialects.] 
 * [In these names of musical instruments, some borrowed from foreign languages, and all more or less uncertain 
 of import, there are nevertheless traces of classincation : 
 I Cornet, [ ^[r- , \ Simple. 
 \ Flute. r^""^ 1 Keyed. 
 
 [wind, 
 
 [ Guitar., J [ 
 
 II. \ Lyre, > String, \ Gradually more complex 
 
 I Unrv- S I 
 
 III. — Bagpipe. — Wind — Compound. 
 IV — Ail aori*.— General,] 
 
 * \.'"^ linl^'p ibDS, lit., ate their pieces of. I.e., slandered; cent. English "backbite."] 
 
 * [The iIa.soretic interpunction requires us to punctuate thus: to deliver us ; from the burning fiery furnace and 
 from thy Itand, O king, lie will deliver.] 
 
 * [The pcsition of the terra for the executioners is verj' emphatic in the original ; literally, those men^ who lifted 
 
 t/i£ Jiame of the fire i-itleit them.] 
 
 * [The order of the words in the original is emphatic ; " Waa it not three men ice caM into [to] the midst of the fire- 
 bound f" This last was an additional circumstance of wonder. — ' 5<2'^2'^ may be the fem. or the "deflnit* state;" 
 in eithercase it is emphatic, i. q., *' the truth." — s The pronoun, being expressed, is emphatic, i". 7., " I myself." The 
 others appear to have been so situated as not to observe this fact, or did not Dot.:ce it. — « TT,lij being in Pael, so far aa 
 the form is concerned, is smiply transitive; but the context gives it the sense of contravene, common in the cognate 
 Syriac— '» nb'i'i Keri li™i something astray, an error or wrong word, *. e., detraction.— " nrPa> his iMUse, i. e., 
 the house of any individual so doing.] 
 
 EXEGETICAL RESIARKS. 
 
 Verses 1, 3. Thu- erection of the image, and the 
 command to fittend itK dediciition. Nebuchad- 
 nezzar the king made (had made) an image of 
 gold. Properly "made" ("27), similar to the 
 repeated phrase in the following : " he set it up," 
 in.stead of '' he caused it to be set up " (verses 1 A, 
 2, 'A, .'). 7, 12, etc.), or to ver.se 34, " we cast three 
 men into the fite,'" instead of " had them cast in." 
 — The Hob. text does not state token the image 
 was made. According to the Septuagiut and 
 Theodotion, who are followed by the Syriac hex- 
 aplar version, it was prepared crni% uKvuKunSiKanw 
 Haiai'x iiWvoCT'y/i, heuce at about the time of the 
 destruction of Jerusalem (cf. 3 Kings xxv. 8 ; 
 Jer. lii. 12), and after the accomplished subjec- 
 tion to ChaldEea of all the nations from India to 
 Ethiopia (cf. the additions in the Sept. to verses 
 2 "nd 'S). The incident appears at all events to 
 belong to this later period of Nebuchadnezzar's 
 reign, since verses 4 4, 7 6, 29 a, mention mivny 
 " people.s, nation.s, and languages," a.s being sub- 
 ject to him, and it was possibly a feature con- 
 nected with a feast in commemoration of his 
 victories (cf. Herodot. IV. 88). The impression 
 of Jehovah's power and greatness which he had 
 formerly received in consequence of Daniel's 
 interpretation of his dream, appears therefore to 
 have been long obliterated. He not only causes 
 the colossal image subsequently described to be 
 erected in honor of some Babylonian national 
 god, but with arrogant presumption he chal- 
 lenges a conflict (see verse l.")). — An image of gold. 
 C,"i certainly designates in this place, as well 
 as in chap. ii. iM. a statue in the human form, 
 and more particularly, the image of a god, as 
 appears from verses 13, 18, 38. It was not there- 
 
 fore a statue of Nebuchadnezzar himself. A 
 marked disproportion seems to have existed in 
 its dimensions, on the supposition that it repre- 
 sented an upright human form, since its height 
 is given at sixty cubits, and its breadth or 
 thickness at only six cubits, while the normal 
 height and breadth of a person in an upright 
 posture are as 6 : 1, not as 10 : 1. For this 
 reason the cb^ has been held to have been in 
 part a mere idol column, similar to the Egyptian 
 obelisks, or, which is certainly more appropriate, 
 analogous to the Amyclaean Apollo, which formed, 
 according to Pausanius ( Lacon. III. 19, 2), a slen- 
 der column provided with head, arms, and feet, 
 in the human form. So M^nter, lidiy. (ler Baby- 
 loiiier, p. .59 ; Hengstcnberg, p. 95 ; and more re- 
 cently Kranichfeld, who refers to the colossus of 
 Rhodes, the height of which was seventy cubits, 
 also to the Egj-ptian ko'/ /.uooin /At}c.?.ot and lii'ii^d- 
 ooi;>ff mentioned by Herodotus (II. 175), and to 
 the image of the sun mentioned by Pliny (//. iV". 
 xxiv. 18), which reached a height of 110 feet, 
 in addition to the Apollo of Amyclje. ["c'?2 
 is properly an image in human likenesn, and ex- 
 cludes the idea of a mere pillar or obelisk, for 
 which n25:?3 would have been the appropriate 
 word. Yet ... . as to the upper part — the 
 head, countenance, arms, breast — it may have 
 been in the form of a man. and the lower part 
 may have been formed like a pill.ir." — Keil.] 
 We might be content with this, or refer in ad- 
 dition to the remarkably tall and slender forms 
 of individual persons on Egyptian wall-painting» 
 and also on Assyrian and Babylonian sculptures 
 (cf. the copies in Wilkinson's Manners and cus- 
 tam.i of the ancient Egi/ptians. and Layard's workt 
 on Nineveh and Babylon [German by Th.Zenkerl 
 — in the latter, e.g. , the co ossal sitting tigure on 
 
y2 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 plate XXII. A), if it were not still more suitable to 
 regard the statement of the height of sixty cubits 
 as asjTiecdoche, designating both the image and 
 its pedestal, and to allow to the latter perhaps 
 twenty-four, and to the former thirty-six cubits, 
 which assumption clearly results in an entirely 
 well-proportioned shape of the statue. If there- 
 fore, the sis proper was Umited to a height of 
 about thirty-six feet, it would compare with 
 the statue of Belus, which, according to Diodor. 
 II. 9, was erected by Semiramis on the summit 
 of the great temple of Bel at Babylon (probably 
 the present "Birs Nimroud "), and attained a 
 height of forty feet ; but it can hardly be directly 
 identified (with Bertholdt) with that statue of 
 Bel,nor yet with the one mentioned by Herodotus 
 (I. 183), which measured twelve cubits in height. 
 Not only was it erected outside of the temple 
 area of Babylon, and possibly even at a consider- 
 able distance from the city itself (see infra), but 
 it is also extremely questionable whether an 
 image of Bel must be assumed in this case, since 
 the Babylonians were devoted to the zealous 
 worship of numerous gods. Entirely too artifi- 
 cial is the opinion of Hofmann ( Weiss, iind 
 ErfilUuiig. I. 277), Ziindel, and Kliefoth, that 
 the image was designed by Nebuchadnezzar to 
 represent the world-power he had founded, in 
 harmony with the religious (cosmical 1 conceptions 
 of heathenism — as indicated (according to Klie- 
 foth) particularly by the numbers six and sixty. 
 — The expression :n~~"il does not compel us to 
 assume that the image was composed through- 
 out of solid gold ; for in Ex. xxxvii. 35 et seq. 
 an altar of wood, and merely covered with 
 plates of gold, is designated simply as "nai^ 
 Syjn ; and Isa, xl. 19 ; xli. 7 ; Jer. x. 3-5 in- 
 dicate plainly that the images of Babylonian idols 
 especially were usually compot:ed of wood with 
 an outside covering of gold. The construction 
 of this image by no means, therefore, involved 
 an immoderate expenditure, as J. D. MichaeUs 
 supposed ; and the gold required to cover its 
 surface may have been less, in weiglit and value, 
 than the amount required (80(1 talents) for the 
 construction of the statue of Bel already referred 
 to as mentioned by Herodotus, whose height was 
 twelve cubits, and for the tables and chairs 
 which accompanied it ; and also less than the 
 amount expended on the statue of Bel mentioned 
 by Diodorus, which reached a height of forty 
 cubits, and cost, as is reported, 1,000 talents. 
 The relative unimportance of this image, which 
 is thus so easy to conceive, deprives the argu- 
 mentum c.r silent io of all its force, as against 
 the credibility of the narrative, which Von Len- 
 gerke and Hitzig have assigned to it, on the 
 ground of its not being mentioned by profane 
 authors. Finally, it is thoroughly inconsequent 
 and ridiculous to discover, with Bleek (in Schlei- 
 erm., Liicke, etc. ; T/ied. Zeitschr., 1822, III., 
 p. 209 ; ct. Eiid. im A. T., % 265), an imaginary 
 prototype of the liiU'/vyua ipj/uuneuc of Antiochus 
 Epiphanes, which was assigned by pseudo-Daniel 
 to the a;ra of the captivity ; for according to 1 
 Mace. i. 54, 59, this .Mf/ . was not a statue at all, 
 but an altar of small size, erected on the altar 
 of burnt offerings at Jerusalem (cf. Hcngsten- 
 berg. p. 80). — Whose height was threescore 
 cubits, and the breadth thereof six cubits. 
 
 "'riB< properly " breadth," but here signifying 
 both breadth and thickness, cf. Ez. vi. 3. The 
 cubits (l"^S-) were probably the royal cubits of 
 the Babylonians (Herod. I. 178), and not smaller 
 than the ordinary cubits iGesen. , Tfieaaur., p. 
 112 s.). Instead of x^Xffwr e^r/xmra as a statement 
 of the height, the Septuagint has -f/xsui' c;, which 
 reading some have endeavored to defend, e. g., 
 MichaeUs, Eichhom, etc. ; but is it probably not 
 even an ancient attempt to provide an ea.sier read- 
 ing, and must be considered merely as the error of 
 a copyist, if not as a tyjiographical error of the 
 Ed. princeps of Simon de Magistris ; see Bugati, 
 in Hiivemick on this passage. — He set it up 
 (caused it to be set up) in the plain of 
 Dura, in the province of Babylon. ^*"■p3) 
 like the corresponding Hebrew term, does not de- 
 signate a narrow valley enclosed by mountains, 
 but a low and level tract, a plain; hence a 
 majority of modems read "in the plain of Dura." 
 The location of this plain is not entirely certain ; 
 but it was probably east of the Tigris and 
 near Apollonia in the province of Sittacene, 
 where a town by the name of Dura was situated, 
 according to Polyb. v. 52, and Ammian, xxv. 
 6, 9. The Aovpa (otherivise Dor) near Caesarea 
 Falsest, on the Mediterranean, mentioned in 
 Polyb. V. 66, and the town of that name situated, 
 according to Polyb. v. 48 ; Ammian. xxiii. 5, 8, 
 near Circesium at the entrance of the Chaboras 
 into the Euphrates, which was l;oo far northward 
 to have been included in the province of Baby- 
 lon,* cannot possibly be intended here. ["We 
 must, without doubt, much rather seek for this 
 plain in the neighborhood of Babylon, where, 
 according to the statement of Jul. Oppert (Ex- 
 pedit. Scieritifique en Mimpoirimie. I. 238 ff.), 
 there are at present to be found in the S.S.E of 
 the ruins representing the former capital a row 
 of mounds which bear the name of Dura ; and 
 at the end of them, along -n-ith two larger 
 mounds, there is a smaller one named el-Mohattnt 
 (= la Celine obliguee), which forms a square six 
 metres high, with a basis of fourteen metres, 
 wholly built of unbumed biicks, and which shows 
 so surprising a resemblance to a colossal statue 
 with its pedestal, that Oppert believes this lit- 
 tle mound to be the remains of the golden image 
 erected by Nebuchadnezzar. " — 'Eeil.] The Sept. 
 which probably regarded the plain here referred 
 to as identical with the plain of Shinar. Gen. xi. 
 2, and which could find no town bearing the name 
 of Dura within its limits, has conceived the name 
 i<"l_'"'1 to be an appellative, and rendered it by 
 hi TTfriJu -at' Trepiiiu'/.m (cf -7,-r,, circiimire, in 
 orbem ire) ; in which, however, they were more 
 nearly correct than is Hitzig, who assumes that 
 his pseudo-Daniel adopted the name of fheplnin 
 from the earlier designation (chap. ii. 45) of the 
 mountain, s^ir- — Verse 2. Then Nebuchadnez- 
 ■Lax the king sent to gather together, etc. This 
 ser\-ice was probably performed by couriers 
 (Ci2^)i '>^ho were doubtless employed in similar 
 duties at the Babylonian court, as well as at th« 
 Persian (Esth. x. 15 ; viii. 14). and even at thg 
 courts of Saul (1 Sam. xi. 7) and of Hezekiah 
 (3 Chron. xxx. 6, 10). — The princes, the gov- 
 
 • Cf. gcneraEy, Rawlinson, Journal o/ the B. Geogr. i 
 vtelu, \„ p. 'J3. 
 
CHAP. III. 1-30. 
 
 9c 
 
 emors, and the captains. Among the seven 
 classes of officials enumerated, these three are 
 shown to have been more immediately related 
 to each other by the ^ before !*";ns. Their 
 members were executive officers of superior 
 rank, who combined both civil and military 
 functions in their range of duties, and who may 
 have been substantially on a par with the execu- 
 tive officials connected w^th the ministry of the 
 interior in a modern state, while the four suc- 
 ceeding classes were probably connected with the 
 departments of finance and justice. (1) The 
 V?S1~'.;."ns were naturally satraps (cf. ksJmtra- 
 pt'twuii on the cuneiform inscriptions at Behi- 
 tun, which, according to Haug [in Ewald's 
 Bibl. Jithrb., V. 153J is equivalent to "protec- 
 tor of the country," and according to Lassen 
 [Zeitschi: far Kunde des Murgenl., VI. 1, IS] is 
 synonymous with "guardian of the warriors of 
 the host;" cf. also the Zend shoithrapaiti and 
 the Sanscr. /cshiithrapn) — the superior executive 
 officers of the several provinces, vice or sub- 
 kings to the sovereign (cf. the Vr P*?! Isa. x. 8 ; 
 Gen. xiv. 1, 2, with the S';?^'? '^bs, Dan. ii. 
 37, Ezra vii. 12), and therefore mentioned at 
 the head of the body of officials. The fact that 
 the title of these chief administrators of pro- 
 vinces is Persian does not demonstrate that 
 their office was entirelj' confined to the time of 
 the Acha^menidian Persian empire, or that it 
 was even created by Darius Hystaspis (Herod. 
 III. yO s.s. ); for Xenophon {Cyrop. viii. 6, 1) 
 dates its existence back to the time of Cyrus, 
 and Berosus liu Josephus, c. Ajnoit, 1. 19 ; Ant. 
 X. 11. 1) designates Xecho already as a re-nyfiivog 
 cnrnd-i/r of Xabopolassar, which is hardly to be 
 considered a gi'oss anachronism, but rather as an 
 indication of the relation of Xecho as a vassal to 
 Babylon. Consequently, the author cannot be 
 charged with a historical error, either in this 
 connection, or in chap. vi. 2 et seq. , where he 
 refers to the satraps of Darius the Mede. The 
 •i";r-^-'Jns must be regarded rather, as one of 
 the Persian elements of the writer's Chaldee 
 idiom, the number of which, according to the 
 Introd. ^ 1, note 3, must have been considerable, 
 even at an early period (cf. on chap ii. 4); and 
 the early intrusion of such into the language and 
 range or conception among the Chaldasans, is no 
 more remarkable than is the mention of the 
 3""-"!, Jer. xxxix. 3, as a Chalda^an offi- 
 cer. The Septuagint, however, renders the 
 term by anv/wTai only here and in chap. vi. 2, 
 4, while in vs. 3 and 27 it has h~aroi, in Ezra 
 viii. 36 (hntK/irai^ in Esth. viii. 9 ntKm'6iwi^ and in 
 Esth. ix. 3 riiiuvmi. These variations indicate 
 that the conception of a definite office was no 
 longer connected with the title, at the time 
 when that version was made. — (2) According to 
 the observations on chap. ii. 48, the V:^9 
 were "superintendents, administrators " gener- 
 ally ; in this case naturally not endowed with 
 spiritual functions, but rather performing secu- 
 lar duties under the satraps, and finally em- 
 ployed chiefly in military rather than in civil 
 offices (cf. the S^:30 of Babylon, mentioned 
 together with the Bi-liSJ, Jer. Ii. 57). The 
 
 Septuagint appears to have conceived of these 
 Signin, in harmony with this view, as being 
 " prsefects of the host, or commanders of the 
 provinces;" for they render the term in this in- 
 stance by iyrpaT!i)nt (as in v. 3 and often, twelve 
 times in all), while they translate it elsewhere 
 by rnrraijxai (chap, iii 27), 'lynriiivot (chap. ii. 
 j 48), oriiMoiTff.— (3) S«r^^~5 (Heb. ninp, from 
 nriB). In view of the probably Indo-Germanio 
 derivation of this term (cf. Sanscr. paksha, 
 " side," Prakr. pakkha. modern Persian and 
 Turkish panha) it properly designates "those 
 who are stationed on the sides or flanks, adju- 
 tants," and then governors, or the representa- 
 tives of a sovereign in a designated field of ad- 
 ministration, provincial pra;fects. The gover- 
 nors whom Solomon placed over his pro\'incea 
 outside of Palestine, already bore this title (1 
 Kings X. 15 ; 2 Chron. ix. 14), also the governors 
 of the Syrian king Benhadad (1 Kings xx. 24) ; 
 the corresponding officers among the Syrians 
 (Isa. xxxvi. 9 ; 2 Kings xviii. 24), Chaldaj-ans 
 (Ezek. xxvi. 6, 23 ; Jer. Ii. 23) and Persians (Esth. 
 viii. 9 ; ix. 3 ) ; and especially the Persian gover- 
 nors of Judjea subsequent to the captivity (Hag. 
 i. 1, 14 ; ii. 2, 21 ; Neh. v. 14, 18, etc.) Among 
 the nations last mentioned, who employed 
 satraps as the chief priefects of provinces, the 
 nnp was merely a subordinate to those officers 
 (and more purely civil than military in his official 
 character, as appears from the position of Zerub- 
 babel and Nehemiah, according to Haggai and 
 Neh. 1. c. ) ; but in the kingdoms of Solomon 
 and Benhadad the Tinc seem to have been 
 equal in rank to the later satraps, and there- 
 fore were chief governors. In this place and v. 
 3 the Septuagint translates To-ap xai ; in v. 27, 
 aftxi^^n~f>i''>~<u {i.e., chief of a nationality). — (4) 
 According to the Sept. the '*'|'^!3"^^^< are "over- 
 seers" generally (Jn-nm/), while most modems 
 regard them as "chief judges or discerners." 
 Ewald defines them as " chief star-gazers, or au- 
 gurs of the first-class " (!), and Hitzig. as "direc- 
 tors, upon whom devolves the decision of matters, 
 or magistrates." The term, which occurs only in 
 this place, appears to be a genuine Aramaic 
 compound, from "l~Si glory, dignity, and "l!3t 
 to decide (cf. chap. ii. 27), and therefore proba- 
 bly designates a class of officers with whom 
 rested the final decision, particularly in regard 
 to the economical or financial administration of 
 the provinces [possibly = the modem Oriental 
 Tiziers], The class which follows next in order 
 obliges this restriction of the offices of the 
 H'-lTjI-ts. -_ (.5) X^'ISia, "the treasurers." 
 These officers do not probably differ from the 
 V"}?!3, Ezra vii. 21 (cf. i. 8), which term signi- 
 fies } aCnoi'/.a/v-ff, *''• managers of the public treas- 
 ury " (cf. Sept. ihniKr,Taij, and is possibly related 
 to the Pers. gaitha, modem Pers. genj, "treas- 
 ure " (cf. gma). Ewald's assertion that '^?~3 
 is synonymous with "l?!", vs. 24, 27, and sig- 
 nifies a " bearer of power,'' or " exalted prince 
 of the empire" (analogous to the old-Pers. 
 chudtdr, from chad., "God, authorization"), is 
 
 without adequate support. — (G) The K^'llCj'' 
 
94 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 are clearly the " learned in the law," or the 
 "guardians of the law."' The first element of 
 the word is evidently r~, "the law" (cf. Pers. 
 ddtii. from da, "to give"), to which the Pers. 
 ending vdr is annexed. Cf. the Pehlvi word 
 (Uitouber (Armen. dataior), "judges." — (7) The 
 immistakable connection of H"~^~ (like No. 4, i 
 a hapax leg.) with the Arab, ftah (cf. the Tur- 
 kish mufti, chief judge) marks this class of 
 officers as " dispensers of justice, lawyers, jud- 
 ges" in the strict sense (not "prsfecti" as the 
 Vulgate has it. or "oi f-' i^ovaion;" as it is ren- 
 dered by Theodotion, in each case because of a 
 failure to apprehend the true meaning. — And 
 all the rulers of the provinces; i.e., all the re- 
 maining officials who administrated the affairs 
 of provinces. On flSpC, "ruler, high offi- 
 cial," cf. Eccles. viii. 4, and also the verb 
 t:;".L"S. chap. ii. 48. The prfefect of the body- 
 guard, mentioned in chap. ii. 14, is not neces- 
 sarily included among these remaining rulers, 
 since only the officers of the provinces are more 
 immediatel.y referred to in this connection 
 (against Kranichfeld). Von Lengerke is guilty 
 of a gross impropriety, when he finds here "an- 
 other extravagance, since the empire could not 
 in the meantime be left without an administra- 
 tion." It is not necessary to stretch ;t so un- 
 reasonably in this case, as to make it indicate 
 the presence of iiU the government officials with- 
 out exception (cf. 1 Sam. xxviii. 4, and gene- 
 rally Kranichfeld on the passage). — To come to 
 the dedication of the image, etc. "SIH- the 
 fea»t of (kdicfition, religious dedicatory ser- 
 vices, with which were connected sacrifices, the 
 burnmg of incense, sacrificial feasts, etc. Cf. 
 Ezra vi. Hi, where the same expression is em- 
 ployed with reference to the dedication of the 
 second temple. 
 
 Verses 3-7. The dedication. And they stood 
 before the image that Nebuchadnezzar had 
 (caused to be) set up. The Keri has ","■»; "p in- 
 stead of V^^Tt, as it substitutes V''!l for 
 "r"H~ in chap. ii. 38, according to the usage of the 
 Targums. — '.-~^, "before, opposite." which is 
 employed here and in Ezra iv. 10. instead of the 
 usual Chaldee form -.-pb (chap. v. 1. 4, 10 ; Ezra 
 vi. 13), is a Syriasm in the pronunciation, similar 
 
 to that in 
 
 Gen. xxxvii. 23. which is used 
 
 instead of — '.^/'. — Verse 4. Then a herald cried 
 aloud. ""~3 and the corresponding verb '"13 
 •' to proclaim publicly" (v. 29), are not exactly 
 Aramaic adaptations of the Greek terms '■'iini, 
 KT/pir-eir iBertholdt and othersi, but are without 
 doubt radically related to them, and also to the 
 Sanscr. kfiis, old-Pers. khre>sio. ""one who calls 
 or screams" (mod. Pers. r/ris-t&a; cf. the Ger- 
 man kreischen) ; while on the other hand, they 
 are also related to snp " to call." — '"T?" 
 miyJdily. with a loud voice, as in chap. iv. 11 ; 
 V. 7, and as in the Heb. v-r, Psa. xxix. 4 ; 
 Isa. xl. i). — To you it is commanded, O people^ 
 nations, and languages. "("""Sf, properly •■ they 
 sav" («/t .«".V"ij), a very common idiom in the 
 
 Chaldee, expressing an impersonal sense, oi 
 more directly, serving as a substitute for the im- 
 personal passive construction (Winer, § 49, 3). 
 The collocation of S"^"? (" peoples, nations"), 
 S'^iit (" tribes," a more limited conception than 
 the preceding ; cf. alsointheHeb., e.j. Psa. cxi. C 
 with Gen. xxv. 16), ana *«v"f ^ ("'tongues," "'peo- 
 ples having a common language ;" cf. the Heb. 
 ■|i"i;3 Isa. Ixvi. 18 ; Zech. viii. 23), recurs again in 
 vs. 7, 29, and 31, and, indeed, often in the book of 
 Daniel (v. 19; vi. 26; vii. 14). This formula, 
 which combines in a solemn triad " all the na- 
 tions in the empire, however distantly related 
 they may be, or however great may be the 
 diversity between themselves or their constit- 
 uent elements," and which exhorts them to 
 give attention, was probably stereotyped in the 
 official edicts of the ChaldEean realm, whose 
 motley aggregate of languages and nations would 
 give rise to such comprehensive phra.-^es more 
 readily than would the character of any other 
 empire of antiquit}'. The proclamation, of 
 course, is not addressed to all the individuals of 
 the various nations, tribes, etc., but only to their 
 representatives who were actually present. 
 ["The proclamation of the herald refers not 
 only to all who were present, since besides the 
 officers there certainly was present a great crowd 
 of people from all parts of the kingdom, as M. 
 Geier has rightly remarked, so that the assem- 
 bly consisted of persons of various races and 
 languages. S'SS denotes tribes of people, as 
 the Hebr. riSS, T'^tH, Gen. xxv. 16, denotes 
 the several tribes of Ishmael, and in Num. xxv. 
 15, the separate tribes of Jlidianites ; and ia 
 thus not so extensive in its import as 1"^'??> 
 peoples. S^'Cb, corresponding to ri:~^n, Isa. 
 Ixvi. 18, designates (see Gen. x. 5, 20, 31) com- 
 munitics of men of the mine l/inyitayt. and ia 
 not a tautology, since the distinctions of nation 
 ami of Language are in the course of history fre- 
 quently found. The placing together of the three 
 words denotes all nations, however they may 
 have widely branched off into tribes with differ- 
 ent Languages, and expresses the sense that no 
 one in the whole kingdom should be exempted 
 from the command. " — Kdl. ] — Verse 5. At what 
 time ye hear the sound of the comet, flute, 
 etc. As in the case of religious dedicator}- fes- 
 tivals among the Israelites (Psa. xxx. 1; Neh. 
 xii. 27 ; 1 Mace. iv. 04), so at the dedication of 
 this heathen statue, there was no lack of music 
 and sonc (cf. E,x. xxxii. 18 et seq. ). This is an 
 especially natural feature, since the Babylonians, 
 as well as the ancient Assyrians, appear, as a 
 people, to have been unusually addicted to music, 
 in view of the testimony afforded by numerous 
 historical records of a positive character; cf. 
 Isa. xiv. 11 ; Psa. cxxxvii. 2 ; Herodotus, I. 191 
 (the X"!"^''"' ot the Babylonians during the cap- 
 ture of their city by Cyrus) ; Curtius. V. 3 
 (Alexander welcomed on his entrance into Baby- 
 lon, by ■' artificer cum Jidibiix xni yeiuris—laiideif 
 rajtiin cntiere wliti'"). Additional evidence in 
 found in the representations of musicians with 
 various instniments. on the mcnumentul edifices 
 of Ntueveh and Babylon.— The names of the siji 
 
CHAP. III. 1-30. 
 
 95 
 
 Instruments here enumerated axe in the singu- 
 lar, not as indicating that only one of each kind 
 was at hand, but as a generic designation of the 
 entire class to which it belonged. Hence, there 
 is no impropriety in rendering them in the 
 plural "the comets, flutes," etc. [" SJ"ii5, horn, 
 is the tuba of the ancients, the l^p or lETi" of 
 the Hebr.; see Josh. vi. 5. sn^'pinica, from 
 P^'f, to hiss or whistle, is the reed-flute, trans- 
 lated by the Sept. and Theodotion ovpiy^, the 
 fhephercCs or Pan's pipe, which consisted of 
 several reeds of different thickness and length 
 bound together, and according to a Greek tradi- 
 tion (PoUux, IV. 9, 15), was invented by two 
 Modes." — Ktil. "It is uncertain whether the 
 horn intended was straight, like the Assyrian, or 
 cun-ed, like the Roman cornu and lituiis. The 
 pipe was probably the double instrument, played 
 at the end. which was familiar to the Susianians 
 and .\ssyrians. The harp would seem to have 
 resembled the later harp of the Assyrians ; but 
 it had fewer strings, if we may judge from a re- 
 presentation upon a cylinder. Like the As.syr- 
 ian, it was carried under the arm, and was 
 played with both hands, one on either side of the 
 strings" (Rawlinson, Five Momirchies, III. 20).] 
 — The harp, sackbut, psaltery, dulcimer. For 
 the opinion that of the names of the four instru- 
 ments here mentioned, which several e.Kpo.sitors 
 hold to be derived without exception from the 
 Greek, probably but two are really taken from 
 that language, see the Introd. § 7. See ibid, 
 note 2. concerning the possibility of an impor- 
 tation of musical instruments and their names 
 from Greece, even prior to the time of Daniel. 
 It is yet to be noticed in this connection: (1) 
 that instead of the Kethib Q-iri"^p. which is to 
 be pronounced either as w^r^""!? or C1"ip, the 
 Keri has the shortened form Ci"P, which ap- 
 jiears to have been in general use in later times. 
 The Syriac affords repeated examples of the con- 
 version of the Greek ending n: into ct (Gesen. 
 T/ies., p. 1215). so that in this direction the 
 derivation of the term from the Gr. K'tidim: seems 
 certainly to be secured. However, see the 
 lutroJ., as above. — (2) The cau^iiKi/, which 
 Strabo notices (X. 8, Ti as being of foreign 
 origin, and whose invention is attributed by 
 Clemens Alex. (Slrow. I. ?(!) to the Troglodytes, 
 might possibly be exjilained in analogy with the 
 Sanscrit ^ambiiku, "bivalve, muscle." The 
 form S*?r?' however, appears rather to point to 
 the Shemitic root TiZZ, "to weave." — (3) The 
 orthography of VlPr^S is not fixed; in v. 7 
 the name is written with ^ instead of j-,, and in 
 vs. 10 and 15 it is pointed with _ under p. 
 The numerous changes of the Greek ending wv 
 into y— which are found in the later Chaldee, 
 and of which l'";~~:~ = nvviSpiov is the most 
 familiar (Gesen. Thesaur., p. 1116), uidicate 
 the identity of this instrument with the 
 \ba'/-iiiiiov, ["It was an instrument like a harp, 
 which, according to .Augustine (on Psa. xxxii. 
 [xxxiii.] 3 and Psa. xlii. [xliii.] 4) was dis- 
 tinguished from the citJiara in this particular, 
 
 that while the strings of the cithara passed ovei 
 the sounding-board, those of the psalterion (or 
 organon) were placed under it. Such harjis are 
 found on Egyptian (see Roselini) and also on As- 
 syrian monuments (cf. Layard, yinev. andBdb., 
 plate XIII. 4)." — Keil. "In Egypt they have 
 an instrument, evidently of the same name, san- 
 tir (Lane, Mod Eg., p. 77), which is a species 
 of dulcimer, is stringed, and is beaten with two 
 small sticks."— 5<«nr(.]— (4) V. 10 has tho 
 softer ~'^:.S~w instead of ~^:"'D'3^0 ; a form 
 which points back no less certainly than does 
 the more usual term, to the Greek av/jouvm, 
 since the sound v is intermediate between ^ and 
 ^—. Its rendering by " bagpipe" (Germ. Sack- 
 pfeife, Dudelsack) has a sufficient support iu 
 Polyb. XXXI. 4, in Saadias on this passage, and 
 in the Italian sampogna. In addition, the name 
 avudumt (Jerome, " consonantia ") is exceedingly 
 suitable lor an instrument consisting of two 
 pipes which are passed through a leathern bag, 
 from which their ends protrude equally above 
 and below — the lower of which pipes, when 
 played with the fingers like a flute, emits in 
 screaming tones the sounds breathed into the 
 upper and increased in force by passing through 
 the bag (cf. Winer, R'alw. II., p. 123). We 
 must therefore reject its interpretation by -J^J", 
 ' ' Pandean pipes " in the Heb. translation of the 
 pa.ssage ; further, its rendering as "a drum " by 
 Isidore (Origg. III. 21) ; the derivation of the 
 word by Hiivernick from n^c> " a reed ;" that 
 by Paulus from '"';^t^, " a ship," "the cover- 
 ing of a ship" (cf. a resonant frame), etc. 
 [Stuart adduces the instrument called mim- 
 miirah, described and figured by Liine (Mod. Eg. , 
 II. 81, 82), still commonly used in Egypt by the 
 boatmen, and giving two symphonious sounds, 
 being double.] — And all kinds of music. A 
 comprehensive supplemental phrase, similar to 
 that which follows the names of the oflicers in 
 V. 2. [By the addition "this pompous lan- 
 guage of the world-ruler and of the herald of his 
 power is well expressed." — Keil.} ^'l'^\ does 
 not desiguate either instrumental music or 
 " song" (Hitz. ) as distinct from each other, hut 
 music in general ; cf. the Sept. and Theodotion : 
 K 11 ~in-7'i'; jti'iuf unvaiKLii'. The expression there- 
 fore does not refer to various melodies, nor to 
 different parts of vocal music ; but it does not, 
 on the other hand, exclude such music from the 
 ceremony ; cf. the Targ. Gen. iv. 21 ; Ez. xxxiii. 
 22. — Ye (shall) fall down and worship the 
 golden image, etc. Kranichteld obser\'es cor- 
 rectly (on V. 6) : " The homiige which the king 
 required to be rendered to his god (cf. on v. 14) 
 on the occasion of this great national festival in 
 honor of their victories (cf. on v. 1), was re- 
 g.arded as a test of the loyalty of the officers to 
 the king himself, and especially in the case of 
 those who belonged to subjugated nations. The 
 \-ictory of a heathen king over other tribes and 
 nations was considered a triumph of his gods 
 over their gods (1 Kings xx. 23, 28; 2 Chron. 
 xxviii. 23 ; Isa. xxxvi. 18-20, etc.); and hostile 
 kingdoms included the gods of their opponents 
 among their foes, and in contrast with the usual 
 tolerance and indifference of heathenism in re- 
 gard to the worship of the gods, they refuseo 
 
ae 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 them rnverence. so long as neither party believed 
 that its cause was lost. Thus, for instance, the 
 different foes of the Assyrian empire are char- 
 acterized on an inscription of Tiglath-pilesar as 
 those who ' refuse to reverence ' the god of 
 Asshur, as the lord of Tiglath-pilesar. Oppod- 
 tioii to the gods of a kingdom was therefore 
 equivalent to hostility against the realm. The 
 same inscription represents Tiglath-pilesar, for 
 this reason, as directly imposing on the con- 
 quered nations the worship of Asshur's god ; 
 they must prostrate themselves before this of- 
 fended god, and thus render their tribute 
 (Fusey, Daniel, p. 444 ss.). This will illustrate 
 the baselessness of Von Lengerke's assertion that 
 religious compulsion was unknown among the 
 ancient Asiatic nations, and that they never en- 
 forced a recognition of the gods from unwilling 
 persons. What has been remarked, serves to 
 show that, on the contrary, an expression of 
 homage toward the national divinity was always 
 required, and even insisted on, whenever the 
 political supremacy of a realm wa.s in question ; 
 and this would be observed especially in the 
 case of officers, upon whose loyalty the security 
 of the realm of such divinity might depend. If 
 Nebuchadnezzar was concerned, on the celebra- 
 tion of the nation's triumph before us, to secure 
 a recognition of his right, as the supreme ruler, 
 to the allegiance of his subjects, and especially 
 to the homage of the officials to whom was en- 
 trusted the administration of his empire, it fol- 
 lows that the compulsory requirement to do 
 homage to the national god of his kingdom, was, 
 in this instance, a necessary measure, aiming 
 simply at the preservation of the realm." — Verse 
 6, And-whoso fallethnot do\im. . . . shall the 
 same hour be cast into the midst of a burning 
 fiery fumaoe. ^TIP, guicungue, synonymous 
 with "l""':. chap. ii. 28 (cf. v. 11 ; chap. iv. 14). 
 — S<~5|P"ri3, in tJie sameJunir, literally " in it, 
 the hour ;" the suffix, which anticipates the con- 
 nected noun, is annexed to the preposition ; cf. 
 vs. 7, 8, 1 "> ; iv. 80, 33, and also the instances in 
 which, additionally, the preposition is itself re- 
 peated before the noun, e.g. S'^b'^ba RS, chap. 
 V. 30; cf. chap. v. 12. [''The frequent pleo- 
 nastic use. in the later Aramaic, of the union of 
 a preposition with a suffix anticipating the fol- 
 lowing noun, has in the Bibl. Chald. generally a 
 certain emphasis, for the pronominal suffix is 
 manifestly used demonstratively, in the sense, 
 ' even this.' " — Keil.] "5™, after the Arabic, is 
 literally, "the quickly expiring, the quickly 
 passing," hence ii moment, in which sense the 
 term is often found in the Targums ( — Hebr. 
 53 T). In Daniel it always has the meaning of 
 " hour," as appears especially from chap. iv. 16 
 [19). [The passage here referred to, however, 
 does not support this later or Rabbinical import 
 to the word, which is therefore here, as else- 
 •K-here in Daniel, to be rendered moment.] The 
 word docs not seem to be related to the verb 
 nrUT, "to see;" the root from which it is 
 derived signifies in the Arabic " celenter ire, 
 eui-rere." — l^PH, according to the Arabic, liter- 
 ally. ' ' a furrow, excavation " (whence probably : 
 lime pit), designates an excavated smelting 
 
 furnace in the form of a pit, a fire pit, which 
 sense is also expressed in the corresponding 
 Ethiop. TI~S, and by the originally synonymous, 
 but not essentially related Heb. ~l=i:P. The 
 smelting furnace here referred to, however, 
 being designed for the infliction of the death 
 penalty on criminals by means of fire, was ar- 
 ranged according to vs. 2a and 26, so that at 
 least one. if not more of its sides, rose as per- 
 pendicular (or inclined) surfaces above the earth, 
 analogous to the construction of our lime-kilns 
 and furnaces, and probably also to the brick- 
 kiln (13bn) at Tahpanhes in Egypt, which ia 
 referred to in Jer. xliii. 9 et seq. The principal 
 j opening, by which fuel and other materials de- 
 signed for burning (or smelting) were introduced 
 into the furnace, was above (see v. 22) ; a 
 second, for the removal of slag, cinders, etc., or 
 the molten metal, was arranged below, in one 
 of the sides, and permitted persons standing 
 before the furnace to observe the material in its 
 interior (the J'^P, v. 20 ; cf . vs. 24, 25). The 
 passage Jer. xxix. 22 (" The Lord make thee 
 like Zedekiah and like Ahab. whom the king of 
 Babylon roasted in the fire " ) attests that the 
 Babylonians were accustomed to bum con- 
 demned criminals, and perhaps prisoners of 
 war in such furnaces, even prior to the time of 
 Daniel. The Moabites employed the same 
 method of inflicting capital punishment, accord- 
 ing to Am. ii. 1, as did also the Israelites, 
 according to the Keri of 2 Sam. xii. 31. [" That 
 burning was not an unusual punishment in the 
 East is sufficiently known. As to the Persians, 
 see Brissonius. Jje li(g. Pers., II. cap. 216. . . 
 . . . Chardin (who was in Persia A. D. 1(571-7) 
 relates that in a time of scarcity, two furnaces 
 were kept burning a whole mouth, in order to 
 consume such as exacted more than the lawful 
 price of food ( Voyages, VI. p. 11%)."— Stuart.] 
 The genitive clause SF,""^ S"^:, '• of the 
 burning fire," exemplifies the terribly cruel and 
 frightful character of the threatened punish- 
 ment.— Verse 7. Therefore at that time when 
 all the people heard the sound cf the cornet, 
 etc. ["8«:?:T na (cf. also v. 8) is interchanged with 
 8''153, at the time (verses 5 and 15) ; but it is 
 to be distinguished from SPI'^.'Tia, at the same 
 moment, verses 6 and 15, for ^^^, or HSO has 
 in the Bib. Chald. only the meaning instant, 
 moment (cf. chap. iv. 16, 30 ; v. 5), and 
 acquires the signification short tiine, hrmr, first 
 in the Targ. and Rabbins." — Keil.] Only five, 
 instead of six, sorts of musical instruments are 
 here mentioned ; but the omission of the 
 SS^rB^^O can hardly be designed, as appears 
 from vs. 10 and 15. It is probably to be attri- 
 buted to the haste of the writer, which also 
 caused the orthography of Tiic:C!:, with ^ in- 
 stead of n, in this passage, and only here. 
 
 Verses 8-12. 'I'lie companions of Daniel 
 charged with transgressing the royal command. 
 Wherefore at that tijne certain Chaldaeana 
 came near, ete. "'Wherefore," i.e., in \iew o£ 
 the worship rendered by all the people, except- 
 ing only the Jews, to the idol image. Daniel 
 does not mention that it was refused by the 
 
CHAP. IIL 1-SO. 
 
 Jews, leaving it to be inferred, as a matter of 
 coarse. — And accused (or slandered) the Jews 
 (cf. chap. vi. 25 1 ; literally, " and ate the pieces 
 (of flesh) of the Jews" — a phrase found also in 
 the Arabic and the Srriac, which expresses both 
 the murder caused bj the slanderous tongue, 
 and the gloating over the fragmentary remains 
 of the victim. Cf. the German ■'Jemnndeii 
 kurz und kUin machen, an ihm keiii (jutm Hnar 
 iassen." It appears from the indefinite "Chal- 
 rtajan men " that the malicious informers were 
 not specifically Chalda^an priests or wise men 
 (thi.s would have been indicated by T'I'.pS 
 merely, cf. chap. ii. 2), but people generally, 
 who were of Chaldaian descent. [" That which 
 was odious in their report was, that they used 
 the instance of disobedience to the king's com- 
 mand on the part of the Jewish officers as an 
 occasion of removing them from their offices, — 
 that their denunciation of them arose from their 
 envying the Jews their position of influence, as 
 in chap. vi. .5 i4). fE." — Keil.] — Verse 9. O 
 king, live lor ever. Cf. chap. ii. 4. — Verse 12. 
 There are certain Jews wrhom thou hast set 
 over the affairs of the province of Babylon. 
 A clear reference to the close of the preceding 
 section (chap, ii 49). The mention of their ex- 
 alted official rank was designed to emphasize the 
 dangerous feature connected with the disobedi- 
 ence of such men to the royal command, and also 
 to direct attention to the blackness of their in- 
 gratitude toward their royal benefactor. — Thess 
 men, O king, have not regarded thea; i.e., 
 thy comra.ands. '^iS' " these," is peculiar to the 
 Bibliciil Chaldee of Daniel and Ezra, and is not 
 found in the Targums, which have P^S or n^H 
 instead (Winer, § !), p. 29). — They sarvo not 
 thy god<, nor worship the golden image, etc. 
 The furnier of these charges is related to the 
 latter as the general to the particular; the 
 gener.al lack of reverence for the gods of Babj-- 
 lou on the part of the three men, which had been 
 formerly observed, was now demonstrated by a 
 flagrant example. Because of this evident re- 
 lation to e.ich other between the two clauses — 
 a relation that is again brought out in the par- 
 allel ver e 18 (and possibly in verse 14 ; see on 
 the passage;^ — the Kethib Tj'.TjStl^i "thy gods." 
 mu.st be preferred to the Keri ■;]";»", "thy 
 god ; ■' which has been the case accordingly, 
 in Theodotiou and the Vulgate Compare, al- 
 though-it is superfluous, verse 28 i, where ~i^'? 
 ~^;.H shows clearly that a number of gods were 
 
 in question. [" The Chaldeans knew the three 
 Jews, who were so placed as to be well known, 
 and at the same time envied, before this. They 
 hail long known that they did not worship idols ; 
 but on this occasion, when their religion made 
 It necessary for the Jews to disobey the king's 
 command, they made use of their knowledge." 
 — Ilitzlij. It is barely possible that the pro- 
 posal of erecting such an idolatrous image and 
 requiring the whole realiu. and especially the 
 punlic officials to adora it, originated, as in 
 chap. vi. with some such malicious and envious 
 enemies of Judaism.) — Why was not Daniel in- 
 cluded in this charge of the Chaldajans '? To this 
 question that so readily presents itself, no an- 
 
 swer can be given that will be sufficiently as- 
 sured to exclude aU others ; but we are not on 
 that account compelled (with v. Lengerke) tc 
 find here a new improbability, and a testimony 
 against the credibility of the book. Daniel 
 might be omitted from the number of the ac- 
 cused, (1) because he was too firmly established 
 in the favor of the king, to justify the attempt 
 of a slanderer to destroy him (Calvin, Hiivemick, 
 etc.); (2) because he was absent on business, or 
 sick (Liiderwald, Jahn); (3) because his position, 
 as chief of the magian caste, would remove him 
 from the gaze of the multitude, and would alsc 
 relieve him from the obligation of prostrating 
 himself before the idol, which more immediately 
 affected the secular officials (see on verse 2, 
 Kranichfeld). All of these explanations are ad- 
 missible ; and very possibly any two of the 
 reasons adduced might combine to cause hia 
 absence, e. g. Nos. 1 and 2, or 2 and 8. The 
 opinion of Hengstenberg however (with whom 
 Hitzig agrees), that according to chap. ii. 49, 
 Daniel filled no office of superior power and in- 
 fluence in the state, but that he at once trans 
 f erred to his three friends the dignity of a viceroy 
 which was offered to him. and contented him- 
 self with the spiritual rank of chief of the iilagi. 
 cannot be entertained. See to the contrary 
 chap. ii. 48, 49, where it was shown that, 
 together with this spiritual dignity, Daniel must 
 have possessed considerable influence in the 
 political field, although not bearing the title of 
 a recognized officer of the state. ["But the 
 circumstance that Daniel, if he were present, did 
 not exert himself in behalf of his three friends, 
 may be explained from the quick execution of 
 Babylonian justice ; provided some higher reason 
 did not determine him confidently to commit 
 the decision of the matter to the Lord his God." 
 —KcU.] 
 
 Verses 13-15. The accused summ'med to re- 
 nounce Jehotnh. Then Nebuchadnezzar in 
 rage and fury commanded to bring, etc. 
 '*?r'l '?")?• The use of the synonymous terms 
 expre.sses the violence of the king's rage. The 
 Inf. Aphel "'i'^^'^''' "to let them be brought," is 
 found also in chap. v. 2. 13. — Then they brought 
 these men belore the king; rather, " Then 
 these men were brought before the king." 
 ^"-^"'■■^ is not to be taken transitively. " they 
 brought these men" (Chr. B. Michaelis. etc.) ; 
 ni^r is it to be explained as a Hebraizing Hophal 
 form (Buxt. . Haveruick, v. Lengerke). It is 
 rather a passive form of the Aphel after the 
 manner of the Hebrew [Hophal], of which the 
 3d pers. masc. sing, is ''^''D' the fem. CT;r"'n 
 (chap. vi. 18), while the regular participle with 
 a passive signffioation would be """''5' and the 
 active partic. Aphel ^""'^ (cf. Hitzig and Kra- 
 nichfeld on this passage). — Verse 14. Of pur- 
 pose (marg.), O Shadrach .... do ye not 
 serve my god? The plural ^.~;s;i "my 
 
 gods," is perhaps admissible here, in analogy 
 with verses 12 and 18 (Hitzig) : but in this in- 
 stance the singular is especially suitable, as re- 
 ferring directly to the image of the idol im- 
 mediately before them ; and there is no Keri, in 
 this case, recommending the plural. — Sf^^ri, 
 
n^ 
 
 THE PEOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 literally, "Was it design?" — a combination of 
 the interrogative H with ttlS, a noun that oc- 
 curs in no other jilace, but which may be ex- 
 plained by '-fraudulent design, evil purpose" 
 [contumacy] on the analogy of the Hebrew n'^-IS 
 (Num. XXXV. SO, 21). The question, '-Does'an 
 evil purpose lead you to refuse to serve my 
 god"? evidently has a substantial basis in the 
 Bituation as described ; for these men had by no 
 means presented themselves at once in the 
 festive assembly, as is shown by the command 
 to " bring them." Despite their official station, 
 they had rather endeavored to avoid any parti- 
 cipation in the ceremonies. Nothing could 
 therefore be more natural than the question 
 of the king, as to whether their absence was 
 grounded on an actual disobedience or evil de- 
 sign, or not. The usual interpretation of »"l"j:n 
 is therefore to be retained, and the departures 
 from it must be rejected ; e. (/., the rendering of 
 Ht'veniick (" Is it because ye mock, or despise 
 my gods, that ye do not worship them?"), 
 and by Fiirst and Kranichfeld (who conceive 
 Sir.- as an adverbi.al Aphel noun, from SIS, and 
 thus avoid the interrogative sense of the clause 
 entirely : "In mockery ye not serve my god ! "). 
 [The interpretation of the Engl. Bible. " Is it 
 true," is not only unsustained by the etymo- 
 logical signification of the word, but at variance 
 with the circumstances of the case ; for their 
 absence %yas a matter of fact, and their declining 
 to worship was only a question of inadvertence 
 or setted determination. ' ' The king, .seemingly 
 with more than usual moderation, first inquires 
 into the truth of the accusation." (Rather he 
 first opens the way for the most favorable con- 
 struction of the omis.sion. ) •• He probably 
 suspected the accusers of envious motives, and 
 was desirous of sparing these Hebrews on whom 
 he had bestowed special favors." — Studrt.] 
 —Verse 15. Now if ye be ready that at 
 what time .... ye worship; i.e. "at the 
 time ... to worship. This conditional clause 
 of a positive character may be re.adily completed 
 from the negative conditional clause which im- 
 mediately follows, whose apodosis involves the 
 contrary- of the thought here required ; hence, 
 e.g.. ■■nothing shall be done to you; ye shall 
 escape the death by fire." The same construction 
 [aposiopesis] occurs in Ex. xxxii. ;J3 ; Luke xiii 
 9. It is also frequent in the classics, e. g., 
 Homer, 11. I. ia,5 ; Plato, I'roiag. 1,5 ; and like- 
 ■wise m the Araijic— "1'3 at the beginning of 
 
 the sentence, corresponds to the Heb. "FJ'''. ; 
 the Vulgate rendersit correctly by "i\'«HC ergo." 
 —And who is that God that shall deliver 
 you out of my hand ? Not exactly a direct blas- 
 phemy of the God of the Jew (Hitzigi, but 
 still a challenge .iddressed to Him in a presump- 
 tuous spirit and -with a haughty sense of superior 
 power; cf. Isa. xxx-vii. 10; and supra, on 
 verse 1. 
 
 Verses 16-18. Tlie simdfant confession of the 
 threi Jew.i. Shadrach .... answered and 
 faid to the king, O Nebuchadnezzar, etc. 
 Thus the Masoretic punctuation, l^•hich, how- 
 i ver, is departed from by all the ancient trans- 
 lations. The Septuagint introduces a ikiaO.cv, 
 "0 king," before the vocative Nebuchadnezzar, 
 
 and Theodotion and the Vulgate connect the 
 name of the king mth the preceding dative 
 case, and therefore place the Athnach under 
 2=13:. But there is no ground for either of 
 these variations : for while on the one hand, 
 the boldness of the reply is indicated at the be' 
 ginning by the word S3^J:ib, the direct addresa 
 by name, on the other hand, conveys an em- 
 phasis and solemnity that fuUy comport -with 
 the situation. The vocative ^t3bS in v. 17 
 shows that the form of this address, which con- 
 tains merely the name of the king, and omita 
 the royal title, was not designed as an ex- 
 pression of contempt. Cf. v. 14, where Nebu- 
 chadnezzar likewise addresses the three Hebrews 
 simply by name. — We are not careful to answer 
 thee in this matter, i. e. , it is not ntcessary. The 
 primary emphasis falls on ''jnrs, as appears 
 from the words ^^^r^is ''^''^H ""n at the begin- 
 ning of the next verse. Hence the sense is, 
 "It is not we that are compelled to answer thee 
 {i.e., to manage our case before thee), but if 
 our God can deliver us," etc. On ^"'nrn cf. 
 chap. iv. 16; v. 25. The root nsn is foreign 
 to the language of the Targums. but is found in 
 the Syriac, where it signifies "to be useful, 
 suitable," while in the Bibl. Chaldee it expresses 
 the idea of being necessary (e.g., Ezra vi. 9 ; cf. 
 rman^ " need," Ezra vii. 20), or of standing in 
 need of (as in this place). — T\'rr\'S, " upon 
 this," is connected with the following Dj-r, by 
 the Sept., Theodotion, Vulgate, Havernick,"etc. : 
 "to answer thee upon this word (or matter) ;" 
 but in that case ajr.c must be in the stat. em- 
 pluiticus, despite the preceding demon.strative ; 
 cf. chap. iv. 10 ; ii. 32 ; Ezra vi 11.— 03-E is a 
 word unquestionably borrowed from the Persian 
 (cf. the Introd. g 1, note 3), but found also in 
 the later Hebrew of the book of Ecclesiastes 
 (see on Ecc. viii. 11). It is compounded from 
 the Zend preposition pniti ( = pi-ati, -pd(;) and 
 the verb gam. " to go," and accordingly, signi- 
 fies "what is going forward, a message" (cf. 
 mod. Pers. paiam, "a messenger," and the 
 Armen. patgam. "a message"), from which 
 results the further meaning of " a command, 
 edict, word." The latter is the sense in this 
 place. The idea of "answer" results from its 
 connection -with the verb 3^r.rt, " to give back." 
 — Verse 17. If it be so, our God whom we 
 serve is able to d.eliver us ; rather, " If our God 
 whom we serve, can save us." in is not the 
 Heb. >"i or n3n, and cannot be rendered by ecee 
 enim, -with the Vulgate, nor by a causal ;op, 
 with the Sept. It corresponds rather, as always 
 in Daniel, to the Heb. CS, "if," and is here, aa 
 in V. 15, in contrast with a Hb "in (see v. 17). 
 In this case, however, the conditional clause is 
 followed by its apodosis. which begins, as the 
 atlinach correctly indicates, with the words 
 ■(=lPH"Tp. ,3^, " to be able," does not, of course, 
 refer to the ability of God, as limited by .any 
 bounds whatever, but as ethically conditioned 
 (cf. Gen. xix. 29). Tho pious Jews were no* 
 
CHAP. III. 1-3U. 
 
 99 
 
 p~obably concerned to maintain the perfection 
 of the Divine power in opposition to the king, 
 but at the most, their own worthiness to find 
 mercy at the hands of the Almighty (cf. chap, 
 ii. 18; Ti. 22; is. 15-19),— and perhaps not 
 even this, — for the whole may have been spoken 
 from the point of \new occupied by the heathen 
 hearers of the three Hebrews, who certainly 
 doubted Jehovah's ability to save His servants. 
 In order to refer these opponents, and above all 
 the king himself, with all possible emphasis to 
 the test of experience, upon which everything 
 depended, the Jews employ the words, " If our 
 God — can save" (thus corresponding to v. IT), 
 although it would have been more in harmony 
 with their Israelitish consciousness to say, " If He 
 iciU save " (cf. Hitzig on this passage). [" There 
 lies in the answer, ' If our God will save us, 
 then .... and if not, know, O king, that we 
 will not serve thy gods,' neither audacity, nor a 
 superstitious expectation of some miracle, (ver. 
 17), nor fanaticism (ver. 18), as Berth., v. Leng., 
 and Hitz. maintain, but only the confidence of 
 faith and a humble submission to the will of 
 God." — Keil. In the most extreme event they 
 prefer death to idolatry.] 
 
 Verses 19-23. The extmition. Then .... 
 and the form (the expression) of his visage 'was 
 changed against Shadrach, etc. The A. V. is 
 literal. The Kethib ^?r'.L"S is conformed to the 
 Genit. "'niBIS;, while the Keri ■':PrH agrees 
 with the Nom. sing. 2;^- The former con- 
 struction, as being more rare and difficult, is to 
 be considered genuine. — Seven times more 
 than it was wont to be heated ; thus Ber- 
 tholdt, Gesenius, and other's, in agreement with 
 the A. V. But "^yn, passive part, of riTn> "to 
 see." is constantly used in the Targums in the 
 sense of "suitable, appropriate" (literally, 
 '• what has been selected as appropriate," j««(i 
 conteniens vinim est), and the construction with 
 i, c. Infinit., shows that the same signification 
 is required here. Therefore, "seven times 
 beyond its appropriate heating;" i.e., seven 
 times more than was necessary {-ap b hhi. Sept). 
 [The sense thus yielded, however, is more inept 
 than the other, and the impersonal construction 
 of the former verb (.-itp), together with the 
 active form of the latter (n"T?::). rather favors 
 the same rendering. In either case the ultimate 
 thought is the unusuriUy intense fire.] — The 
 command to heat the furnace exactly Keeen times 
 beyond its proper measure, has a parallel in 
 judicial procedures and limitations, where seven 
 as a number indicates a full atonement or satis- 
 faction, cf. Lev. xxvi. 18-24 ; Deut. xx.xviii. 7 
 et seq. ; Prov. vi. 31 ; Matt, xviii. 21 et seq. ; 
 and perhaps passages like Isa. xi. 15 ; xxx. 2(i ; 
 Psa. xii. 7, etc. This judicial bearing of the 
 number seven, which was familiar to all the 
 ancient Oriental nations and current among 
 them, is the only respect in which the number 
 is here employed, and it affords the only expla- 
 nation of the phrase as used by the Babylonian 
 king, Ivranichf eld's remark is less appropriate, 
 when he observes that the number seven ser^'es 
 ill this instance to express the idea of intensity, 
 because here, " where a notorious injury had 
 been inflicted on the national divinity," no other 
 
 than a pre-eminently sacred number would be 
 adequate ; but this may be admitted rather than 
 the general opinion that in this case seven was 
 " merely the indefinite expression of a round 
 number" (Hiivemick, etc.) — Verse 20. And he 
 commauded the most mighty men ... in his 
 army. n"nr must not be limited to the life 
 or body guards, against which view the com- 
 prehensive and indefinite signification of the 
 term '; -n is, in itself, a suSicient testimony ; 
 but in addition, the selection of executioners 
 from the army is seen to be well grounded and 
 capable of an easy explanation, in view of the 
 fact that the task was not without danger, and 
 would require the services of especially trust- 
 worthy men ; and the presence of the troops at 
 a religious ceremony is not strange, since a great 
 festive procession was one of its features. — To 
 hind Shadrach .... and to (rather ' ' in order 
 to ") cast them into the burning fiery furnace. 
 The second inf. S~"i":; is subordinated to the 
 first, arssp, as more directly pointing out the 
 special design. — Verse 31. Then these men were 
 bound in their coats, their hosen, etc ; rather, 
 their undergarments, coats, etc. The haste, as 
 here implied, with which the sentence was exe- 
 cuted, is in strong contrast with the direction 
 i given immediately before, to heat the furnace 
 1 more intensely than usual ; for the newly added 
 ! fuel would require time before it could bum 
 ! with sufficient force, in a furnace of consider- 
 i able size. But the rage of an inflamed Oriental 
 despot allows itself no time in which to quietly 
 consider aU the circumstances connected with 
 any given case. — Three articles of clothing are 
 specified as belonging to the costume of the 
 three Hebrews, which may have constituted the 
 distinguishing features of their official dress ; 
 and upon these follows the generalizing 
 T'~"'"r'--?^, "'and their (other) garments" (cf. 
 vs. 2 and 5) [as " coverings for the feet and the 
 head" (Keil)]. There would be no need to 
 mention such a variety of garments in the case 
 of men of inferior rank. — (1) The 1";3"0 were 
 probably long and closely-fitting under-gar- 
 ments, that covered the whole body (xhirts, 
 tunicK) ; for the word is most readily explained 
 by comparison with the Chald. quadril. verb 
 \ '?"!?! texit, ope7-uit. It occurs in the Syriac 
 and the Talmuds, with the signification of 
 : pattium (hence "mantles" — Luther, Ge.senius, 
 and many others) ; and in the Arabic, where it 
 becomes serl/al, it designates a long under-gar- 
 ment for females, iiidiisit/in mtiUerts. Others, 
 among modems, especially Hiivemick, v. Len- 
 gerke, and Hitzig, identify 3310 with the Pers. 
 shahcar, Chald. i'^lr, and therefore translate 
 it by "hosen," justifying this opinion by an ap- 
 peal to Symmachus, the Vulgate, and also to 
 Hesychius, Suidas, etc. (who explain the later 
 Greek fjapdiJapa hy ra rrepi T(i(; iivi/iui^a(; f^(Ju.^CTa, 
 lipaKia, nKt'/rai). But the Pers. shalwdr appears 
 to differ fundamentally from our word, and to 
 be related to ffi'it. "the hip" (Sanscr. khnra, 
 Latin cnis), while it bears no relation to th« 
 Zend ndrai-dro. "covering for the head" (from 
 siira, "head," and i-ri, "to cover") in eithei 
 
100 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Bound or sig-nification. The Greek napaffapa 
 ijlid. Age sarabnUn). in the sense of "hosen," 
 aeems, on the other hand, to owe this interpre- 
 tation to the Arabic .wjvnrii •' a covering lor the 
 thighs, ' and also to the Pers. nlmlvdr ; but this 
 sense was not attributed to it by the earliest 
 Greek translators. Theodotiou, indeed, renders 
 V^?"!? hy (japa.inpii^ but reserves the interpre- 
 tation by ' ' hosen " for the third garment, 
 "):?~2, which he translates ircpiKvj/^j'Kk^- while 
 the Sept. (and Aquila) evidently failed to com- 
 prehend the meaning of ",i;~^o, since it ren- 
 ders it in this place by t'-oJijuarn, but adopts 
 crapa:inpa in v. 27. Upon the whole, the first 
 named garment in this passage is probably 
 identical with the K(C)ijy -rrmhp'eKi/c /.iveo(, which 
 Herodotus (I. 195) describes as the innermost 
 garment worn by the Babylonians. — (3) The 
 ■^T-Ti'S, or, as the Keri prefers, V'PP?. were 
 ■ not " hammers." of course, although the root 
 ~-r, "to spread, extend" (cf. ::™p, " to spread 
 out"), is probably the same from which "lU^tSBi 
 " a hammer," is derived ; cf. the Gr. Trarducru, 
 "to strike." According to the Hebrew trans- 
 lator of the Chaldee sections of Daniel, TIJ^CB 
 in this place con'esponds to the Heb. f^?ri3, and 
 therefore designates a wider and more flowing 
 under-garment than the iS^S, which answers 
 to the second, woolen tunic (c'tpiveof ftdJtJr), 
 which the Babylonians wore, cf. Herod. 1. c. 
 The derivation from the Arabic fuels, " a spider, 
 fine web," according to which the word would 
 rather designate the innermost, closest, and 
 finest garmant (Hitzig), seems too precarious, 
 because of the harsh ?-sound. The identifica- 
 tion of the word with the Gr. -fVncrof, " a hat, 
 covering for the head" (Bertholdt), is entirely 
 too far-fetched, since -ivaaoij was used by the 
 Greeks exclusively to designate the head-cover- 
 ing of the ioi/8'i', and since the Chaldee lan- 
 guage was certainly able to command other than 
 Greek terms with which to designate the Orien- 
 tal turban (e.j., in Ezek. xxiiL 15 we find 
 C^""3I?). The same reference of e'-'wS back 
 to — /r«(7or seems to underlie the rinpatr, by 
 which the Sept., Theodotion, and Theodoret 
 render the word in this passage. — (8) The 
 K^?"? appears to have been the third Babylo- 
 nian garment mentioned by Herodotus, the 
 X'/ai'ldiuv '/^vKtiv, which was worn over the two 
 KiSCive^ ; for this word is based on the quadril. 
 verb -5"13, '' to gird, wind about," which is 
 also found in the later Hebrew, cf . 1 Chron. xv. 
 27. ri2 b''?^? i^l?"?. [According to Raw- 
 linson (Five Monarchies, iii. 3 sq. ), the ordinary 
 Babylonian dress of the lower orders of men, 
 was "but one garment, a tunic, generally orna- 
 mented with .a diagonal fringe, and reaching 
 from the shoulder to a little above the knee. It 
 was confined round the waist by a belt. " The 
 head and feet were bare. The richer persons 
 are represented on the cylinders as having "a 
 fillet or head-band, not a turban, round the 
 head. They wear generally the same sort of a 
 tunic as the others, but over it they have a long 
 robe, shaped like a modem dressing-gown, ex- 
 
 cept that it has no sleeves, and does not covei 
 the right shoulder. In a few cases only, we see 
 underneath this open gown a long under-dress 
 or robe, such as that described by Herodotus.'' 
 '• In lieu of the long robe reaching to the feet, 
 which seems to have been the ordinary costume 
 of the higher classes, we observe sometimes a 
 shorter but still a similar garment — a sort of 
 coat without sleeves, fringed down both sides, 
 and reaching a little below the knee." " With 
 rare exceptions the Babylonians are represente J 
 ■with bare feet on the monuments." " The 
 girdle was an essential feature of Babylonian 
 costumes, common to high and low." "The 
 dress of the priests was a long robe or gown, 
 flounced and striped, over which they seem to 
 have worn an open jacket <>f a similar character. 
 A long scarf or ribbon depended from behind 
 down their backs. They carried on their 
 heads an elaborate crown or mitre " (ib.).] — The 
 garments which are specially mentioned, are 
 accordingly referred to in the order of their suc- 
 cession from within outward, " under-garments, 
 coats, mantles" — a climax which serves to indi- 
 cate that because of the excessive haste undei 
 which this transaction took place, the victims 
 were not relieved of their under, nor even of 
 their outer garments. [Or, as Keil suggests, 
 " in the easily inflammable nature of these ma- 
 terials, namely, of the fine long linen gown (cf. 
 Herod. ), we have perhaps to seek the reason on 
 account of which the accused were bound in their 
 clothes."] — Verses 33, 33. Because the king's 
 command was urgent, or furious. ' ' Because ' 
 (n:~ ;:p iS) refers to what has preceded, and 
 the clause '"31 "'I'p ( = Heb. Tf't^?, "there- 
 fore ") points out this reference more fully ; 
 "because" is therefore equivalent to "namely 
 because," and the "] before St^lPH expresses 
 the consequence : " and because in consequence 
 the furnace was in the mean time exceedingly 
 heated up." With regard to HC^nQ, "strict, 
 raging" (not "hurried") see on chap. ii. 15. — 
 The flame of the fire slevr those men that 
 took up, etc. It is not stated how and at what 
 portion of the furnace the death of these execu- 
 tioners took place, nor could it be demonstrated 
 with any degree of probability ; but it is not 
 difficult to aB.sume that, owing to the excessive 
 violence of the fire, a strong draught of air, 
 while sweeping through the compressed flames, 
 might blow them in the direction of the execu- 
 tioners on their issuing from the upper opening 
 of the furnace, while leaving the three victims 
 unharmed at the bottom of the furnace, and 
 continuing to burn above their heads without 
 attacking them. The deliverance of the con- 
 demned Hebrews is still viiraculoiis, even on this 
 assumption, and the contrast between the ex- 
 traordinary strictness of the means employed, 
 and the security of the followers of Jehovah in 
 the face of the rage of men, which is so strongly 
 emphasized by our book (and also by the " Song 
 of the three children," vs. 46-50), is .stUl a not- 
 able fact Cf. the Dog. -ethical remarks, No 
 3. [''If the three were brought up to the fur- 
 nace, it must have had a mouth above, through 
 which the victims could be cast into it. When 
 heated to an ordinaiy degree, this could be done 
 without danger to the men who performed thif 
 
CHAP. in. 1-30. 
 
 JO] 
 
 geryice ; but in the present case the heat of the I 
 fire was so great that the servants themselves 
 perished by it. This circumstance also is men- 
 tioned to show the greatness of the miracle by ; 
 which the three were preserved unhurt in the 
 midst of the furnace. The same thing is in- 
 tended by the repetition of the word T'f'S;':i 
 bound, ver. 23, which, moreover, is purposely : 
 placed at the close of the passage to prepare i 
 for the contrast VI'^P, at liberty, free from the ' 
 
 bonds, ver. 2.5." — Ke.il.\ — The Sept., and also 
 
 Theodotiou and the Vulg., influenced probably 
 by an already existing Hebrew or Greek tradi- j 
 tion (see Introd. § 11), introduce after v. 23 the j 
 apocryphal fragment, "The prayer of Azariah | 
 and Song of the three children " {-/maf I'V'/ j 
 ACapiov fcai vftvoi^ ruv rpti^r), which is broken by 
 a shorter narrative section (vs. 4G-50, or also 
 vs. 23-20), devoted to a detailed description of 
 the subject of vs. 22, 23, and containing especi- 
 ally the statement, that the turning aside of the 
 flames from the three men was due to an angel 
 of the Lord. 
 
 Verses 24-26. T/ie liberntioii nf the three men 
 from the furnace. Thee Nebuchadnezzar the 
 king wa: astonished, and rose up in histe, 
 viz. : from the chair on which he had been 
 seated opposite the side-door of the furnace, 
 and from whence he had witnessed the execu- 
 tion. He did not seat himself in that position 
 after the victims were cast into the furnace, for 
 the purpose of gloating over their tortures 
 (Hitzig) ; but, as a king, he was doubtless 
 seated before (although all others might be 
 standing), and his position probably enabled 
 him to see the inside of the furnace, in whose 
 immediate vicinity his chair was placed. It is 
 not necessary to assume that his seat was so 
 near the opening of the furnace, that he 
 could view the interior perfectly, and thus ob- 
 serve the three men together with their heavenly 
 protector ; for his words in v. 25 may be readily 
 explained on the hypothesis of a merely spirit- 
 ual or visional sight. — Spake, and said to his 
 counsellors. The l'^"lr'^''^ are councillors of state 
 or ministers. coiigUiarii, socii in judieio (Sept. 
 (pi'/M; Theodot. /;t;/(T7(iirf ; Vulg. and Syr. opti- 
 mates). The word is scarcely the Chaldee 
 1"'"l'?'1, "leaders," with the prefixed Hebrew 
 article ,-;, which in this instance, like the Arabic 
 article in "Alcoran," "Almanac," has become 
 inseparably united to the word (Gesenius) ; 
 but the rt must probably be regarded as 
 an organic element of the first half of this com- 
 pound word (as it must be considered), whether 
 that part be traced back to the Sanscr. sn/un, 
 "power" (Hitzig), or it be compared with the 
 Pers. hnmd, "judgment, counsel" (v. Bohlen, 
 Kranichfeld). The second half 13 is. without 
 doubt, the Pers. var, " possessor, owner." as 
 in Vlr"'^ and V"?"-!, v. 2. In regard to 
 Ewald's attempt to identify the terms "l^'I'T! and 
 "laij directly, see supra, on v. 2. Compare , 
 generally the repeated mention of these promi- ' 
 nent royal officials, in v. 27 ; chap. iv. 33 ; vi. 
 8. — Verse 25. IjO, i see four men loose, walking 
 in the midst of the fire. 1"??"^ is a regular 
 
 part. Aphel, as in iv. 34 ; of. the Chaldaizing 
 B^2ir;?a in the Heb. of Zech. iii. 7. In opposi- 
 tion to Hitzig, who regards the form as a meta- 
 morphosed part. Pael, basing his opinion on chap, 
 iv. 2(). see Kranichfeld on this passage. — And the 
 form of the fourth is like the son of God ; 
 rather " like a son of the gods." It is b\ no mcan.H 
 necessary to believe that this vision of the king 
 which revealed to him this "son of the gods" 
 (■)in':s-n2, cf. the plural -ji-bs in fs. 12 and 
 18) in company with the three Jews, was an ob- 
 jeclire seeing. It must be observed, that here as 
 well as in v. 28, where the son of the gods is desig- 
 nated as the "angel" of the God of the Jews, 
 Daniel does not himself attest his appearance, 
 nor does he refer to additional witnesses, but in 
 each case mentions the king only as the author- 
 ity for the occurrence of the event. Kranich- 
 feld' s hypothesis that the king employed the 
 term "angel" ('Hi!;;^) in the second reference 
 to the son of the gods, in consequence of the 
 instruction (which is to be read between the 
 lines after v. 27) imparted to him meanivhile by 
 the rescued Jews, is unnecessary, and without 
 support in the context. From his heathen Ba- 
 bylonian point of view the king could readily 
 char.icterize an appearance from the celestiiJ 
 world which he fancied he had seen, either as a 
 " son " or a " messenger " of the gods (or of one 
 of the gods — for only thus would he conceive of 
 the national God of the Jews, despite v. 2(i). 
 That thtJigordc ide/is were unknown to the 
 ancient Babylonians, and that the expression 
 " a son of the gods" must therefore be regarded 
 as a conception of Hellenistic origin, which was 
 foreign to the Orient until after the march of 
 Alexander, as Bertholdt asserts, is wholly un- 
 true ; and it is with entii'e justice that Heng- 
 stenberg (p. 159 et seq. ) while opposing it, re- 
 fers to the marriage between Bel and Mylitta 
 and to their offspring. On the conception of a 
 messenger of the gods, compare, also the god 
 Nebo, the " writer of the gods," who corre- 
 sponds fully to the Greek Hermes. The Sejit. 
 however, renders even the pn??*. ^? of this 
 verse by ir/yeAof Hen'r, and thus avoids all refer- 
 ence to heathen conceptions. — Verse 20. Vhen 
 Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of 
 the burning fiery furnace. On "~^. see on v. 
 
 6. — Ye servants of the most high God. The 
 
 king thus designates the national God of the 
 Jews from his heathen stand-point, because he 
 has just received an overjjowering impression of 
 His greatness, and therefore regards Him as 
 mightier than all his Babylonian divinities. Cf. 
 pnbst ri"S, chap. ii. 47 ; also the Gr. i'l/wcrnc 
 i?fdc, as applied to Zeus by Pindar, Ifem. i. 90. — 
 SfbS SfS corresponds exactly to the Hebrew 
 VliS b». Gen. xiv. 18. Instead of S"^? the 
 Keri has ns^]* in this place, chap. iv. 14, and 
 nine times elsewhere in the book —substituting 
 the later form, which is usual in the Targuma, 
 for the more ancient ; cf. the similar Keris ir, 
 chap. ii. 5 and 40. 
 
 Verses 27-30. 27ie effect of this incident. And 
 the princes .... being gathered together, 
 saw these men, upon whose bodies the fir 
 
102 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 had no power, etc. ; literally, that the fire had 
 possessed no power over their bodies, — an antip- 
 tosis, like Gen. i. 3. The Chaldee of the Tar- 
 ^ms constantlj- substitutes S?a"i"13, a fuller 
 form, and analogous to the SjTiac, for the 
 era, i«"9ril, " body," of Daniel. — Neither were 
 their coats ( under-garments ) changed. The men- 
 tion of this particular article of clothing only, as 
 being uninjured, might lead to the conclusion that 
 the remaining, or outer garments, had actually 
 been harmed by the fire ; but that the writer in- 
 tended no such toning down of the marvelous na- 
 ture of the event, is shown by the words, ' ' nor the 
 smell of fire had passed upon them." The point- 
 ing of the expression ' ' on them " (TlHS) refers 
 indeed, to the persons themselves, but it fur- 
 nishes an indirect testimony to the preservation 
 of their clothmg that is unmistakable ; and the 
 testimony of the passage as a whole, relating to 
 their bodies, hair, and under-clothing, and also 
 to the absence of any odor of the burning, con- 
 stitutes a gradation analogous to that of v. 21. 
 Only one of the four gannents there referred to 
 is here mentioned, and the first is selected, in 
 order to recall that enumeration. — Verse 28. 
 Blessed be the God of Shadrach, etc. The dox- 
 oiogy correspond.s in form with those recorded 
 in chap. iv. 31 et seq. and vi. 2(i et seq. , but 
 is addressed to Jehovah himself, in a precatory 
 or explanatory form, cf . Gen. ix. 20 ; Luke 
 i. OS. — That trusted in Him, and have 
 changed the king's vrord ; rather, " and trans- 
 gressed the king's command." The :i before 
 C^3^ is Qlative : "and in consequence," or, 
 " and by reason of their trust, they transgressed 
 the king's command ; " cf. supra on v. 22. 
 U3;'2 r'b'Z i<y^ is, literally, "to change the 
 word of the king, to alter it (criminally)." The 
 sameidiomoccursinEzravi.il; cf. pn f|'bn. 
 Isa. xxiv. 5. — And yielded their bodies; cf. 
 Acts XV. 2G : an^/jwTOfc -at}nfh(^a}\ooi rnc; V'X'H' 
 nvTf'.n' iTf/j ror ov6iiar''% rnv Kvp'uv — Verse 29. 
 Therefore, I msike a decree; literally, " And by 
 me is issued a decree." -?:'3 S'''^' as in v. 9, and 
 also in Ezra vi. 11, which latter passage is upon 
 the whole very similar to this (e.g., because of 
 its use of the phrase ?3 rii>3 **;'■?•'), but is not 
 for this reason to be regardfd as the model, 
 from which the alleged pseudo-Daniel copied in 
 this place (as Hitzig contends). The writer of 
 this book displays too thorough an acquaintance 
 with the Chaldee, to warrant the assumption of 
 its composition by the process of a laborious and 
 clumsy compilation of extracts taken from Ezra 
 and other ancient documents ; and in addition, 
 nothing is more probable than that royal edicts 
 should employ stereotyped phrases to enforce 
 obedience to law, threaten punishments, etc. — 
 whether the respective kings were Chaldieans or 
 Persians (cf. also Kranichfeld on this p.as.sage). 
 — Which speak anything amiss against the 
 Ood of Shadrach, etc. The Kethib nba, a 
 Hebraized form for St:-, is not to be changed, 
 with Hitzig, into nb'i" ( = nis'lj = l^'^, " any- 
 thing whatever"), nor to be replaced by the 
 Keri '-•-, which is used in the Kethib of chap. 
 
 I vi. 5 ; Ezra iv. 22 ; vi. 9. nilO, " a fault, smgle 
 I error, offence," is rather a concrete term, which 
 is related to the abstract ^b-, "error," pre- 
 cisely as the Heb. "5??, " a disgraceful thing," 
 is to rittjS (Jer. sxiii. 40), " disgrace," or the 
 
 Chaldee HB':?? (Dan. v. 19) to ^^btt, etc.— 
 Shall be cut in pieces. This threat, which was 
 evidently a stereotyped formula in royal edicts, 
 and in view of the customs of Oriental despots 
 might also be employed with reference to minor 
 offences, has already been explained in chap. ii. 
 5. — Because there is no other God that caa 
 deliver after this sort. Thus also, among 
 recent expositors, Kranichfefd, who takes n;~3 
 = ovrij;, ltd ; cf. Sept., Theodotion, Vulg., in a 
 feminine sense. The masculine form, however, 
 which accords better with the syntax and tha 
 context, is sufficiently supported by chap. ii. 43 ; 
 vi. 29. Therefore, "that can deliver as He 
 can. " — Then the king made Shadrach, .... 
 . . , to prosper (marg. ) in the province ot 
 Babylon. n:^n is not intransitive, as in chap, 
 vi. 29, but has a transitive signification, "to 
 bless," and is accompanied by b of the person 
 prospered, as in the Heb. of Neh. i. 11 ; ii. 20 ; 
 cf. Gen. xxxix. 23 ; 2 Chron. xxvi. 5. The re- 
 ference to ' ' the province of Babylon " indicates 
 the nature of this hlessiug or prospering, viz. : 
 as a repeated endowment with a position of ex- 
 alted dignity and power ; cf. chap. ii. 49. The 
 expression " made to prosper" is therefore 
 equivalent to " gave prosperity and great 
 power. " 
 
 ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES RELATED 
 TO THE HISTORY OF SALVATION, APOLOGE- 
 TICAL REMARKS, AND HOMILETICAL SUG- 
 GESTIONS. 
 
 1. Oenernl preliminary observation. — A cor- 
 rect estimate of the foregoing section impera- 
 tively requires the recognition of the peculiari- 
 ties of the style of writing employed. That style 
 will serve in a greater degree than any other of 
 the first six chapters, to exemplify the repeated 
 observations in the Introduction respecting the 
 ' ' theocratic chronicling style " of our prophet 
 (cf. Intrqd. § 4, note 2; § 9, note 1). The 
 whole of the event descrilied is considered em 
 phatically in the light of the stiictcsi theocrafie 
 pragmatism. It is Jehovah who preserves His 
 devoted confessors in the midst of the flames. 
 The heathen executors of the barbarous decree, 
 and not the//, are destroyed. The tyrant, at 
 first blasphemous and presumptuously defiant, 
 is compelled to humble himself, and reverently 
 to acknowledge the superior power of the only 
 true God, in the end. At the same time, the 
 narrative possesses a peculiar breadth and 
 minuteness of detail, combined with a con- 
 densed brevity and force that recall the Lapidary 
 style of records relating to the Assyrian and 
 Babylonian empires. Observe the frequent re- 
 petition of identical formulas, and of changes 
 and series of names (including both appellatives 
 and proper names). The phrase, "The image 
 
CHAP. III. 1-30. 
 
 lOS 
 
 which king Nebuchadnezzar had caused to be set 
 up," is found no less than ten times in the first 
 fifteen verses ; three times we meet the expres- 
 sion " not serve the gods (or " the god ") ot the 
 king, nor worship the golden image erected by 
 him." and the characteristic triad "peoples, 
 tribes, and tongues " recurs as often, as does also 
 the triad of officials, ' 'satraps, governors, and pra;- 
 fects." The sounding list of official titles, " sa- 
 traps, governors, prsefects. chief-judges, treasur- 
 ers, judges, lawyers," is repeated at least once ; 
 the names of the six instruments, " the comet, 
 flute, harp, sackbut, psaltery, and dulcimer" 
 three times (on v. G, where the " ' dulcimer " is 
 omitted, see the exegetical remarks); while the 
 proper names Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed- 
 nego recur no less than thirteen times. The 
 explanation of this extraordinary wealth in re- 
 petitions, is evidently not to be sought in the 
 careless style of the writer, but in his woll-de- 
 fined intention to impart a solemn and weighty 
 character to the narrative. This hypothesis, 
 however, which is supported by the frequent use 
 of a similar style by both earlier and later 
 writers of the Old-Testament Scriptures, — <'..(/., 
 by the Elohist in the Pentateuch, among the 
 former, and by the writer of the books of 
 Chronicles among the latter — is not of itself 
 sufficient to explain the numerous repetitions. 
 It win be necessary to assume, in addition, a 
 de.signed imitation of the solemn jihrases and 
 stereotyped formulas employed in the official 
 documents and records of the Babylonian em- 
 pire, on the part of our prophetic author. The 
 propriety of this method was already app.orent 
 in the preceding chapter, in view of the repeated 
 expression, "The decree has been published by 
 me" (vs. 5 and 8) ; and also with regard to the 
 triad "scribes, conjurers, and Chakla;.ans" (vs. 
 2 and 10), and in the phrases repeated in this 
 chapter, although not found in the former : " O 
 king, live for ever," and "ye shall be cut in 
 pieces, and your houses be made dunghills " 
 (cf. ii. 4 with iii. 9. and ii. .5 with iii. 29). 
 The fact that such stereotyped formulas and re- 
 peated phrases in an unchanged form are con- 
 siderably more numerous in this chapter, than 
 in either the chapters that precede or the three 
 narrative sections that follow, indicates that the 
 writer preferred the documentary and chroni- 
 cling style in this connection, because the subject- 
 matter afforded greater inducements than any 
 other for this choice, and possibly also because he 
 had a special inclination to narrate the event in 
 question in the manner of a theocratic chronicler. 
 — The peculiar coloring of the style of narration in 
 this section unquestionably affords an evidence 
 ot especial significance, for the hypothesis postu- 
 lated in the lutrod. S 4. note 2 (in agreement 
 with Kranichfeld), which assumes that the 
 writer recorded the events contained in chap, 
 ii.-v. at different times (although not without 
 regard to their relation to each other), and in 
 the form of a diary. 
 
 2. Ajwlor/i^tic'il. — The foregoing remarks con- 
 tain features that testify to the authenticity and 
 historical accuracy of the narrative ; but a far 
 more forcible evidence is found in the strong 
 contviiiit beticeen the situntion and circinnntunec^ 
 of the persecuted Hebrews who steadfastly 
 clung to their faith, as here related, and the 
 similar fortunes of pious Jews in the As- 
 
 monjean age. According to Bertholdt, Bleek, 
 T. Lengerke, Hitzig, etc., the motive that in- 
 spired the alleged historical fictions of the 
 pseudo-Daniel, was derived from the tribulations 
 of the latter period ; but at that time Israel en- 
 dured the barbarous persecutions inflicted on 
 account of its faith in Jehovah while established 
 on its own native soil; whereas here, the suffer- 
 ing is imposed while in a foreign land and in 
 captivity, and merely upon three individual rep- 
 resentatives, who are penally prosecuted on the 
 ground of the slanderous accusations of envious 
 persons or of politico-religious opponents, who 
 charge them with hostility to the national gods 
 of Babylon. In the former case the heathen 
 despot attempted to carry into effect a general 
 system of persecution which aimed at the extir- 
 pation of the worship of Jehovah ( 1 Mace. i. 41 
 et seq. ) ; while here an occasional denunciation 
 incites a single act of heathen intolerance, which 
 is immediately followed by the recognition and 
 adoration of the God of Israel as a pre-emi- 
 nently powerful divinity, as in a former instance 
 (cf. chap. ii. 46 with iii. 28 et seq.). In that 
 case the furious religious intolerance of the per- 
 secuting tyrant is opposed by the fanatical de- 
 fiance of the desperate Jewish confessors,* while 
 the confession of the three persecuted Hebrews 
 in this case, vs. 17 and 18, reveals no trace of 
 fanatical excitement ; it presents, on the con- 
 trary, " so moderate a reflection on the interfer- 
 ence of God for the purpose of delivering His 
 servants, that it concedes the possibility of a 
 refusal, on the part of God, to deliver in the 
 present exigencj-, — for which reason the Sept, 
 felt constrained, in the spirit of its time, to 
 guard against the possible mistake that a douljt 
 of the Divine ability to .save is here implied " 
 (see on the passage;. Finally, while the bar- 
 barous custom of inflicting the death-penalty by 
 means of fire, and in large smelting-furaaces, 
 prevailed at the period of the Chaldaian supre- 
 macy, as is certified by Jer. xxix. 22 (cf, xliii. 9 
 et seq. ; cf. above, on v. (i), the books of the 
 Maccabees, which describe so manj' modes of 
 capital punishment as inflicted on the Jews of 
 his time by Antiochus Epiphanes (see 1 Mace. i. 
 50, 57, 60 etseq. ; ii. 38 ; 2 Mace. vii. ), make no 
 mention whatever of this. The burning of isolated 
 fugitives in caverns, where they had concealed 
 themselves in order to observe the Sabbath (2 
 Mace. vi. 11), was an unpremeditated device, 
 and therefore entirely different from the pre- 
 determined punishment by meaJis of the liery 
 furnace. — Even Hitzig recognizes the weight of 
 the numerous differences in the situation, as 
 here indicated — to which must be added the 
 extreme contrast between the golden image on 
 the plain of Dura, and the ,^iV'/v}ua fpiiuuneur of 
 Antiochus (1 Mace. i. ,54; .see above, on v. 1) — 
 but assumes that the compiler purposely avoided 
 an exact adaptation of his types to the circum- 
 stances and facts of his time, in order to prevent 
 any suspicion that his work was invented for a 
 
 * The martyrs in 2 Mace. vii. 9 address the Syrian king 
 as : '■ Th'tii accursed man.'' and in v. Z\ of the same chap- 
 ter they denounce him thus: "Thou godless man, and ot 
 all others most wicked, be not lifted up without a cause, nor 
 puffed up with uncertain hopes, lifting up thy hand again.st 
 the servants of God ; for thou has not yet escaped the 
 judgment of Almighty God, who seeth all things." How 
 different is the language of the three Hebrews, vs. 16 18. 
 Cf. upon the whole, Ztindel, Krit, Untcrss.^ p. 73 et ae(|. 
 
104 
 
 THE PROPHET DA2^1EL. 
 
 purpose (p. 43, " Ought a type to correspond so 
 exactly as to arouse suspicion ? ") He thus at- 
 tributes to our author an art in concealing his 
 aim, a gift of refined simulation, a practised 
 cunning and adroitness, that might excel even 
 the efforts of modern pseudologioal tendency 
 \\Titers. But while these, and similar charges 
 of such a critical tendency in the book, are un- 
 worthy, and establish nothing, the manifold ex- 
 positions of details of the narrative which have 
 been deemed necessary by the modem criticism, 
 are no less so. No improbability can be dis- 
 covered in the statement of the dimensions of 
 the golden image, giving its height at sixty 
 cubits and its thickness at six (v. 1), or in the 
 remark that all the high officials of the realm 
 were summoned to the dedication of the image 
 (vs. 2. 3), which is unquestionably to be taken 
 in a relative sense ; nor yet in the mention of 
 certain Grecian instruments (vs. 5, 7, 10, 15), or 
 in the occurrence of the title of "satrap" 
 among those pertaining to political dignitaries 
 (vs. 2, 3, 27). We have already furnished the 
 necessary explanation of these features, and also 
 have accounved for the circumstance that Dan- 
 iel was abnent from the ceremony (see on v. 12), 
 that the garments of the three martyrs are re- 
 ferred to by names that belong, as is asserted, to 
 a post- Babylonian (Persian or Greek) age, and 
 finally, that the decree directed against the 
 blasphemers of the God of these Jews (v. 29) is 
 couched in terms that are considered extrava- 
 gantly severe. 
 
 o. 'I'he mirride. — The strongest objections, of 
 course, are raised by opponents against the de- 
 liverance of the three condemned Hebrews out 
 of the fiery furnace, while at the same time the 
 executioners are destroyed by the flames. Hit- 
 zig holds that " the claim of this narrative to a 
 historical character is unworthy of considera- 
 tion. Its correctness would not only involve 
 that the nature of an element was changed, but 
 also that the flames had at the same time de- 
 monstrated (v. 22) and denied (v. 27) their 
 power to consume ; and a reference to the 
 angel (vs. 2S, 2.")) does not improve the matter." 
 — Our exegetical remarks have already pointed 
 out that the case is not really so desperate. 
 Traces of a certain co-operation of natural laws 
 in the wonderful event are by no means want- 
 ing from the text, despite its evident aim to 
 emphasize the extraordinary and supernatural 
 features of the incident, rather than to modify 
 them. The excessive heating of the furnace 
 which the king had commanded, the reckless 
 haste in executing his commands, which his 
 rage demanded, and even the circumstances that 
 the flames issuing from the upper opening 
 should seize upon and destroy the persons em- 
 ployed in the execution — all these taken to- 
 gether make it possible, up to a certain point, 
 to conceive how the condemned persons might 
 remain uninjured, and afterward, on their 
 leaving the furnace, be without even the odor 
 of fire upon them. Nebuchadnezzar believed 
 himself able to testify that the efficient or co- 
 operating cause of this deliverance was the 
 visible appearance of an angel which was ob- 
 served at the same time by several witnesses, 
 probably because, in his fearful excitement and 
 conscientious terror, he really saw in vision a 
 fourth person of celestial form in company with 
 
 the three victims. The writer, however, does 
 not personally assert such an objective entrance 
 of an angel on the arena, because he neither 
 aims to positively establish the fact, nor yet to 
 explain the philosophy of the event taken as a 
 whole. Without seeking out secondary causes 
 of the deliverance of the Hebrews, he contents 
 himself with simply certifying to the extraordi- 
 nary event itself, which was probably reported 
 to him, as absent at the time, by his delivered 
 friends in person ; and his added remarks, of a 
 religious and practical nature, refer merely to 
 the unmistakable interference of hin God, whom 
 he represents, after the manner of the older 
 theocratic writers, as working directly and with- 
 out the mediation of angels. A narrator of the 
 Maccabajan period who possessed a mania for 
 miracles, would exaggerate the marvelous ele- 
 ment of the event far more conspicuously, would 
 describe the terrible rage of the flames in colors 
 much more glowing, and would introduce, not 
 one, but a multitude of angels as instrumental 
 deliverers. An approximate idea of the descrip- 
 tion of the event in question which such a writer 
 would have furnished may be gained from a 
 comp.arison of verses 46-50 of the apocryphal 
 " Prayer of Azariah and song of the thi-ee chil- 
 dren ; " although the embellishment and descrip- 
 tion of the event attempted in that connection 
 are still within the bounds of reason, and would 
 doubtless be surpassed by a religious-tendency 
 writer of the Maccabaean period. On the othei 
 hand, a writer at the beginning of the exile, 
 although influenced by an extravagant mania for 
 miracles and inclined to angelolatry, was not 
 necessarily without a real beUef in miracles, but 
 rather, might possess a firm and living confidence 
 in the power of God to work miracles for the 
 deliverance and exaltation of His faithful ones. 
 This is apparent in numerous expressions of the 
 exilian Isaiah,* and of Jeremiah and Ezekiel, 
 who assert miraculous displays of Jehovah's 
 power and grace, in the proper sense, and also 
 express conceptions of the Divine government of 
 the world, and particularly of his direction of 
 the theocratical people in the past, present, and 
 future, which are, to say the least, decidedly 
 supranaturalistic ; cf. Introd. , § 1 , note 1 ; § 9, 
 note 1. The shallowness and triteness of the 
 reasoning is thus apparent, on which Hitzig, p. 
 44, formulates his conclusion : "A belief in 
 miracles, such as the writer confesses, could not 
 arise and flourish in the night of the exile, in 
 the days of discouragement and despondency, 
 nor yet in the centuries of servitude (Ezra ix. 9) 
 subsequent to Cyrus. The deliverance from the 
 fiery furnace expresses a supranaturalism entirely 
 different from that manifested in the additions 
 of the reviser in Lev. xxv. 21 ; xx. 20 ; Ex. 
 xxxiv. 2, 4 ( ? ), and seems to be indicative of 
 the enthusiasm, the increased power of faith, 
 and the boundless imagination of the Maccabae- 
 an epoch." 
 
 4. The ethical and religions importance of the 
 miracle is found substantially in the consequent 
 Divine confirmation and rewarding of the stead- 
 fast faith, by which the three Hebrews had 
 glorified the name of God before the heathen 
 
 • [The author by this epithet proliably refers to the 
 pseniio-lBaiah assumed to have written the latter ehapten 
 of that book — an luinecessary and unwarranted distice 
 tjon.j 
 
CHAP. III. 1-30. 
 
 105 
 
 monarch and his court. As they had confessed 
 Him, so He now acknowledges them ; as they 
 haH glorified His name by the confession of their 
 faith, so He now magnifies Himself in them by 
 a glorious display of His power, and of His in- 
 finite superiority over all the gods of the heathen. 
 It is a miracle of deliverance, analogous to those 
 witnessed by Noah at the flood, by Lot at the 
 burning of Sodom, and by Israel at the passage of 
 the Red Sea and of the Jordan ; but it is none the 
 less, on that account, a type of the deliverance 
 which the recording projihet should himself ex- 
 perience when, at a much later period, his unwav- 
 ering devotion to Jehovah had brought him to the 
 lion's den, as well as of the rescue of a Peter 
 from the dungeon of Herod, of a Paul from the 
 jail at Philippi, and of other miraculous events 
 of the Apostolic age. The writer of the epis- 
 tle to the Hebrews therefore classes this event 
 among the Old-Testament trials of faith that 
 were followed by marvelous results, when, near 
 the close of his glorious Catalngus testium fidei 
 VetcrU Testamcnti (chap. .xi. ::i3i, and immedi- 
 ately after the allusion to Daniel in the lion's 
 den, he refers to his three companions with the 
 words, they "quenched the violence of fire" 
 (ivT-ifcaii iSiiaun- -f/jnr). In the same sense, and 
 in a similar connection, the first book of the 
 Maccabees had already adduced the wonderful 
 occurrence, obser\-ing with reference to Hana- 
 niah, Azariah, and Jlishael, that they -lartbaai'-Fc 
 icuitrjcav in o'o;"';, — a primitive attestation of 
 the fact, with which, as has been indicated in a 
 former connection, the assumption of its inven- 
 tion in the Asmon;can period, can hardly be made 
 to consist (Introd. , s '')• The dogmatic impor- 
 tance of this miraculous event is, however, de- 
 cidedly overestimated, when it is assumed, with 
 Beveral church fathers, e.g.. Tertullian, IrenaB- 
 us. Hlary. Augustine, etc. , and also with Carp- 
 zov, Joh. Gerhard (in the Bihl. Vimar.). Joach. 
 Lange, etc., that the appearance in company 
 with the three men was an actual objective fact, 
 and further, that it was not merely an angel, 
 but the personal Logos t'lat was made flesh in 
 Jesus Christ. Jerome is far more correct when 
 he rejects, as being improbable, the idea that 
 the Son of God should have appeared to the 
 godless king Nebuchadnezzar, and therefore as- 
 sumes that the appearance of the delivering 
 angel was only a typical prefiguration of the 
 Redeemer: " Cwttrum in typo pritfiyurat ute 
 angelni siee \1iUns Dei' Dominum nostrum Jesum 
 Christum, qui ad fornacem descendit infcrni, in 
 gtu) ciiusa peccniorum et justorum nnimce tene- 
 bintur, vt absque exustione et nnxa sui eos, qui 
 tenebfintnr iiidnti. rinculis mortis libernret." His 
 remark (on v. 1) on the relation of this event 
 to the Messianic mission of Israel in the midst 
 of the pre-Christi.an world of nations, is also 
 worthy of note : " Dntnr autem per occnsionem 
 cnpticoruni barbaris nntionibus snlutis nccnsio ; 
 vt qui primum per Dtinielis rerelationem poten- 
 tinm cognocerant unius Dei. in. trium puerorum 
 qnoque fortttudine discnnt mortem contemnere et 
 idilu lion colere." 
 
 5. UomUeticiil sugr/e-itiims. Melancthon has 
 ccirrectly specified the points of practical im- 
 p irtance in his observations : 1, on v. 1 : "Sr- 
 entfiluin huinana ctfcitatis et audiwiee institueittis 
 noecsculius sine verho Dei. quos hie oitendit se 
 Jieui reprobare ;'" li, on v. 13; " Quod oporteat 
 
 mandntum Dei anteferre omnibus rebus humanis, 
 potestnli, legibus huinanis. piici, tranquilUtati 
 ntef-TmstrcB ; " 3, on vs. 16-18; '■^ Qualis debeat 
 esse Jides de corporaU liberatione. videlicet cum 
 conditione. si Deo placet ; " 4, on v. 22 et seq. : 
 " Glorificatio piorum contra blusphemiam. et 
 poena impiorvm. prcesertim satellitum. qui alieni 
 furoris ministri sunt ; " 5, on v. 25 et scq. : 
 " Conversio regis, sequins concionem et ghrifica- 
 tionem piorum. " He also finely develops several 
 of these points. Thus, he remarks on v. 1 et 
 seq. : " Con.sider that not only the one Nebuch- 
 adnezzar is here intended, but all idolaters in 
 general. As Nebuchadnezzar, with fearfu' 
 temerity, but still under the impression that 
 he was acting religiously, est.iblishes a new 
 cultus, so have many acted at other periods. 
 A majority of states protect idolatry ; and even 
 within the church godless popes found dynas 
 ties, and seek to confirm them by the successive 
 
 introduction of new forms of worship 
 
 Consider, therefore, how great is the guilt of 
 the popes and princes, who defend ceremonies 
 and traditions that contradict the Word of God, 
 such as the Mass, monasticism, etc." Cf. AL 
 Geier ; ' ' The great lords often put forth greater 
 efforts to introduce false religions than to protect 
 the true. . . . It is a false opinion that all 
 the subjects of a state must adhere to one and 
 the same religion. Thence result so many 
 bloody plans to effect by force what cannot be 
 required with a good conscience."' Melancthon 
 observes, on vs. 17, 18: " All • the Divine prom- 
 ises require us to believe both that God cun 
 and that He will aid ; but with reference to His 
 will the following distinction must be observed ; 
 God iriU bestow on us the forgiveness of sins, 
 justification, and eternal life, for He has posi- 
 tively declared His readiness to do this (John 
 iii. 36 ; 1 John v. 11). Faith in this must there- 
 fore shine everywhere upon our pathway before 
 us, and govern our expectations of various ex- 
 ternal blessings and supports. But the latter 
 must ever be subject to the condition, ' If it 
 please God, He will now deliver me,' — a condi- 
 tion that in no wise conflicts with the essence of 
 faith, but that exhorts us to obedience, to pray- 
 er, to patient waiting for aid, and to humble 
 submission to the only wise decree of God." 
 Cf. Starke : "In need and danger men are cheer- 
 fuUv to submit to the will of God, and are not 
 to prescribe to Him in relation to His aid and 
 deliverance. Their motto must always be, ' Thy 
 will be done ' (Matt. ixvi. 39 ; cf. Jas. iv. 15 "). 
 On V. 23 et seq., cf. Melancthon : "Though the 
 deliverance be long delayed, in order that we 
 may be tried, we dare not cease to call upon the 
 Lord, because supplication is never in vain. 
 For . . . God always aids, either by imme- 
 diately imparting comfort and diminishing the 
 evU, or by granting a fortunate escape from the 
 tribulation" (1 Cor. x. 13). Cf. Osiander: "God 
 has assigned a limit to aU tribulations and per- 
 secutions. If it appears to be too distant, con- 
 sider that the affliction is light and but for a 
 moment, yea. that it secures an eternal glory ' 
 (2 Cor. iv. 17 1. On v. 28 et seq., Melancthon : 
 " Learn from this that it is the office of princes 
 to suppress godless teaching and customs, and to 
 provide for truly pious instruction and worship. 
 I'or the government is the guardian and protec- 
 tor of the whole moral law ; it cannot chungfl 
 
106 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 and renew men's hearts, but it must forbid and 
 prevent idolatry, blasphemy, immoral religious 
 services, etc., as well as murder, theft, and the 
 like. For, although a civil government is not 
 enrolled in the service of the Holy Spirit, it is 
 nevertheless the servant of the external moral 
 law. and the responsibility rests upon it, as a 
 distinguished member of the church (membrum 
 
 prmcipmim Ecdesia), to aid and protect the othei 
 members in maintaining the true faith." [" The 
 moral effect of this transaction must have been 
 all the greater because it was the final outcome 
 of a public conflict between the king's god and 
 Jehovah of Hosts. Nor let us fail to note that 
 here, as usual, an unseen hand made the wrath 
 of man work out the praise of God." — CowU»\. 
 
 4. TJie royal report concerning Nebuclmdnezzar's dream relaling to Ms unfitness to govern, and Hi 
 
 fulfiUme^tt. 
 
 Chap. III. 31-IV. 34 [English Bible, Chap. IV.]. 
 
 1 Nebuchadnezzar the king, unto all people, nations [tribes], and languages, 
 
 2 that dwell in all the earth ; ' Peace be multiplied unto you.' I thought it good ' 
 to shew the signs and wonders that the liigh God hath wrought toward [with] 
 
 3 me. How great are his signs! * and liow miglity are his wonders ! his kingdom 
 is an everlasting kingdom, '' and his dominion is from generation to generation 
 [witli age and age]. 
 
 4 I Nebuchadnezzar was at rest [tranquil] in my house, and flourishing [green] 
 
 5 in my palace. I saw a dream which made [, and it would make] me afraid," 
 and the thoughts upon my bed [came], and the visions of my head ti-oubled 
 
 6 [would trouble] me. Therefore [And] made I a decree ' to bring m all the 
 wise men of Babylon before me, that they might make known unto me [make 
 
 1 me know] the interpretation of the dream. Then came in the magicians, the 
 astrologers, .the Chaldseans, and the soothsayers; 'and I told the dream before 
 them ; "but [and] they did not make known unto me the interpretation thereof. 
 
 'i But [And] at the last Daniel came in before me, (whose name loas Belteshazzar, 
 according to the name of my god, and in whom is the spirit of the holy gods), 
 
 9 and before him I told the dream, saying, Belteshazzar, master of the magi- 
 cians, because I ' know that tlie spirit of the holy gods is in thee, and no secret 
 troubleth [is burdensome to] thee, tell me the visions of my dream that I have 
 seen, and the interpretation thereof. 
 
 10 Thus [And these] were the visions of my head in [on] my bed: I saw, and, 
 
 11 behold, a tree in the midst of the earth, and the height thereof wax great. The 
 tree grew, and was strong, and the heiglit thereof reached [would reach] unto 
 
 12 heaven [the heavens], and the sight thereof to the end of all the earth. The 
 leaves thereof jue;-e [Its foliage urns'] fair, and the fruit" thereof much, and in it 
 was meat [food] for all [the wliole] : the beasts [living creature] of the field had 
 [might have] shadow under it, and the fowls of the heaven dwelt [might dwelH 
 iu the boughs thereof, and all flesh was [might be] fed of it. I saw in^the visions 
 of my head upon my bed, and, behold, a watcher and a holy one came down 
 from heaven [the heavens]. lie cried aloud [with might], and said thus, Hew 
 [cut] down the tree, and cut [lop] off his [its] br.anches, shake off his leaves 
 [its foli.ige], and scatter his [its] fruit : let the beasts get away [living creature 
 
 15 flee] froin under it, and the fowls from his [its] branches. Nevertheless, leave 
 the stump of his [its] roots in the earth, even [and] with a band of iron and 
 brass in the «e)tf/e;- grass of the field ; and let it [him] be wet with the dew of heaven 
 [the heavens], and let his portion be with the beasts [living creature] in the grass 
 
 J 6 [lierbage] of the earth. Let his heart be changed " from man's [mankind], and 
 let a beast's heart " be given unto him : and let seven times pass over him. 
 
 1 T This matter [Tlie rescript] is by the decree [decision] of the watchers, and the 
 demand by the word of the holy ones; to tlie intent that the living may know 
 that the Afost High ruleth in the kingdom of men [mankind], and giveth [will 
 give] it to whomsoever he will [may please], and setteth [will set] up over it the 
 basest [low] of men. 
 
 Tliis dream I king Nebucliadnezzar have seen. Now [And] then, Belte- 
 shazzar declare the interpretation thereof; forasmuch as all the wise vien of my 
 
 13 
 
 14 
 
 18 
 
CHAP. III. 31-IV. 34. 10^ 
 
 kinctloni are not able to make known unto me [make me know] the interpreta- 
 tion : hut [and] thou art able [capable] ; for Me spirit of the holy gods is in thee. 
 
 19 Then Daniel (whose name was Belteshazzar) was astonished for [as] one 
 liour, and his thoughts troubled [would trouble] him. The king spake and said, 
 Belteshazzar, let not the dream, or [and] the interpretation thereof, trouble thee. 
 Belteshazzar answered and said. My lord, the dream be to them that hate thee, 
 
 20 and the interpretation thereof to thine enemies. The tree that thou sawest, 
 which srew, and was strong, whose height reached [would reach] unto the 
 
 21 heaven,'^and the sight thereof to all the earth ; whose leaves were [and its foliage 
 was] fair, and the fruit thereof much, and in it ^cas meat for all [the whole] ; under 
 which [it] the beasts [living creature] of the iield dwelt [might dwell], and upon 
 whose Tils] branches the fowls of the heaven had their habitation [might abide] : 
 
 22 it is th.ni, king, that art [hast] grown and become strong : for [and] thy 
 greatness is [has] srown, and reacheth unto heaven [the heavens], and thy 
 
 23 dominion to the end^of the earth. And whereas the king saw a watcher and a 
 holy one comin<T down from heaven [the heavens], and saying. Hew [cut] the 
 tree down, and destroy it; yet leave the stump of the roots thereof in the earth, 
 even [and] with a band of iron and brass in the tender grass of the field; and 
 let it be wet with the dew of heaven [the heavens], and let his portion he with 
 
 24 the beasts [living creature'] of the Iield, till seven times pass over him; this i$ 
 the interpretation, king, and this is the decree [decision] of the Most High, 
 
 2o which is [has] come upon my lord the king: That they shall drive thee from 
 men," and thy dwelling shall be with the beasts [living creature] of the field, 
 and 'they shall make thee to eat grass [the herbage] as oxen, and they shall 
 wet thee with [from] the dew of heaven [the heavens], and seven times shall 
 pass over thee, till thon know that the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men 
 
 26 [mankind], and giveth [will give] it to whomsoever he will [may please]. And 
 whereas they commanded [said] to leave the stump of the tree roots [roots ot 
 the tree] ; tliy kingdom shall be sure [standing] unto thee, after that thou shalt 
 
 27 have known that die heavens do rule. Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be 
 acceptable unto thee, and break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniqui- 
 ties by shewing mercy to [pitying] the poor; if it may be a lengthening of [to] 
 
 thy tranqiiillitv. 
 
 28 All this [The whole] came ujion the king Nebuchadnezzar. At the end ot 
 
 29 twelve months he walked in [was walking on] the palace of the kingdom of 
 
 30 Babylon. The king spake and .said, Is not this [the] great Babylon that I' have 
 built for the house of the kingdom,'* by the might of my power, and for thc^ honour 
 
 31 of my majesty ? While the word was in tlie king's mouth, there fell a voice from 
 lieaven [tlie lieavens], say/nr/, king Nebuchadnezzar, to thee it is spoken," 
 
 .^2 Tlie kingdom is [has] depaVted from thee. And they shall drive thee from 
 men," and thy dwelling shall be with th^ be.asts [living creature] of the field : 
 they shall make thee to eat grass [the herbage] .as oxen, and seven times shall 
 pass over thee, until [that] thou know that tife Most High ruleth in the kingdom 
 of men [mankind], and givcth [will give] it to whomsoever he will [may 
 
 33 please]. [In] The same hour was the thing [word] fulfilled upon Nebuchad- 
 nezzar: and he v-as diiven from men [mankind,], and did [would] eat grass 
 [the herbage] as oxen, and his bodv was [would be] wet with [from] the dew 
 of heaven [the heavens], till [that] his hairs [hair] were [had] grown like eagles' 
 feathers, and his nails like birds' claws. 
 
 34 ' And at the end of the days, I Nebuchadnezzar lifted vv mine eyes unto heaven 
 
 [the heavens], and mine understanding [knowledge] returned [would return] 
 unto [upon] me ; .and I blessed the Mok High ; and I praised and honoured him 
 that liveth for ever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and his kingdom 
 
 35 is from generation to generation [with age and age]: and all <A« inhabitants 
 of the earth are reputed .as nothing; and he doeth according to his will in the 
 army of heaven [the heavens], and amonrf the inhabitants of the earth ; and 
 [there is] none [who] can stay [lay hold of] his hand, or say unto him, Wh.at 
 
 36 doest thon? At the same time my reason [knowledge] returned [would 
 return] unto [upon] me ; and, for [as to] the glory of my kingdom, mme hououi 
 
lOS 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 and brio^htness returned unto [would return uponj me ; and my counsellors and 
 my lords sought [would seek] unto me; and I was established in [upon] my 
 37 kingdom; and excellent majestj' was added unto me. Now"' I Nebuchad- 
 nezzar praise and extol and honour the King of heaven [the heavens], all whost 
 works are truth, and his ways judgment : and those that walk in pride he is able 
 to abase. 
 
 CRITICAL AND GRAMMATICAL NOTES. 
 
 [The numerical division of the verses in chap. iv. differs in the English Bible from that in the original text, as the 
 latter annexes the first three verses of this narrative to chap, iii., and consequently begins its chap. iv. with ver. 4 of the 
 English Bible.] 
 
 [' The customary phrase : neruls this greeting, is to be mentally supplied. — ^ Literally. May your peace (I. e., prosperity) 
 be iiicreamd. — ^ Literally. It fxt-^ seemed good before me. The order in the original is also emphatic: T/ie sirjns aiui 
 
 wonders I (hare) t/wjight ii good to shoip , — * The same emphatic order is observed in this and the following 
 
 Clause : Jlis signs how, (literally, as tcbat) great (literally, very great, a reduplicated form) I etc. — ^ Literally, a kingdom 
 qf eternity. — ' ^i^sbm"^") is the fut. Pael, with J epenthelic, as usual in these forms. The te7tse seeioB to express the 
 
 continued effect on the speaker's mind. — '' Lit^'rally, From me was marie a decree. — ^ The terms employed for these various 
 classes of conjurers are the same as those in chap. ii. 2. except the last, but they are named in a somewhat different order. 
 — s The pronoun, being expressed, is somewhat emphatic. — ^^ nS"^K from 3X by resolution of the dage^h. — "Liter- 
 ally, Let them change his heart from the man. — 12 Literally, a heart of the living creature. — Js Literally. And thee they are 
 driving from mankind (the man). — '* Both nouns being anarthrous, the meaning is a royal residence. — * Literally, they 
 aTe sai/ing. — '« Literally, awrf/rom mankind (the man) thee they are driving. — -'The particle "^"^S is emphatic=:^r 
 this time^ in contrast with his former impiety.] 
 
 the narrative, resulting from the many repetitions 
 (of. e.g., the repetition of identical or entirely 
 similar turns in the sentences of chap. iv. 6, 15 
 and of V. 5 ; in iv. 17-23 and in vs. 17-23 ; in iv. 
 30 and in vs. 12 and 22 ; in iv. 31 and in iii. 33, 
 etc. 1. which it has in common with the remain- 
 ing narrative .sections, thus indicating liy its style 
 that Daniel was its author; (3.) by chap. iv. 
 25-30. where the king is referred to in the third 
 person, while elsewhere the first person is con- 
 stantly employed; (4.) by the designation of 
 the palace as being located "at Babylon," chap, 
 iv. 2G, which is positively inconsistent with the 
 assumption that Nebuchadnezzar composed the 
 proclamation in person, but indicates, as clearly 
 as could possibly be required, that the writer 
 was not a Babylonian, or, at least, that he wrote 
 chiefly for other than Babj'lonians, aud that he 
 even adopted their modes of thought. No sub- 
 stantial difficulty can be raised against the hy- 
 pothesis that Daniel was the writer, and that he 
 composed the proclamation by direction of the 
 king soon after the conclusion of the events to 
 which it refers. The peculiarly heathen forms 
 of thought and expression which occur beside 
 the Jewish-theocratic (especially in ch.ap. iv. .5, 
 f>, 10, 14. 15, and 30), find a sufficient ei.plana- 
 tion in the consideration that the writer em- 
 ployed, although a decided theocrat. w ould be 
 obliged to adhere as closely as possibli; to the 
 king's habits of thought and the range of his 
 conception in the framing of an official docu- 
 ment to be published in the royal name — other- 
 wise it would fail to receive his approval. This 
 view, which has recently been represented by 
 Kranichfeld especially, is at any rate more sim- 
 ple and natural than the assumption, which be- 
 comes necessary on the supposition that Nebuch- 
 adnezzar in person composed the writing, thai 
 its theocratic coloring resulted from the inst.ruc 
 tion derived by the king from his intercourse 
 with Daniel (Calvin, Hiivemick, Heugstenberg, 
 etc.). Upon our hypothesis, moreover, it be 
 comes easy to comprehend why the writer should 
 occisionally pass from the first to the third per- 
 son (v.*. 2.~i-;H0). If Nebuchadnezzar ne ccn 
 ceived as the author, the eicplanatioi. of thit 
 
 EXEGETICAL REMARKS. 
 
 Chap. iii. 31-33 [Engl. iv. 1-3]. The intro- 
 duction to the edict. Nebuchadnezzar the king 
 unto all the people, nations, and languages, 
 etc. On the triad " people, tribes, and tongues," 
 see on chap. iii. 4. As it there occurs in the 
 public proclamation of a herald, so here in a 
 royal edict in writing, and at the very beginning. 
 This probably induced the persons who in a 
 former age arranged the division [of the Hebrew 
 text] into chapters, to include the introduction 
 of this edict in the preceding section ; but such 
 an arrangement is obviously inadmissible and in- 
 correct, in view of the evident relation of verses 
 31-33 to the statements commencing with chap. 
 iv. 1. and in view also of the considerable in- 
 terval of time that appears to have elapsed be- 
 tween the events of the third and those of the 
 fourth chapter (cf. on chap. iii. 1, and see ch.ap. iv. 
 2f) et seq ). A certain relation, however, exists 
 between the subject of the present section and 
 that of the preceding, inasmuch as both record 
 experiences of the exalted greatness and power 
 of God. stlch as had come to the king in the 
 course of events that partook of the superna- 
 tural to a greater or siuialler extent. — Like this 
 edict of the Babylonian king Nebuchadnezzar, 
 go an open letter (manifesto) of the Persian king 
 Artaxerxes. in Ezra vii. 12, begins with a solemn 
 wish for the welfare of the people, immediately 
 after the names of the king and of the person 
 addressed. — Is Nebuchadnezzar in person to be 
 regarded as the immediate composer of the pro- 
 clamation? Such a conclu-ion is opposed (1.) 
 by the frequent indications of an intimate ac- 
 quaintance with theocratic modes of thought 
 and expression which are found in the document, 
 and especially in the beginning and the end (cf. 
 e.g., the doxology in chap. iii. 33; iv. 31 ; with 
 Psa. Ixxii. 4 et seq. ; Psa. cxlv. 13, and also 
 with Dan. vii. 14. 27 ; cf. further, the descrip- 
 tion of the infinite greatness of God in chap. iv. 
 32, with Isa. xxiv. 21 ; xl. 17; xli. 12. 24, 29 ; 
 xliii. 13; xlv. 9; Job ix. 13; xxi. 22, etc.); 
 (2. ) by the broad and circumstantial character of 
 
CHAP. III. 31-1 ;. 34. 
 
 lOS 
 
 feature can only be found in the supposition , 
 that the report of the king is interrupted to I 
 admit of an abbreviated statement by Daniel j 
 (Calvin), or in the assumption that " Nebuchad- 
 nezzar considered it improper to report his in- j 
 sanity in person" (Hengstenberg, Maurer, etc.), 
 or finally, in the admission that verse 25 is still [ 
 due to Nebuchadnezzar, while verses 20-130 are ' 
 regarded as a parenthesis inserted by Daniel j 
 (Havemick ; see to the contrary infra, on ver. 
 25).*— Peace be multiplied to you; literally, ! 
 " increase richly, be richly imparted to you ; " 
 of. Ezra iv. 22. S^i^.""; corresponds exactly to 
 ■TTAT/dvinteir/ in the analogous formulas of greet- 
 ing, 1 Pet, i. 2 ; 2 Pet. i. 2 ; Jude 2 ; Clem. 
 Rom. 1 ; 1 Cor. i. 1.— Verse 32 [iv. 2], I thought 
 it good to show (to you) the signs and won- 
 ders, etc ; i.e., '"it pleases me." — **'"? 
 '«^™"■^ in the Heb. trans., r isni:! rinis ; cf. 
 the weU-known similar combination nir.ist 
 n"'71!:i'2n, Isa. viii. 18 (Greek ai/ina Kal Teparn). 
 The somewhat indefinite and general term THi 
 •' a sign, token," receives the special significa- 
 tion of •■ miraculous sign" (portentum) from its 
 combination with "^r, "a wonder, wonderfui 
 thing." The same combination occurs in v. 33 
 [iv. 3J. and also in chap. vi. 28. — ''^7K: "'r'?' 
 pulcrum est coram ine, i. e. , nmim est mihi, placu- 
 it mihi (Vulg.) ; cf. iv. 24; vi. 2 — Verse 33 [iv. 
 3], How great are His signs, etc. iT^S, quan- 
 typere, a strengthening of the simple 3, quam. 
 The exclamation does not by any means deny 
 that signs and wonders were also performed by 
 the Babylonian gods, but asserts the incompar- 
 able greatness of the miracles of Jehovah — a 
 thought which Daniel might express as well as 
 Nebuchadnezzar, — His k.ngdom is an ever- 
 lasting kingdom, etc. The same doxology 
 occurs also at the close of chap. iv. 31, with but 
 little change. Cf. Psa. cxlv. 13. 
 
 Chap. iv. 1-6 [4-9]. The king's dream, liia- 
 bility of the Mugians to interpret it. I Nebu- 
 chadnezzar w^as at rest in mine house. '" At 
 rest," ('.(., in the undisturbed possession of my 
 
 * [The nuthor'-s ar^iment*; for the original composition of 
 this pa.'wage by Diiniel are plansible, but not quite conclu 
 sive. It would seem that ail the Chaldee poitions of this 
 book are .substantially extracts from thearchive-s of theChal- 
 ■ilean realm, and this portioti has mure than ordinary marks 
 of having been such a document. The record of the facts 
 would doubtless be made as a part of the annals of the 
 empire, such as we know were wont to be preser\-ed by the 
 mouarchs of the great Ea.st(E.-thervi. 1). written doubtless by 
 the official scribe or historiographer in the vernacular or court 
 language. Thisaccount we may readily conceive Nebuchad- 
 ne/.zar on his recovery from insanity would be anxious to re- 
 Ti-'ie, and he would naturally select Daniel as his secretary in 
 publishing an authorized statement of the matter. This view 
 accounts for the mi.\ture of theocratic and heathen senti- 
 ments contained in this extraordinary coitfemion of royal 
 humiliation. Well might Daniel recur to this scene in his 
 bold rebuke of Belshazzar's impiety, chap. v. IS et seq. The 
 explanation of the Jewish coloring of parts of this chapter 
 by the hypoth'-'sis of a later interpolation of the AIaccaba?an 
 age. is amply refuted by Stuart and Keil (pee likewise our 
 author's apoloaetical remarks [No. 3] appended to this chap- 
 ter/. These writers both adduce, as corroboration of the 
 account of Nebuchadnezzar's madness, the statement of 
 Abydenus in the fragments preserved by Kusebius (/•/vrp. 
 Evang.. IX. Vi. and 'Miron. Armen,. eti. Aiicher, 1. p. .5111. 
 that the Chald.ean monarch was seized with a preti^rnatnral 
 frenzy (.«aTa<r;^t^cn)t^€i oT«ta» 67 .... 0«oirta-ai) while walk- 
 ing on the cop of his royal tower at Babylon.] 
 
 kingdom, which, according to v. 19, extended 
 to the end of the earth ; "in my house," i.e., in 
 the abode of peace, not in the field in order to 
 prosecute warlike enterprises. Both expressions 
 therefore refer to the later period of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar's reign, when his wars (probably includ- 
 ing that against Tyre, Ezek. xxix. IT) were 
 ended, and he was able to devote himself to the 
 affairs of peace, and especially to the erection 
 of the great edifices at Babylon, to which v. 27, 
 and also Berosus, in Josephus, c. Apion, I. 19, 
 refer. The time of this dream is therefore still 
 later than that indicated "by chap. iii. 1. — And 
 flourishing in my palace. i:?.7, "green," not 
 IjHbc, "quiet" (as the analogy of Job sxi. 23 
 might perhaps lead us to expect), is the term 
 employed by Nebuchadnezzar perhaps because 
 he already recalls at this point the fresh and 
 strongly flourishing tree (v, 7 et seq.), by which 
 he was symbolized in the dream-vision. Such a 
 prefatory use of a characteristic feature in the 
 symbolic vision was the more appropriate, since 
 the comparison of fortunate and healthful con- 
 ditions in life with the verdure of trees was 
 exceedingly common throughout the Orient, and 
 especially so in the Old-Testament usage of lan- 
 guage ; cf. Psa. i, 3 ; xxxvii. 35 ; Iii. 10 ; xcii. 
 13 et seq.; Prov. xi. 28; Hos. xiv. 7; Ezek. 
 xlvii. 12 (see upon this thought, my Theohgia 
 naturalis, p, 495 et seq,). For the rest, "W?"!, 
 belongs to the somewhat numerous class of 
 words which fell into disuse in the later AramtE- 
 ism ; cf. Pusey, Daniel, p. oO'J-liOG. — Verse 2 
 [5]. I saw a dream ■which made me afraid. 
 The abrupt connection, without n or Tl^? in- 
 dicates the alarming influence which the sud- 
 denly transpiring dream exercised over the king, 
 who had previously spent his time in peace ; cf. 
 Job iv. 20, and also the numerous antithetic 
 asyndeta in the Proverbs ilntrod. to Prov. of 
 Sol., § 14). — And thoughts upon my bed, viz. : 
 "came to me, arose in me; " an independent 
 clause, which must not be connected ivith the 
 final verb ^;:iri2^, hut which is rather to be 
 regarded as a parallel to ~^.^n -.n, exactly as 
 -13-1 "''i.'n'l is parallel to "'^rrH"!^! hi the former 
 half of the verse. The assumption of such a 
 parallelism is not, however, to be strained to 
 the point of regarding (with Kranichf. ) the 
 " thoughts" as the details of the vision itself; 
 for they, like the "^-r? ^'V^l in chap. ii. 29, 
 were probably the troubled reflections of the 
 king on awaking from his slumber, and whOe 
 meditating on the nature of his dream (Von 
 Lengerke ; cf . supra, on chap. ii. 29). ^The 
 l-i-irin (= the V;^mn of the Targums) seem, 
 however, to be identical with the Armen. c/ior- 
 hurd, " a thought," and the word, therefore, is 
 perhaps of Indo-Gerraanic derivation (thus Hit- 
 zig, at any rate ; but Ewald, p. 477, objects ; 
 cf. also Gesenius and Dietrich, s. v. -iin). — And 
 visions of my head troubled me. Exactly 
 similar to chap. vii. 15 b. The "visions of tha 
 head " are the several fancies or images of the 
 dream, as in chap. ii. 28.— Verse 3 [(>]. There- 
 fore made I a decree. The same words occur 
 ui chap, iii. 29 ; cf. chap, ii, 5. — In regard tc 
 
no 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 '^??t'"!'^> "se on ii. 35. — Observe that, in this in- 
 stance, where the contents of the dream were 
 not forgotten by the king, nor regarded as being 
 especially marrellous, the condition of the king 
 while demanding an interpretation of the dream 
 is very different from that described in chap. ii. 
 5 — a circumstance that strongly endorses the 
 credibility of the narrative.— Verse 4 [7]. Then 
 came in all the magicians, etc. Concerning 
 the various classes of the wise men of Babylon, 
 four of which are here specially referred to, see 
 on chap. ii. 2.— Instead of ri"?? (read pii;,), 
 the participle of bbs, "to go in," the Keri in 
 this place has ''^^J' (cf. chap. v. 8), which is 
 contracted from T'ib?, a form that shortens the 
 initial _ to _ ; with the latter cf., e.g., V?"?"' 
 chap. iii. IG.— Verse 5 [8]. But at the last 
 I>aniel came in before me. The Kethib Vl'.ns 
 13 a form with an undeniably adverbial significa- 
 tion (= "at last, posti'eino" — not adjective: 
 "the last, postremus," as Hitzig prefers), that 
 iloes not occur in the later Chaldee, and is re- 
 placed by the Keri inHH for T.ns). It is rather 
 ';o be regarded as an extension of the sing, ad- 
 jective formation "'"ins, than as an irregular 
 plural in which the «-sound has taken the place 
 of ''— (see Olshausen, Lehrb. der hebr. 8}yrache, 
 p. 208). — The n5 preceding is the familiar con- 
 junction " until" (Ezra iv. 21 ; v. 5) ; the whole 
 expression i^ns -J>i, " untU at last," is an 
 adverbial phrase similar to 3"'3£" yz, chap. ii. 8. 
 — Whose name is Belteshazzar, according to 
 the name of my god. Cf. on chap. i. 7. This 
 thoroughly heathen reference to the name of 
 Daniel is immediately followed by a reference 
 to his person, which indicates the feature that 
 had inspired the heathen king with confidence 
 in his superior power and understanding, and, 
 through this, with a faint conception of the 
 nature of that Deity to whom he owed such 
 power and %visdom. From this afBrmation "that 
 the spirit of the holy gods is in thee," which is 
 repeated in v.s. C [9] and 15 [18], it follows that 
 Nebuchadnezzar had by no means forgotten 
 what he had learned upon two previous occa- 
 sions respecting the eminent prophetic gifts of 
 Daniel, and his direct intercourse with the only 
 true God. The expression does not, indeed, 
 have an orthodox look from a theocratic or Old- 
 Testament point of view ; but it is only to the 
 half a heathen sentiment, similar to the remarks 
 by Pharoah in praise of Joseph, Gen. xli 88. — 
 V'?1P is probably not an epilheton omnm of the 
 go<lB in general, but rather a special designation 
 of the ir,af)i)iSaiunvir in distinction from the de- 
 structive divinities (Kranichf.). — Verse 6 [9]. 
 O Belteshazzar. master of the magicians, 
 t<''73D"n :^. This title differs only in form and 
 not in substance from that of "chief president 
 of all the wise men of Babylon," which dignity 
 was conferred on Daniel, chap. ii. 48. It was 
 by no means necessary that Daniel, as the pos- 
 (Hsaor of this exalted dignity, should at once 
 and without ceremony present himself before 
 4he king with the remaining p)3'>;n- The 
 
 more independe/it position which he occupies, 
 according to this passage, is rather in entire har- 
 mony with chap, iii., where he is absent from a 
 large assembly of the officials of the royal court, 
 and also with chap. v. 10 et seq., where it is 
 represented that his character as the chief 
 magian was lost sight of by Nebuchadnezzar's 
 successors, but not that he had been deprived of 
 that dignity. Among the various answers to 
 the question as to why Daniel was not at once 
 summoned before the king to interpret the 
 dream, instead of being subsequently introduced, 
 the one here indicated, which refers to the free- 
 dom of his official station, is certainly the most 
 simple and appropriate, since various features of 
 our book appear to conflict with the assumption 
 that he occupied a political or priestly station in 
 the proper sense (cf. on chap. ii. 49 ; iii. 12 ; 
 and on viii. 2). Consequently we prefer this 
 explanation to the many which have been at- 
 tempted, e.g., that of Jahn, that '^miMom re- 
 quired that the chief of the magians should not 
 be summoned at the first ; " that of Fuller, 
 which considers Daniel as being, in fact, an offi- 
 cer of the state (chief satrap) rather than a 
 magian; that of Havernick, that "the 7uiste 
 with which the terrified king caused the wise 
 men to be summoned " caused the overlooking 
 of Daniel at the outset; that of Kranichfeld, 
 which argues that Nebuchadnezzar, who already 
 surmised the relation of the image of the fallen 
 tree in his dream to his royal person, dreaded 
 the harsher judgment and sterner prophecy of 
 evil to be expected from Daniel, the prophet of 
 Jehovah, exactly as Ahab, in 1 Kings xxii. 8 et 
 seq., summoned the heathen wise men and seera 
 into his presence, before he turned to the propel 
 source, etc. J. D. Slichaelis, however, observes 
 with entire correctness, that a certain and trust- 
 worthy answer to that question would require a 
 more exact acquaintance with all the facts of 
 the history than we are able to command.* — 
 And that no secret troubleth thee. ~rs< .sig. 
 nifies in the Targums " to sweep away, to apply 
 force," but here " to cause difficulty or trouble ;" 
 cf. the Heb. C:s, " to compel," Esth. i. 8. 
 
 Verses 7-14 [10-17]. Subject of the king's 
 dream. Thus were the visions of my head, 
 etc. ; Uterally, ' ' And (concerning) the visions of 
 my head upon my bed ; I saw ; " an abrupt and 
 detached clause similar to chap. vii. 17-2y. — In 
 relation to "vision of my head," see on v. 2. — 
 And behold, a tree (stood) in the midst of the 
 earth. T^"**, unlike the corresponding Heb. 
 'pbs<, does not signify an " oak " in particular, 
 but " tree " generally ; cf. ''pfr and robnr. The 
 position of this tree, "in the midst of the earth," 
 indicates its great importance for the whole 
 earth, and its destiny to develop an unlimited 
 growth in every direction (cf. v. 8). The tree 
 thus occupies a central position that corresponds 
 
 * [Keil reviews at length the variou.'^ reanons assigned 
 for not summonine Daniel jit first, and conclndes that it 
 must nave been because the kint^ had in the lapse of time 
 and varied successes meanwhile totally fort^otton the for- 
 mer prophetical powers of the Heltrew captive. This 
 would be natural and entirely satisfactory, but for the 
 fait that on his very introduction into the royal presence 
 he ifi here designated as one po.sscssing diviue forekE,owI 
 edge, an evident allusion to his former eervicca in tcAf 
 relation.) 
 
CHAP. III. 31-IV. 34. 
 
 ill 
 
 to its exceeding height. The symbolizing of the 
 mighty Babylonian king by a tree recalls the 
 description by Eze a iel. chap. xxi. 3 et seq. , which 
 was probably not known to Nebuchadnezzar, but 
 with which Daniel, the narrator of his dream, 
 must have been acquainted. It also suggests a 
 reference to Ezek. xvii. 22 ; xix. lOetseq. ; and, 
 among the earlier prophets, to Isa. ii. 13 ; vi. 13 ; 
 xiv. 12; Jer. x-xii. 1.5 ; Anx ii. 9 (cf. also the pas- 
 sages cited above, on v. 1). The especial fond- 
 ness of the ancient Orientals for the illustration 
 of the growth or decline of human greatness and 
 power by the figure of a growing or fallen tree, 
 is shown by Havemick in the parallels he adduces 
 from Herodotus (iii. 19 ; the dream of Xerxes; 
 vi. 37 ; the threat of Croesus to destroy the town 
 of Lampsacus Uke a pine tree ; cf. also i. 108 ; 
 the dream of Astyages respecting his daughter 
 Mandane), from Arabic writers (Antara's Moal- 
 laka, V. 51, 5(i; Reiske on Tariifa, proleg., p. 
 xlvii.), from the later Mohammedan traditions 
 (Mohammed's comparison of a Moslem to an 
 evergreen palm in Sunna, according to v. Ham- 
 mer, Fundyrubeii des OrieuU. I. 152), and from 
 Turkish history and literature (the prophetic 
 dream of Osman I., according to Murajea 
 d'Ohssnn, AUgem. Schilderung des ottoman. 
 Rciclis, p. 273 et seq.). Cf. further, with refer- 
 ence to the general use of this tree-symbolism 
 among the Greeks, the interesting work of Bot- 
 ticher : Biiiimkultiis der Uelleiicn (Leips. , 1858). 
 — Verse 8 [11]. The tree grew and was strong, 
 '•became great and strong;" thus, correctly, 
 Chr. B. Michaelis, Hitzig, and Kranichfeld. 
 The finite verbs "~<, and i^p.ri do not designate 
 a fixed, but a becoming state ; hence Nabuchad- 
 nezzar sees the tree growing and becoming 
 greater than it was in v. 7 [10]. — And the 
 height thereof reached unto heaven, like the 
 tower of .Babel, Gen. xi. 4, or the f^tvipea 
 oiiiavouiima, Herod. II. 138. Observe the imper- 
 fect "S'2';, which here takes the place of the 
 perfect, and indicates the heaven-aspiring ten- 
 dency of the slowly developing tree. — And the 
 sight thereof to the end of all the earth; 
 r.ither, " its extent" or circumference. i^r?Tn 
 does not signify "its visibility" (Vulg., Syr., 
 de Wette, and many modems), but "its outlook, 
 its circumference, its extent" (the Sept. and 
 rhsodotion are correct, so far as the sen.se is 
 concerned : "u xi""! airoi, its bulging, exten- 
 sion) ; the contrast with mail would itself re- 
 quire this interpretation. — Verse 9 [12]. The 
 leaves (branches) thereof were fair, and the 
 fruit thereof much. rr-ES, properly its branch- 
 ing, its crown, as n2:s is the aggregate of its 
 fruit. Bertholdt, von Lengerke, and others, 
 render incorrectly "and its fruit was large" 
 (i.e.. it bore a large, thick kind of fruit); for 
 there was no reason to mention such a quality 
 of the tree. The immediate connection shows 
 that the great quantity of fruit, instead of its 
 size, was here referred to. — And it was meat 
 for all, rather, " and food for all (was found) 
 on it." ''ilbi, "for all," i.e., for all who lived 
 under its shelter — an exemplification and more 
 circumstantial exposition of S<^3?. It is, how- 
 ever immaterial to the sense of the passage as 
 
 a whole, whether na be construed with 11'^ 
 by neglecting the makkeph between Ki>2"^ and 
 ns. as a majority of expositors, including our- 
 selves, translate, or whether we translate, as 
 Kranichfeld [and Keil], with regard to the in*ih 
 keph: " and food was found for aU o'i it," i.e., 
 for all the birds that nestled on it. The maiora 
 evidently requires this rendering here, while in 
 ver. 18 (21J, where the nuikkeph is wanting from 
 between StbsJ and HS, it observes the other 
 construction. — The beasts of the field had 
 shadow under it. i'3?P, ximbram egit, spent 
 in the shadow. The aphel of bbc (" obimbrare, 
 to overshadow, protect "), which, in the Ian 
 guage of the Targums, is generally transitive, 
 like the Heb. i^^n, 1 Chron. iv. 3, is here in- 
 transitive by virtue of its Xiphal signification. — 
 And the fowls of the heaven dwelt in the 
 boughs thereof ; cf. Matt. xiii. 32, and the par- 
 allel pass,age8. The masculine V'" has its 
 explanation in the fact that T'^SV is of the 
 common gender ; the Keri T)""; construes the 
 word in the feminine, in analogy \\dth l?2~";i 
 V. 18 [21].— And all flesh was led of it. •' All 
 flesh," i.e., not merely all the birds, but also all 
 the beasts of the field, and. in short, all the ani- 
 mals living on and under the tree, thus imaging 
 all of the human race that were united under the 
 sceptre of Nebuchadnezzar; cf. v. 19 [22]. 
 Verse 10 [13). I saw in the visions of my head 
 upon my bed ; a formula designed to prepare 
 for tlie new and remarkablj* sudden turn of the 
 hitherto quietly transpiring dream. — A watcher 
 and holy one ceime dowrn from heaven. ^'2 
 D^'lpl, .obviously a liendkidys for "a holy watch- 
 er, a watcher who is holy." n^r, the pass. part, 
 of -iTij, expergefieri, designates a ■' watchful one, 
 one who watches" (cf. ""?, Cant. v. 2; Mai. ii. 
 12), in this place more particularly a celestial 
 watcher, an angel who from heaven watches 
 over the fortunes of men. Thus Aquila. Symra. , 
 and the Sept. : eypi/ynpur • also a scholium in the 
 Cod. Alex, on the dp [a transfer of T""] of 
 Theodotion ((■;/)'); 0()oc Kai a-; pvTvvuf) ; also Poly- 
 chronius : tu uypvTzvov nai ayyr/.or, and Jerome : 
 •• Sigiiificat angelos, qvod semper vigilent et iid 
 Dei impenum sint parati." By the addition of 
 the modifying -^'lUI the l""^ mentioned in 
 this place is expressly classed with the good or 
 holy watchers of heaven, and thus is distin- 
 guished from the KaKiKhi/mvcc, in which light 
 the Babylonians regarded a number of their 
 astral gods (see Gesenius on Isa., II. 334 et 
 seq.), and also from the >')p'riiip"i of the book 
 of Enoch, who are described as bad angels and 
 as inimical to men. The erxpression " decree 
 (determination, counsel) of the watchers " points 
 strongly to the conclusion that the V"!"'? of f" 
 book are identical with the ^erii PuvXaloi of the 
 Babylonians in Diodor., ii. 30 — i.e., with the 
 thirty-six inferior gods associated .as counsellors 
 ( deos) with the five superior planetar}' gods ; but 
 the entire correspondence of this feature to tht 
 
112 
 
 THK PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Bab^-lonian doctrine of the gods does not exclude 
 the existence, at the same time, of a certain 
 analogy or essential relation of the ' ' watchers " 
 with the Amex/^a-cptiiia of the Parsees, nor even 
 that the supposed etymology of Amesha-(;penta 
 = noil ammrens xinictus (thus Bopp. who is, 
 however, contradicted, e.g., by Bumouf) might 
 be asserted m its support. But that -"'"Pl "ill" 
 is '■ merely a translation of Amshaspand " is an 
 arbitrary dictum of Hitzig, which is opposed by 
 the possibly post-Babylonian age of the name 
 Amesha-Qpenta (this does not occur at all in the 
 oldest portion of the Zendavesta), and which 
 lacks all scientific support, to an extent equal to 
 the identification of "l"'? wivh T^^, " a messen- 
 ger" (Isa. xviii. 2; Ivii. 9), as was attempted 
 b}' several older expositors, e.ff., Michaelis (in 
 Castell. Lex. Si/r., p. 649), cf. , however, Hiiver- 
 nick and Kranichfeld on this passage, and also 
 Hengstenberg, Christologie des Alien Testamejits, 
 III. 2, 74 et seq.— Verse 11 [14]. He cried 
 aloud and said thus. " Aloud," exactly like 
 the royal herald, in chap. iii. 4; cf. x. 16 ; Isa. 
 Iviii. 1, etc. — Hew down the tree and cut off 
 its branches. The command is addressed to the 
 servants of the angel, who were perhaps inferior 
 angels, and whose presence the rapidly transpir- 
 ing dream presumes without further explana- 
 tion ; cf. Matt. viii. 9, and the parallel pa.ssages, 
 Isidorus Pelusiota already is correct (Epj>. 1. II. 
 n. 177) : a)LOV(^ de ^(jiT/Grv tovc; to divdpoi- t'iTtftri:tv 
 TTpoarux'HivTa^ ayyiAirvr. [Perhaps KeU rather 
 is correct, who suggests that "the plur. is to 
 be regarded as impersomal : the tree sliall be cut 
 down."] — Shake (strip) off its leaves, literally, 
 "cause them to fall off." IIPS (instead of 
 llrs after the analogy of verbs third gutt. ), 
 the aphel of "iC^, which designates the falling 
 of faded leaves or blossoms from the tree, in the 
 Targums, Psa. i. 3; Isa. xl. 8; Joel i. 10. — 
 Scatter its fruit ; contemptuously, as if it 
 were of no value, and as if it were not worth 
 the trouble of gathering. The consequence, that 
 the animals, who were hitherto sheltered by the 
 tree, were now likewise scattered, and driven 
 far asunder — a lively image of subjects alarmed 
 by the fall of their sovereign — is indicated in 
 what foUow.s. — Verse 13 [15]. Nevertheless, 
 leave the stump of its roots in the earth, 
 Ipr. the still thrifty stump, like P=?'?, Isa. vi. 
 13, or 17?- Isa. xi 1 ; Job xiv. 8. The ultimate 
 sprouting of this root-stump (cf. Job xiv. 7-9), 
 which was allowed to remain in the earth, typi- 
 fied, as appears from verse 23 [26 1 compared 
 with verse 33 [36], the restoration of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar from his sickness ; but not the continued 
 supremacy of his dynasty, as Hiivemick inter- 
 prets, since "ip_5 in this passage obviously desig- 
 nates an individual, Nebuchadnezzar himself, 
 instead of the whole race of Chaldsean rulers. — 
 Even with a band of iron and brass; rather, 
 "but in fetters of iron and brass. " Supply 
 '■ shall he lie, or be ; " or even •' shall he be left" 
 ("^""^■f")- The figure of a tree is now dropped ; 
 in the stead of a vegetable organism that neces- 
 sarily clings to the ground there is presented, 
 obviously with regard to the bestializing of Ne- 
 
 buchadnezzar, an animal organism, which, while 
 naturally capable of unimpeded motion and o* 
 an individual and independent participation in 
 life, is for the present forcibly restrained. There 
 is thus a partial transition from the figure to the 
 fact (as is frequently the case in the compari- 
 sons and allegories of our Lord, e.g., Mark iv. 
 28; Luke xii. 46; Matt. xxii. 13; John x. 11 
 et seq. ), or at least an approximation of the 
 figurative representation to the actual conditions 
 of the event typified. This fact is misimder- 
 stood as soon as the attempt is made, with Von 
 Lengerke, to conceive of the fetters of iron as 
 fastened on the root-stump, ' ' in order to pre- 
 vent it from cracking and splitting," and also 
 when it is assumed, with Jerome and others, 
 that an actual binding of Nebuchadnezzar as a 
 furiosus, who required to be fettered like all 
 maniacs, is asserted at this early stage. The 
 literal conception of the idea " to fetter " is in- 
 appropriate on either method. The " fetters of 
 iron and brass " svmbolize the chains of darkness 
 and coarse bestiality in which the mind of the 
 king was held duiing an extended period. Cf. 
 expressions like "chains of darkness," Wisd. 
 xvii. 17 ; 2 Pet. ii. 4, and figurative descriptions, 
 such as Psa. cvii. 10 ; cxvi. 16 ; cxlix. 8 ; Job 
 xxxvi. 8. Kranichfeld observes correctly : " A 
 more forcible binding of his sovereign aims for 
 himself, exceeding the disgrace of that which 
 might be applied to a prisoner of war, could 
 scarcely happen to the king, than was that to 
 which he was compelled to submit according to 
 verses 22 [25] and 29 [31], in the form of a 
 beastly restraint on his understanding, and of an 
 actual expulsion from the society in which he 
 moved. And since binding in fetters of iron and 
 brass is a metaphor as common as it is in this 
 instance a striking figure of the deplorable con- 
 dition to which the Babylonian universal mon- 
 arch was reduced ; since, moreover, .the tower- 
 ing height of the tree in the dream is of itself 
 suflBcient to establish th<^ selection of an expres- 
 sion to indicate the corresponding contrast of a 
 severe and servile compulsion, the explanation 
 of the figure does not require the combination 
 of this expression proposed bj' Hitzig with an 
 assonant /cednn, Syr., 'to bind,' taken from the 
 name of Nebuchadnezzar. This is the more ob- 
 vious because of the consideration that no refer- 
 ence is made to the name in other portions of the 
 description, although, by a repeated use of the 
 k in nebiik (Nebuch), it might to the Hebrew 
 sound portentously like the Arabic inbaka, " iur- 
 brita meiite fuit." For the Talmudic animal with 
 an ingrown tree which resembled man in form 
 and language, adne sadeh (Bust. Lex. Cludd., p. 
 34), may be explained, as by Hitzig, without any 
 doubt whatever, from the ."■■* of the name Ne- 
 buchadnezzar much more readily thau that really 
 fabulous creature would have allowed itself to 
 be fabricated, had not the self-authenticated 
 description of Daniel (verses 12, 13 [1,5, 16], in 
 connection with the otherwise familiar "'?.'',*' 
 the heliolrnprnn which moves its leaves (see Buxt. 
 1. c. ), furnished the material." — In the tender 
 grass of the field, etc. This Ij-ing in the grass 
 and being exjiosed to the dews of heaven is aa 
 applicable to the stump of the tree as to Nebuch- 
 adnezzar, the maniac ; cf. verse 20 [23] et seq.— 
 
CHAP. III. 31-IV. M. 
 
 113 
 
 Concerning the reading 5*^^", for which verse 
 20 [23] substitutes "StriT (corresponding to the 
 Hebraizing Keris in chap. v. 39 ; vi. 1), of. Hit- 
 zig and Kranichfeld on this passage. — And let 
 his portion be witti the beasts in the grass of 
 the earth. Cf. verse 30 [38], ''and did eat 
 ;fra.ss as oxen." The iigure has been departed 
 from entirely in this place, and a feature of the 
 interpretation is anticipated. PrHi "'portion," 
 occurs also in verse 20 [23] and Ezra iv. IG. The 
 Targuras have P^in instead. Concerning the 
 not local, but telic signification of 3, " in or of 
 the grass," cf. e.g., Joshua xxii. 35 ; 2 Sam. xx. 
 1. — Verse 13 [10]. Let his heart be changed 
 from a metn's ; literally, "they shall change from 
 
 (thatof)aman"(i<'f':S"l'? = -i^?« ^^'p, as Ibn- 
 Kzra correctly adds). Cf. the similar bvemlo- 
 quentifB in chap. i. 10; vii. 20, etc., and con- 
 cerning the active signification of 'V''-'^^. (for 
 which the angels addressed in ^P?"'? serve as an 
 indefinite subject), cf. supra, on chap. iii. 4. "His 
 heart," i. e. , his faculties of conception and desire, 
 or. if it be preferred, his consciousness ; cf. verses 
 29, 30 [33, 33]. The Hebraizing form S^'^:^ 
 here and in verse 14 [17] is perhaps to be re- 
 jected in favor of the more correct Chaldee 
 t«^':» ; cf. verses 22, 29, 30 [25, 32, 33] ; chap. 
 V. 21 ; vii. 13, etc. [ — And let a beast's heart 
 be given unto him. "The heart of a man is 
 dehumanized when his soul becomes like that of 
 a beast ; for the difference between the heart 
 of a man and that of a beast has its foundation 
 in the difference between the soul of a man and 
 the soul of a beast (Delitzsch, Bihl. I'ki/cIi., p. 
 252)." — Keil.] — And let seven times pass over 
 him, properly, "change over him;" ^?~, a 
 select word for " to pass over, expire," priHerire, 
 prmteiiiibi. It may be seriously doubted whether 
 the term ^~"", "'over him," was chosen with 
 a special reference to " the stars succeeding each 
 other in the heavenly heights above the tor- 
 mented one, which were to indicate the duration 
 of his affliction " (Kranichfeld), although the 
 mystical phrase ' ' seven times " may contain a cer- 
 tain reference to the astrology of the Chaldaeans. 
 The seven Trl" are seven years, as appears 
 from chap. vii. '25, compared with xii. 7 (thus 
 the Sept., Josephus, Ibn-Ezra, Rashi, etc.), — 
 not seven months (as Saadia Gaon, Dorotheus, 
 Pseudo-Epiphanius, etc., held) or seven half- 
 years ( Theodore t). T^?, in itself equivalent to 
 "juncture, emergency," receives in this place 
 and chap. vii. 25, the sense of ^?^'3 or T3T, " a 
 point of time," from the context. The dura- 
 tion of the king's punishment as extending over 
 8eren years is explained here, as in chap. iii. 19, 
 by the fact that a jiidiriiil retribution is con- 
 cerned ; and the heavy weight of punishment 
 which Jehovah cau.sed to be announced with 
 solemn emphasis to the king was accordingly in- 
 flicted, verses 25, 29 [28, 32]. The number 
 seven is. however, not to be pressed literally, to 
 the exten; of assuming that the duration of the 
 king's 8ic!;ness covered exactly seven times 3(>5 
 
 days, which would do violence to the always 
 prophetically-ideal pragmatism of the history. 
 Cf. infra, on chap. vii. '25.* — Verse 14 [17]. 
 This matter (message) is by the decree of the 
 watchers, and the demand by the word of 
 the holy ones. The paralkiisiaua meinbrwuin 
 in which the solemn and elevated speech jiro- 
 ceeds, shows that the V"'r'''vP are here also, aa 
 in verse 10 [13], identical with the V"]"'?. The 
 terms C3~S and S'^?*™ are likewise synony- 
 mous, but do not, as Hitzig holds, signify "mat- 
 ter " (concern) and "circumstance," but, in 
 harmony with their etymology and the sense of 
 ;3rr ii chap. iii. 16, must be rendered " word " 
 (message, announcement) and '" demand " (com- 
 mand); cf. the Heb. ~;H'i', "a request, desire," 
 Judg. viii. 34 ; 1 Kings ii. 10 ; Job. vi. 8 ; Esth. 
 V. 6, 8, etc. Entirely too artificial and contra- 
 dictory of the unquestionable sense of '*"]:3, '• a 
 decision, resolution " (and also of Tpstr, " a de- 
 cree, decision"), is the attempt of Kranich- 
 feld to vindicate the signification "a request, 
 petition," for S*^?.".^", which is based on the idea 
 of a petition such as the watchers, as inferior 
 ^ml li'w'/.alm (see on verse 10 [13]), were obliged 
 to address to their superiors, the five planetary 
 gods. But the V:^< appear nevertheless to be 
 advisory deities, inasmuch as they are only 
 '\""l''", and not V~~?*, and inasmuch as the 
 supreme decision in their college rests, accord- 
 ing to verse 21 [24], with the "Most High" 
 
 * [Keil, on the other hand, contends that '■ from ver, 26 
 the duration of the '^"'3'^^ cannot at all be concluded, and in 
 
 chap. vii. 25. and xii. 7, the times are not years. ■','1T de.<sig- 
 
 nattfs generally a definite period of time, whose length or du- 
 ration may be very different. '• Seven is the * nieasuie and sig- 
 nature of the hietory of the developmet)t of the kin'jdom of 
 God, and of all the factors ind phenomena Bignificalit for 
 it" (Liimmett's Revixiuii of thit Bibticitt or Stfinboli<:al 
 Number^!, in the Jahrb.f. dentnche 7'henl., IX. p. II). or aa 
 Leyrer. in Herzog's Jienleiicykl,. XVIII. p. :-.»»(), expresfiea 
 himself, 'the si<jnature for all the actions of (rod, in jadg- 
 ment and in mercv, puniPhmenta, expiat'ons, con-^fcrations, 
 blessings, conserrated with the economy of redemption, per- 
 fecting themselves in time.' Accordingly, 'seven times' is 
 the duration of the divine punishment which was decreed 
 against Nebuchadnezzar for purposes connected with the 
 history of redemption. Whether these times are to be im- 
 derstood as ycar>, months, or weeks is not said, and cannot 
 at all be determined. The supposition that they were seven 
 years ' cannot well be adopted in opposition to the circum- 
 sUince that Nebuchadnezzar was again restored to reason, a 
 thing that very rarely occurs, after so long a continuance 
 of psychical disease' (J. B. Friedrich, Zur Bibl ]^aturhint., 
 aiulirop. u. inetl. Fra^mente, I. p. .31())," This last argu- 
 ment, however, is of little force, in view of the evidently 
 miraculous, or at least specially providentjal, character of 
 the entire event. *'C. B. Michaelis, Geeenius, Rosenimiller, 
 Winer, Lengerke, and nearly all the critics agree that j/ear 
 is the probable meaning." — Stuart. The supposed dilhculty 
 of the management of the empire during so long a }ieriod 
 of the king's incapacity is fairly disposed of by Stuart, by • 
 reference to Berosus, who states that on Nebuchadnezzar's 
 return to his capital, after his protracted absence during his 
 wars m Western Asia, upon his father's death, ''he took 
 upon himself the affairs which hatl been m.inaged by the 
 Chaldees [Magi], and the royal authi>r;ty wliich had been 
 preserved far him Inj their cf tie f^^ ( Josephu.-. .Aiitiq., X. II, 
 I. ) Geo. Rawlinson was inclined to find a trace of this in- 
 terniption of Nebuchadnezzar's government in the period of 
 four years' inactivity noted in his annals {IJi^toricnl Evi- 
 ftence-s. p. 1.^7) on the '• Spaniard Inscri|>tion " (Herodotua, 
 II. 485) ; but he has since doubted the reference (/"/ce Jfo* 
 archies. III. 60).] 
 
114 
 
 THE PROPHET DA^flEL. 
 
 (s'^iS). Cf. the representation erf a great sub- 
 ordinate council of the Deity as composed of 
 angels in 1 Kings xxii. 19 et seq. ; Job ii. 1 et 
 seq. ; and also, with reference to the specifi- 
 cally Babylonian idea of a decision in the coun- 
 cil of the deity, Diodor. ii. 30 : ol 6'ovv XaMaioi 
 — pnatv Tt/v TL}V uALiV rd^iv Kai dianonfjijoiv ^eia 
 Tivl npovoia yEyovevai.^ kol vvv knaora tliv ev ovpavtj> 
 yivouh'otv ovx ^f irvxsv oitd' airo/idrwf, cAX' 
 
 upiGfilvT} Tivl Kal (ieliai<MiQ KEKVptJfiivri i^ECJV Kpictt 
 
 cvvTe2.eiadai ; further, the familiar picture near 
 Kazwini, which represents Bel as a judge and 
 surrounded by genii (Gesen., ml Isa., ii. 337). 
 Before ^^K^p, "a decree," the instrumental 3 
 must be supplied from the preceding. The 
 variation T2S?a21 is, therefore, correctly sup- 
 plied in the interpretation. — To the intent that 
 the living may know that the Most High 
 ruleth, etc. "'T ri::'!"!!'' is to be rendered, 
 either "until, to the circumstance, that" = 
 "until that" (doatc, Vulg. ), or, with Hitzig, in 
 harmony with chap. ii. 30, and with the Iva 
 jiijod'of Theodotion, "^T r"in"l"bs, -'totheend 
 that." The latter may perhaps be preferred, 
 because of the ease of mistaking j? for ^S', and 
 because of the fact that fll.^'l IS does not 
 occur elsewhere.* Verse 22 [25], which directly 
 substitutes l"i:ri for the '^'S'TjI of this verse, 
 shows that Nebuchadnezzar, the ruler of the 
 earth, is not excluded from the number of the 
 ' ■ living " who are to recognize the authority of 
 the Most High, but rather, that he especially is 
 included. — And setteth up (rather, "can set 
 up" I over it the basest of men. Q"''^ps« i?"i"i 
 "the humblest of men," is grammatically a 
 general conception conveying the idea of the 
 superlative, as in 2 Chron. xxi. 17, the Heb. 
 v;a Pp ; cf. Winer, Chald. Gramm., § 58, 2. 
 The assertion of Hitzig, that by this humblest 
 of mtn, an Israelite, or even the Israelitish Mes- 
 siah ('ii;:^^ 13, chap. vii. 13), is designated as 
 successor to the great world-monarch, is with- 
 out support from the context. The thought of 
 a person of the lowest rank, rather, was natur- 
 ally suggested to the mind of the dreaming king, 
 because the fall of himself, the most exalted 
 man, was concerned. — For the opinion that the 
 imperfects nrP" and D^p^ in this place express 
 the idea of ability — " is able to confer, can exalt " 
 — cf. chap. ii. 47, where ']'']') njjj also desig- 
 nates that Being who is able to reveal secrets. 
 [ — "The Kcthib n^'^y is shortened from S^"'?!!'.' 
 md in the Keri is yet further shortened by the 
 rejection of the i ; cf. chap. v. 21; vii. 4 sq., 
 etc " — Keil. ] 
 
 Verse 15 [18j. Darnel required to interpret the 
 dream. This dream I king Nebuchadnezzar 
 
 • [Keil, however, justly claims that "the change of 15 
 to iz! is unDecefis.try and arbitrary. The expression is gen- 
 
 ei\il. beraiiwp it is not yet said who is to be understood by 
 ttie tr<ie thiit is to be cut down. Ttiif, general expression is 
 in reality correct : for the king conies by experience to this 
 knowledge, and so all will atta n to it wLo consider this."] 
 
 have seen. The demonstrative n:! is placed 
 first for emphasi.-i, thus corresponding to the 
 disturbing and exciting subject of the dream. 
 The predicative rendering, " This is the dream, 
 which," etc., is opposed by the rule that the 
 relative cannot be omitted after the designated 
 noun (Winer, § 41, 4). — Declare the interpre- 
 tation thereof. S«"i!L"S, is a softened form for 
 (Tl'wD, " its interpretation," in this place, v. 16 
 [19], and chap. v. 8. This view is confirmed by 
 the Peshito, while Theodotion and the Vulgate 
 have S'l/'r?) which reading is still represented 
 among modems, e.g., by Hitzig. — On the close 
 of the verse, cf. 6 [9]. 
 Verses 16-24 [19-27]. The interpretation. 
 
 Then Daniel was astonished for 
 
 (about) one hour. On the reading CKiri".^!* 
 instead of t^P^, cf.' Winer, § 25, 2. Several 
 MSS. have nrca instead of ri^'t-S, but this 
 reading conflicts with the usage of the context, 
 and also with the testimony of the ancient trans- 
 lators (Thfcodot., Vulg., Syr., and probably with 
 the Sept.). Concerning the etymology of ~''1V"' 
 "hour," which is certainly to be taken here in 
 the literal sense, cf. on chap. iii. 6.* That the 
 astonished gazing of Daniel continued "about 
 an hour," is mentioned by the author from a 
 motive (viz., in order to indicate the greatness 
 of his astonishment) similar to that from which 
 the book of Job records the sympathetic mourn- 
 ing and silence of the three friends during seven 
 days (Job ii. 13). Hitzig observes correctly : 
 " He meditates on the interpretation, and is as- 
 tonished when he perceives it. because he wishes 
 well to the king, and probably, also, because 
 Nebuchadnezzar might receive the prophecy un- 
 graciously, and might take vengeance on him (aa 
 Ahab did on Micaiah. 1 Kings xxii. 26, 27). His 
 confusion is depicted on his countenance ; which 
 causes the king to observe that he has found the 
 interpretation, and to invite him in encouraging 
 terms to impart it freely. " It cannot really be 
 comprehended how it is possible, in the face of 
 so unsought-for, and, in itself, probable a his- 
 torical situation, to establish the hyjiothesis of a 
 conventional forgery in the Maccabtean age. — 
 ["That Nebuchadnezzar (ver. 16 [19]) in his 
 account speaks in the third person does not jus- 
 tify the conclusion either that another spoke of 
 him, and that thus the document is not genuine 
 (Hitzig), nor yet the conclusion that this verse 
 includes a historical notice introduced as an in- 
 terpolation into the document ; for similar forms 
 of expression are often found in such documents ; 
 cf. Ezra vii. 13-15 ; Esth. viii. 7, 8."— AViV.] — 
 IVIy lord, the dream be to them that hate 
 thee, and the interpretation thereof to thine 
 enemies ! i.e.. Would that the dream concerned 
 thine enemies, and that its interpretation related 
 
 * [Keil. however, insists that the terra here means "ap 
 it were an instant, a nwrneitt." But so brief a delay would 
 seem altogether insignificant, and could have excited little 
 surprise, or called for any urging on the part of the king. 
 Stuart, on the other hand, regards so long a hesitat on as 
 an hour ns " very improbable," and therefore addufcs the 
 derivation of nyHJ (« looi, GeToi. aur/eiib ict, Hcb. ri"! 
 
 as favoring the signification rtn instant ; and in taie inter 
 pretation Gescnins and Furst both coincide.] 
 
CHAP. III. 31-IV. 34. 
 
 115 
 
 to thy foes rather than to thee ! Instead of the 
 Kethib ^^"'? (-a regular formation from S«"l^' 
 chap. ii. 47 ; v. 23), the Keri has, here and in 
 V. 21 [24], the shorter form "^"l?:, which corre- 
 sponds to the usage of the later Chaldee. The 
 following '1^, "an enemy," is likewise peculiar 
 to the pre-targumistic Chaldee. — Verse 17 [20]. 
 The tree that thou sawest, which grew, and 
 was strong ; rather, "of which thou sawest that 
 it was great and strong." The second "'1 is sub- 
 ordinated to the first in ""^T.^ "'l, and is there- 
 fore lo be rendered as a conjunction, not as a 
 relative i>ronoun coordinated with the first. The 
 ensuing description of the tree, in vs. 17 and 18 
 [20 and 21], and likewise of the Divine sentence 
 of judgment pronounced on it in v. 30 [23], are 
 repeated verbally from vs. Tand 13 [10 and 16], 
 although with abbreviations and unessential vari- 
 ations. —Verse 19 [22]. It is thou, O king, that 
 art growrn and become strong, etc. ; i.e., " that 
 art become great and strong." The following 
 rai Ijri^a"!^, etc., is loosely connected with the 
 
 relative clause 13 1 S"~ '^\ The Keri offers the 
 smoother form I"?"! instead of v"!?"!' ^^^ ^ ^^^ 
 following, the third pers. fem. HCa instead of 
 rspn = rst-a; cf. also v. 21 [34].— Concern- 
 ing the remarkable addition by the Sept. to v. 
 19 [32], cf., e.g.. Eth.-fuud. principles. No. 3 
 [below]. — Verse 21 [24], This is the interpre- 
 tation (of it), Oking; — the conclu.sion to the 
 lengthy antecedent clause, v. 20 [23]. — And 
 this is the decree of the Most High which is 
 come (determined) upon my lord the king. In 
 regard to b" S^'J?, cf. the Heb. Vy j^^j, Gen. 
 xxxiv. 27 ; Job li. 11. The preterite nCQ re- 
 presents the decree as already decided on, and, 
 therefore, as unavoidable, and certain to be 
 executed on the king. — Verse 23 [2.j]. They 
 shall drive thee from men, literally, " and thee 
 shall they drive," etc. The 1 in '^b'] is consec- 
 utive: "and thus shall they drive thee." The 
 impersonal active T'll'? is exactly similar to 
 Vy?^, chap- iii- 4, and infra, v. 28 [31]. The 
 agents of the punishment, who are not desig- 
 nated, are the inferior angels, as %vith V^O"]. v. 
 
 13 [IG], and as in v. 28 [31].*— Verse 23 [36]. 
 And w^hereas they commanded to leave the 
 stump of the tree roots; " they " — the heav- 
 enly watchers, of whom one only spoke, vs. 10- 
 
 14 [13-17] ; but that one, was the representative 
 of the entire community of angels. — Thy king- 
 dom shall (again) bs sure unto thee, after that 
 thou shalt have known, etc. D'^p neither sig- 
 nifies "to continue" (Theodotion, Vulg., Dere- 
 
 * [We prefer to say, with Keil, that "the indefinite plur. 
 form '\''Tni3 suinds instead of the passive, as the following 
 
 TiZ ^I'aJ:^'' and "I'lJSiQ, ct. under chap. iii. 4. Thus 
 
 the subject remains altogether indefinite, and one has nei- 
 ther to think of men who will drive him from their society, 
 etc.. nor of anfreln. of whom perhaps the expulsion of the 
 king may be predicated, hut scarcely the feeding on grass 
 ftod being wet with dew."] 
 
 ser, von Lengerke, etc.), nor " to bo preserved '' 
 (Bertholdt), but rather, "to arise, stand, bo 
 firm," and here, in view of the context, " t'l 
 again be firm" (Hitz., Kranichf.). "'""T? 'D 
 this place is not inferenti.^l — " since, because," 
 — as in chap. iii. 22, but instead relates to tin.e, 
 " as soon as," and designates a juncture follow- 
 ing the period included in "^1 ~~, vs. 21, 29 [24, 
 32] — hence at the close of the seven years.— 
 That the heavens do rule, viz. : over the king- 
 doms of men, cf. vs. 14 [17] and 23 [2.5]. " The 
 heavens " is here used to designate God, instead 
 of " the Most High." The expression must be 
 regarded as an abbreviation of the phrase " the 
 God of heaven," which w.ts emplo^'ed on former 
 occasions (chap. ii. 18, 37, 44), or of " the King 
 of heaven " (iv. 34), which is synonymous with 
 the former, or also of "the Lord of heaven" 
 (v. 23). There is nothing untheocratic and 
 polytheistic in the expression, even though the 
 Chinese designate their god as heaven, and 
 though the same usage prevailed among the 
 ancient Persians (Herod, i. 131), the Greeks 
 (Z'l'f = Sanscr. jdus, "heaven"), and the ^o- 
 raan-i {Deus ; Divus, Jovis, etc.). Even in the 
 New Testament the SaaiAem ruv nhpavui' is iden- 
 tical with the -iaai/.. vnv ^cov. and the Talmud- 
 ists (e.g., Jfedaiim, IX. 10; X. 12, etc ; Bux- 
 torf. Lex. C/ttild., col. 2440), as well as the Jews 
 of a much earlier period (according to Juvenal, 
 Sal., XIV. 96 et seq., and Diodorus in I'botius, 
 BiM. , XI;. ), generally designated God directly as 
 " heaven," indicating thereby that they attrib- 
 uted to Him the sole dominion over the heav- 
 enly world, and denied that other gods were 
 associated with Him (cf. Psa. cxv. 16). — Verse 
 24 [27] . Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be 
 acceptable unto thee, "b, '• wherefore," as in 
 chap. ii. 6. In regard to ~'rr< cf. on chap. iii. 
 32. The term is here construed with :;, as in 
 that passage and chap. vi. 3, with D"!^., by which 
 the persuasiveness of the remarks is increased 
 (cf. -3 with ;?, Ezra v. 17), and by which the 
 desire of Daniel to aid the king, if po.ssible, in 
 averting the impending danger and |)unishmeut, 
 becomes more apparent than would be the case 
 if the more courteous phrase Tj^!2~p ~Z^ h.id 
 been employed. From this truly theocratic 
 standpoint, the prophet persists in holding it 
 possible to turn aside the punishment threatened 
 in the dream, similar to Isaiah (xxxviii. 1 etseq.) 
 and Jeremiah (xviii. 7 et seq. ) in analogous cases ; 
 cf. Joel ii. 12 et seq. ; Am. vii. 3, 6 ; Jouah iii. 
 5 et seq.; 2 Kings xx. 1 et seq.* — And break 
 off thy sins by righteousness; rather, "pur- 
 chase thy deliverance from thy sins," etc. The 
 ancient translators justlj' regard 'il"'^n as plural ; 
 cf. the parallel '^~';l". The suffix in "'^^n. in- 
 stead of '^■'^^n, is defective, similar to that in 
 ^-^"?'^> chap. V. 10. The word is derived from 
 the Stat, emphat. SST.'^n of a singular "'ipn (~ 
 
 * [" Daniel knew nothing of a heathen Falum, but h€ 
 knew that the judgments of G-id were directed against men 
 according to their conduct, and that punishment threatened 
 could only be averted by repentance." — Keil.] 
 
Lie. 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL 
 
 Heb. >iVn, cf- Olshausen, Lelirb., p. 283).— 
 P'B, properly *"to break" (cf. Sanscr. prnk, 
 Lat. frango. Germ. brecJien), designates, similar 
 to the Heb. ~-r i^ passages like P.sa. cxxxvi. 
 24 ; Sam. v. 8, etc.. a " tearing out" of a mat- 
 ter from its former position or relations, and 
 hence, a '"liberating, redeeming, or purchase" 
 (uf. 3 Sam. vii. 23 ; Isa. xxxv. 9, 10, where pi2 
 is used for ;!{3 or ,-"£, exsulve-re. redimcrt). The 
 Sept. and Theodot. therefore render it correctly 
 by '/.i'Tiiuxju/, the Vulg. redime, and Syr., Saad., 
 Ibn-Ezra, Berth., de Wette, Hitzig. etc., in a 
 similar manner. On the other hand, Rashi, 
 Geier, Starke, Dereser, Hiivernick, von Len- 
 gerke. Kranichfeld, etc., prefer the idea of cast- 
 ing off, casting away, as it is found in Gen. 
 xxxvii. 40, and accordingly interpret : " lay off 
 thy sins" (Hiiv.). or "break off thy sins, give 
 them up " (Kranichfeld). But in the usage of 
 the Chaldee language, and especially in that of 
 the Targums, p-2 constantly and undeniably 
 bears the sense of redeeming by purchase [e.g., 
 a birthright, a field, the daughter of Jephthah, 
 Judg. xi. 3.5) ; and the rather broad conception, 
 admitting, as it does, of an application to many 
 and diverse relations, by no means requires that 
 the object to be redeemed should be desirable to 
 the purchaser, and possess value for him. Ra- 
 ther, the remark of von Hofmann {Sc/iriftbeweis, 
 I. h\9) is correct : " The sins are not under re- 
 straint, but, instead, they enslave. The idea of 
 D.aniel, therefore, is that the king should deliver 
 himself from the sins that involve him in guilt 
 and slavery, by practising righteousness and 
 mercy for the future, instead of persisting in 
 tlie arbitrary and tyrannical course to which he 
 had hitherto been addicted." * Cf. Melancthon 
 al.-fo. in the Apology (Art. III., p. 112), where 
 the " redime " of the Vulgate is retained, but 
 the supposed interpretation is decidedly rejected. 
 a.s favoring the doctrines of work-righteousness 
 insisted on by the Jewish and Roman Catholic 
 exegesis (see Eth.-fund. principles, etc., No. 2 
 I below]). This interpretation, however, does 
 not result from any possible rendering of the 
 imper. ~~2. but from the incorrect explanation 
 of ~P,"!^ by '■ doing good, alms," which is found 
 in numerous expositors, from Jerome to Hitzig ; 
 and the latter rendering is not justified, either 
 by Psa. xxxvii. 21, nor by a comparison with 
 extravagant laudations of works of mercy in 
 Ecclus. iii. 28 ; x-xix. 12 ; Tob. iv. 10; xii 9, etc. 
 The only interpretation of "P^"]? allowed by the 
 context and general usage is " righteous deport- 
 ment " to be observed by the king toward his 
 
 * [This interi)retation of j3*ir, however, is hardly Rstis- 
 fuctory, for, as lieil iirgea, it "means to break oil, to break 
 '1 pieces, hence to separate, to disjoin, to put at a distance, 
 see under Gen, :cxi. 40. And though in the Targums p'lD 
 Is used for ifcty, "^B, to loosen, to unbend, of redeeming, 
 
 ransoming the iirst-bom. an inheritance, or any other valn- 
 alile powiession, yet this use of the word by no means accords 
 with Hint &^ the object, because sins are not (joods which 
 one redeems or ransoms so as to retain them for his own 
 use." Kosenmiiller I.kewise notes ihis incon;a"uity. and ad- 
 duces Exod. xxxii. 2. as an instance, v here On'.:c!os retains 
 the word in the sense of breaking off (the earrings). He 
 •ven declares that " Cbaldee writers employ pIS simply for 
 laying tuitU as in Num. i. 51.^] 
 
 subjects, In contrast with his former tyrannj 
 and arbitrary domination. In the parallel mem- 
 ber, "mercy toward the poor" is intimately 
 connected with this, as being the second leading 
 virtue in rulers, which virtue the king is ex- 
 horted to cultivate (cf . Hofm. , as above). The 
 historical situation, rather than the usage, indi- 
 cates that, in connection herewith, the VT"; 
 are to be sought for principally in the number of 
 the poor Israelites, the theocraticaUy wretched 
 'C"":?), who were languishing in exile and cap- 
 tivity. The usage would admit of a different 
 rendering of the y",- *—^ it may be a length- 
 ening of thy tranquility f rather, " if thy pros- 
 perity shall be durable." This is the external 
 motive addressed to the king, to induce him to 
 heed the warning of the theocratic seer. The 
 conditional language is very decided ; "1", "if," 
 is no more to be taken in the dubious sense of 
 ei u,m (Acts viii. 22) in this passage than in chap, 
 iii. 17. — sa-iS* is not "forbearance, forgiveness," 
 but " duration, continuance ; " cf. Jer. xv. 15 ; 
 Ecc. viii 12. 
 
 Verses 2.')-30 [2»-33]. T/ie fulfilment. AU 
 this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar. 
 Havernick regards these words as still belong- 
 ing to the royal proclamation, while all that fol- 
 lows, to V. 30 [33], is a parenthesis inserted by 
 the prophet (see supra, on chap. iii. 31). But 
 this hypothesis renders it impossible to obserie 
 unity of the report, which must obviou.sly be 
 preserved, since the theocratic coloring appar- 
 ent in these verses may elsewhere be frequently 
 noticed (supra), and since a detailed statement 
 of the infliction of the threatened punishment 
 is required in order to give point to the report. 
 This does not make it inconceivable that Daniel, 
 the writer of the report as a whole, should in 
 this coimection relegate the royal subject, who 
 had hitherto been spoken of in the first person, 
 to the background, and that he should describe 
 the Divine judgment executed on the kin.i: from 
 his own theocratic point of view, f— Verse 26 
 
 ♦ [Daniel prudently alludes to the king's moral obliquitieg 
 only in general terms. Impiety wits doubtless his most 
 heinous offence (see verses 27 pJO], 37 [40], and compare 
 chap. V. 22, S3), and it was indeed his failure to remember 
 Jehovah, whom he had once been brought to recognise 
 (chap. ill. 28), that bred and fostered his heaven-insulting 
 arrogance. Yet Daniel doubtless hinted al^o at some special 
 sin^ of Nebuchadnezzar as a wilful desjiot. Stuitrt thinks 
 '■ he means to de.si'-'nate his capricious and tyrannical be- 
 havior on some occasions when he fell into a rage ; perhaps 
 also to remind him of the heavy hand that pressed on all 
 the captives whom he had led intoe.xile " nnd still retained. 
 This last seems especially probable from the particulars 
 specified immediately.] 
 
 t [Keil thus aptly refutes the view of Bertholdt. Hitzig, 
 and others, who " find here that the author falls out of 
 the role of the king into the narrative tone. ?.nd thus be- 
 trays the fact that some other than the king framed the 
 edict. But this conclusion is opposed by the fact that 
 Nebuchadnezzar from ver. 81 [34] speaks of his recovery 
 again in the first person. Ttius it is beyond doubt that 
 the change of person has its rea.son in the matter itself. 
 Certainly it could not be that in this Nebnchadiiczzar thought 
 it unbecoming to speak in his own person of his madness; 
 for. if he had had so tender a regard for his own person, 
 he would not have published the whole occurrence in a 
 m.anifcsto addressed to his subjects. Eut the reason of hii 
 speaking of his madness in the third person, as if sonic 
 other one were narrating it, lies simply in thi.s that ic 
 that condition he was not Icli = Ego (Kliefotli). With thf 
 return of the Irh, T, nn his recovery from his madness 
 Nebuchadnezzar begins again to narrate in the first pe' 
 son."] 
 
CHAP. IIL 31-rV. 34 
 
 in 
 
 )2fl]. At the end of twelve months he walked 
 upon (marg. ) the palace of the kingdom of 
 Babylon; rather, "the royal palace at Baby- 
 lon." In relation to the time mdisated, " at the 
 end of twelve months," Kranichfeld observes : 
 " WTien the important incident of the dream was 
 a year old, and on that account its recollection 
 naturally exercised the imagination of the king 
 with special force, he gave himself up, despite 
 the Divine warning, to the proudest exaltation 
 of self, which indicated that he was neither con- 
 trolled by religious piety in general, nor by rev- 
 erence for the God of the Jews in particular." 
 ■itc. It appears to us that this is seeking too 
 much in that designation of time. It is simply 
 a historical circumstance that exactly twelve 
 months elapsed between the dream and its ful- 
 filment, and at the same time an illustration of 
 the simple accuracy and concrete truth of the 
 narrative.* — "Upon the royal palace," i.e.. 
 upon its flat roof; cf. 2 Sam. xi. 2. The proud 
 king, who has employed the respite of twelve 
 months in cursing his tyrannical supercUious- 
 ness, instead of improving it by repenting and 
 working righteousness, wishes, by actual obser- 
 vation from this elevated spot, to assure him- 
 self of the condition of his royal power, and to 
 feast himself with looking on the gigantic metrop- 
 olis of the world which he h.ad created. His 
 thoughts are similar to those of another, in 
 Schiller's OLockc (the Bell) : 
 
 "The splendor of the house 
 Stands firm as earth's foundations 
 Against the power of evil," etc. 
 
 The " walking along" (Xin '^bna ; cf. T"^'"n 
 m33, v. 34 [37]) likewise indicates his conceited 
 arrogance and pride ; cf. the Germ. " dnherstol- 
 lireii" (strutting along). — The mention of the 
 location, "at Babylon," does not at all compel 
 the assumption of a Palestinian origin of the 
 book, or of any particular part of it, as even 
 Hitzig acknowledges. It merely indicates that 
 the author was not a constant resident in the 
 cit;/ of Babylon, and that his narrative was com- 
 posed for readers who were chiefly, or without 
 exception, strangers in Babylon (however long 
 they might have been detained in that city 
 against their will I. These features are suited 
 to the view that Daniel was the writer of the 
 document before us, as thoroughly as theymili- 
 tate against the idea that Nebuchadnezzar was 
 its immediate author ; cf. supra, on chap. iii. 
 31. f— Verse 27 [:J01. Is not this (the) great 
 Babylon that I have built, etc. " The great " 
 (sri"]) was evidently a standing title of Baby- 
 lon, with its circumference of 480 stadia (Herod. 
 
 • [Keil will have it that " ~'^V here means not .Mmply 
 
 to befiiu to speak, but, properly, to anxwer, and suggests 
 to us a foregoing colloquy of the king with himself in his 
 own mind " He prudently refrains, however, from infer- 
 ring that Nebuchadnezzar was thinking of the very dream 
 in question at the time.] 
 
 t (Rather, as Keil suggests. " the addition at Babylon 
 does not indicate that tlie king was then living at a dis- 
 tance from Cubyloii. as Berth., von Leng., Maurer, and 
 others imagine, but is altogether suitable to the matter, 
 becinse Nebuchadnezzar certainly had palaces outside of 
 Babylon ; Ljut it is made with reference to the language 
 of the king whicl'. follows regarding the greatness of liaby- 
 lon."l 
 
 i. 191), its colossal walls, its 2.5 gates on either 
 side of the immense square, its 076 districts 
 filled with houses of several stories each, its 
 hanging gardens on the Euphrates, its gigantic 
 temples and palaces, etc. Cf. Herod., 1. c. ; 
 Diodor. ii. 5 et seq. ; Aristotle's P'/lit., III. 2; 
 PhUostratus, i. 18 ; Curtius, VI. 1 et seq. ; also 
 Starke's Synopsis on this passage ; Wattenbach, 
 Nineve und Bubylon (Heidelberg. 1868); and 
 Alfred Maury, Niiieve et Bnbylone, in the Rente 
 des deux Moiides, 1868, March 1-5, p. 470 ss. ; 
 [also Rawlinson's Five Ancient Monarchies. I. 
 510 et seq.]. For th^ reason many other au- 
 thors apply the predicate t) iuyn?.r] to that city ; 
 e. g., the Apocalyptist John, Rev. xiv. 8 ; xvi. 
 19 (cf. also Isa. xui. 19 ; xiv. 4 ; xlvii. 3, 4) ; 
 and Strabo (L xvi.), who applies to it the stanza : 
 ipijfiia iie-ja/.ii car'iv i] jitya'/.i} To/.(f, cf. Pausanius, 
 Arcad., p. 509, who describes Babylon as a city 
 7/i'Tna eide TO/.fw rdv rore ue}iGrT^' r/Aior. Nebu- 
 chadnezzar's Babylon might certainly be desig- 
 nated as " the great city " with as much pro- 
 priety as formerly Nineveh (cf. Gen. x. 11, 12 ; 
 Jonah i. 2 ; iii. 2 ; iv. 11), and far more justly 
 than, e.g., Hamath (see Amos vi. 2; nan PJin), 
 or Diospolis (Amff-o/./f // iieyii/.i/, Insor. 4717), or 
 Ephesu.s, Smyrna, Pergamos, Nicomedia, and 
 other cities of a later period in Asia Minor (of. 
 Rheinwald, Komment. znm Br. an die Philippir, 
 p. 3 et seq. ). — That I have built for the house 
 (or seat) of the kingdom. The A. V. is literal. 
 The expression is equivalent, in modem idiom, 
 to " the royal capital and seat of government." 
 The ^3;^ of the whole empire was to have its 
 seat, its residence, in that metropolis ( Kranichf .). 
 Cf. the reference to Bethel as a nab'^': , in Am. 
 vii. 13. " That I have built ; " i.e., that I have 
 developed and completed. On Kta, otherwise 
 n:3, n this signification, cf. 2 Kings xiv. 22 ; 2 
 Chron. xi. 5, 6 ; and see the Chalda;an histori- 
 .ans Berosus, Abydenus, and Megasthenes, in 
 Josephus. Ant.. X. 11, 1 ; c. Apion, I. 19 ; and 
 in Eusebius, Chron., I. 59, with reference to the 
 numerous edifices erected in Babylon by Nebu- 
 chadnezzar; also Bochart, Phnleg. p. 263 et seq., 
 where Nebuchadnezzar's services in beautifying 
 the city and increasing its architectural great- 
 ness are compared with those of Augustus in 
 Rome, which justified his well-known remark, 
 ",«(! marmorcmn relinquere, qunm lateritiam nc- 
 cepisset" (Suetonius, Aug., c. 29).* — For the 
 honor of my majesty ; ^']'^_!^ "'P"'r ; cf. the 
 similar constructions in Deut. v. 33, 17 ; Zech. 
 xi. 13 ; and with reference to the preceding ex- 
 pression, " by the might of ray power," cf. pas- 
 sages like Isa. xl. 26; Eph. i. 19; Col. i. 11, 
 etc. — Verse 28 [31]. Wh'le ths word ivas in 
 the king's mouth. The Divine punishment fol- 
 lows closely after the vain and presumptuous 
 exclamation (cf. Isa. xxviii. 4) ; exactly as in 
 the poem by Schiller quoted above, where it if 
 added : 
 
 ♦ [Abundant confirmation has been founf' of these en- 
 largements and reconstructions of the edifices nf Babylon 
 by Nebuchadnezzar in the excivations carried on there by 
 Botto, I.ayard, and others. Most of the anciert brick-* are 
 stamped with the name of that monarch. Sec Rawlinson'i 
 UtroUnlm, I. 412 (Am. e.l.).l 
 
118 
 
 THE PROPHET DAJflEL. 
 
 " For no eternal bond can be 
 With the fates that rule out destiny, 
 And misfortune's pace is swift.'' — 
 
 There fell a voice from heaven. Observe the 
 agreement bet.veen the prophetic description in 
 the dream, vs. 10 [13J and 11 [14]. and the ful- 
 filment twelve months later. The words rn: 
 
 **: -r T?, which are employed in the former 
 passag-e, are here echoed by b?: (cf. Isa. ix. 7), 
 which still more strongly emphasizes the sud- 
 denness with which the judicial sentence is 
 promulgated ; and S^H? ^~P, in that place is 
 here repeated by the characteristic bjT, which 
 recalls the analogies in Deut. iv. 33, 36 ; Matt, 
 iii. 17; John xii. 28; Acts ix. 4; x. 13, etc. 
 The record, although sufficiently circumstantial, 
 is but a summary, and affords no trustworthy 
 indications to show whether this oua'?) t^ nhpavov 
 was produced by the mediation of psychologi- 
 cal or of physical causes. The leading fact to 
 be observed is merely that the powerfully excited 
 king was compelled to recollect the warning 
 formerly conveyed in the dream, by what he 
 now heard, whether by a purely subjective mode 
 of perception, or whether objective agencies 
 were at the same time employed. — O king Neb- 
 uchadnezzar, to thee it is spoken; The 
 kingdom is departed from thee. The perf. 
 r~l' is employed, because he who was degraded 
 to the level of the brute by the most fearful of 
 mental maladies, was at once and directly in- 
 cajiacitated for his position and office as ruler as 
 a matter of course. In regard to 'l'''l?2S, " they 
 say." see on v, 23 [2.5] ; concerning v. 39 [83] 
 see ibid., and on v. 14 [17].— Verse 30 [33] The 
 same hour (hence immediately ; cf. on chap. 
 iii. 0) ■was the thing (or word) fulfilled upon 
 Nebuchadnezzar, ~C3, literally, " came to 
 end ; " for the end of a prophecy is its coming 
 to pass, by which it ceases to be prophecy (Hit- 
 zig) ; cf. n^-. chap. xii. 7; Ezra i. 1. etc. — Con- 
 cerning the lycanthropy of Nebuchadnezzar, see 
 Introd. , § 8, note 1, and the literature there 
 adduced. — Till his hairs ■were grown like 
 eagles' feathers, and his nails like birds' 
 claws; literally, "like eagles — like birds" 
 <'^^";c:2 — T^TD^S), a comparntio mynpendiaria-, 
 with which the Stat, const, after the particle 
 of comparison has been omitted, as with T? in 
 v. 13 [16], and as in Isa. ix. 3; Joshua v. 36, 
 and also in the classics (e.g., 11., 17, h\ ; Juve- 
 ual, Sat. 4. 71. etc.). 
 
 Verses 31-34 [34-37]. The restoration of Ne- 
 hnchiHlnezznr. nnd his ascription of praise to God. 
 And (rather "but") at the end of the days, 
 i.e., of the period of seven years, vs. 13, 32, 29 
 [10, 2.5. 32]. — I .... lifted up mine eyes 
 unto heaven, namely, as seeking help from 
 thence, as supplicating the God of heaven (see 
 on V. 23 [26] ; cf. Psa. cxxiii. 1 et seq. ; xxv. 5, 
 etc. * — And mine understanding returned unto 
 me; or, taking the t as illative, " so that mine 
 
 * [This raising of his eyes to heaven was " the 6r-t 
 piini of the return of human consciousness : from which, 
 however, we are n-tt to conclude, with Hit?.ig, that before 
 this, in UiB madness, he went on all-fours like an ox," — 
 Keil.\ 
 
 underst.inding returned." The prayer of tht 
 hitherto maniac king was thus shown to be any- 
 thing rather than a "flagrant inconsequence,' 
 as Von Lengerke, Hitzig, and others character- 
 ize it. On the contrary, it produced the bene 
 ficial effect of delivering the penitent king from 
 his disease, and of restoring him to the society 
 and the mode of life of civilized people. Cf. 
 Pusey and Kranichteld on this passijge, in rela- 
 tion to the inclination lo prayer, or to other 
 religious manifestations and observances, which 
 has frequently been observed in the case of 
 maniacs afflicted with lycanthropy. In the case 
 before us, where the period ot insanity and pun- 
 ishment imposed by God had, at any rate, ex- 
 pired, the prayerful looking up to heaven by 
 the humbled king could not possibly result in 
 less than the elevation of the sufferer from his 
 brutal condition to manhood — from the state of 
 one lying helplessly on the ground, and looking 
 earthward in his debasement, to the dignity and 
 bearing of man, who is formed in the image of 
 God, that is to say, to the normal form of man, 
 of which Ovid sings (Metnm., I. 85 ss.) : 
 
 " Pronaque ciini apectent animalia ccetera terram 
 Ofi homini sjtbtime dedit, cifhtmqlce videre 
 Jtts-Ht, et ererton ad sidera toUere viiUu't.'^ — 
 
 And I praised and honored him that liveth 
 forever. Cf. vi. 27 ; xii. 7 ; and also, in rela- 
 tion to the latter half of the verse, chap. iii. 33. 
 [" The first thought he entertained was to thank 
 God, to praise him as the ever-Uving One, and 
 to recognize the eternity of His sway. Nebu- 
 chadnezzar acknowledges and praises God as the 
 ' ever-living One,' because He had again given 
 to him his life, which had been lo.st in his mad- 
 ness." — Keil] — Verse 32 [35]. And all the in- 
 habitants of the earth are (to be) reputed as 
 nothing, that is, " in comparison to Him." The 
 partic. Vr'"'?'?! must be regarded in this place 
 as the part. fut. pass., and is not, therefore, to 
 be explained (in analogy with Isa. xl. 17) by, 
 "are reputed .as nothing by Him" (Havem., 
 Kranichf., etc.). [" The eternity of the suprera 
 acy of God includes His omnipotence as opposetl 
 to the weakness of the inhabitants of earth " 
 (Keil).] ~-3 instead of ''bs may be regarded 
 as the error of a copyist, who thought to correct 
 a supposed »b3 (that is, t*?"!*) by substituting 
 nbS. Oi " '13 for 'tb, is an archaism, conform- 
 ing to the pregnant character of the negation, 
 similar to n'; for s<3, Deut. iii. 11 " (Kranichf.). 
 [The final ,i seems to be a mere Chaldaic inter- 
 change for i< in the ordinary 5*-3, as not.] The 
 rabbinical assertion, found in Rashi and Saadia, 
 that nb signifies " an atom of solar dust," is at 
 all events to be rejected. —And he doeth accord- 
 ing to his vrill in the army of heaven, etc. 
 Cf. Isa. xxiv. 21, a passage that evidently lies 
 at the foundation of the one before us, in ■which 
 " the host on high " presents the same idea as is 
 contained in "the army of heaven" in this 
 place. Both refer to the innumerable compa- 
 nies of angels who inhabit heaven (Gen. xxxii 
 2 et seq. ; Heb. xii. 23 et seq. ; cf. Dan. ■i-ii. 
 10).— And none can .... say unto him, 
 what doest thou? Cf. Isa. xliii. 13; and in 
 relation to the phrase, " to stay one's hand — 
 
CHAP. ni. 31 -IV. 34. 
 
 119 
 
 to oppose him." see the Targ. on Eocles. viii. 
 
 4; Tt. Sanhtdr., c. 2 ; also the Arabic of Hariri, 
 p. 444.* — Verse 33 [30]. And the glory of my 
 kingdom, mine honor, and my brightness re- 
 turned unto me. The 3 before "ip" serves to 
 introduce that word as a new subject, after the 
 former, "'""r'r (of. Isa. xxxii. 1 ; xrxviii. 16 ; 
 P.sa. bc.xxix. 19). "P."!, "station, majesty, dig- 
 nity," such as is manifested in the look, bear- 
 ing, and manners of a princely personage, "n.^" 
 ■•splendor." A. V. '• honor "(cf. v. 27 [30]; 
 chap. V. I'Si, is here contrasted with his former 
 appearance and condition, which denied his 
 royal state, and even his nature as a man, v. 30 
 [33]. T^' is properly "brightness," and here 
 refers to the beauty or beaming freshness of the 
 human countenance (cf. chap. v. 6, 9 ; vii. 28), 
 while 1-in refers more particularl_v to the splen- 
 dor of his robe.s (cf. Psa. ex. 3 ; xxix. 2 ; xcvi. 9 ; 
 2 Chron. xx. 21 ). — And my counsellors and my 
 lords sought unto me, — they, %%'ho had formerly 
 avoided and deserted me ! That ^<" 2 signifies 
 a search for one who is believed to have disap- 
 peared without leaving a trace by which to dis- 
 cover him, is an assumption mode by Hitzig and 
 also by a number of earlier expositors, such as 
 Geier, Jlichaelis, Berthoklt, etc., which, how- 
 ever, is without any support whatever. The 
 expression rather designates " a seirrch conduc- 
 ing to the honor of the king, which was insti- 
 tuted by his former counsellors and magnates 
 in their capacity as the council of the regency 
 during the interim, for the purpose of oiBcially 
 requesting the king on his restoration to health, 
 to resume the control of the government." The 
 terms i^',!"" (see on iii. 24) and ■\-':2-i:i do 
 not, however, designate different subjects, but 
 the same ones with reference to their several 
 powers and dignities ; cf. bi~3T "lb, 3 Sam. iii. 
 2S ; u.';t!c mi i)rvar77rir, Job. ix. 23. — And I was 
 (again) established in my kingdom. CfP"'^ 
 instead of ~,-P~'j. because of the following iic- 
 crnt. diritinct. — And excellent majesty was 
 added u ito me ; '■ I received still greater pow- 
 er" than I had formerly enjoyed; cf. Job xlii. 
 10. There are no historical authorities to show 
 in what the additional power consisted which 
 came to Xebuchadnezzar toward the end of his 
 life ; but the truth of this statement cannot on 
 that account be questioned. — Verse 34 [37 j. 
 Now (or therefore) I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise, 
 and extal, and honor, etc. By this doxology 
 the close of the ro.yal proclamation returns to 
 the thought of the introduction, chap. iii. 32 et 
 seq. — All whose (rather, " for all His ") works 
 
 are truth, and his ways judgment. 
 
 Sir 
 
 Hi 
 
 lit- 
 
 erally "firmness, immutability," and hence, 
 " faithfulness, truth " (=r Heb. n?K). I'^l, lit- 
 erally "judgment." procedure strictly con- 
 formed to justice (= Heb. ^2"f:^) ; cf. Jer. ix. 
 23 ; xxii. 1 3. — And those that walk in pride, 
 
 * [rT"'^n KH"^ in the Pael, t<f atrike on the hand, to 
 
 hinder. U derived from the cu^tcm of striking children on 
 the hiind in cha.stlsemeut (Keilj, or iu order to cheek them 
 from a proceeding.] 
 
 he is able to abase. Cf. Isa. x. 33; xiii. 11 ; 
 XXV. 11; 1 Sam. ii. 7 ; Psa. xviii. 28 ; Luke i. 
 51 et seq. — In relation to the enlargement of 
 this doxology of Nebuchadnezzar which is found 
 in the Sept. in this place, see the Eth.-fund 
 principles, etc., No. 3 [below]. 
 
 ETHICO-FUNDAMEXTAL PRIN'CIPLES RELATED 
 TO THE HISTORY OF SALVATION, APOLO- 
 OETICAL REMARKS, AND HOMILETICAL 
 SUGGESTIONS. 
 
 According to the remarks on chap. iii. 31 [iv. 
 1], the authorship of this section is divided be- 
 tween Nebuchadnezzar and Daniel, with the dis- 
 tinction that the former is conceived as the 
 moral originator and ordainer of the edict, while 
 the latter is its writer. But, at the same time, 
 both the heathen king and the theocratic pro- 
 phet are so exclusively the active (or suifering) 
 characters of the narrative, that every observa- 
 tion of dogmatic or apologetical importance 
 must be derived from the conduct of one or the 
 other of these two persons. We therefore direct 
 our attention 
 
 1. To Xe.huclutdnezznr, — with reference to 
 whose seizure by lycanthropic mania, as being 
 credible on general grounds, and also as being 
 attested by extra-biblical authorities, the neces- 
 sary explanation has been given in the Introd. 
 (^ 8, note 1). We now direct attention to the 
 act of profound self-abasement which the king 
 performed by publishing, of his own impulse, a 
 report respecting his protracted disease of sev- 
 eral years' duration, and also respecting its causes 
 and his final cure. This involves no improba- 
 bility on psychological, political, or religious 
 grounds. (1.) From a payckohf/iciil point of 
 view, the report became nece.ssar3', because- a 
 spirit of repentance and of sincere self-abase- 
 ment had really come over the proud monarch, 
 and because he had been led to recognize with 
 all emphasis that the humiliation, as wearisome 
 as it was deeply painful to his consciousness, 
 was a righteous punishment inflicted on him by 
 the only tnie God, even though a genuine, dura- 
 ble, and fruit-bearing conversion might not have 
 been accomplished in his case. On the nature 
 of this sincere and profoundly realized humilia 
 tion of the king, which, however, was inadequate 
 to secure his admission to a gracious state, or to 
 formal membership in the congregation of God's 
 people under the Old Covenant, cf. Calvin on 
 chap. iv. 34: " Hic est modun omiii.i liumiliii- 
 tionU ; .led cnreret profectu. ilia JiumiUntio, nial 
 Dnmiiiu.i po.<itea rcgeret iios /tjnntit mimsmetixdiui.i. 
 Et ita Nebxcadiieznr hic non complectitur grntium 
 Dei, qu(B tamen digna erat non vulgiiri clogio et 
 prcediontione ; sed non descripnit etinm in hoc 
 edicto quicqnid posset requiri ab homine pio et qui 
 edoctua fucrit din in schola Dei, sed tamen osten- 
 dit se multurn profecisae sub Dei ferulis, quum 
 tribuit itti suminam potentiam (c. iii. 32, 33 ; 0. 
 iv. 31 ss.), dcinde coujungit justitiit laudem ei 
 rectitiidinis (c. iv. Zi) et sesc interea fatetur reum 
 et testatur juslam fui-t-ie pcxnam, quas dii)initui 
 irrogata fuit." — (2.) In a political aspect, also, 
 the edict became necessary, since, as appears 
 from V. 33, circumstances required that at the 
 end of the king's illness a proclamation should 
 be issued, certifying that the monarch in person 
 
;20 
 
 THE PEOPHET DAIsIEL. 
 
 was about to resume the government, and to 
 supersede the regency of the interim, composed 
 of his '■ counsellors and lords," who had hitherto 
 administered the aifairs of the state. The king 
 bad no need to dread the effect of such an ex- 
 planation on his people, even though it involved 
 much that was humiliating to him ; but it is by 
 no means recorded that he caused it to be pro- 
 mulgated in the public places and on the streets 
 by the lips of a herald (as was the case with 
 tie edict in chap. iii. 4 et seq. ), nor even that it 
 was at any time brought into public notice in 
 writing. (S. ) Finally, the document involves 
 no considerable difficulty in a religious point of 
 view, inasmuch as the partly heathen and partly 
 Israelitish faith of the IJabylonian king, in other 
 words, that syncretism which amalgamated all 
 religions, and which so frequently appears in the 
 history of the rulers of the period of the captiv- 
 ity, is clearly manifested, as has already been 
 shown on chap. iii. 31 [iv. 1], Accordinglj', 
 even Hitzig fitids it to be entirely credible that 
 Nebuchadnezzar as a newly or only partially 
 converted person should " acknowledge a god 
 as his god (v. 5), and even other holy gods (vs. 
 6, 15), in addition to the Highest God." The 
 Btatement by the same critic that it is strange 
 that " after this stern experience Nebuchad- 
 nezzar should not have liberated the Jews, the 
 captive servants of the Highest God, as the 
 history shows he did not," is without any foun- 
 dation ; for, according to chap. iv. 1 compared 
 with vs. 27 and 31, the event did not transpire 
 until near the close of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, 
 ami we cannot tell what he would have done 
 had he lived anj- considerable time after his re- 
 covery (which was certainly not the case, accord- 
 ing to Berosus. in Josephus, c. Apiori, I, 20), 
 nor yet what political relations, combinations, 
 or considerations may have prevented the im- 
 mediate execxition of a pl.au to restore the Jews 
 to their country, which may already have been 
 prepared. 
 
 2. So for as the conduct of Daniel is concerned, 
 the characteristic feature of the two-fold posi- 
 tion which he occupied at the Chaldsean court 
 as a prophet of Jehovah and chief of the Ma- 
 gians, is prominently exhibited in a manner that 
 affords a highly favorable testimony for the 
 credibility of the narrative as a whole. The 
 Jewish wise man, who is dignified by an honorary 
 ofiBce rather than burdened with definite official 
 functions, e. g., with sacerdotal duties, is per- 
 mitted to be absent at first, on the occasion 
 when the interpreters of dreams or Magians 
 were summoned before the idng, because he was 
 allowed a greater freedom of action in general 
 (see on v. 6j. It was not, probably, without 
 producing a feeling of profound injury that 
 ■when he finally appeared the king addressed the 
 servant of the Hving God (vs. 5, 6) in a thor- 
 oughly heathen manner as " Belteehazzar," 
 after the name of his god (^. c, the idol Bel), 
 according to Calvin's just remark, "Non dnbium 
 est. quin hoc nmnen grariter rulneraverit ani- 
 mnm prnpheto'.'' He did not, however, re- 
 nounce his allegiance and devotion to the royal 
 per'fonage who was his benefactor, and who, in 
 case he would receive and be guided by the 
 prophet's counsel, might so easily become the 
 benefactor a-nd liberator of the entire people of 
 God. When the king had related to him the 
 
 dream, so prophetic of misfortune, he gave way 
 to trouble and sympathetic sorrow '• about an 
 hour" (v. 16), and the words by which he at 
 length introduced the interpretation, invoked a 
 blessing on the king coupled with the wish that 
 the fate which threatened the monarch might 
 rather overtake his foes. Of. Calvin again : 
 " Daniel exponit (v. 16), curitafuerit attonitus. 
 nempe quia eiipei'et nverti tarn horribiletn paiiam 
 a regis persona. Etui enim merito eum potuit 
 detestnri, tamen reeeritus est potestatem divinitua 
 ei traditam. Discamus igitur exemplo prophetce, 
 bene precari pro inimicis nostris, qui cnpivnt nos 
 perdere. maiime rero precari pro tyranm'.i, si 
 Deo placeat svbjici 7ws eorum libidini ; — alioquin. 
 non tiintum illis, sed etiam Deo ipsi stnmis re- 
 bettes. C'ateiiim altera ex parte ostendit Daniel, 
 se non frnngi ullo misericordim affectu, neque 
 etiam mvUiri. qxiominus pergat in sva vocatione." 
 — The manner in which Daniel succeeded in 
 uniting the strictest theocratic fidelity towards 
 God with this devotion to his sovereign, is seen 
 partly in the unconcealed directness and the 
 categorical plainness with which he announced 
 the most degrading and humiliating punishment 
 to the king, in v. 22 [25], and partly in the 
 warning or epOogue, v. 24 [27], with which he 
 concluded his interpretation. In this epilogue 
 the fundamental dogmatic and ethical ideas of 
 the entire section concentrate and crowd to- 
 gether in pregnant significance. The exposition 
 of this passage has shown that the course which 
 Daniel here recommends, with a noble frankness 
 and an impressive fervor, is none other than that 
 which should be followed by every pious ruler 
 who is faithful in his office, and in brief, that it 
 comprehends the sum of princely virtues. Hence, 
 those expositors who find that this passage rec- 
 ommends and prescribes work-righteous con- 
 duct, and especially the giving of alms, as in it- 
 self meritorious, do violence to the words. 
 Such expositors are the Rabbins, who generally 
 ascribe an almost magical virtue to alms-giving, 
 and who press every possible passage of Scrip- 
 ture to support their view, especially those con- 
 taining the term np"1^, which is by them 
 rendered "well-doing, alms-giving" (cf. Bux- 
 torf, /,ex. p. 1,891 et sq. ) ; further, the Roman 
 Catholic exegetes, who are accustomed, since 
 Bellarmine's detailed exposition of this passage 
 (1. II. paitiitentin, c. 6 ; cf. 1. iv. c. 6), to employ 
 it as one of the principal proof-texts for their 
 anti-evangelical theory of justification and sancti- 
 fication (in connection with which they declare, 
 of course, that the rendering of the Vulgate : 
 " peceata tiia eleemosj/nis redime," is the only cor- 
 rect translation) ; finally, nearly all the rational- 
 intic expositors, from Griesinger and Bertholdt 
 down to Gesenius, de Wette, and Hitzig, who, 
 while defending the translation by Jerome above 
 referred to, and while referring to apocryphal 
 passages like Ecclus. iii. 28; xxtx. 13 ; Tob. iv. 
 7 et seq. ; xii. 9 et seq.; xiv. 10 et seq., en- 
 deavor to find here a work-righteous " morality 
 of the later Judaism," and therefore a certain 
 indication of the composition of the book subse- 
 quent to the exile. Grotius already pointed 
 out that even on the adoption of the faulty Vul- 
 gate exegesis, which makes rpl^ equivalent to 
 eleeinosyn(e. the passage does not necessarily 
 yield a sense favorable to Pelagianism : " JV«JM 
 
CHAP. III. 31-IV. 34. 
 
 12: 
 
 offendere qnemqiiam potest, quod operibus pceiii- 
 tenti(E, in quibiis excellunt eleemosynm, tribuatur 
 id. quod panuteiitifB proprie conreiiit ; eH e/iim 
 talis metoiiymia aut synecdoche frequens." Still 
 better Melancthon, in the Apolog. Vonf. Aug. 
 art. iii. p. 113 K: ^' Noii vokbut Daniel regem 
 taiUum eleenutsynnm largiri, sed tutam paniten- 
 tiam complecUtu)\ quum ait : ' Uedirne peceata 
 tua eleemosynis,'' i. e.: redime peceata tun muta- 
 tione cordis et operum. Hie nutom et fides re- 
 quiritur Ac verba Daitielis in swi lin- 
 gua darius de tola paaitentiii loquuntur et clarius 
 promissionem efferunt : ^Peceata tua per justi- 
 tiain redime. et iniquitates tuns beneficiis erga 
 paupcres.' Heic verba prcecipiunt de tota pami- 
 tentia ; jubent enim, ut Justus fiat, deinde ut 
 beneoperetur. ut. quod regis officiuni erat, miseros 
 adcersus injuriam defendat. Juslitia autem est 
 fides in corde," etc. He expresses himself sim- 
 ilarly in his comment on the passage (0pp. ed. 
 Bretschueider, vol. xiii. p. 843 ss. ), where he 
 pays no attention to the false rendering of np~^ 
 in the Vulgate ; as does also Calvin in his com- 
 mentary and the Inst. rel. Chr., III. 4, 31, 36, 
 and among the later Protestant expositors especi- 
 ally Carpzov, De eleemosynis Judceorum (in his 
 Apptirat. historicus in the Critica Sacra, p. 720 
 Bs. ). In all the conduct of Daniel, therefore, as 
 described in this section, nothing can be dis- 
 covered which is at variance with the proper de- 
 portment of a witness to the faith and a highly 
 enlightened seer of the Old Covenant in the 
 presence of a heathen ruler of the world . To 
 This deportment in practical life corresponds also 
 the tone observed by him in the composition, 
 under the king's direction, of the document be- 
 fore us, whose agreement with the theocratic 
 modes of thought and conception has already 
 been pointed out. 
 
 3. In an apologetic respect the disharmony 
 must be noticed, which exists between what 
 might have been expected from the art of a 
 pseudological tendency - writer of Asmonasan 
 times, aud the conditions of place and time as 
 indicated in our narrative. A careful and un- 
 biased examination of the document with refer- 
 ence to the conditions of the Maccabasan period, 
 reveals at once how empty and arbitrary is 
 everything that has been said by Bertholdt, 
 Bleek, Von Lengerke, Hitzig, and others, respect- 
 ing the parenetic aim, calculated for the time 
 of Antiochus Epiphanes, with which they allege 
 it was written. " The sinner Nebuchadnezzar, 
 who was punished for his pride and folly, was a 
 type of the presumptuous E-iuaii/(, who in like 
 manner sought improper associates, denied the 
 kingly character, and had but recently issued a 
 circular letter, although of an entirely different 
 character." This brief extract from Hitzig (p. 
 58) contains a whole brood of tendency-critical 
 assumptions and captious perversions of tlie 
 actual historical facts, based on the erection of 
 false parallels. It is impossible to understand 
 why precisely Nebuchadnezzar, the Chaldaean 
 king whose presumption was punished with 
 lycanthro|iy, should be selected as a type of the 
 proud Seleuiidian 'E-rrnrnvi/r (cf. 1 Mace. i. 21, 
 34), when, e g., Sennacherib (2 Kings xviii. 19), 
 Said (1 Sam. xvi. 14; xviii. 10 et seq. ), or 
 Pharaoh (Ex. 14), would have furnished a far 
 more suitable parallel to the tyrant of the Mao- 
 
 cabaean period, who was to be punished for pre- 
 sumptuous fury against God, and since, more 
 over, there is no lack, upon the whole, of 
 historical examples to illustrate the proverb, "A 
 haughty spirit goeth before a fall " (Prov. xvi. 
 18). The fact recorded by Polybius xxvi. 10 
 (to which passage Hitzig explicitly refers), that 
 Antiochus Epiphanes was a lover of improper, 
 i.e., immoral, coarse, and riotous gatherings, 
 certainly finds but a clumsy illustration and an 
 exceedingly vague foreshadowing in Nebuchad- 
 nezzar's association with the beasts of the held. 
 The analogy is merely superficial, and that to a 
 degree in which it dissolves into incougruity and 
 even absurdity, whenever it is submitted to a 
 careful examination (cf. Kranichf. p. 174 et 
 seq.). With reference to the third parallel, that 
 both tyrants issued circular letters, Hitzig him- 
 self concedes that the circular mentioned in 1 
 Mace. i. 41 et seq. was " really of a nature 
 entirely different " from that of Nebuchadnez- 
 zar's edict. The mere fact, therefore, that 
 Nebuchadnezzar addressed a circular to his sub- 
 jects, convinces him that it was typical of the 
 other fact, that Epiphanes also issued such a 
 docuinent^as if any king whatsver could reign 
 but a single year, without publishing some mam- 
 festo, or edict, or circular, etc. ! Hitzig's treat- 
 ment of chap. iv. 28 [31], (the sentence of 
 Divine punishment denounced on Nebu ;had 
 nezzar, " The kingdom is departed from thee"), 
 by which he endeavors to demonstrate the 
 special time in the Maccaba;an epoch during 
 which this section originated, results in similar 
 absurdities. He holds that the threat of an im- 
 mediate overthrow, or rather of a ruin already 
 in progress, clearly indicates that the document 
 was " composed at a time when the Asmonaeana 
 had already taken up arms and had gained the 
 upper hand," hence in the period designated in 
 1 Mace. ii. 42^8 ; as if any real analogy ex- 
 isted between the punishment of a presumptuous 
 spirit by means of a severe mental disease, and 
 the political and religious revolt of an oppressed 
 nation against their persecutors ! and further, 
 as if the syncretistic Chaldaan king, who ad- 
 mitted all religions, could by any means be 
 placed in comparison with Antiochus, the fa- 
 natically intolerant worshipper of Zeus ! How 
 can Nebuchadnezzar, who was exhorted to mercy 
 toward the "poor" (T;!", v. 24 [27], be brought 
 into parallelism with the Syrian king, who was 
 engaged in an open conflict with the represen- 
 tatives of the Theocracy {i.e.. with the armed 
 bands of Israelitish heroes inflamed with rage, 
 who, moreover, could at that time hardly be 
 termed the poor) ? — the world-monarch of the 
 captivity, who was punished indeed, but whose 
 punishment led him to repent and be converted, 
 with the incorrigibly hardened and diabolized 
 antichrist upon the throne of the Seleucidas, whc 
 for that very reason was regarded as hopele.'ssly 
 lost, and as the certain prey of eternal damna- 
 tion, from a theocratic point of view ? And in 
 relation to the conduct of Daniel — where, in the 
 theocratic state, and especially among the 
 apocalyptists of the Maccabjcan period who were 
 enthusiasts for God, could a parallel to the 
 prophet of this chapter be found ? VtTiat ser- 
 vant of Jehovah in that age can be mentioned, 
 who. like our prophet, and in analogy with the 
 
l'-/ii 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 course of the Syrian captain Naaman (2 Kings 
 V. 18), would quietly sojourn at the court and 
 in the immediate presence of a heathen ruler ; 
 who would have counselled the king in friend- 
 ship, warned him in loving earDe.=tness, supported 
 and comforted him, as Daniel actually did in his 
 intercourse with the Chaldasan monarch, accord- 
 ing to the statements of our section ? Certain 
 passage? of the Talmud, (Hilchot Bozeach, xii. 
 15; Bubn Bathrn, f. 4, p. 1) may serve to indi- 
 cate the kind of description which the Maccabsan 
 age would probably have given of the ancient 
 Daniel. It is there asserted that God afterwards 
 punished that prophet, because he had wasted 
 good advice and instruction on the heathen 
 Nebuchadnezzar, such as are found in chap. iv. 
 34 ! In addition, cf. the doxology api)ended by 
 the Sept. to chap, iv 34, for an illustration of 
 the manner in which that age would have de- 
 scribed a Nebuchadnezzar who should actually 
 repent and turn to God. In that passage the re- 
 stored king is represented as renouncing forever 
 the heathen gods as being utterly powerless, as 
 promising to dedicate himself and his people to 
 the constant service of Jehovah, and as honor- 
 ing and exulting the Jewish people with exces- 
 sive praise ! — Upon the whole cf. Kranichfeld, 
 p. 170 et seq. and p. 203. See also Ibid., p. 
 175: "The situation, however, becomes no more 
 conceivable, if, for the purpose of demonstrat- 
 ing the invention of this section as a sketch 
 copied from the circumstances of the reign of 
 Antiochus Epiphanes, its composition be placed 
 prior to the armed revolt mentioned in 1 Mace, 
 ii. 42 et seq. and consequently in a time when 
 Antiochus raged in unresisted power against the 
 helpless Jews. In this case it must be allowed 
 indeed, that the writer possessed considerable 
 prophetic gifts, so that even Hitzig ascribes 
 prophecy to him in relation to the final fate of 
 Epiphanes, mthout characterizing it as prophecy 
 ex erentu. The definite and unconditional pre- 
 diction concerning the loss of the kingdom by 
 means of force, v. 28 et eeq. , would thus be 
 fully realized ; and likewise that foretelling of a 
 peculiar disease by which he should be brought 
 to a humble recognition of the God of the Jews, 
 even though it were not a disease of the mind 
 (cf. 2 Mace. ix. 5 et seq.). The total desertion 
 to which he was actxially expo-sed during the 
 progress of his disease (cf. 3 Mace. ix. 9) i^i 
 ih'iir iv Tiiiq opeaiv (ibid. V. 38) would have re- 
 flected honor on the prophetic threat of the al- 
 leged forger (cf. Dan. iv. 23, 29 et seq.). But 
 besides mistaking the nature of the disease, he 
 has unfortunately erred with reference to the 
 recovery, and on that very account he is com- 
 pelled, according to Hitzig, to renounce the 
 honor of composing a prophecy nfte?- the event 
 had transpired, and that without compensation 
 for the otherwise really wonderful prediction of 
 the three circumstances mentioned above, whose 
 combined fulfillment of itself assuredly deserves 
 the distinguishing attribute of pseudo-prophecy. 
 But there still remains the oracle of chap. iv. 
 23 [36], an expression on the part of a Jew re- 
 garded as a model of the patriot who is jealous 
 because the law of his God is trodden under 
 foot, and which is ambif/uwis when compa'^ed 
 with the circumst<ances of the period of persecu- 
 tion under Antiochus Epiphanes, and therefore 
 inconceivable in a historical point of view, since 
 
 that yeriod preceded the armed rising. More- 
 over, it must seem strange at the least, that the 
 writer should content himself at the time of 
 Epiphanes with assigning such very ordinary 
 limits to the sinfulness and presumptuous pride 
 of Nebuchadnezzar, while the violence done to 
 the sanctuary of Israel is not mentioned with a 
 single word, for instance, in v. 34 [37] ; and yet 
 it was this very act which ranked chief in im- 
 portance in the eyes of Antiochus himself (cf. i. 
 Mace. 31-34, 36 et seq., 44 et seq.; v. 1 et seq.), 
 and which was regarded as the most heinous crime 
 of that tyrant, and as the principal ground for 
 the lamentations of pious .lews in the Maccabaean 
 , period, as well as of the Divine vengeance visited 
 on him ; cf. 1 Mace, ii S-13 ; iii. .55, 51, 58 et 
 seq.; iv. 3S et seq.; vi. 13etseq. Such a sUenca 
 in this connection with regard to so scandalous 
 a deed is the more remarkable, since the histori- 
 cal books expressly record the robbery of the 
 sanctuary perpetrated by Nebuchadnezzar, which 
 action was known to our author, according to 
 chap. i. 2 ; cf. v. 3, as well as to his compatriots. 
 He was not obliged therefore, as a cmitimts 
 forger, to fear that he shou^d betray his pseudo- 
 nymity by the mention of the sacred edifice. 
 How greatly the Sept. animated by the spirit 
 and views of the Maccab^an time, niii.st have 
 desired to find in the words of Daniel v. 19, a 
 condemnatory mention of the violence done to 
 the temple by Nebuchadnezzar, and how ap- 
 propriate it would seem to them, may appear 
 from their addition to v. 19, which is certainly 
 significant for the AsmouEean period, and for 
 that reason has unjustly been eliminated by 
 Tischendorf without ceremony : i'-ij'uiiiT/ co'v r/ 
 Kaodia VTT€p7j(pavig kol i(j;\;ii VKqi to. -rrpb^ tov dywv 
 Kal roiif a-}}£Xovc aiirov, Td £p}a gov Cxp^?/ Ka\}6~t 
 i^rjp^fii^oar, tuv oIkov tov ^ e o b tov 
 ^ Liv TO^ eTTi TnJg npapTiatc TOV ?.aoi< tov ijyiacfih'ov." 
 — The exact acquaintance of the writer with the 
 architectural condition of Babylon (cf. the ex- 
 egesis) which is apparent in vs. 20 [29], and 37 
 [30], and is as unlocked for as it is evident, de- 
 serves to be mentioned as a circumstance of 
 especial force as bearing against the hypothesis 
 of a fiction in the interests of a tendency of the 
 Maccabjean period. A Maccabasan author would 
 scarcely have represented that bis typical pseudo- 
 Antiochus was overtaken by a fearful visitation 
 of Divine justice in the form of an unusual 
 disease, while walking on the roof of his own 
 palace and within the limits of his capital. The 
 temptation to let him encounter this fate in the 
 place where Epiphanes succumbed to his, "in 
 a strange land and in the desert," would have 
 been almost irresistible (cf. 2 Mace. is. 3. 38). 
 
 4. Hnmiletknl suggestions. — The features of 
 practical importance in this section are con- 
 centrated in V. 34 [37], the same passage in 
 which Daniel's words of exhortation and warn- 
 ing to the king furnish the leading elements of 
 dogmatic significance. Not merely is the counsel 
 of Daniel, recommending the practice of the 
 Tirtues belonging to a ruler who pleases God, 
 such as the doing of works of righteousness and 
 mercy (cf. supra. No. 3), worthy of notice and 
 of thorough homiletical treatment ; but equ.ally 
 so the impulse which constrains and encouragea 
 him to venture this exhortation — his faith in 
 the willingness of God to avert the threatened 
 punishment from the king, in case he should 
 
CHAP. V. 1-30. 
 
 12c 
 
 repent and be converted while it was yet time ; 
 his truly prophetic and theocratic conviction 
 that God might possibly repent of His purpose, 
 on the fulfilment of the proper co»ditions by the 
 threatened person. In this connection see the 
 prophetic parallels adduced above, and compare 
 the remarks of Jerome on this subject: " &' 
 prcsdlxit i^iintriiiiann iJei, qucsnon pote-H immutari, 
 quotjuido kortatur ad deeinosynas et misericofdiui 
 paupwum. ut Dei sententia commutetur ? Quod 
 facile solcitiir Ezeehiw regit exemplo, quern Isajaa 
 dixerateifse moriturum. et Ni/iivitarum, guibusdic- 
 tum est : Adhuc rjuiidraginta dies, et Niiiive sub- 
 vei'tetur. Et tanieii adpreces Ezechiie et Niiiive Dei 
 sententia commutata est ; non vanitatejudicii, sed 
 illorum eonversione qui meruere indulgentiam. 
 Alioqiiiii et ill Jeremia loquitur Deiis se mala 
 minari super geritem ; et si bona fecerit, minas 
 dementia commvtare. Mursum bona agenti se 
 asxent puUiceri, et si mala fecerit, dicit se mutnre 
 mam senteiUiam ; non in homines sed in oj)era, 
 qua; mutata sunt. Neque enim Deus /lominibus, 
 sed vitiis irascitur ; quce quum in homine non 
 fuerint, nequaquam punit quod mutatum est." 
 Cf. also Melancthon, Calvin, Geier and Starke, 
 on this passage, and further, the expositions of 
 Biblical theologians on the Old-Testament teach- 
 ing concerning the repentance of God, e.g., 
 Steudel, Theologie des A. Ts., p. ISl et seq. ; 
 Havemick, Vorlens., p. 65 et seq.; F. Majer, 
 Was hast da wider das Aite Testament? (Stutt- 
 gart, 1804), p. 118 etseq., andKling, in Herzog's 
 Beal-Encykl., art. Reue, vol. xii. p. 764. — The 
 theme derived from v. 24 [27j might therefore 
 'je formulated : " Repent of thy sin, and God 
 ivHl repeat of the punishment threatened against 
 thee; " or, " The aim of Divine punishment is 
 the conversion of men ; if this be attained, how 
 f ladly will He cause the punishment to cease " 
 (Starke); or, "Be ye therefore merciful, as 
 your Father also is merciful " (Luke vi. 3(i).* 
 
 * [''This noble example of manly and Christian fidelity to 
 his sovereign is worthy of all admiration, and of course inii- 
 union. Prompted by such manifest love and in manner so 
 respectful to the king, and yet with so much personal dig- 
 ally, it must have fallen upon the king's inind with great 
 
 Additional points of departure for homileticaJ 
 discussion and observation are afforded in chap, 
 iti. 31-33 [iv. 1-3], and chap. iv. 31-34 [34-37J, 
 the introductory and closing doxologies of th? 
 report. These are particulai'ly adapted to serve 
 as points of connection for sermons upon the 
 entire narrative, having the theme, "All the 
 works of God are truth, and His ways judgment" 
 (iv. 34 [o7J ) ; or, "Humble yourselves in the 
 sight of God, and He shall lift you up " (Jas. 
 iv. 10) ; or, "God puts down the mighty from 
 their seats, and exalts them of low degree " 
 (Luke i. 53), etc. Cf. especially what Theodoret 
 observes, on chap. iv. 31 : l:oaavT7iv oxpiAeiav 6 
 Naiiovxudovdaop ek tuv cvfifliopfjv E^E^aTO, on 
 
 7^pO(^7]7LliC)^ ~Epi TOV ^EOV Kol (ppOVEi Kal 0i?t)7 era/, 
 
 Kai (jf EK auu^uvinc rwo^ n-n-o ri/t; kt'iheu^ TrdaJiv -r/v 
 vfivuiSiav vonii'Ei. Another homiletical text is con- 
 tained in chap. iv. 3 [6] et seq., on which Cramer 
 (in Starke) obseiTes correctly, " If human wis- 
 dom cannot interpret and explain a dream, it is 
 much less able to discover the secrets of God. 
 Human reason should therefore not be permitted 
 to be master in Divine things ; for none can 
 know what is in God, except the Spirit of God." 
 A still further passage of homiletical bearing is 
 chap. iv. 20-30 [29-33] , a powerful and awfully 
 impressive illustration of the proverb, "Pride 
 goeth before destruction" (Prov. xvi. 18). Cf. 
 Starke : " When a man permits the time for re- 
 pentance to pass witliout a change of disposition, 
 the Divine punishment overtakes him in the 
 midst of his sins. He then learns that the 
 threatenings of God were not idle words" (Num. 
 xvi. 13, 31 et seq). 
 
 force. — The sin specially indicated here, unrighteous oppres- 
 sion of the poor, looks very probably toward the terrible 
 exactions of labor imposed upon his ilelenceless subjects 
 (some of them captives of war) in those immense public 
 works which were, in the eyes of men, the glory of his reign. 
 The eye of m;in, dazzled with so much architectural splendor, 
 commonly fails to look down throui^h Ui the crushed bodies 
 and broken hearts, and to the hopele-s-s, never-lifted pressure 
 of woe which such a mass of coerced labor always signifies. 
 Uumau eyes rarely see it, still more rarely make any account 
 of it, but the Great Father sees it and can never fail to takt 
 it into most solemn accoimt.^'— Coic/eti.] 
 
 J. Belshazzar'i feast, and DanieVs foresluidowing of the doionfall of the CJialdaan Empire, based 
 upon the mysterious handwriting on the wall. 
 
 Chap. V. 1-30. 
 
 1 Belshazzar the king made a groat feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank 
 
 2 wine' before the thousand. Belsliazzar, while he tasted [in the taste of] the 
 wine, commanded to bring the golden and silver vessels which his father" 
 Nebuchadnezzar had taken out of the temple which was in Jerusalem ; that 
 [and] the king and his princes [lords], his wives and his concubines, might drink 
 
 3 tlierein. Then they brought the golden vessels that were taken out of the temple 
 of the house of God which was at [in] Jerusalem ; and the king and his princes 
 
 4 [lords], his wives and his concubines, drank in them. They drank wine' and 
 praised the gods of gold, and of silver, (/brass, of iron, of wood, and of alone. 
 
 5 In the same hour came forth fingers of a man's hand, and wrote over against 
 the candlestick upon the piaster of the wall of the king's palace ; and the king 
 
 6 saw the part of the iiand that wrote. Tlien tiie king's .'ountenance loas changed,' 
 and his thoughts troubled [would trouble] him, su that [and] the joints of iiis 
 loins [loin] were loosed, and his knees smote one against anotlier [this to that| 
 
124 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 7 The king cried aloud [with might] to bring in the astrologers, the Chaklaeang 
 and the sootlisayers. A^ul the king spake, and said to the wise men of Babylon 
 Whosoever [That any man that] shall read this writing, and shew me the inter 
 pretation thereof, shall be clotlied with scarlet [put on the purple], and have a 
 [the] chain of gold about [upon] his neck, and shall be the third ruler [rule 
 
 8 third] in the kingdom. Then came in all the king's wise men: but [and] they 
 could not read [call] tlie writing, nor [and] make known to the king [make the 
 
 9 king know] the interpretation thereof. Then was [the] king Belshazzar greatly 
 troubled, and his countenance was changed in him,' and his lords wei-e aston- 
 ished. 
 
 10 Now the queen, by reason of the words of the king and his lords, came into 
 the banquet-house [house of the drinking] ; and the queen spake and said, O 
 
 11 king, live for ever; let not thy thoughts ti'ouble thee, nor let thy countenance 
 be changed.' There is a man in thy kingdom, in whom is the spirit oi tlte lioly 
 gods : and, in the days of thy fatlier, light, and understanding, and wisdom, 
 like the wisdom of the gods, was found in him; whom [and] tlie king Nebu- 
 chadnezzar thy father, the king, I say, thy father, made [appointed him] mastei 
 
 12 of the magicians, astrologers, ChaldiBans, awrf soothsayers ; forasmuch as an 
 excellent spirit, and knowledge, and understanding, interpreting of dreams, and 
 shewing of hard sentences [riddles], and dissolving of doubts [knots], were 
 [was] found in the same [in him] Daniel, whom the king named [put his 
 naraeJBelteshazzar: now let Daniel be called, and he will shew [or, and shew] 
 the interpretation. 
 
 13 Then was Daniel brought in before the king. And the king spake and said 
 unto Daniel, Art thou that Daniel, which art of the children of the captivity of 
 
 14 Judah," whom the king my father brought out of Jewry .[Judah] ? ^ I have 
 even heard of [upon] thee, that the spirit of the gods is in thee, and that light, 
 
 15 and understanding, and excellent wisdom, is [was] found in thee. And now 
 the wise men, the astrologers, have been brought in before me, that they should 
 read [call] this writing, and make known unto me [make me know] the inter- 
 pretation thereof: but [and] they could not shew the interpretation of the thing. 
 
 16 And I ' have heard of [upon] thee that thou canst make [interpret] interpreta- 
 tions and dissolve doubts [knots] : now, if thou canst read [call] the writ- 
 ing and make known to me [make me know] the interpretation tiiereof, thou 
 shalt he clothed with scarlet [put on the purple |, and have a [the] chain of gold 
 about [upon] thy neck, and shalt be the third ruler [rule tlie third] in the 
 kingdom. 
 
 17 Then Daniel answered and said before the king. Let thy gifts be to thyself 
 [thee], and give thy rewards [largesses] to another ; yet I will read [call] tho 
 writing unto the king, and make known to him [make him know] the interpre 
 
 18 tation. O thou king, [Thou O king — ] the mosinigh God gave [to] Nebuchad- 
 nezzar thy father a [the] kingdom, and majesty [greatness], and glory, and 
 
 19 honour. And, for [fiom] the majesty [greatness] that he gave him, all people, 
 nations [the nations, peoples], and languages, trembled and feared [were trem- 
 bling and fearing from] before him : whom he would he slew, and whom he 
 would he kept alive, and whom he would he set up, and whom he would he 
 
 20 put down.' But [And] when his heart was lifted up, and his mind [spirit] 
 hardened in pride [to act proudly], he was deposed from his kingly throne [the 
 throne of his kingdom], and they took [caused to pass away] his glory [the 
 
 21 dignity] from him. And he was driven from the sons of men [mankind] ; and 
 his heart was made like [with] the beasts [living creatures], and iiis dwelling 
 was with the wild-asses : they fed him with [would make him eat] grass [herb- 
 age] like oxen, and his body was [would be] wet with [from] the dew of heaven 
 [the heavens] ; till [that] he knew that the most high God ruled in the kingt^"ui 
 of men [mankind], and that he appointeth [will set up] over it whomsoevei ae 
 
 22 [may] will. And thou" his son, Belshazzar, hast not humbled thy heart, 
 
 23 though [because] thou knewest all this ; but [and] hast lifted up thyseli 
 against the Lord '" of heaven [the heavens] : and they have brought the vessels 
 of his bouse before thee, and thou and thy lords, thy wives and thy concubines, 
 
CHAP. V. 1-30. 
 
 12- 
 
 24 
 
 25 
 26 
 27 
 
 28 
 
 29 
 
 have drank [are drinking] wine ' in them : and thou liast praised ihe gods of 
 silver and gold, of brass, iron, wood, and stone, which see not, nor hear, noi 
 know ; and the God in whose hand thy breath is, and whose are all thy ways, 
 hast thou not glorified. Then was the part of the hand sent from [before] 
 him ; and this writing was written [signed]. 
 
 And this is tlie writing that was written [signed], mene, mkne, tekel, 
 UPHAKSix. This is the interpretation of the thing [or, word] : mexe 
 numbered] ; God " hath numbered thy kingdom, and finished it. tekel 
 weighed] ; Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting, peres 
 divided] ; thy kingdom is divided, and given to the Medes [Media] and Per- 
 sians [Persia]. 
 
 Then commanded [said] Belshazzar, and they clothed Daniel with scarlet [tlie 
 purple], and jjut a [the] chain oi gold about [upon] his neck, and made a pro- 
 clainatiiin concerning [upon] him, that he should be the third ruler in the king- 
 30 dom. In that night was Belshazzar the king of the Chaldaeans slain. 
 
 GRAMMATICAL NOTES. 
 
 [* The emphatic state in St^lJOHj Ulce the art. in Heb, and Gr., is equivalent to the pers. pron. his tctne. — ^ 25< 
 
 frequently used, in all the Shemitic tongues, of a forefather, whether immediate or remote. — * Literally, the king — his 
 bright looics changed for him. — * Liter-'lly, his bright looks were changing upon him. — * Literally, and let not thy Itright 
 looks be changed. — « The form n^rt", apocopated for brevity's sake from m^H^' is exclusively applied in Biblical 
 
 Chaldee to .ludmn. — ' The pronoun is emphatic, being expressed. — ® The participial form of thsse verbs {whom he was 
 willing he leas killing, and lohom ti£ wojt icilting he ?£><?« nutktnp live, and tchutn he waft icilliug he was raising, and 
 whom he was wilting he wa^t depressing) indicates the continued as well as absolute i>ower of the autocrat. — ' The pro- 
 noun here is resumptive of that which stands absolutely in verse 18. — i** 5t^^ is the Chaldee equivalent of "^"ni^- 
 
 • ■' Snbst is significant of the (riM God, like Dinbsn]. 
 
 EXRGETICAL REMARKS. 
 
 Verses 1-4. The rfesecrntion of the sniyred res- 
 tels of the temple at the roi/nl feast. Belshazzar 
 the king made a great feast. The name of the 
 king ^2S*n;a differs in its orthography merely 
 from the Chaldee name 12!«-3t:b3, which Neb- 
 uchadnezzar, according to chap. i. 7 (cf. infra, 
 V. 12 of this chapter), had conferred on Daniel, 
 as it omits the f -sound between the letters I and 
 ih. It is therefore a softened form, having the 
 Same etymological significance in its elements, 
 and both are equivalent to Belt priitceps, = the 
 Bel-sarussiir of the Babylonian inscriptions (cf. 
 Introd., S f^i note 3). According to Hitzig (on i. 
 7. and on this passage), Bel-tsh-dznr is synony- 
 mous with the Sanscrit Pilla-tsht^arn, "pro- 
 vider and devourer," while in Bel-sliiizzar the 
 middle member of this compound, the Sanscr. 
 and Zend copula tslm. " and," has been dropped 
 out and replaced by the Heb. relative •,:■, so that 
 the shortened form signifies. " provider, who (is) 
 devourer." This hypothesis appears altogether 
 too artificial, and. like the direct derivation of 
 the word from the Aryan, is doubtful, especially 
 as the Bel-sarussur of the inscriptions on the 
 Babylonian monuments favors it but little. 
 Ewald's assumption that the royal name 2??3 
 comprehends the name of the male god Bel, 
 while that of Daniel, ^""33, includes that of 
 the goddess Belt, is likewise without suflScient 
 proof, and is opposed by chap. iv. .5 [8], and 
 also by the orthography with o instead of p. — 
 Concerning the hypothesis th.it Belshazzar was 
 the same as Evil-merodach, the son and imme- 
 diate successor of Nebuchadnezzar, see the 
 Introd., § 8, note 3. — Made a great feast, i.e., 
 
 caused it to be made. 1??^, " he had prepared," 
 as in chap. iii. 1. ^\y?, "bread, food," compre- 
 hends the beverages (Hn'.l"?3, v. 10) also, as the 
 second half of the verse shows ; cf. in the Heb., 
 Gen. xxvi. 30; 1 Sam. xxv. yU ; Ecc. x. 19. — . 
 And drank wine before the thousand. This 
 does not probably mean that he "vied with 
 them in drinking" (Hiivemick), but that he 
 "drank in their presence, while .seated at a 
 separate table," — as was the custom of the Per- 
 sian kings on the occasion of their great ban- 
 quets, according to Athenseus, Dciprio.i. iv, 10. 
 On the expre.ssion, "to eat and drink before 
 others," cf. Jer. Hi. 33 ; it differs m.aterially 
 from " to eat and drink itith others," Ex. xviii. 
 13; Acts X. 41, etc. The number of the king's 
 guests, a thoUMind lords (grand-officers, mighty 
 ones, cf. iv, 33 [30], which the Sept. doubles, 
 (!((7Y'''-""). is not remarkable, when it is remem- 
 bered that, according to Ctesias (in Athen., 1. c. ). 
 the Persian king provided daily for fifteen thou- 
 sand persons at his table ; that, according to 
 Curtius, Alexander the Great invited ten thou- 
 sand to a wedding feast ; and that Ptolemy 
 Dionysius (according to Pliny, H. N.. XXXIII. 
 10) supported a thousand soldiers of the army 
 of Pompey the Great from his kitchen. 
 ["The number specified is evidently a round 
 number, i.e.. the number of the guests amount- 
 ed to about a thous,aud " (Keil).] However, 
 according to the genuinely Oriental custom, 
 which is attested, e.;/.. by Herodotus, II. 78, in 
 the case of the Egyptians, and by ^Elian, V. U. . 
 XI. 1, among the Persians, the wine -drinking oi 
 ca.xous2i\ follows upon the feast proper. At such 
 times, and especially at a court like the Baby- 
 lonian immediately prior to the Persian period, 
 i the banqueters may have given way to all the 
 
12J 
 
 THE PROPHET DA^fIEL. 
 
 excesses of their dissolute frivolity, in the man- 
 ner described in the ensujng narrative. In rela- 
 tion to the drunkenness and wantonness of the 
 Babj'lonians, cf. Isa. xiv. 11 ; xlvii. 1 ; Jer. li. 
 3:i; Herod., I. 193, 193; Athena;us, XIV. p. 
 601 ; Ciirtius. V. 1 etc. — Verse 2. Belshazzar, 
 ■while he tasted the wine, commanded, etc. 
 St^in Sf;w2, "while tasting, while enjoying the 
 wine," therefore, while under its influence ; cf. 
 Prov. XX. 1 ; Acts ii. 13 ; and in regard to -I's, 
 cf. Job \i. 6. [It "does not mean merely sip- 
 ping in order to determine the flavor, or as a pre- 
 lude to drinking more freely, but drinking with 
 rilish. and therefore plentifully" (Stuart).] — 
 To bring the golden and silver vessels, name- 
 ly, out of the " treasure-house of the gods." in 
 which they had been deposited by Nebuchad- 
 nezzar, according to chap. i. 2, The etymology 
 of the name Belshazzar invented by Saadia and 
 favored by Hitzig. by which it is derived from 
 this very act of causing the vessels to be brought 
 from the treasure-house (-iS, ''to seek" and 
 IIT'N), is an idle vagary that never entered into 
 the mind of the writer. — That the king .... 
 and his concubines might drink therein. The 
 1 in l"~r ^1 is expressive of the design ; cf. 
 chap. i. 5 b. nnd with 3, "to drink from a 
 vessel," occurs also in vs. 3 and 23 ; cf. Winer, 
 g 51, 1. — His wives and his concubines. ;3U! 
 designates the legal consort as contrasted with 
 the concubine (n^ni), as in the Hebrew (Psa. 
 xlv. 10; Neh. ii. 6). The Sept. represents only 
 the concubines as present at the feast (both here 
 and in vs. 3 and 33). being apparently governed 
 in this by what is described in Esther! 9 etseq. 
 (cf. Josephus. Ant., XI. G, 1) as the court custom 
 of the «/(c/t'«< Persians ; but even with reference 
 to them. Herodotus (v. 18) testifies that their 
 wives {unvftit^rai yi'viiiKsr') were admitted to ban- 
 quets (cf. also Plutarch, Sympos. I. 1 and 
 Macrob. vii. 1, who represent that at least con- 
 cubines were present at the Persian feasts). It 
 is clear that the luxurious Babylonians were 
 even more lax in the observance of a strict eti- 
 quette, from Herod, i. 191 ; Xenophon. Cyriyji., 
 V. 2. 28, and especially from Curtius. V. 1 , 38. 
 From this may appear the propriety with which 
 Bertholdt (p. 3(10), on the strength of v. 10 of 
 this chapter, which he misunderstood, charges 
 ignorance of the Babylonian custom in question 
 on the prophet. — Verse 3. Then they brought 
 the golden vesssls that were taken out of the 
 temple of the house of God which was at 
 Jerusalem. Merely the golden vtunii') are here 
 mentioned, while the silver ones are omitted, on 
 the principle a piitionfit dtiumiinatio. The tem- 
 ple" (iS^^^D) in this place, as in 1 Kings vi. 3; 
 Ezek. xli. 4. is the temple proper, consisting of 
 the holy and the most holy place, and is here 
 di.stinguished from the " house of God," i.e., the 
 whole of the sacred area of the temple. — Verse 
 4. They drank wine, and praised, etc. T"?'.VS 
 (with s prosthet. , Winer, Gramm., % 23, note 
 I) resumes the '"^"r'*! of the preceding verse 
 supplemerted by '*■)'?'!', "wine," in order to 
 "onnect immediately with it the praising of the 
 
 gods, and thus to present in a striking maimei 
 the profanity and lasciviousness of the scene. * 
 — On the six-fold number of the materials from 
 which the idols were constructed, "gold, silver, 
 brass, iron, wood, and stone." compare the simi- 
 lar number (" gold, silver, precious stones, wood, 
 hay stubble") in 1 Cor. iii. 11 ; rdso Psa. cxv. 
 5-7 ; Bar. vi. 7 et seq. ; Wisd. xv. 15. f On the 
 number itself, as the number of the world amen- 
 able to judgment because of its hostility to God, 
 cf. Auberlen, Dan., p. 304 et seq. ; and my 
 Theohyid natiiralix, p. 8Hi et seq. — The aggra- 
 vated feature of this profanation of the sacred 
 vessels of the temple does not consist in the 
 " placing of Jehovah and the idols of the king 
 upon the same level " (Hiivemick), but in the 
 fact, which Daniel mentions with censure in v. 
 23, that Belshazzar proudly exalted himself 
 above the God of Israel, and in mockery em- 
 ployed the vessels stolen from His sanctuary to 
 drink mne whUe singing the praises of the vic- 
 torious gods of Babylon It was thus essentially 
 an exaltation of the idok abnre Jehovah, who had 
 succumbed to them in battle, and whom they 
 had despoiled (cf . Kranichf. on this passage). 
 
 Verses .'), 6. The fingeron theueUl, and the cor^ 
 sequent terror of the king. In the same hour, 
 therefore while the sacrilegious act was in pro- 
 gress ; immediately and suddenly. Cf . chap 
 iii. 6. — Came forth fingers of a man's hand. 
 The Kethib ^pC: (3 plur. masc.) is sulEciently 
 explained by its position before the feminine 
 subject 15i^?<, or also by the supposition that 
 the mind of the wTiter reverted in an indefinite 
 manner to the Divine powers here engaged. 
 The feminine plural ~P.^', substituted for it by 
 the Keri, is therefore to be rejected, as .<m easier 
 reading (similar to that in chap. ii. 33). The 
 participle l^"'?"! ("^■^d writing," instead of 
 "and wrote "), which follows the verb 1p?-., has 
 a realizing effect, as in ch.ip. ii. 7a; iii. 9 a. — 
 Over against the candlestick on the waU of 
 the king's palace. The wall of the banquet- 
 hall was not panelled nor draped, but rather a 
 simple, light-colored "wall of lime or plaster " 
 (iri3 = the irriS of the Targums). such as the 
 ruins of the palaces at Nineveh still exhibit in 
 great number, according to Layard (JS'in. and 
 Babylon, p. 051). Upon a spot of this wall that 
 was especially exposed to the light from the 
 lamp above the king, he suddenly beheld the 
 mysterious and terrifying phenomenon of the 
 hand engaged in writing. — And the king saw 
 the part (the extremity) of the hand that 
 wrote. ^<~■) "5 properly designates here and 
 in V. 24 the "extremity of the hand," probably 
 
 * ["As the city WHS alrcirly besief?ei,t. and the reai king 
 Naboniied hail pone into the tieid apaiust the armies ol 
 the Meiles and Persians under CjTiis. the sense of .security 
 which this feast implied must be aceountx-d for by theii 
 confidence in the a.ssumed strenjrth of the city. Plainly it 
 was supposed txi lie absolutely impregnable . — It may tx 
 added that God ha(t given up the kinp and the prir.ees t* 
 a blind infatuation, of such sort as usually precedes de- 
 Btrnetion." — Co/rlen. ] 
 
 t [-The si.K predicates of the gods are divided by the 
 copula 1 into two classes ; gold and silver — brass, iron, wiod, 
 and stone, in order Ki repre..,ent before the eyes in an ad 
 vuncing degree the varietj of these gods."' — Kei 1 
 
CHAP. V. 1-30. 
 
 127 
 
 inclnding the fingers, honce what the first sen- 
 tence describes by IJ^^S. The rendering of 
 Gesenius and Dietrich in the HandwOrterbuch, 
 "palm of the hand. pKlnta." is hardly correct ; 
 nor is that of Hitzig, who. in connection with 
 Saadia, takes S~" in the wider sense of "' the 
 lower arm, including the hand." and hence ex 
 plains XTi'IE hy " the whole hand." The 
 writer appears rather to have employed the 
 words " lingers " and " extremity of the hand " 
 interchangeably, with design, — "in order to 
 excite more efEectually the conception of a mys- 
 terious person in the background, by the obser- 
 vation that only the extremity of the organ em- 
 ployed in writing was visible " (Kranichfeld). 
 Whether the phenomenon of the mysterious 
 band is to be placed solely to the account of 
 "the fancy of the king under the influence of 
 wine." and therefore to be reduced (with Kran- 
 ichfeld ) from an objective and actually transpir- 
 ing miracle to a merely subjective apprehension 
 (similar to the perception of the fourth person in 
 the fiery furnace — see on chap. iii. 24), or other- 
 wise, depends entirely on the other question, 
 whether the mysterious writing on the wall, 
 which certainly was visible to others as well as 
 to Belshazzar (cf. vs. 7, 8, IG, 25), is to be 
 regarded as having been previously carved or 
 painted in a natural way and by human agency, 
 or whether it is to be accepted that the inscrip- 
 tion was made by supernatural intervention at 
 the time of the lianquet and before the eyes of 
 the terrified king. In support of the former 
 theory reference might perhaps be made to the 
 distinction between an older and a later cunei- 
 form writing among the Babylonians, the former 
 of which differed materially from the latter, or 
 even to the hieroglyphics which the primitive 
 Babylonians are said to have emploj-ed (cf. Spie- 
 gel. Art. Ninete u. Ansyrieii. in Herzog's Re^d- 
 Eiioykl. , vol. XX. p. 2:j-t et seq. ), but with which 
 the later ages were entirely unacquainted. It 
 is conceivable that the king may suddenly have 
 noticed an inscription in characters of that 
 former time, that were traced on bricks and in- 
 serted in the wall, and that such characters were 
 not intelligible to the ordinary magians of the 
 time, but required the all-surpassing knowledge 
 of Daniel to decipher. But. aside from the evi- 
 dent design of the narrator to report a positively 
 miraculous incident, this theory is militated 
 against and positively overthrown by the luftiwe 
 of the icritind. which does not bear the charac- 
 ter of the primitive oracles of the kind repre- 
 sented by the Sibyl lines, but is a Divine sentence 
 of destniction upon the king and his people, 
 that was called forth by the insolent presump- 
 tion of the present ruler, and is adapted to the 
 circumstances of his time icf. on v. 25 et .seq.). 
 The theory of an actual miracle is therefore to 
 be received, and the psychological explanation 
 cited .ibove. as well as every other naturalistic 
 theory, must be rejected.* — Then the (color of 
 the) liin5's countenance was changed ; liter- 
 ally, "Then the king, his color was changed to 
 him." [" **?" (the king) stands absolutely, 
 
 • fThc appearance of the fin?ers "immediately awak- 
 sned the thought that the •^■r^ting was by a supernatural 
 being, and alarmed the king out of his intoxication.^* — 
 KtU.\ 
 
 because the impression made by the occurrenca 
 on the king is to be depicted " ( Keil). ] The in- 
 transitive ^«:3 ("to change") has the accusa- 
 tive suffix in ^~^"■2, instead of the dative ; cf. 
 "'rn^'ra in the Heb. of Ezek. xlvii. 7. However, 
 the more circumstantial expression "l"^" "^"'l''' 
 ^ni^5. T. 9, has substantially the same signifi- 
 cation, as is the case also with the somewhat 
 different expressions in v. 10 and chap. vii. 28. 
 On ^""."^ see on chap. iv. 33. — And his thoughts 
 troubled him ; "^irinsi, the imcomfortable and 
 terrifying thoughts concerning the meaning of 
 the writing, which sprang from the guilty con- 
 science of the king. Cf. chap. ii. 30. — The 
 joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees 
 smote one against another. The tremuloufc 
 knocking together of the knees is a consequence 
 of the yielding of the joints of the loins, and 
 this again, like the change of color in the coun- 
 tenance, is the natur.al effect of terror.* Cf. 
 with 7rr', "hip, loin," the etymologically equiv- 
 alent Heb. v;n (only in the dual, 3"^;n). 
 SI:1S"1S, "knee," appears not to be etymologi- 
 cally related to -i^;, c-;il, but rather to sigm- 
 fy originally "combination, amimmtirv ; " cf. 
 cumrimtiurei genu, Plin.. U. X., XI. lO'i. 
 
 Verses 7-9. The useless mnsiiltntioii with tJu 
 Magians. The king cried aloud j i^n^, " with 
 power," as in chap. iii. 4 ; iv. 11. — To bring in 
 the astrologers (soothsayers), the Chald8eai.&, 
 and the soothsayers (astrologers). Several 
 classes of wise men are here mentiouftd to desig- 
 nate the entire number, as in chap. ii. 2 (cf. 27) 
 and in iv. 4 ; and among them the Chartummin 
 or learned class (see on chap. ii. 2). whose wisdom 
 would be especially required in the present in- 
 stance, are not even mentioned by name. This 
 is evidently an oversight on the part of the 
 writer, which is paralleled in the somewhat 
 more complete enumeration of the piiucipal 
 classes of Magians in v. 11. and also in the ab- 
 breviated expression. " the wise men, the sooth- 
 sayers," in V. 15. The indefinite ^33 ^?:^:n in 
 this verse, and the expression i^SJIp "'^'^rH 3^ 
 in V. 8, show clearly that the author always 
 refers to all the wise men. without excluding 
 any of the chief classes, and especially so in this 
 instance. But it cannot be required here, any 
 more than in the similar case mentioned in the 
 preceding chapter, that Daniel should have at 
 once presented himself am^ng all these wise men 
 of Babylon (see on iv. 5). The position of the 
 great Jewish wise man under Nebuchadnezzar's 
 reign, which was not official in the more limited 
 sense, was probably continued to him under Bel- 
 shazzar ; and, moreover, the latter, who. accord- 
 ing to V. 11 et seq.. knew little or nothing about 
 Daniel, would bt» far more likely than was his 
 father to ignore the prophet of Jehovah, and to 
 
 * [" It is an appalling scene w'len a sinning mortal 
 knows that the great God has come tr. meet him in the 
 very midst of his Bins ! — How chj.nffed the 8i;eu,. *rom th* 
 glee of his blasphemous reveliT ro this palenene uf cheek, 
 convulsion of frame, iemor?c o." jon:.rieuce, and dread for& 
 boding of doom ! Many a sipaer Las had a like experi 
 ence, and other thousands mu&f r*,<j itl"' — Coic^.l 
 
I -28 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 geek the counsel of the heathen wise men at the 
 outset. The words of the queen in v. 11 et seq. 
 by no means indicate that the king was wholly 
 unacquainted with Daniel, but merely that up 
 to that time no personal or official intercourse 
 had taken place between them. This circum- 
 Btance also finds a sufficient explanation in the 
 greater freedom of action incident to the partly 
 official and partly private station of Daniel, which 
 devolved on him the oblig-ation to attend to cer- 
 tain portions of "the king's business" indeed 
 {see chap. viii. 27), but released him from the 
 duty of frequently presenting himself before the 
 king. The assumption of Hengstenberg and 
 Hiivei-nick, that on the accession of Belshazzar 
 Daniel was formally deprived of his office as the 
 chief Magian, is a very doubtful supposition, and 
 stands in direct contradiction to chap. viii. 27 
 (cf viii. 1) — Whosoever shall read this writ- 
 ing, etc. n~r2 (here and v. 15), for '^^f)?, v. 
 8, 16, 25, appears to be the orthography of a 
 later copyist, as in the case of n33, chap. iv. 
 82. and of n"irS in v. 13, below. — Shall be 
 clothed with purple (marg. ) and have (rather 
 "with"*) a chain of gold about his neck. 
 VJIS here, and in the Chaldaizing Heb. of 2 
 Chron. ii. 6, equivalent to the Heb. Tpal** (Ex. 
 XXV. 26, 27, and often), the "red or genuine 
 purple," Tzopiirpn^ was probably more costly and 
 brilliaEt than the violet or blue purple n^.2t|ii 
 from which it must be distinguished. It formed 
 the distinguishing feature of clothing among the 
 Persian kmgs (Pollux, VII. 13), and was by them 
 occasionally bestowed on high officials, as a mark 
 of especial favor and exalted dignity; e.g., on 
 Mordecai, Esth. viii. 15 ; and on the piD'pvrati, 
 i.e.. persons who were adorned \vith the purple 
 iCTi't/i'f, whom Xenophon(.4n«i., I. 5,8), Curtius 
 (III. 2, 10 ; VIII. 3, 15 ; XIII. 13, 14), and others 
 mention (cf. Xenophon, Cprop. . I. 3, 2 ; II. 4, 
 0; Herodotus, III. 20, etc.). Purple was pro- 
 bably the badge of distinguished rank at the 
 Babylonian as well as at the Persian court, espe- 
 cially as Babylon, like Tyre, was celebrated 
 among the ancients for its manufacture of pur- 
 ple goods. Cf. Philostralus, Np. , 27 ; Ezek. 
 xxvii. 24 ; Josh. vii. 21 ; and generally, Heereu, 
 Ideen. etc , I. 2, 205 el seq. With respect to 
 their etymology, both forms, pans and pais, 
 may be most readily derived from the Sanscrit, 
 in which both rdffiimaii and rdgavan occur as 
 adjectives derived from rdga, '-red," and sig- 
 nify 'Ted-colored;" cf. Gesen., Addit. ad The- 
 lai'i?:, p. 111. Hitzig however refers to the 
 Sanscr. argh = "' to possess value, be costly," 
 and most of the older expositors prefer a Shem- 
 itic root, e.g. 23n-— ''^^•'^C, "chain, necklace" 
 (Sept. and Theodot., /lavinKT/r ■ also Aquil. and 
 Symm . on Gen. xh. 42), seems not to have been 
 changed to S2^:':n (= Gr. /xavidKr/c), the form 
 which is here and in vs. 16 and 29 preferred by 
 the Keri. As among the early Egyptians (Gen. 
 xli. 42^, so also among the later Persians the 
 
 • [The phrase Sai ^l sailTini "does not depend 
 on dx"', but forms a clause by itself ; aiid a chain of 
 gold ftltall be about his neck.''^.- &'£)/,] 
 
 golden necklace served as the ornament of princea 
 and as the mark of special favor from the king, 
 cf. Herod. , III. 20 ; Xenophon, Aimb., I. 2, 27 ; 
 5, 8 ; 8. 29.— And shall be the third ruler in 
 the kingdom ; rather, " shall have power in the 
 kingdom as a triumvir." 'P-r-;', not the same 
 as S«PbP, vs. 16 and 29, is generally regarded as 
 an ordinal number, "the third," formed aft«r 
 the. Heb. analogy, and is compared with the 
 more usual "'H'^iP ; but it may perhaps, and 
 with greater probability, be regarded, with Kran- 
 ichfeld, as a feminine adverbial formation after 
 the analogy of adverbs like n^O"JH, ''^.~.'*, etc., 
 and be rendered accordingly, by like, or as a tri- 
 umvir ; while xri.ri in vs. 16 and 29 is the 
 corresponding masculine noun "triumvir" 
 (formed from srjp, "three"). There is there- 
 fore no difference in sense between the term 
 employed in this passage and those found in the 
 parallel verses cited above ; but it is unneces- 
 sary and arbitrary to declare, with Hitzig, that 
 the two forms are identical, and on that account 
 to substitute "'BiP in this place. The dignity 
 of triumvir which is here promised to the for- 
 tunate interpreter of the mystery is probably 
 not identical with the office of one of the three 
 governors of the province of Babylon mentioned 
 in chap. ii. 49, but designates the position of 
 one of the three chief governors over the whole 
 kingdom. The latter office is noticed in chap, 
 vi. 3, as established by Darius the Mede ; but 
 that statement may be regarded as merely indi- 
 cating the restorption of a feature in the admin- 
 istration of government which had already 
 existed under the Babylonian regime. The Sept. 
 presents the correct idea : iinvoni rob zpi-ov //j/jui'c 
 ri/i; ikiai'/tinc: ; but the Peshito is less correct in 
 its rendering by "the third rank in the king- 
 dom," which results in the idea that the recipi- 
 ent should immediately succeed in rank the 
 king, who was supreme, and the prime minister 
 or grand vizier, who fiUed the second place in 
 the kingdom. This thought was certainly for- 
 eign to the author, and would be expressed aa 
 indefinitely as is possible by "'^T "'PtP"'.. The 
 evident meaning of these words is rather that 
 the person concerned should be placed over 
 the kingdom airof rpiroi;, or the third beside two 
 other grand officials or T?^^? (cf- chap. vi. 
 3). — Verse 8. Then came in all the king's wise 
 men. On the Keri V^T see on chap. iv. 4. The 
 SSia ■■)a^Sn is are evidently the same as 
 those mentioned separately (although not ex- 
 haustively, and merely by way of indicating 
 their office) in v. 7. Kranichfeld is exceedingly 
 arbitrary when he assumes a gradation between 
 the three classes of wise men who are specially 
 mentioned in v. 7, and the summoning of (lii 
 the wise men related in this passage, and con- 
 sequently finds between the lines and preceding 
 the T^l?<., "then," a series of incidents that are 
 not expressly noticed (after the manner in 
 which many expositors treat the mj' tlrrcv 
 6 (iof/of , Luke xiv. 22). Instead of this compare 
 the relation of the general expression "'^"'3'? 33 
 
CHAP. V. 1-30. 
 
 12f. 
 
 i33 in chap. ir. 3, to the special classes of wise 
 men which are immediately referred to (ibid. v. 
 4). and also what has been observed above, on 
 V. 7, in relation to the careless stj-le of the au- 
 tb'>r. — Bat they could not read the ■writing, 
 etc. Krauichfeld supposes that the reason for 
 this was, that the mj-sterious inscription was 
 written in the old Phojnician characters, which 
 Daniel, being a Hebrew, would have recog-nized, 
 while the Chaldaian Chiirtinnmi/i, who were 
 acquainted only with the character in use among 
 the ancient Babylonians, which corresponded to 
 the later Syriac or Palm3'rene, would naturally 
 be unable to understand them. But in this in- 
 stance we are probably to conceive of cuneiform 
 writing, or ef hieroglyphic characters (see on v. 
 7). because the brick walls of the palaces in 
 ancient Babylon generally contained only such. 
 Prideaux, however, preceded Kranichfeld in the 
 opinion expressed in the Unicersnl HiUory, part 
 III. p. 755, that the writing was not composed 
 of the square characters in use among the Chal- 
 daeans, but of the ancient Arabic (?), which pre- 
 ceded the modem Samaritan. * — Verse 9. Then 
 V7as king Belshazzar greatly troubled .... 
 and his lords were aston-shed. The unusual, 
 and even unique and incomprehensible charac- 
 ters in which the suddenly apparent writing was 
 ccmposed, increased the alarm produced by the 
 apparition, and filled the king and his guests, 
 now thoroughly aroused from their wild debauch, 
 with anxious dread in relation to the misfortunes 
 predicted by the supposed oracle. If, with Hav- 
 eraick, and many earlier expositors, we could be- 
 lieve that Belshazzar's feast was held during the 
 siege of the city bv the Medo- Persians, and with 
 a design to ridicule the danger from that source, 
 it would be still easier to explain so general an 
 alarm, and it would not even be necessary, in 
 that case, to allude to the fear of thf many offi- 
 cials that their own deposition from office might 
 1)6 connected with the king's impending fall ; but 
 ihat conclusion does not necessarily result from 
 T. 30 et seq. — Hitzig remarks on the Ithpael 
 Part. Vf"?"''r'2, and probably with justice, that 
 '' it not only comprehends the idea of alarm, but 
 also that of confusion and e.xcited movement." 
 "None retained their places; a general uproar 
 ensued ; groups were formed ; and the people 
 talked, .ind ran hither and thither to no pur- 
 pose." 
 
 Verses 10-13. The queen-nwtJier refers BiUiaz- 
 ear to Daniel. Now (or "then") the queen 
 . . . came into the banquet-house. KllSi'a 
 can only be the queen-mother (rT1"':3, 1 Kings 
 XV, 1-3 ; 2 Chron. xv. 16 ; cf. Jer. xiii. 18)— not 
 
 * [" But thi^ interpretation of the miracle on natural 
 principles is quite erroneous. First, it is ver}' unlikely th.it 
 the ChaMmnn wise men should not have known these old 
 Shemitic characters, even although at that time they had 
 ceased to be in current use amouR the Babylonians in their 
 common writing. Then, from the circumstance that Daniel 
 coul i at once read the writing, it docs not follow that it 
 «as the welt-known Old-Hebrew writing of hie father- 
 land. 'The characters employed in the writinp,' as Heng- 
 dtenberg has rightly observed {Ileitr., I. p. 122), 'must 
 have been altogether unusual, so a?; not to be deciphered 
 but by Piv ne illuniination.' Yet we must not, with M. 
 G<?ier and other.-., assume that the writing wa,s visible 
 only to the king and Daniel. Thi.i contradicts the text, 
 according to which the ChaldiEaUrWise men. and, without 
 doubt, all that were present, also saw the truces of the writ^ 
 Ing, but were not able t/j read it." — i.'si7.] 
 
 one of the king's wives; for, according to vs. 3 
 and 23 these were already in the banquet-hall 
 among the carousers. Hence, if Belshazzar wa.s 
 the same person as Evil-merodach. the son and 
 successor of Nebuchadnezzar, this queen-mother, 
 who here evidently displays a dignity and au- 
 thority such as belonged to the yibiroth at the 
 Israelitish courts (cf. the passages adduced), was 
 probably the Nitocris whom Herodotus celebrates 
 in I. 185. Cf. the Introd., § 8, note 3.* — Instead 
 of the Kethib nib?, the Keri, conforming to the 
 usage of the later Chaldee, has r35 ; cf. on 
 chap. iv. 4. — "i31 'a ''i'p i-rf.^, "by reason (on 
 account) of the words of the king and his lords." 
 So the majority of moderns, correctly; for a 
 confused. e.xcited talking, whose sound possibly 
 penetrated to the apartments of the queen- 
 mother, is implicitly included in ii^^fwai ^• 
 9. The plural V?"?, as well as the complemen- 
 tary genitive, is opposed to the version of the 
 Vulg. , Luther, Bertholdt, Dereser, von Lengerke, 
 etc. : " by reason of the matter, or the affair." — 
 O king, live for ever. Cf. on chap. ii. 4, where 
 also the defective '^1'^\'\ "^-^"^^l has been no- 
 ticed. — Verse 11. And in the days of thy 
 father light ("^^n:, cf. on chap. ii. 23), and 
 understanding, and wisdom, like the wisdom 
 of the gods, was found in him. Cf. 1 Kings iii. 
 28; Wisd viii. 11. — King Nebuchadnezzar, 
 the king, thy father. The subject is briefly 
 repeated at the close of the sentence, because 
 its first position was somewhat distant from the 
 verb, similar to Cant. v. 7. — Verse 12. Foras- 
 much as an excellent spiiit . . . were found 
 in the same Daniel. The wisdom of Daniel, 
 which had been e.xtolled in v. 11, is again men- 
 tioned as the reason for the distinction conferred 
 on him by Nebuchadnezzar, for the purpose of 
 preparing Belshazzar to listen to the counsel 
 which follows. — Interpreting of dreams, and 
 showing of hard sentences and dissolving of 
 doubts ; rather, " to interpret dreams, show rid- 
 dles, and loosen knots." This triplicate circum- 
 stantial clause, — the first and third of whose 
 members are expressed in the He'.i. [Chald. ] by 
 participles, and the second by the infinitive 
 S'J'ins — is a genitive, depending on ^rfibpipii 
 which closes the series of objects governed by 
 the principal verb rnrPCn in the maimer of a 
 parenthesis. Hitzig holds differently, taking 
 the three terms '"iEa, >«"J";ns«, and »<T.?a, un- 
 der the precedence of the Vulgate, as three 
 nouns of action, coordinated to the preceding 
 ones ("an excellent spirit, knowledge, and un- 
 derstanding "), and consequently assuming six 
 subjects to ~a rn;ri"rn. But "■•3??p and 
 
 * ["The ' queen ' in this passage is the queen-mother, aa 
 may be inferred from the fact that the kiug'a (Belshazzar'8> 
 wives and concubines are \vith him in his carousals, while 
 this woman was not :«and also from her intimate acquain- 
 tance with Daniel and the inciiients of Nebuchadnezzar's 
 life. She was probably the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar, 
 and the mother of Belshazzar." — Co>r[en. If Rawlmson> 
 conjecture {/feriittnlun i. 4^1 be correct, that the real king 
 Nabonadus had lift his sun Belshazzar temporarily In 
 charge of Babylon, this woman may have really been tll# 
 consort of the actual king.] 
 
130 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 S^-"; are clearly Pael participles, and they 
 cannot be taken as nnmina aetionis, even under 
 reference to the Heb. "?:'?, "a covering," or 
 to ■":"■:, chap. ix. 27. It is exceedingly doubt- 
 ful whether the figurative expression " to loosen 
 knots " (cf. the Lat. nodos solrere ; and also 
 Seneca's '• iwdom mrtis ■verba,'" (Edip., 101) 
 contains an illusion to the '"looseniag of the 
 loins," in v. 6 (as Hitzig, Kranichfeld, etc., 
 assert), or not, in view of the merely superficial 
 relation between st.:."^ and iiiri-73. — 1° • • • 
 Daniel -whom the king named Belteshazzcir j 
 ;s«':~S ns (cf. v. 30), an emphatic pleonasm. 
 The giving of the name is referred to, as in 
 chap. iv. 5. as something honorable to the pro- 
 phet. — NoTW let Daniel be called, and he ■will 
 show the interpretation. Concerning the form 
 mt;:^, see above, on v. 7. [" The tone in 
 which this last clause is spoken betokens that 
 the speaker herself is conscious of an elevated 
 rank and a kind of authority, or, at least, a right 
 to give advice ; a tone which only such a woman 
 as stood in the relation of a mother (not a wife) 
 could assume in the East before a king " 
 (Stuart).] 
 
 Verses 13-16. DanieVs appearance before the 
 king. Then was Daniel brought in before the 
 king, ^v." ^'"l ^^^n are Hebraizing Hophal- 
 forms, like P^1~, chap. iv. 33, or like ~^'-~ in 
 v. 20. — Art thou that Daniel, which art of the 
 children of the captivity of Judah, etc. 
 ['•The question did not expect an answer, and has 
 this meaning : Thou art indeed Daniel^ — Keil.] 
 This question clearlj' indicates that no direct in- 
 tercourse had hitherto taken place between the 
 king and D.miel (see on v. 7). but also, on the 
 other hand, that the former had some knowledge 
 of the prophet. The use of the name Daniel 
 instead of Belteshazzar, in the king's address, 
 was probably dictated simply by a desire to 
 avoid the use of a name so nearly identical in 
 sound to his own — although it certainly be- 
 longed to the prophet in the official language of 
 the Babylonian court. Hitzig therefore com- 
 mits a decided error, when he assumes ahistorical 
 improbability in this place, suggestive of a later 
 Jewish authorship. — -Whom the king .... 
 brought from (nather "hitherto, out of") 
 Jewry ? T"" "~ is probably to be referred to 
 the captives, as Theodotion. the Sept., Luther, 
 Hitzig, etc.. hold, and not specially to the per- 
 son of Daniel, which is the view of the Vulgate, 
 Kranichfeld, etc. On the form ^2St for "^X 
 (cf. the voc. S^X = 'A,S3(!, Rom. viii. 15), see 
 Hitzig, Kranichfeld, and others, on this passage. 
 —On V. 14 cf. V. 11 ; on v. 15 cf. v. 8. [" It 
 is not to be overlooked that here Belshazzar leaves 
 out the predicate holy in connection with l"'?.;^; 
 gods " (Keil).] — The wise men,, the astrologers 
 (" eoothsiiyers"). On this combination cf. on v. 7. 
 — That they should read this writing, etc. "^ 'li 
 as the accompanying imfierfect indicates, is in 
 this place the telic conjunction "that, in order 
 that." Upon this clause which indicates the de- 
 
 sign, depends that which follows, construed 
 with 5 c. Inf. (cf. ii. 16). Concerning the form 
 n:r3 see supra, on v. 7. — But they could not 
 shex7 the interpretation of the thing (or 
 " word"). S*"!": cannot be rendered by "matter, 
 thing," any more than T3& in v. 10 , it rathei 
 signifies, collectively, the words written on the 
 wall (against Hitzig and others). — Concerning 
 SFibri V. 16 b., see supra, on v. 7. 
 
 Verses 17-24. DanieVs cemuring address to 
 the king, as tJie prologue to the interpretation of 
 the imting. Let thy gifts be to thyself. This 
 refusal of the royal presents was designed merely 
 to decisively reject, at the outset, and in a man- 
 ner becoming the prophet of Jehovah, any in- 
 fluence that might be brought to bear on him. 
 It is not, therefore, a pert expression, which the 
 king might justly punish, nor is it inconsistent 
 with the fact that Daniel ultimately accepted 
 the reward offered for the interpretation, v. 29, 
 since he regarded it as a recognition of his God. 
 The assertion of v. Lengerke, Hitzig, etc.. that 
 we should expect either that the emraged king 
 would punish the prophet who bears evil tidings 
 and couples them with threatenings and cen- 
 sure, or that, in v. 20, Daniel would despise the 
 royal purple and the golden necklace, all this is 
 simply adapted to afford a conception of the 
 manner in which a Maccabaean tendency-writer 
 would have treated this historj', and of the 
 probable issue to which he would have conducted 
 it. — Verse 18. O thou king, the most high 
 God, etc. The absolute position of the vocative 
 SO^Ja nn:K at the beginning of the sentence, 
 places the king rhetorically in a living relation 
 with the facts reported in the following clause, 
 with regard to his father Nebuchadnezzar. — Verse 
 19. And for the majesty (or "power ") .... 
 cill people, nations ("tribes"), aud laoguages 
 trembled and feared; properly. " were tremb- 
 ling and fearing," were in a state of fear and 
 trembling. The Keri has 1'?']^ instead of T>!!<T, 
 
 similar to Vll"^, (chap. ii. 38; iii. 31; iv. 32) 
 instead of T"^.'*'^ ; see on ii. 38. Concerning 
 the triad, "people, tribes, and tongues," see on 
 chap. iii. 4.- Whom (soever) he would (cf. 
 Winer, Grramm. § 47, 1, a) .... he kept 
 alive, ''n^ is derived by Theodotion (IrvTr-tv) 
 and the Vulgate (jiercutiebat ; cf. Luther, "ef 
 sefdug ") from sna "to smite ; " but the paral- 
 lelism requires the Aphel partic. of S*'^'^, " to 
 live," and Sufi's must either be considered as 
 such (namely, as a peculiar, old-Chaldaic con- 
 traction of '*"'7'3, which is generally contracted 
 
 to "'DP, '• ff.. Targ. Deut. xxxii. 39), or, with 
 Saadia, Rashi, Buxt., Bertholdt, Gesenius, 
 Fiirst, Hitzig, etc., the usual contracted form 
 Hn^ must be sub.stituted for sn^. [" The bril- 
 liant description of Nebuchadnezzar's power in 
 ver. 18 and 19 has undesirably the objeci; of 
 impressing it on the mind of Belshazzar that he 
 did not equal his f.ather (that monarch) in power 
 and majesty .... The last clause in ver. IP 
 remindi us "of 1 Sam. ii. G. 7 "(.Keil).] Verse 20 
 
CHAP. V. 1-30. 
 
 13] 
 
 But when his heart was lifted up. D"l = cy 
 
 is a preterite with intransitive signification, not 
 a p.issive partic. ,asv. Lengerke suggests. Cf. 
 W'uier, § 83, 4. — -And his mind hardened in 
 pride. H^^, the nearest synonym to 32l3i is 
 also frequently used interchangeably witli it in 
 the Hebrew, e. g., Psa. li. 13, 19. qp.-, in this 
 place, is about equivalent to the Heb. p-;n in 
 Bx. vii. 13 * — He was deposed . . . , and they 
 took his glory from him; or, " his glory was 
 taken from him." Inste.ad of '*^P''l the best 
 MSS. have ,T~ip"n, which is possibly to be read 
 a.s n"ip"'T (Hitzig) ; but on the other hand the 
 
 case may be analogous to S*".??, supra, v. 8 and 
 chap. iv. 15. — Verse 31. And his heart w^as 
 made like the (heart of) beasts. Read ^Vwi 
 not T^ViT (Keri) or "'l^ C'^- Leng., Hitzig), or 
 even ^1- (Ewald). The 3d sing, active ^Tb 
 is used, instead of the more usual 3d plural 
 active, to express an impersonal sense. There 
 are thus three several modes of indicating that 
 sense employed in vs. 30 and 31 : «, the passive 
 (rn:n v. 30, T'lp v. 31) ; b, the 3d plural 
 active (1^1?'7 v. 20, n:3?353-i v. 21); c, the 3d 
 sing, active C^?? v. 21) — a rapid change, that is 
 conditioned by the rhetorical, or if it be pre- 
 ferred, the poetical elevation of Daniel's re- 
 marks. — [And his dwelling was with the 
 wild asses. This " circumstance is added by 
 the speaker, and not found in chap. iv. 39 (33). 
 It is added for the sake of stronger impression " 
 (A'^wfrt). l--TiU he knew that . . . God . . ap- 
 pointeth over it (or " them ") whomsoever he 
 will. CI. chap. iv. 14, at the close of which, as 
 here, the Keri substitutes nb5 for the Kethib 
 R-^b; —Verse 33. And thou .... hast not 
 humbled thne heart, though thou knewest 
 all this. f Properly, ^^ precisely becai/se (*^p",3 
 "") thou knewest all this," hence, because of a 
 defiant opposition to the well known design and 
 will of the Highest. The words indicate the 
 reason not for what Belshazzar should have 
 done, but for what /le did not perform (thus 
 Kranichf. correctly, against v. Lengerke, Hit- 
 zig, etc.). — Verse 33. And thou has praised 
 the gods of silver, and gold, etc., cf. v. 4. The 
 descriptive addition in this case, " which see 
 not, nor hear, nor know," is based on Deut. iv. 
 28; cf. P.sa. cxv. 5 et seq.; cxxxv. 15 et seq. — 
 And (rather " but ") the God in whose hand 
 
 * [" The perpetual incense of flattery, coupled with the 
 daily experience of being dependent on no one, and of hav- 
 ing every one dependent upon himself, tempts an ahsoliite 
 monarch to feel himself almost a god. — It is fully time for 
 the Almighty to hiu-1 such a hardened sinner down." — 
 Cmole-:.] 
 
 t [Keil argues that these words *' place it beyond a doubt 
 that BeUhazzar knew the<;e incidents in the life of Nebuchad- 
 nellar, and thus that he was his son, since his grandson 
 (daughter's son) could scarcely have been srtold that thef>'r- 
 getfulness of the Divine judgment could have been charged 
 tujainst him as a sin." Most readers, however, will regard 
 this as a strained argument, for surely Belshazzar had ample 
 means of knowing what his grandfather had set forth by a 
 roy il proclamation, and these events are here not merely al- 
 luded to as aggravating his sin. but rather by way of con- 
 a*asr. and possibly for an iuciteuient to aimilar repentance.) 
 
 thy breath is. Cf Job xii. 10 ; Num. xvi. 22. 
 On the following, " whose (or "with whom") 
 are all thy ways" ("'71*' ways = experiences, 
 Targ. Job viik 13). cf. Jer, x. 33.— Hast thOB 
 not glorified; a litotes for. '• hast thou di» 
 honored, disgraced." [" This is surely plai* 
 and faithful admonition ; and probably tha 
 king's conscience was smitten by it." — Stuart.} 
 
 — Verse 24. Then (or -'therefore") was 
 
 seat from him. 1"1S3, properly "then,'' 
 
 namely at the time when thou didst thne 
 exalt thyself against God. The post hoc in 
 this instance is really a propter fioc. — U^b'.r 
 does not, as, e.g., in Ezra vi. 13 (cf. the Heb. 
 Dan. xi. 43), designate the stretching forth of 
 the hand, as if God Himself were the writer ; 
 but rather indicates the emanation of the hand 
 from God in a general way. and therefore, so as 
 not to exclude the intervention of angels, but 
 rather to presume it. Hitzig remarks correctly : 
 " The hand that writes is that of an angel who 
 stood before God (chap. vii. 10), and received 
 the commission to write thi.s." 
 
 Verses 35-38. Tlie reading and interpretation 
 of -the Writing. Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin 
 = numbered, mimbered, ireighed. and-dividers. 
 The forms Hp^S, blTP, and also B^S, which in v. 
 38 takes the place of TP^S, are unmistakably 
 passive participles Peal, by which the surely- 
 impending future is expressed in the manner 
 of a Prceteritum propheticnm. but with greater 
 brevity and emphasis. The forcible laconic 
 utterance of a mysterious oracle sounds forth 
 from these disconnected consecutive passive 
 participles ; and this tendency and signification 
 appear also in the unusual and antique form of 
 the participles, of which only the first, S?.?, has 
 a somewhat regular formation (analogous to 
 "p, chap. iii. 36, or to ~~, for -"r'^", in the 
 later Chaldee), while the «-sound in bi?P and 
 275 is decidedly abnormal, and conflicts with 
 the ordinary usage. bp.~ appears to have been 
 selected as an equivocal mediating form between 
 b"'PP, the regular passive participle of ii'J.P, and 
 bp_n (from vvp^ >. to be light; " cf. v. 27); S*:'^ 
 was possibly chosen because of its assonance to 
 STK?2, vs. 3 and 33 ; and in like manner O'^S 
 
 — O^IS may contain an amphibole, by way of 
 an allusion to the name C~5 — hence a reference 
 to the world-power which was chiefly instrumen- 
 tal in the "division," i.e., the overthrow of the 
 Chaldajan empire. Kranichfeld rejects, but 
 without any reason, this assumption of a de- 
 signed two-fold sense of the terms, and espe- 
 cially of Tpy}, which is adopted by Hitzig and 
 others; although Hitzig is probably in error 
 when he assigns to ^T (upon the ^ound of Isa. 
 Iviii. 7, and in cormection with Ibn-Ezra and 
 Rashi) the meaning of the Heb. '~ or P"E> 
 "to break."* As v. 28 shows, the writer repre- 
 
 • [Keil regards ^*^D"'ID as " a noan-form, and plor. :< 
 
13'2 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 sents the destruction of the Chalda3an empire, 
 which is foretold in "^ {T^.'^), precisely as a 
 dirmon between the allied nations of the Per- 
 sians and the. Mides. although he might properly 
 have mentioned the Persians only, as effecting 
 the destruction of the kingdom. The substitu- 
 tion of the plural active partic. T~'.P for tlie 
 abnormal passive partic. 3"/Q in the written 
 oracle itself, which results in a change of con- 
 struction similar to that observed in vs. 20 and 
 21 (cf . also chap. ii. 7 ; iii. S) ; vi. 14, and the 
 remarks on P'j'?!<, chap. iii. 4), appears to have 
 been made for the sake of clearness. The un- 
 usual 0"? would have accorded more exactly 
 with the two preceding terms, but would scarcely 
 have been intelligible ; while the plur. Tp"!?^' 
 "and dividers." or, "and they divide," could 
 not be misunderstood. (Ewald's interpretation : 
 "and in pieces and in ruins," is without any 
 linguistic proof. ) However, the expressions ' ' to 
 number " or " count." and "to weigh " are found 
 elsewhere also, as figures to designate a final 
 judicial determination; cf. P.sa. Ivi. 9; ixii. 10; 
 Job xxxi. 4, 0. The repetition of t<';'0 as indi- 
 cating the character of the entire sentence, is 
 designed merely to add a solemn emphasis to 
 tTie words ; cf. the frequent nurii', a/iiiv Wiyu vu'iv 
 in the New Testament, and O.-T. passages like 
 Gen. xiv. 10; Dent. ii. 27; xiv. 23, etc. ; and, 
 generally, Ewald, Lehrh., % 313 a. — Verse 26. 
 God hath numbered thy kingdom. 'TIDlSia is 
 not "thy kingdom," but "thy kingnhip" the 
 duration of thy reign, the days of thy sover- 
 eignty. • The verb ".12 is written with ,t pro- 
 bably with design, in order to indicate the change 
 of the vowel as compared with S*.;'?. — And fin- 
 ished it. "'pbu."". literally, " has made it com- 
 plete," or "has fully numbered it;" i.e., has 
 i/iought it to the end of the time assigned to it. 
 •^f. :"^i"r.";, Isa xxxviii. 12. — Verse 27. Thou art 
 weighed in the balances, and art found want- 
 ing. "Thou." i.e., thy moral personality, thy 
 moral character and worth ; cf. Job xxxi. : 
 " Let me be weighed in an even balance, that 
 God may know mine integrity." — Thou "art 
 found wanting " seems to refer to the threaten- 
 ing ~iii5 "r. "for thou art vile" (or "too 
 light"), which the prophet Nahum (i. 14) hurls 
 at the Assyrian king ; and in so far may serve 
 to substantiate what has been observed above on 
 the two-fold sense of ipKl. ~"'s"7, properly 
 "wanting" (= "^^il), namely in moral worth or 
 capacity. — Verse 28. Thy kingdom is divided, 
 and given to the Medes and Persians. In re- 
 gard to the abnormal form ""^.S. which is fol- 
 
 0~3 = Hebr. O^B (cf. iriiS^E, Zcrh. xi. 16), in the 
 ■ense of broken pieces, fragments." He adds that S<-?3 '* is 
 
 twice fivfn perhaps only for the sake of the parallelism, so 
 AS to inaintiiin two members of the verse, each of two 
 word=."l 
 
 • [The author is led to this forced inten>retation by his 
 fttttmpL tr. iitentify Belshazzar with Evil-mcrodaeb. ur.d con- 
 lequeiitly to defer the capture of Babylon beyoail the night 
 andtr ooDfilderation.1 
 
 lowed by the regular fem. pass, part., rC"^'1& 
 see above, on v. 2.5. God is n.aturaUy conceived 
 of as the divider ; the related tribes of the 
 Medes and the Persians are named as the recipi- 
 ents, although the latter clearly appears as the 
 principal power. The oracle contains an ety- 
 mological allusion to ~~S only, and none to 
 ^~'^, an assonance to which might have been 
 readily found in the root t;);, "to measure' 
 (cf. --a, ~:?3, Ezra iv. 20; vi. 8; vii. 24). 
 The evident design with which the Persians, aa 
 the preponderating power in the Medo-Persian 
 kingdom (for only thus was it known to tha 
 author, as the comprehensive V^'^i^l indicates 
 cf. on chap. iL 39), are thus brought into prom 
 Inence, is not contradicted by chap. vi. 1. where 
 Daiius the Mede is mentioned as the first foreign 
 ruler over Babylon after the Chalda^an dynasty 
 was overthrown. The actual state of affairs 
 compelled the author to represent that at that 
 time Media stOl held the same rank as Persia, at 
 least formally and ofiicially, and at first ever 
 gave a dynasty and name to the whole empire ; 
 and this was done with sufficient clearness by 
 the mention of the Medes before the Persians in 
 this verse. * 
 
 Verses 29 and 30. Tlie mnseqvertces. Then 
 commanded Belshazzar, and they clothed 
 Daniel; rather, "and caused Daniel to be 
 clothed." The literal rendering is, " Then said 
 Belshazzar, and they clothed," etc. ; a similar 
 construction as in chap. ii. 49; iv. 17, 25. In 
 the Heb llli^sb^] (fut. "with "cav convers. — cf. 
 Neh. xUi. 9 ; 2 Chron. xxiv. 8 ; Jon. ii. 11), 
 rather than =ni;'^2b~T would have corresponded 
 to =l-3bn"l. The enrobing is therefore to be re- 
 garded as immediately succeeding the command, 
 and Hiivemick's opinion, that "the sudden 
 death of the king prevented the execution of 
 his design," is evidently wide of the narrator's 
 meaning The opinion that the prophet was in- 
 vested with the royal insignia of the purple and 
 the necklace on the same evening, involves no 
 questionable feature, which could lead us to re- 
 fer the execution of the king's command to the 
 following day (Dereser). or even to regard L~j 
 whole incident .as improbable (Hitzig, etc. ) ; but 
 rather, the immedinte bestowal of the promised 
 marks of favor and honor harmonizes fully with 
 the oriental despotic methods of admini-stering 
 government and justice, which under different 
 circumstances observed the most rapid modes 
 of executing punishment (see chap. iii. 0, 20 et 
 seq. ). The " public announcement" of the pro- 
 motion which had taken place (the verb '13 = 
 Sanscrit kriis, Ktmi-rciv, signifies to proclaim 
 piiblidy. as was shown on chap. iii. 4), in the 
 same night and in every street by means of 
 heralds, is however an unjustified demand which 
 the closing words of v. 29 by no means involve. 
 The solemnity in question may have been con- 
 fined to the range of the royal pa'.ace, and even 
 
 ♦ ["In the namins of the Median before the Per-sian then 
 lies a notable proof of the genuineness of this narrative; 
 for the hegemony of the Medes was of a very short duration, 
 ai:d after its overthrow by the Persians the form of expre* 
 .sion used is always ' Perfiian>s aitd iifclen.' as is found in tb» 
 book of Esther."' — A'cif.l 
 
CHAP. V. 1-30. 
 
 13? 
 
 to the banquet hall (which, acoordiDg to v. 1. 
 must be regarded as an extended building, and 
 as filled with an extraordinary multitude). — 
 Concerning the probable motive (namely, be- 
 cause his God and Lord was thus honored) \ 
 which induced Daniel, despite his former refusal, 
 to accept the expressions of the royal favor, see 
 on V. 17. In connection with this, the assump- 
 tion is still admissilile, that any protest which 
 the prophet may have offered, remained without 
 effect, in view of the stormj' haste of the king in 
 his alarm, and was lost an::d the acclamations 
 and the nois.v conversation of the excited throng. 
 Of. Jerome : " Accepit aut.em (Daniel) iiisigne re- 
 gium, torguem et purpuram, lit Darim, qui erat 
 suceessnrun in regnum, fleret notior et per noti- 
 tiam hiinoratior. Nee niirum, si Baltasar, 
 audiens tristia, solverit prwmium, quod jtoUicitiis 
 est. Aut enim longo post tempore credidit Ven- 
 tura, quce dixerat, aut dum Dei Proplietnm 
 Imiwrat, sperat se veniam co/iseeuturum." — Verse 
 SO. In that night was Belshazzar, the king 
 of the Chaldaeans, slain — evidently through a 
 conspiracy of a number of his magnates, which 
 may have existed previously, but svhich did not 
 attempt the execution of its design, untU the 
 interpretation of the mysterious writing by 
 Daniel gave the conspirators courage. Only 
 this opinion seems to be justified by the lan- 
 guage of this passage and by the context,* to 
 the exclusion of the more general view, by 
 which the king was slain at the hands of the 
 victorious Medo-Persians, who are supposed to 
 have taken the city on that night, and by which 
 Belshazzar is in consequence identified with 
 Nabonidus, the last Chald;ean king — ah of which 
 ie based on a combination of Isa. xvi. ; xxi. 5 ; 
 Jer. li. 39; and of Xenophon, Cyrifp. vii. 5, 15 
 et seq.; Herodotus, I. 190, etc., with this nar- 
 rative. The latter view has recently been de- 
 fended, especially by Hengsteuberg (p. 325 et 
 seq.), Keil (Einl., p. 417), Havernick, etc., and 
 also by nearly all the rationalistic expositors and 
 critics (also by Stiihelin, Sinl. ins A. ?'., p. 350 
 et seq. ), and is certainlv supported by the open- 
 ing verse of chap. vL , m case it be immediately 
 connected with the one before us, as is done by 
 the writers named. It is however more than 
 questionable whether this arrangement corre- 
 sponds to the conception and design of the 
 author; for (1) the words, "And Darius the 
 Median took the kingdom," together with the 
 subjoined reference to his age, " being about 
 threescore and two years old," seems intended 
 to introduce the narrative concerning Darius and 
 his relations to the Babylonian dynasty, much 
 rather than to close that relating to Belshazzar. 
 (2) Berosus and Abydenus relate nothing of a 
 taki:«g of Babylon while a luxurious banquet, 
 held by the last Chaldaean king and his mag- 
 nates, was in progress, as the tradition of Xeno- 
 phoL and Herodotus asserts (cf. Introd. § 8, 
 note 3, and especially the extracts from Kranich- 
 feld on this question there adduced). (3) Bero- 
 Bus, in Josephus, Ant. x. 11, 1, does not, indeed, 
 Btato that Nabonidus, the last Babylonian king. 
 
 *[The requirements of the lungiiage are obviously met 
 quite as well by the presumption that the king fell that 
 Bame night together with his emjiire, and s(» the author c.an- 
 ?idly admits a little further ou. although himself liriveu to 
 •.lother -lew by tils preconceived theory of the identity of 
 Belliaa££iir with £viI-merodach,l 
 
 became the victim of a conspiracy, but he does 
 ascribe that fate to Evil-merodach, the immediata 
 successor of his father Xebuchaduezzar (cf. vs. 
 11, 13, 18, 22). The conspiracy in the case of 
 the latter was headed by Xeriglissar, the brother- 
 in-law of the king, and removed the latter under 
 circumstances entirely similar to those under 
 which Belshazzar is said by our passage to hare 
 been slain, by murderers whose names are not 
 given. The identity of the latter with Evil- 
 merodach thtis becomes highly probable (cf. 
 Introd. 1. c). (4) Finally, the prophecy of the 
 mysterious writing in v. 25, which transfers the 
 Chaldaean empire to the hands of the Medes and 
 Persians, does not oppose, but it rather furors, 
 the mode of division we advocate, on which an 
 entirely new section begins with chap. vi. 1. For 
 precisely as in chap. ii. 38, 39, Nebuchadnezzar, 
 the head of gold, appears flr.st as an individual, 
 and then as identified with his dynasty and aa 
 the representative of the Babylonian world-king- 
 dom, so Belshazzar appears first under the con- 
 ception of a single person — in the words, 
 "numbered, numbered, weighed" — but after- 
 ward as identified with his kingdom, in th" 
 closing prediction expressed by 0~S or VP^.B 
 The interval of perhaps 22-2-1 years which thns 
 falls between his own destruction and that of 
 his kingdom, will, in view of the recognized per- 
 spective character of all nrophecy, appear no 
 more questionable than the stiU greater number 
 of years which, according to that earlier predic- 
 tion, were to elapse betsveen the death of 
 Nebuchadnezzar and the ruin of his dynasty. 
 Similar groupings of immediate with more dis- 
 tant events are frequent in the O.-T. prophecies ; 
 a particularly noteworthy and instructive instance 
 of which fact may be found in the remarkable 
 prophecy to the wife of Jeroboam by Ahijah of 
 Shiloh in 1 Kings xiv. , that comprehends three 
 distinct events, between which extended inter- 
 vals intervene : (1 ) The death of the sick prince, 
 Abijah"(vs. 12, 13) ; (2) the overthrow of Jero- 
 boam's dynasty, more than 28 years later (vs. 
 10, 14 ; cf. 1 kings xv. 29 et seq.) ; (3) the ruin 
 of the kingdom of Israel, which did not transpire 
 until two centuries afterward (v. 1 5 et seq. ; cf . 
 2 Kings xvii. ). The fundamental law of all 
 Messianic typology, by which later events are 
 grouped organically with earlier ones, and by 
 which one and the same guilty act conditions a 
 succession of Divine judgments in the course of 
 developments, underlies this collocation in the 
 perspective vision of a single prophecy. " The 
 cause of the sad end of the kingdom of the ten 
 tribes existed already in the beginning made and 
 cultivated by Jeroboam, two and a half centuries 
 before ; the fate that extinguishes the house 
 of Jeroboam is at bottom the same which de- 
 stroys the kingdom of the ten tribes. Jero- 
 boam's sin destroys his dynasty and his king- 
 dom ; for this reason the destruction of both is 
 comprehended in the same prophecy, and not 
 merely because the destruction of the dynasty 
 coincides with that of the kingdom" (Kianich- 
 feld ; cf. also Biihr, on 1 Kings chap, xiv p. 148 
 
 * (The weakness of these arguments is obvious, and in- 
 deed seems to have been apparent to the writer hiiiiHeif. TiM 
 eoUatA.'ral considerations which he adduces i-elow are tor 
 vague to support a tlieory so plainly at vuriance with tlu 
 tenor of the text and its comii*ctiuDa.] 
 
i:ii 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 of vol. 7 of ibe Bibelicerk). Substantially the 
 same principles apply to the predictions of evil 
 lenounoed by our prophet against Nebuchad- 
 lezzar and his kingdom, and against Belshazzar 
 md his kingdom. The connection of widely 
 .eparate everts which they embody, is natural 
 md orgauically necessary ; and therefore the re- 
 erence to tin> events of fulfilment, although 
 i eparate in point of time, upon which we insist, 
 Lnvolves no arbitrary features. — The assertion 
 of Keil (Eiid. 1. c. ) that if the two events were 
 cot coincident, the author would have been re- 
 quired to -state, in chap. vi. 1, how the second 
 fact in the fulfilment stands related to the first, 
 or, in other words, "when and how the tr.ins- 
 mission of the kingdom to the Medes and Per- 
 sians came to pass," is entirely uncalled for, and 
 is opposed by the analogy of Ahijah's oracle, 
 whose final and complete realization by the 
 overthrow of Israel, is likewise not exj)r(:ssly 
 noticed ; and in addition the inere mention of 
 the taking of Babylon by Darius is a sufficient 
 indication of the anti-typical relation of that 
 event to chap. v. 25-38. The annexed reference 
 to the age of Darius seems rather to indicate a 
 reference to a period considerably later, than a 
 design to designate the particular night in which 
 Belshazzar was slain as falling in the sixty- 
 second year of Darius. There was certainly no 
 apparent motive for the .author to make a chron- 
 ological statement of this sort. — In relation to 
 the peculiar opinion of Ebrard (Die Offenhdrung 
 Johitnnii ei-kUirt, p. 53 et seq. ), that chap. v. 80 
 together with chap. vi. 1, refers to the overthrow 
 of Laborasoarchad, the grandson and third suc- 
 ce.ssor of Nebuchadnezzar, by Nabonidus (= 
 Darius the Jlede), see on chap. vi. 1 et seq. (cf. 
 supra Introd. § 8, notes 3 and 4). 
 
 Ethico-fundamental principles related 
 to the history of salvation, apolo- 
 
 GETICAL remarks, and HOMILETICAL SUG- 
 GESTIONS. 
 
 } . The principal object in an apologetic point 
 of view wQl have been realized in this section, 
 whenever the identity of Belshazzar with Evil- 
 merodach is established, and when, in conse- 
 quence, the repeated designation of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar as his father (vs. 11, 13, 18, 23), the cor- 
 respondence of the mode of his sudden and vio- 
 lent death (v. 30) with that attested by Berosus 
 with regard to Evil-merodach, and the accession 
 of Darius the Mede to the throne of Babylon at 
 a period considerably later, shall have been 
 properly substantiated. After what has been 
 observed upon this question on v. 30, and also 
 in the Introd. (§ 8, note 3), it only remains to 
 examine the question, " In how far does the 
 naiTative yield to the tendency-critical attempts 
 to represent it as a romantic fiction of the Mac- 
 cabiean age ? "—According to Bleek (Einl. § 
 2')(i), V. Lengerke (Dnnid, p. 241 et seq., p. 
 250) and others, the story was inspired by the 
 plundering of the temple .at Jerusalem by Anti- 
 ochus Epiphanes in the year B. C. ll>8, and 
 above a year before the MaccabaJan revolt. The 
 Virutal manner in which the Syrian king at that 
 <ime penetrated into the temple of Jehovah, 
 »nd seized, with polluted hands, the golden 
 
 lavers and other sacred vessels (1 Mace. i. 21 el 
 seq.; 2 Maco. v. 15 et seq.). is said to have led 
 the pseudo-Daniel to compose this history, and 
 " by the fate of Belshazzar to warn the Syrian 
 monarch, that a similar Divine judgment would 
 be visited on him, because of his sacrilege." 
 But the narrative concerning the Seleucidse and 
 the Maccabees makes no mention of a luxurious 
 banquet, such as a sacrificial feast, at which 
 anything transpired that would at all compare 
 with the profanation of the sacred vessels, as 
 described in this chapter ; and the only remain- 
 ing parallel between the passages cited from 1st 
 and 2d Maccabees, and Dan. i. 2 (cf. v. 2), is 
 surely insufficient to justify the adoption of the 
 charge that the history was invented to further 
 a tendency ! Any other embellishment of the 
 sacrilege that took place at that time would 
 certainly have been more appropriate than the 
 one here offered, which does not charge the in- 
 solent spoiler of the temple with venting his 
 frivolous pride on the stolen relics, but reserves 
 this for his son aiid successor! The tendency- 
 narrator might well be charged with clumsiness, 
 if he had represented his Epiphanes-Belshazzar 
 as not merely easy to be excited and capable 
 of contrition and repentance while influenced 
 by terror, but also as promising and conferring 
 the highest dignities and honors of his kingdom 
 upon a zealous theocrat and prophet of Jehovah. 
 The circumstance that such a theocrat is per- 
 mitted to accept such honors and rewards (v. 
 29) nnthout further question, is likewise in 
 strange contrast with the rigid monotheism and 
 anti- Hellenistic fanaticism of the Judaism of 
 Maccaba;an times, as whose representative the 
 author is said to have written, and for which 
 his work is alleged to have been designed (cf. 
 1 Mace. i. 24 ; Dan. xi. 28). — In no wise superior 
 to this theory of the date of the history, as ad- 
 vocated by Bleek and v. Lengerke, is the asser- 
 tion of Hitzig, that although this section was 
 not composed before the revolt of the Asmo- 
 najans, it yet originated in the first year aftcj 
 that rising took place, immediately after and in 
 consequence of the magnificent feasts which 
 Antiochus Epiphanes held in B. C. 166 near 
 Daphne, when, besides splendid games and lux- 
 urious banquets, there was a solemn procession 
 in the presence of many ladies of the highest, 
 as well as of lower rank, in which " the images 
 of all conceivable gods were carried, together 
 with an incredible number of golden and silver 
 vessels." If the report by Polybius (1. 31, cp, 
 3, 4) respecting those festivities be carefully ex- 
 amined, it will reveal a most marked discrepancy 
 between the historical original and the supposed 
 copy, which was framed after it \>y the alleged 
 pseudo-Daniel. Polybius does not mention the 
 sacrilegious use during those feasts of sacred 
 vessels belonging to the temple with a single 
 syllable. He states indeed that the expense 
 connected with those festivities was chiefly met 
 out of the treasures stolen from various temples 
 — but from Kijyptian temples, which the pseudo- 
 Daniel would assuredly have placed in the cate- 
 gory of the vain "gods of gold, silver, brass, 
 iron, wood, and stone" (vs. 4, 23), and whose 
 desecration he would have been more ready to 
 applaud than to censure. But beyond all this, 
 Polybius reveals no trace of a knowledge that 
 the wild festivities were interrupted by a terrify 
 
CHAP. V. 1-30. 
 
 135 
 
 ing incident, which compelled the proud Syrian 
 king to recognize the judicial interference of 
 Buperior Divine power ; nor of any inclination 
 on the part of that prince to honor and promote 
 the prophet who opposed him with earnest cen- 
 sure, despite his boldness ; nor yet of a course 
 on the part of the heroic Jewish defender of his 
 faith towards the heathen ruler, which, al- 
 though not slavishly subservient, was yet cour- 
 teous, and mindful of the obedience due from a 
 subject to his superior. But if such a meeting 
 between a Je^vish zealot and the proud Anti- 
 ochus, who was fanatically devoted to his Hel- 
 lenistic faith in the gods, had transpired during 
 a public feast in the Maccabfean age, a materi- 
 ally different kind of incidents might have been 
 looked for, from that described in this chapter. 
 Both the i'-cpji(favia and (ppovoKTovta of the blood- 
 thirsty tyrant, and the defiance inspired by 
 faith, prepared for conflict, and careless of 
 death, which was characteristic of the martyr of 
 the theocracy who was engaged in an open re- 
 volt against the despot, would have been brought 
 into collision in a manner entirely different from 
 anything found in the report of Polybius — 
 which contains no mention whatever of such an 
 .nterruption during the feasts of Daphne — and 
 also from the description found in our alleged 
 tendency-forgerj'. The latter, if it were really 
 the work of a pseudological apocalyptist of the 
 Alaccabsan times, would, without any doubt 
 ivhatever, have presented to our notice persons 
 of the stamp of Matthias (1 Mace. ii. 2, 18 et 
 seq. ), Judas and Simon Maccabeus (ibid, chap, 
 iii. 1 et seq. ), and Eleazar |2 Mace, vi.) as op- 
 ponents of the raging heathen, instead of a man 
 like Daniel. A narrative of the kind before us, 
 as respects its contents and progress, would be 
 wholly inconceivable as a product of the ortho- 
 dox Palestinian Judaism of the year B. C. ICG, 
 and would rank as an unequalled historical 
 monstrosity. 
 
 2. Accordingly, if confidence may be placed 
 in the pre-Maccabajan, and, what amounts to 
 the same thing, in the Babylonian origin of the 
 history during the captivity, it will be possible 
 for that very reason to examine the miracle of 
 the mysteriously introduced hand which traced 
 the writing, as here recoi:ied, without being re- 
 strained by sceptical considerations. It will not 
 be necessary to inquire in this connection, hoio 
 such a thing could take place, but merely, 
 w/iet/ter and why ^uch an event was itecensai'y. — 
 The necessity for a miraculous announcement 
 to Belshazzar of the impending judgment was 
 co: ^tioned by the fact that hLs impious conduct 
 had reached an intolerable height when he de- 
 secrated the sacred vessels of Jehovah's temple 
 to a common use, and exposed them to the 
 ridicule of a besotted heathen mob, and also 
 that it threatened danger to the faith in Jeho- 
 vah of the community of exiles. If such an 
 act of presumption was permitted to pass with- 
 out being Divinely censured and punished, it 
 might certainly be expected that not only the 
 last spark of reverence for the mighty God of 
 the Jews would fade from the consciousness of 
 the royal officials and the Babylonian population, 
 but that the faithful adherence of the Jewish 
 captives to their confession would gradually 
 lose its firmness, and give way to a tendency to 
 favor the idolatrous worship of the Babylonians, 
 
 and to adopt their luxurious, dissipated, and 
 immoral mode of life. Dangers such as these 
 are described, in a realizing manner, in the 
 second part of Isaiah (see xlvi. et seq.; Ivii. 5 
 et seq.; Ixv. 3 et seq.; Iviii. 2 et seq.; lix. 3 
 et seq. Cf. supra, Introd. g 1, note 1); and 
 it appears from the penitential prayer of 
 our prophet in chap. ix. , that they existed 
 for his people, and threatened the continu- 
 ance of the theocracy and its Messianic faith, 
 while in the land of exile. With regard to them 
 it became imperatively necessary that a stem 
 example should be made of the presumptuous 
 king, while giving utterance to his witticisms 
 and blasphemies, and while surrounded by the 
 sycophants of his court and the women of his 
 harem, that thus the name of the only true God 
 might be brought powerfully to the recollection 
 of all, and that an emphatic testimc«i3', coupled 
 with an immediate execution of the threat, 
 might be borne against the impious conduct ot 
 the idolaters. Such a testimony, however, 
 could only possess sufficient weight if it were 
 demonstrated to be absolutely miraculous, ad- 
 mitting of no natural explanation {i.e., for the 
 purpose of destroying its supernatural force), 
 and transpiring under the observation of all who 
 were present. For this reason all the various 
 attempts to limit the incomprehensible character 
 of the incident, that have been made by modem 
 expositors since M. Geier, are to be rejected, 
 without exception; e.g., the assumption of 
 Geier, which decidedly conflicts with v. 8, that 
 the writing was visible to the king .and Daniel, 
 but to no others (similarly Calvin remarks that 
 the Chaldteans were all smitten with blindness— 
 " itd acteaitos fuiixe, nt tidendo non HdcviiU") , 
 the coarsely naturalistic attempt at explanation 
 made by Bertholdt, that the hostile party of the 
 king's courtiers, who were in league with the 
 Medo-Persian besiegers of the city, produced 
 the writing in a purely natural manner, but gave 
 a mysterious appearance to the transaction, in 
 order "to gratify their malice and over-confi- 
 dence, by announcing his last hour to the victim 
 of their treason ; " and finally, the psychological- 
 visionary mode of interpretation, advocated in 
 the last century by Liiderwald, and more re- 
 cently by Kranichfeld — the latter by means of 
 an attempt to transfer the miraculous feature to 
 the imagination of the king (cf. his observation 
 on V. 8, p. 221 : "How and when during the 
 hilarious banquet the writing itself was traced 
 on the wall, was of no importance to the author, 
 as the wonderful feature was alone significant 
 for his purpose, that the king should obseiye, at 
 the moment of the blasphemous act by which he 
 ridiculed the God of Israel, the hand which 
 wrote the sentence that changed the confident 
 humor of the idolater into anxious fear "). In 
 opposition to these naturalizing interpretations, 
 and especially to the one last mentioned, see the 
 remarks on v. 5, and compare Buddeus, Iluit. 
 ecci. V. Tent., II p. 508: " Verum qnis non videt, 
 hec omnia ad mernit conjecturn^ redire, qticB 
 eadem rejiciunUir fiiHlitate. qvti afferuntur. Sa- 
 tiim itoqiiefiierit, in ii.t my/iiii'.icd'e. g>i(e Daniel 
 ipse de haa re tnididtrit, scripturam srii. ita com- 
 parntam fuisse, ut sapientes et magi, etn earn vide- 
 rent (v. 8), non tnmen legere, midto minus inter- 
 pretari putverint ; Danielem autem earn ita a 
 legere et interpretari potuiase, ut rex ipse itatin 
 
lae 
 
 THE i-ROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 contitceretur, leclumem iettim atque interpreta- 
 tioneirt Tcram esse." Also cf. Pfeiffer, Dubia rel- 
 ate, p. 503 SB., and Starke, Synops. on the pass- 
 age. 
 
 3. In accordance with this, the homiletical 
 treatment of the section is chiefly concerned 
 with the miracle of the writing and its mys- 
 terious origin and contents, as the central point 
 of the narrative, and also of its theological and 
 ethical importance. As in the preceding chap- 
 ter the object of the narrative was to show tliat 
 " pride goeth before destruction," so the aim 
 here is to illustrate the ' ' judgments that are 
 prepared for scorners " (Prov. xix. 29), the 
 "snare" into which "they bring the whole 
 city" (Prov. xxix. 8), the " non-iinmunity from 
 punishment of the blasphemers of the Divine 
 Wisdom " (Wisd. i. 6). Cf. Psa. i. I ; Jer. xv. 
 1 7 ; Prov. xiii. 1 ; xiv. 6 ; xxiv. 9 ; also Ec- 
 ^us. xxvii. 28 : " Mockery and reproach are 
 ■ I'rom the proud ; but vengeance as a lion shall 
 lie in wait for them ; " Psa. Ixxil 4 : " He shall 
 break in pieces the oppressor " (or blasphemer) ; 
 1 Cor. V. 10 . "Nor revUers . . . shall inherit 
 the kingdom of God,"— and other oracles di- 
 rected against the re%-iling and blasjftieming of 
 the Holy One, which may afford a theme for a 
 homiletical treatment of the section as a whole. 
 Starke is therefore correct in designating as the 
 leading features of the narrative " Belshazzar's 
 transgression and his puEishment." Cf. Geior's 
 arrangement of subjects in this chapter : " (1) 
 Regiuia flayilium (v. 1-4) ; (2) subseqxiens por- 
 tentiim (v. 5, 6); (i) porientiinterpretamentnm, 
 partim vt pi-ofariis impossibile (v. 7-6), partim 
 ut Dnnieli expeditum ac facile (v. 10-28) ; (4) 
 inteipretamenti complementum (v. 29, 30)." — 
 With reference to the relation of the fundamen- 
 tal idea in this narrative to that of the preced- 
 ing section, cf. Melaucthon : " Supra pruposuit 
 legem ngentempixnitentiam et propaganteni veros 
 euitus, quern Deus etiam ornavit prcemiis. Nunc 
 
 addit contrarium exemphim regis impii, reMitu- 
 entis idolatriam., non agcntis panitetUiam. quern 
 I)eus pnnit et regno exuit . . . Ha* hhisphemi<i» 
 enim dto seg^iuntur parice, juxta secundum prce- 
 ceplum: ^Non habebit Deus insontem,' etc. (Ex. 
 XX. 7)." 
 
 Upon separate points the following passages 
 may be used, as furnishing suitable matter for 
 homiletical discussion . 
 
 Verses 2-4. Luxurious banquets and carousals 
 are dangerous precipices, even for the pious and 
 unsuspecting (cf. Jude v. 12); at them Satan 
 himself is the host and master (Cramer, in 
 Starke, under reference to 1 Cor. x. 20), and 
 there religion, the fear of God, brotherly love, 
 uprightness, morality — and, in short, everything 
 is forgotten (Starke). 
 
 Verse 17. Daniel's disinterestedness and mod- 
 esty. On these Jerome observes : •^^mulemm 
 Danielem, regis dignitatem et mvnera contem- 
 nentem, qui absque pretio proferens veritatem 
 
 \ jam iUo tempore praceptum evaxgdicum sequubi 
 tur : 'Gratis accepistis. gratis date' (Matt. i. 
 
 I 8). Alioquin et tristia nuntiantem itidecens erat 
 
 ! Ubenter dona accipere." 
 
 I Verses 2.5-28. The oracle against Belshazzar, 
 whose spirit is : "If thou wUt neglect to num- 
 ber thy days, to ii>eig/i thyself in the balance of 
 
 I divine righteousness (Job xxxi. (>), and to meas- 
 ure thyself by the rule of the Divine law, thou 
 shalt be weighed by God in the scale of Hia 
 judgment, and — be found wanting." Cf. the fig- 
 ure of farming grain. Am. ix. 9; Isa. xxx. 24; 
 Jer. XV. 7; Matt. iii. 12; Luke xxii. 31, etc. ; 
 and also Joachim Lange : ' ' Outside of Christ 
 we are always wanting in the scales of God, and 
 are lighter than nothing," Psa Ixii. 10, and 
 Starke: "The duration of everj' kingdom ia 
 pre-determined by God ; without the permission 
 of God, no monarch is able to extend or limit 
 it," etc. 
 
 6. The deliverance of Daniel from the lion's den. 
 
 Chap. VL 1-29." [English Bible, v. 31-vi 28.] 
 
 SI Darius the Median took [received] the kingdom, being about three score and 
 two years old [as a son of si.xty and two yearsj. 
 
 1 It pleased [seemed good before] Darius to set over the kingdom a hundred 
 and twenty princes [satraps], which should be over the whole [in all the] king- 
 
 2 d'om ; and over '' these [them], three presidents, of whom Daniel ivas first 
 [one] ; that the [these] princes might give accounts [the reason] unto them, 
 and the king should have no damage [not be damaged]. 
 
 3 Then this Daniel was preferred^ [made eminent] above the presidents and 
 princes, because an excellent spirit teas in him ; and the king thought to set 
 
 4 him over the whole realm [all the kingdom]. Then the presidents and princes 
 sought [were seeking] to find occasion against [cause as to] Daniel concerning 
 [from the side of] the kingdom ; but [and] they could find none occasion nor 
 fault [corrupt thine/] ; ibrasmueh as he was faithful, neither was there any erro 
 [wrong] or fault [corrupt thii)ff'\ found in him. 
 
 5 Then said these men, [That] We shall not find any occasion against [cause at 
 to] this Daniel, except we find it against him concerning [in] the law of his God. 
 
 6 Then these presidents and princes assembled [crowded] together to [upon] the 
 1 king, and said thus unto him, King Darius, live for ever. All the presidents ot 
 
CHAP. VI. 1-29. 1S7 
 
 the kincrdom, the governors, and the princes, the counsellors, and the captains 
 [pashas], have consulted together to establish a royal [or, for the king to establish 
 a] statute [an established act of the king], and to make a firm decree [confirm an in- 
 terdict], that whosoever [any one that] shall ask a petition of [an asking li'oni] 
 any god or man for [till] thirty days, save of [except from] thee, O king, he 
 
 8 shall be east into the den of [the] lions. Xow, O king, [mayest thou] estab- 
 lish the decree [interdict], and sign the writing, that it be not changed [change 
 not], acco)-ding to [like] the law of the Medes [Media] and Persians [Persia], 
 
 9 which alteroth not [will not pass away]. Wiierefore [Therefore the] king 
 Darius signed the writing and the decree [^interdict]. 
 
 10 Now when Daniel [And Daniel, as «oora as he] knew that the writing wot 
 signed, he went into his house ; and, his [its] windows bein(/ [were] open in his 
 [its upper] chamber toward [in front of] Jerusalem, [and] be ' kneeled upon his 
 knees three times a day [in the day], and prayed [was praying], and gave 
 thanks [thanking] before his God, as he did aforetime [because he was doing 
 
 11 so from before that timej. Then these men assembled [crowded in], and found 
 Daniel praying faskingj and making supplication before his God. 
 
 12 Then they came near, and spake before the king concerning [upon] the king's 
 decree [interdict] ; Hast thou not signed a decree [an interdict], that every 
 [any] man that shall ask a petition- of [from] any god or man within [till] thirty 
 days, save of [except from] thee, O king, shall be cast into the den of [the] 
 lions ? The king answered and said. The thing is true [word is firm] accord- 
 ing to [like] the law of the Medes [Media] and Persians [Persia], which altereth 
 
 13 not [will not pass away]. Then answered they, and said before the king. 
 That ' Daniel, which is of [from] the captivity of the children of Judah, regard- 
 eth not [has not put attention upon] thee, O king, nor [and] the decree [inter- 
 dict] that thou hast signed, but [and] maketh his petition [is asking his asking] 
 
 14 three times a day [in the day]. Then the king, when he heard these worrls 
 [this word (thing)], loas sore displeased with [it greatly offended upon] him- 
 self, and [he] set his heart on Daniel to deliver him ; and he laboured [was 
 exerting himself] till the going down of the sun to deliver [rescue] him. 
 
 ■"5 Then these men assembled [crowded] unto [upon] the king, and said unto the 
 king, Know, O kintr, that the law of the Medes and Persians is [it is a law to 
 Media and Persia], that no decree nor statute [interdict and established act] 
 
 16 which the king cstablisheth [shall establish] may be changed [change]. Then 
 the king commanded [said], and they brought Daniel, and cASt him into the den 
 of [the] lions. ^Vow the king spake and said unto Daniel, Thy God, whom 
 thou' servest continually [art serving in continuity], he' will [may he] deliver 
 
 17 thee. And a stone was brought, and laid upon the mouth a' the den; and the 
 king sealed it udth his oicn signet, and with the signet oi his lords, that the 
 purpose [(will) matter] might not be changed [change] conct ning [in respect to] 
 Daniel. 
 
 15 Then the king went to his palace, and passed [lodged] the nitjht fasting : 
 neither were instruments of music brought [and concubines le did not bring] 
 
 19 before him, and his sleep went from [fled upon] him. Then tie king arose very 
 early in tiie morning [in the dawn would rise in the earli/ light], and went in 
 
 20 haste unto the den of [the] lions. And when he came [near] to the den, he 
 cried with a lamentable [pained] voice unto Daniel: and the king spake and 
 said to Daniel, O Daniel, servant of the living God, is thy God, whom thou' 
 servest continually [«rt serving in continuity], able ' to deliver thee from the 
 
 21 lions? Then said [talked] Daniel unto [with] the king, O king, live for ever. 
 
 22 Mj' God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the lions' mouths, that [and] they 
 have not hurt me : forasmuch as before him innocency was found in [to] me; 
 and also before thee, O king, have I done no hurt. 
 
 23 Then was the king exceeding glad [it gre.itly rejoiced] for him [upon him- 
 self], and commanded [said] that they should take Daniel up out of the den. 
 So fAnd] Daniel was taken up out of the den, and no manner of hart was 
 found ui.on [in] him, because he Ijelieved in his God. 
 
 14 And the king commanded [said], and they brought those men which [who] had 
 
1.3<? 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 accused * Daniel, and they cast them, into the den of [the] lions, them, their chil 
 dren, and their wives ; and the lions had the mastery of" them, and brake all then 
 bones in jneces or ever [ere] they came at the bottom of the den.' 
 
 25 Then [the] king Darius wrote unto all people, nations, and languages, ' that 
 
 26 dwell in all tiie earth ; Peace be multiplied unto you. " 1 make '° a decree, That 
 in every dominion of my kingdom men tremble and fear '' before the God of 
 Daniel ; for lie is the living God, and steadfast for ever, and his kingdom tluU 
 
 27 which shall not be destroj'ed, and his dominion shall be even unto the end. Hi 
 delivereth [delivering] and rescueth [rescuing], and he worketh [working] signs 
 and wonders in heaven [the heavens] and in [the] earth, who hath delivered 
 Daniel from the power of the lions. 
 
 28 So [And] this Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, and in the reign of Cyrus 
 the Persian. 
 
 GRAMMATICAL NOTES. 
 
 {* As Chap, vi. in the original begins with verse 31 of the A. V., there is a difference of one in numbering the verses 
 of this section. — ^ The form fi^i)T» followed by "^^ seems like a nonn in the emphatic state, and may not inaptly be 
 
 rendered, "(75 the chief above.'^ — ^ -jhe pronoun, being expressed, is emphatic,—* H here = ort expletive, — ' The order 
 of words is emphatic : Thy God . . , . hat He been able. — ^ Literally, that ate his pteceti of, i. e., backbit, as in ch.ip, 
 iii. 8, — ' The order and style of the original are very emphatic : aiid they did not reach to the earth of the den till thtit 
 (before) the lions railed over t/iem, etc.. — " The terms in the original are the same as in chap, iii. 4. the nations, the peoples, 
 and the tongues. — ^ Literally, J/ai/ 2/o«r peace be great, — ^'^ From me is made. — " They sftall be trembling and fearing 
 from.\ 
 
 EXEGKTICAL REMARKS. 
 
 Verse 1 [v, 31]. Transitional introductory oh- 
 sercation.s. And Darius the Median took the 
 kingdom, etc. The copula before -1"^1~ serves, 
 indeed, to connect the present section closely 
 with the preceding one, and indicates that its 
 sulDJect is more intimately related to the fore- 
 going, than is the case in chapters iii, , iv, , and 
 V. , ivhich begin \vithout any copulative particle 
 whatever. The "1 however, does not compel 
 the assumption that chapters v. and vi. were 
 properly a unit in their plan and the time of 
 their compo-sition (Hitzig, Kranichfeld; ; for (1) 
 chap, ii,, although forming a decidedly inde- 
 pendent whole, likewise begins with the copula, 
 as do also numerous sections in the historical 
 and prophetical portions of the Old Testament, 
 whose subjects are independent of what pre- 
 cedes them, (2) Kranichfeld's opinion (p, 210) 
 that chap, v. ought to conclude with a "theo- 
 cratic panegyrical closing sentence " similar to 
 chap, vi. 27, 28, if it were to rank as an inde- 
 pendent and complete section in itself, is appa- 
 rently confirmed, indeed, by the closing verses 
 of chaps, ii,, iii., and iv., but is decidedly op- 
 posed by chap, i, , which has no such doxology 
 at the close, (3; Chapters v, and vi. are dis- 
 tinguished from each other by several unmis- 
 takable differences in the mode of expression 
 and representation, which indicate the composi- 
 tion of these sections at diflferent times. Notice 
 especially the character of the descriptions in 
 chap, v,, which are more circumstantial and 
 full of repetitions than those in chap vi, (cf, vs. 
 2, i. 4 with V, 23 ; v, 7 with v, 12 ; v. 12 with 
 v. 10 ; v, l(i with vs, 7 and 29, etc,), (4) The 
 transactions recorded in the two sections are 
 separated by an interval of at least twenty-two 
 years icf, supra, on bhap. v, 30) since the 
 events of chap, v, transpire! under the fourth 
 reign before the close of the Chaldasan dynasty, 
 
 while chap. vi. falls in the reign of Darius the 
 Mede, — which covered about two years and a 
 half — and probably not in its opening period 
 (see vs. 15, 17) ; and chap. v. creates the im- 
 pression that it was composed immediately after 
 the events which it records transpired, and that, 
 like all the narratives in the historical part of 
 the book, it originated while they were still 
 fresh in the recollection of the writer (cf. In- 
 trod., § 4, note 2). The connection of the two 
 sections by means of a copulative "j^ despite the 
 diflference in the time of their composition, ia 
 probably owing to the circumstance that at the 
 close of chap v. only the beginning of the ful- 
 filment of the oracle addressed to Belshazzar 
 had been noticed, whUe the principal fact, 
 which concludes the fulfilment, ia reserved for 
 the narrative in the present section ; cf. on 
 chap. V. 30. — For the view that ■'Darius the 
 Mede " can only designate Cyaxares, the son of 
 Astyages and father-in-law of Cyrus, see In- 
 trod , § 8, note 4, Perhaps the Sept, also re- 
 ferred to this Cyaxares, when it translated thia 
 passage Kui 'A/^ra^f/yfp/f 6 ruv Mt}{^uiv Trapi/a^iev 
 rifv jiu(n?.£inv Kai tlapelo^ 77'Ai/pr/(^ ruv i/iiepijv Kal 
 Ivin^or er y'lpif, hy ' ApraifpiTiq they may have 
 intended Astyages, the father of Darius Medus, 
 and by the predicate '^'iipiK ^'■>., which they 
 applied to Darius, they may have attempted to 
 repeat the l"'"!?' "r? of the second half of the 
 verse (cf. Michaelis, Oriental. Bibl, iv. 20). 
 Despite the marked ignorance of history which 
 the Alexandrians occasionally reveal, they can 
 hardly be presumed to have been guilty of the 
 gross anachronism of confounding the Median 
 Darius with Darius Nothus, the son of Artax- 
 erxes I. Longimanus (against Hiivernick).-- 
 Ebrard (Die Offenbarung Joluinnis [in Olshau 
 sen's Bibl. Kommcntar], p, 5.5 et seq, . and in a 
 review of Fuller's Prophet Daniel in the G ■ ters 
 lohe AUg. literar. Anzeiger, October, 1868, p 
 267), attempts, in harmony with his assumption 
 
CHAP. VI. 1-39. 
 
 13t 
 
 that Belshazzar was identical with Laborasoar- 
 chad. to identify Darius the Mede with Naboni- 
 du8, whom the conspirators who slew Labora- 
 loarchad elevated to the throne (similarly Syn- 
 cellus, Scaliger, Petavius and Buddeus). In 
 this way he certainly succeeds in removing 
 every difference between the time of chap. v. 
 30 and vi. 1 ; but he neglects to notice (1) 
 that Laboraso.irchad was a grandson of Nebu- 
 chadnezzar, instead of being his son, as chap v. 
 11 et seq. requires; (2) that Nabonidus, accord- 
 ing to the express statement of Berosus, was not 
 of Median, but of Babylonian descent, although 
 not of royal blood ; (S) that according to vs. 9, 
 
 13, and 10 (the " laws of the Medes and Per- 
 sians ") the administration of the king in ques- 
 tion is characterized, in the plainest maimer, as 
 modelled and organized after the Medo-Persian 
 code, rather than the Babylonian ; (4) that the 
 system of espionage and denunciation (vs. 13, 
 
 14, lli), the barbarous custom of executing the 
 families of criminals (v. 3.5) together with the 
 culprit, and also the aristocratic constitutional 
 procedure connected with the promulgation of 
 the prohibition and with the sealing of the 
 stone (vs. 8, 18), all likewise refer to specifically 
 Medo-Persian arrangements, such as could not 
 yet have been introduced under Nabonidus. 
 These arguments will also hold good against 
 A. Scheuchzer, of Zurich, who, without refer- 
 ence to Ebrard, and to some extent basing his 
 Tiews on different grounds, has recently likewise 
 attempted to identify Xabonidus with Darius 
 the Mede (Asoi/rUche Fofschuitgen, in Heiden- 
 helm's Vierteljithrsschrift fiir engl.-theolog. For- 
 ichung, vol. IV., No. 1, p. 17 et seq.). — 
 ["The addition of »""!'? (Kethib) forms on 
 the one hand a contrast to the expression, ' the 
 king of the Chaldaeans' (chap. v. 30), and on 
 the other hand it points forward to S«"^C"1D- 
 ver. 29 (28); it, however, furnishes no proof 
 that Daniel distinguished the Median kingdom 
 from the Persian ; for the kingdom is not called 
 a Bledian kingdom, but it is only said of Darius 
 that he was of Median descent, and, ver. 29 (28), 
 that Cynic the Persian succeeded him. In 
 ,5i^' ''« received the kingdom, it is indicated 
 that Darius did not conquer it, but received it 
 from the conqueror" (/li'i'i).] — Being about three- 
 score and two years old. This precise and con- 
 crete designation of his age was hardly designed 
 to note that he had overthrown the Chaldiean em- 
 pire after attaining to old age and when he was 
 DO longer competeut to the personal conduct of 
 warlike operations (Kranichfeld) ; for such a 
 purpose is not expressed with sufficient rlear- 
 ness, and moreover, the implied reference to 
 the weakness and defenceless condition of the 
 declining Babylonian empire would involve a 
 historical maccuracy which cannot well be 
 ohai'ged against the author. The real motive 
 that led hiui to mention the age of Darius can 
 only consist in the design to refer to the consid- 
 erably later time of the taking of Babylon, 
 in its relation to the events that had just been 
 described (cf. supra, on chap. v. 30).* 
 
 Verses 2, 3 [1, 3J. The new constitution, of tJie 
 
 • [Rather it may have been as a premonition of the short 
 Interval duriag D.irius's rule before the ftiU assumption of 
 Aaminiou by C^tus lu person at Baby lun,] 
 
 empire under Darius, and the position assigned 
 to Daniel. It pleased Darius to set over the 
 kingdom a hundred and tvrenty princes. 
 The Sept. increases this number to 127, proba- 
 bly with a reference to Esth. i. 1. Josephus 
 Ant. X. 13 multiplies it by three (eir/nnvrn koi 
 TjiiahOo^oL cnTfid-ai), perhaps because he believed 
 each of the three chief prtefects to have been 
 placed over 120 satraps, or because he believed 
 himself obliged to make the number of satrapies 
 equal to that of the day s in the year. The num • 
 her 130 is to be retained, in opposition to both 
 these uncritical attempts to enlarge it, although 
 no other authorities mention so large a number 
 of satrapies or provinces in the Medo-Persian 
 empire at the time of its first organization under 
 Darius-Cyaxares and Cyrus, and although ac- 
 cording to both Herodotus and Xenophon their 
 number seems to have bsen considerably smaller 
 at that period. The former of these authors 
 mentions no definite organization of satrapies by 
 Cyrus whatever, and remarks of Darius Hystas- 
 pis that he founded in all only ttcen ty of such 
 provinces for the whole empire (III. 89) ; the 
 latter notices satraps under Cyrus as well, but 
 mentions only nine, eight of whom were ap- 
 pointed for Asia Minor and one for Arabia — 
 from which it might be concluded that the ag- 
 gregate number of such officials did not much 
 exceed twenty, and perhaps, did not even reach 
 that number ( Cyrop. VII. 4, 2 ; VIII. G). The 
 statements of these Greek historians do not, 
 however, compel us to doubt the accuracy of 
 Daniel's report, or to reduce the number from 
 1 20 to 20 ; for various indications lead to the 
 conclusion that the number and boundaries of 
 the satrapies varied exceedingly in different pe- 
 riods of the Persian empire. The three lists of 
 Persian provinces, for instance, which are found 
 among the inscriptions of Darius (at Persepolis, 
 at Behistun, and at Nakshi Rustam) enumerate 
 on the whole thirty-three satrapies or provinces, 
 without permitting us to regard the number as 
 exhaustively complete. The opinion that such 
 changes among the satrapies actually occurred 
 is further supported by Ezra viii. 30, where 
 sereral satraps beyond the Euphrates are men- 
 tioned as holding office under Artaxerxes, whik 
 Herodotus, III. 91, knew of but one; and alsc 
 by Esth. i. 1, where the whole number of the 
 Persian satrapies is fixed at 137, etc. Hence, 
 it must probably be assumed that at different 
 times the arrangement of provinces varied in 
 the Persian empire, and that a subdivision of 
 the realm into numerous smaller sections (whose 
 number, 120, may have been symbolically sig- 
 nificant, and relating to astronomical condi- 
 tions) existed already under Darius- Medus and 
 Cyrus, but in such a manner that in addition a 
 reckoning by larger, and consequently less nu- 
 merous provinces, was customary. The divi- 
 sion into 130 smaller satrapies may have descend- 
 ed to the Medo-Persians from the Chaldaeo- 
 Babylonian world-kingdom, in which, according 
 to chap. iii. 3, 37, the title of satrap had long 
 been known, and on account of its almost sacred 
 astronomical importance, they may have gladly 
 admitted it into the constitution of their realm. 
 The enumeration by larger and less numeroua 
 (30-30) satrapies may h ive been chiefly in use 
 in the official language of the court and the 
 arts in the kingdom of the Achsemenidae, as being 
 
140 
 
 THE PKOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 a natioaal Medo-Persian institution, aud for that 
 reason may have been principally or exclusively 
 observed by the Greeks. The Biblical enumera- 
 tion, having ,■» Babylonian origin, may therefore 
 be properly designated as the esoteric or hieratic, 
 and the ancient Aryan division, supported by the 
 classics, as the eiotcric or demotic. Jsor is it a 
 questionable feature that on this explanation 
 the title kshntrapa (nJwitrapaiti, achashdnrpan) 
 was applied interchangeably to the administra- 
 tors of both larger and smaller divisions ; since 
 this harmonizes well with the fluctuations of 
 later Hellenistic writers in rendering the word 
 and especially with the indecision of the Sept. 
 On this question, and in relation to the origin 
 and significance of the title of satr,ip, cf. the 
 exeg. remarks on chap. ui. 3. — Verse 3 [31]. 
 And over these three presidents, of whom 
 Daniel was first; rather, "'was one." [The 
 following verse, however, shows that he was the 
 principal one]. The li:")? (in the Targ. equiv- 
 alent to C^^l-', "arrangers, overseers") were 
 certainly " chief -prfefects, princes, ministers," 
 whether the 'nno is regarded as related to ~B, 
 l'. e. , as derived, by means of the Pers. particle of 
 derivation rr, from the Zend mra (Gr. Kapa, 
 Pers. ser), '" head," or as related to the Sanscr. 
 (^araiia. "protector," or also to turakti, "steers- 
 man" (the former according to Gesenius, the 
 latter, to Hitzig). The dignity of these 
 ^Smvkin was doubtless identical with that of 
 the J'li/lain or "triumvirs," who are mentioned 
 in the preceding chapter (vs. 7, 16, 29) as the 
 superior princes of the realm, or heads of the 
 government under Belshazzar. Accordingly, 
 like the 120 satraps, they were a cla.ss of digni- 
 taries in the Medo-Persian kingdom, whose 
 office was modelled after the Babylonian pre- 
 cedent, but was discontinued at a later period, 
 or perhaps, was developed into the institution 
 of the seven counsellors of the Persian kings 
 (corresponding to the seven Amshaspands— cf. 
 Esth. i. 14; Ezra vii. 14; Herod. III. 31). 
 Daniel owed his elevation to this rank to the 
 cii-cumstance that he had already been raised to 
 the dignity of a triumvir by Belshazzar. and had 
 probably remained in that office until the over- 
 throw of the Chaldasan kingdom ; as also 
 Nebuchadnezzar, according to chap. ii. 48. 49, 
 had already conferred on him a position of dis- 
 tinguished political and priestly power and emi- 
 nence. — That the princes (satraps) might give 
 accounts to them and the king should have 
 no damage, i.e., not suffer loss in his revenues 
 (cf. p.': Ezra iv. 13, 15, and pr Esth. vii. 4). 
 The satraps are thus designated more particu- 
 larly as officers ot fimince, which doubtless con- 
 stituted one of their chief functions; cf. Herod. 
 III. 89 et seq. 
 
 Verses 4, 5 [3, 4]. The iU-wiU <f the other 
 grand njpcials of (he realm against Daniel. 
 'fhen th.>; Daniel was preferred above (showed 
 himself superior to) the presidents, etc. nr:~^i 
 "distinguished himself, outshone them." The 
 demonstrative n:~, "this," which is connected 
 with the name of Daniel only here and in v. 30, 
 is conceived and spoken from the standpoint of 
 his opponents, who look with envy on him 
 {i»tum) whom God has hitherto so highly favored 
 
 with His assistance. In this way the succeed- 
 ing remark, ' ' because an excellent spirit was in 
 him " (cf. chap. v. 12), may hkewise be explained 
 without involving any suspicion of self-laudatiou 
 on the part of the narrator. — And the king 
 , thought to set him over the w^hole realm, 
 hence, to promote him to the office of grand- 
 vizier or prime minister — the superior of the 
 I " triumvirs " or Sarekin. The Targums alwayi 
 ! employ the Ithpael for the intransitive "^V-^?, " to 
 be inclined, to purpose." ["This intention of 
 i the king stirred up the envy of the other presi 
 dents" (KeiV)]. — Verse 5 [4]. Then the presi- 
 dents .... sought to find occasion against 
 j Daniel concerning the kingdom, i.e., they 
 i sought to assail his official character ; and only 
 I after frequent proofs that their efforts in this 
 direction were futile, did they direct their atten- 
 tion to his religious standpoint (v. 6 et seq.).* — 
 But they could find none occasion nor fault. 
 i"iS", as before, is an " occasion, opportunity, 
 pretext," upon which the accusation might be 
 based ["as ahia, John xviii. 38; Matt, xxvii. 
 37, an occation for impeachment" (Keil)]. This 
 more general term may be co-ordinated with 
 nri"'rTr, " wickedness," because it is conceived 
 concretely or objectively ; and hence also with 
 the following ib'J, " fault, inadvertence " (from 
 nb'.r, the probable primitive form for r!3",13 ; cf. 
 in the Gr. fju/.u- and /'oj'i). Fidelity is the lead- 
 ing political virtue of the sei-vant or officer of a 
 government (cf. 1 Cor. iv. 2). in like manner as 
 justice and mercy should be the ornament of 
 rulers (chap. iv. 34). 
 
 Verses 6-10 [5-9]. The procuring of a gotem- 
 mental edict pertaining to religiein, directed against 
 Daniel.\ We shall not .... against this 
 Daniel, excepttve find it against him concern- 
 ing the law of hJs God. ri~b?« P^, the law of 
 Daniel's God. is the theocratic law, considered 
 as the rule of his religious life, and especially of 
 his devotional exercises. Cf. HT in Ezra vii. 0, 
 13, 14, 31, 35, 36 ; and supra, chap. ii. 9. — Verse 
 7. Then these presidents (princes) and princes 
 (satraps) assembled together to the king ; 
 rather (as marg. ), "ran in stormy haste." 
 " These princes and satraps " (cf. " these men," 
 V. 6 [a]) were not, of course, aU ot them, with- 
 out exception, but only those who envied and 
 sought to calumniate Daniel, since only such are 
 here concerned ; cf. v 35 [34]. The idea that 
 all the satraps participated is the more improba- 
 ble, in view of the fact that the possible presence 
 of all in the metropolis is nowhere indicate i (nf t 
 
 * [" Such a model of excellence. Ro far surp.issiog and feo 
 nncomfort'ibly eclipsing themselves, was lieerl.v cutting to 
 these corrupt officers, and aroused their bitterest hostility." 
 — Coicie'i.] 
 
 t [*' With Satanic cunning the princes shaped tius proposed 
 law to tike with the king by a bait for his low vanity, and 
 to entrap Daniel through his known decision liiid firmness 
 in the worsiiip of his God. It was the best compUmcnt they 
 could pay to Ilaniel that they assumed so conlideiitly that be 
 would pray to God none the less for this monstrous law. It 
 was the keenest reproach to their king that they should an- 
 ticipate hie rendy assent to such a law under the impulses 
 of his excessive vanity. Uarius was a weak and vain king, 
 eUu he would have asked. What can be the motive of the8€ 
 men iii proposing such a law ? Tlainly the appended e,xcei> 
 tion, * Save of thee, O king,^ was so .grateful to hi* vanitj 
 that it blinded his dull eye to the monstrous nature &rd po« 
 Bible b'urings of this law." — Cowieti.^ 
 
CHAP. VI. l-2y. 
 
 141 
 
 BTen in V. 8 LTD- — On -•■'31Si "to rush any- 
 where in stormy haste, to rush anywhere fre- 
 quently '' [rather, tumultuously] (Luther, '■ came 
 often "), cf. the German "jema/iden die Thure 
 fiturmeu'^ ("to storm somebody's door"); see 
 infra, vs. 13 [11] and 16 [15].— Verse 8. AU the 
 presidents (princes) of the kingdom, the gov- 
 ernors, and th9 princes (satrap.s), the counsel- 
 lors, and the captains ipraifects) have consulted 
 together ; rather, ' ' have considered it advisa- 
 ble." 1"r~? seems here to be employed in a 
 more extended sense than heretofore (vs. 3 [3] , 
 5 [4], and T [(!]). where it designates the chief - 
 prasfects who were placed over the satraps ; * 
 for the four classes of officials which follow — the 
 same as in chap iii. 37, but in a different order 
 — are evidentlj- intended to specialize the pre- 
 fixed general idea of "princes" or '" pnefects" 
 (thus Chr. B. Michaelis correctly, against Hitzig 
 and others, who in this place also reg.ard the 
 Sarekin as the chief praefects who were Daniel's 
 colleagues) In like manner the term Chaldse- 
 ans was found to be employed above, at one 
 time to designate a special class of wise men, 
 and at another to denote the whole order of 
 magians (see on chap. ii. 3).f — In relation to 
 ^?r"^^, "to determine or agree among them- 
 selves," compare the term ^?'^, "a counsellor," 
 coiuiliarius, as designating one of the principal 
 officers of the Persian king, Ezra vii. 14, 15. — 
 To establish a royal statute ; rather, "that the 
 king should establish a statute." In view of the 
 accentuation, 8*2;^ is not to be construed with 
 D"p as a genitive (" to establish a royal statute," 
 
 • [" If we compare the list of the four official classes here 
 meDtioned with that of the great officers of state under Ne- 
 buchadnezzar, ch. iii. 2, the naming of the i<'?t;30 before 
 
 the S':E~Ti)n6« (»a«roi>», while inch. iii. 2 they are named 
 after them) shows that the K^IHO are here great officers 
 to whom the satraps were subordinate, and that only the 
 three ^''^"O could be meant to whom the satraps had to 
 render an account. Moreover, the list of four names is 
 divided by the copula T into two classes. To the first class 
 belong the K^Z30 and the satraps; to the second the 
 
 Vl^'^n, »tate counciUora, and the ^^r^^B, civil pra- 
 fectJl of tke provinces. Accordingly, we will scarcely err 
 If by S':30 we understand the member) of the highest 
 
 council of state^ by S^'niS^n the ministers or members 
 
 of the (lotcer) slate councU, and by the satmps and pec/ias 
 the milittiri/ and civil rulers of the provinces. This group- 
 ing of the names confirms, consequently, the general inter- 
 pretation of the 8<riiri^ 13ID ^3, for the four classes 
 
 named constitute the entire chief prefecture of the king- 
 dom. This interpretation is not made questionable by the 
 fact that the '^"'D^.O had in the kingdom of Darius a dif- 
 
 "erent position from that they held in the kingdom of 
 Nebuchadnezzar ; for in this respect each kingdom had its 
 own particular arrangement, which underwent manifold 
 changes according to the times." — Ketl.'\ 
 
 t [" The whole connection of the narrative plainly shows 
 that the authors of the accusation deceived the king. The 
 council of state, or cliief court, to which all the satraps had 
 to render an acc-'unt, consisted of three men. of whom 
 Daniel was one. But Daniel certainly was not called to this 
 consultation; therefore their pretence that ail "presidents 
 of the kingdom' had consulted on the matter, was false. 
 Besides, they deceived the king in this, that they concealed 
 from him the intention of the decree, or misled him regard- 
 ing it." -A'e«.] 
 
 etc.), but must be regarded as the subject of the 
 Inf. r!"l"p*. so that the object -"I^ is placed 
 between tl e im'jiitive and its noun, as in Isa. v. 
 34 ; xix. 8 ; xx. 1 (thus correctly Rosenmiiller, 
 Hitzig, Kranichfeld, [Keil]. etc., against Theo- 
 dotion, Vulgate. Luther, Bertholdt, and a ma- 
 jority of modems). * — And make a firm inter- 
 dict (marg.). The '^'p, which the king was to 
 establish, is at the same time an "l^?*- ''inter- 
 dict ; " in the parallelism of the address it is at 
 first designated generally as a "statute," and 
 afterwards more especially as an "interdict.*' 
 On '"'".!<, "to bind," in the sense of "to pro- 
 hibit," see Num. xxx. 10, and also the X.-T. 
 Sim' as the opposite of >-ica'. Matt. xvi. 19 ; 
 xviii. 18.- — That whosoever shall ask a petition 
 .... for thirty days; i.e., during the thirty 
 days next ensuing, from that time until the 
 expiration of thirty days. Literally, "unto 
 thirty days." This number, the triplicate of 
 the ten days in chap. i. 13-15, is a round num- 
 ber, corresponding to the duration of a month, 
 and employed otherwise also as a general period, 
 during which an interdict was imposed on per- 
 sons ; e.g., by the vows of Xazarites. Acts xxi. 
 36 ; cf. Tract, yusir. I. 3 ; Joseph., de B. Jud., 
 II. 15, 1. — The command (or interdict) to pray f 
 during one month only to the king was in this 
 instance specially aimed at Daniel, the pious 
 worshipper of Jehovah, for the purpose of en- 
 trapping him ; but it was suggested by a national 
 reUgious custom of older date among the Jled^s, 
 by which Divine honors were rendered to the 
 king. Herodotus. I. 199. refers to this custom, 
 when he remarks that Deioces had introduced 
 the Trepi iavrov geuvveiv for himself and his suc- 
 cessors, by removing his person from the obser- 
 vation of his subjects, in order to persuade them 
 that he was erf/io/oc (cf. also Xenophon, Cyrop. , 
 I. 3, 18). The existence of this custom among 
 the Medes is further substantiated by the fact 
 that the Persians, who were intimately related 
 to the Medes, observed it, as did several others 
 of the Oriental nations of antiquity {e.g., the 
 Egyptians and Ethiopians, according to Diodor. , 
 Sicut., 1. 90; III. 3, 5 1 — the former from the 
 peculiar reUgious reason that they considered 
 the king as the "offspring of the gods" (ficjoi'of 
 ijfiji) and the image of Ormuzd, and even ad- 
 dressed him directly as tftdr ; cf. .dJschylus, 
 Pers., 157, 855; Plutarch, Tkemist., 37; Cur- 
 
 • [But this construction is extremely harsh, and, as Len- 
 gerke remarks, opposed to the usage of 5t3*?2 ""OK in r. 
 
 1.3. Even Rosenmiiller renders (apparently by inadvertence, 
 however) decreto regto. The pas,sages adduced by the au- 
 thor from Isaiah (lix. 8 is not correct) are not altogether in 
 point, as the preposition there is not ^, but "2 or 2, Had 
 the writer intended such a construction he would naturailj 
 have used ^T with the fut. The Masoretic iLttrpuno- 
 tion, however, undeniably favors it.] 
 t [The term " ^73 is here not any kind of request or 
 
 supplication, bat prayer, as the phrase, ver. 14 (13), K^S' 
 nri^rS. directing his prayer, shows. The word ^IKT 
 
 does not prove the contrary, for the heathen prayed also u 
 men (cf. ch. ii. 4(i). and here the clause, except to the king 
 places together god and man, so that the king might not 
 observe that the prohibition was specially directed agamtf 
 Daniel." — Keil. 
 
142 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 tins, VIII. 5, 11 ; Isocrates, Panegyr.. in Brisso- 
 nius, de Fersar. princ, p. 17, and generally, 
 Hengstenberg, Anthentie des Daniel, etc., p. 127 
 et seq. ; Delitzsch, Art. Daniel in Herzog's Beal- 
 Encykl., p. 378 et seq. See the Ethico-fuud. prin- 
 ciples, etc. , against the assumption of the modem 
 psendo-Daniel tendency-criticism, on which the 
 edict of Darius in question is a cunningly in- 
 vented prototype, and at the same time an ex- 
 aggerated caricature of the course of Antiochus 
 Epiphanes as described in 1 Mace. i. 41 et seq. ; 
 2 Mace. vi. 1 et seq. — Verse 9 [8]. Now, O 
 king, establish the decree and sign the writ- 
 ing ; rather, "and record the writing," for c"i"1 
 always signifies to record, and not to sign ; and 
 moreover, the Persian edicts received their offi- 
 cial stamp as laws from the royal seal, instead 
 of the royal signature ; * cf. Esth. iii. 10 et seq. ; 
 viii. 8. — Thai it be not changed, according to 
 the law of the Medes and Persians, i.e.. accord- 
 ing to that law of the united Medo-Persian 
 realm, as is somewhat more fully described in v. 
 16 [15], by which every official edict from the 
 king, issued with certain formalities, should pos- 
 sess enduring force as law, hence, "should not 
 be changed " (IT^Drrii H^, cf. Winer, Gramm. , 
 
 § 46, 3) ; cf. Estk; i. 19 ; viii. 8. Against the 
 opinion of Von Lengerke, that the writer here 
 was guilty of an anachronism, since the phrase 
 " the law of the Medes and Persians " must have 
 originated subsequently to the time of Cjtus, cf . 
 supra. Hitzig also rejects this position of Von 
 Lengerke. inasmuch as he denies, for telling 
 reasons, the presumption on which it rests, that 
 TT in that formula designates the whole body of 
 laws of the kingdom. — [Verse 10 (9). " The king 
 carried out the proposal. '*'^,9-'!^1 i^ exphcative : 
 the writing, namely, the prohibition (spoken of); 
 for this was the chief matter, therefore '''39?^ 
 alone is here mentioned, and not also D"p (edict), 
 ver. 8(7)."— /tVa] 
 
 Verses 11, 12 [10, 11]. DanieFs protest, t>y his 
 conduct, against the royal decree.^ And, his 
 windows being open in his chamber toward 
 Jerusalem; rather, "but he [itfl had open 
 windows," etc. The upper chamber, or attic, 
 receives consideration as being more removed 
 and less liable to be disturbed, hence as being 
 particularly adapted to purposes of devotion ; cf. 
 
 * [This distinction is ratiier ovev-nice; for it was not the 
 engrosHinij of the edict, surely, that the magnates desired. 
 and this of conrse would not have been done by the royal 
 hand, but his official approval and sanction, such as a signa- 
 ture — whether by writing or stamping the name — only could 
 confer.) 
 
 t [*' The satraps did not wait long for Daniel's expected 
 disregard of the kinpr's prohibition. . . . He continued 
 this custom (of prayer) even aft«r the issuing of the edict ; 
 for a discontinuance of it on account of that law would have 
 been a denying of the f.Mth and a sinning against God. On 
 this his enemies had reckoned. They secretly watched him, 
 and immediately reported his disregard of the k ng's com- 
 mand. In ver. 11 (10). the place where he was wont to 
 pray is more particularly described in order that it might be 
 shown how they could ob^rve him." — Keii.'] 
 
 t [" nb does not refer to Daniel ('he had opened win- 
 dows '), but to nn"^3 J, his house had open windown. If 
 ni referred to Daniel, then the K^.1 following would be 
 mpernuo IS." — Keil. The same remark of course ^viU apply 
 
 io nn'brs fouowug.] 
 
 2 Sam. xix. 1 ; 1 Kings xvii. 20; Acts i. 13; x. 
 9. — "Opened windows," I^Tr V'!?, are the 
 opposite of such as are covered with lattice-wora 
 (l?airiy p^S, Ezek. xl IG) by which the view is 
 
 ob'Sitructed. These open w-indows were required 
 to be " toward Jerusalem," because according 
 to ancient custom the face of the worshipper 
 must be turned towards the temple in that city ; 
 for as in Jerusalem the supplicant turned to- 
 ward the sanctuary (Psa. v. 8 ; xxviii. 2 etc.), 
 so he turned when abroad towards the " holy 
 city" (Matt. iv. 5) as the site of the temple. 
 This was the case long prior to the captivity ; 
 see 1 Kings viii. 33, 35, 38, 44, 48 ; 2 Chron. 
 vi. 29, 34, 38. The corresponding custom 
 among the Mahommedans (Kibla) with refer- 
 ence to Mecca, appears thus to be the imitation 
 of a custom developed on the primitive soil of 
 Bible lands ; and for the e.irliest followers of 
 Islam Jerusalem itself was Kibla. On the other 
 hand, the ancient Jewish and the most ancient 
 Christian custom prohibited, on the ground of 
 Ezek. viii. 16, 17, the turning of the face in 
 prayer towards the east, i.e.. towards the sun 
 (cf. Clement, Strom. VII. 724 ; Origen. Hnmil. 
 V. in Num. ; Tertull. Apol. e. 16). whUe the 
 later church, standing on the ground of MaL 
 iiL 20; Luke i. 78 et seq., zealously recom- 
 mended that supplicants and houses for prayer 
 should face towards the east, and introduced it 
 into geueral use. Cf. Bingham, Origines, V. 
 275 ss. — He kneeled upon his knees three 
 limes a day. Kneeling is mentioned as the 
 characteristic posture of supplicants in 1 Kings 
 viii. 54 ; 3 Chron. vi. 13 ; Ezra ix. o ; Luke 
 xxii. 41 ; Acts vii. 59 ; ix. 40 ; xxi. 5 ; Eph. 
 iii. 14 ; (ilem. Rom. 1 Cor. 48 ; Hernias, Pas- 
 t«r. Vis. I. 1, etc. Cf. O. A. Hubnenis, de gen- 
 vflexione (Halle, 1741) ; Z'jckler. Krit. Geschichte 
 der Askese (Frankf. and Erlangen, 1863), p. 350 
 et seq. — ["Daniel offered prayers not to make 
 an outward show, for only secret spies could ob 
 serve him when so engaged. ''" ;|:p";S does 
 not mean altogether so as (Rosenmiiller, Von 
 Leng. , Maurer, Hitzig), but, as always, on this 
 account that, because. Because he always did 
 thus, so now he continues to do it" — {Keil).]* 
 The custom of praying three times in a day, 
 which is attested for the first time in this pas- 
 sage, and which, according to the Tahnudic tra- 
 dition was first brought into general use among 
 the Jews by the " men of the great synagogue," 
 appears to have taken shape during the Baby- 
 lonian captivity as a usage observed by pious in- 
 dividuals among the Israelites. The fundamental 
 general idea of this custom is already expressed 
 in Psa. Iv. 18; but the desire to find a regular 
 substitute for the morning and evening sacri- 
 fices, which were now iuteirupted, doulitlesa 
 contributed towards originating the custom, 
 since the Jews were accustomed, from an early 
 period, to regard prayer as in itself a sacrifice 
 with which God is pleased ( Hos. xiv. 3 ; Psa, 
 li 1 7 ; cxvi. 17, etc. ), and especially since they 
 associated it in their minds with the evening 
 sacrifice (Psa. cxli. 3 ; 1 Kings xviii. 36 et seq.; 
 
 *['' Blessed man ! How quietly, how calmly, how p^aoe- 
 fully did thy heart repose on the cniiuriop love and faith 
 fulness of the never-failing power of thy fathers' Gol 1 * 
 — Cuicles,] 
 
CHAP. VI. 1-39. 
 
 143 
 
 Eira ix. 5 ; cf. Dan. ix. 21). The Parsee custom 
 of rendering Divine honors to the three parts of 
 the day themselves, has. of course, nothing in 
 common with the habit of the Jews and prim- 
 itive Christians (Acts iii. 1 ; x. 9, 30 ; cf. Pusey, 
 Daniel, p. ooi) ; nor has the custom of the 
 Egyptian priests, who, according to Porphyry, 
 de ahitinent. IV. 8, sang daily four hymns of 
 praise to the sun ; nor yet the three daily sacri- 
 fices and hymns of the Pythagoreans, as men- 
 tioned by Jamblichus, Tit. Pythig. c. 149 ss. 
 Cf. generally, Zcickler, 1. c. p. 329 et seq.— 
 Verse 13 [11]. Then these men assembled 
 (rushed together), and found Daniel praying 
 and making supplication before his God. Here, 
 as in V. 7 [6J, Ti""?"]'"! is not a single rushing to- 
 gether, but a frequent* hasty gathering ; the 
 only difference is that in that passage the design 
 was to obtain the decree from the king, while 
 here it is to watch Daniel in order to denounce 
 him. According to v. 11, the open windows in 
 Daniel's upper chamber seem to have enabled 
 them to execute their plan of espionage with 
 success, either because they saw him while 
 engaged in prayer (perhaps from a still more 
 elevated room in the vicinity, cf. 3 Sam. xi 3), 
 or because they heard him from the street. At 
 any rate, a repeated [?] approach and observa- 
 tion in secret must be assumed, instead of a 
 single surprise; hence the question, " At which 
 of his daily prayers was he surprised ? " is in- 
 appropriate. — Concerning the thoroughly or- 
 ganized system of espionage and denunciation 
 in the Medo-Persian kingdom, of which this 
 passage affords a characteristic proof, see Max 
 Duncker, GeKChiclite des AWrthuiM, II. 648. 
 
 Verses 13-1.5 [12-14], The denunciation. 
 Then they came near and spake before 
 (" with ") the king, etc.. cf. chap. iii. 8, and for 
 what follows, iii. 24. — The thing is true, ac- 
 cording to the law of the Medes and Per- 
 sians ; rather, "the word is firm, according, 
 etc. 8*^1;^ S«:"'2^ does not affirm that the de- 
 cree was published, but indicates the certain 
 punishment of any who might transgress it. — 
 Verse 14 [13]. Daniel, which is of the children 
 of the captivity of Judah. Cf. chap. v. 13, 
 .ind observe that the accusers do not mention 
 the high oflfioial station of Daniel and his inti- 
 mate official relations with the king, but merely 
 refer to his foreign birth, (''in order that they 
 may thereby bring hus conduct under the sus- 
 picion of being a political act of rebellion against 
 the royal authority." (KeU.)] — Verse 1.5 [14]. 
 Then the king .... ■wdiS sore displeased. 
 C«a is impersonal in "'Hibr 3S3, like 'I'] in 
 Gen. xxi. 12, and like 3!*p below, in v. 24 [23]. 
 Literally, therefore, it reads, "Then the king, 
 when he heard the word — sorrow came on him" 
 (and similarly V. 24 [33], "Then . . . joy came 
 onhim").f — And set his heart on Ltaniel to 
 
 * [The idea of frequency insinted apoD by the author aa 
 refiidingin ■i^''3nn seems to have no good su port. The 
 
 sense is rather rushedfcmcard, made their way in a body 
 and eagerly,] 
 
 t ['• Tne Icing is chagrined and ashamed of himself that he 
 allowed himself to be caught in this snare. Now for the 
 Urst time he sees the enmity and mean spirit of his officers 
 obtaining from him that decree, and hites hie lips in 
 ue that he could have been so beguiled and eutrapped. 
 
 deliver him. 33, " heart," is not found in th« 
 later Chaldee, but occurs in the Syriac and 
 Arabic. Compare, however, the phrase J -3 
 S<3b, Targ. Prov. xxii. 17 —And he labored till 
 the going dow^n of the sun, etc. On the form 
 "'5?? i»'- constr. plur. of '*?^^, or also of thp 
 Inf. 3??), cf. Hitzig and Kranichfeld on this 
 passage. Instead of "lirips, " he labored ' 
 (cf. ayun^eaiiai, Luke xiii. 24), the Targums 
 have i'^.Pr'?, which, however, has a different 
 meaning from that of "i'lrip!*. 
 
 Verses 16-18 [15-17] . The condemnation and 
 execution. On v. 16 cf, supra, on v. 9 b. — Verse 
 
 17 [16]. Then the king commanded, and they 
 brought Daniel, and cast him into the den of 
 lions; rather, "that they should bring Daniel 
 and cast," etc. The construction is the same aa 
 in chap, v, 29 [but in neither this nor that pas- 
 sage is this rendering justified by the force of 
 the text, Vr'?'!'! .... ^a'l]. According to 
 Oriental custom, the execution in this case, aa 
 in that under Belshazzar, chap. v. 39, and in 
 that under Nebuchadnezzar, chap. iii. 19 et seq., 
 was to follow immediately on the sentence. 
 [" This does not. however, imply that it was on 
 the evening in which, at the ninth hour, he had 
 prayed, as Hitzig afiirms, in order that he may 
 thereby make the whole matter improbable." 
 (KeU). The season of prayer at which Daniel 
 was discovered would seem to have been at 
 noon. This will allow ample time for the pre- 
 paration of the edict the same morning, and the 
 execution the same evening. The accusers were 
 evidently in hot haste], — Thy God, whom thou 
 servest continually, he will deliver thee ; 
 rather, "may thy God .... deliver thee." 
 Pilate may have solaced himself with a simOar 
 confession of his own weakness and cowardice, 
 when he delivered the Saviour into the hands of 
 his mortal enemies (Matt, xxvii. 24 ; Luke xxiii. 
 25, etc. ) ; or Herod, when he commanded to 
 bring the head of the Baptist (Matt. xiv. 9). 
 Verse 19 [18] et seq. shows that the exclama- 
 tion was by no means intended to be ironical or 
 malicious, as those in Psa, xxii, 9 ; Matt, xxvii. 
 43 ; but on the other hand, Josephus probably 
 attributes too favorable a disposition to Darius, 
 when he observes : i/.~ioai; di u Aapnuc art 
 pvatTai Tu ^^lov aiiTov Kal oiideii py Trd^r/ otivoi' 
 ifKo Tuv ^fipiui\ £Ke/.£vaev ai'Tov €v^i'fiuj(; t^ipsiv rd 
 avfiSaivnvra (similarly also Jerome etal.). — Verse 
 
 18 [17]. And a stone was brought, and laid 
 upon the mouth of the den. tT^r"',-!^ a Hebra- 
 izing passive form of the Aphel ; cf. on chap. 
 iiL 13. ri?*', Hebraizing passive partic. Peal, 
 instead of n^-'O (cf. v. 27 [26]).— It is natural 
 to suppose that the stone was of sufficient size 
 to completely close the mouth of the den, and 
 that it was at hand for that purpose, instead of 
 
 No doubt he heartily esteemed Daniel, and probably loved 
 him, and felt iherefure the bitterest grief and shame that he 
 should be made unwillingly the author of his destniction,'" 
 — Cowltx. He also felt intensely an,xious for his fate, .ind 
 doubtless cast about in his mind 3ome method of extricating 
 him, and at the ,samo time o{ exposing and punishing hij 
 accuse rs,l 
 
1+4 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 MBUming, with Hitzig, that it was necessary to 
 bring it from a distance. The den itself, cor- 
 responding to the sense of »ail (H313), which is 
 thoroughly identical with that of the Heb. nis, 
 must not be conceived of as a cistern or funnel- 
 shaped pit (Hitzig) ; but rather as having a 
 capacity sufficient to hol-.l several lions and per- 
 mit them to move freelj ibout (which involves i 
 no greater difficulty than that the s$;i3 in the 
 Targ Jer. xli. 7, 9 should have contained the 
 corpses of seventy slain persons ; cf. also the 
 Targ. Jer. xxxvii. 16; Isa. xvi. ISy In brief, '■ 
 it may be supposed t<- have been an actual lions' 
 den, similar to those connected with the Roman 1 
 amphitheatres, from which it probaby differed 1 
 simply in having a horizontal opening in the flat 
 or arched roof, through which the ad bestkis 
 dnmnati were thrown to the lions, in addition to 
 the door at the side, by which the beasts were 
 introduced into the den or removed from it. Its 
 construction may therefore have been similar to 
 that of the fiery furnace, upon the whole (see 
 on chap. iii. 6) — an opinion which seems to de- 
 rive additional support from the manner in 
 which Darius was enabled to converse with 
 Daniel while in the den, even before the stone 
 was removed from its opening (v. 31 et seq.). 
 The two lions' dens at Fez, belonging to the 
 emperor of Morocco, which Host describes in 
 his Nachriditeii roa Fez unci Marokko (pp. 77, 
 290) as being large rectangular and uncovered 
 pits in the earth (whose wide opening was sur- 
 rounded by a wall one and a half ells in height), 
 were consequently constructed somewhat differ- 
 ently from that of the Medo-Babylonians under 
 consideration, but are still interesting for com- 
 parison with the latter. — And the king sealed 
 it TO'ith his own signet, and with the signet of 
 his lords. On the custom of sealing cf . Matt, 
 xxvii. 2(5. The two- fold sealing, with the ring 
 of the king and with that of his grand officers, 
 may have been designed to secure Daniel, for 
 whose deliverance the king still hoped (see vs. 
 17 [16], 21 [20J, against any violent assault, and 
 also against any attempt to liberate him — 
 hence, to insure a strict control of the prisoner. 
 Cf. Jerome: '■'■ Obsignavit annulo suo lapidem, 
 quo OS Liici cJaudebatur, ne quid ct/ntra Danielem 
 molkintur inimici .... Obsignat autem et an- 
 milo optimatum suormn, ne quid suspicionis 
 contra eos habere videretur." — That the purpose 
 might not be changed concerning Daniel ; 
 rather, " that the matter," etc.; that his situa- 
 tion might not be unlawfully altered. 'IS^ here 
 is not " intention, purpose " (v. Leng. etc.)"" but 
 ''affair, n>atter;" cf. the corresponding Syriac 
 word. 
 
 Verses 19-23 [18-22]. The kincf discovers the 
 miraculous presemation of Daniel. Then the 
 king went . . . and passed the night fasting. 
 TTt? is properly a substantive with adverbial sig- 
 nification — "with fasting" — i.e., supperless. 
 Luther renders it forcibly, "and remained not 
 eating." — Neither -wer instruments of music 
 brought before him; /ather "concubines." 
 
 • ["This thought (would fcave) required the«W(. emptiat. 
 S^r.^-^^ and alBO doep not correspond with the application 
 If ■ double Bcal." — Kelt.] 
 
 IiLstead of "food," which is the interpretation 
 assigned by Theodotion, the Peshito, the Vul- 
 gate, Luther, etc., the rendering of inn"! bj 
 "concubines, women of the harem," is suffi- 
 ciently supported by closely related terms in the 
 Arabic ; and the verb b^^C in connection with 
 the prep. D"!'^. admits of no other interpreta- 
 tion. The bringing in of inanimate object* 
 would have been expressed by '^ri'^O ; cf. chap. 
 V. 2 with ii. 24. 2.j ; iv. 3 ; v. 13, 15.— And his 
 sleep went from him ; forsook him ; cf . on chap, 
 ii. 1. — Verse 20 [19] . Then the king arose very- 
 early in the morning ; ' ' with the dawn, when 
 it became light." Sl.S-icip, "the dawn" ( = 
 "in'iJ, Targ. Jon. on Isa. Iviii. 8). The hypo- 
 thetical rendering of the imperf. S'lp^, for which 
 Kranichfeld contends, is unnecessary. ["The 
 future or imperfect is used instead of the per- 
 fect to place this clause in relation to the follow- 
 ing, meaning : the king, as soon as he arose at 
 ■morning dawn, went hastily by the early light" 
 (Keil).] The Septuagint is [substantially] cor- 
 rect : up^piat TTpui ; also Theodotion, the Pesh- 
 ito, etc. — ''l^???! "with the twilight, with the 
 dawn or break of day " ["serves for a mere de- 
 termination of the S"lB";S"i'a, at the mm-ning 
 dawn, namely, as soon as the first rays of the 
 rising sun appeared " (Keil)] ; cf. "i'i*<3. Job 
 xxiv. 14. — And went in haste. n,~3r~3, as in 
 chap. ii. 35, = pc~a a^uvdiji: ; cf. Luke i. 39. — 
 Verse 21 [20]. And .... cried with a lamen- 
 table voice unto Daniel. -■'V" = "'? ; cf. Isa. 
 liv. 6 with Prov. xxxi. 6. — O Daniel, servant of 
 the living God. Darius was able to designate 
 the God of Daniel as the living God (cf. v. 27) 
 thus early, before his observation had convinced 
 him of the prophet's safety, for the simple 
 reason that during the intercourse consequent 
 on their intimate relation, Daniel had instructed 
 him concerning the nature and power of his God 
 as the God of all gods, and also because the 
 pangs of conscience endured by him during the 
 night that had just elapsed, had produced a pro 
 found conviction of the truth of the prophet's 
 testimony to Jehovah. *— Verse 23 [22J. My 
 God hath sent his angel, and hath shut the 
 Uons' mouths. Cf. v. 28 [27] ; Acts xii. 7. The 
 summary conciseness of the statement forbids 
 any conclusion as to whether Daniel had seen 
 the angel who wrought his miraculous deliver- 
 ance, as an objective fact, or whether he merely 
 argued from the effect to the underlying invisi- 
 ble cause (cf. Psa. xxxiv. 8; xci. 11 et seq. ; 
 Matt. viii. 9, etc. ). On the expression, ' ' to shut 
 the lions' mouths," cf. 2 Tim. iv. 17 ; Heb. xi. 
 33. — And also before thee, O king, have I done 
 no hurt. "Before thee," '^l^tt-p, i.e., "in 
 thine eyes, according to thy judgment " — a 
 loosely connected supplemental proof of what he 
 has just asserted, viz., that he is innocent. In 
 
 * [" The pretlicate tfte living God isoccasioned by the prc?- 
 servation of life which the kinp regarded as possible, and pri> 
 bably was made Itnown tu the king in previous conversation! 
 with Daniel; cf. Psa. xlii. 3; lixxiv. 3; 1 Sam. xviL Sti, 
 ete."- ^tU.\ 
 
CHAP. VI. 1-29. 
 
 lU 
 
 modem speeoli the connection might have been. 
 "even as I was likewise found innocent by thee " 
 (which was apparent to him from the king's 
 anxious inquiries concerning his welfare). * 
 
 Verses 24, 25 [23, 24]. T/te ddicerance of 
 Daniel and the puKis/imint nf /lis enemies. Then 
 was the king exceeding glad (of. on v. lo) for 
 him,f and commanded that they should take 
 Daniel up out of the dea4 ~P9:'T') ^^^ inf 
 Aphel of the root P-0, compensates for the 
 doubling by ;, similarly to b^rC in v. 19 [18J 
 
 (cf. ii. 25). Cf. P^Sn, chap. iii. 22.— Verse 25 
 [34J. And the king commanded, and they 
 brought those men; rather, "that those men 
 should be brought. " The same construction as 
 inv. 17 [1*5]. § — "Those men" are the same who 
 are mentioned in vs. 6 [5] and 7 [OJ, viz. : the 
 grand officers who were present in Babylon 
 itself, and who had taken part in traducing 
 Daniel. A number of them may have been in 
 the king's train, when he commanded that the 
 seals should be broken and the stone removed (v. 
 24 [23J), without venturing to protest, in the 
 presence of the angry monarch, against the vio- 
 lation of the seal which belonged in part to them. 
 The others were brought from their houses by 
 the king's command. There is consequently 
 nothing in the passage that involves a ditficul;y 
 or that contradicts V. 18 [17] (ag.ainst Hitzig). — 
 WriiCh had accused Daniel Literally, "who 
 had devoured Daniel's flesh ; " cf . on chap. ui. 
 b. — And they cast . . . into the den of lions, 
 them their children, and their wrJves. Upon 
 this point even Hitzig is compelled to remark ; 
 *' To execute the familes of criminals together 
 with themselves was eminently the Persian cus- 
 tom (Herod., III. 119; Ammian. Marcel., xxiii. 
 G, 81) ; Justin, in such an instance, makes espe- 
 cial relerence to the wives and chililren (X. 2) ; 
 cf. further, Justin, XXI. 4; Josh. vii. 24, 25." 
 On the authority of the statements quoted from 
 Herodotus and Justin (and also inlluenced by 
 what Curtius, VI. 11. states with reference to 
 the custom among the Macedonians), Hitzig con- 
 tends that such fearfully bloody justice — whose 
 barbarous severity our prophet seems to allude 
 to when he mentions the children before the 
 wives — was only inflicted on conspirators against 
 the king. But Ammian, (1. c.) states no such 
 limitation ; and the maUcious plot of these 
 magnates against one of the chief officials of the 
 kingdom, as well as intimate counsellor of the 
 
 • [" Daniel casts no severe reproach upon the king. In- 
 deed the orifrinal rather expresses a eenial and kindly feel- 
 ing ; Daniel * talked with the king.' With beautiful modesty 
 he ascr.bes his deliverance to God's own hand alone through 
 his angel, and very properly asserts his innocence of any 
 wrong in this matter.— We may suppose Daniel to have had 
 a sweet sense of the presence of God by his angel while 
 spending the night in the den with these hungry lions." — 
 Voicleh.] 
 
 t LTT^j-? does not refer to Daniel, but to the king him- 
 
 eelf. It denotes the reflexive sense of 35eD, which is here 
 
 used impersonally : gladness came over him.j 
 
 t l**By this, however, we are not to undei-stand a being 
 drawn up by ropes through the opening of the den from 
 above. The bHiigiiig out was by the opened passage in the 
 hide of the den. for which purpose the stone with the seals 
 was removed." — Keii.\ 
 
 \ [But the rendering proposed by tile author lA equally 
 Iniidmissible here ' \ 
 
 10 
 
 king, was almost equivalent to a conspirac> 
 directed against the royal person. — And the 
 lions had the mastery of ihem (or "fell upon 
 them ") . . . or ever they came at the bottom 
 of the den. LiteraUj-. "and not came they . . 
 . . wnfS Mai." i.f., when the lions already seized 
 them. On the incident, cf . chap. iii. 22 ; con- 
 cerning the form '-P'r, see chap. ii. 29. 
 
 Verses 26-28 [25-27] . The royal prodnmation 
 consequent on the mirnenlmis deliverance oj 
 Daniel. Then king Darius wrote (commanded 
 to write) unto all people, nations, and lan- 
 guages, etc. ; i.e., to all the subjects of hia 
 realm, which was a world-kingdom like that of 
 Nebuchadnezzar, chap. iii. 31. — Verse 27 [26]. I 
 make a decree. Cf . iii. 29 ; iv. 3, where ths 
 shorter "'i'p occurs instead of ^^"Ip"!":, which 
 is foimd in this place. ^That . . . men tremble 
 and fear before the God of Daniel. Cf. chap. 
 V. 19. — The theocratic phi.aseology of the royal 
 edict admits of the same explanation as do the 
 similar proclamations of Nebuchadnezzar, chap, 
 ii. 47 ; iii. 28 et seq. ; iii. 31 et seq. ; iv. 31 et seq. 
 It results in part from the extended intercourse of 
 the king with Daniel, the representative of the 
 theocratic faith of revelation ; and in part from 
 the profound influence of the experience of the im- 
 mediate past. — And his kingdom (is one) which 
 shall not be destroyed ; a forcible ellipsis, simi- 
 lar, for instance, to that in chap. vii. 14 ; cf. 
 also chap. ii. 44; and on the thought, iii. 33; 
 iv. 31. — And his dominion (shall be even) unto 
 the end; i.e., "to the end of all earthly king- 
 doms, to the end of the world " (the nuv7t'/.eia 
 rnr cii'jrct;), which coincides with the erection of 
 the completed kingdom of Messiah or God ; cf, 
 vii. 14, 20 et seq.— Verse 28 [27]. He deUver- 
 eth and rescuetn ; rather, "He is a saviour and 
 deliverer." Cf. chap. iii. 29 6., and for what 
 follows cf. iii. 32 ; iv. 32. — From the power of 
 the lions : literally, "oit of the hand of the 
 Uons ; " cf. Psa. xxii. 21, " out of the hand of 
 the dogs." 
 
 Verse 29 [28]. I'he epilogue. So this Daniel 
 prospered in the reign of Darius. " This 
 Daniel," as in v. 4 ^3]. — f^-?~, " found prosper- 
 ity, prospered ;" similar to cnap. ii'l. 30. Ewald'a 
 reading, T?2n, which is designed to be equiva- 
 lent to, " he was reinstated in his office " (?), is 
 unnecessary. — On the subject cf. chap. ii. 48.— 
 And (also) in the reign of Cyrus the Persian. 
 This complementary closing sentence, like that 
 in chap. i. 21, appears to have been added a con 
 siderable time after the preceding facts were 
 recorded, for the purpose of closing the histori- 
 cal part of the book as a whole. But the objec- 
 tion that it is clearly a ' ' bald and labored 
 gloss in its appearance" (Kranichf.), is not 
 therefore justified. The reign of Cyrus is mere- 
 ly mentioned, as having been reached by Daniel, 
 for the same reason that dictated chap. i. 21. 
 
 ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAIi PRINCIPLES REL.\TED 
 TO THE HISTORY OF SALV.iTION, APOLO- 
 GETICAL REMARKS, AND HOMILETICAL SUG- 
 GESTIONS. 
 
 1. The similarity of the facts recorded in tbii 
 section to those of the third chapter is certainJj 
 
110 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 evident and vmdeniable ; but these analogies do 
 not warrent the disregarding of the important 
 differences between the incidents of the two sec- 
 tions. These differences, on the one hand, 
 affect the disposition and the modes of action of 
 the persons engaged in the various transactions, 
 in which respect the king Darius especially ob- 
 serves from the beginning a more cordial bear- 
 ing toward the worshipper of Jehovah than does 
 Nebuchadnezzar ; and, on the other, they relate 
 to the miracle which forms the end and climax 
 of the entire event. The deliverance of Daniel 
 from the lions' den was a miracle differing mate- 
 rially in character from that of the deliverance 
 of the three Hebrews from the fiery furnace ; 
 while the latter, as was intimated on chap. iii. 
 23, would admit of a natural explanation. To 
 some extent at least, this is absolutely impossi- 
 ble with the event recorded in this chapter, as 
 may be seen more particularly from the fact, 
 noticed in v. 25 [24] b, that the same lions who 
 spared Daniel during an entire night immedi- 
 ately seized on his .accusers with a ravenous vora- 
 city in order to rend them. By this contrast 
 between the subjection of the beasts to the pro- 
 phet, and the outburst of their savage nature 
 towards the guilty princes — a contrast which 
 evidently constitutes the fundamental charac- 
 teristic of the incident before us — this miracle 
 takes its position amoug that series of marvel- 
 lous events in Old and New Testament history 
 in which the life and work of isolated distin- 
 guished messengers of revelation appear, by vir- 
 tue of Divine grace, to have restored the para- 
 disaical dominion of man over nauare, so that 
 the beasts of the desert yield him a ready obe- 
 dience as their rightful lord. We class here, 
 prior to the time of Daniel, the ravens of Elijah 
 (1 Kings xvii. 4) and the bears of Elisha (2 Kings 
 iL 24) ; and in N. T. times, the sojourning of 
 the Saviour with the beasts of the desert, imme- 
 diately subsequent to his temptation (Mark i. 13), 
 Paul's escape from injury by the viper on the 
 island of Malta (Acts xxviii. 5 ; cf. Mark xvi. 
 18), and perhaps several incidents of a similar 
 character in the history of the earliest monkish 
 saints and missionaries of the Church down to 
 the times of Columban and Gallus, so far as any 
 faith may be placed on the statements in the 
 generally fancifully distorted biographies of 
 these saints which relate to their friendly inter- 
 course with wild beasts (cf. Montalembert, Les 
 Moines (F Occident depais St. Benoit jusqu'd St. 
 Bernard, vol. II. ; and for a criticism of the 
 often excessively credulous judgment of this 
 author with reference to such miracles, see the 
 reyiew of his work in the Jahrbiicher filr deutsche 
 Thef}logie, 1862, No. 2). — It is, however, pre- 
 cisely because the miraculous incident of this 
 section belongs to the category of such facts, 
 that it must rank as the greatest wonder record- 
 ed in the historical part of the book, as the 
 climax in the series of mighty works by which 
 God glorified Himself in His servants in the 
 metropolis of the Chaldsean empire, and which, 
 forming a gradation of miracles in certain as- 
 pects, ami presenting a constantly-increasing 
 manifestation of the supernatural element in 
 them, from chap. i. l.'S to the close of this chap- 
 ter, excludes, with steadily-increasing emphasis, 
 the possibility of tracing back the events to 
 natural caufles (of. especially on chap. v. 5). 
 
 2. So far as the general situation is similar to 
 that described in chap, iii,, it accords well with 
 the conditions of the captivity, "in which the 
 aim was not, as afterwards under Antiochua 
 Epiphanes, to extirpate the Jewish worship, but 
 where we find merely certain very natural and 
 intelligible displays of grudging selfishness and 
 envy on the part of individual native officials, as 
 against a captive foreigner who was preferred 
 above them in official stations ; while the gen 
 eral condition of the captives was very tolerable, 
 as a natural result of the lax administration ol 
 government which was usual an.oiig Oriental 
 conquerors " (Kranichfeld). The assertion of the 
 modem "tendency-critics" (Hitzig, p. 80 et 
 seq. ; Bleek, p. 604, etc.), that the edict of 
 Darius which prohibited the rendering of Dirine 
 honors during one month to any but the king 
 (v. 8 [7J) was invented for the purpose of exag- 
 gerating or caricaturing the proclamation of 
 Autiochus Epiphanes, which prohibited the Jews 
 from observing the Divine law and their worship 
 of Jehovah (1 Mace. i. 41 ; 2 Mace. vi. 1-9), in 
 order to incite them to steadfast endurance and 
 to patient trust in God, — this assertion is decid- 
 edly nugatory, since the raging fanaticism of 
 the Syrian king, which aimed at the total de- 
 struction of the Jewish worship and nationality, 
 had nothing in common with the far milder dis- 
 position of Darius, and since the latter was 
 merely concerned to bring about a temporary 
 suspension of the religious observances in vogue, 
 rather than to definitely extirpate the current 
 systems of religion. Nor would it have been 
 possible for the pious Jews of the Macoabaean 
 period to recognize an edict, which amounted 
 directly to the deifying of the king, as a proto 
 type of the m.nnifesto of the Syrian king, which 
 differed materially from it, in respect both to its 
 language and its character. For this reason Von 
 Lengerke, more cautious than his compeers, re- 
 jects the assumption that the edict of v. 8 [7] 
 was a conventional fiction framed on the model 
 of that mentioned in the Maccabsean books, as 
 being too artificial and unsupported a hypothe- 
 sis, and contents himself with observing that 
 "the proclamation of Darius on the religious 
 question corresponds in general to that persecut- 
 ing spirit which produced the measures of Anti- 
 ochus. " But it will be seen that even this is not 
 correct, since the deportment of Darius towards 
 Daniel, manifesting in every respect a mild, 
 friendly, and benevolent spirit (vs. 14, 15 et 
 seq. ; 21 et seq.), presents the sharpest contrast 
 to the senseless rage and blood-thirsty spirit of 
 persecution displayed by the intolerant Syrian 
 tyrant ; and, moreover, since no reason ^vhat- 
 ever can be discovered that could induce the 
 alleged Maccabsean-tendency writer to invent so 
 weak, and in all respects so inappropriate, a 
 counterfeit of Autiochus at the Inst, after hav- 
 ing furnished in Nebuchadnezzar and BeKshazzar 
 far more suitable and tangible types of that 
 despot. Nor does it appear why he should 
 desire to conceal the person of Antiochus behind 
 that of a jealous and scheming official under the 
 Median king (vs. 4, 5 et seq.). — How much more 
 simple and intelligible, in comparison with such 
 hypercritical assumptions, does the narrative 
 appear when its characteristic peculiarities are 
 regarded as historical facts, such as were natu- 
 rally to be expected in the scenes of a politioo 
 
CHAP. VII. 1-28. 
 
 147 
 
 religious drama that transpired on the soil of 
 the newly-fouuded Medo-Persian world-king- 
 dom ! The 120 satrapies Instead of the former 
 division of the kingdom into differently consti- 
 tuted provinces ( cf . vi. 2 with iii . 2) ; the exceed- 
 ingly independent course of the royal counsel- 
 lors and officers, without whose consent no edict 
 could be promulgated nor the royal seal affixed 
 (vs. H [7], 18 [17J); the temporary deifying of 
 the king as the son and image of the supreme 
 God (V. 8 et seq. ), so suq>risingly in harmony 
 with the fundamental principles of the Old-Per- 
 sian state religion ; the cruel procedure connected 
 with the punishment of the offenders (v. 25 [34J) 
 which bears, in an equal degree, the stamp of 
 specifically Persian legal usage ; and finally, the 
 repeated reference to the " law of the Medes and 
 Persians," as the original source and inviolable 
 authority for the measures proposed and put in 
 force — all these point, with all possible force 
 and internal congruity, to a well-defined his- 
 torical condition with which the writer was 
 familiarly acquainted, an actual condition which 
 was distinguished from the state existing in 
 the Chaldajo-Babylonian kingdom in a man- 
 ner that corresponds fully with numerous 
 extra-biblical testimonies, and which indicates 
 that the experience and personal observation of 
 the author formed the only source of his descrip- 
 tions. Cf. the observations made above on the 
 several passages. 
 
 3. The homUetical treatment of this section 
 will vary, according as the conduct and fate of 
 Daniel, the man of God, receive attention, or as 
 those of the other agents, viz. : of the good- 
 natured but weak king and of the jealous accus- 
 ers, are prominently considered. In the former 
 case, the theme for the treatment of the subject 
 as a whole might be : " We should obey God, 
 rather than men " (cf. v. 5 with v. 11 et seq. ) ; 
 or, " Fidelity to God is a more precious virtue, 
 and secures a more certain and precious reward, 
 than fidelity to human authority; " or, " It is 
 better to be the friend of God, even if the foe 
 of the whole world. " In the latter case : "Who- 
 so digs a pit for others, shall fall into it him- 
 self ; " or, '' God knows how to use the plans by 
 which men seek to destroy his faithful servants, 
 for their deliverance and honor;" or " God has 
 converted many a ruler, from being a persecutor 
 of His church into its forwarder and zealous 
 protector ! " 
 
 In coonectiou with the former class of medi- 
 
 tations, cf. the following extracts from oldei 
 practical expositors: Jerome (on vs. 11. 12) 
 " Daniel, regusjussa conteinncim et in Deohabem 
 Jiducuim, non orat in humili loco, scd in eicelsD, 
 et feiieMran aperit contra Jerusalem, iibi erat 
 vino pads. Orat avtem secundum prcecej^tum 
 Dei dictague Seilonwnis, qnicontra templum ornn- 
 dum esse admonuit." Melancthon (on v. I'J et 
 seq.); " Periculum Danielis jiinr/it robur et fio- 
 lentiam /wstium Christi. Sicut Daniel iinbecillis 
 objicitur leonibus, sic tota Ecclesia luibct hvstet 
 valtdissimos, diabolum, reges, potentes, superbos, 
 prifstantes auetoritnte et opihm in mundo. Lib- 
 eratio Danielis est testimonium, quod Dtus adsit 
 Sanctis et aervet eos suojudicio, alias corpore, alias 
 spiritu." Starke (on v. 29 [28J): "Whosoever 
 does not permit himself to be driven by persecu- 
 tion and danger, either from the upright fear of 
 God, nor. on the other hand, from his lawful 
 obedience to earthly authorities, shall hud at 
 la.st that honor and glory follow upon fidelity " (1 
 Sam xxiv. 11, 21). 
 
 With the second class of themes, cf. : Melanc- 
 thon (on V. 5 [4|) : '■ 'J'ales hahet diabolus minis- 
 tru.1, (pii cnjrtntis occasionibus regum animos astute 
 a teritate avertunt, ubi sumina officii et virtutis 
 specie insidicB struuntur. Ita hie . . . bonus 
 senex . . . non videt quantum admittat sceleris, 
 quod in edicts etiam Dei intocatio prohibetur. 
 Monet igitur hoc exemplum, vt cauti sint pirinci- 
 pes in obsertandis tulibus insidiis, nc pnesertim 
 in leyibus et edictis c^ndendis." Id. (on v. 1.) et 
 seq.) : "' Quamquam igitur peccarit Darius, tamen 
 injirmitate lapsus est et contra furorem accusa- 
 torum s-ustentat se quadam scintilla fidei, q\K^ 
 ostendit Tion ipsum. sed pi'incipes esse supjiUeii 
 auctores, etiamsi i/isi non satis furtitor eos repres- 
 serat .... 'J'ales infirnios sublecat Deus, vt hie 
 apparet. Sequitur enini statiui acerbissima pieiii- 
 tentia regis, ac deinde tantum fidei robur, tunta 
 animi miignitudo, ut puniot etiam atcusatores." 
 Geier (on v. 21 [20]): "Hoc sensu Darium ex 
 animi sui sententia adeoque ex vera fide compel- 
 lasse Danielis Deum, vero»imile non est; sic 
 nainque omnia Persarum Medorumque improbas- 
 set et abnegasset numina .... immo non vocat 
 Deum suum, sed Danielis, neque ait se ipsun 
 colere, sed: quern tucolis." Joh. Gerhard ( Weim. 
 Bib., on V. 24 et seq ) : " God is able to promote 
 and extend the true faith by means of the very 
 persecutions and other methods by which ita 
 enemies seek to destroy it. " 
 
 SECOND (PROPHETIC) DIVISION. 
 
 Chap. VII. -XII. 
 
 1. TJie vision of the four world-kingdoms and of the Messianic kingdom, 
 
 VII. 
 
 In the first year of Belsliazzar king of Babylon, Daniel had [saw] a dream, 
 and visions of his head upon liis bed : tiien he wrote the dream, anduAii the sum 
 of the matters.' 
 
 Daniel spake '' and said, I saw ' in my vision by ° night, and, behold, the four 
 winds of tile heaven [heavei\sj strove upon [were riishiai/ to] the great sea. Aud 
 four great beasts came up from the sea, diverse one from another ° 
 
V4!> THE PROPHET DAXIEL. 
 
 4 The first was like a lion, and had eajjle's wings : I beheld till ' the wings there 
 of were plucked, and it was lifted w^7 troiu the earth, and made [to] stand upon 
 
 5 the teet as a man, and a man's heart was given to it. And, behold, another beast, 
 a second, like to a bear, and it raised ' tqj itself [was made to stand] on one side,' 
 and it had three ribs in the mouth of it between the teeth of it : and they said 
 
 C thus unto it. Arise, devour much flesh. After this I beheld,' and lo, another, 
 like a leopard, which [and it] had upon the back of it foui' wings of a fowl [bird] : 
 
 7 the beast had also four heads ; and dominion icas given to it. After this I saw * 
 in the night visions, and, beliold, a fourth beast, dreadful and terrible, and strong 
 exceedingly ; and it had great iron teeth: '" it devoured and brake in pieces, and 
 stamped the residue with the feet of it : and it was diverse from all the beasts 
 
 8 that were before it; and it had ten horns. I considered " the hoi'ns, and, behold, 
 there came up among them another little horn, before whom [and from before it] 
 there were three of"' the first horns plucked up by the roots [were extirpated] : 
 and, behold, in this horn were eyes like the eyes of man, and a mouth speaking 
 great things. 
 
 9 I beheld till ' the thrones were cast [set] down, and the Ancient of days did 
 sit, whose [his] garment was white as snow, and the hair of his head like the '" 
 pure wool: his throne vms like the''' fiery flame [flames of fire],a«rf his wheels as 
 
 10 burning fire. A fiery stream [stream of fire] issued [flowed] and came forth from 
 before him : thousand thousands ministered unto him," and ten thousand times 
 ten thousand stood '* before him: the judgment was set [did sit], and tlie books 
 
 1 1 were opened. I beheld ' then, because of the voice of the great words which 
 the horn spake \yaas speaking] ; I beheld, even till' the beast was slain, and his 
 
 12 [its] body destroyed, and given to the burning flame. As concerning [And] 
 tlie rest of the beasts, they had their dominion taken away : '" yet their lives were 
 prolonged for " a season and time. 
 
 13 I saw' in the night visions, and, behold, one like the Son of man came [was 
 coming] with the clouds of heaven [the heavens], and came to [reached] the 
 
 14 Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given 
 him [to him loas given] dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, 
 nations, and languages," should serve " him : his dominion is an everlasting 
 dominion, which shall not pass away, and his kingdom that which shall not be 
 destroyed. 
 
 15 I Daniel was grieved in my spirit [my spirit was grieved] in the midst of my 
 
 1 6 body \its sheath], and the visions of my head troubled " me. I came near unto "' 
 one"' of them that stood hy, and asked him" the truth of" all this. So [And] 
 
 17 he told me, and made^' me know the interpretation of the things."' These great 
 IS beasts, which are"' four, are four kings, which shall arise out of the earth. But 
 
 [And] the saints of the Most High " sliall take [receive] the kingdom, and pos- 
 sess the kingdom for ever, even for ever and ever. 
 
 19 Then I would knoio [wished] the truth of' the fourth beast, wliich was diverse 
 from all the others [of them], exceeding dreadful, whose [its] teeth were of 'won, 
 and his [its] nails of bi-ass ; which devoured, brake [breaking] in pieces, and 
 
 20 stamped the residue with his [its] feet; and of" the ten horns that were in his 
 [its] head, and of the other which came up, and before whom [from before it] 
 three lell ; even [and] of that horn that [and it] had eyes, and a mouth that 
 spake [speaking] very great things, whose [and its] look was more stout than hia 
 
 21 [its] fellows. I beheld,* and the same [that] horn made war with the saints, and 
 
 22 prevailed ' against them ; until the Ancient of days came, and [the] judgment was 
 given to the saints of the 3Iost High ; "' and the time came [arrived] that [, and] 
 the saints possessed the kingdom. 
 
 23 Thus he said, The fourth beast shall be tlie fourth kingdom" ujion [the] earth, 
 which shall be diverse Irom all [the] kingdoms, and shall devour the whole 
 
 S4 earth, and r.hall tread it down, and break it in pieces. And the ten horns out of 
 this" kingdom are ten kings that shall arise: and another shall rise [arise] aftei 
 them ; and he shall be diverse from tlie first, and he shall subdue [abase] three 
 
 fS kings. And he s^hall speak great words against the 3Iost High, and shall wear 
 out [artli(.<tj the saints of the Most High," and think to change times and laws 
 
CHAP VII. 1-28. 
 
 149 
 
 [law] : and they shall be given into his hand, until a time and times and the 
 2G dividing of [half a] time. But [And] tlie judgment shall [did] sit, and they 
 27 shall t'.ike away his dominion, o consume and to destroy it unto the end. And 
 
 the kingdom and [the] dominion, and the greatness of the kingdom under the 
 
 whole heaven [heavens], shall be given to the people of tfi^ saints of the Most High," 
 
 whose [his] kingdom is an everlasting kingdom, and all [the] dominions shall 
 
 serve and obey him. 
 28 Hitherto is the end of the matter." As for me " Daniel, my cogitations 
 
 [thoughts] much troubled " me, and my countenance " changed in " me ; but 
 
 [and] I kept the matter '" in my heart. 
 8 
 
 GRAMMATICAL AXD LEXICAL NOTES. 
 
 [* To. — ' Or, chief of the words. — ^ Aiisicered. — * Was seeing. — * With the. — " Changed this from that. — ' Was seeing 
 Hit that. — * r ?3^pri is evidently used here to correspond with the description of the preceding verse, and hence the pointing 
 n to is preferred, as in the margin. — " *n~"1 wCi» to one side, sidewise, i.e., partialti/^ prob. on the fore or hind feel 
 
 only ; in a cronching or half-risen posture ; thus contrasted with the erect attitude of the Uon preceding on both feet ^y 
 
 ^'^^m — '" The position of the terms is emphatic, teeth of iron vere to it, ffreatonee >' Was occupying my attention with. — 
 
 -'■' Out of, or among, — 13 The definite article is here injurious to the sense. — '* Wontd serve him as attendants. — '^ Myriad oj 
 myriads teould stand.— ^^ Literally, cau.^ed to pats away. —^"^ And a lengthening in their lives wa* giren them tilt. — '^ As in 
 chap. vi. 26; All the nations, the pefjples, and the tongues.— ^^ Labor fur. — '^^ Would trouble.—'*^ Cpon.—'^"^ Would a-^k 
 from him.—'" Would make.—'" Or, words,— '^ They.—'" In the plur., like most names of Deity.— "^ kingdom thefonrt/i, 
 >s It the,—^> To the side o/.— '» Or, word,—'' I,—''' Looks would be,\ 
 
 EXEGETICAL BEMARES. 
 
 Verse 1. Historkal introduction. In the first 
 year of Belshazzar j hence, in the first year 
 after the death of Nebuchadnezzar, the father 
 and predecessor of Belshazzar ; see on chap. v. 
 1.* This designation of the time "seems sub- 
 stantially to . have furnished the occasion for 
 renewed reflection on the part of the pro- 
 phet, bearing upon the former series of pro- 
 phetical meditations that had been called forth 
 in him by an important event (the dream of 
 Nebuchadnezzar concerning the image of the 
 monarchies, which Daniel interpreted, chap. ii. ). 
 The idea of the four heathen kingdoms which 
 were to precede the intioduction of the Messi- 
 anic kingdom of Israel, that was announced by 
 the earlier prophets and believed by them to be 
 near, is again brought out comprehensively in 
 this place, with reference to the course observed 
 by those kingdoms toward the theocracy " 
 (Kranichfeld). — Concerning the chronological 
 parallelism of the series of apocalyptic visions, 
 opened by this new vision of the monarchies, 
 with the series of historical events recorded in 
 the former division of the book, and beginning 
 with chap. ii. , see the Introd. , § 3. — Daniel had 
 a dream and visions of his head upon his bed. 
 Cf. chap. ii. I'J; and with reference to the 
 visions of his head, cf. ii. 28. — Then he iwrote 
 the dream, immediately or soon after it trans- 
 pired ; a note intended to strengthen the follow- 
 ing .statements concerning its nature (cf. chap, 
 xii. 4). This note, however, as the change of 
 person between vs. 1 and 2 indicates, was proba- 
 bly introduced by the author at a later time, in 
 
 * [This assumption rests upon the author's theory that 
 Belshazzar is identical with Kvil-merodach, which, as we 
 have shown in the notes appended to the Introduction, is not 
 sustained by the Ir-test authorities or. Babylonian hist'jry. 
 If Rawlinsou's conjecture is correct, that Belshazzar was 
 the son of Nahouned, left in command of Babylon while his 
 father threw himself into Borsippa. the date in questif'n will 
 rt-laie ti) the viceroyship of the former, which may well have 
 r.ontinued a year or more (or even into the third year, see 
 chap. viii. 1), since tb- -lege of B.ibylon lasted two years.] 
 
 connection with his final revision of the whole 
 book. The closing verse of the chapter, which 
 likewise is merely important as a transitional 
 passage, seems also to be a later addition. — And 
 told the sum of the matters ; gave the leading 
 features. P^'r "'*'^, the sum or substance of 
 the words ; cf. •,;;5t-i in passages like Lev. v. 24 ; 
 Psa. cxix. 160; and also the Talmudic ^■,i"st-i 
 S-'-^T (Hash /task., II. 0), and the Gr. i..'^.i/-<!;oi-, 
 which is employed in this place by the Sept. 
 The "sum" signifies, of course, the aggregate 
 of all that is of Messianic significance. Cf. 
 Ewald : "AVhen it is said that Daniel merely 
 recorded the leading features, or gave a mere 
 summary, of the wonderful visions which he 
 saw, the meaning becomes evident, when it is 
 observed with what freedom the leading outlines 
 of the visions are drawn in the first two turns of 
 the description (vs. 1-14), and are afterward re- 
 peated for the purpose of interpretation. All 
 the remaining prophetic sections of the book 
 have the same plan in substance ; but whenever 
 it is attempted to record personal experiences 
 and observations in writing, it is advisable to 
 furnish the briefest outline consistent with clear- 
 ness, on account of the readers, if for no other 
 reason." * 
 
 ♦ ["This vision accords not only in many respects with the 
 dreR.z. of Nebuchadnezzar (ch. ii), but has the same subject. 
 Thi^ subject, however, the representation of the world-power 
 in its principal forms, is differently given in the two chaji- 
 ters. In ch. li. H Is represented according to its whole char- 
 acter as an image of a man whose different parts consist of 
 different metals, and in chap. vii. under the figure of four 
 beasts which arise one after the other outof the sea. In the 
 former, its destruction is represented by a stone breaking 
 the image in pieces, while in the latter it is effected by a 
 solemn act of judgment. This further difference also is to 
 be observed, that in thia chapter, the first, bttt chiefly the 
 fourth, world-kingdom, in its development and relation to 
 the people of God, is much mor« clearly exhibited in ch. ii. 
 These differences have their principal reason in the differ- 
 ence of the recipients of the liivine revelation : Nebuchad- 
 nezzar, the founder of the world-power, saw this power in its 
 imposing greatness and glory ; while Daniel, the prophet of 
 God, saw it in its opposition to God in the form of ravenous 
 beasts of prey. Nebuchadnezzar had his dream in the second 
 year of his reign, when he had just founded his world-mon- 
 archy ; while Daniel had his vi-sion of the wor'd-kingdoinf 
 
150 
 
 THE PEOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Vei-ses 2, 3. T.\e entrance of the fmtr beasts. 
 Daniel spake and said. The incoherence of 
 these words with the statements of v. 1 seems 
 to indicate that they no longer belong (as Kran- 
 ichfeld believes) to the supplementary note, v. 
 1, but that they originally served to introduce the 
 description of the vision. — I saw in my vision 
 bynight; C>', "during, by," spoken of syn- 
 chronous things ; cf. chap. iii. 33.— And behold, 
 the four winds of the heavens strove ('• broke 
 forth ") upon the great sea. Concerning 1"l?*i 
 see on chap. ii. 31. — The fourfold number of the 
 '■ winds of the heaven " ij.e.. the winds blowing 
 from the different quarters of heaven, or, more 
 simply, those blowing Hinder heaven; cf. "the 
 birds of heaven ") has reference, of course, to 
 that of the beasts in v. 3 et seq. It designates 
 all the winds of the world (cf. chap. viii. 8; 
 Zech. vi. 5 ; Jer. xlix. 36), and therefore indi- 
 cates at the outset the universal importance of 
 the following vision. Hence actual winds must 
 be intended, and not ^' nngelkcB potentates'" as 
 Jerome suggests, under reference to Deut. xxxii. 
 8 (Sept.).* It is not necessary to ask, in con- 
 nection with a dream-vision, how all the four 
 winds could arise together ; nor ho%T the great 
 sea {i.e.. probably the Irtediterranean, the ocean 
 of the nations of hither Asia ; cf . Josh. xv. 48) 
 could enter into the dream of an Israelite who 
 resided from his early youth at Babylon. The 
 sea, as is frequent in prophetic figurative lan- 
 guage of the Old Testament, represents the 
 heathen world of nations, which unquestionably 
 afforded a striking illustration in every case 
 when they arose in hostility against the theo- 
 cracy, in order to overwhelm and destroy the 
 constantly-diminishing people of God, as the 
 raging waves of the ocean break upon an insig- 
 nificant island or coast. Cf. Isa. viii. 7 et .seq. ; 
 xvii. 12; xxvii. 1 ; Ivii. 20; Psa. xlvi. 4; also 
 Rev. viii 8; xvii. 15 ; and with reference to the 
 overflowing (by hostile forces) see Dan. ix. 2(j ; 
 xi. 10, 22, 26.— »?"_!? in-37; may be properly 
 translated " breaking forth iipo7i the sea, break- 
 ing loose against the sea ; " on n'^p, cf . the corre- 
 sponding Heb. word in Job xl. 23 ; Ezek. xxxii. 
 22. and also the Syr. and Targum. usage, which 
 principally employs the word to represent the 
 hostile irruption of warlike forces. Less natural 
 is the factitive renderingof the partic, '^cmised 
 t'ue great sea to break forth" (Kranichf. ), and 
 the reciprocal, by Luther, "stormed against 
 each other on the great sea (cf. Ewald's " swept 
 through the great sea ") ; the prep. 3 seems not 
 Bnited to either conception.! — Verse 3. And 
 four (excessively) great beasts came up from 
 the sea. The strengthening of the idea impUed 
 in the reduplicated l^"?"] may be rendered, 
 with Ewald. by " monstrous," or by an adverb 
 ^f comparison prefixed to "great," as "very, 
 
 and of the judgment against them in the first .vcar of Bel- 
 fehazzar, when the glory of the world-monarchy hogan to 
 fade, and the spirit of its opposition to God became more 
 manifest.'' — A'ciV.] 
 
 ♦ [Keil's remark, however, Is apposite: "The winds o/ 
 the henntnH rcpr("»ent the heavenly powers and forces by 
 which tfOd sets tht nations of the world in motion."] 
 
 t (We snggeiit that the preposition rather indicates the 
 4>rti'll-m of the winds as converging to this one point as a 
 •**!ne el eontiict.l 
 
 excessively," etc. * Kranichf eld is incorrect an J 
 interpolating: "four ravenous beasts." — The 
 rising of "the beasts from the sea" describes, 
 figurtttively, their rising out of the great unde- 
 fined, and, so to speak, mist- enveloped sea of 
 nations, and their more noticeable entrance into 
 the range of the dreaming prophet's vision. 
 There is therefore no allusion to a coming up 
 out of the sea to the land (unlike Gen. xli. 2, 18 
 et seq.), especially since, in the parallel descrip- 
 tion in V. 17, four kings, corresponding to the 
 four bea.st8, arise "out of the earth." [" These 
 four fierce beasts arise, not all at once, but, as 
 ver. 6 and 7 teach, one after another " {KeiV).\ — 
 Concerning the representation of nations or 
 kingdoms under the figure of certain beasts, 
 especially ravenous beasts, monsters (cf. Isa. 
 xxvii. 1; li. 9 ; Ezek. xxix. 3; xxxii. 2; Psa. 
 Ixviii. 31 ; Ixxiv. 1 3), see Ewald : " It is an 
 ancient habit to regard beasts as symbols of 
 kings and empires ; but it first became really 
 significant through the custom of emblazoning 
 them on standards and arms, especially on 
 shields, and also on permanent monuments and 
 works of art, as standing symbols. The most 
 ancient picture-writing in Egypt and Assyria 
 afterward contributed its part to introduce an 
 intimate connection in thought between a figur- 
 ative creature and a kingdom corresponding to 
 it. It is now known that each of the twelve 
 tribes of Israel bore the figure of an animal on 
 its standard and its coat of arms ; and likewise 
 that every representative of a tribe could wear 
 such a symbol, while a king could elevate the 
 symbol of his tribe to the dignity of a national 
 emblem" (Geschichte des V. Israel, III. 341, 
 849). Certain animals, such as the lion, panther, 
 and ox, would naturally be suggested in any 
 case ; and others would be chosen by way of 
 contrast. But nowhere would such animal- 
 symbols be likely to become so significant as in 
 the ancient Assyrian empire. This has become 
 the more certain, since the frequent colossal an- 
 imals scnttered among the ruins of Nineveh and 
 other places, which served as symbols of the 
 power and greatness of that empire, i. e. , of its 
 kings and gods, have been brought to light. 
 Hence, after Assj'ria and the other great powers 
 of the ancient world had, from the 8th and 7th 
 centuries B. C, been opposed to the Israelites, 
 whom the latter were continually less and less 
 able to resist, their poets and orators adopted 
 the custom of designating them on proper occa- 
 sions by such symbols, e. g.. Assyria as a lion or 
 as a " reed-be.-ist," and Egypt as a crocodile or 
 dragon. As a consequence, it is comprehensible 
 why animals were chosen here and in chapters 
 vii. and viii. as symbols of the great monarchies 
 beginning with the Assyrio-Chalda^an, although 
 these animals are selected independently, be- 
 cause an entirely new conception is here intro- 
 duced. Since an increased spiritual significance 
 was attributed to animals as the emblems of 
 kingdoms, it would become possible for the im- 
 agination to extend such figures beyond the 
 realm of actual creation, and to construct idea! 
 I forms ; but our author clearly avoids the use of 
 wholly imaginary animals for this purpose, at 
 being inappropriate. His object is here to re- 
 
 * [The reduplicated form, however, seems to be meiely UH 
 usual one in Cbaldets.] 
 
CHAP. VII. 1-28. 
 
 151 
 
 present in a more striking and impressive man- 
 ner the four succes.sive changes of the great 
 world-kingdom described in chap. ii. under the 
 figure of a monstrous human image, which 
 aiforded but faint analogies ; and for this pur- 
 po.se he selects four wild beasts, which differ 
 among themselves respectively, and which over- 
 come each other in succe.ssion. — Diverse one 
 from another, for the reason that they repre- 
 sented distinct kingdoms, which differed from 
 each other respectively, and were peculiarly con- 
 stituted in respect to their national chzu'acter 
 and their political tendencies. These distinc- 
 tions are now to be brought out as clearly and 
 prominently as possible, thus indicating a differ- 
 ent purpose from that connected with the image 
 of the monarchies, which was chiefly designed 
 to represent the perpetuation of the same hea- 
 then world-power throughout the four succes- 
 sive phases of its development. 
 
 Verses i-H. Mure detailed description of the 
 four beasts, and (specially nf the fourt.i. The 
 first -c^as like a lion and had eagle's wings. 
 The emblem of a wonderful beast so constituted 
 might be chosen with propriety to represent the 
 Chaldsean. or, if it be preferred, the As.syrio- 
 Chaldiean world-power (cf supra, Eth.-fund. 
 principles, etc., on chap, ii.), since the winged 
 lions with human heads recovered at Nimrud 
 (Layard. Xinei-eli and Babylon, p. 348) and also 
 the similar images of winged animals at Babylon 
 (Miinter, Eeligion der Babylonier, pp. 98. 139) 
 were doubtless designed as symbols of the power 
 and glory of that empire or of its rulers. In 
 addition, the description of Nebuchadnezzar as 
 a lion in strength and an eagle in swiftness was 
 familiar to his contemporaries, as may be seen on 
 the one hand, in Jer. iv. 7 ; xlix. 19 ; 1. 17, 44 ; 
 on the other, in Jer. xlix 22; Lam. iv. 19; 
 Hab. i. 8; Ezek. xvii. 3, 12. Moreover, the 
 rank of the lion as the king of beasts, and of the 
 eagle as the king of birds, corresponds to that of 
 gold, the most precious of metals, which had 
 been in chap. ii. the symbol of the first world- 
 kingdom. As in that instance (v. 3K) the king 
 was identified with his realm, and therefore was 
 regarded as its representative, so here the fate 
 of the first world-kingdom is illustrated by vari- 
 ous traits taken from the history of Nebuchad- 
 nezzar in chap. iv. — I beheld till the wings 
 thereof were plucked, ;'.<;., until its power and 
 unrestrained motion were taken from it ; cf. 
 chap. iv. 28 et seq. — And it was lifted up from 
 the earth, to which, after being deprived of its 
 wii^gs. it had been confined ; compare chap. iv. 
 80 with iv. 33. The words, therefore, as well 
 as those which follow, relate to the restoration 
 from a state of beastly degradation to the up- 
 right posture and free dignity of man. Others, 
 as Jerome, Theodoret. Rashi, Bertholdt, Hitzig, 
 etc., render it, "and it was taken away from 
 the earth," as if the sentence implied the de- 
 struction of the Chalda^an world-power ; but 
 neither its connection with the following con- 
 text, nor the usual meaning of I^:, ''to raise 
 up, elevate," — cf. iv. 31 and the corresponding 
 Heb. verb. Gen. xxi. 18 — will justify this read- 
 ing. — And made (to) stand upon ths feet as a 
 man; cf. chap. iv. 13. 31, 33; v. 21. Notice 
 the suffixless V.^J" ;", •• upon two feet," instead 
 of " on its two feet," which (corresponding with 
 
 3 Kings xiii. 21) would have been employed If 
 the description had from the first referred to 
 Nebuchadnezzar in person. [The phrase " does 
 not mean that the whole beast was lifted up into 
 the air, but that it stood upon its hinder legs, 
 taking the upright position of a man. The pur- 
 pose of this is explained more fully by the clause 
 that follows. — Tl"^1 is a Hebraizing dual form, 
 
 only found in Biblical Chaldee — The 
 
 heart of a mem was given to it, i.e. (in connec- 
 tion with the preceding clause), not only did it 
 take the outward position of a man, but also 
 partook of his internal mind and feelings. I 
 understand the design here to be to character- 
 ize the greater moderation and humanity which 
 the Babylonian dominion exhibited after Ne- 
 buchadnezzar's malady and restoration, or, to 
 use the language of the prophet, after ' its 
 wings were plucked.' " — Stuart.] — See Hitzig 
 on this passage, with reference to the at times 
 venturous explanations offered by exegetes who 
 deny its relation to chap. iv. in any way what- 
 ever {e.g., Bertholdt : " The \vriter designed to 
 indicate in this place that human empires are 
 symbolized ; " J. D. Michaelis, Dereser : " The 
 civilizing of the formerly barbarous Chaldaaans, 
 which was reserved until the Babylonian period, 
 was to be described ; " Jerome, Rashi, Ibn-Ezra, 
 etc. : '■ The standing upon two feet of the 
 hitherto four-footed beast was to symbolize the 
 humiliation of the Chalda;ans on the overthrow 
 of their supremacy ; " etc., etc. ). — Verse 5. And 
 behold another beast, a second, like to a bear. 
 "'~nx is the more extended, '"';V.^ the more 
 definite idea ; the former only Is repeated in v. 
 C, and the latter in v. 7. The bear, con-sidered 
 as being second only to the lion in point of 
 strength and .savage disposition, is frequently 
 mentioned in close connection with the latter ; 
 e.g., 1 Sam. xvii. 34 ; Prov. xxviii. 13 (cf. xvii. 
 12); Wisd. xi. 17. — And it raised up i-tself on 
 one side ; or even, ' ' it stood leaning to one side " 
 (Hitzig), as it is to be rendered on the authority 
 of the reading l^r. "side" (for which several 
 MSS. substitute the usual Aram, form 17? • 
 The common reading i^'J would require to be 
 regarded as synonymous with the Heb. ~t:'i"?3. 
 
 "dominion" (Job xxxviii. 33), but would thus 
 lead to the vapid sense, " and it raised up one 
 dominion," which is opposed by the context, and 
 is questionable in every respect. This meaning, 
 however, has recently been unsuccessfully advo- 
 cated by Kranichfeld, who refers to the erection 
 of a Median empire on the ruins of the Baby- 
 lonian. Most expositors regard it correctly as 
 indicating a kjiiiing posture of the beast, an in- 
 clination to one side. Such a posture would 
 naturally suggest a tendency to fall, an unsteady, 
 vaccinating character of the monarchy in ques- 
 tion, verging upon ruin — and thus it has been 
 interpreted by the Sept., Theodot. , the Syr., 
 and by many modems, as Hitzi.g, Ewald, Kamp- 
 hausen, etc., who find here a reference to the 
 weakness and brief duration of the Median su- 
 premacy, which soon gave way to that of the 
 Persians. The context, however, requires that 
 a strong kingdom, animated with a lust for con- 
 quest — or, in the figurative language of the text, 
 a " voracious " kingdom— should be understood, 
 
152 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 to which the words " arise, devour much flesh," 
 are not spoken ironically and uselessly. For 
 this reason we must suppose (with HiiTemick ; 
 cf. also Bertholdt, Von Lengerke, and Maurer) 
 that the beast inclined /o/'iraj'rf, i.e.. that it was 
 prepared to spring and to attack ; and this 
 threatening, rapacious, and warlike posture of 
 the beast shows clearly that not the weak and 
 shortlived Median kingdom, but the powerful 
 empire of the Medo-Persians. with its greed for 
 lands and conquest, is intended. * — And it had 
 three ribs in the mouth of it between the 
 teeth of it. T?)?? ~i? evidently designates a 
 prey that has already been seized by the beast, 
 and which it is preparing finally to devour (cf. 
 Num. xi. 38 ; Zech. ix. 7), and not (as Saadia, 
 Bertholdt, and Havemick suppose) parts of its 
 own body, such as three molar teeth — an inter- 
 pretation which i-'jij:; nowhere bears. The 
 three states, or even cities, which became the 
 prey of the Persian empire as symbolized by the 
 "three ribs," can hardly be specified; perhaps 
 three is used merely as a round and indefinite 
 number. If, however, it is attempted to desig- 
 nate them more particularly, it will certainly be 
 more appropriate to conceive of three countries, 
 e.<l., Babylon. Egypt, and Lydia (or, instead of 
 the latter, Palestine, including Syria), which 
 were conquered by the Jledes or Medo-Persians 
 (with be Wette), than (with Hitzig) to think of 
 the three great Assyrian cities on the Tigris, 
 Nineveh, Calah, and Resen, — or Nineveh, Mes- 
 pila(y), and Larissa, which, according to Xeno- 
 phon, Ariab., III. 4, 10, the Medes are said to 
 have destroyed (cf. Gen. .\. ]3;Jon.iii. letseq.). 
 —And they said thus unto it, Arise, devour 
 much flesh. These words evidently refer to 
 something in the history of the Median empire, 
 that is subsequent to the devouring of the three 
 ribs, and therefore to the later wars of that state 
 for conquest and plunder, which followed after 
 the subjugation of the tliree neighboring king- 
 doms. This clearly indicates that tlie beast de- 
 scribed' in this connection does not represent 
 
 * [Keil adopts a different, but, as it seems to ns, far- 
 R'trhed and over-ingeniuns interpretation: "This means 
 neither that it leaned on one side (Ebrardl. nor that it stood 
 on its fore feet (Havemick), for the sides of a bear are not 
 its fore and hinder parts ; but we conceive that the beast, 
 resting on its feet, raised up the feet of the one side for the 
 purpose of goin^ fonv.ard, and so raised the shoulder or the 
 whole tKxly on that side. But with such a motion of the 
 b*i.nst the gtographical situation of the kingdom (Geier, 
 Mich., Ros.) cannot naturally be represented, much less can 
 the near approach of the destruction of the kingdom (Hit- 
 ligj be signified. Hofmann, Delitzsch, and JCliefoth have 
 found the right intcrprct.ition by a reference to ch. ii. and 
 viii. As in ch. ii. the arras on each side of the breast sig- 
 nify that the second kingdom will consist of two parts, and 
 this is more distinctly indicated in ch. viii. by the two horns, 
 one of which ruse up after the other, and higher, so also in 
 this ver^e the double-sidcdncss of this world-kingdom is re- 
 presented by the beast lifting itself up on one side. The 
 Medo- Persian bear, as such, has, as Kliefoth well remarks, 
 two sides ; the one. the Median side, is at rest after the 
 efforts made for the erection of the world-kingdom ; but the 
 other, the Persian side, raises itself up. and then becomes 
 not only higher than the first but also is prepared for new 
 rapine.'' — Stuart justly remarks that "'the difhcult.v seems to 
 have arisen from the fact that, until lately, we have been 
 Ignorant of a like symbol sculptured on the ancient monn 
 ments of Persia. Mi'mter {Rel. der Uab., p. 112) hns given 
 ns a description (with an engraving) of an animal of the 
 Bymbolic kind, in a group near the star of Belus, which, 
 kneeling or lying on tlic right foot, has its left one erect. A 
 sense of ser-urity, combined with watchfulness, seems to be 
 the indication. Pnihably this symbol, now on the monu- 
 ments of Persia and Babyl m. was a part of what belonged 
 to the instgnUi of the rx)yal and national standards."] 
 
 Media only, but the united Medo-Persian empire 
 (against Ewald, Kranichfeld, etc., and also 
 against Hitzig, who applies this command to 
 "devour much flesh" to the overthrow of the 
 Chaldsean empire by the Medes, which he be- 
 lieves to have preceded the destruction of the 
 three cities on the Tigris) . The direction to 
 devour much flesh is, however, an appropriate 
 feature in the description of the voracity of this 
 ^Ciov Tva/j(i>a-,(rf • cf. Micah iii. 2, ii ; Isa. ix. 11 ; 
 Jer. 1. 17. The speakers who are implied (T~ r?'' 
 as in chap. iu. 4 ; iv. 28) are the angelic powers 
 of God, who govern the world and especially 
 watch over and guide the fortunes of the great 
 world-powers.* — Verse 6. After this I beheld, 
 and lo another, like a leopard, which had 
 upon the back of it four wings of (or " like ") a 
 fowl. Ewald observes, with entire correctness : 
 "This beast is already distinguished from the 
 other in being less one-sided, and in having ' four 
 wings of a bird ' — !. e. , such as are large and capa- 
 ble of carrying it swiftly to anj place — on its back. 
 [It moves, however, " not so royally as Nebuch- 
 adnezzar — for the panther has not eagle's wings 
 but only the wings of a fowl — yet extending to 
 all the regions of the earth " (KeU).] Hence it 
 can move with ease and freedom towards either 
 of the four regions of the world, and therefore, 
 in a sense, it possesses all the four regions of the 
 world, i.e., it is in the full sense a world-king- 
 dom." Cf. Kranichfeld also: "The flashing 
 swiftness of movement, the Trnpdri/tof o;rr7,c 
 (Hab. i. 8), which is here specially indicated by 
 ' four wings of a fowl on the back of it,' i.e., in 
 a condition for flying, is regarded as character- 
 istic of this beast (the leopard) while lurking f oi 
 its prey (Jer. v. 6 ; Hos. xiii. 7). Compared 
 with the clearness and correctness of this inter- 
 pretation there seems to be a strange lack of 
 motive for the refusal of the two scholars to 
 apply it to that world-kingdom, which more 
 than any other was remarkable for its extension 
 by leaps of panther-lilje swiftness, and by the 
 lightning-like rapidity of its rise and fall — 
 namely, the Macedonian empire of Alex, the Gr." 
 Cf. the remark of Hitzig : " The special rapidity 
 of the Persian movements to war and «ctory 
 cannot be historically established " — certainly a 
 con-ect remark, but one which ought not to 
 have decided its author, who was likewise an 
 opponent of the Macedonian hypothesis, to re- 
 gard the four wings in thig instance, not as sym- 
 bols of rapid movement, but as " an emblem of 
 the far-reaching protecting royal power from 
 above " (after Lam. iv. 20 ; Psa. xxxvi. 8). — The 
 beast had also four heads, i.e., it extended its 
 dominion in the four quarters of the earth, and 
 governed the whole world. The words which 
 follow, " and dominion was given unto it," are 
 probably merely epexegetical of this symbolical 
 description, in which the four heads have the 
 same significance as the pushing of the ram 
 towards the four quarters of the heavens in 
 chap. viii. 4, or as the four faces of the cherubs 
 which looked towards the four quarters of tha 
 earth in Ezek. i. 10 et seq. If it is desired to 
 interpret the four heads more closely, they may 
 be taken to represent the four principal divisioni 
 
 • ("Thcplur. •p-.?:S t'« (mpersoMi" (KeU); "ItmigM 
 be rendered passively " (Stuart).] 
 
CHAP. VII. 1-38. 
 
 153 
 
 or aggregates of coiintries which the empire of 
 Alexander embraced (cf Hiivemick on this pas- 
 sage), e.g., Greece, Western Asia, Egj-pt, and 
 Persia (including India). This is less arbitrary, 
 at least, than the opinion of Jerome, that the 
 heads represented the four leading generals of 
 Alexander, vix. : Ptolemy, Seleucus, Philip, and 
 Antigonus, or than the faTorite assumption of 
 many moderns after Von Lengerke (e.g.., Hitzig, 
 Ewald, Kamphausen, etc), that the author 
 represents the four earliest Persian kings, from 
 Cyrus to Xerxes, who alone were known to him 
 as the four heads of the leopard. The advocates 
 of the latter opinion refer for support to chap. 
 xi. 2, which passage, however, does not even 
 imply that Daniel knew of but four kings of 
 Persia (see on that passage), to say nothing of 
 its affording no proof whatever that the present 
 passage is concerned with any Persian kings. 
 Our apocalyptist does not represent kings by 
 heads, but by horns (see vs. 8 and 34 et seq. ) ; a 
 feature which recurs in the apocalypse of St. 
 John, where the ten horns of the beast (Rev. 
 xvii. 13) symbolize ten kings, while the seven 
 heads indicate seven mountains. This analogy 
 seems to favor the view of Hiivemick, which 
 assumes that the four heads represent the four 
 principal sections of the world-kingdom in ques- 
 tion, but of course without demonstrating its 
 correctness. — Verse 7. After this I saw in the 
 night visions, and behold a fourth beast, 
 dieadful and t3rrible, and strong exceeding- 
 ly. Observe the solemn minuteness with which 
 the fourth beast is introduced, and also the 
 description as both " dreadful and terrible," 
 -rr^KT "O^riT ; cf. Chr. B. Michaelis : " Juiig- 
 untiir duo symmymn, nd intendendum, rem signi- 
 ficiiUiiii. lit h(vc bentia rwn vulgariter, sed supra 
 nwdnm hnrrihili^ apparuisge tideatur." * — And it 
 had great iron teeth. Iron is mentioned as 
 signifying firmness and incisive sharpness (cf. 
 Jer. XV. 12 ; Mic. iv. 13), while the teeth sym- 
 bolize its lust of conquest (cf. V. 5). — It devoured 
 and brake in pieces a id stamped the residue 
 with the feet of it. Unlike the other beasts, it 
 
 * ["The writer gives to thi6 fourth bea.=it no particular 
 name. Plainly it was e peculiar monster. The reason why 
 he omits a name seems to be, that in the world of nature no 
 similitude could be found, for in no cai^ of really-exifiting 
 be;ists are four of them united in one, so as to constitute an 
 appropriate symlwl for the four kingdoms of Alexander's 
 successors. He classes the-^; under the dynasty, comprehen- 
 sively considered, which grew up out of the predominance or 
 victories of the Greeks in the East. But when enouu'h is 
 Introduced to desi^ate the general nature of the dynasty, 
 both here and in ch. viii. and xi.. he goes over into a notice 
 of only such kings as were in the neighborhood of Palestine, 
 and had more or less to do with annoying it. As Antiochus 
 Epiphanes was incomparably the most annoying and mis- 
 chievous of them all, so a peculiar share of the prophecy 
 respecting the fourth dynisty is allotted to him in each of 
 the chapters named, it is evident from a comparison of 
 historical facts as well as from the nature of the casp^ that 
 a dynasty is spoken of by Daniel as more or less dreadful and 
 de.structive according to the measure iu which P;ile*.tine was 
 actUiiUy affected by it in this way." — Stuart. Keil. on the 
 contrary, who adopts the common or " orthodox " interpre- 
 tation of the fourth monarchy, gives a different explanation 
 of this feature ; " The fourth kingdom is represented by a 
 nameless be,'\st. because in Daniel's time Rome had not come 
 into contact uith Israel, and as yet lay beyond the circle of 
 vision of OM-Testament prophecy." This candid adraiss-on 
 one would think might have led the commentator to doubt 
 any reference even here to Rome. He does not seem, more- 
 o\ er, to have perceived that fur precisely the same reason 
 the Macedonian emi)ire should have tjeen represented by 
 ■ome namelesa beast, as being hitherto unknown to the 
 HebrewB.] 
 
 was not content with simply securing its prey, 
 but, rejoicing in destruction, it stamped with its 
 feet what it could not devour. This description 
 evidently does not indicate that the conquests of 
 the fourth world-kingdom were more exten- 
 sive than those of its predecessors, but merely 
 that its course was more devastating and de- 
 structive. This obviously alludes to the de- 
 scription of the legs of iron and clay (the organs 
 employed in treading and stamping), whi'h 
 belonged to the colossus in chap, ii., and corre- 
 sponds fuUy to the actual character of the em- 
 pires of the Macedonian Diadochi, and particu- 
 larly that of the Seleucidae. Cf. Kranichfeld : 
 '■ It is generally acknowledged that the descrip- 
 tion of the fourth beast agrees in its leading 
 features with that of the fourth kingdom in 
 chap. ii. 40 ; especially in regard to its rage for 
 destruction, which crushed without pity and 
 trode everything under foot. Even the iron, the 
 medium of destruction in chap. ii. 23, 40. re- 
 turns here in the large teeth of the monster. 
 The terrible appearance of the colossus resulted 
 primarily from its fourth constituent part, and 
 corresponding to this, the qualities which pro- 
 duce a terrible appearance are here expressly 
 connected with the fonn of the fourth beast." — 
 And it was diverse from all the beasts before 
 it. This does not assert that "it combined in 
 itself all that was prominent in the three former 
 beasts, the lion, bear, and leopard respectively " 
 (Jerome, Havernick, et al., under comparison 
 with Rev. xiii. 2), but merely that it differed 
 from them all. and displayed its nature in a way 
 that could not be realized by a comparison with 
 the lion, the bear, or the leopard. This differ- 
 ence of the fourth beast from all the others is 
 chiefly suggestive of the fragmeiit^iry and diiided 
 character of the fourth world-kingdom, and 
 consequently alludes to the composition of the 
 feet of the colossus out of intermingled iron and 
 clay.* The opinion of Hiivemick and other 
 advocates of the theory which regards the Roman 
 empire as the fourth world-kingdom, that this 
 description indicates the contrast between the 
 character of that empire and that of the Orien- 
 tal-Hellenistic monarchies which preceded it, is 
 entirely too far-fetched ; but that of Hitzig is no 
 less so, when, in the support of his theory that 
 the fourth beast represents Alexander the Great, 
 he asserts that the contrast between the Hellen- 
 istic and the Oriental rule is here indicated — a 
 contrast that was far greater than that between 
 Rome and the world-kingdoms which preceded 
 it. — And it had ten boms. According to v. 24 
 these ten horns represent '" ten kings." Unlike 
 ordinary animals, which have two horns, this 
 monster representing the fourth world-kingdom 
 has ten, being so many symbols of warlike power 
 and dominion (cf. Deut. xxxiii. 17 ; 1 Sam. ii. 
 1 , 10; Psa. xviii. 3 ; Job xvi. 15; Mic. iv. 13, 
 etc. ) . The number ten is hardly to be strained, 
 in this connection, to represent ten specified 
 kings ; but like the number four in v. 6, it is 
 rather to be taken in a symbolic sense, and to be 
 regarded as indicating a multiplicity of rulers, 
 or an indefinitely large number of kings — in har- 
 mony with the usual significance of the number, 
 
 • [May not the diversity rather consist in the fact that, 
 anllke all the former governments, the Seleucid dynastj 
 began a systematic attack upon the religwus institutioiu 
 of the sabject Jews?] 
 
154- 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 both in the Scriptures and elsewhere, as the 
 symbol of earthly perfection.* Kranichfeld 
 observes correctly, "It is clearly not in the 
 nature of the prophetic idea, that the number 
 ten, in addition to the value vfhich it thus has 
 for the w-riter, should be capable of being de- 
 monstrated on the analog-y of ordinary numer- 
 als, iii the realization of the picture of the 
 future." The notes on chap. xi. noil show that 
 in the more detailed description of the develop- 
 ment of the fourth world-power in that place, 
 there is by no means an exact enumeration of 
 ten kings on the throne of the Seleucidae. — 
 Verse 8. And behold, there came up among 
 them another little horn. Concerning ''"IH^' 
 and its relation to the succeeding modifying 
 predicate, see supra, on v. 5. — The prophet ob- 
 serves the rising or springing up of this little 
 horn, the eleventh one, as taking place between 
 the ten which already existed (notice the idea 
 of ountiimed observation, so to speak, of being 
 lost in observation, which is indicated by the 
 expression H^^n ;3n'i"^, " I was engaged in 
 
 considering, in observing"). The smaUnesa of 
 the new horn in this case, as in the parallel chap, 
 viii. 9, refers merely to its original state, not to 
 its later appearance when fully grown; for, 
 according to v. 30, it was then greater than any 
 of the other horns. Concerning the reading 
 rpbp, instead of ^"^..0, see Hitzig on this pas- 
 sage. — Before (or "by") whom there were 
 three of the first horns plucked up by the 
 roots; i.e., it grew so strongly, and through its 
 growth exercised so disturbing an influence upon 
 its neighbors, that three of them were uprooted 
 and wholly destroyed. Here also the definite 
 number " three " is hardly to be strained to sig- 
 nify precisely three kings, who were overthrown 
 by the monarch represented by the eleventh 
 horu.f The prophecy certainly had its more 
 immediate Messianic fulfilment in the manner 
 in which Antiochus Epiphanes rose from his 
 originally obscure condition to the throne of the 
 Seleucidaj, by removing two or perhaps three of 
 his rivals (see infra) ; but from the prophet's 
 point of view, involving substantially a ruerely 
 ideal, or, more correctly, a dreara-like indefinite 
 view of the future, the idea of precisely this 
 personage in future history, and of the political 
 conjunctures preceding his accession to the 
 throne, was assuredly excluded. — And behold, 
 in this horn were eyes like the eyes of a 
 man. Eyes like those of a man, human eyes 
 (therefore two in number, despite the plural 
 V:"!^. which is probably substituted for the 
 dual for euphonic reasons merely, and by virtue 
 of a usage that is frequent in the Chaldee). are 
 borne by the horn in token that it represents a 
 
 • See Leyrer, art. Zaftfen in Herzop's Real-Encyklop., 
 TOl. 18, p. -378 : also Zockler. l/teologiu naUiraliH, I. 713 et 
 Beq. In both places the essentially political or cosmtcat 
 Bi^ificance of this number is pointed out, in opposition to 
 Delitzsch, who regard-^ it as the symbol of Divine perfection. 
 Cf. further, Bahr. .Si/mlmlik dtttt mos. Knltu^, I. 17,'); Jlof- 
 mann, WitiHuui/img itnil Erfiitlitng, I, 75 : Hengstenberg, 
 Beitritge z. Eint., III. 3111. 605. (On the contrary, it seems 
 to un that the delinitencss of the numbers finer and three 
 In the same connection requires a similar definiteness in this 
 Oumber likewise. See f,ur remarks in the Ethico-funda- 
 mental principles, etc., on this chap.. No. 8, «.] 
 
 t [See, however, the remarks in the Ethico-fundamental 
 principles, etc., below, 3, a.] 
 
 van,* and, moreover, a wise, judicious man ; 
 for here as elsewhere (e.g.. Ezek. i. 18, x. 12; 
 eyes are the symbol of understanding; cf. ^21:;, 
 '* to look at, understand." — And a mouLh 
 speaking great (or "proud") things; a far- 
 ther indication of the A »mif;i nature and charac 
 ter of the historical personage prefigured by the 
 horn. 13~3"l ii>;'?, properly, " speaking great 
 or monstrous things ; " cf. supra, on v. 3, and 
 also infra, v. 11; also the Heb. DliilJ ~3~) 
 Psa. xii. 4. The interpretation in v. 25 shows 
 that blasphemies are meant by this " spealdng 
 of great things; " cf. xi. 3U ; Rev. xiii. 5. f 
 
 Verses 9-13. The Dirine judgment upon the 
 world-powers. I beheld (such things) tUl the 
 thrcnes were cast down (or " set "). The A. V. 
 is literal (T'^l). The chairs of the Orientals 
 consist of cushions, which are not set down, but 
 laid down, and, in case of haste, are ca.tt down ; 
 cf. cKeivTo, Rev. iv. 2. The place where the 
 thrones are set is not in heaven, for according 
 to V. 13 the Son of man descends to it from 
 heaven ; nor is it on the earth, but. as in chap, 
 xii. 7, a locality intervening between heaven 
 and earth. [" Seats, not merely a throne for 
 God the judge, but a number of seats for the 
 assembly sitting in judgment with God. That 
 assembly consists neither of the elders of Israel 
 (Rabbins), nor of glorified men (Hengstenb. on 
 Rev. iv. 4^, but of angels (Psa. Ixxxix. 8). who 
 are to be distinguished from the thousands and 
 tens of thousands mentioned in ver. 10, for those 
 do not sit upon thrones, but stand before God 
 as servants to fulfil his commands and execute 
 His judgments" (Keil).] — And the ("an") 
 Ancient of days did sit; viz., on his throne, 
 in order to preside at the judgment ; cf. Psa. ix. 
 5; xxix. 1(3; Isa. xxviii. 0. The "Ancient of 
 days" (VO'i'' P"P?), '■*•• ^^^ aged in days 
 [-e-nlcuujiivnr fjutpiir, Sus. 52), is doubtless the 
 God of Israel, the same as the Most High, v. 25, 
 who was blasphemed by the little horn. He is 
 described as the "Ancient of days," probably 
 not by way of comparison with the younger asso- 
 ciated judges, nor yet with the "blasphemous 
 upstart," the little horn (Kranichfeld), but in 
 comparison with the more recent gods of the 
 heathen ; cf. Deut. xxxii. 17 ; Jer. xxiii. 23. 
 This predicate therefore refers to that attribute 
 of the God of the Old Covenant, which is desig- 
 nated in such expressions as 3~1^, ''~-?^, Deut, 
 xxxiii. 27, B"p 23i, Psa. Iv. 20; jiaaiAnj^ tuv 
 n'luivijv, 1 Tim. i. 17 ; -pdva^ Km 6 eoxarn^. Rev. 
 i. 17 (cf. Isa. xliv. 6 ; xlviii. 12). " He, who 
 from primitive times has proven Himself a pow- 
 erful judge, assumes the form of venerable age, 
 in order to beget the confidence that He pos- 
 
 * [" The eyes of a man were not attributed to it (merely) 
 in oppcsition to a beast, but in opposition to a hitrher celes- 
 tial beine, for whom the ruler denoted by the horn might 
 be mistaken on account of the terr bleness of his rule and 
 government : ' tie mm putetmtftjiixta Quontndatr, opinion- 
 ei.i vel diabolujn eJite vet dcemonem, sed unum de ItonUiti- 
 bits, in QUO totu.t Sataiinn hattiturns sit roi-poi-eaiiter,^ as 
 Jerome well remarks ; of, Hofinimn and Kliefoth." — Kelt.} 
 
 t ["A mouth which speaketh great things is a vain 
 glorious mouth. *12*31 are preaumptnotis things, not 
 
 directly blasphemous (Havr.). In the Apocalypie, xiii. B, 
 tityii\a and fi\a(rtt>i]iJ.iai are distinguished." — Keil,] 
 
CHAP. VII. 1-38. 
 
 155 
 
 Eesses the wisdom and power to bring the blas- 
 phemerto judgment." — His garment was white 
 as snow; thus correctly Theodot., Vulg. , Hit- 
 zig, under comparison with JIark ix. 3. but con- 
 flicting with the Masoretic accentuation, which 
 requires " as the white snow." The white color 
 of the garment is probably not designed " to in- 
 crease the impression of awful majesty " (Kran- 
 ichf. ), but to symbolize the purity and innocence 
 of the judge. He appears, " so to speak, robed 
 in the ~P"i2 of the righteous judge ; " cf. Isa. 
 lix. 17; Job xxix. 14; 3 Chrou, xix. 7, and also 
 the passages which mention the light, the sym- 
 bol of Iwliness, as the garment of God, e.g., 
 Ezek. i. 2(i ; Psa. civ. 3; 1 Tim. vi. 16.— And 
 the hair of his head like the pure wool, hence, 
 likewise as white as snow, as in the case of a 
 Tenerable sage. Cf. the parallelism of snow and 
 wool in passages like Isa. i. 10 ; Psa. cxlvii. 10 ; 
 Rev. i. 14. — His throne like the fiery flame; 
 flashing like flaming tire, and apparently com- 
 posed of it. The mention of the fiery appear- 
 ance of the throne of God, does not of itself con- 
 vey the conception of flaming vengeance on the 
 Dart of the strict judge (Deut. iv. 24 ; ix. 3 ; 
 xxxii. 23 ; Heb. xii. 29, etc.) ; for He frequent- 
 ly aiii)ears surrounded by fire in cases where His 
 judicial character is not involved, f.,9. , Gen. xv. 
 17 ; Ex. iii. 3 ; Psa. xviii. 9, etc. In the pres- 
 ent instance, however, the judicial significance 
 of the fire that emanates from God is clearly 
 established by the connection, as in Ex. xix. 10 ; 
 XX. 15 ; Psa. 1. 3 et seq. (against Hitzig and Von 
 Cengerke). — His vrheels as burning fire. The 
 throne of the universal judge is therefore mount- 
 -.A on wheels (cf . the cherubic chariot, Ezek. i. 
 12 et seq. ; x. 13 et seq. ; Psa.l.xxvii. 19), whose 
 BwiJt revolutions are encompas.sed with flashing 
 tre. This description of the Divine throne of 
 judgment as mounted upon wheels leads Kran- 
 ichfek! to the incongruous opinion that the 
 ''casting down of the thrones" was accompa- 
 nied with noise (!). — Verse 10. A fiery stream 
 is'sued and came forth from him; i.e., from 
 the Divine Judge, not from His throne ; for the 
 "~T;"]~ of the first sentence can hardly be 
 constraed with a different object from that of 
 the second, which clearly relates to God. Nev- 
 ertheless both the author of the book of Enoch 
 (xiv. 19) and the writer of the Apocalypse (iv. 
 9) represent the fiery stream as issuing from the 
 throne, in the descriptions copied by them from 
 this passage. Ewald interprets the "stream of 
 Sre " as a " stream of light," and arbitrarily 
 Taakes it the symbol of the speech which issues 
 from God, that is, of His command to begin the 
 judgment (in support of which he appeals to 
 chap. ii. 15; vi. 27, etc., whose character is en- 
 tirely different). Hitzig is no less arbitrary when 
 he remarks that the stream must be conceived 
 as flowing evenly over a smooth bottom (hence 
 like liquid glowing lava !), and as constituting 
 the floor for the entire scene of the judicial pro- 
 cedure, since without this "the whole appari- 
 tion would float in the .lir without support " — an 
 empty fancy, which the prophet's language in 
 no wise favors.* — Thousand thousands minis- 
 
 • [" Fire unci the chining of fire ftre the constjint phen- 
 omena uf the manifestiitiun of G-xi in the woriil as the 
 earthly element* mosr fitting for the representation of the 
 
 tered unto him, and ten thousand times ten 
 thousand stood before him. The imperfect 
 tense of the verbs indicates that a readiness to 
 serve existed in the thousands as a constant and 
 enduring quality. Concerning " to stand before 
 one" as synonymous with "to serve," cf. chap. 
 i. 4. — In relation to the plural ending 'i''— in 
 Q■'?3^t, which the Keri rejects as a Hebraism, 
 cf. chap. iv. 14 ; Ezra iv. 13.— The Kethib "0=1. 
 (the plural of 13") immedisitely following is 
 likewise to be retained, in opposition to the 
 Hebraizing Keri 133"] ; Hitzig' s suggestion, how- 
 ever, to write 'IST (on the analogy of the cor- 
 responding Syr. word) instead of 13'^ is unne- 
 cessary. — The " thou.sand thousands and ten 
 thousand times ten thousand " are of course a 
 host of ministering angels, which, standing in a 
 wide circle, surrounds the council of the judges 
 who are seiited beside God (these are angels of a 
 superior order, or perhaps "elders," cf. Rev. 
 iv. 4). Cf. Deut. xxxiii. 2; 1 Kings xxii. 19; 
 Neh. ix. 0; Psa. Ixviii. 18; ciii. 20 etseq., and 
 also the mention of the angelic hosts in Gen. 
 xxxii. 3 ; 3 Kings vi. 17, etc. The numbers 
 1,000 and 10,000 are not to be regarded as defin- 
 ite ; they indicate, in a symbolic manner, the 
 impression of an innumerable multitude which 
 was made on the prophet in his dream-vision, 
 while he was naturally in uo condition to over- 
 look the whole of this immense host, to say 
 nothing of counting its numbers exactly ; cf . 
 Psa. Ixviii. 18; xci. 7.* — The judgment was 
 set. "P'l is properly an abstract word, signify- 
 ing. " judgment ; " here used concretely to de- 
 signate the judicial conclave composed of the 
 superior angels— the angelic princes or archan- 
 gels (cf. Josh. v. 14; Tob. xii. 15, etc.) ; cf. the 
 analogous use of judicium in the concrete by 
 Cicero, Tf ;■/■., II. 18. Since chairs indeed were 
 mentioned in the foregoing (v. a), but nothing 
 was said about the judges taking their seats, we 
 must find it indicated in this place, and it is 
 therefore not necessary to explain, with Dathe 
 and Kr.anichfeld, that " He seated Himself in 
 judgment " (the Ancient of d.iys), as if this were 
 merely a repetition of -T\^ in v. 9 (similarly also 
 Syrus, who read S*-.',! instead of S*;"''^, and 
 therefore renders it, "the judge seated him- 
 self "). — And the books were opened ; the 
 books of record, in which the good and bad 
 deeds of men were recorded, that they may 
 serve as a basis of the sentence to be pronounced 
 upon men by God, the heavenly judge. Cf. 
 Rev. XX. 12, as weU as the frequent mention of 
 the " book of life " in which the names of the 
 
 burning zeal with which the holy God not only pnnisheii 
 and destroys sinners but also purifies and renders glorious 
 His own peojile : see on Exod. iii. 3." — Keit.} 
 
 * ("In the N. T. Christians are represented as sharing 
 in the like solemnities, 1 Cor. vi. 2; Matt. xix. 28; Luke 
 xxii. 30 ; Rev. iii. 21. Not iniprobalily such expressions as 
 ' Let us make man in our image.' • Let us go down and see.' 
 'Who will go for us?' take their plural form from such 
 views of the heavenly Coucesfms. "The sum of the matter 
 is that the prophet presents the Supreme Lord and Judgl 
 to our view by imagery burr* wed from earthly soveieigna, 
 i.e., as htivmi: all the insignia of [ re-eminence and si:preiU' 
 acy around him." — Stuart.\ 
 
156 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 heii-s of celestial glory, who have been reconciled 
 to God, are inserted, — in Ex. xxxii. 32 ; Psa. Ixix. 
 29 ; Isa. iv. 8 ; Dan. xii 1 (see on that passage) ; 
 Luke X. 20 ; Phil. iv. 3 ; Eev. iii. 5 ; xx. 15 ; 
 also the " book of remembrance," in which God 
 records the suflferings of His faithful servants, 
 which is noticed in Psa. Ivi. 9; Mai. iii. 16, etc. 
 — Verse 11. I beheld then, because of the 
 voice of great words Tvhich the horn spake — • 
 I beheld even till the beast W£is slain. An 
 anacoluthon, in the second r^]n T^}T^ repeats 
 the first, which was separated from 111'*!? by 
 the accent, but gives a somewhat different turn 
 to the thought ; cf . the similar constructions in 
 Jer. XX. 5 ; Rev. xii. 9 ; 1 Mace. i. 1. "'1 l?i 
 ' ' till that, ' ' indicates a protracted trial, which 
 ends with the destruction of the beast, i. e. , with 
 the judicial execution of the God-opposed world- 
 power. The little horn, representing the last 
 anti- christian king of the fourth monarchy, who 
 brings ruin upon his whole empire by his inso- 
 lent rebellion against the Most High, is desig- 
 nated as the cause for this destruction. — And 
 his body destroyed, and given to the burning 
 flame; rather, ''and given for burning to the 
 flame." The latter of these expressions illus- 
 trates the former ; the destroying of the " body " 
 of the beast, i. e. , of the entire edifice of anti- 
 christian national power, is effected by burning, 
 which burning C'P.I = Heb. npnia in Isa. Ixiv. 
 10) is of course to be taken figuratively, as in 
 Isa. ix. 4 ; Ixvi. 24; Rev. xix. 20; xx. 10; and 
 the fiery nature of the Divine Judge of the 
 world, as described in v. 9, unquestionably 
 stands in a causal relation to the kindling of 
 this devouring fire of judgment ; cf. Isa. x. 17; 
 XXX. 27; Zeph. i. 18, etc.— Verse 12. The rest 
 of the beasts, they had their dominion taken 
 away ; rather, " and the power of the rest of 
 the beasts was also taken away." The subjects 
 of T'^^'C are the celestial powers, as in v. 5. 
 Since the dominion of the three earlier beasts 
 was destroyed before the rise of the fourth, so 
 far at least as it was a dominion over the world 
 in the proper sense, and since it does not seem 
 admissible to take 1"'^™ in the sense of the 
 pluperfect, thus explaining the passage as a 
 mere supplementary note (against Ephraem, 
 Polychron., Kamphausen, C. B. Michaelis, etc.), 
 the judgment inflicted on the "rest of the 
 beasts " together %vith that visited on the fourth 
 must be understood to signify that utter destruc- 
 tion of the henthen world-poioers which subjects 
 the remnants of all the four world-kingdoms to 
 Vie new all-embracing Messianic dominion, and 
 incorporates them in its realm ; for as the char- 
 acteristic expression S^Hlin "ISD, " the rest of 
 the beasts " (instead of ^-ins* x?T^n or stnT^irbs 
 mJiTp "It V. 7 b) indicates, certain fragments 
 or remnants of the three former world-kingdoms 
 are conceived of as continuing to exist beside 
 the fourth, and as being involved in its destruc- 
 tion. The fall of the three earlier world-king- 
 doms is not regarded as complete by the pro- 
 phet, inasmuch as larger or smaller portions of 
 them continue to exist beside the last— perhaps 
 temporarily incorporated into it as provinces, 
 bat not on that account assimilated to it — until 
 
 the Messianic judgment involves them in a com- 
 mon destruction. That he refers only to such 
 remnants, and not to Jiew kingdoms essentially 
 distinct from the former world-monarchies (an 
 J. D. Michaelis, Von Lengerke, Hitzig, Ewald, 
 etc., suppose), is evident (1) from the paraUel 
 description in chap. ii. , where the destruction 
 of the four constituent parts of the colossus re- 
 sults at the last and in the same moment through 
 the agency of the stone which rolls from the 
 mountain (see v. 34 et seq. . and especiaUy v. 
 44) ; (2) from the later paraUel, chap. viii. 4, 
 where all the beasts (ri^rrbS) with whom the 
 Persian ram contends, are likewise only the con- 
 stituent parts into which the latest world -king- 
 dom had dissolved, and which are all overthrown 
 and subjugated by the new dynasty (see on that 
 passage, and compare Kranichfeld's remarks on 
 this place, p. 265 et seq., which are certainly 
 correct). — Yet their lives were prolonged for 
 a season and time ; rather, • ' for the duration 
 of their life was fixed, to the season and time." 
 This time (T3T, identical with S«;^T, v. 22, ac- 
 cording to the correct opinion of Von Lengerke, 
 Kranichfeld. etc. ) has come, so far as the seer 
 is concerned, with the judgment of the fourth 
 beast and of the remnants of the other beasts, 
 which has just been described. The duration 
 of their Uves (V.'?? **?""*, properly "respite, 
 prolongation of life ") finds its unalterable ter- 
 minux ad quern in this period of Jlessianic judg- 
 ment, beyond which, indeed, the various nations 
 (v. 14) continue to exist, but not the heathen 
 world powers formerly composed of them. Con- 
 cerning yrs^ yaX (- Heb. n::iai n?) .see on 
 chap. ii. 21. 
 
 Verses 13, 14. The erection of Missiafi's king- 
 dom. I sa\7 in the night visions, and behold ; 
 again a solemn and circumstantial introduction, 
 like that preceding the description of the fourth 
 beast in v. 7. Cf. the minuteness with which 
 the prophet dwelt on the description of the 
 fourth world-power, and of the Messianic judg- 
 ment which came upon it, in chap. ii. 40 et seq. 
 — (One) like the Son of man came writh the 
 clouds of heaven j literally, " ' with the clouds 
 of heaven (one) coming like a Son of man " (""^ 
 Sin). The subject is omitted, and must be .-en- 
 dered indefinitely by " one," as in chap. viii. 15 ; 
 X. 16, 18. ^^With the clouds of heaven," i.e., 
 together with them (Rev. i. 7), and therefore in 
 thfera (Mark xiii. 26) or upon them, iiri -ruv 
 rfi/jfXwi' (Matt. xxiv. 30; xxvi. 64; Rev. xi v. 14). 
 As the Messiah here comes to God upon the clouds 
 of heaven and stands before Him, so God Him- 
 self rides, in poetical and prophetic descriptions 
 elsewhere, upon the clouds as His celestial 
 chariot, cf. Psa. civ. 3 ; Jer. iv. 13 ; also Psa. 
 xvui. 10-18; xcvii. 2-4; Nah. i. 3 et seq. ; Isa 
 xix. 1 (cf. Isa. xiv. 14). — '.^"JS* ^3, "son of a 
 man, son of man." is a simple circumlocution 
 to express the idea " man," which is found also 
 in the Syr. and the Targums ; and therefore = 
 the Heb. D13St or tj-is, for which the Heb. also 
 occasionally substitutes aiS'l? or ci:!«."l| (see 
 Psa. viii. 5 ; cxiiv. 3 ; and infra, chap. viii. 17 ; 
 X. 16, 18). This combination serves to specially 
 
CHAP. VII. 1-38. 
 
 15T 
 
 point out an organic connection with or mem- 
 bership in the human race. The personage 
 whom Daniel saw coming with the clouds of 
 heaven had the appearance, therefore, of being 
 one of the human race — a man. The mention 
 of the human appearance of the apparition cer- 
 tainly does not aim at contrasting it with the 
 forms of the beasts before described (as Hof 
 mann supposes, Weissngung uitd ErfuUiing. I. 
 290) ; for these have passed from the prophet's 
 vision in consequence of their destruction, which 
 has already transpired (vs. 11, 12). The com- 
 parison with the human iform of Him who comes 
 ^vith the clouds, which, although not expressed, 
 is certainly implied, is to be found in the super- 
 humau — hence the Dieine. or at least angelic — 
 form, which the seer would naturally expect, to 
 behold in these exalted scenes (see Ewald on this 
 passage). That he should observe a form simi- 
 lar to that of man, shining through the clouds, 
 instead of a terrifying apparition that blinds and 
 confuses his senses, produces on him an impres- 
 sion of wonder, but also of pleasure. Cf . Kran- 
 ichfeld : " The case here is different from that 
 of chap, iii. 25, where only ordinary men might 
 be looked for in the fiery furnace, so that he 
 who became the associate of the three Jews was 
 at first regarded merely as partaking of /lumnn 
 nature, and a comparison with merely human 
 traits was necessary to lead the judgment to 
 express the stronger utterance P^r^ "^??i ^vith- 
 
 out thereby denying the human appearance of 
 the form. And as the judgment in iii. 25 rests 
 in the couolusion that the personage in question 
 belongs to the race of gods, although present in 
 human form, so it here concludes that the object 
 of notice is one belonging to the hinnnn race, but 
 wearing the form of God." The prophet, how- 
 ever, holds fast to the distinction between a 
 wholly human appearance and the vision he has 
 seen, and indicates this by the particle of com- 
 parison 3, which points out that he Intends to 
 represent a reJiUt/ supernatural, but still human- 
 like personage. (The correspondence with the 
 3 in vs. -1 and 0, does not militate against this 
 conception of the 3 here — despite the assertion 
 to the contrary by Richno, in the Stud. u. Kritt. , 
 1889, II. , p. 255. ) There cannot be the slightest 
 doubt, in view of the entire description, particu- 
 larly in V. 14, and also in view of the exactly cor- 
 responding signification of the destroying stone, 
 in the parallel vision of the 2d chapter (see ii, 44 
 et seq. ), that this superhuman form of a man re- 
 presents the Messiah, the Divine-human founder 
 of that fiith world-kingdom, which is at the s.ame 
 time a heavenly kingdom of eternal duration. 
 The effort of Hitzig to refer the ~';\\ ""^S to the 
 people of Israel as the "personified community 
 of saints, which rules over the heathen," is 
 merely the product of a persistent and funda- 
 mental aversion to the idea of a personal Mes- 
 siah, which results naturally from the extreme 
 rationalistic position of that exegete. The in- 
 terpretation which asserts a personal Jlessiah is 
 advocated by nearly all expositors (with the 
 exception of Ibn-Ezra, Jahn, Paulu.s, Baumgar- 
 ten-Crusius, and Hofmann, who agree with Hit- 
 zig, but, in part, for very different reasons, and 
 ijving a more positive turn to the subject), and 
 
 is removed beyond the region of doubt, (1) by 
 vs. 18 and 21 of this chapter, in which an unbi 
 assed exegesis is compelled to find the people of 
 Israel clearly distinguished from the Son of man 
 (see on v. 18) ; (2) by the undeniable reference 
 of vib<: Tov ai'i^puToi', the pre-eminently favorite 
 Messianic designation of Himself employed by 
 the Saviour, to this passage (Matt. viii. 20, etc. ; 
 John xii. 84) ; (3) by important testimonies of 
 the Jewish-Hellenistic literature, such as Enoch 
 (xlvi. 1-3 ; xlviii. 2 et seq. ; Ixii. 7. 9, 14 ; Ixiii. 
 11 ; Ixix, 27.— Cf, Hilgenfeld, Jiidische Apoka- 
 li/ptik. p. 155 et seq.), Orac. Sibi/U. (Ill,, 286 et 
 seq,, 653 et seq., ed. Friedlieb; cf. Ziindel, 
 Kritische Untersuchungen, p. 163 et seq.) ; * (4) 
 by most of the rabbins {e.g. , R. Joshua in Ibn- 
 Ezra, Saadia, Rashi, Ibn-Jahja, etc.), who fre- 
 quently designate the Messiah simply as "'j;?. 
 "the beclouded one." Cf. the Eth. -fund, prin- 
 ciples, etc., No. 4. — And came to the Ancient 
 of days j i.e., he was admitted to the immedi- 
 ate presence of God (cf. Ezek. xlii. 13), con- 
 ducted before Him until he wag placed as near 
 as were the elders who sat on the right and left, 
 and even still nearer. — And they brought him 
 near before him. The subject of "ri^S^prt 
 is probably not "the clouds," but rather thy 
 ministering angels, v. 10. Thus Hitzig. Ewald, 
 etc., correctly hold, in opposition to Kranich- 
 feld, who construes the clouds as the subject, 
 and to several others, as Kamphausen, etc. , who 
 prefer to leave the subject wholly imdesignated, 
 as with Ti'iyn, v. 13.— That the Messiah was 
 required to be brought before God and be pre- 
 sented to Him at this juncture, indicates that 
 the prophet regards him as having previously 
 existed while the beasts exercised their domin- 
 ion — and therefore that he ascribes personal pre- 
 existence to him. Daniel probably conceived of 
 him as pre-existing among the thousands and 
 tens of thousands of the saints of God, and as 
 subduing and crushing the God-opposed world- 
 powers at their head (vs. 11, 12) ;' for only thus 
 can be explained the investmg of the Messiah 
 with eternal dominion over the kingdom of God, 
 which is evidently a reward for his valiant bat- 
 tling in the service of the Most High, as de- 
 scribed in the next verse ; cf. also the parallel 
 description in chap. ii. 44 et seq. — Verse 14. 
 And there was given him dominion and glory, 
 and a kingdom, instead of ^n"! Syrus and the 
 Vulgate read ^n' — "and He (the Ancient of 
 days) gave him," etc. ; likewise Luther in this 
 place and the parallel v. 32, where also the Sept. 
 and Theodot. interpret ^!^^.. In the latter in- 
 stance the active sense would certainly seem 
 preferable, since the "Ancient of da,vs " imme- 
 diately precedes a different verb in the 3d sing, 
 active as its subject ; here, however, this subject 
 is too distant, and the analogy of vs, 4 and 6 
 recommends the passive form 3"'~";.— The triad 
 " dominion, glory, and kingdom " recalls' chap, 
 iii. 33 ; iv. 31 ; vi. 22, where at least " domin- 
 ion " (I^Vf) and "kingdom" (l^itt) are given. 
 
 ' Cf. nlsn .«/.?//;., 1. II., p. 277, el. Gallanrt : ^f« iv yt<t,iXj, 
 irpb^ aitydtTov aif>dtTOi auTos iv io(jj ;(;ptcrT6s (n-c afAV/ionv 
 ayytKriifHTi Kai Kadiaet, ktA. 
 
I5s 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Ujion it is based the ancient doxology at the 
 close of the Lord's prayer : aov ; ap // .iiiatViia am 
 tj iSthiih; t<a} t] du;a sir rolr a'i(jva<. — And all 
 people .... should serve ("served") him. 
 Concerning the triad " peoples, tribes, and 
 tongues " see on chap. iii. 4. Von Leugerke and 
 Ewald regard T"??"! as future, '" shall serve 
 him," but thereby assume a rather harsh change 
 of tense in ihe midst of the remarks which de- 
 scribe the objects seen in the vision. Hitzig, 
 Kranichfeld. etc., are correct in considering the 
 verb as logically dependent on the preceding 
 principal verb 2"'n', thus expressing design — ■ 
 •'in order that." or, "so that all people, etc., 
 should serve him." nit: i° itself is certainly 
 not to be limited to signify rfligious service 
 iDivine adoration, cnltus), for in the extra-Bib- 
 Ucal Chaldee, e.y., in the Targums. it signifies 
 iilso a purely secular service, and in v. 27 of 
 this chapter it is synonymous with ^r'lr™!*' " to 
 obey; " but in point of fact it serves, both here 
 iind in that passage, to designate service ren- 
 dered to a Divine person, which is also its bear- 
 ing in chap. iii. 12 et seq. — His dominion is an 
 everlasting dominion, which shall not be de- 
 stroyed. Cf. chap. iii. S3; iv. 31 ; vi. 27; also 
 Mic. iv. 7; Luke i. 33; Rev. xi. 1.5; six. 10, 
 etc. 
 
 Verses 15-18. Tlie interpretation of the vinon. 
 ill general, without special reference to the fourth 
 hewtt. The impression of alarm produced on 
 Daniel by what he saw, led him to seek a fur- 
 ther explanation of its meaning. He therefore 
 mingles with the host that surrounds the .\ncient 
 of days, after having hitherto remained apart as 
 a mere observer. A second act in the drama of 
 the dream-vision, in which the prophet himself 
 takes part, though merely as an inquirer, begins 
 therefore at this point. Von Lengerke arbitra- 
 rily remarks: " The vision is now over iwith v. 
 14) ; but the seer remains on the heavenly scene, 
 and requests an angel to interpret the dream." 
 That this is incorrect, appears from v. 16, where 
 the ministering ho.sts of angels mentioned in v. 
 10 still appear, while on that assumption they 
 must have disappeared with all the other fea- 
 tures of the vision ; and the character of what 
 follows, to the end of the chapter, does not in- 
 dicate that it is a mere interpretation as distin- 
 guished from the preceding dream. — I, Daniel, 
 ■WAS grieved in my spirit in the midst of my 
 body; properly, "within in the sheath" (^32 
 ri:"];), ;.«., in the body, which contains the 
 spirit, as the sword is contained in its scabb.ard ; 
 cf. Job xxvii. 8; PUny, U. N., Vll., .53. Ewald 
 well remarks that " ' as the sword remains at rest 
 as long as it is in its sheath, so the spirit of man 
 is generally quiet while it feels itself enclosed 
 by the coarse veU of the body ; but there are 
 still moments in which the spirit becomes rest- 
 less while in its coarse tenement, and when it 
 would break forth impatiently aud venture all." 
 etc. In relation to ** " 2 ( properly ' " to abbrevi- 
 ate, contr.act, torrjvere") as designating an unu- 
 sually bitt«r grief, cf. the coiTesponding Syr. 
 and Arab, verb.s. The feature that plunges the 
 prophet into so severe and bitter sorrow is not 
 w) much the circumst.ince that he is unacquaint- 
 ed with the special meaning of the vision, as that 
 a majority of its features, and particularly the 
 
 four beiists and the dreadful fate imposed o; 
 them, were so prophetic of evil and misfortune. 
 The end, indeed, toward which everything was 
 tending, according to vs. 13 and 14. was glori- 
 ous, but the way by which to reach it was i)ain- 
 ful. and opened a prospect of severe conflicts 
 for the people of God ; and the prophet must 
 have suspected this, even before it was explained 
 to him in detail. — **;?*, in the combination 
 S<:x "'H^"', is not the nominat. absol. , as Ber. 
 tholdt supposed, but is in apposition to the suf- 
 fix in ■'v^" ; cf. viii. 1, 15; Ezra vii. 21 ; also 
 Winer, § 40, 4, and concerning the correspond- 
 ing construction in the Hebrew, see Gesenius, 
 Li'hrgeb.. p. 72y. The solemn emphasis which 
 the prophet's language gains by this apposition- 
 al supplement, corresponds to the import.ance of 
 his \nsion ; cf. chap. x. 1, 7; xii. 5. — Verse l(i. 
 I came near unto one of them that stood by, 
 i.e., one of those engaged in His service, who 
 stood about God. — And asked him the truth 
 (or " the true explanation ") of all this ; 'Sf ^i^^ 
 properly "the firm, or certain;" here used of 
 the trustworthy interpretation, conforming to 
 the designs of God. for which Daniel asks. 
 Kranichfeld interpolates: "He desires that 
 nothing should be concealed because of a desire 
 to spaie the inquirer in his excited state." 
 This additional idea of laying aside reserve, of 
 disregarding considerations of pity, is not con- 
 j tained in the simple S^f "7^'^. — And he told me, 
 I and made me know the interpretation of the 
 ] things (or "words"), viz. : in the remarks 
 which foUow (vs. 17, Iti). The clause "and 
 ' made me to know " is therefore epexegetical to 
 " and he told me ; " the ;] before ~rr is expli- 
 cative, as in v. 1 a. Von Lengerke and Kran- 
 ichfeld unnecessarily take ■'::?-in'^ in the telic 
 sense, " He told me that he would make me to 
 know," etc. The reason for such a proinine to 
 reveal the interpretation is not discoverable, 
 since the interpretation itself immediately fol- 
 I lows. — Verse 17. These (exceedingly) great 
 I beasts, which are four — four kings — shaU 
 arise, etc. With reference to the clause in the 
 nom. absol., "these exceedingly great beasts, 
 which are four" (or, " With reference to these 
 .... beacts. concerning them." etc.). cf. vs. 
 23, 24. .and also Isa. xUx. 49. —The f ur kings 
 (I'tJ;":) whom the beasts are here said to de- 
 note, are unquestionably not regarded as four 
 individuals, but as the represenlriticts of four 
 kingdoms, as appears from vs. 23. 24 (where the 
 fourth beast is represented as a '-'," governed 
 by a numerous succession of individual kings). 
 Cf. the identifying of l-b^p and "^ which 
 appears alre.ady in chap. ii. 37 (as well as supra, 
 V. 4) in the case of Nebuchadnezzar, and again 
 in chap. viii. 21 et seq. ; xi. 2.— The •■ arising 
 of the kings will be i*'"?** 1^, i.e., not '-out of 
 the earth," but " from the surface of the earth," 
 hence, in effect, "on earth" (Luther). — In ihe 
 later Heb. parallels, viii. 22, 2:; ; xi. 2. 3 et se 1. , 
 zr,~ is rendered by T?<. The future l"":"""! 
 denotes the Divine decree, which limits the 
 duration of the dominion of kings, as wjll a; 
 
CHAP. VII. 1-28. 
 
 15£ 
 
 tppoints their rise. Instead of " ' They shall 
 
 arise," ""5^P"1 may therefore be rendered mod- 
 ally, "They shall be compelled to arise." If 
 the purely future sense be retained, it will be 
 necessary to assume, with Von Lengerke, Kamp- 
 hausen, etc., that the prophet carelessly, or by 
 virtue of a denmaiitatio a potiori, included the 
 actually existing, and even partially superseded 
 Babylonian world-kingdom among the future 
 ones of his vision. This view is, however, more 
 eligible than the strange assumption of Hitzig 
 that the author does not in this connection re- 
 gard the Chaldfean empire as the first of the 
 coming monarchies, but assigns that position to 
 the reign of Belshazzar merely, which opened 
 shortly after the time of this vision ; as if v. 1 
 did not expressly specify " the first year of Bel- 
 shazzar" as the time of recording the vision, 
 and as if it were at all certain that the author 
 really regarded Belshazzar as the last Chaldcean 
 king ! Moreover, how can it be reconciled, that 
 whUe formerly (chap. ii. 37) Xebuchsidnezzar 
 was selected as the representative of the Chal- 
 dsean monarchy, and this was to a certain extent 
 repeated at the commencement of the present 
 \'isiou (see v. 4). the unimportant, listle.ss, idle 
 Belshazzar should here suddenly be installed in 
 his place? — Verse IS. But the saints of the 
 Most High shall take (• receive ") the king- 
 dom. The plural "i";t;>, which occurs here 
 aild in vs. 32, 35. and 27, serves, like "^^5 in the 
 Targums, as a phiraiis exceUeiitke, to denote the 
 God of Israel, who in Gen. xiv. 18 is called -!< 
 ^^''i>. As similar plurals of excellence, of. not 
 merely D^n'is, but also 5■'■-^^p, Josh. xxiv. 
 19; Hos. xii. 1; Prov. ix. 10; xxx. 3.-- -The 
 "saints of the Most High," or the "saints" 
 simply (T'?'''1P), as they are called in vs. 21 
 and 33, are not the angels, mentioned in vs. 10 
 and lU, who surround the throne of God, but 
 the people of God on the earth, the '" real mem- 
 bers in the communion of the perfectly true 
 religion " (Ewald), the members of the house of 
 Israel in its ideal spiritual signification (Gal. vi. 
 10;, the Israel of the Jlessianic time of fulfil- 
 ment ; cf. Isa. iv. 3 ; vi. 13 ; Ixii. 13 ; Rom. ix. 
 G, etc. — The same expression is also found in 
 vs. 22 and 25 ; cf. C-Tip'CJ", chap, viii 34, 
 
 and -~p~~, chap. xii. 7 (also Ex. xix. 6 ; 
 Deut. vii. G; xiv. 21 ; Psa. xvi. 3; xxxiv. 10). — 
 When it is said that these saints of the Most 
 High " shall receive tte kingdom," the reference 
 is evidently to the transmission of the Messianic 
 kingdom into the hands of the Son of man from 
 the Ancient of days, as described in v. 14. The 
 saints, however, are bv no "means to be regarded 
 as identical with the Son of man, so as to make 
 him a mere personification of the people of 
 Israel. This view, which, besides being advo- 
 cated by Hitzig and Hofraaun (see supra, on v. 
 13), is adopted by Herzfeld in his Ueschichti 
 Isi-neU. II., 381, is opposed by v. 21, where the 
 saints are represented as a host of battling per- 
 sons, and are clearly distinguished from the 
 Mes.siah, who is exalted far above them, and at 
 the time of their conflict with the anti-christ 
 tarries in heaven with the Ancient of days — 
 
 I hence the relation between the Messiah and 
 the Messianic people is represented to be 
 such that he aid." them in heaven and from 
 heaven (strengthening, comforting, and support- 
 ing them in their conflicts and sufferings), .and 
 for that reason, as their representative, receives 
 for them the dominion over the eternal kingdom 
 from the hand of God, as was already indicated 
 in the vision, v. 14. Cf. Auberlen. p. 51 ; alst 
 Von Lengerke, Kranichfeld, and Ewald on this 
 passage. The latter correctly observes, p. 406 : 
 " If the language in this place and in vs. 23 and 
 37 refers at once to the genuine members of 
 Messiah's kingdom instead of Himself, this is 
 merely for the purpose of more fully explaining 
 the great picture which has been given once for 
 all. A kingdom and its sovereign cannot exist 
 without subjects, and in fact, they only exist 
 
 through the latter When such a people 
 
 has really been found, it receives the power and 
 perpetuity, the indestructible and eternal char- 
 acter, as well as the dignity and the pre-emi- 
 nence which lie in the nature of that empire and 
 its Messiah (cf. ii. 44). The language of this 
 interijretation refers therefore to this pe&ple. and 
 the subject of the vision in v. 13 et seq. derives 
 therefrom a self-evident but not unimportant 
 completion. This by no means implies, how- 
 ever, that the Me.ssiah, who was already suffi- 
 ciently characterized in that passage, is identical 
 with the people who are now, at the final stage, 
 included, any more than that the description of 
 the Messiah in that place, whose majestic char- 
 acter is not easily repeated, has any analogy 
 with the words here employed. The king and 
 his people are associated only in the final results 
 and end, in the etemitj' and glory of the king- 
 dom itself, as is strikingly remarked in this pas- 
 sage and in v. 37 ; and yet even here the dis- 
 tinction is clearly observed that the three things, 
 ' authority, glory, and dominion,' i.e., majesty 
 in its full activity and glorious recognition, are 
 in V. 14 awarded only to the Messiah, and not to 
 his people." Cf. also the same author's Jiihr- 
 biicher iter blblMcheii WUtenxchaft, vol. III., p. 
 331 et seq. — And possess the kingdom for 
 ever, etc. "cnsi "to possess," here denotes 
 the continued possession, while in v. 33 it is in- 
 ceptive, and signifies the assumption of the pos- 
 session, or the entrance upon it. The superla- 
 tive expression '<'^"?i> Di> 15, " unto the 
 eternity of eternities, unto all eternities," is 
 exactly like the Hebrew ^? ^733'IJ""!?', Isa. 
 xiv 17; cf. 1 Tim. i. 17 ; Eph. iii. 31, etc. 
 
 Verses 19-22. Daniel desires a ce^jtain explana- 
 tion of the FOURTH BEAST. He therefore 
 briefly recapitulates the former description of 
 its appearance and fate in vs. 7-14. In this 
 recapitulation, which recalls to mind the similar 
 ones in chap. ii. 45 (cf. v. 34). and especially in 
 chap. iv. 17 et seq. (cf. v, 7 et seq.), we have 
 the new features that cliiws of brass are noticed 
 in addition to its iron teeth (v. 19), and tliat the 
 people of God are mentioned as warring against 
 the beast (aided by the Messiah, and under his 
 protection) and overcoming it. — Then I would 
 know the truth of the fourth beast. ."■22 
 
 -? '*7^-?, I desired to be certain about this, 
 fs'/rouv aiipi^Sur ^tpi (Theodot.). The reading 
 
160 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 SZil";, iDstead of S<:2^2, which is found in 
 three MSS. at Erfurth, probably owes its origin 
 to the defective form, which in this place, unlike 
 T. It), seemed to indicate an Inf. Pael (which, 
 however, is found in no other place). The ren- 
 dering in the Vulgate : " Post Iwc rdui diligenter 
 diseeve" may also have contributed to originate 
 that reading. — Whose teeth were of iron and 
 its nails of brass. The brazen claws are asso- 
 ciated with the iron teeth, by virtue of the 
 association of ideas, which frequently connects 
 iron and brass in thought ; see e.g., Deut. xxxiii. 
 25; Jer. xv. 12; Isa. xlv. 2; Psa. cvii. 16, etc. 
 — Verse 20. And the other which came up, 
 and before whom three fell. Literally, "and 
 they fell before him the three." The relative 
 construction is dropped at this point, as well as 
 the connection of the speech from b^l, at the 
 beginning of the 30th verse, so that the 
 discourse again assumes the character of de- 
 scription, especially from the beginning of 
 the 21st verse. — And (of) that horn that 
 had eyes j properly, "and that horn, aud 
 it had eyes," etc. The 1 before V?'?? is epexe- 
 getical or correlative, as in Isa. xliv. 12; Psa. 
 Ixxvi. 7. — The form b^^S with _ occurs also 
 in V. 25 and chap. vi. 23. — Whose look was 
 more stout than his fellows, rimnn Ip, a 
 shortened expression for H ITn ^2 ; cf. chap. 
 I 10 ; iv. 13, 30.— Verse 21. I beheld, and the 
 same horn made war with the saints, etc. 
 This war against the saints merely indicates a 
 .special feature connected with the " devouring, 
 breaking in pieces, and stamping under foot" 
 (v. 19), of which the beast was guilty, but pre- 
 cisely thut feature which would especially arouse 
 the attention and fears of the prophet. So far as 
 the mode of expression is concerned, the writer 
 here passes from figurative to literal language ; 
 cf. Rev. xi. 7; xiii. 7; xix. 19. — Verse 22. Until 
 .... judgment was given to the saints of the 
 Most High; i.e.., "until justice was done to 
 them." ''P" here signifies justice to be secured 
 by law, equivalent to the Heb. DBO'3, e.g., 
 Deut. X. 18 ; cf. Psa. cxl. 13. It cannot here be 
 taken in the sense of judging or performing ju- 
 dicial functions ; for according to vs. 9, 10, it is 
 God, with whom are associated the elders of 
 heaven, who sits in judgment and administers 
 justice (cf. Psa. ix. T)). There is no design here to 
 assign a participation in this judicial administra- 
 tion of the Almighty to the saints (thus differ- 
 ing from Matt. xix. 'iA ; 1 Cor. vi. 2).— Instead 
 of •' the saints of the Most High," the original 
 has "saints of the Most High," without the ar- 
 ticle, which is also the case in the latter half of 
 the verse, and in v. 21. Concerning the omis- 
 sion of the article in solemn and poetic speech, 
 cf. Ewald, Lehrb., § 277 4, where Mic. vii. 11 et 
 seq. ; Isa. xiv. 33; Hab. iu. 16; Psa. Ivi. 11, 
 etc.. are adduced as illustrations of the Hebrew 
 usage. 
 
 Verses 33-37. The explnnation of the angel re- 
 iperting the fourth beast and its judgment. The 
 fourth beast shall be the fourth kingdom; 
 rather, "the fourth beast, a fourth kingdom 
 ihall be," etc. The same construction as in v. 
 17 o, and as in v. 24,— And shall devour the 
 
 whole earth. The emphasis does not fall oc 
 "the whole earth," but on "shall devour" 
 (.i3S«ri), which is not only placed first, but is 
 also repeated by two synonymous terms follow- 
 ing the object. ''?"1?* 3? does not, therefore, 
 as Hitzig supposes, signify ' ' all the countries of 
 the earth," for this would result in an unneces- 
 sary exaggeration of the hyperbole which, with- 
 out question, really exists. Nor does the related 
 i;s< signify " to swallow up," which would be 
 equivalent to " appropriating, or incorporating 
 with itself " (as Hitzig asserts, appealing for 
 proof to Dent. vii. 16; Isa. ix. 11 ; Jer. x. 25 — 
 which passages are, however, by no means con- 
 vincing), but only " to devour," which, like the 
 synonyms "to break" and "to stamp" {,~rfT\ 
 and P^.U)] indicates merely a devastating and 
 destructive energy, without including the idea 
 of conquering. The fourth world-kingdom, 
 therefore, may be held to signify the empire of 
 the Seleucidae, in the light of this passage also ; 
 and there is no necessity to refer it to the Mace- 
 donian empire of Alexander, nor yet to that of 
 the Romans. — Verse 34. And the ten horns out 
 of this kingdom are ten kings that shall arise ; 
 rather, " And the ten horns ; out of this king- 
 dom shall arise ten kings." nri13r^ Hi?:, liter- 
 ally, "out of this, the kingdom," i.e., out of 
 this same kingdom ; cf. on chap. iii. 6. Con- 
 cerning the form nri^ril'p, for 8*i;1~i'?, see on 
 chap. ii. 7. Hitzig prefers, needlessly, to sub- 
 stitute the ending n_, and refers the resulting 
 ' ' out of it, hi^ kingdom " to the fourth beast, 
 or even to the "other one" (antichrist) who 
 is afterivard mentioned, as its subject — which 
 clearly is forced and arbitrary. Hengstenberg 
 (p. 311 et seq.) attempts, contrary to the sense 
 of the prophet, to make the " ten horns " repre- 
 sent ten kingdoms, i.e., ten Christian German 
 states which are developed out of the Roman 
 world-empire. Bleek (Jahrb. fiir deutsche Theol. , 
 1860, I. p. 68) also inclines to this transforma- 
 tion of the "kings" into kingdoms, since he at- 
 tempts to apply the fourth beast as a whole to 
 the Macedonian-Hellenistic world-monarchy, the 
 ten horns to the several kingdoms of the Dia- 
 dochi which sprang from the former, and the 
 eleventh horn directly to the dominion of the 
 Seleucidae, and at the same time to its charac- 
 teristic leading representative, Antiochus Epi- 
 phanes. Since the ten horns correspond to the 
 partly iron and partly clay toes of the colossus 
 in chap. ii. 41 et seq.,* the assumption that 
 "kings" are here really put for "kingdoms" 
 might seem admissible ; but in paralleUzing the 
 toes of the image with the horns of the beast, 
 the prophet would hardly think of individual 
 rulers, any more than of distinct states or king- 
 doms (see on ii. 43). A horn, as Hitzig justly 
 observes, would not be especially appropriate as 
 the symbol of a kingdom ; and the attempts of 
 
 * [This correspondence, however, cannot be legitimntely 
 urged US an argument in favor of the contemporaneousnes? 
 ot the ten kinffs, fur it is doubtful if the number of thf 
 toe^ has any special significance, aud no stress is laid upon 
 it in the explanation of the vision. Like the two legs, It 
 forms but an aecidcntal accessory ic completing the figure. 
 Otherwise we should be obliged to count the toes on both 
 feet likewise, and this would be more than any interpret«rt 
 are prepared to do. ] 
 
CHAP. VIL 1-28. 
 
 ICl 
 
 Luther. Melancthon. Geier, Ph. Nicolai (De regno 
 Chriiti, 1. I., c. 5 ss. ). etc., to make the ten 
 horns denote ten designated states which were 
 formed out of the Roman world-monarchy — e.g. , 
 Syria. Asia, Egypt, Africa. Greece. Italy, Ger- 
 many. France, Spain, and England, or (as Nico- 
 lai. 1. c. , suggests) S^-ria. Egypt, Greece, Italy, 
 Germany, Poland. Hungary, France, Spain, and 
 England — can only produce absurd and arbitrary 
 results. In v. 8 the horn is clearly represented 
 as a person ; and accordingly the numerous 
 horns in this place are probably intended to 
 denote individual royal personages. Of. also 
 chap. viii. 21, where the horn is said, iu the 
 plainest terms, to represent a personal king.* 
 For the rfst, see Ethico-fund. principles, etc., 
 Nos. 2 and 3. — He shaU be diverse from the 
 first. "As the fourth kingdom differs (vs. 7, 
 19) from the other three, so he differs, and to 
 his disadvantage, from his predecessors ; this is 
 true generally, but especially so in his conduct 
 towards God and his saints, v. 25" (Hitzig). — 
 And he shaU subdue three kings. b"D",r~-, 
 
 the opposite of -"P?*, as in chap. ii. 21. It does 
 not denote a merely moral humiliation, but a 
 complete degradation, and even a hurling down, 
 a seizing of their dominion (cf . Ezek. xxi. 32 ; 
 Isa. X. 33j. This is also shown by v. 8, which 
 speaks very plainly about a " plucking up by the 
 roots " of three of the former horns by the " little 
 horn," and thereby probably refers to a supplant- 
 ing of three rulers of the Seleucidae by the vio- 
 lence of a new sovereign (see on that passage), f — 
 Verse 2.5. And he shall speak — words against 
 the Most High; bb'?^ — lio, like the Heb. 
 C"~f~ ~?~i Hos. X. 4; Isa. viii. 10; Iviii. 13. 
 It appears from vs. 8 and 20, and also from the 
 later parallel, chap. viii. 25 b, that blasphemous 
 words are meant. This prophecy was certainly 
 fulfilled in a marked degree by the blasphemous 
 words of Antiochus Epiphanes (1 Mace. i. 24, 
 etc.), but by no means for the last time; cf. the 
 N.-T. prophecies relating to antichrist, 2 Thess. 
 ii. 4 ; Rev. xiii. 5 et seq. *<"^? "'?'?, properly, 
 "in the direction of the Most High," t.«. , agniiist 
 
 • [Kcil'a reference to chap. viii. 20-22 is nnavailjng against 
 this express statement of the text here, for not only is the 
 great goat horn there undeniably a personal ruler, but so 
 are likewise the "four notable hoins" that succeed it as t^ie 
 founder? of so many dynasties. His entire ar^ment on 
 this point is a perversion of the sense : '• Since the ten 
 hoi ns all exist at the same time together on the head of 
 the beast, the ten kings that nri.-e out of the fourth king- 
 dom are to he regarded as contemporary." On the contrary, 
 they are explicitly said to •' arise 'in the sight of the pro- 
 phet, as if they were not there origin;illy. and this admits 
 if it does not require, the idea of their gradual and <-onsecn- 
 tive development. So in the ease of the two-horned ram 
 (chap. viii. 3) we might with equal reason have presumed 
 both horns to have arisen simultaneously, but such was not 
 the fact. Moreover, as they are stated in so many words to 
 be kings of one and the same kingdom, they mu.st in the 
 nature of the case be successive ; for ten simultaneous sove- 
 reigns in one dominion would be a pa!p;ible absurdity. In 
 the case of the last three only, whose fall makes room for 
 the eleventh, is there a partial simultaneousness.] 
 
 t ^Keil contends that "'the kinz coming after them can 
 only overthrow three of the ten kingdoms when he himself 
 has established and iwssesses a kingdom or empire of his 
 own."' But such is not the ijrones-- represented in the vision. 
 The little horn m Ifie act o/ariHiiig evidently usurps the 
 room previ>>usly occupied by the three others. It is this 
 expansion in their place that m tkes it become great. They 
 must, theref jre, have been the.ii.-elve- rivals at the timo, 
 and not well-established in their seat, when this fourth con- 
 testant a'osG in its tirst insignificance,] 
 11 
 
 the Most High (who is personally near), " against 
 the person of the Most High " (Kranichfeld).— 
 And shall wear out (" disturb") the saints ol 
 the Most High. Hitzig' s remark is too far- 
 fetched : " S<i?" is assonant with the preceding 
 parallel ii^"^, and is not equivalent to ' disturb, 
 wear out ' (cf. ri"i2 in 1 Chron. xvii. 9, and the 
 T.irg.. Isa. iii. 15), but signifies ' to trj-, oppress, 
 make wretched' " (?). — And think to change 
 times and laws. Vr^r! does not signify " sta 
 tutii sacra" (Havemick), but = Heb. S^"?"": 
 " festival seasons " (Lev. xxiii. iv. ; Isa. xxxiii. 
 20), i.e., determined, legally appointed times foi 
 religious celebrations in general, for the great 
 annual feasts as well as for the weekly and 
 monthly (Sabbaths and new moons) ; cf. Xum. 
 xxviii. 2. The following r"1"i, "and law, tra- 
 ditional usage," indicates that the impious king 
 shall not merely endeavor to change the ap- 
 pointed tunes of these rites, but that he shall 
 seek to abrogate the ceremonial observances of 
 religion themselves ; hence, what was formerly 
 said in a good sense (chip. ii. 21) of God, the 
 absolutely perfect and omnipotent " changer of 
 times and seasons," is here predicated in a bad 
 sense of His dsemoniacal adversary, the impious 
 'AiT/v>fof. Cf. the attempts of Antiochus Epi- 
 phanes, recorded in 1 Mace. i. 45 et seq. ; 2 
 .Mace. vi. 2-7, to destroy the theocratic system 
 by abrogating the daily sacrifices, the observance 
 of Sabbaths and feasts, and by introducing the 
 sacrifice of unclean beasts, and the worship of 
 Jupiter and Bacchus — attempts in which the 
 prophecy before us found its more immediate 
 historical fulfilment, while its idtimate realiza 
 tion must be looked for in the last times, accord 
 ing to 2 Thess. ii. 4; Rev. xiii. 8, 12 et seq.— 
 And they shall be given into his hand until a 
 time and (two) times and the dividing of (or, 
 " a half ") time. The expression sounds, upon 
 the whole, like Mic. v. 26 ; but the duraliou of 
 the period of suffering imposed by the permis- 
 sion and paedagogic wisdom of God is somewhat 
 more definitely fixed in this instance, without, 
 however, omitting the mystical feature in this 
 limitation which requires to be interpreted. 
 The aggregate duration of this time of altiictioa 
 is divided into three distinct periods, which, how- 
 ever, are suflSciently indefinite in themselves, 
 and therefore in no wise indicate the real mea- 
 sure of time in the prophet's mind ; for while 
 it is entirely probable that l^? has the same sig- 
 nification here as in chap. iv. 13, namely. " a 
 year " (see on that passage), yet the duration o£ 
 " a year " in a vision of the future, which con- 
 stantly presents symbolic conceptions, is upon 
 the whole extremely doubtful. It must remain 
 an open question whether ordinary calendar 
 years are intended, or, what is scarcely less 
 probable in itself, whether mystical periods are 
 referred to, which are measured by a standard 
 not known to men, but only to God.* It may 
 
 * [Few readers, however, will be content with this inde- 
 finite exposition of these sharp'y defined and frequently 
 reiterated su.tements of time -.vith reference to the events 
 predicted. The dilficulties in the way of their litaral appli- 
 cation to the period of desecration of the Temple by .Anti- 
 ochus Epiphanes do not appear so formidable as to requir* 
 such a vague interpretation. See under the Rthico-fujid» 
 mental considerations below.) 
 
162 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 be shown with more confidence how the three 
 particular designations of time, TJ^", T'?'^?, and 
 1~" 3v2. are related to each other, and also why 
 precisel3' these terms are employed in the pro- 
 phecy, which are repeated in the Heb. of the 
 parallel, chap. xii. 7, iu the words ~>i^, Cili'TQ 
 and ■^?n''J. In harmony with a not infrequent 
 Chaldee usage, the plural V:l-? ^^ P^^ ^°^ ^^^ 
 dual (cf. Targ. , Am. iv. 6 ; Ex. xi. 5 ; Num. 
 six. 3i) ; supra, v. 8 et seq. , and, upon the whole 
 question, Winer, § 55, 3), and therefore, like 
 the corresponding Heb. BilJitt, represents a 
 double period, a pair of times, and, in case l^J-' 
 signifies a year, a period of tico years. The con- 
 verse holds with 3pp, which, though in itself 
 denoting any fraction whatever, is shown posi- 
 tively by the parallel "^n in xii. 7 to signify ' ' a 
 half." Hence a double year is at first added to 
 the year which stands at the beginning, and 
 afterward another half year. The period of 3+ 
 years which thus results is symbolically signifi- 
 cant, inasmuch as it forms the half of seven 
 years, and therefore stands related to the pro- 
 phetically significant " seven times" in chap. iv. 
 13, as the half to the whole. If, therefore, 
 the sevenfold number of the years passed in 
 lycanthropy by Nebuchadnezzar (which was not 
 to be taken literally, but ideally and propheti- 
 cally) denoted, in a general way, an extended 
 duration of the sufferings imposed on him by 
 God, it follows that the present figures indicate 
 a period of affliction t/iiit k shorter by one-half. 
 "A time, and times, and a half time" repre- 
 sents a time of suffering that is abbreviated by 
 one-half, or that is interrupted at the middle, 
 similar to that referred to iu the prophetic words 
 of Christ : e'i fUj iKu'/.oiidttt/^cav ui t'/iupat f \'fn'n/, ovk 
 n" iijuiii/ -una aapE, Matt. xxiv. 22; Mark xiii. 
 20. The same idea of a shortened or halved 
 time of affliction is expressed by the " half- 
 week " (i.e.. half week of years) iu chap. ix. 27, 
 which, like the 1,290 days in chap. xii. 11 (or the 
 1,200 days or 42 months of the Apocalypse, xi. 
 2 et seq. ; xiii. 5), is merely a tolerably exact 
 designation of the 3^ years, in different lan- 
 guage. It will be shown hereafter that this 
 prophecy of the affliction of Israel during 3| 
 years prior to its deliverance likewise had a 
 typical fulfilment in the history of Antiochus 
 Epiphanes, while its final realization is reserved 
 for the eschatological future.* For the present 
 it will be necessary to remember merely, as the 
 result of an uuprejudiced exegesis having a suit- 
 able regard for the prophetic us.age of language 
 in this book, that a strictly litei'al conception of 
 the period of 3* years will hardly conform to 
 the sense of the prophecy, and that there is 
 
 * [Some of those modem interpreters who hold in pnrt to 
 the * ' year-f or-a-day theory" nmke the little horn in this 
 passage to be different from that in ch. viii., referring the 
 latter to Autiochus Epiphanes, but the former to the papacy 
 or else to Mohammeti'anism. Such as maintain that the 
 days stand for years in both instances regard the difference 
 In the periods oetween this passage and that (1,II50 years 
 here and 2,300 there) as caused by computing the period in 
 the one case from the rise of the power to its do\mfall, and 
 In the other from Daniel'n own time. In either case the 
 mme fatal objection applies, that there is no good evidence 
 Df such a Bymbolic use of the word '* day" by Daniel.] 
 
 therefore no need to seek for a period of suffer 
 ing iu the history of the Jews, while subject tc 
 that Syrian despot, which shall cover precisely 
 that length of time, for the purpose of demon- 
 strating that first fulfilment of the prophecy. * 
 — But the judgment shall sit j of. v. 10 b, and 
 also V. 22. — And they shall take away his do- 
 minion, to consume and to destroy (it) unto the 
 end. Ri9rr is to be repeated, as the accusa- 
 tive of the object to the two infinitives. REio iJi 
 "unto the realized end," i.e., to the end of the 
 last God-opposed world-power, which marks the 
 end of the heathen world-power as a whole. 
 SSIO therefore designates (unlike chap. vi. 27, 
 where the never-accomplished end of God's 
 kingdom is referred to) the goal at the end of 
 the development of earthly dominion, which 
 coincides with the erection of the kingdom of 
 God (v. 13 et seq.). — Terse 27. And the king- 
 dom and dominion and the greatness of the 
 kingdom(" kingdoms") ; a triad similar to that 
 in V. 14, differing only in the substitution of 
 ^*^'I2'^, ' ' the greatness " (Luther, " the power "), 
 for "Ip'^, "glory." rriabJO I'l depends equally 
 on all the three nouns as a subjective genitive, 
 and therefore denotes that the dominion, power, 
 and greatness possessed by all the heathen king- 
 doms is intended. On the meaning of the ex- 
 pression " of the kingdoms under the whole 
 heaven," see supra, on v. 12. 
 
 Verse 28. The impression made on Daniel by 
 what he has seen andheard. Hitherto is the end 
 of the matter (or "remarks"), namely of the 
 interpreter, the conclusion of which coincides 
 with the end of the dream. De Wette, Hitzig, 
 etc. , render it inappropriately, and contrary to 
 the sense of '*^'?'?, " Thus far the history " — an 
 interpretation which finds no sujjport in chap, 
 xii. 6. — As for me, Daniel, my cogitations 
 much troubled me, namely, after awaking from 
 his dream-vision; cf. ii. 1 ; iv. 2. — And (the 
 color of) my countenance changed iu me. Cf . 
 chap. V. 9, where the same expression is found, 
 and chap. x. 8, which is parallel in substance. — 
 But I kept the matter in my heart, viz. ; th« 
 remarks of the interpreting angel, v. 17 et seq., 
 and consequently, the subject and signification 
 of the dream-vision. Cf. Ltike ii. 19. 
 
 ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES RELATED 
 TO THE HISTORY OF SALVATION, APOLO- 
 GETICAL REMARKS, AND HOMILETICAL 
 
 SUGGESTIONS. 
 
 1 . After what has been remarked, it is app.ar- 
 ent that the principal force and the greatest in- 
 terest of the prophetic descriptions of this chap- 
 ter centre in fhe fourth world-kingdjm and in its 
 development as an anti-christian power, which 
 immediately prepares the way for the judicial 
 advent of Christ. In the parallel description in 
 
 * [Keil. in like manner, argues for the purely symbolical 
 and indefinite import of this designation of time, being 
 driven thereto) by his theory that this whole prophecy applies 
 to the duration nf the Ronisn power, which he extends into 
 the unknown future. He has all along contended against 
 a literal interpretation of these cbrouological data as they 
 eeeui to be.] 
 
CHAP. Vn. 1-28. 
 
 16J 
 
 the second chapter, — where the series of world- 
 kingiioms was represented by four metallic sub- 
 stances, respecti%'ely inferior to each other in 
 value, in the order of their succession, and al- 
 though together forming a great colossus, yet 
 indicating its perishable nature by the weakness 
 of the feet on which it rested — the observation 
 of both the dreaming king and the interpreting 
 prophet was fixed equally on all the four world- 
 monarchies. Their intimate relations to each 
 other, their separation, and their subjection to 
 the same ultimate fate through the agency of 
 the rock of Messiah's kingdom, formed the prin- 
 cipal features of that prophecy, which, however, 
 likewise dwelt more extensively upon the fourth 
 kingdom than upon its predecessors (v. 40 et 
 seq. ) ; but the principal re-ason for the promin- 
 ence thus given to the last kingdom in the series, 
 existed substantially in the fact that the aim 
 was to point out that its heterogeneous elements 
 and its divisions laid the foundation for its own 
 ruin, and, as a matter of course, for the fall and 
 ruin of the former empires. The case is differ- 
 ent with the present vision and its interpretation. 
 Each of the four bea.sts which in this instance 
 represent the world-kingdoms is indeed drawn 
 with nervous and strongly characterizing strokes, 
 that admit of no doubt respecting their identity 
 with the four constituents of the image (v. 4 et 
 seq) ; but the attention of the narrator is prin- 
 cipally directed to the fourth beast, and to the 
 horn which denotes the height of the develop- 
 ment of the world-power (v. 7 et seq. ; 11 et 
 seq.), even during the dream-vision itself. The 
 interpretation of the vi.sion disposes of the first 
 three beasts and their reference to the three 
 earliest world-kingdoms very summarily (v. 17), 
 but emphasizes the fourth beast and its '• little 
 horn which speaks blasphemous things." as Sym- 
 bols of the final phase of development on the 
 part of the world-power, and of the reign of 
 antichrist produced by it ; for not only are the 
 characteristic peculiarities of this beast noticed 
 twice over, the second time in a recapitulation 
 denoting the reflections of the prophet concern- 
 ing its nature and appearance (vs. 18-22), but 
 they receive a somewhat detailed explanation 
 (vs. 23-26), which does not indeed display the 
 clearness of the disclosures in chapters viii., xi., 
 and -xii. relating to the same events in the period 
 immediately prior to the Messianic future, but 
 which is nevertheless far superior to all the for- 
 mer prophetic sections of the book, and espe- 
 cially to that contained in chap. ii. , in the pre- 
 cision and clearness of its expositions. 
 
 2. In order to a correct apprehension of the 
 Messianic bearing of this prophecy, it is requisite 
 before all else, that the identity of the monar- 
 chial relations and situations indicated in this 
 chapter with those described in chapters viii. . xi. , 
 and xii. should be carefully observed ; or, in 
 other words, that the common reference of the 
 prophecies in all these chapters to Antiochus 
 Epiphanes and the Maccabrean period, as mark- 
 ing their more immedi,ate fulfilment, should be 
 recognized. The following considerations will 
 demonstrate th.at this reference is common to 
 the prophecies mentioned (and also to that con- 
 tained in chap. ix. 24^27), and that, consequent- 
 ly, the second part of the book of Daniel refers, 
 as a whole, to that time as the epoch of its first 
 ».nd more immediate fulfilment : 
 
 a. The world-power in question is described as 
 dirided and suhjcct to disxeiisions in itstif, in all 
 the parallel representations, especially in chap, 
 ii. and vii. on the one hand and chap. xi. on the 
 other. This agreement extends even to the 
 point, that in both instances, chap, ii, 43 as 
 well as chap. xi. 6, 17, the vain attempts to 
 secure peace by means of intermarriages are 
 noticed (see on iL 43 and cf. infra, on chap. xi. , 
 1. c). 
 
 b. The number ten, is applied to the kings of 
 the fourth monarchy, and receives prominent 
 mention in at least two of the parallel descrip- 
 tions (chap. vii. and xi. ), although merely as a 
 symbolic number, which finds its counterpart, in 
 a general way, in the first ten possessors of the 
 throne of the Seleucidas. (It must be remem- 
 bered, however, that [according to the author's 
 view] neither the ten toes of the image of the 
 monarchies, chap. ii. 42 et seq., nor the four 
 horns of the Grecian goat, chap. viii. 7 et seq., 
 refer to these ten predecessors of Antiochus 
 Epiphanes, or to any individual kings what- 
 ever. ) 
 
 c. The blasphemous and sacrilegious course of 
 (lie eleventh king — symbolized by the "little 
 horn " — towards the Most High, His law, and 
 His saints, is described in chap. vii. (vs. 8, 11, 
 20-25), and more fully in chap. viii. 10, 24 et 
 seq. ; ix. 24 et seq. [?] ; xi. 31 , 3(i, in a manner that 
 recalls the statements of the Maccabiean booke 
 relating to the abominable attempts of Epiphanes 
 to profane the Jewish worship and oppress its 
 adherents, with the liveliest and strongest em- 
 phasis. 
 
 d. Chapters vii. 25 ; ix. 27 ; xii. 7 et seq. , 
 agree in limiting the duration of the tribulation 
 caused by the antichristian tyrant to 3^ years. 
 (In relation to the merely apparent discrepancy 
 in the duration of the suffering, as stated in chap, 
 viii. 14 and chap. xii. 12, see on those passages.) 
 
 e. The several descriptions agree in supersed- 
 ing and destroying the antichristian supremacy 
 by the erection of a Messianic kingdom. This is 
 noi only asserted in the chapter before us and in 
 chap. ii. 44 etseq., but also in chap, viii., where 
 the breaking of the foe witiiotit /lands (v. 25) 13 
 evidently synonymous with the loosening of the 
 destroying stone "without hand " in chap. ii. 
 34, 45, and where the "justifying" (v. 14) of 
 the desolated sanctuary denotes nothing else 
 than the introduction of the Messianic period ot 
 salvation. Further illustrations of this head 
 appear in chap. ix. 24 and in xii. 1 et seq., 7 et 
 seq. , where the Messiah likewise is described aa 
 the direct opponent and victorious successor of 
 antichrist and his abominations. Hengstenberg 
 (p. 213 etseq.), Hiivernick. Ebrard (Offenb. Jo/i.. 
 p. 84 et seq.), Ziindel (p. 119), and Auherlen (p. 
 197 et seq.) attempt in vain to deny the identity 
 of the antichrist noticed in chapters ii. and vii. 
 with the enemy of the people of God described 
 in chapters viii. and ix. , asserting that the for- 
 mer Ls to be looked for in N. -T. times immedi- 
 ately prior to Mes.siah's second advent, while the 
 latter appeared and was destroyed during the 
 Old Dispensation and before the first advent of 
 Christ, and that the prophecies in chapters ii. 
 and vii. relate to the eschatological antichrist, 
 while those in viii. and xi. denote a typical per 
 sonage ! — as if the descriptions in chap. vii. 25 
 did not already indicate on opponent of the O. -T. 
 
164 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 church and ceremonial ! as if the " changing of 
 (festal) times and laws," there referred to, coald 
 designate anything but the Tiolent oflenceR 
 against the temple and the sacrifices of the Old 
 (/'ovenant, as described in chapters viii. , ix. , and 
 XI. (see supra on v. 25, and also under c) ! and 
 as if an Israelitish prophet could possibly sus- 
 pect that the worship of Messianic tunes would 
 differ from that of the former dispensation ; and 
 as if he had not, in chap. ix. 24, even expressly 
 opened the prospect of a restoration of the O. -T. 
 sacrifices and sanctuary services when Messiah 
 should appear (see on that passage) ! An unpre- 
 judiced exegesis, governed by scientific princi- 
 ples, can discover but a single antichrist in all 
 the parallel prophecies, and that one is clearly 
 described as the immediate predecessor of the 
 ^lessiah, who supersedes and destroys him. * 
 The prophet, however, wag evidently ignorant 
 of the merely typical importance of this anti- 
 ihrist, as being only a forerunner of the anti- 
 christ A the last times (to whom refer the N. -T. 
 desr.iptions of the future, which are based upon 
 th.s book indeed, and which frequently recall 
 its features — in 2 Thess. ii. ; Rev. xi. 7 ; xiii. 1 
 et seq. ; xvii. ; xix. 19 et seq.) ; for instead of 
 representing the former as merely an imperfect 
 analogue of the incomparably more atrocious 
 impiety, the far more concentrated and diaboli- 
 cal wickedness of the latter, as he must have 
 done if he were actually conscious that the dis- 
 tinction between type and anti-type existed in 
 this case, he ever3-where presents the idea of a 
 flagrant rebellion against the Most High, and of 
 the desecration of the sanctuary, and the at- 
 tempted extirpation of the true religion, in ex- 
 pressions of equal force. And instead of dwell- 
 ing chiefly on the anti-type as the more impor- 
 tant character, and as being more signilicant in 
 his relations to Messiah's work, as might have 
 been expected, he pursues a contrary course, 
 and furnishes a far more thorough and realistic 
 praphetic description of the type ! — We are 
 therefore obUged to conclude that, in harmony 
 with the law of prophetic perspective, Daniel 
 saw the type and anti-type, the vista of Old and 
 Kew-Testament times, the scenes of the more 
 immediate future and those of the eschatological 
 period, as a comprehensice whole, and that from 
 his point of view, as a captive in Babylon, he no 
 
 * [Keil seek' (p. 258 et seq.) to make the most of the in- 
 cidental variations in the description of the "little horn," 
 in ch. vii. and v\n. : but his points are minute and often 
 far-fetched, whereas the coincidences are striking, numer- 
 ous, and essential. Consnitthe harmonic table in the intro- 
 duction. Lest we might be thought to treat the opposite 
 view too lightly, we briefly note the differences adduced by 
 Keil. 1. The little horn of ch. vii. rises out of one of the 
 four horns without adding to their number or injuring them ; 
 that of ch. viii. arises among the ten as an additional nr 
 parallel element, and uproots three. This merely proves 
 that the four iiowers are not identical with the ten hom.s 
 which is precisely our view. 2. The enemy in ch. vii. goes 
 much farther in his violence than that in ch. viii. ; but as 
 the conduct is of the same eeneral character, this is evi- 
 dently but a fuller or more detailed description. Both cer- 
 tftinly tallied with the behavior of Autiochus. It is vain to 
 allege that in one chapter the persecutor is not an antichrist 
 because he is not directly said to arrogate divinity as in 
 the other chapter, but only to oppose the people of God : for 
 t.-.r!.e are everywhere in the Bible identihed with God hira- 
 t*e]f, and their cause and interests are his likewise. 3. The 
 periods in the two cases are diflferent (i.-MH) days, and a 
 year and a half, or 1.2110. or l.."W5 days). This is readily 
 explained as including in some ptissages more accessory cir- 
 cumstances than in others. Sec the exegetical remarks ou 
 each.] 
 
 more saw the interval between the two featnrei 
 in the history of the future, although it covered 
 thousands of years, than the pilgrim who jour- 
 neys toward a distant goal is able to observe the 
 broad and depressed valley that intervenes be- 
 tween the mountain immediately before him 
 and that which seems to rise in close proximity 
 beyond it. Cf. Hofmann, Weissagvng und Erf., 
 p. 313 et seq., where it is correctly remarked, 
 with reference to the closing verses of chap. xi. , 
 which describe the terrible end of the typical an- 
 tichrist, Antiochus Epiphanes, that " at a subse- 
 quent point he (the prophet, or rather the angel 
 who speaks to him) observes only the final end 
 of national history, the fear and tribulation 
 which overtake the whole world, and the preser- 
 vation of Israel in the midst of it, in addition to 
 the final end of human history, the resurrection 
 of the dead to Ufe or to perdition (chap. xii. 1- 
 
 3) The connection of these last things 
 
 with the prospect of the end of that oppressor 
 of Israel is not different, for instance, from that 
 by which Isaiah speaks of the impending attack 
 on Jerusalem by Assyria as the final alarm of 
 that city, or which causes Jeremiah to regard 
 the end of the seventy years as coinciding with 
 the end of all the afflictions of his people." 
 Similar views are advanced by the same author 
 in his Schriftbeweis, U. 2, 547 et seq. , and also 
 by DeUtzsch, p. 285 : "It is a law of Messianic 
 history that the fulfilment of a prophecy, if not 
 completed by one event, must produce succes- 
 sive developments, until the actual state that 
 has been realized shall correspond to the sense 
 and word of the prophecy. The afflictions 
 caused by Antiochus were not the last experi- 
 enced by God's people ; but the book of Daniel 
 predicts them as the last, as Tsaiah in the down- 
 fall of Assyria, chapter x. , and Habakkuk in the 
 destruction of Babylon, chap. ii. et seq. , foretell 
 the overthrow of the world-power. The range 
 of the prophet's vision is decided by the border 
 of the horizon where arises the glory of the con- 
 gregation of God, but not the measure of the 
 meaning which the Spirit of prophecy introduces 
 into his words, and which history gradually un- 
 folds." 
 
 3. While, however, the more immediate ful- 
 filment of the predicted misfortunes of the 
 dream-vision is to be chiefly, and even exclu- 
 sively sought in the period of tribulation marked 
 by the reign of the Seleucidas and the revolt of 
 the Asmonmans, it does not follow in any degree 
 that a contemporary of that generation must be 
 regarded as the composer of this vision, and that 
 therefore it must be held to be a prophecy forged 
 ex eventu. In opposition to this assumption of 
 a pseudological conveutional composition of the 
 chapter by an apocalyptist of the Maccabsean 
 period, it must be observed that discrepancies 
 exist between several leading characteristic fea- 
 tures of the prophecy and the facts connected 
 with the history of the sufferings of Israel under 
 Antiochus, and also the facts connected with the 
 development of the empire, which are ungues- 
 timiablymore vinrked than the origin of the chap- 
 ter in the time of the Maccabees uould justify in 
 any vay. Above all we notice the following : 
 
 a. The difference betweer the ten horns of the 
 fourth beast (v. 7et seq.. 20, 24) and the number 
 of the predecessors of Antiochus Epiphanes on 
 th« throne of the Seleucids. The most plan- 
 
CHAP. VII. 1-28. 
 
 1G5 
 
 Bible method of reconciling the number of the 
 horns with that of the early Seleuoidae — hence, 
 of fixing the number of the latter at ten, while 
 Antiochus follows as the eleventh — is that adopt- 
 ed by Prideaux, Bertholdt, Von Lengerke, De- 
 Utzsch, and Eivald, by which Alexander the Great 
 is excluded from the series, and Seleucus 
 Nicator heads the Ust. This certainly secures 
 a succession of seven rulers down to Seleucus 
 IV. Philopator, the brother and predecessor of 
 Ant. Epiphanes (1. Seleucus Nicator, B. C. 312- 
 280; 2. Antiochus Soter, 279-201 ; 3. Antiochus 
 Theos, 260-246; 4. Seleucus Callinicus, 245- 
 226 ; 5. Seleucus Ceraunus, 225-223 ; 6. An- 
 tiochus the Great, 222-187 ; 7. Seleucus Philo- 
 pator, 186-176) ; but every attempt to designate 
 the three missing monarchs, who should fill the 
 brief interregnum and state of restless anarchy 
 which preceded the accession of Antiochus 
 Epiphanes, results in failure. The ordinary re- 
 source is to assume that these three kings, whom 
 Antiochus dethroned and superseded, or, as the 
 figurative language in v. 8 has it, ''the three 
 horns which were uprooted before the little horn 
 came up," were (1) Demetrius, the eldest son of 
 Seleucus Philopator, and therefore the nephew 
 of Ant. Epiphanes, who was at Rome as a host- 
 age when his father died, and whose crown was 
 usurped in his absence by his uncle (who had 
 just returned to Syria from an extended sojourn 
 in Rome, where he had likewise been a hostage) ; 
 (2) Heliodorus, the murderer of Seleucus Philo- 
 pator (see chap. xi. 20), who occupied the throne 
 for a short time after poisoning that king, until 
 Epiphanes dethroned him ; and finally (3 ) Ptol- 
 emy IV. Philometer, king of Egypt, a minor at 
 the time, who was the son of Cleopatra, the 
 daughter of Antiochus the Great and sister of 
 Epiphanes. It is assumed that this queen laid 
 claim to the throne of the Seleucidfe for her eon, 
 or at least to the provinces of Palestine and 
 Phoenicia, which adjoined Egypt. In point of 
 fact, however, none of these rivals of Epiphanes 
 could be regarded as the king of Syria, for Heli- 
 odorus was a mere usurper, who was dethroned 
 after a brief reign, and there is no record to 
 show that either Demetrius or Ptolemy Philo- 
 meter pretended to the throne with any degree 
 of earnestness.* Hence a variety of different 
 explanations have been attempted; as, for in- 
 stance, Alexander the Great has been included 
 in the series of the ten kings, as being the ac- 
 tual founder of the empire of the Seleucidse (!), 
 so that the line begins with him and closes with 
 Seleucus Philopator as the eighth, Heliodorus 
 as the ninth, and Demetrius as the tenth repre- 
 sentative of that dynasty (thus Hitzig, on the 
 passage, emd Hilgenfeld, Dl4 Prop/wten Esra 
 und Daniel, 1863, p. 82) ; or again, attention is 
 
 * [Keil urges these objections with all their force to disprove 
 any reference here to the time of the Seleucidae ; but they 
 apply with equal and even greater force to the Roman list of 
 emperors. It does not appear however, that the three horns 
 in question represent actually reigning k.ngs, nor do the 
 terms "plucked up" and "fell'' cle-irly mean dethrone- 
 ment. It is sufBcient that they were royal personages who 
 claimed or were entitled to the throne. One of them, at 
 lea-t, Heliodorus, actually occupied it, for a brief period, in- 
 deed, but long enough to come within the description. The 
 other two, as being ieg.timate heirs, may fairly be designated 
 as prtiicefi, and this is all that the figure requires. The partial 
 and ternixirary royalty of all three is evidently denoted by 
 their speedily succumbing to the upstart. It is difficult to 
 imagine a case of four rivals to the same throne that would 
 more accurately answer to the vision.] 
 
 caUed to the fact that exactly that peri<d in the 
 history of Syria which immediately precedes the 
 reign of Epiphanes, is known to be particularly 
 obscure, uncertain, and defective in its records 
 (Ewald, and also Hitzig and Kamphausen) ; or 
 it is observed that on the analogy of the toes of 
 the image, which were partly of clay and partlj 
 of iron, the requisite number of kings is prob- 
 ably to be found both among the Seleucidae and 
 the Ptolemies (Rosenmiiller, Delitzsch, following 
 Porphyry, Polychron, and other ancients); or 
 the attempt to discover a succession of ten kings 
 is wholly given up, and the ten horns are regard- 
 ed as denoting ten con temporary ivieTs, e.g., ten 
 satraps or generals of Alexander the Great, 
 among whom the three that Seleucus Xicatot 
 conquered, Antigonus, Ptolemy Lagus, and Lysi- 
 machus, were especially prominent (Bleek, p. 
 68). The uncertain and unsatisfactory nature 
 of all these attempts at an explanation, which 
 Delitz.sch (p. 283) also acknowledges in substance, 
 has finally led even several advocates of the 
 theory of the Maccabtean composition of this 
 section {e.g., Hertzfeld. Oenchkhte IsraeUs) to 
 adopt the only correct view, on which the num- 
 ber ten as applied to the horns is a round or sym- 
 bolic number, whose more specific interpretation 
 it is useless to attempt. This view is also held 
 in substance by a majority of the expositors who 
 refer the fourth beast to the lioman world- 
 power and the occidental-Christian kingdoms 
 which emanated from it, although they hold 
 fast to the really prophetic character of the 
 vision, and therefore its origin with Daniel and 
 during the captivity.* We have already shown 
 that the advocacy of the genuineness of thi 
 prophetic book by no means involves, as a neces 
 sary consequence, the interpretation by which 
 the fourth beast designates Rome. It has also 
 been shown, on v. 8, that we must be content 
 with a general and symbolic explanation of the 
 subordinate three-fold number of the horns, as 
 well as of the number ten. Cf. infra, on chap, 
 xi. 2 et seq. 
 
 b. The statement in v. 25, according to which 
 the period of tribulation, prepared for God's 
 people by the eleventh king of the fourth mon- 
 archy, was to cover "a time, and two times, and 
 a half time " (hence according to chap. iv. 13 
 was to extend over three and a half years and 
 then to be ended by an act of Divine judgment), 
 ivill likewise admit of no exact and thoroughly 
 
 * [So formidable is this difficulty on the Roman theory of 
 interpretation that Keil, its last most noted advocate, takea 
 refuge in a remarkable postponement of the solution. 
 " The kingdoms represented by the ten horns belong still to 
 the future. To be able to judge regarding them with an.v 
 O'rtainty, we must first make clear to ourselves the place of 
 the Messianic kingdom with reference to the fourth world- 
 kingdom, and then compare the prophecy of the .\p0Crtlyp5e 
 of John regarding the formation of the world-power — a pro- 
 phecy which rest« on the book of Daniel." This is a virtual 
 abandonment of the Held. If all the other parts of this 
 prophecy have their clear counterpart in history, why not 
 this also ? If, as Keil claims, these ten horns are found 
 simultaneously on the head of the beast as it fii-st arises it 
 is obviously inconsistent to refer their identification to the 
 future. But the attempts made to distingui.sh the horns in 
 question, in their literal applicatioi Rome, have signally 
 failed, as the must cursory inspection of the schemes proposed 
 in vari<'us commentar.es on Daniel and the Apocalypse 
 will abundantly show. The ten kings in Rev. xvii. 'A art 
 there expreasly assigned to the indefinite future : but the 
 seven in ver. 10 are clearly chantcterized as lielonging to 
 proximate history, and the first six as bavintf been at the 
 time actually realized.] 
 
ItJfi 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 satisfactory comparison with the periods of re- 
 ligious persecution under Antiochus and of the 
 Jlaccaba'au revolt. If the introduction of a 
 sacrificial worship and the erection of an altar 
 to the Ol.ympic Zeus by Antiochus ( 1 Maco. i. 
 •54 1 be taken as the terminus a quo, and the re- 
 dedication of the desecrated sanctuary by Judas 
 Maccabfeus (1 Mace. iv. 52) as the term in us ad 
 quern of that period of suffering, the result is 
 merely three years and ten days, instead of 
 three and a half years (cf. Josephus. Ant. XII. 
 7, 6) ; for the llaccabEean books fix the date of 
 the former event on the 1.5th Chisleu of the 
 year 14.5 of the ^ra of the Seleucidfe (= B. C. 
 16") and of the latter on the 2.5th Chisleu 148 
 te. Sel. (B. C. 104). Hitzig attempts unsuccess- 
 fully to recover the five and two third months 
 yet lacking by going back to the arrival in Judasa 
 of AppoUonius, the commissioner of tribute 
 (which he asserts must have happened about 
 three months before the 1.5th Chisleu 145, ac- 
 cording to 1 JIacc. i. 29 [cf. v. 19]). as the ac- 
 tual commencement of the sera of persecution. 
 The result is still only three and a fourth 
 years instead of the requisite three and a half ; 
 and a yet more unfortunate feature, which in- 
 creases the difiiculty of settling both the begin- 
 ning and the end of the epoch of three and a half 
 years in question, appears in the two-fold con- 
 sideration, that on the one hand the real begin- 
 ning of the Maccabsean persecution may be found 
 in the barbarous attack on the life and religion 
 of the Jews, which, according to 1 Mace. i. 22, 
 took place fully "ix years prior to the re-dedica- 
 tion of the temple, while on the other hand it is 
 by no means necessary to regard the dedication 
 of the sanctuary on the 2oth Chisleu 148 as 
 marking the cessation of the persecution, which 
 might rather be dated from the great victories of 
 Judas Maccaba3us over the Syrian generals Gorgias 
 and Lysias ( the one of which was gained during 
 the year 14T. and the other in the earlier months 
 of 148 in the asra of the Seleucidai), or on the con- 
 trary, from some event subsequent to the dedi- 
 cation, as the death of Antiochus Epiphanes (cf. 
 infra, on chap. xii. lit. The theories which are 
 admissible, therefore, vacillate between periods 
 covering from three to six years, without being 
 able, in any case, to demonstrate an a;ra of exactly 
 three and a half years, such as v. 35 requires, and 
 further, without presenting any evidence from 
 the recorded history of the Maccabees of so sud- 
 den, complete, and wonderful a conclusion of the 
 period of suffering (without being secured by re- 
 peated conflicts and successes), as the same pas- 
 sage and its par.allels in chap. viiL 14 and chap, 
 xii. 7 et seq. seem to require. * For this reason 
 
 * [In this chronological exanlination the author does in- 
 justice to the data in question. a.s the following exhibit from 
 Stuart's Cnmmentary (p. 2'2;J) will render clear: *' Is this 
 expressi'in of time poetical merely and figurative, cousi.stirg 
 of round numbers (as tliey say), and comprising jnst half of 
 the myotic d number xepen.. which is so often employed in a 
 kind of tropical way ? Ui>,toriC'ilfartx seem to speak for the 
 liliral interpretation, in the Ijook before us. Yet, consider- 
 ing the nature of the case and of the number usually con- 
 cerned with such reckonings {i.e., the number seven), we 
 surely need not be solicitous abont.ji day, a week, or even a 
 month, more or less. The convenience of the reckoning, 
 when it is Dear enough to exactnes-s for all the punw&es of 
 prophecy, is very obvious, and will account for adopting it. 
 
 ■• III exhibiting rhe historical facts, we will begin with an 
 (era which is ccrtam. viz., the time when Judas Mace, cxpur- 
 rated the t^-mple, and began the service of (Jod anew. This 
 was on the 25th of Dec. 148 ann. Sel. - llt.'i B.C., see 1 Mace. 
 
 : we are sometimes referred to the alleged in- 
 . sufficiency of our information respecting the 
 ! various events connected with the MaccabteaQ 
 i history, which lacks certainty and thoroughness 
 [ (Hilgenfeld, as above), and at others, the as- 
 sumption has been adopted that the Maccabaean 
 tendency-writer employed a designedly mystical 
 and indefinite mode of indicating time, which 
 cannot be accurately elucidated by a comparison 
 with the facts of history (Von Lengerke). How- 
 ever conceivable and in itself probable the latter 
 view may be, on the opinion that the prophet 
 was drawing an apocalyptic picture of the dis- 
 tant future, which was necessarily ideal and in- 
 definite so far as details were concerned, it is tc 
 the same degree improbable and incapable of be- 
 ing demonstrated, when the author is regarded 
 as a conventional inventor of riiticiiiia ex eventu, 
 who everywhere attempts to introduce aUusione 
 to the circumstances of the recent past or of the 
 present. From such a writer we might as- 
 suredly have expected .a more exact agreement 
 and palpable correspondence between the proph- 
 ecy and its fulfilling counterpart than results 
 from the relation of the 1 -i- 2 -f i times to the 
 period of the Antiochian persecution. " The al- 
 leged pseudo-composer of our chapter must ac- 
 cordingly have written for a time, with whose 
 historical conditions he was unacquainted, de- 
 s-pite the fact that he was its mntemporfcri/ ; and 
 the entire condition of the theocracy, covered 
 with sh.ame and the want of success a* it was, 
 during the three and a half years of this chaptei 
 — before whose expiration this advocate of the 
 actually victorious but not by him so-designated 
 Maccabiean rebellion is said to have written — 
 becomes historically inconceivable in the light 
 of the pseudo - Daniel tendency - hypothesis " 
 (Kranichfeldj. 
 
 iv. 52. Counting back three and a half years, we come tc 
 June in 145 A.S. =168 B.C. Livy has described the retreat 
 of Antiochus from Egypt, in the earl// spring {' prime 
 vere,' Liv. xlv. 11) of that year. While on that retreat, 
 Antiochus detached ApoUonius, one of his military chieftains; 
 to lay waste Jerusalem (comp. 2 Mace, v. 11, which makea 
 the time clearj, for he had heard that the Jews exulted at 
 his misfortune, in being obliged by the Romans to retreat 
 from Egypt, and he was determined to wreak his vengeance 
 on them. He did so effectually, as 1 Mace. i. 29 seq, fully 
 shows; and vs. 29, 20, of the same chapter, compared to- 
 gether, show that the year was 145 A. S. as above stated. 
 From .Tune, when Jemsalera was proliably taken, to Decem- 
 ber, is six months ; and fr^ tm December in 168 to December, 
 165, is three years. In the same way. as to time, does Jo. 
 sephus reckon I'l-'Wi. ad Bell. Jud. § 7. But to avoid per- 
 plexity, it should be noted that a different mode of reckon- 
 ing, viz., three year«, is sometimes employed, e,fj., in 1 Mace, 
 iv. 54, and 2 Mace, x, 5, such a method seems to be implied ; 
 and so in Jos., Ant. Jud. XII. 7, 6. An examination of the 
 context in these cases sttows, however, that this period de- 
 signates only the time that intervened t>elween the profana- 
 tion of the temple by heathen .sacrifices, 1 Mace. i. 54. and 
 the consecr.ttion of it by Judas Maccaboeu-s, 1 Mace. iv. 54. 
 Some six months after capture of the city, during which .all 
 manner of cruelties and excesses were committed, appear to 
 have elapsed before .\ntiochns began his sicininh offerings 
 in the temple. The consecration of the temple by Judas in- 
 troduced regular Hebrew worship there : and the death of 
 Antiochus happening shortly afterward, the period of his op- 
 pression was of course at its end. Thus did events corre- 
 spond ver,v exactly with the time designated in our text. We 
 cannot indeed sjiecify the exact day, because history has not 
 done this ; but it is enough, that we come so near to the 
 time designated, as to remove all serious difficulty respecting 
 it." 
 
 To this we may add that the period three and a half year? 
 may reasonably iie taken its a somewhat round numt>er, not 
 only ttecause of its being in it-self a general and inexa'.-t er- 
 pression. but more especially as liemg the half of the coa 
 ventional term of seven years. See on ch. ix. 37.1 
 
CHAP. VII. 1-28. 
 
 167 
 
 e. Intimately connected with this is the dis- 
 crepancy between the picture of the Messiah 
 drawn in our chapter, and the nature of the 
 Messianic hopes entertained by the Jews of the 
 MaccabEean period, as revealed in the books of 
 the Maccabees, and also in the other products of 
 Jewish apocalyptic Uterature of nearly the same 
 date. These authorities are indeed able to refer 
 to a final deliverance and re-union of the scat- 
 tered tribes of Israel (see, e.g., Ecclus. xxs. 11 ; 
 1. 24 ; Tob. xiii. 13-18 ; xiv. 6), and also to a 
 Divine visitation of judgment upon the heathen 
 (Ecclus. xxxii. 18; Judith xvi. 17, etc.); but 
 they nowhere base their theocratic expectations 
 clearly on tbe appearance of a single Messianic 
 personage, least of all, on one who is so positively 
 characterized by traits belonging to both Divine 
 and human nature as is the " Son of man " in v. 
 I'd of this chapter. The -/joi?»/-?/f -laro^ of 1 
 Mace. (xiv. 41 ) is a purely human prophet, de- 
 void of aU celestial, supernatural character ; and 
 the " poor righteous one " of the book of ^\ isdom 
 (chap. ii. 10-20) can make no claim to recognition 
 as an individual Messianic person, but is rather 
 a mere personification of the class of suffering 
 righteous men. The conception of a Messiah is 
 very dim upon the whole in all the apocryphal 
 literature of the two centuries immediately pre- 
 ceding the Christian Eera; and in the cases, 
 where the expectation of a personal Messiah, 
 possessed of the Divine-human character to a 
 greater or less degree, actually appears in several 
 productions of this period, as in books II. and III. 
 of the Sibylline Oracles, or in the book of Enoch 
 ( which at least some critics admit to have been 
 composed as early as in the second century B. C, 
 and possibly under John Hyrcanus — ey., Ewald, 
 Dillraann, Jos. Langen), the dependence of such 
 writings on this book must doubtless be assumed 
 (cf. the passage from the Ornc. Siltyll. 1. II., 
 cited above, on v. 8, and also Introd. ^ G, note 
 3). This dependence, however, in no wise com- 
 pels to the assumption that the prophecies of 
 Daniel originated in the Asmonaean period ; it 
 is far more readily understood on the opinion 
 that they originated during the captivity, but 
 that they were recognized at their true value and 
 introduced into general use iji all the circles of 
 pious Jewish apocalyptists ld the Maccabajan age 
 and as a result of its attlictions. 
 
 4. In support of the opinion that He who 
 '' came with the clouds of heaven '' in v. 13 is no 
 other than the penotud Messiah, it has already 
 been remarked among other things (see on that 
 passage) that Christ preferably and frequently 
 employed the phrase o 7'^)^- mv ai^dpij-nv, as a 
 testimony in favor of that view. It is now re- 
 cognized by a majority of expositors and Biblical 
 theologians that this designation, which is found 
 in all eighty-onetimes in the New Testament, was 
 intended to recall Dan. vii. 13, and to assert the 
 identity of Jesus as the Messiah with the "3 
 1C:S< who is there described, although several 
 (e.g.. Von Hofmann, Delitzsch. Kahnis, etc.) still 
 attempt to advocate the view formerly repre- 
 sented by Huetius, Harduin, Schleiermacher, 
 Neander. Weisse, Baur, etc., on which the phrase 
 was derived from Psa. viii. 5, and designates 
 Jesns, not as being the Messiah, but as " the 
 flower of humanity." as "the ideal and normal 
 man," the "man of history, toward whom all 
 
 human development tends." The former method 
 of explaining the phrase does not exclude the 
 latter, but is rather to be traced back to both 
 these passages of the Old Testament, inasmuch 
 as Dan. vii. 13 also expresses the sense of tha 
 ideal and normally human, of the perfectly hu- 
 man, and even of the Diciiie human, as will 
 appear with special clearness from the manner 
 in which the Saviour, in Matt. xxvi. 64, repliec to 
 the question of the High priest inquiring whether 
 He were "the Christ, the Son of God," when, 
 with an evident allusion to this passage. He de- 
 clares Himself "the Son of man," who shall 
 thereafter be seen sitting " on the right hand of 
 power and coming in the clouds of heaven ;" cf. 
 also John xii, 35, 3(i, where in answer to the 
 question of the unbelieving people, "Who is 
 this Son of man?" the Lord declares. "Yet 
 a little while is the light with you," and thus 
 again identifies himself most clearly with the 
 Messianic ' ' Son of man " of this passage. Cf . 
 Me.ver and Lange on both these passages (and 
 also on Matt, %-iii. 20) ; likewise Gess, Lehre vou 
 cler Person Christi (1850) p. 7 et seq., 2o7; J.P 
 Tafel, Leben Jesii, p. 127 et seq. , and especially 
 Nebe, Uebcr den Begriff des JWimens v or vim 
 df<iliili~(n; Herbom, 18(J0 ; also Holtzraann, 
 Ueber den neuteMamentUchen Ausdrvck Men- 
 scliensnhn, in Hilgenfeld's Zeitschr. f. wissen- 
 schaftlichc Theologie, 1805, p. 212 et seq. (al- 
 though the latter has .so distorted a view of the 
 reference of the name to Dan. vii. 13 that he 
 chooses to entirely exclude that to Psa. viii. 5, 
 thus approaching the opinion advocated by 
 Strauss in his Lcben Jesti). — In addition to this 
 reference to our passage in the mouth of our 
 Lord as directlj- testifying to a personal Messiah, 
 and besides the possibly still more ancient refer- 
 ences in the same spirit which are found in the 
 Sibyllines and the book of Enoch (see supra), the 
 substantial agreement of its description of Christ 
 with that of the prophets prior to the captivity 
 affords an important testimony in favor of the 
 correctness of our view. E.specially if the de- 
 scription of the "Sou of man" in chap. vii. 13 
 et seq., to whom an eternal and all-embracing 
 
 dominion over all nations is given, be compared 
 with the de.signation T^j rf— ^, "an anointe<3 
 prince," in chap. ix. 2G, which, although prim- 
 arily applicable to a typical forerunner of Christ 
 (see on that passage), yet clearly indicates tha 
 character of the Messianic ruler as being at tha 
 same time priest and king, the result will be a 
 demonstration of the close analogy and even 
 identity of Daniel's description of the Messiah 
 with those by which Isaiah (chap. ix. 5 ; xi. 1 
 et seq. ) and his contemporary, Micah (chap. v. 
 
 I et seq.), characterize the spiritually anointed 
 ruler of the house of David who should intro- 
 duce the period of the deliverance of Israel and 
 all nations, and also with the Messianic proph- 
 ecies of Jeremiah (xxiii. 5; xxx. 0; .and Ezekiel 
 (xxxiv. 23 ; xxxvii. 25) and even those of the 
 time of David and Solomon together with the 
 period immediateh' subsequent, e.g., David him- 
 self (Psa. ex.), Nathan (2 Sam. vii.), Amos (ix. 
 
 II et seq.), Ho.sea (iii. 5), etc. The Messiah of 
 Daniel does not differ from Him to whom all tho 
 earlier prophets bore witness ; the super-huraau 
 glory and perfection of power of Him who never- 
 theless appears in human form, as described in 
 
168 
 
 THK PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 this vision, correspond exactly to the expecta- 
 tions which the prophetism of Israel in general, 
 from the time of David, when the theocracy 
 bloomed and shone in its splendor, had learned 
 to connect with a later offspring of the house of 
 David, as the restorer, endowed with Divine 
 power and majesty, who should renew the glory 
 jf that house, and consequently the glory of the 
 theocracy as a whole. 
 
 5. For the purpose of a practical homiletical 
 treatment of the chapter it will of course be 
 necessary to pay special regard to the shining 
 clearness of this description of the Messiah, and 
 through it to clear up the more obscure features 
 of the prophetic vision, in so far as this may be 
 possible and of practical utility. The Divine- 
 human Messiah of Israel, the founder and ruler 
 of the kingdom of God in the earth, the Saviour 
 and Judge of the world (cf, John iv. 42 ; v. 27), 
 is to be described in His relations toward the 
 earthly world-power, which, passing through 
 various forms and phases of development, finally 
 reaches the diabolical rage of anti-Christianity, 
 and rebels against Him ; and his ultimate triumph 
 over all His foes is to be displayed as a necessity, 
 founded in the Divine economy of salvation. In 
 this connection it will not be wise to enter upon 
 a consideration of those phases in the develop- 
 ment of the world-power, symbolized by the 
 figure of the beasts, in their relation to the pre- 
 Christian world-monarchies which are to be re- 
 garded as their historical counterparts, any 
 farther than is imperatively necessary for the 
 purpose of clearness. The ideal and funda- 
 mental thought of the prophecy, which substan- 
 tially coincides with that of the image of the 
 monarchies in chap. II. and may be expressed 
 by the statement " that all the kingdoms of the 
 earth must be put to shame" (cf. Rev. xi. 15; 
 xii. 10) before the kingdom of the everlasting 
 God (the Ancient of days, v. 9), and of His An- 
 ointed, must evidently be made prominent ; but 
 the details of its realization in the history of the 
 world should receive only a subordinate atten- 
 tion, especially since none of the theories pro- 
 mulgated to the present time, which undertake 
 to specify the particular kingdoms designated 
 by the four beasts, can claim to be absolutely 
 correct, and recourse must therefore be had to 
 a choice between probabilities, or between inter- 
 pretations, more or less plausible, of the mys- 
 terious hieroglyphic animal figures that " came 
 up from the sea." For as merely the forms of 
 the future world-monarchies were revealed to 
 the prophet — sometimes indeed in surprisingly 
 definite and exact outlines — but he was not made 
 acquainted with their names ; as their nature, 
 but not their historic appearance was prefigured 
 to him : so can no effort of scientific penetration 
 on the part of exegetes succeed in establishing 
 an exact correspondence between the character 
 of these monarchies, as shadowed forth in pro- 
 phetic images, and its actualization in the surg- 
 ing confusion of the life of nations during the 
 course of the last pre-Christian century, and thus 
 in stating, with mathematical exactness and cer- 
 tainty, which great world-kingdom subsequent 
 to the captivity was intended by the Spirit of 
 prophecy by each of the beasts seen by Daniel, 
 what kings were represented by the ten horns of 
 the fourth beast, what was the precise concep- 
 tion of the blasphemous course and anti-theo- 
 
 cratic rage of the last horn, and whether, ib 
 point of fact, Antiochus Epiphanes conformed 
 to it in all respects, or merely realized it gener- 
 ally and in substance. In view of these unavoid 
 able obscurities and difficulties, the practical ex- 
 positor, still more than the scientific exegete, ia 
 limited to a chaste, modest, and reserved course 
 in the treatment of this prophecy as it applici 
 to the history of nations and of the world. In- 
 stead of pursuing to particulars the interprwta- 
 tion of the series of monarchies in vs. 4-T, oi 
 even of the succession of kings in v. 8, in tbn de- 
 tails of history, he will be able to present onlj 
 examples of the wonderfully exact correypond- 
 ence between the type and its histories i anti- 
 type, or illustrative proofs of the generally un- 
 questionable congruity between the visional and 
 the actual succession of monarchies ; and espe- 
 cially, instead of treating the fourth beast and 
 its eleventh horn (in which the idea of the 
 fourth beast attains its complete development, 
 and which may, therefore, to a certain extent, 
 be identified with the beast itself) as referring 
 solely to the anti-Christian world-power in pre- 
 Christian times, or also to the Roman supremacy 
 with Herod or Nero as the representative of ita 
 anti-Christian character * — which would be 
 wholly impractical and a grave offence against all 
 the rules of sound homUetics ; — inste.id of so 
 one-sided an Old-Testament or typical interpreta- 
 tion of this beast, he will doubtless be obliged to 
 deal prominently with that more unfettered, 
 spiritual, and ideal mode of treatment, by which 
 the fourth beast represents at the same time 
 both type and antitype, thus including the world- 
 power of the last times, which is inimical to 
 God and Christ. Here also every one-sided in- 
 terpretation, centring in a definite point of the 
 history of the past, must be avoided, and the 
 antichrist must not be found specifically in the 
 Turkish nation (so Luther. Vun-ede iiber den 
 Proph. Daniel ; Melancthon in the Kortimtntar^ 
 where, however, he also associates the pope ; 
 Calov. ; M. Geier, etc.), nor in the pope (Luther 
 in his exposition of chap, xl and xii. and else- 
 where ftequently ; also Brentius, Calvin, Zan- 
 chius, Cocceius, Buddeus, Bengel, Roos, and re- 
 cently, F. Brunn, in the little work, 1st der 
 Pabst der Antichrist? Dresden, 1868), nor in Na- 
 poleon L or III. (cf. Leutwein, JJas Thier war 
 und ist nicht, etc., Ludwigsburg, 1825), nor, 
 most remarkable of all, in Count Bismarck 
 as representing the Prussian State (thus, e.g., 
 Groen van Priesterer ; many clergymen of 
 Wiirtemberg in the year 18(i6, etc.), but his 
 eschatological character as belonging to the 
 final stage of mundane history must be retained. 
 Cf . Liinemann, on 2 Thess. ii. , p. 204 et seq. ; 
 Auberlen and Rif^enbach on the same chapter, 
 p. 117 etseq. ; H. 0. Kohler, IHe Schriftwid- 
 rigkeit (fes Chiliasmus, in Guericke's Zeitschr. fiXr 
 die hith. Thed. und Kirehe, 1861, No. ni., p. 
 459 et seq. ^where the numeroiis writers in the 
 Middle Ages are mentioned, who declared the 
 pope to be the antichrist, e.g., bishop Arnulf of 
 Orleans, 991; Honorius of Autun; John of 
 Salisbury ; Joachim v. Floris ; Robert Gross- 
 head; Job. Milicz; Matth. v. Janow; Gregory 
 of Heimburg ; the Waldenses ; many Hussites, 
 
 * Thus, e.g., Bectanann, ifeditaUones poMIca, c. 86, »nd 
 Koch (in Starke, on v. 8). 
 
CHAP. VIII. 1-27. 
 
 16& 
 
 et); S. Baring Gould, Carious Mythi of the 
 Middle Ayes, London, 1806 (chap. 9, the Anti- 
 christ) ; H. W. Rinck, Die Lehre der MtUigen 
 Hc/irift vom Antichrist, rait Beriickdchtigung der 
 Zeichen unserer Zeit. Elberfeld, 18G7 [and many 
 of the monographs cited at the close of the In- 
 troduction] . 
 
 Since but few of the practical expositors of 
 former times occupy the ground of this more 
 free and spiritual iuterpretatiou, but rather are 
 generally concerned to adapt the visions of the 
 prophet to special events and appearances in 
 modern history, or confine themselves to the 
 work of disproving the interpretation which as- 
 sumes that the chap, was a vatic, ex eeentii, 
 written by a pretended Daniel in the Maccaba^an 
 period (so many church fathers, e.g., Jerorae, 
 whose observations on this section aim solely to 
 resist the tendency-critical attacks of Por- 
 phyry ; among modems, e.g., Hiivemick), a 
 thoroughly proper practical and homiletical 
 treatment of the chapter, based on a solid exe- 
 getical foundation, can of course derive but 
 little benefit from them. Nevertheless, we quote 
 several observations on the more important pas- 
 sages. 
 
 On vs. 4-8, Meiancthon : " MirabiU Dei con- 
 silio et voluntate Ecdesia subjecta est cruei. . . 
 . . Pradicunt Frop/ieta et ApostoU, muhdum 
 panas daturum esse, quud post sparsum erau- 
 geliurn tj/rannisceriant in membra Christi, dcinde 
 et ab iUis ipsis gtii gubernant Ectlesiam, poUitta 
 sit Ecdesia idplui, falsis dogmatibm, paricidiis 
 sanctontmlibidinibus." {To this, however, is added 
 the one-sided and arbitrary remark, " Est ex his 
 leminibus ortam essepestain MalMineticam historia 
 
 ostendit.") On v. 9, Calvin : •' Sciamus lion posst 
 a nobis Deum conspici qualis est, donee simus plane 
 similes ei. . . . Deus certe neque solimn aliquud 
 occupat, nequ^ rotis vehitur. sed nun debemus im- 
 aginnri Deum in sua essentia talem esse, qunlii 
 propheta suo et aiiis Sanctis patribus apparuit / 
 sed iuduit subinde varias fonniis pro captu Iwrai- 
 num. quibus prdsentiee siue aliquod sig?ivm dare 
 volebat," 
 
 On vs. 11, 13, the Tubinger Bibel : "In Hia 
 eternal decree God has fixea a limit to every 
 kingdom ; beyond this it cannot go, and the 
 Divine providence exerts a special agency to this 
 end (Isa. .xxiii. 15)." 
 
 On V. 13 et seq. , Luther ( Von den letzten Wor- 
 ten DaHds, in his Werke, vol. XXXI. p. 30 et 
 seq. ) : " This eternity or eternal kingdom cannot 
 be given to any evil creature, whether man or 
 angel ; for it is the power of God, and of God 
 Himself. . . . Namely, the Father confers the 
 everlasting power on the Son, and the Son re- 
 ceives it from the Father, and all this from all 
 eternity. . . At the same time, the Son is also a 
 child, i.e., a real man and the Son of Da^d, to 
 whom such eternal power is given. Thus we see 
 how the prophets properly regarded and under- 
 stood the word ' eternal, ' when God says to 
 David by the mouth of Nathan. ' I will place my 
 and thy son in my eternal kingdom ' (3 Sam. vii. 
 13, 16)." 
 
 On V. 25, Starke : " WTien crowned heads 
 assail God with impious hands, and are not con- 
 tent with the honor of earthly gods, their re- 
 spect and honor, dominion and glory, are taken 
 from them by a common stroke ; cf. Acts xii. 
 23 et seq." 
 
 2. The vision of the ttoo loorld-kingdoms and their faU. 
 Chap. VIII. 1-27. 
 
 1 In the third year of the reign of king Belsliazzar a vision ai^peared unto me, 
 
 2 even unto me [I] Daniel, after tiiat lohich appeared unto me at the first. xVnd I 
 saw in a vision (and it came to pass, when 1 saw, that I icas at [in] &husl\an in 
 the palace [or, citadel], which is in the province o/'Elam) ; and I saw in a vision, 
 and I was by [upon] the river of Ulai. 
 
 3 Then [And] I lifted up mine eyes and saw, and, behold, there stood before the 
 river a [single] ram which [and he] had two horns, and the two horns were high ; 
 
 4 but [the] one was higher tlian the other, and the higher came up last. I saw 
 the ram pushing" westward [sea-ward], and northward, and southward; so that 
 [and] no beasts might [could] stand before him, neither was there any that could 
 deliver out of his hand ; but [and] he did according to his will, and became 
 great.' 
 
 5 And a.s I was considering [then], behold, a he-goat' came from the west,' on 
 the face of the whole earth, and tonched not the ground [earth] : and the goat 
 
 6 Juid a notable [sightly] horn between his eyes. And he came to the ram that 
 had [master of the] two horns, which I had seen standing before the river, and 
 
 7 ran unto him in the fury of his power. And I saw him come close unto ° the 
 ram, and he was moved with choler ' against [towards] him, and smote the ram, 
 and brake his two horns ; and there was no power in the ram to stand before 
 him, but he cast him down to the ground [earth], and stamped ujwn [trampled] 
 him: and there was none that cjiild deliver' the ram out of his hand. 
 
170 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 8 Therefore [And] the he-goat* waxed [became] very' great:' and when fas! 
 he was strong, the great horn was broken ; and for it came up four notable 
 
 9 [sightly] ones," toward the four winds of heaven [the lieavens]. And out of [the 
 one of them came forth a [single] little " horn which waxed [and it became 
 exceeding great/ toward the south, and toward the east and toward the pleasant 
 
 10 land.'- And it waxed [became] great,' even to </je host of heaven [the heavens] : 
 and it cast down " some of the host and of the stars to the ground [earth], and 
 
 11 stamped ii2)on [trampled] thum. Yea [And] he magnified himself even to tht 
 prince of the host, and by [from] him the daily [continual] sacrifice was taken 
 
 12 away," and t/ie place of his sanctuary was cast down. And a host was [would 
 be] given /u')?j against the daily [continual] sacrifice by reason o/"[in] transgression, 
 and it [would] cast dowii the truth to the gronnd [earth] ; and it practised [did], 
 and prospered. 
 
 13 Then [And] I [quite] heard one saint [holy one] speaking, and another saint 
 [one holy one] said unto that certain saint whicli spake [to so-awrf-so the o}ie 
 speaking]. How long shall be the vision concerning \aT\ the daily [continual] 
 sacrifice, and the transgression of desolation [desolating or astounding trans- 
 
 14 gression], to give both tlie sanctuary and </iehost to he trodden underfoot? And 
 lie said unto me, Unto two tliousand and three hundred days [evening-mornings] ;" 
 then [and] shall the sanctuary be cleansed [sanctified]. 
 
 15 And it came to pass, when I, even I Daniel, had seen the vision, and sought 
 for the meaning [understanding], then, behold, there stood before me as the 
 
 16 appearance of a man [person]. And I heard a man's voice between thehanhs of 
 Ulai, which [and he] called, and said, Gabriel, make this man to understand the 
 
 17 vision [appearance]. So [And] he came near where I stood;" and when he 
 came, I was afraid, and fell [quite] upon my face : but [and] he said unto me, 
 Understand, O son of man ; for [that] at [to] the time of the end shall he the 
 
 18 vision. Now [And], as he was speaking with me, I was in a deep sleep 
 [stunned] on my face toward the ground [earth] : but [and] he touched me, and 
 
 19 set me [made me stand] upright." And he said, Behold, 1 wtW make thee know 
 what shall be in the last end of the indignation : for at the time appointed the end 
 shall he [it is to the time oi' the end]. 
 
 20 The ram which thou sawest having [master of the] two horns are the kings of 
 
 21 Media and Persia. And the rough goat" is the king of Gn«cia [Javan] ; and the 
 
 22 great horn that is between his eyes [, that] is the first king. Now that being 
 broken, whereas [And the broken one, and] four stood up for it, four kingdoms 
 
 2.3 shall stand vp out of the nation, but [and] not in his power. And in the latter 
 time of their kingdom, when [as] the transgressors are come to the full [have 
 completed], a king of fierce countenance [strong (bold) of face], and understand- 
 
 24 ing dark sentences [stratagems], shall stand vp. And his power shall be 
 mighty, but not by his o!o?i"power: and he shall destroy [or, corrupt] wonder- 
 fully, and shall prosper, and practise [do], and shall destroy [or, corrupt] the 
 
 2.5 mighty [ones] and the holy people [people of the holy ones]. And througl 
 
 [upon] his policy also [and] he shall cause craft to prosper in his hand ; and he 
 shall inagnify himself m his heart, and by peace [in security] shall destroy [or, 
 corrupt] many : he shall also [and he will] stand iq) against the Prince of 
 
 26 princes ; but [and] he shall be broken without " hand. And the vision [appear- 
 ance] of the evening and the morning which was told is true [, it is truth] : 
 wherefore [and thou] shut thou vp the vision ; for it shall he for many days. 
 
 27 And I Daniel fainted," and was sick certain days: afterward [and] I rose v^), 
 and did the king's business [work] ; and I was astonished at the vision [appear- 
 ance], but [and] none understood it. 
 
 GRA.MMATICAL AND LEXICAL NOTES. 
 
 [1 T>.—' njltti bulling, as rams are fond of doing.—' i''~3n, acted prouaty.—* Literall.r, a teoper of the goan.- 
 * 3^7"^. a different term from that used in ver. 4, D'^i '''« f^fi. *■*■. Mediterranean, which here might have been mi* 
 
 underAtooO ns being literally the place of origin, whereas the idea of direclion only is intended.—" Literally, louchtug the 
 i(<Kc/.— ' Literallj-, inibiuiml Ulimeif, I.e., waBcxasperated.—" Literally, no de;ic»r«i-/or.—" Literally, tUl txaedingly.— 
 
CHAP. VIII. 1-27. 
 
 171 
 
 'I Literally, a fight jf/ow.—^' m"32?;, alminuUon; the order too is emphatic, one Itom—apeUy one.—" '^SH, tlu 
 beaul!/ of lands.—" Cav-Kd to fall.—" According to the tejtt B^ir!) one took awai/.—" The original is excoedinglj 
 laconic an J obsciu-e, C":~'2 Sl^TI ™";p1 m- literally, a 0tJi'nff niid the raiiceKary a;ui the Aos< n Ireodi/ig.—" The 
 original is very peculiar, fill an enening.morning, 2300.—" Literally, to the stile of mv s«niidiii£;.— "Literally, upon mi 
 Man<fiii£7.— '"Literally. Aairy (eaper.-'" Literally. loUh a cessation of—" "'n"'1'n', S.d.i "' Was done up," was oTercome.l 
 
 EXEGETICAL REMAKKS. 
 
 Verses 1, 2. Time and place of the vhion. In 
 the third year of the reign of king Belshaz- 
 zar ; hence, shortly before the end of this king, 
 who reigned but little more than two years (cf . 
 Introd., g 8, note ^l, and therefore not long 
 after the incident recorded in chap, v., which 
 revealed the Medo-Persiau kingdom already 
 rising with a threatening light above the politi- 
 cal horizon of the Chaldtean empire, as the 
 heiress of Babylonia. Nebuchadnezzar's vision 
 of the image and that of the four beasts and 
 the Son of man (seen perhaps two years before 
 the present datei. as well as the vision of the 
 Medo-Persi.in ram and the Grecian goat, de- 
 scribed in the following verses, had already pre- 
 pared Daniel, before he interpreted the mysteri- 
 ous writing on the wall of Belshazzar's banquet- 
 hall, to see Medo-Persia standing on the arena 
 of history as the leading world-power instead of 
 Babylonia in the not distant future The ex- 
 tent, however, to which recent political events, 
 such as successes achieved by the Medes, or, 
 what is more probable, the rise of the youthful 
 Persian prince Cyrus and his victory over Asty- 
 ages (B. C. ").")9, and therefore two years after 
 the death of Nebuchadnezzar in.5(il. and shortly 
 after the overthrow of his successor Belshazzar- 
 Evilmerodach), may have been influential in in- 
 citing the prophet to the politico-religious medi- 
 tations from which originated the vision of this 
 chapter, cannot be positively decided, in view 
 of the silence of the book with regard to such 
 externally conditioning circumstances. The 
 political situation must certainly not be appre- 
 hended as if the fall of the Babylonian empire 
 n-ere immediately impending, and the approach 
 of the Medes under Darius were looked for 
 shortly. Against this view, which is based on 
 the familiar but incorrect interpretation of chap. 
 V. 29 et seq., and which is still advocated by 
 Hitzig. Ewald, etc., see supra, on that passage.* 
 — A vision appeared unto me . . . Daniel, 
 after that which appeared unto me at the first; 
 i.e., "after having seen, somewhat earlier, an 
 important prophetic vision, another of a similar 
 character appeared to me." This new vision, 
 however, is not called a " dream " or a dream- 
 vision, like that in chap. vii. 1, but simply a 
 T'v'i " vision, what has been seen ; " cf. vs. 15, 
 26. and also ns-': (vs. 16, 27 ; chap. x. 7 ; also 
 Ex. iii. 3 ; Ezck. xliii. 3), which is often substi- 
 tuted for "■"n. It is evident that the prophet 
 was awake and conscious during this vision, from 
 the language of the verses at the beginning .ind 
 
 • [If, howrver, Rawlinson's identification of Belshazzar 
 with Nabunned'A son and viceroy be correct, the Medo-Per- 
 siail army wa-* at this ver\' time beeiepnij;? Babylon, though 
 with apparently little pmspect of success: and the fall of 
 the city must have followed shortly after this vision. Hence 
 the first monmchy, the Chaldwan. is here kept out of view, 
 fts il ^li-eady a thiut^ of the past,] 
 
 end of the section (vs. 2 and 27), and also from 
 a comparison with the vision in chap. x. , which 
 is analogous in form (see especially vs. 7-10). — 
 nsn:!!, mstead of "«"' "wN li'nri. On this 
 apparently relative use of the article, cf. Ewald. 
 Lelifb., § 335 a. — ni~p3, properly, " in the be- 
 ginning," is here and in chap. ix. 21 equivalent 
 to '■ formerly, before," and therefore = n:r»"'2. 
 Isa. L 26 ; Gen. xiii. 3, 4 (in both passages the 
 two terms are employed as synonyms). The ex- 
 pression refers back to chap. vii. , and especially 
 to vii. 28. — Verse 2. And I saiw in a vision; 
 and it came to pass, when I saw, that I was 
 at Shushan in the palace. T^~r "'"T indi- 
 cates that he iraB merely visionally present at 
 Shushan, or that in spirit he was transported to 
 that Persian metropolis; but in the following 
 words he describes its situation and locality in 
 so realizing and exact a manner that his actual 
 presence in or near that city becomes exceed- 
 ingly probable. During his long oflBcial and 
 semi-official service under Nebuchadnezzar he 
 may have visited that region more than once 
 (cf. supra, on iii 12 and iv. U). Like Josephus. 
 a majority of the older translators, Luther, Gro- 
 tius, etc. , Bertholdt and Gesenius advocate the 
 view that the words beginning with "''"I'^l are in 
 parenthesis ; but this is contrary to the Heb . 
 usage and to the expression of the author, and 
 consequently the view adopted by nearly all the 
 modern expositors, which finds only a presence 
 of Daniel ;i' Tvvcv/jan at Shushan indicated by 
 this language, is preferable. This destroys all 
 foundation for the charge of Bertholdt, that the 
 \vriter is guilty of anachronism in this instance, 
 since Shushan was no longer subject to the Baby- 
 lonian empire in the reign of Belshazzar, i.e.. 
 Nabonidus. Even prior to the fall of the Chal- 
 daean world-power Daniel was able to speak of 
 the palace (or castle) of Shushan (with regard to 
 n"l^3, Pers. bdi-u, "a castle," S.anscr. bitra, Gr. 
 /W»;f, cf. Gesenius and Dietrich, s. v.) as a cen- 
 tre of Persian power, and ereii, in (/measure, «.s 
 t/ie hcdrt nf the Mcdo-Persinn world-monarchy. 
 because the city of Susa (Old-Pers. probably 
 Shiiza, now Shush — see Lassen, Zeitschr. fiir 
 Kimde des Morgenl., VI. 47), together with its 
 well-fortified castle, was, from the earliest times, 
 a principal feature in the province of Elymais 
 (which is indicated by the terms applied to it by 
 Herodotxis, e.g., Mf urdrfor hcrr, Inina ra Me/iv6- 
 vn, etc; see Herod., V. 53, .')4 ; VIL 151; cf. 
 Strabo, XV. 52 et seq. ; Pausan., IV. 31, 5), and 
 because the prominent and all-controlling part 
 which that city would take under the direction 
 of a native Persian prince could readily be fore- 
 seen, even before Cyrus should have solemnly 
 declared it the capital of his empire, and before 
 Darius Hystaspis should have enlarged and 
 splendidly ornamented it as such (cf. Havemick, 
 on this passage). — Which is in the province oi 
 
172 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Elam. Kranichfeld Qbserves correctly that " if 
 this book had been written subsequent to the 
 exile, Shushan would not have been located in 
 Elam, but in Susiaua" (cf. Fiiller, p. 190); for 
 Elara (Gr. 'E'/.vuak-, Sept. Ai/iiu) is the old-Heb. 
 designation of the countries situated east of 
 Babylon and the lower Tigris, which were in- 
 habited from the earliest times by Shemites 
 (see Gen. x. 23; xiv. 19; cf. Isa. xi. 11 ; xxi. 
 2; xxiL 6; Jer. xxv. 2.5. etc.), and it was not 
 till the period of the Persian supremacy that 
 the extended province of Elam was limited to 
 the narrow strip between the Tigris and the 
 Euloeus, or between the Persian satrapies of 
 Babylonia and Susiana, by which arrangement 
 the river Euloeus (see the notes immediately 
 following) became the boundary between Ely- 
 mais and Susiana, and the city of Susa was 
 assigned to the latter province. Cf. Strabo, XV. 
 3, 12; XVI. 1, 17; Pliny, H. Jf., VI. 27: Su- 
 fianam ab Elymaicle disterminat omnU EuUfus." 
 The expres.sion n_:"^~'an C3''>, " the province of 
 
 Elam," does not by any means convey the idea 
 of a Chaldcean province of that name, whose 
 capital was Susa, because the author conforms 
 entirely to the ancient Heb. usage. Cf. Nie- 
 buhr, Gejic/i. Asstirs und Babels, p. 198 et seq. ; 
 Vaihinger, in Herzog's Real-Encykl. , Art. EUim. 
 — And I -was by the river of Ulai, i.e.. on the 
 banks of the Euteus. which flowed on one side 
 of the city of Susa, while the Choaspes (on 
 which river the classics, as Herod., I. 188; V. 
 49, 53; Strab., XV. p. 738, etc., locate that 
 town) probably bounded it on the other. Cor- 
 responding with this, the representation of a 
 large city, lying between two rivers, on a bas- 
 relief of Kuyunjik copied by Layard (Niiiereh 
 and Babt/loii, p. 452), was probably designed for 
 Susa. The explorations of Loftus in the region 
 of Shush in 1851 make it probable th.it the 
 Eulajus itself was merely a fork or branch of 
 the ancient Choaspes or modern Kerkhah, and 
 that the latter stream was also occasionally 
 called Eulseus (see R idiger, ZeUschr. f. Kunde 
 dc.t Murgenl. , XIII. 715 et seq. ; Riietschi, in 
 Herzog's Real- Encykl. , art. Siisa). The peculiar 
 name 3^'^'<, "stream, water-course," which is 
 applied to the Ulai in this place and in vs. 3. 6, 
 It), appears likewise to indicate that it was not 
 so much a single river as a stream which divided 
 into two forks. The same idea was probably 
 intended by the expression " between the Ulai," 
 T. IG (see on that passage).* 
 
 Verses 3, 4. The first leading feature of the 
 vi.iion : the Per-iian ram. And behold there 
 stood before the river a ram. "Before it," 
 i.e.. probably, eastward from it, in case the 
 branch of the river which flowed to the west of 
 Susa is intended ; for if Daniel did not stand in 
 the castle of Shushan, he was at any rate close 
 beside it, and therefore on the eastern bank of 
 
 * ["But why such a locality f Because the jirophet's 
 present vision begins with the Medo-l'ersian empire, and 
 Shushan was to be its capital. And why on the river k hunk f 
 Not because the Jews were wont to hniVX praifer-htiuiteH in 
 such places. Acts xvi. \'.i\ nor because Ezeldei had visions 
 on the Chaboras. i. 1, 3 : iii. 15, 25 a/. (Leng.) ; nor because 
 Df the solitude of the place (Maurer) ; but simply, a-s I un- 
 d';rscand it, because the castle ("""iS) stood ou the banks 
 
 of the river. The mention of the river, however, would still 
 lio in a measure superfluous, were not this mention a pre- 
 paratiou for what is f«id in ver. 16."— tituart.] 
 
 that branch of the stream. If from this position 
 he saw the ram standing befvre the river, the 
 latter must likewise have been on the eastern 
 bank. [" Daniel first sees one ram, j'^^, stand- 
 ing by the river. The ins (one) does not here 
 stand for the indefinite article, but is a numeral 
 in contradistinction to the two horns which the 
 one ram has " (Keil). Rather it indic.ites a soli- 
 tary ram, and not a member of a flock, as is 
 usual with these gregarious animals. For every 
 ram has of course two horns.] The vision sym- 
 bolizes the Persian monarchy as a 7'am (and after- 
 ward the Grajcian empire as a he-goat i, in har- 
 mony mth that mode of representation — which 
 prevailed generally in the figurative language of 
 O.-T. prophecy and accorded with Oriental 
 modes of conception in general — by which 
 princes, national sovereigns, or military leaders 
 were tyjiified under similar figures ; cf . Isa. xiv. 
 9 ('■ all the great goats of the earth "), and as 
 parallel with it, "all the kings of the heathen," 
 Jer. 1. 8 ; Ezek. xxxiv. 17 ; Zech. x. 3. From 
 extra- Biblical sources, cf. Zendar., part II., p. 
 373 et seq., in Kleuker (Ized Behram appears 
 "like a ram with clean feet and sharp-poin ted 
 horns"); Hamasa, p. 482, ed. Shultens ; also 
 the Iliad, xiii, 491-493; Cicero, de dirinat., I. 
 23, 14 ; Plutarch, Sulla, c. 27.* It is especially 
 significant that Persia is represented as a male 
 sheep, while the Macedonian-Greek empire is 
 symbolized as a he-goat, in view of the contrast 
 between the solid prosperity and even abundant 
 wealth of the Persian monarchy, and the com- 
 bative, rampant, and warlike nature of Mace- 
 don. With similar propriety the preceding 
 vision (chap. vii. 5 et seq.) employed the bear 
 to represent the slow, clumsy, but enormous 
 power of Medo-Persia, and the four-winged leo- 
 pard to illustrate the fleetness and warlike spirit 
 of the Slacedpnians. It is also possible that an 
 indirect allusion to the ethieal contrast between 
 Medo-Persia, as a power which in a religious 
 point of view approximated somewhat towards 
 Shemitism and the Theocracy, and maintained 
 friendly relations with them, and the Greecian 
 empire, as being thoroughly heathen and fun- 
 damentally opposed to all monotheism, was im- 
 plied in this representation ; for the parallel 
 descriptions in chapters ii. and vii. likewise de- 
 scribe the succeeding world-kingdoms as in every 
 
 * ntad, 1. c. : 
 
 Oi oi aju' riyffi.6ve^ Tpwtov eaav ainap Irreira 
 Aaoi k-novO , lixrct re p.€ra. (cT(Aou ((Tttcto ^ijjAa 
 Ilio^ei- tK PoTatTjs' yow^Tai 5" dpo Te (/tptt-a ttoi^^v. 
 
 Cf. the prophetic dream relating to the murder of a brothel 
 of Brutus by Tarquin Superbns, and to the vengeance in. 
 flieted by Brutus for that deed, as narrated by Tarqnin m 
 Cicero, ile dicin.. 1. c. 
 
 '* Vifnm '( i" somntu pastor ad me adpellere 
 Pecits kntigenim exiniia pulchi itudiue. 
 Dun corisarifttiiitettn nrietex itidf eliui 
 Pro'.clarioremtjve nltennn immnkne me : 
 Veinde tju« germanum coriubus cojinUier 
 In me arieturt, euque ictu me ad cojsuni dari.^' 
 
 In Plutarch's Sr/lla the following is related, and treated u 
 an omen of the defeat of the j ounger Marins and the cousu; 
 Xorbanua. which oeenrred stton afterwards: eV Kap-navio 
 ntpt To'Hli^alO^' (? read Ttrftarov instead) opos ijuepa? uj<|)C7)ffa» 
 Svo Tpdyot itcyd\ot (rv/i(/)cpo/jei'oc, xai TTavra. dpuiyrt^ Kai 
 jraCTYoeTt?, (i avfji^a I'fi fjiaxo^A-ivoii avSpuiWOL^. — Cf. addi- 
 tional e\tracts from the daisies and firmi the oriental liter 
 at ire wliieh be-ir on this i>o nt in Hfn^riiiek. 
 
CHAP. Tin. 1-27. 
 
 173 
 
 case more degraded and abominable, in a re- 
 U^ous and ethical light, than their predecessors 
 (see Eth. -fund, principles, etc., on chap. ii. No. 
 S, n and b). He-goats serve elsewhere also as 
 symbols of a violent, savage, and obstinately 
 hostile disposition, while sheep (and consequently 
 cams also) are distinguished by being more gov- 
 ernable, and by evincing a more peaceful and 
 rnild nature, and thus are better adapted to typ- 
 ify what is ethically good and attractive. See 
 Matt. XXV. 31-40, and cf. Lange on that passage, 
 who observes against Meyer, and certainly with 
 justice, that in this description of the last judg- 
 ment, Christ does not represent the wicked 
 under the symbol of goats because of the in- 
 ferior value of that animal (Luke xv. 29), but 
 because of its " incorrigible obstinacy " and un- 
 governable temper (Vol. I. of the New-Test, por- 
 tion of this Bible work). Cf. also Piper, Christui, 
 der Wcltriohter in the evangel. Kalender, 1853, p. 
 2o. — Which had two horns ; and the horns 
 were high. The ram was therefore not impo- 
 tent and defenceless, since the tall horus which 
 he bore are symbols of great power, being the 
 natural weapons of rams, both for offence and 
 defence ; cf. on chap. vii. 7, 24. — But one was 
 higher than the other, and the higher came 
 up last. The vision therefore represents the 
 horns as stiU growing, and fixes the prophet's 
 attention on the fact that the horn which comes 
 up last excels the other in its powerful growth — 
 a striking illustration of the well-known process 
 of development by which the Persian nation be- 
 came the head of the Medo-Persian world-em- 
 pire after the time of Cyrus, as being the more 
 powerful element in the confederacy, and thus 
 able to compel the Median branch, though older, 
 to assume the second place in power and dignity. 
 Theodoret thinks that this passage refers to the 
 expulsion of the dynasty of Cyrus by the later, 
 but more powerful family of Darius Hystaspis ; 
 the ram, however, does not represent Persia 
 only, but the combined Medo-Persia, as the 
 angel expressly states in the interpretation v 
 20, and as the parallel visions in chap. ii. 39 and 
 vii. 0. when properly conceived and understood, 
 compel us to suppose (see on that pas.sage). — 
 Verse 4. I saw the ram pushing westward, 
 and northward, and southward. The " push- 
 ing "' can only be intended to signify the asser- 
 tion and extension of its power in a warlike man- 
 ner; cf. chap. xi. 40; Psa. xliv. G ; Deut. xxxiii. 
 17; 1 Kings xxii. 11. In this place the pushing 
 westward denotes more particularly the vic- 
 tories of Medo-Persia over Babylonia and the 
 Lydiau kingdom of Asia Minor ; that toward 
 the north, the expeditions for the conquest of 
 Scythia. led by Cyrus and Darius ; and that to- 
 wards the south, the conquest of Egypt and 
 Libya by Cambyses. The ram does not push 
 eastward, because the east already belonged to 
 the Medo-Persian empire, and no farther exten- 
 sion in that direction was to be expected. Hit- 
 zig remarks, with incredible absurdity: "The 
 fourth quarter of the earth is here unnoticed. 
 While the ram turns bis head to the right or left, 
 he may, without changing his position, push 
 northward and southward, but not backwardx ; 
 in that direction, moreover, he would assail 
 Daniel himself, and afterward Susa " — as if there 
 could have been any difficulty in the matter of 
 changing the position of the ram, in case it be- 
 
 came necessary to represent an extension of its 
 power eastward, by the symbol of pushing in 
 that direction!* — So that no beasts might 
 stand before him; literally, "and all beasts — 
 they stood not before him." The imperfect 83 
 1~?35^ expresses here, as often, the sense of 
 " not being able to resist" (cf. Gesen., Lehrgeb.. 
 p. 773 et seq.). The verb in this place is mascu- 
 line (unlike v. 22), because the writer has in hia 
 mind the kingdoms or monarchs symbolized by 
 the ni'n. Cf. the simUar enallage gen. in Job 
 XV. 6; Hos. xiv. 1. — But he did according to 
 his will and became great. b^~?'7':, properly, 
 "and he made great," namely, his power, i.e.^ 
 he became strong, mighty. Not " and he pre- 
 tended to be great, gave himself boastful airs " 
 (de Wette, van Ess, Ewald, etc. ) ; for, as v. 25 
 shows, S"^'^?'7 never expresses the sense of boast- 
 ing or conceited superciliousness when standing 
 alone, as it does here and in v. 8, but only when 
 joined with the particularizing T:^»2.f With 
 regard to vs. 10 and 11 cf. infra, on those pas- 
 sages. 
 
 Verses 5-7. The Oreeciun hc-goat and its vic- 
 tory over the Persian ram. And as I was con- 
 sidering, behold, a he-goat, etc, "Consider- 
 ing," V^^, as in V. 27. The he-goat with a 
 single notable horn between the eyes — hence 
 in its general appearance resembling one of the 
 unicoriis which are prominent in the drawings 
 on the monuments of Nineveh, Babj-lon, and 
 Persepolis — symbolizes the Macedonian-Hellen- 
 istic world-monarchy founded by Alexander the 
 Great (whom the single great horn more directly 
 represents, see v. 21), and at the same time the 
 kingdoms of the Diadochi which emanated from 
 it, as V. 8 indicates with all possible clearness 
 by the growth of four new horns in the place of 
 the great horn which was broken. This com- 
 prehensive animal symbol accordingly includes 
 all that had been characterized separately in the 
 two former visions of the world-monarchies, 
 chapters ii. and vii. , at first by the figure of two 
 different parts of the body of the colossu.", and 
 afterward by the symbol of two beasts appear- 
 ing in succession. This departure from the 
 former mode of representation involves no ques- 
 tionable features whatever, inasmuch as this 
 chapter follows a different train of ideas in many 
 other respects as well, and the advocates of the 
 interpretation of the fourth beast in chap. vii. 
 (and of the legs of clay and iron intermingled, 
 
 * ["He did push toward the east — not because .... tho 
 Medo- Persians themselves came from the east (Von Leng., 
 Kran. ) ; nor yet because the conquests of the Persians did 
 not stretch toward the east (Hav.), for Cyrus and Darius 
 subdued nations to the east of Persia, even as far as to the 
 Indus, but because, for the unfolding of the iledo- Persian 
 monarchy as a world-power, its conquasts in the east were 
 subordinate, and therefore are not mentioned. The pushing 
 toward the three world-regions corresponds to the three ribs 
 of the bear, ch. vii. 5, and intimates that the Medo- 
 Persian world-kingdom, in spite of the irresistibility of its 
 arms, did not extend its power into all the regions of tho 
 world." — Keil.\ 
 
 t [Yet '• the idea of insolence or arrogance U not absent 
 from i^ian used thus absolutely, see Sam. i. 9; Zeph. 
 
 ii. S Flushed with success, we know from all quarters that 
 the Persians assumed a haughty position; so Cnesiis (in 
 Herod, i. 6!)), IltrpcTai .... v^pc(rT(u, and so .^schylui 
 {I'era. 7l>5) ujrepico/iirot avoi*." — Stmtrt ] 
 
174 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 in chap, ii.), which differs from ours, must not 
 be permitted to urge their view to the exclusion 
 of our own, because they also are compelled to 
 acknowledge that the present vision combines 
 in one two features which are there found sepa- 
 rately, BO that the one Medo-Persian ram in this 
 place con'esponds to the two beasts in the former 
 vision, which, in their judgment, represent 
 Media and Persia (cf. supra). — Came from the 
 west on the face of the vrhole earth, and 
 touched not the ground j therefore, with great 
 swiftness, as if flying, or as if borne on the 
 wings of the storm. Cf. the description of the 
 leopard in chap. vii. 6, and the statement re- 
 specting Alexander the Great, in 1 Mace. L 3 : 
 dif/Aiiei: iuf aKpui' -ijf yi/c ; also Isa. xli. 2 et seq. ; 
 Hos. xiii. 7 ; Hab. i. 6, 8, and other descriptions 
 relating to conquerors of earlier times, — And 
 the goat had a notable horn between his 
 eyes. TlTn '\~p_ does not signify a "' horn of 
 vision " (Hofmann, Weiss, viul ErfuUung. I, 
 292), but rather a " notable horn," as the parallel 
 nbna in vs. 8 and 21 shows, and as the ancient 
 versions already declare (Theod. : nepai; ^eupTrrdv ; 
 Vulg. : cornu insigne, etc.) ; cf. "^'I'a ■i"^t<, 2 
 •Sam. xxiii. 21; also Targ., Esth. ii. 2; Gen. 
 vii 11. — Verse G. And he came to the ram that 
 had two horns. The Ai'abs term Alexander the 
 Great " the two-horned one," because he was 
 represented on coins, etc. , as the son of Jupiter 
 Ammou, wearing two horns on his head. The 
 fact that, on the contrary, the Medo-Persian 
 empire which he conquered is represented as a 
 double-horned ram, indicates with sufficient 
 clearness that the symbolic visions of this chap- 
 ter did not originate with a pseudo-Daniel, who 
 prophesied subsequent to the event. Cf. Kran- 
 ichfeld on this passage, where he justly rejects 
 Hitzig's opinion that we have here merely an ' ' ac- 
 cidental analogy " to the Arabian idea. — And ran 
 unto him in the fury of his pow^er ; properly, 
 in the heat of his power, i.e. , iu the irresistible 
 rage (nan) of which he was capable by reason 
 of his mighty power. Hiivemick is not exactly 
 correct when he reads ' ' full of a fierce desire for 
 battle ; " nor are De Wette, Von Lengerke, etc., in 
 their version, " iu his mighty rage." — Verse 7. 
 And I saw him come close unto the ram. The 
 manner in which Alexander the Great, at the 
 head of the Macedonian forces, put an end to 
 the Medji-Persian empire, corresponds in the 
 main with this description of the assault by the 
 goat upon the ram, which resulted in the break- 
 ing of the two horns of the latter ( i.e. , the power 
 of Media and of Persia), but still not so exactly 
 as to suggest a sketching ex event ii of that event. 
 The figurative description is especially defective 
 in not containing any tolerably clear indication 
 of the fact that several vigorous blows by the 
 ram, which were inflicted at different points (the 
 first at Granicns, the next at Issus, and the final 
 one in the neighborhood of Susa and the Eulijeus 
 river), were required to break and destroy the 
 Persian power. A Maccabajan pseudo-Daniel 
 would hardly have escaped the temptation to 
 introduce more tangible allusions to these fea- 
 tures. 
 
 Verses 8-12. The little horn which gyeai from 
 the goat, and its opjlence against the Most High 
 uiid His sanctuary. And the goat waxed very 
 
 great. Here again b"^~3n does not signify " to 
 pretend to greatness," but " to become great, ta 
 develop mightily." * "Stl T>, "' unto excess," 
 as in Gen. xxvii. 33 ; 1 Kings i. 4; Isa. Ixiv. 8. 
 — And vrhen he w^as (or, "had become') 
 strong, the great horn was broken. T3253i 
 when the height of his "becoming great" was 
 reached, when his power was at its climax. 
 Thiidi of Alexander's expeditions to Bactria, 
 Sogdiana, and India, which were soon followed 
 by his death. The " ' breaking of the great horn," 
 however, does not refer simply to Alexander's 
 death, but also to the division of the dominion 
 and disruption of the unity of the realm imme- 
 diately consequent on the decease of that mon- 
 arch. — And for it came up four notable ones. 
 MTn is properly in apposition with >"?"'<, " con- 
 spicuousness. four," or also an adverbial accusa- 
 tive, " in conspicuousness, in a notable manner ; " 
 cf. supra, on v. 5. Each of the separate powers 
 is therefore still important, although each re- 
 ceives but a fourth of the power and greatness 
 of the original collective empire. — Toward the 
 four VTinds of heaven. This addition alludes 
 to the centrifugal principle, tending to division 
 and separation, which after Alexander's death 
 (not after the battle of Ipsus, as Hitzig prefers) 
 seized on the Macedonian-Hellenistic world- 
 monarchy, in which the centralizing principle 
 had hitherto prevailed. The number of the 
 horns appears to be based on the number of the 
 winds, and to be a standing symbolic expression 
 which is found in other writers also (cf. Jer. 
 xlix, 36; Zech. ii. 10; vi. 5; Job i. 19). It is 
 at any rate of symbolic significance, referring to 
 the separation and parting of the empire toward 
 all quarters of the world ; and it is therefore not 
 admissible to seek four particular kingdoms 
 which should be denoted by the four horns 
 growing towards the four quarters of the earth, 
 as those of Cassander (Macedon). Lysimachua 
 (Thrace and Asia Minor), Seleucus (Syria, Baby- 
 lonia, and Persia), and Ptolemy (Egypt). f Both 
 the opponents and the advocates of the genuine- 
 ness of this book, since Porphyry and Jerome, 
 are agreed in this speciaUzing interpretation of 
 the four homs, by which the kingdoms of the 
 four Diadochi, who have been mentioned, are ob- 
 tained (cf. in addition Havemick. Hitzig, Ewald. 
 and Kamphausen, on the passage). But they do 
 not consider (1) that not the battle of Ip.'ius, but 
 the death of Alexander, the monarch who 
 founded the empire, is given as the terminiii a 
 5 «o at which the growth of the "four homs" 
 begins ; (2) that in point of fact the number of 
 the great empires' of the Diadochi Cassander, 
 Lysimachus, etc., was limited to four during a 
 period even more brief than that during which 
 the empire was a imit under .Alexander; (3) 
 that the enumeration of four such empires even 
 immediately subsequent to the battle of Ipsus 
 
 * [The necessity for this limitation of the meaning of 
 i^'nnn here is not clear ; it seems better to take it in the 
 
 same sense of arrogance as the result of succeas which it 
 bears in the remainder of the chapter,] 
 
 t [Yet Daniel says explicitly that the four horns are foul 
 kingdomn (ver. 22 )i and the coincidence is too striking and 
 minute to be accidental. There weie indeed originally Ave 
 of the Diadochi, but they so soon resolved themselves int< 
 four that this temporary pentarchy is disregarded.] 
 
CHAP. VIII. 1-27. 
 
 175 
 
 might be assailed as being inexact, inasmuch as 
 Demetrias, the son of Antigonus whom those 
 kings had conquered, stood upon the scene of 
 action (as ruler of the sea, and lord of Phoenicia, 
 Cyprus, Athens, etc. ), as well as the independent 
 rulers of the Achsemenidaa who governed Pontus, 
 Armenia, and Cappadocia ; (4) that the parallel 
 visions in chap. ii. and vii. appear to indicate a 
 division of the original empire into two kingdoms 
 (the "two legs" of the colossus, chap. ii. 33, 
 40 et seq.), or into ten (cf. Bleek's interpretation 
 of the ten horns, chap. vii. 7) instead of four. 
 Among modem expositors Kranichfeld advocates 
 the correct view by laying the principal stress on 
 the symbolic idea of a "dispersion to the four 
 winds," and contenting himself with observing 
 in relation to the bearing of this prophecy upon 
 the four empires of the Diadochi in question, 
 that " the prophetic idea is verified formally 
 also, by events suggesting its fulfilment which 
 were connected with the four kingdoms of the 
 Diadochi in the Macedonian realm." — Verse 9. 
 And out of one of them came forth a little 
 horn. rriiSK'p, literally, "out of httlenesa, in 
 a small way," an adverbial conception of similar 
 formation as Ct'p Tp, Ii"'2'^ yi^ in chap. ii. 8, 
 47 (see on those passages). On the masculine 
 forms Q~5 and S<^;|) cf. the similar construc- 
 tions ad seiisum in v. 4 (11'9?") and v. 11 
 (b^ia"). — The horn from which the horn 
 " sprouting in a diminutive manner " comes 
 forth has its historical counterpart in the king- 
 dom of the Seleueidae ; the little horn which 
 sprouts or branches forth from it — after the 
 manner of the prongs in the antlers of a deer — 
 finds, like that in chap. vii. 8, its most pregnant 
 historical illustration in the most godless off- 
 spring of that dynasty, Antiochus Epiphanes. 
 The little horn, however, was certainly not in- 
 tended to represent EJJiphanes only and exclu- 
 sively, as the description shows that immedi- 
 ately follows, which relates to the predecessors 
 of Epiphanes also, especially to Antiochus the 
 Great, and perhaps even suggests a reference to 
 Seleucus Nicator and his expeditions to Persia 
 and India in search of conquest. — Which 
 waxed exceeding great toward the .south and 
 toward the east. It is usual to apply this to 
 the wars of Ant. Epiphanes against Egypt (1 
 Mace. i. 18 et seq. ; cf. infra, Dan. xi. 22 et 
 seq.), against the countries beyond the Eu- 
 phrates, Armenia and Elymais (1 Mace. i. 31, 
 37; vi. 1 et seq. ; cf. Appian., Si/r.^ c. 45, 66), 
 and against the Jews under the leadership of 
 the Asmonaeans. But Syria derived no "ex- 
 ceeding greatness under that tyrant from these 
 wars; the "'^V^'^??^! may be far more appro- 
 priately applied to the former extensions of the 
 power of the Seleucidse under Sel. Nicator and 
 Antiochus the Great (whose conquests toward 
 the west are not noticed, probably because of 
 their transient character). Moreover, in case 
 the reference to the undertakings of Epiphanes 
 that have been mentioned could be established, 
 the prophecy would be so direct in its applica- 
 tion, that it would be hardly possible to defend 
 
 its origin during the captivity with Daniel. * It 
 is better, therefore, to be content with the more 
 general, and, so to speak, collective or genealo- 
 gical interpretation of the "little horn," by 
 which it signifies, m<w« immediately, the anti- 
 theocratic or anti-Christian governing power in 
 the empire of the Seleueidae merely, the power 
 of the "transgressors," who are clearly distin- 
 guished in like manner in v. 23 from Ant. Epi- 
 phanes as the most concentrated expression of 
 the anti-theistic principle (see on that passage). 
 Cf. also Kranichfeld, who, while assenting to 
 this general idea of the little horn, seeks to ex- 
 plain the circumstance that the growth of this 
 horn toward the west is not mentioned, by as- 
 suming that ' ' the Grecian horn as such is con- 
 ceived as being in the icest and as operating from 
 thence," and that therefore the author "would 
 naturally describe it as asserting its power only 
 in the regions which lay southward and eastward 
 from Javan." — And toward the pleasant land, 
 ■^j^rn, properly, " the ornament;" here equiva- 
 lent to ^32Zn 7-H (chap. xi. 16, 41), i.e., the 
 valued, precious lacd, the blessed land, the land 
 of Israel ; cf. Jer. iii^ 19 ; Ezek. xx. 6, 15 ; 
 Zech. viL 14; Psa. cvi. 24. "Palestine is here 
 noticed as a third land between the south and 
 the east, as, in a different connection, in Isa. 
 xix. 23 et seq., it is located between the once 
 hcstUe Egypt and Assyria."! — Verse 10. And 
 it waxed great, even to the host of heaven. 
 The " becomiug great" is here no longer to be 
 taken in the strict and proper objective sense, 
 but is subjective, an impious presumption, a 
 conceited pride whose greatness reached to the 
 host of heaven ; cf. v. 25. The "host of 
 heaven," however, is doubtless a figurative ex- 
 pression, referring in strong eulogistic phrase to 
 Israel, the community of saints, who contsi- 
 tute "the Lord's host" on earth, even as the 
 glittering stars form His host in the sky ; of. 
 Gen. XV. 5; xxii. 17; Num. xxiv. 17; also Ex. 
 vii. 4 ; xii. 41 ; and further, the name Jehovah 
 Sabaoth, which probably designates God in a 
 two-fold sense, namely, as the " Lord of hosts," 
 %vith reference to the starry host, and also to 
 people of Israel, the host of His earthly servants 
 and elect ones. The figurative designation of 
 Israel £is the "host of heaven" was probably 
 caused by the designed assonance between S*^^ 
 and "'^^. the latter of which had just been em- 
 ployed to characterize the tend of Israel. J — And 
 it cast down (some) of the host and of the 
 stars to the ground. The copula before IP 
 
 * [The force of theac »rguraentfi. especially the last, for 
 extendingtlie import of '* the little horn '" beyond Antiochua 
 Epiphanes. it is very difficult for those who are wholly ua- 
 tinged with rationalistic sentimentfi to appreciate.] 
 
 t A later Rabbinical interpretation conceives "^322 in the 
 
 sense of *' gazelle,'" and refers this designation partly to it* 
 Ijeauty, and partly to its peculiarity to extend its border.^ 
 when inhabited, like the skin of a gazelle, but to shrink 
 when uninhabited {Taanith, ti9 a). 
 
 X ["The comparison of the saints to the host of heaven 
 has its root in this, that God. the king of Israel, is called 
 the God of hosts, and by the n"lfit32fc {I'Osttt) are generally 
 
 to be understood the stars or angels ; but the tribes of Israel 
 also, who were led by God out of Egypt, are called 'tiw 
 hosts of Jehovah ' (Eiod. vii. 4 ; lii. 41)."— ife'fc] 
 
176 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 C^saiSn is explicative (= namely), aad serves 
 to introduce an explanatory clause, intended to 
 sustain the force of the fifrure presented in the 
 preceding sentence while applying the term 
 s;:r — which is not metaphorical in itself — to 
 the host of Israel, and thus to strengthen the 
 conception of the impious character of the 
 attempt. — And stamped upon them, namely, 
 the members of the people of God ; cf. v. 13 
 and chap. vii. 21, 25. The manner in which 
 this part of the prophetic vision was fulfilled 
 uuder Ant. Epiphanes is recorded in 1 Mace. i. 
 24, 30, 37 ; ii. 38. Cf. the reference expressly 
 to this prophecy in 2 Mace. ix. 10. — Verse 11. 
 Tea, he magnified himself even to the prince 
 of the host. The masculine i"''??'"' is used 
 because the foe who is typified by the horn is 
 intended ; cf. xi. 36. — The " princeof the host" 
 is of course not identical with him who is men- 
 tioned in Josh. V. 14 (who is probably identical 
 with Michael, Dan. x. 13), but the Most High 
 God Himself, to whom v. 25 refers as the 
 "Prince of princes." Cf. chap. vii. 8, 20, 25 ; 
 xi. 36. — And by him the daily sacrifice was 
 taken away. The ene»iy of God's people, who 
 is symbolized by the horn, must be regarded as 
 the agent of the two passive verbs Clin and 
 TjVan (for which Hitzig, following the Keri and 
 the versions, unnecessarily desires to substitute 
 the actives 3^1" and '^b'iini). l^'pPn, " the 
 daily" (Gr. hSEy^x"'M°i)-, designates, as is shown 
 by the mention of "the place of his sanctuary" 
 immediately afterward, the daily service in the 
 temple, and more particularly, probably the 
 daily nwrning and evening sacrifices, the nil? 
 "I^"r, Num. xxviii. 3; 1 Chron. xvi. 40; 3 
 Chron. xxix. 7. Cf. the rabbinical usage which 
 expresses this idea also by T-?;rn simply ; cf. 
 also infra, on v. 14. — The events in the history 
 of the theocracy immediately prior to the Chris- 
 tian ajra, which fulfilled this prophecy in a mea- 
 sure, are narrated in 1 Mace. i. 39, 45 et seq. ; 
 iii. 45. — Verse 12. And a host was given him 
 against the daily sacrifice by reason of trans- 
 gression; rather, "and war in raised against 
 the daily sacrifice, with outrage." The impert. 
 verbs iriP and '^ir? are not, indeed, praster- 
 ites (Hitzig), but they are not used in a strictly 
 future sense (Ewald, Lehrb., p 829 et seq.). 
 They denote, rather, the idea that the predicted 
 course of conduct accords with the Divine 
 decree, or that it is ordained or permitted by 
 Sod, thus corresponding to chap. vii. 14, 17, or 
 Bupra, V. 4. This sense is most readily ex- 
 pressed in the English by the present tense. — 
 ir:p S2^ does not signify "the host is given 
 ip. or devoted to ruin" (De Wette, Von Len- 
 ferke, Hiivemick, Kranichfeld, etc.), but, "a 
 nar is carried on, a warlike expedition is begun, 
 » campaign is undertaken " (cf. Isa. xl. 2). 
 The correct view was already entertained by 
 Jerome, Luther, etc., and among modems by 
 Hitzig, Kamphausen, and Ewald, the latter of 
 whom justly notices the contrast between VS2 
 liere and the same word in v. 10. where it stands 
 iu a different sense, and therefore translates, 
 
 " and the compulsion of a host is imposed on th« 
 daily." His idea is that compuhion is employed 
 for the purpose of introducing idolatrous wor- 
 ship in place of the ser\ ice of the tn;3 God. and 
 particularly, compulsion to service in the host, 
 so that ' ' host stands opposed to host, serfdom 
 to the true service (of Godi, coercion to free- 
 dom." — In imitation of Theodotion (rai ii^<iti 
 i-i Ti/v ^vaiav afiapna), Bertholdt makes the very 
 uncalled-for proposition of rejecting S^^^l from 
 the text, and then reading "l?Bn. 5'4:ca un- 
 questionably indicates the method of making 
 war upon the daily sacrifice ; it stands sensu ob- 
 jectiro, to designate the outrageous heathen 
 idolatry or sacrificial service, which superseded 
 the worship belonging to the true faith. The 
 same feature occurs iu v. 13, where '■^^ is 
 added, to strengthen the idea.* — And it cast 
 ("oasts ") dowTi the truth to the ground. The 
 subject of '^l?™r'^ (for which Hitzig, following 
 the Septuagint, Theodot., and Syr., prefers to 
 read "iji't-nn) is the TliJ, which is last mentioned 
 
 • [Keil thus reviews the various interpretations proposed 
 of this difficult clause : •' "We must altogether reject the in- 
 terpretation of the Vulgate. '/.'oAitr autem datum eat con- 
 tra Juge nacrijicium propter peceata,^ which is reproduced 
 in Luther's translation. ' There was given to him such 
 strength against the daily siicritice on account of sin ; ' or 
 Calvin's, * Et tempus datum est super jugi mcrifivio in 
 gcelere,^ whereby, after Rashi's example, idS is Interpreted 
 of the statio viilUaris. and thence the interpretation tempus 
 or intervatlum is derived. For &<;:]; means neither roixttr 
 nor teynptts^ nor statio militaris, but only miluari/ tervice, 
 and perhaps military forces. Add to this that &(a^ both 
 
 in vers. 10 and 1.3 means host. If we maintain this, with 
 the majority of interpreters, only two explanations are ad- 
 missible, according as we understand 5tLi of the host of 
 
 heaven, i.e., of Israel, or of some other host. The latter in- 
 terpretation Ls apparently supported partly by the abseuce. 
 of the article in 5tZ2fc aud partly by the construction 
 
 of the word as fem. ("^Tl.r]^ Accordingly, Hitzig saya 
 
 that a Hebrew reader could not understand the words othw- 
 wise than as meaning, *aud a warlike expedition \va.s niaoi6 
 or conducted against the daily sacrifice with wickednest ' 
 (i.e., the impure service of idols) : while others translate, 
 * and a host placed against the daily sacrifice on account ol 
 sin' (Syr., Grot., Harenb,, J. D. Michaelis) : or, 'a host ia 
 given against the daily sacrifice in w*ickedness' (Wie-eler) ; 
 or, ' given against that which was continual with the service 
 of idols' • e., so that, in the place of the ' continual ' wick- 
 ednes.s. the worship of idols is appointed (Hofmnnn) ; or, 
 ' the power of an army is given to it (the horn^ against the 
 daily sacrifice througlt wickedness,' i.e., by the evil higher 
 dfemons (Ebrard). But the latter interpretation is to be 
 rejected on account of the arbitrary insertion of "IJ {to 
 it); and against all the others it is \x^ be remarked that there 
 is no proof either from ver. 13, or f"om Ezek. .vxxii. 23, or 
 xxvi. S, that "1^2 means to lead out, to bring for\vard. to 
 give contrary to or against." Keil concludes by translating ; 
 "And (a) host shaU be given up toe-ether with the daily 
 sacrifice, because of transgression." St'iart renders. '• And 
 « host was placed over the daily sacrifict by wickednes.s** 
 and remarks ; " P-at or place is a very cotui:»on meaning of 
 "ITir, as also the kindred signification to appoiiU, constitute . 
 
 see Lex. — ^3?, orer, in a hostile sense, implying that the 
 daily sacrifice was subjected to oppression and impiona 
 supervision.— 2?*,:;2S, by the rebel. Hence, in the N. Test., 
 
 2Thes8. ii. 3, awwrToaia (an exact version of JTD5), alu) j 
 
 avdfmnot Trjs afiapTiai ; and in v. S (ib. ), 6 avofio^ ; expres- 
 sions having their basis, as I apprehend, in the vcrec befon. 
 U8, and applied by Paul to some personage of a chnvactw 
 similar to that of Antioch"?."] 
 
CHAP. VIII. 1-27. 
 
 177 
 
 in V. 10, and which forms the principal feature 
 of the entire description before us. The "truth " 
 (r?3», Theodot. , diKamniv/,) to be cast down by 
 this "horn" is the true relig-ion, the objective 
 truth of God, which is revealed in the law and 
 the prophets (cf. Psa. xix. 10; xxx. 10; also 
 Dan. ix. 13). V. 14 shows that its being cast 
 down, like that of the daily sacrifice, shaU con- 
 tinue but for a brief period. — And it practised 
 and prospered; rather, "and it accomplishes 
 this, and prospers," namely, because of the 
 Divine permission. The words, and indeed the 
 verse as a whole, serve to recapitulate and 
 gather together the preceding statements. 
 
 Verses 13, 14. A question conceniing the 
 duration of the oppression of the truth, and the 
 answer to this question. Then I heard one 
 saint speaking. This speaking angel (for -ili" 
 here signifies an angel, cf. ly^.P., chap. iv. 10, 
 and also Dent, xxxiii. 2 ; Job v. 1 ; xv. 5 ; Psa. 
 Ixxxix, a, 8; Zech. xiv. 1) enters into the vision 
 here described without previous notice, because 
 the prophet conceives of the whole scene as sur- 
 rounded by angels, similar to chap. vii. 10 ; cf. 
 V. 16, and analogous features (perhaps in imita- 
 tion of thLs passage) in the night visions of 
 Zecbariah, e.g., Zech. i. 9 et seq., 13 et seq. ; 
 ii. 2, 5, 7 ; iii. 1 et seq. ; iv. 1 et seq. The pro- 
 phet does not state what the angel, who is intro- 
 duced in this mysterious and dreamlike man- 
 ner, said at first, evidently because he does not 
 know, i.e.. because, although he has heard him 
 speak, he has not understood his words. He 
 saw. therefore, two angels, who were engaged 
 in conversing with each other, and lieard one 
 of them say something which he failed to under- 
 stand ; the question, however, which the other 
 addressed to the first speaker was so clearly 
 apprehended by the prophet that he was able 
 to repeat it in the latter half of this verse. 
 Ewald puts it, correctly : " Thus, at the first 
 moment of sOence after that speech, he sud- 
 denly hears one angel ask another, imih whom he 
 is conversing,'" etc. Hitzig, Kamphausen, etc. , 
 on the other hand, are arbitrary : "The second 
 angel addressed the speaker, by directing an in- 
 quiry in the interest of Daniel to him (v. 13 b), 
 bi/ rep/i/ing to which the other angel became for 
 the first time a speakers!' According to this the 
 greater part of v. 13 would be a logical paren- 
 thesis, and the words "and he said unto me " at 
 the beginning of v. 14 would serve simply to re- 
 sume the introductory words of v. 13 ; the lan- 
 guage of the writer, however, does not accord 
 with this view. His evident aim is to repeat 
 what he has overheard of a conversation be- 
 tween two angels ; otherwise the most simple 
 course for him would have been to address the 
 inquiry concerning the duration of the tribuliv- 
 tion to the angel in person, as in chap. vii. 10, 
 which is, in other respects, an analogous case. 
 — How long shall be the vision concetning the 
 dziily saorifice. " The vision," i.e., the subject 
 of the viision, which is here more specially indi- 
 cated by the two genitives that follow, viz. : 
 n^':?!" and -r"^ ''"■PPl'"'.- The anxious ques- 
 tion as to "how long?" (cf. Lsa. vi. 11) is 
 caused by the fearful and alarming character of 
 the profanation and destruction, as seen in the 
 vision of the prophet.— And the transgression 
 
 of desolation; rather, " and the horrible trans- 
 • grcssion." ^"-, the partic. of Cl^r, "to be 
 astonished," and then "to be desolate or laid 
 waste," certainly expresses the idea of the 
 "horrible or monstrous" (Lat. horrendus), 
 whether the intransitive sense of "being as- 
 tounded," or, in accord with Ezek, xxxvi. 3, the 
 less general transitive sense of " laying waste," 
 be regarded as the radical meaning ; cf. on 
 chap. ix. 27. In the laUer case it would pro- 
 bably be necessary to tiSnslate the participle as a 
 substantive in apposition; "and (of) the trans- 
 gressor, the destroyer ; " * but in the former 
 case also, where the adjective sense " hon'ible " 
 (Ewald) or "astounding" (Kranichfeld) is 
 chosen, the participle must be regarded as a 
 kind of appositional supplement to '"4-"2, to 
 which it is therefore added without the article 
 (as in Ezek. xxxix. 27). The expression Srsn 
 C~3, instead of which D^Sn 3>rtS might have 
 been expected (cf. xi. 31), produces a sol- 
 emu emphasis, which warrants the urgent ques- 
 tion that is proposed. — To give both the sanc- 
 tuary (rather, "the most sacred thing") and 
 the host to be trodden under foot, i.e., 
 to give both the holy sacrifice (the central 
 point of worship) and the community of the 
 samts of the Most High (cf. vii. 18, 23, 27). the 
 partakers of the theocratic covenant, to be trod- 
 den under foot (thus Ewald, correctly). [The 
 grammatical construction of the latter clause of 
 the verse seems to be that nri and liJlp and 
 !<~^ are all in dependence upon Ti'n^ like l^SFl 
 and "™S preceding. " How long shall be . . . 
 . (the) giving, and (the) sanctuary, and (the) 
 host (to be) trampled." 3?1'? thus qualifies 
 all the last three nouns, the latter two directly 
 as an adj., and the former as an equivalent for 
 the infin.] " The expression adds nothing that 
 is new to the former statements, but simply re- 
 peats the comprehensive estimate of the condi- 
 tion of the Jewish religion referred to, and the 
 outrage committed against it, in the light of the 
 idea that they are permitted by a superior Pro- 
 vidence ; and, in point of fact, the only object 
 of the question is to recapitulate what has 
 already been said. The asyndetic connection 
 accords with the abrupt conciseness of the de- 
 scription, and the disjunctive "] before -Ip and 
 H32, added to the lack of conjunctions, is suit- 
 ed to its poetic character (note also the omission 
 of articles). Consequently, everything that Hit- 
 zig regards as objectionable in this place, and 
 that he urges against the traditional pointing 
 for the purpose of removing "P to the preced- 
 ing clause, arises naturally from the subject it- 
 self. Moreover, the explanation of "p; by Hit- 
 zig, ' to permit the horrible transgression to go 
 on,' has no parallel, neither in v. 12, nor in lsa. 
 
 • [Stuart, on the other band, strongly contends for the 
 pasw'pe sense of S^O'tT here, '^equivalent to which oughl 
 
 to he laid wa^le or dett'-oj/ed," as being sustained not only 
 by the intransitive force of the root, but bv the distinctivt 
 use of the transitive D?2ID?3 in cli. ix. 27. KeiJ :.<ike8 3i.'\> 
 Btaatially the same view.] 
 
ITS 
 
 THE PROPHET DA>"IEL. 
 
 X. 6, where, like the synonymous litlv ' to make 
 into' something,' it is joined to a double accusa- 
 tive ; and when Hitzig takes ^~'■ at first in the 
 sense of ' to permit,' and immediately afterward 
 makes it signify ■ to make into something,' the 
 artificial zeugma certainly does not diminish the 
 imaginary difficulty which, in view of the disjunc- 
 tive vav, he discovers in the vav that is not pre- 
 fixed to ^^," (Kranichfeld.)— Verse 14. And he 
 said unto me. Thus all the MSS. , which read 
 "is, while the ancient translators, and among 
 modem expositors, Bertholdt. Dereser, Hitzig, 
 Ewald, etc. , prefer T'is. The latter form certain- 
 ly seems to accord better with the contents of v. 
 13, since it is supposed that the "i^l^n ^'.yzbs (cf. 
 Ruth iv. 1) who says what follows, would address 
 it to the other angel, who inquires of him : but it 
 is conceivable, on both logical and psychological 
 
 ■ grounds, that the witness to the conversation of 
 the angels would represent the information con- 
 veyed in the reply to the angel's question as im- 
 parted to himself, because he was still more inter- 
 ested in that information than was the inquirer. 
 
 ■ Accordingly, he substitutes himself for the an- 
 gel, because the interest felt by him in equal 
 measure justifies him in identifying himself to 
 some extent with the questioner. — Unto two- 
 thousand and three-hundred days (" evening- 
 mornings ") ; then shall the sanctuary be 
 cleansed (rather, '-justified"). The " justify- 
 ing of the sanctuary " is the re-consecrcttion of 
 the desecrated sanctuarj- and its services (which 
 were permitted to be trodden under foot), which 
 is accomplished by the renewal of the daily 
 sacrifices. P'^?-'! consequently denotes a being 
 justified by that work, and, in its position at the 
 -head of the apodosis to the antecedent clause 
 beginning with the connective 1?, expresses to 
 some extent the sense of the fut. exactum. The 
 material justification or renewal of the perfec- 
 tion of the hast, according to v. 18, the second 
 of the objects exposed to being " trodden under 
 foot," is conceived of as essentially coincident 
 with that of the sanctuary, or as immediately 
 involved in it, and for that reason is not expressly 
 mentioned. The neglect to mention the host 
 does not warrant the conclusion reached by Hit- 
 nig, under i-eference to 1 Mace, v. 2 et seq. , that 
 lihe author intended to point out that its state 
 'it being trodden under foot was to be more pro- 
 tracted, while that of the sanctuary was to cease 
 kt an earlier date. —The duration of the period 
 jvhich is to precede the re-dedication of the 
 Banctuary, is again indicated by a mystically in- 
 definite and equivocal limitation of time, as in 
 chap. vii. 25. The 2,300 evening-mornings 
 (ipS 2~.5) cannot be intended to signify so 
 many (ktys (as Bertholdt, Hiivemick, v. Len- 
 gerke, etc., assume), for although the several 
 days are, in Gen. i. 5 et seq. , divided into the two 
 parts which represent them, 3'!}'; and "ip.3, they 
 sd:e not numbered accordingly ; and the Gr. 
 vvx^il!'n""\ which is often adduced in compari- 
 Bon, is the less adapted to serve as an analogy 
 or ground of proliability for the signification of 
 evening-morning as synonymous with " day," as 
 "j-a Z'XS_ can hardly be regarded as a compound 
 
 word (on the analogy of "5^?), but is, on the 
 contrary, an asyndeton, arising from the poetic 
 brevity of expression in this section (similar to 
 D?:0 yrDH in V. 13 1, which, so far from being 
 a " current phrase " or " stereotyped formula." 
 occurs only in this place as a designation ol 
 time. The limitation of the expression in this 
 sense to this passage indicates, with an almost 
 absolute certainty, that -->■ and --; do not 
 signify the con-esponding periods of the day, 
 but rather the sacrifices required to be offered 
 in them. The whole prophecy relates princi- 
 pally to the T^^P, to which the passage under 
 consideration assigns an especially prominent 
 position ; but as, according to Ex. xxix. 41 (cf. 
 infra, chap. ix. 21), this consists of a -"l'_~"n:^ 
 anda -|:--V, the terms " evening" and "morn- 
 ing" in' this" place clearly denote the evening 
 and morning sacrifices, or, if it be preferred, the 
 times at which they were offered. " Morning '" 
 and " evening " are therefore to be counted 
 separately ; * and thus the period indicated by 
 the author covers 1,150 days instead of 2,300. 
 This period is nearly equivalent to the three 
 and a half years in chap. vii. 25, while, on 
 the other hand, the later numbers of 1.290 
 and 1,335 days (chap. xii. 11 et seq.) exceed 
 the medium of three and a half years but 
 little. How this discrepancy in the limits 
 assigned to the duration of the time of anti- 
 Christian persecution and oppression is to be ex- 
 plained, and, in particular, how the number in 
 this place is to be interpreted, is of course very 
 uncertain, and must always remain undecided. 
 In generd, those expositors of the truth who 
 always come nearest to the sense of the pro- 
 phetic author, wUl regard the present number 
 1,150 as a designed narroiriny, and the numbers 
 1,290 and 1.335 as a designed extension or wer- 
 stepping of the limit of three and a halt years, and 
 seek to establish a conformity to law both in the 
 narrowing and the extension of that period. If it 
 is assumed that this book limits the year to 360 
 days (or to twelve months of thirty days each) 
 besides five intercalated days, amounting in all 
 
 * [This conclusion, however, if by no means certain, as 
 the following considerations w-ill serve to show ; " n^B 2"15 
 have no cupnla or conjunction between them : it would 
 therefore seem to be a popular mode of compound expression, 
 like that of the Greek wxHl^tlx"' C-i Cor. xi. 25), in order to 
 designate tlie whole of H day. Compare Oen. i., where the 
 evening and morning constitute respectively day the .first, 
 day Iht aeiond, etc. ; for it seems plain that the phraseolipgy 
 before us is derived from this source. In other words, ^"5 
 
 "l~a, as here employed, may be admitted to contain an 
 allusion to the morning end evening sacrifices, and thns the 
 phrase virtually becomes a kind of substitution for T"l?pr)i 
 which is generic, and includes both the morning and the 
 evening sacriflce."— 5<"ar«. "That in ver. 26 an^rt 
 
 "IpS"'^ ((Ae evening and the mornina) stands for the 
 phrase in question, does not prove that the evening and 
 morning are reckoned separately, but only that cveninr;- 
 morning is a period of time consisting of evening and morn- 
 ing. When the Hebrews wish to e.>:i>rC8s separately day and 
 night, the component parts of a day of n week, then the 
 numlicr of both is expressed, Thns they say, e.g., firty dayi 
 and forty nights (Gen, vii, -1. 12; Ex..d, xxiv, IS; 1 Knigs 
 xix. 8), or three davs and three nights ( Junah ii. 1 ; Matt, 
 xii, 4U). but not e.ghty or six days and nights when they 
 wish to speak of forty or three full days.' —Ktit. ] 
 
CHAP. VIIL 1-27. 
 
 179 
 
 to 365 days, it will be found 1 1 ) that the whole 
 number of 1.277 days, which are necessary to 
 cover the period of three and a half years, is 
 decreased by 127 days, or something more than 
 four months, by the number 1,150 ; i2) that the 
 number 1,290 adds twelve days or about half a 
 month to 1.277 days or three and a half years ; 
 and (8) that the number l.SUj adds fifty-eight 
 days, or nearly two months, to the period of 
 three and a half years A certain conformity to 
 law is evident from these figures, inasmuch as the 
 two mouths by whicn the three and a half years 
 are extended in the last number, are added to the 
 shorter period of three years in the fii-st {i.e., to 
 1,095 days) ; or, in other words, in the one case 
 the prophet regards the period of three and a 
 half years as exltitdtd by two mouths, in the 
 other Un the present passage) as n/torteiiid by 
 four months. These piojihet ic limiUitwits of time 
 correspond generally to the events of the primary 
 historical fulfilment of this vision in the Macoa- 
 basan sera of oppression and revolt, wUlumt being 
 chronologically coi-ertd by them. It has already 
 been shown, on chap. vii. 25. that the interval 
 between the abrogation of the daily sacrifices by 
 Epiphanes ' 1 Mace. i. 54) and the reconsecration 
 of the sanctuary by Judas Jlaccabaaus (ibid. iv. 
 52) amounted to three years and ten days, or 
 1.105 days, thus covering forty-five days or one 
 and a half months less than 1,150 days, as here 
 stated. But if, on the other hand, the arrival 
 in Judcei of Appollonius, the commissioner 
 of tribute (1 JIacc. i. 20), is taken as the start- 
 ing-point of the calculation (as Hitzig does), 
 a result of three and a quarter years to the re- 
 dedication of the temple is obtained, with toler- 
 able exactness, which amounts at least to from 
 one to one and a half months more than 1,150 
 days. A comparison of the larger periods of 
 1.290 and 1,3^5 days with the circumstances of 
 the aira of the religious persecution by Antio- 
 chus, as recorded in the books of Maccabees, 
 leads to still more unsatisfactory results (cf. 
 infra, on chap. xii. 1 1 et seq, ). Hence, nothing 
 more definite than a general or approximate cor- 
 respondence between the predicted periods and 
 their historical counterparts can be looked for ; 
 or, what amounts to the same thing, the pro- 
 jiheticaUy-ideal value of the numbers in question 
 must be recognized. Cf. the remarks in the 
 Eth.-fund. principles, etc.. No. 1, respecting the 
 nece&iity that the predictions of any prophet 
 which involve numbers should be only approxi- 
 mately fulfilled. — AH the expositors of this pas- 
 sage, whether upholding or denying the compo- 
 sition of Damel's prophecies during the captiv- 
 ity, are in the end obliged to assume a merely 
 approximate correspondence of the number 
 1,150 to the periods of the Maccabsean tera of 
 persecution. Among the former class, the view 
 we have presented comes nearest to that of 
 Delitzsch (p. 280), who holds that, "for rensuus 
 which vur knowledge tf hiatury doen not permit us 
 to recognize" the prophet's estimate of the 
 period of something more than three years, 
 from the 15th Chisleu 145 eb. Sel. to the 25th 
 Chisleu 148, is " somewhat inadequate ; " and 
 also to that of Kranichfeld (p. 300 et seq. ). who 
 diverges from us on the mode of estimating the 
 Juration of the years in question, but is wholly 
 agreed on the general principle. His opinion is 
 that here, as well as elsewhere in the book, 
 
 Daniel estimated the year at twelve mont hs ol 
 thirty days each, intercalating a month of thirty 
 days every third year. This results in exactly 
 1,290 days for 31 years, but leaves a discrepancy 
 of forty days between 1,150 days and three 
 years or 1,110 days. With regard to this differ 
 ence he then observes: "It is equally in har- 
 mony with the vei-y general employment of the 
 number forty in theocratic representations of 
 times of severe trial and sifting (e.g.. Gen. vii. 
 4, 12, 17; Xum. xiv. 33, 34; Ezek. iv. U; xxix. 
 11 et seq. ; 1 Kings xix. 8 ; Matt. vi. 1 et seq. ), 
 and with the author's general usage which em- 
 ploys numbers in an ideal sense (cf . on iv. 1 3 ; 
 vii. 25). as well as with the context more espe- 
 cially, that precisely this number should be 
 found in combination with the final half-time. 
 Consequently the amount 1,110 + 40 results ae 
 substantially identical with the more direct meas- 
 urement of the three and a half times in chap. xii. 
 11; and this discrepancy within the book itself 
 becomes no more strange than that, for instance, 
 which represents the same kingdom at one time 
 as divided into two parts, at another as falling 
 into ten, and again (see supra, on v. 8) as sepa- 
 rating into four, in all of which descriptions the 
 same fundamental idea prevails, although pre- 
 sented under different forms." We cannot 
 adopt this estimate of the 1,150 days, by which 
 they are made to consist of 1,110-1-40 days, be- 
 cause it seems too artificial upon the whole, and 
 because the opinion on which it rests, that 
 Daniel added an intercalary month of thirty 
 days to every third year of 300 days, seems to 
 be untenable, and to conflict with the 1,200 
 days or forty-two months of the Apocalypse, 
 which, beyond all question, are synonymous 
 
 • with the three and a half years of this book (cf. 
 Auberlen. Viinitl, etc., pp. 185, ;j8(j et seq. i. — 
 Among those who deny the genuineness of this 
 book, Ewald approaches our method of reckon- 
 ing, upon the whole, inasmuch as he supposes 
 that the author constantly assigns 305 days to 
 the year ; and he consequently extends the 1.290 
 days over three and a half years + oue-half 
 month, and the 1,335 days over three and a half 
 years -t- two months ; but he»departs from our 
 view in arbitrarily reducing the number 2.300 to 
 2,230, so as to obtain only 1.115 days, or three 
 years + one month, instead of 1,1.50 (p. 408). In 
 opposition to such critical violence. Hilgenfeld, 
 Kamphausen, etc. . retain the reading 2,300 in the 
 text, reckon the 1,150 days backwards from the 
 dedication of the temple on the 25th Chisleu 
 148, and accept some unknown event as mark- 
 ing the beginning of the 1,150 days, since they 
 
 j exceed the period to the 15th Chisleu 145 by 
 
 I forty days. Hitzig thinks that only 1.105 days 
 elapsed between the 15th Chisleu 145 and the 
 25th Chisleu 148, instead of 1,110, and therefore 
 forty-five less than 2,300 evening-mornings, and 
 that this difference of one and a half months "be- 
 longs to the interval between the abrogation of the 
 
 j "'"'?^ (1 Mace. i. 45) and the introduction of the 
 3iU'/-i'y/iri tyj?//;aK7f<jf (ibid. V. 54)." A hasty glance 
 at the description of these incidents in 1 Macca- 
 bees will be sufficient to .show that this interval 
 of exactly forty five days between the interdict 
 of the daily sacrifices and the erection of the 
 statue of Zeus in the temple is wholly imagin- 
 ary. Moreover, the critic contradicts himself. 
 
ISO 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 since he employs all his aouteness to prove, on 
 chap. Til 25, that the Antiochian persecution 
 began at least a quarter of a year, or more than 
 three months, before the 1.3th Chisleu 145, while 
 he finds it proper in this place to place the abro- 
 gation of the T'^Pl, or the beginning of the 
 same period of oppression, only one and a half 
 months earUer thim this date. — WhUe the repre- 
 sentatives of the opinion that the 2,300 evening- 
 mornings are but half as many days, fail to 
 establish an exact correspondence between the 
 prophecy and its fulfilment, those expositors 
 who regard the language as designating 2,300 
 days succeed no better. Bertholdt and Hiiver- 
 nick go three years beyond the time of Anti- 
 ochus, to the defeat of Nicanor (1 Mace. vii. 43, 
 4!l), and assign to that period 2,271 days; the 
 29 days which, accordingly, are still lacking, 
 are placed by Bertholdt at the close of the 
 period, as an interval between that victory and 
 the consequent celebration of the triumph, 
 while Hiivernick would prefer to assign them to 
 the beginning, prior to the 15th Chisleu 145 (in 
 opposition to both, see Hitzig, p. 136). On the 
 other hand. Dereser, Von Lengerke, Wieseler 
 {Die 70 Jahrirochen, etc., p. 110 et seq.), and 
 Von Hofmann ( Wemnrjnng unci Erfulliiiig, I., 
 295 et seq.) go back to the year 142 le. Sel. in 
 reckoning the entire period of about six years — 
 Dereser and Hofmann calculating from the 25th 
 Chisleu 14S (the day of the dedication of the 
 temple I. and Von Lengerke and Wieseler from 
 the death of Ant. Epiphanes in the month of 
 Shebat 148. The former are thus carried back 
 :o the summer of the year 142 in fixing the date 
 of the begiiming of the apostasy of the Jews 
 who were seduced by Antiochus, Von Lengerke 
 to Sivan, or the third month, and Wieseler only 
 to the feast of tabernacles in the same year, 
 142. Wieseler himself afterwards recognized 
 the untenable character of this method of reck- 
 oning, and therefore acknowledged his conver- 
 sion to the exegetically more correct view enter- 
 tained by a m.ajority of moderns, which estimates 
 only 1,150 days, in his subsequent essay in the 
 GOtt. Gelchi ten- A/izeigcn, ISiti." [The author, 
 
 * [These difficulties in the way of the literal exactness of 
 the period in question as applicable to the history of the per- 
 secution by Antiochus Epiphanes, are drawn out in detail 
 by Keil, p. 3iJ2 et seq., who does not, however, add anything 
 ot importance to what the author adduces. They seem to 
 us to be fairly met by the following explanation of Stuart in 
 his Commentary, p. 'J^ et seq. : "And then nhall that which 
 is holy be vindicated, p'^^'2\ shall lutve justice done, i.e., 
 
 the rights of the sanctuary sh.iU be effectually restored, its 
 claims shall be vindicated. This was dune when Judas 
 Maccaba-'US, after the three and a half years in which all 
 temple rites had been suspended, and heathen sacrifices had 
 been offered there, made a thorough expurgation of every- 
 thing pertaining to the temple, and restored its entil'e ser- 
 vices. This was on the SSth of Dec, 165 B. C, just three 
 years from the time when swine's fle.sh was first offered 
 there by Antiochus. We have then the terminus ad qitem 
 of -the y,.'iUO days ; and it is not difficult, therefore, to find 
 the terrnlnUH a quo. These days, at thirty in a month 
 (which is clearly the prophetic mode of reckoning), make 
 bLx years, four months, and twenty days. Dec. 25th of 171 
 makes six years, and the four months and twenty days ivUl 
 bring the time to the latter half of July in the same year. 
 i.e., 171 B. C. Dur.ng this year, Menelaus, the high-priest 
 appointed by Antiochus on the gi-ound of a proffered bribe, 
 rifled the temple of many of the treasures to pay that blibe, 
 and in this transaction he was assisted by liis brother Lysi- 
 machus. The regular and lawful high-priest, Oiiias lU., 
 frh't hiKl been rern-jvetl, severely reproved ihis sacrilege com- 
 mitted by his brethren ; and afterward, through fear of 
 tbem, fled for refuge to Daphne, an asylum near Antioch, 
 
 it will be perceived, ignores that class of inter 
 preters, quite common in this country and Great 
 Britain, but comparatively rare in Germany, whc 
 understand by the days in question so many 
 yearx, and generally apply the prophecy to the 
 continuance of the papal supremacy. There is, 
 however, a great discrepancy among these inter- 
 preters as to the point of time from which to 
 date the period spoken of, as well as some diver- 
 sity as to its length, whether 2,300 years or only 
 1,150 years, although the majority prefer the 
 latter. It would be a tedious, and, in our opin- 
 ion, a bootless task, to follow them into all the 
 details of their historical investigation.--, compu- 
 tations, and comparisons. Others, adopting the 
 same substitution of years for '" days," apply 
 the prophecy to the rise and sway of Mohamme- 
 danism, and make out the requisite dates as best 
 they can. It is an adequate answer to all these 
 interpretations to say that such a meaning of 
 the word (lay has no sufficient — if any — warrant 
 in Scripture use, and certainly is not hinted at 
 in this entire passage. A calm but fundamen- 
 tal refutation of the theory in question is given 
 by Tregelles, Remarks on Diiidel (Lond., 1804, 
 5th ed. ), p. 110 et seq. It is aJso abundantly 
 met by Stuart in his Vmnmeiitary mi the A-poca- 
 lypse, II. 459 seq. Elliott, the strongest advo- 
 cate of this theory, admits (Hurai Apoailyjiticee, 
 II. 905) that it was unknown till the close of 
 the fourteenth century, when it was first 
 broached by Walter Brute. It came into vogue 
 with the Reformation, and owes its prevalence, 
 not to any sound exegetical support, but to the 
 
 in Syria. Thence he was allured by the false promises of 
 Menelaus, and perfidiously murdered by the king's lieuten- 
 ant, Andronicus. See the whole story in '.i Mace. iv. 27 seq. 
 The Jews at Jerusalem, incensed by the violent death of 
 tlieir lawful high-priest, and by the sacrilegious robberies of 
 Menelaus and Lysimachus, became tumultuous, and a severe 
 contest took pljice between them and the adherents of those 
 who committed the robbery, in which the patriotic Jews at 
 last gained the victory, and Lysimachus was slain at the 
 treasury. This was the first contest that took place between 
 the friends of Antiochus and the adherents to the Hebrew 
 laws and usages. The whole of it was occasioned by the 
 baseness of Antiochus in accepting bribes for bestowing the 
 office of high-priest on those who had no just claim to it. 
 The payment of the bribes occasioned the robbing of the 
 temple and the sacrilege committed there; and this was the 
 commencement of thnt long series of oppression, (lersecu- 
 tion, and bloodshed which took place in the sequel under 
 Antiochus. 
 
 " We have, indeed, no data in ancient history by which 
 the very day, or even month, connected wth the transac 
 tions above related can be exactly ascertained. But the 
 j/ear is certain ; and, as the time seems to be definite in our 
 t«xt, the fair presuniption is, that the outiireak of the popu- 
 lace and the battle that followed constitutes the terminus a 
 quo of the 2,yUll days. See Froelich, Annates Reg. .Vyr., p. 
 
 46 ; and also Usher's Chronol As to the difference 
 
 between the time here, viz., 2,300 days, and the three and a 
 half years in vii. *25, if the reader narrowly inspects the lat- 
 ter, he will perceive that the time there specified has rela- 
 tion to the period during which Antiochus entirely prohib- 
 ited the Jewish religion in every shape. This period, as is 
 well known, corresponds with historic.il facts. In the pas- 
 sage before us a more extensive series of events is comprised, 
 as vs. 10-1*2 indicate. They begin with a.ssaults on the 
 priesthood (which we have seen to be matter of fact, as 
 stated above), and enil with the desecration and prostration 
 of all that is sacred and holy. It is unnecessary to show 
 that each of the things described belongs to each and every 
 part of the 2,300 day.s. Enough th.lt the events are sticces- 
 sive, and -spread over the time specified in our text. The 
 trampling down nr degradation of the priesthood and the 
 sanctuary commenced the whole series of oppression and 
 persecution, and this, with most aggravated acts of sacrilege 
 and blasphemy, was also the consummation of the tyrant'? 
 outrages." Cowles gives a similar explanation in detail 
 Com>iientai% p. 878 et seo.J 
 
CHAP. VIII. 1-27. 
 
 ISJ 
 
 polemical spirit of the times, which has seized 
 upon it as a popular weapon against papacy. ] 
 
 Verses 15-19. Preparatory to the interpreta- 
 tion of the vijiwn of the ram and the he-goat. 
 And . . . when I . . . sought for the mean- 
 ing, namely, of the entire vision that was seen. 
 The seeking was purely subjective, and not ex- 
 pressed in the form of a question addressed to 
 the angel (Von Leng. ), nor in a silent prayer to 
 God (Havemick). — Behold, there stood before 
 me (one), as the appearance of a man, i.e., ap- 
 pearing like a man. The expression "behold, 
 there stood," etc., indicates the startling and 
 extraordinary character of the apparition, which 
 argued something terrible and superhuman (cf. 
 Job iv. 16); the "?3 HK^'^S then follows to 
 denote the encouraging effect produced on the 
 seer by the taanlike appearance of the form. 
 The term "l^J is employed instead of CIH or 
 ■i:;i;s, doubtless in allusion to the name of the 
 angel, which is given below, in v. 16 ; see on 
 that pass.ige, and cf. chap. ix. 21. where the 
 same angel is designated as " the man Gabriel," 
 but where his super-human nature is also very 
 clearly implied (in his " flying"). — Verse 16. And 
 I heard a man's voice between (the) Ulai, i.e., 
 between the two branches of the Eulseus ; cf. 
 supra, onv. 3. V? does not stand for V?'?, as 
 if the voice only, and not also the listener, were 
 stationed between the TJIai ; nor does ^3^6* V3 
 signify "between the banks of the Ulai" 
 (against Von Lengerke, Hitzig, etc.). — Gabriel, 
 make this man to understand the vision. 
 ;st"'T23, i.e., "man of God,"oralso "man-god" 
 (according to Ewald, " a God who kindly conde- 
 scends to man"), is the name of one of the 
 principal angels or angel-princes (cf. Luke i. 19), 
 one of the apxayyeAoi or D"'"^ (chap. x. 13 et 
 seq.), whose number is fixed at seven in Rev. 
 viii. 2 {<H i—ra I'v. jc/o'. ol 'tvCi-iov rov i^toh efjTijKatjt), 
 equal to that of the nmjiha,<ipands, who stand 
 beside Ormuzd as a divine council, according 
 to the ancient religious books of Parseeism. 
 The Scriptural archangels, however, of whom 
 another, Michael, is mentioned hereafter in this 
 book, are not to be regarded as identical with 
 the Ame.^haxpentas of Parseeism; for (1) the 
 number seven in the latter case is obtained only 
 by adding Ormuzd himself to six others ; (2) 
 they are not represented as angels or servants of 
 God. but as being themselves divine, and as 
 governing determined portions of creation in 
 that char.acter, e.g.. Bohumarm (Bohman) gov- 
 erns the sky, Ardihesht the fire, Sapandomad 
 the earth, etc. ; (8) the 7iames of the anuha- 
 upandt are as thoroughly Persian or Aryan in 
 their character as those of the Scriptural arch- 
 angel, so far as they occur in the Holy Bible 
 (namely, Gabriel and Michael, and Raphael in i 
 the Apocrypha, Tob. iii. 25 ; xii. 12 et seq.) are 
 specifically Shemitic, and bear, by virtue of the 
 ending ;f< in each case, a thoroughly monothe- 
 istic character; (4) the attempts to establish 
 the identity of individual anuhnsiinnd.t with 
 individual archangels of the Bible must be re- 
 garded, without exception, as failures ; e. g. , 
 the supposed recognition of Chordad (Haur- 
 
 vatat) in the Apocalyptic "angel of the waters," 
 Rev. xvi. 5 (Hitzig ; also Hilgenf did, Dasjuden- 
 thum im pers. Zeitalter, in the ZeitscJir. f. win- 
 senseJuiftl. Theologie, 1866, No. 4), the proposed 
 identifying of Gabriel with Crao.^ha and ol 
 Michael with Bohman (by Alex. Kohut, Uebei 
 diejiidische Angelokif/ie tind Vdmonolngie in ihrer 
 Abhdngigkeit vom ParsiJimus," in Abhandlungen 
 der Deutsch. Morgenl. GeselUchuft. vol. IV. No. 
 3). Cf. Haneberg, in Reusch's Theolog. Litera- 
 turbl, 1867, No. 3, p. 72; also D(jllinger, Hei- 
 denthum nnd Judenthuin, p. 361 ; M. Haug, 
 E.'isays on the sacred language, writings,, and 
 religion of the Parseen, Bombay-, 1862. — Ewald 
 appears inclined to regard Gabriel not as one of 
 the superior angels, but as occupying an inter- 
 mediate or inferior rank, since he designates 
 the " man's voice " which calls to him as that 
 of a still higher angel. This assumption, how- 
 ever, is unnecessary ; it is conceivable that an 
 angel of equal rank may have given him this 
 direction, or, if this should not be preferred, 
 that God Himself, giving a human sound to 
 His voice that He might be heard by Daniel, ad- 
 dressed the angel. — It must remain undecided 
 whether the " man's voice " is to be considered 
 as belonging to the former of the S'"i'lp who 
 were speaking together in v. 13, while Gabriel 
 is to be identified with the questioner in that 
 place (as Hitzig supposes), since the author has 
 not definitely indicated such an identity. — Verse 
 17. So he came near where I stood; literally, 
 " beside my standing" (cf. v'. 18i. Luther ren- 
 ders it, "and he came hard by me" — And 
 when (or "as") he came, I was afraid, and 
 fell upon my face. Cf. chap, x 9 ; Ezek. i. 2S; 
 xliii. 3 ; Rev. i. 17. — Understand, O son of 
 man ( — this address is probably rai'delled after 
 Ezekiel — ) ; for at ths time of the end shall 
 be the vision j rather, " for the vision is for 
 the final time," i.e., it refers to the final period 
 of earthly history ; cf. v. 19 *, 26. [But these 
 verses do not warrant this interpretation. See 
 below.] The words are not designed to com- 
 fort, but to direct attention to the impressive 
 and alarming nature of the prophecy, in which, 
 according to the following context, they are suc- 
 oe6.sful. — Verse 18. Now as he was speaking 
 with me, I was in a doep sleep on my face 
 towEtrd the ground ; rather, " and while he 
 was speaking with me, I fell stunned upon my 
 face to the ground." Not until this repeated 
 falling down in terror did the " benumbing" or 
 Divine cKn-noir take place, as the immediate 
 presence of God for the purpose of imparting to 
 the prophet a highly important revelation, was 
 not realized until then. Cf. the case of Moses 
 (Ex. xxxiii. 20), Isaiah (Isa. vi. 5), Peter, John, 
 and James, on the mount of transfiguration 
 (Luke ix. 32), Paul and his com|ianions near 
 Damascus (Acts ix. 4; xxii. 7; xxvi. 12), etc. — 
 But he touched me, and set me upright. Cf. 
 X. 10 et seq. ; Neh. ix. 3, etc. — Verse 19. Be- 
 hold .... what shall be in the last end oi 
 the indignation, namely, of the Divine indig- 
 nation upon the godless world (the o/))'/ iicyuAT), 
 1 Mace. i. 64 ; cf. Rom. ii. 5 ; Isa. x, 5, 25 ; 
 xxvi. 20; Jer. 1. 5), which naturally will be 
 manifested most strongly toward the close of 
 human history, when the tares of wickedness 
 shall flourish most luxuriantly (see v. 23 .and 
 
1S2 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Matt. xiii. 30. 39; cf. Matt. xxiv. 9 et seq.). 
 For this reason the last timts shall constitute a 
 period of great tribulation and woes (i^/'i/'f'S', 
 Ljildff — Matt. xxiv. 7 et seq ). — For at the time 
 appointed the end shall be; rather, "for it 
 relates to the point of time of the end." The 
 subject here, as in v. 17 ft, is the vision (ITH"), 
 or rather its contents, which, according to this 
 HS.su ranee from the angel, refers to the 7P. "^".1'-' 
 the determined point of time of the end." * 
 
 Verses 20-26. Tlie interpreUitwn of the visiiyn. 
 On V. 20, cf. supra, on v. 3; concerning v. 21, 
 on V. 5. — The king cf Graecia; properly, of 
 Javan (V"^). By this term the Hebrews desig- 
 nated all the Hellenic lands and peoples, because 
 the lonians (Homer, 'hutm;) dwelt in the e-astern 
 portions of Hellas, and- through their colonies 
 in Asia Minor were the first to become acquaint- 
 ed with the Asiatics. The Egyptians, ancient 
 Persians, and Indians appear likewise to have 
 constantly denominated the whole body of Grae- 
 cian nations as lonians or Jaonians ; .^Eschylus 
 and Aristophanes, at least, introduce Persians 
 as employing the term '\<inn<; instead of 'E/Z-i/ifr. 
 Cf- generally, Knobel, Vulkertfifd, p. 78 et seq. 
 — Verse 22. Notv that being broken, whereas 
 four stood up for it; rather, " and that which 
 was broken, and in whose stead four stood up," 
 It should have read, properly, "and concerning 
 this, that it (the great horn) was broken, and 
 that in its stead four stood up ; " but instead of 
 this, ~"ip:n"J stands abruptly at the beginning 
 (cf. vii. 17). and the ecbactic 'l3T nnttsni, 
 " and four stood up," etc., is subordinate to that 
 
 * tKeil, however, justly remarks : " But yj^TlTi the 
 H'n^ of the end, and yp "^yiTZ, the appointed time of the 
 
 end, 19 not the absolute end of all things, the time of the 
 setting up of the retjutnn gtorifv, and the time of the tribu- 
 lation preceding the return of the Lord ; but the time of the 
 judgment of the world-kingdom and the setting up of the 
 everlasting kingdom of G-od by the appeai'ance of the Mes- 
 Biah. the end of aluiv oyros and the commencement of the 
 aiwf jneAAwi', the time of the Q'i?Q'nn n^"ini< (chap. ix. 
 
 14). which an apostle calls (1 Cor, x. 11) rd reATj Toti- aluivmv, 
 and speaks of as having then already come.'" Stuart still 
 more correctly says: ''End of what? Of Antiochus? or 
 of a troublous state of things ? or end of the world ? Not 
 merely of Antiochus: for his importance, as exhibited in 
 the book of Daniel, arises principally from his power to 
 annoy the people of God. Not, the end of ttie world : for in 
 chap. viiL no Messianic period is developed at the close of 
 It-i predictions, and yet the Messianic reign is itself the end 
 or last time of the world. Ver. 19 gives ns perhaps more 
 light; Oy^tl ri^"*ni!52, in the latter time of the indigna- 
 tion, i.e., the latter time of afflictions permitted to be 
 brought upon Israel, because of the divine indignation 
 against their sins. The vi-sion itself in fact reaches only to 
 the enfl of those special afflictions that are to come on the 
 people of the Jews be/ore the Messianic period, and which 
 are made the subject of prophecy because of their impor- 
 tance. The warning to mark ipett or von^tider the vision, 
 because it discloses these afflictions, connects itself of course 
 with a supposed importance attached to the knowledge of 
 the final special troubles of the Jews before the coming of 
 the Messiah. The Kabbins call these trouble-i ^b-H 
 
 T^23^." In other words, as Keil presently says m >re dis- 
 tinctly, " Q2.'^n ifi the wrath of God against Israel, the pun- 
 
 Uhment *A-hich God hung over them on account of their 
 «ins. as in Isa. x. 5 : Jer. xxv, 11 ; Ezek, xxii. 24, et^,. and 
 here the sufferings of pimishment and discipline w.'lich the 
 little horn shall bring over lai-uel."] 
 
 term in its absolute position. — Pour kingdom] 
 shall stand up out of the nation ; ~:"!?ar'^, an 
 archaism (Gen, xxx. 38; 1 Sam. vi. 12), that 
 here seems to be renewed under the influence 
 of the Chaldee element, — But not in his power. 
 The suffix in inSa does not refer back to "'13': i 
 
 but to ^r'?'? in y- 21 ft. The power of the first 
 great Gra3cian conqueror shall not descend to the 
 kingdoms which spring from his empire ; they 
 shall not equal him, neither singly, nor all taken 
 together, — Verse 23. And in the latter time of 
 their kingdom, when the transgressors are 
 come to the full, namely, of the measure of 
 their wicked plans and actions ; cf. the same 
 elliptic usage of onn in chap, ix, 24 Keri, and 
 in addition Gen. xv. 16 ; 2 Mace. vi. 14 ; Matt, 
 xxiii. 33; 1 Thess. ii. 16. The S^JSTQ who are 
 here charged with ' ' filling the measure of their 
 sins " are not the Israelites who have forsaken 
 Jehovah and His law (Dereser, Von Lengerke, 
 Kranichfeld), but, without doubt, the enemies 
 of God's people, the heathen oppressors of the 
 saints of the Most High; for the term 2i;tL"S 
 alludes with sufficient clearness to i'r E in vs. 
 6, 12, and 13. For the opinion that this does 
 not probably refer to the servants and abettors 
 of Antiochus Epiphanes, but rather to his pre- 
 decessors, see supra, on v. 9. * — A king of fierce 
 (rather, "insolent") countenance, and under- 
 standing dark sentences, shall stand up. 
 D^:E tV, properly, "of hard countenance" (cf. 
 Deut. xxviii. 50 ; Isa. xix. 4). The predicate 
 probably refers chiefly to the blasphemous say- 
 ings of the tyrant, see chap, vii, 3 et seq. The 
 following predicate, niin Vt*?! "versed in 
 riddles," denotes his art of cunning dissimula- 
 tion, b.y which he is able to conce.al his purposes 
 from both friend and foe; cf, v, 2.'>. and xi, 21, 
 27. — Verse 24, And his power shall be mighty, 
 but not by his own power. The implied 
 thought is. "but by Divine permission;" cf. 
 vs. 12 and 13, and also Isa. x. 5 et seq. ; 1 Sam. 
 ii. 9, etc. — It is incorrect to supply, with Dere- 
 ser, Von Lengerke, etc, an antithe,sis to "not 
 by his own power," so that it will read " but by 
 his cuniii/ig." rna sb is a litotes, which, 
 exactly similar to the expression ' ' without 
 hand" (chap, ii, 34 and infra, v. 25). alludes to 
 the superhuman providence of God as com- 
 pared to human power, which is never more 
 than impotence. — And he shall destroy won- 
 derfully, and shall prosper; r"S<;E;, an ad- 
 verb, as in Job xxxvii, 5, For what remains, 
 cf, supra, V. 12 A. — And shall destroy the 
 mighty (ones) and the holy people. The I in 
 
 ^^H"?'?! is explicative ; it is designed to denote 
 more particularly the respects in which the king 
 shall prosper. The " mighty ones" are the war- 
 like enemies over whom he shall triumph, and 
 to them are added, by way of contrast, the 
 
 * [Stuart and Keil. on the contrary, strongl.v maintain 
 that "the transgre,ssors" here are not the heathen, but the 
 apostate Jews, whose sin will be visited by the indignatior 
 of God : and this seems to be more appropriate to the whole 
 connection.] 
 
CH-VP. Vlll. 1-27 
 
 ISJ 
 
 "nation of saints'' (cf. vii. 18, 22), as unwar- 
 like opponents. In the opinion of Hitzig, 
 Ewald, etc., the 3"'':^^ J are the three preten- 
 ders to the crown whom Epiphanes was com- 
 pelled to depose ; but not one of these deserved 
 to be called a mighty one, not even the usurper 
 Heliodorus ; see supra, on chap. vii. 8, 25.* — 
 Verse 25. And through (rather, "according 
 to ") his policy he shaU cause craft to prosper 
 in his hand. 'Z^'^'Z^ is probably not "by 
 reason of." but "according to his cunning ; " of. 
 Psa. ex. 4 ; Esth. lx. 20, etc. This expression, 
 ia an absolute position at the beginning, is con- 
 nected with the principal sentence which fol- 
 lows by an emphatic 1 ; cf . Gesenius, Tlietaur. , 
 p. 390 a. rf^ISn jg not transitive (Hitzig, et 
 al. ), as if the following ~^~^ were its accusa- 
 tive, but probably intransitive, despite the fem. 
 r?3"in ; cf. Isa. liii. 10. — "In (or with) his 
 hand " (cf. Isa. xliv. 20), considered as the out- 
 ward sphere of action, seems intended to form 
 an antithesis to the following "in his heart." 
 Concerning 'i-^?-? and the signification of -"'1?7 
 which results from it, cf. supra, on v. 4. — And 
 by peace shall destroy many; rather, "and 
 unawares shall destroy many." ~'^3~:^ does 
 not exactly signify "in the midst of profound 
 peace" (.Job xv. 21), but more indefinitely, 
 " with suddenness, by a malignant surprise," an 
 illustration of the malice and dissimulation prac- 
 tised by this t>Tant, which were already men- 
 tioned in V. 28. The circumstance that it is 
 recorded of Antiochus Epiphanes, in 1 Mace. i. 
 30, ^'ii kit^TTeaev l~l t/'/v tto/h' i^a-tva, proves 
 nothing in favor of a vntic. ex ereiitu, beyond 
 the fact that malignant and sudden surprises 
 are necessarily practised by every warlike foe of 
 cruel dispo.sition. ["In the -"^'^ (many) are 
 comprehended 'the mighty (one) and the holy 
 people' iver. 24)." — Kfil.] — He shall also stind 
 UD against the Prince of prince?, etc. Cf. v. i 
 11. and with regard to the being " broken with- I 
 oat hand," cf. chap. ii. 34 ; also Job xxxiv. 20 ' 
 and Lam. iv. (5. It is not necessary to seek a 
 definite reference to the death of Ejiiphanes by 
 sickness or extraordinary accident in this pas- 
 sage, instead of permitting him to fall on the 
 battle-field, or by the hand of a murderer 
 (against Bertholdt, Von Lengerke, Hiivemick, 
 etc. ).f — Verse 2(5. And the vision of the even 
 
 * ['* O^T^^i^ doofl not here signify many^ numerous, 
 mftny indivi Inal Israelites (Von Leng., Slaurer, Kliefotfl 
 [Btuart]), partly because in ver. 25 D''^'^ stands for that, 
 
 partly because of the C'^~~p 25, by which we are to 
 
 undei-stand the people of fm-aet." — Keil.\ 
 
 t ["The language is adaptctl to the .symbol, namely, the 
 little horn. The meaning is. IntaUtj destroi/ed. Facts cof- 
 Tespond. According to history. Antiochus. after marching 
 Into Persia, and robbing the temple at Elymats, was driven 
 a-.vay by popular tumult : and on his return back towards 
 Syria, be was met with the news of the total defeat of his 
 army in Judaea, and of the restoration of the temple -services 
 there. Polybius i XXXI. U) says of him, that ^ lie fell mad 
 (6oi/ioi''i<rtt«) and died :' 1 Mace. vi. 8 relates that he fell .sick 
 of erief for his losses ; Appian( />t?7^^. .Vj/r., LXVI.) says sim- 
 ply : i^Siviav eTeA«ur)j(r«. Various sha.ies are given t«j the 
 picture by the different writers; e.g., in 1 Mace. vi. ?< seq.. 
 which narrates his penitent confessions. But these have a 
 
 ing and the morning which was told, namely, 
 in v. 14. Since the observation in that place 
 respecting the 2,300 evenmg-mornings was really 
 a :Q"4:'?, and not a •IS-':, the words ">'?»«: —is 
 seem to refer back to the genitive l^l -".^n- 
 instead of to the Stnt. Cim-str. (thus Hitzig) 
 Words and things told, however, form the sub 
 ject of visions in other cases also (cf. Isa. ii. 1 ; 
 Am. i. 1; Hab. ii. 1, etc.); and the remark 
 concerning the 2,300 evening-mornings may con- 
 sequently be termed a "vision " in this instance. 
 — Is true (r.ather "truth"), /.<'., it is correct, 
 deserves to be credited, inasmuch as 2,300 even- 
 ing-mornings must elapse before the end of the 
 period of affliction. That period is thus deter- 
 mined as an extended one, which shall not soon 
 reach its close. On P?*, cf. chap. x. 1 ; xi. 2; 
 alsoxii. 7; Jer. xxri. 15; xxviii. 9; Rev. xix. 
 9; xxi. 5; x.Kii. 0. — 'Wherefore shut thou up 
 the vision; rather, "and thou, conceal the 
 vision," i.e. , do not publish it. do not be anxious 
 to spread a report concerning it. --; is noi 
 equivalent to 3.- n. "to seal up" (Theodotion 
 Hiivemick, Von Lengerke) ; for " sealing" ia 
 added to the mere " concealing" in chap. xii. 4, 
 as a strengthening term. — For it shall be for 
 many days, i.e., it (the vision) shall retain its 
 prophetic value for a long period, it does not 
 relate to a near, but to a distant future; cf. 
 chap. xii. 4. 9. As the direction to conceal the 
 vision is here based on the consideration that a 
 long period must elapse before it shall be ful- 
 filled, so, on the contrary, the prophet is direct- 
 ed, in Rev. xxii. 10, not to seal what has been 
 revealed to him, because the time of its fulfil- 
 ment is near. Notice the difference between 
 the Old-Testament seer, who is far removed 
 from the final future, and only sees it primarily 
 in types {e.g.', instead of beholding the antichrist 
 he only sees his forerunner Epiphanes), and the 
 New-Testament prophet, who beholds the events 
 of the last times in the history of the world 
 much nearer at hand, and is therefore not 
 obliged to conceal the prophecies relating to 
 them, especially since he addresses a commun- 
 nitj' composed exclusively of t^fo^^ftJavro/ (Isa. 
 liv. 3 ; John vi. 45 ; cf. 1 John ii. 20, 27). 
 
 Verse 27. T/ie effect of f/ie vision upon the, pro- 
 phet. And I Daniel fainted, anil was sick 
 (certain) days. Cf. vii. 28, and especially chap. 
 ii. 1, in relation to '^""'■^.r'J. — Afterwcird I rose 
 up, namely, from the sick-bed. This formal 
 statement by the prophet cannot be regarded as 
 extraordinary, since not only the vision as such 
 (i.e., by reason of its startling character), but 
 also the fasting which preceded it (cf. chap. ix. 
 3 ; X. 2 et seq. ), comes under consideration as 
 the cause of the complete exhaustion which fol- 
 lowed. — And did the king's business. Con- 
 cerning the extent to which Daniel might have 
 transacted official business for the king in the 
 reign of Belshazzar, without being personally 
 known to him, see on chap. v. 7. — And was 
 astonished at (rather, " dumb concerning") 
 
 strong tinge of .Jetrish coloring. So much is undoubtedly 
 true, viz., that he perished suddenly by a Tiolent sickness, 
 dur ng which he proliably fell into a state of mania. He 
 died, therefore, without violence by the hand of man, and 
 so as to make a deep impression of perishing by a pecuiiat 
 visitation of God." — Stuart,] 
 
1S4 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 the vision, but ("and") none understood 
 (rather, "became aware of") it; usually ren- 
 dered, "none vndentood it," or, "and to me 
 there was no understanding, / did not under- 
 stand it" (thus Maurer, Hitzig. Kranichfeld, 
 Kamphausen, etc., under comparison with chap, 
 xii. 8). Since, however, the obvious design is 
 to state what Daniel did "to conceal" the 
 vision, the signification of "not noticing, not 
 learning" seems to be the only logical and 
 suitable one for Vr'!!' '^^ in this passage ; cf. 
 on this interpretation, vs. 5, 17 ; Job xxviii. 
 23 ; Isa. xxviii. 19, etc. 
 
 ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES BELATED 
 TO THE HISTORY OF SALVATION, APOLOGE- 
 TICAL REMARKS, AND HOMILETICAL SUG- 
 GESTIONS. 
 
 1. The principal difficulty to be met with in 
 this section relates to the concrete number of 
 1150 days or 2300 evening-mornings, in v. 14, 
 and in its failure to agree with the three and a 
 half years of the preceding vision (chap. vii. 
 2o). If simply the idea was to be expressed 
 that the period of tribulation should expire in 
 something kss than three and a half years, why 
 did the author not permit the angel to say, 
 " even before three and a half years shall have 
 passed," etc.? Or why did he not select really 
 a round number, as 1200 days (to denote 1277, 
 which amount exactly to three and a half years)? 
 Or why did he not pursue the course adopted 
 by the New-Test, apocalyptist, who suijsti- 
 tuted forty-two months for forty-two and a 
 half, and hence 1260 days for 1277 (see 
 Rev. xi. 2; xii. (5; xiii. 5)? — This strange 
 feature admits of a correct explanation, only 
 when it is remembered that prophecies relating 
 to time are necessarily and unavoidably of a 
 symbolic-concrete character, and that for this 
 reason, no exact correspondence, or mechanic- 
 ally precise agreement of the prophetic numbers 
 with the extent of the periods in which they are 
 realized, can be expected. Neither the seventy 
 years of being forgotten and of ruin which 
 Isaiah predicted for the Tyrians (chap. xxv. 15- 
 18), nor the seventy years of captivity in Baby- 
 lon, which Jeremiah (chap. xxv. 11, et seq. ; 
 xxix. 10 et seq. ) foretold to the Israelites of his 
 time, were fulfilled with literal exactness* (cf. 
 infra, on chap. ix. ) ; and as the ' ' two days " 
 (a^^'i) during which Israel's state of death or 
 the period of its affliction was to continue, ac- 
 cording to Hos. vi. 2, have primarily an ideal- 
 symbolic value only, so the "three days and 
 three nights," which were to be spent by the 
 prophet in the belly of the great fish, according 
 to Jon. ii. 1, were, in Uke manner, not an exact 
 number, amounting to precisely seventy-two 
 hours (cf. Kleinert on that passage) — and yet 
 both these prophetic numbers were designed to 
 foretell the resurrection of the Saviour on the 
 third daj", i.e., after two whole nights and one 
 
 * (With rctr-irtl to thn latter ]>nint atlcipt the nuthor con- 
 cedes tflo much, for the Bab\ Ionian csiptivity was exactly eev- 
 inty years in length, namely, from the fourth yearof Jehoia- 
 kMii. li. C. titMi, totheeiUccof Cyrus. B.C. 53H, SeeBruwne's 
 Orda StpMartim, ch, iii. sec. i. §§ Itil et seq. Had we the 
 dnta extant we mi^rht dr)ubtless prove the truth of the other 
 periods named In Scripture prophecy with ciuiil precision.] 
 
 entire day.* The prophets are accnstomed to 
 employ concrete conceptions of time, and to 
 clothe them in definite form. This form might 
 arise from any incident or event, most of which 
 can no longer be discovered ; but their relation 
 to the duration of the events which fulfil the 
 prophecy must as certainly be a merely approxi- 
 mate agreement, and not mathematically exact, 
 as the manner in which God secures the fulfil 
 ment of the prophecies uttered by holy men 
 through the Spirit, is in nowise a matter en- 
 trusted to man, but belongs only to the God who 
 brings the predictions to pass (cf. 2 Pet. i. 20 et 
 seq.)f The predictions of the prophets in the 
 Church during the Middle Ages and in modem 
 times (e.g., St. Hildegard, Joachim, the Parisian 
 professor Nicholas Oresmius, who, in 1364, fore- 
 told the great papal schism, which actually 
 broke out in 1378 ; Huss and Savonarola, who 
 predicted the Reformation ; the Lutheran Mi- 
 chael Stiefel of Jena (f 1567) ; the astrologer 
 Nostradamus (fl566); and finally J. A. Benzel 
 and Jimg-Stilling) might be substantially treated 
 in the same manner, so far as they assume a nu- 
 merically exact, ordefinitely chronologicalform.t 
 The partial non-agreement of their predictions 
 with the points of time or periods of the future 
 in which they were to be realized doe.s not de- 
 stroy their character as genuine prophets, or 
 disprove that they were employed in a superior 
 and heavenly caUing ; but the approximate 
 agreement or partial coincidence of their vatici- 
 nations with the facts of fulfilment and their 
 chronological relations, does not warrant a sus- 
 picion that they were forged subsequently to the 
 beginning of their fulfilment, any more than 
 the approximate agreement of either the 1150 
 days or the three and a half years, etc., in the 
 prophecy before us, with the epochs of the Mac- 
 cabEeau history will justify the pseudo-Daniel 
 tendency-hypothesis. 
 
 2. While the slight difference between the 
 prophetic number and the events connected with 
 its realization, discussed above, belongs un- 
 doubtedly to the category of those "slight dis- 
 crepancies " which, according to M. v. Niebuhr, 
 
 * [The *' three days and three nights " in question are an 
 exact expre.ssion according to Hebrew usage, which includes 
 both extremes in all such periods.] 
 
 t Cf. Tholuck Die Prnpheten und Hire Wetftna^ungen ; 
 eine apologetisch'hermenentiscfie suulie (Gotha, 1860). p. 
 11.3 et seq., where the remark is made concerning the seventy 
 years of Jeremiah, considered as being a designation of 
 time that agreed, generally at least, with the duration of 
 the captivity. "Can any means of escaping this conclusion 
 be discovered ? Only that one, which, among others, E^'ald 
 has not despised, viz., to regard the number seventy as a 
 roimd number, and therefore = 'along time.' .... Is 
 then, round number really — long time in the Oriental use 
 of language? The master of Old-Test, language will cer- 
 tainly not attempt to deny that it rather denotes an ' ap- 
 projcimate limitation of time !'.... Such numbers 
 are clearly approximate, e.g., in Am. ii. 4, where it is said, 
 * For three transgressions of Judah and for four, I will not 
 turn :iway,' etc ; Mic. v. 5. ' Then shall we raise against him 
 seven shepherds .and ei,ght principal men ; ' cf. Hos. vi. 'i. In 
 like manner a desolation of forty years is predicted for 
 Egypt, by Ezekiel, in chap. xxix. 11. 12, which is, indeed, a 
 round number of probable reckoning, but is at the same 
 time, an approximate number, namely, 36 or .37." etc. [But 
 these conventional numbers in a general statemmt are very 
 ilifferent from those obviously given as chronological data.] 
 
 t In relation to the prophets of the Christian a>ra, above 
 referred to. and also with regard to several others, cf. the in- 
 teresting statements in Splittgerber, Schlnf tttitl Tod. etc. 
 (Halle. 18t)fi), p. ii;i5-'J53, [But -sound theologians — indeed, 
 accurate observers merely — would certainly place all theea 
 pseudo-predictions on a very different level from those of tb« 
 prophetfi of Scripture.] 
 
CHAP. VIII. 1-27. 
 
 185 
 
 ' ' must excite our awe, instead of begetting a 
 doubt of the truth of the prophecy, or shaking 
 our confidence in the chionology of ancient his- 
 tory" {Geschichte Assurs tind Babels, p. 90), the 
 relation between the character of the history of 
 nations and kingdoms as described iu the vision 
 under consideration, and the condition of Israel 
 during the ssra of oppression and revolt in the 
 Maccabaean age, which corresponds to it as a 
 primary historical fulfilment, is such, that it un- 
 conditionally forbids the idea that the vision is a 
 prophecy ex erentu, and was composed to favor 
 a tendency. There is no complete and thorough 
 correspondence between prophecy and fulfil- 
 ment, that could favor the suspicion of its com- 
 position under such circumstances and for such 
 a purpose ; on the contrary, the discrepancies 
 are so numerous, that to trace historical facts 
 which shall correspond in every case to the par- 
 ticular features of the prophetic vision, involves 
 the greatest uncertainty and difiiculty. Ber- 
 tholdt and v. Lengerke assume that the chapter 
 was written shortly after the death of Antioch- 
 us Epiphanes ; Hitzig, that it was composed 
 shortly before that event; Bleek {Jahrb. far 
 deuUche flieologie, 1860, No. 1, p. 57), that it 
 was framed at least about that time. " Accord- 
 ing to this, the section was at any rate composed 
 at a time when the Jews had already demon- 
 strated their superiority in arms over the troops of 
 the tyrant. At the same time, the.se bloody feats 
 of arms, which formed the basis of all the hopes 
 that animated the newly -awakened national con- 
 sciousness of the Jews, are not mentioned with 
 a single word. As in chap. vii. the heathen op- 
 pressor triumphs in battle over the holy people 
 to the end of the three and a half times, so in this 
 selection the host and sanctuary are represented 
 as being trodden under foot until the close of the 
 period mentioned in v. 14. Even the restoration 
 of the sanctuary (v. 14), which might at least 
 indirectly be interpreted as consequent on a 
 warlike triumph of the Jews, is, in v. 25, re- 
 ferred only to a theocratic judgment imposed 
 directly by God, and not to a national victory. 
 The latter, indeed, is directly excluded. The 
 great deeds of the oppressor only are spoken of, 
 and his overthrow 1^ 2??s3 is immediately con- 
 nected with them. Every real foundation for 
 the opinion that this section originated at that 
 juncture which was marked by the triumphs 
 over ApoUonius and Seron, over Gorgias and 
 Lysius, dearly bought as they were with the 
 blood of the people, is thus taken away, since 
 the situation described iu the chapter, testifies 
 only to defeat down to the time of restoring the 
 temple, and denotes a disposition which looked 
 for help only from a supernatural agency " 
 (Kranichfeld, p. 286 et seq. ). — Remarkable as is 
 this total silence respecting the national revolt, 
 which was so successfully introduced, when the 
 author is regarded as a Maccab^an pseudo- 
 Daniel, it is no less difficult to understand why, 
 if the vision was recorded soon after the death 
 of Antiochus, the Messianic hopes which must 
 have been connected with that death, should 
 not be mentioned with a single word. The only 
 tolerable explanation of this fact is that the 
 death of the oppressor (his " being broken with- 
 out hand," v. 25) was future to the writer, as 
 much so as everything else. Even the restora- 
 
 tion of the temple-service, which had been abol- 
 ished, is clearly placed in the future by the de- 
 scription iu V. 14, and does not appear .is .on in- 
 cident in the past experience of the prophet. 
 The only comfort offered by him in the entire 
 section has no relation to the sufferings of the 
 present or the past, but to tribulations belong 
 ing to the far-distant future. 
 
 3. The only circumstance which seems seri- 
 ously to favor the theory of a MaccabiBau com 
 position is the express mention of Jacaii in v. 
 21, as the world-power from which the impious 
 oppressor of Israel should come forth (preceded, 
 however, by a number of anti-theistic kingdoms 
 [v. 22] and wicked sovereigns [v. 23] ). But this 
 circumstance also loses its apparent character, 
 as disproving Dhe origin of the chapter during 
 the captivity, and becomes decidedly more in- 
 telligible, as soon as we remember the frequent 
 contact of the orientals with Hellenic civiliza- 
 tion and culture, as well as with Gnecian mili- 
 tary art and bravery, which began even before 
 the time of Nebuchadnezzar (see Introd. j 7, 
 Note 2). Let it also be remembered that the 
 ancientprophecy by Balaam (Num. xxiv. I, which 
 threatened destruction to the Assyrians and 
 Hebrews through "ships from Chittim." i.e., 
 through Greek iiiiasioiu from the sea (cf. supra, 
 on chap, ii.), must have been known to Daniel, 
 even if it had originated as late as the age of 
 Shalmaneser and Sennacherib, and afterward 
 been incorporated with the early history in the 
 Pentateuch. There is no lack of natural indi- 
 cations arising from the events of current his- 
 tory, which might suggest to a seer of the period 
 of the exile, that precisely the distant nation of 
 the Greeks would become a threatening riral, 
 and eventually, a victorious opponent of the 
 Persian power and greatness, and w'hich might 
 also awaken in him a presentiment of the inter- 
 nally divided and disunited, and therefore tran- 
 sient character of the future empire of the 
 Greeks. The definite character of the predic- 
 tions respecting the development of that Javanic 
 empire is certainly marvellous and inexplicable, 
 unless referred to the Divine Spirit of prophecy ; 
 but it is scarcely more wonderful than the 
 equally definite character of Balaam's piophecy, 
 which likewise related to the Greeks, or than 
 the surprising clearness and confidence with 
 which Amos foretold that the Israel of his day 
 should "go into captivity beyond Damascus" 
 (chap. V. 27), or Isaiah was able to predict that 
 the successors of Hezekiah should be led into 
 captivity at Babylon (chap, xxxix. 6 et seq. ; 2 
 Kings XX. 17 et seq.), or Jeremiah could de- 
 scribe to his contemporaries the overthrow of 
 Babylon by the Medo-Persians ! Cf. also Kran- 
 ichfeld, p. 128 et seq. 
 
 4. The real and fundamental Messianic fea- 
 ture of this section, and, at the same time, the 
 thought which is pre-eminently adapted to prac- 
 tical homiletical treatment, is that already no- 
 ticed in the exegesis of vs. 19 and 21. accordin^^ 
 to which the moral degradation and the wicked- 
 ness of the world-power in its hostility to God 
 becomes more excessive with each stage through 
 which that power passes in its development, un- 
 til it reaches its climax, when God interferes to 
 judge and deliver — thus bringing it, in its charac- 
 ter as an oppressive, pseudo-prophetic antichris- 
 tiauity, into the strongest contrast with th« 
 
1S6 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 transparent light and holiness of the Messiah 
 and the community of His saints, who are bom 
 of God. This thought is also presented by the 
 Saviour in the parable which describes the tares 
 as growing together with the good seed in the 
 field, and as ripening for the harvest at the judg- 
 ment (Matt. xiii. 80 et seq. ) ; it is the same 
 Messianic truth and necessity to which he re- 
 fers in the former half of his onttio eschato'iigica 
 in thoroughly prophetic language (Matt. xxiv. 5 
 et seq.) ; it is the fundamental thought of all 
 apocalyptic prophecy, of all prophecy relating to 
 the future history of empires, as the analogous 
 sections in 2 Thess, and the book of Revelation 
 show with sufficient clearness. The goiiU tri- 
 umph over the Tuore harmless rnim in the last 
 times ; the place of the weaker horns that arise 
 against the Lord is supplied by others who suc- 
 ceed each other in constantly increasing strength. 
 The " great power " of the enemy is reinforced 
 by "great cunning," which increases with the 
 lapse of time ; and his insolence is joined to 
 craft which steadily develops, and to malignant 
 dissimulation (cf. vs. 28-25), until, through the 
 instigation of the great arch-enemy, who is ever 
 the same, nation rises against nation, and king- 
 dom against kingdom. To increase the need 
 and oppression of the righteous, many false pro- 
 phets arise and practice their deceitful arts, and 
 because iniquity abounds, the love of many 
 waxes cold (Matt. xxiv. 7 et seq., 11 et seq.). — 
 If all this, considered as the real fundamental 
 idea of the visional representation, be duly re- 
 garded, the jejune character of this section, 
 which at first sight seems to offer nothing that 
 possesses practical value, or that is available for 
 homiletical purposes, will speedily disappear ; 
 and as the danger of feeling that only unimpor- 
 tant features, such as the animal-symbols (vs. 3- 
 7) or the doctrine of angels (vs. 13-18), are here 
 presented, becomes less, the preacher will find 
 the energetic warning and promise by the Sa- 
 viour, " But he that endureth to the end shall 
 be saved," available as an encouraging and hor- 
 tatory theme that covers the ground of the 
 whole chapter. This forms the pregnant and 
 solemn expression of the New Testament, which 
 marks the consoling and elevating Messianic 
 back-ground in which the discouraging and 
 Rtorray scene of the chapter is laid, but which 
 here appears but for a brief moment in the con- 
 cluding words of V. 19, like the cheering sun at 
 evening against the border of the stormy cloud. 
 5. Special homiletical suggestions relating to 
 teparate passages : 
 
 On V, 3 et seq., Melancthon : " Aliijuoties di':- 
 i tvm est, ad guid prosit tenere pritdictiones deserie 
 monarchiarum et omnium teinporum usque ad 
 extremvm judicium? Est Ecclesice kac doctriiia 
 et consoUitione opus, ne inter tot afflictiones el 
 scandala desperet. Est etiam admonitione optm, 
 
 ut causas cngitemus afflictionum Hit. 
 
 atroces cmnminationes exsuscitent nos, ut simus 
 diligentioroi in consenanda puritate doctrinm it 
 in tita, ne Deus sinat exi/riri majores tenebras.'' 
 — The Tubing. Bib. : " How uncertain is the 
 glory and majesty of the kingdoms of earth ! 
 Even when they have attained the highest pros- 
 perity they must yet be humbled, fall, and pass 
 away, like every other earthly good and honor. 
 The kingdom of heaven alone is immutable, and 
 forms the hope of every believer," Psa. cxlv. 
 13. 
 
 On V. 10 et seq., the TUb. Bib. : "Nothing ia 
 more dangerous than pride, which leads man 
 even to war against God, His Church, and the 
 true worship. This must inevitably be followed 
 by heavy judgments from God." — Starke : "An 
 earthly ruler will not permit rebellion against 
 his authority to pass unpunished. How shall he 
 escape, who revolts against the Prince over the 
 host of God (Isa. x. 13)?" 
 
 On V. 14, Cramer : '" The persecution and rage 
 of the godless is a storm that sweeps over us • 
 God fixes its limits, results, and mea.sure." — 
 Starke: "God has indeed revealed something 
 in relation to the hope of Christ's Church for 
 better times on the earth, in order that no doubt 
 may be entertained concerning the fact itself ; 
 but to seek to ascertain the particular time, 
 would be fool-hardiness and useless trouble (Acts 
 i. 7.)." 
 
 On v. 17 et seq., Jerome: '■'■ Et EztcMel et 
 Daniel et Zacliarias. quia so'pe inter angelos esse 
 se cermint, ne ileventur in superbiam et angelicm 
 nel naturce nel dignitatis se cnecredant, admonen- 
 tur fragilitatis sua. et jUii Jtominum appellnntitr, 
 ut homines se esse noverint." — Geier : " If the 
 presence of a holy angel was so insupportable to 
 Daniel, how terrible will be the experience of 
 the wicked when they shall behold the Lord of 
 angels and Judge of the whole world, Jesus 
 Christ Himself (Rev. vi. 15 et seq.) ! " 
 
 On V. 24. Osiander : "God sometimes permits 
 the plans of the wicked to succeed, in order that 
 the saints may be tried." — Starke: "God re- 
 quires no great preparation or mighty instru- 
 ments to cast down a tyrant ; He can adapt the 
 most insignificant means to that end (Acts xii. 
 23)." 
 
 3. The vision of the seventy weeks of years. 
 Chap. IX. 1-27. 
 
 1 In the iirst year of [to] Darius, the. son of Ahasnerus, of tJie seed of the Medes 
 
 2 [Media], which [who] was made king over the realm of the Chaldaeans ; in the 
 nrst year of [toj liis reign, I Daniel understood hy [tlie] books the number of 
 the years, whereoy [wiiieli] the word of the Loid [Jehovah] came [was] to Jere- 
 miah the i>ro))het, that he would a.ccom\)V\iih [for fulfilling] seventy years in [for] 
 
 3 the desolations of Jerusalem. And I set [gave] my face unto the Lord God, to 
 S(!ek ' 6y prayer and supplic.itious, with fasting, and sackcloth, and ashes. 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-27. 1S7 
 
 4 And I prayed ' unto tlie Lord [Jeliovali] my God, and made my confession, 
 and said,' Lord, the great and dreadful God, Iceeping the covenant and mercy* 
 
 5 to them that love him, and to tliem tliat keep his commandments ; we have 
 sinned, and have committed iniquity, and have done wickedly, and have rebel- 
 led, even 6;/ [and there has been aj departing from thy precepts [commandments], 
 
 6 and from thy judgments ; neitiier have we [and we have not] hearkened unto 
 thy servants the prophets, which [who] spake in thy name to our kings, our 
 
 7 princes, and our fathers, and to all the people of the land. Lord, righteous- 
 ness helongeth unto thee ; but [and] unto us confusion [shame] of faces,* as at 
 this day; to the men [man] of Judah, and to the inhabitants of Jerusalem, and 
 unto all Israel, that are near, and that are far off, through [in] all the countries 
 
 f lands] whitlier [where] thou hast driven thsm, because of [in] their trespass 
 treachery] that they have trespassed [done treacherously] against [with] thee. 
 
 8 Lord, to us belonf/eth confusion [shame] of face [faces], to our kings, to our 
 princes, and to our fathers, because we [or, we who] have sinned against [to] 
 
 9 thee. To the Lord our God belong mercies * and forgivenesses,* though [for] we 
 10 have rebelled against 
 
 the voice of the Lord 
 
 with] him ; neither have we [and we have not] obeyed 
 .Jehovah) our God, to walk in his laws, which he set 
 [gave] before us by [the hand of] his servants the prophets. 
 
 11 Yea, [And] all Israel have transgressed thy law, even by [and there has been 
 a] departing, that they might not [so as not at all to] obey thy voice ; therefore 
 [and] the curse is [has] poured upon us, and the oath that is written in the law 
 
 12 of Moses the servant of God, Ijccause we have sinned against [to] him. And he 
 hath confirmed his words, which he spake against us, and .against our judges 
 that judged us, by bringing [to bring] upon us a' great evil; for [, which]" 
 under the wliole heaven [heavens] hath not been done as [it] hath been done 
 
 13 upon [in] Jerusalem. As it is written in the law of Moses, [as ta] all this evil 
 [, it] is [has] come upon us; yet [and] made we not our prayer before [we b;'- 
 souglit not the face of] the Lord [Jehovah] our God, that we might [to] turn 
 
 i4 from our iniquities, and understand [become wise in] thy trutli. Iherefore 
 [And] hath the Lord [Jehovah] watched upon tiie evil, and brought it upon us ; 
 for the Lord [.Jehovah] our God is righteous in [u])on] all his works which lie 
 doeth [has done] ; for [and] we obeyed not his voice. 
 
 15 And now, Lord our God, that hast brought thy people forth out of the land 
 of Egypt with a mighty hand, and hast gotten [made for] thee renown [a name], 
 
 16 as at this day; we have siimed, we have done wickedly. O Lord, acconling to 
 [in] all thy righteousness [righteousnesses], I beseech thee, let thine auger and 
 thy fury be turned awni/ [return] from thy city Jerusalem, thy holy mountain 
 [the mountain of thy sanctuary] ; because for [in] our sins, and for [in] the ini 
 quities of our fathers, .Jerusalem and tiiy |)eople arebecoine [are for] a reproacli to 
 
 M all that are about us. Now, therefore [And now], our God, hear [hearken to] the 
 prayer of thy serv.aiit, and [to] his su|i)ilications, and canse thy face to shine upon 
 
 18 thy sanctuary t/iat is desolate, for the Lord's sake. luy God, incline thine ear, 
 and hear; open thine eyes, and behold [see] our desolations, and the city which 
 is called by the name [upon which thy name has been called]: for we do not 
 present' our supplications before thee i'or [upon] our righteousness, but [for it 
 
 19 is] for [upon] thy great mercies. O Lord, hear; O Lord, forgive; O Lord, 
 hearken, and do ; defer not : for thine own sake, my God ; for thy city an<l 
 thy people are called by thy name [thy name has been called upon thy city and 
 upon thy people]. 
 
 20 And while I u-as [And I teas yet] speaking, and praying, and confessing my 
 sin and the sin of my people Israel, and presenting my supplication before the 
 Lord [Jehovah] my God for the holy mountain [upon the mountain of the sanctuary] 
 
 21 of my God ; yea, while I loas [and I was yetj spe.akingin pr.ayer,' even [and, t.e., 
 then] the man Gabriel, whom I had seen in the vision at [in] the beginning, 
 being caused to fly swiftly, touched [reached] me about the time of the evening 
 
 22 obl.ation. And he informed vie, and talked [spoke] with me, and said, 
 
 23 Daniel, I am [have] now come forth to give thee skill and understanding. .At 
 [In] the beginning of thy supplications the commandment [word] came [went] 
 
ISS 
 
 THE PKOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 forth, and I am [have] come to show thee ; for thou art greatly beloved,' there- 
 fore [and] understand [in] the matter [word], and consider [have understanding 
 in] tlie vision [appearance]. 
 
 24 Seventy weeks [sevens] are determined" upon thy people and upon thy holy 
 city [<Ac city of thy sanctuary], to finish the transgression, and to make an end 
 of [seal up] sins, and to make reconciliation for [cover] iniquity, and to bring 
 in everlasting righteousness, and to seal iq^ the vision and prophecy, and to an- 
 
 25 oint the Most Holy [holy of holies]. Know, therefore [And thou shalt know], 
 and understand [be wise], that from the going forth of the commandment [word] 
 to restore [return] and to build Jerusalem, unto the Messiah the Prince, shall he 
 seven weeks [sevens], and threescore and two weeks [sevens] : the street shall 
 be built again, and the wall [trench], even [and, i.e., but] in troublous [trouble 
 
 26 of the] times. And after [the] threescore and two weeks [sevens] shall Mes- 
 siah be cut olf, but not for himself [and there shall be nothing to him] : and the 
 people of </je prince that s/j«Z^ come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; 
 and the end thereof [or, his end] shall be with a [the] flood, and unto [till] the 
 
 27 end of the war desolations are determined [tJi^re is a decision of desolations]. 
 And he shall confirm the covenant with [to] many /'or one week [seven]: and 
 in the midst [half] of the week [seven] he shall cause the sacrifice and 
 the oblation to cease, and for [upon] the overspreading [wing] of abominations 
 /te shall make it desolate [there shall be a desolator], even [and] until the consum- 
 mation, and that determined [decided], shall be poured [it shall pour] upon tlie 
 desolate. 
 
 GRAMMATICAL NOTES. 
 [X T3p21» nsed absolutely here, may be taken in the sense of loorshipping^ which it often bears, or we may supply 
 '*i7iformation'' from the context. — ^ The form is very intensive, nb^DrXI. denoting extreme earnestness. — ' Not only 
 
 is this verb, like the others, emphatic, but the pronoun added gives it a reflexive reference, like the Hithp. of the other 
 verbs, i.q.^for mytelf. — * The art. prefixed = thy, our, his, my, etc. — ^ The indef , art, here injures the sense by really mak- 
 ing the noun definite. — *• Literally, let/all, i.e., rest or base. — ' Literally, to male thee tciae as to. — ^ Literally, delights. — 
 • The verb being in the singular indicates the unity or singleness of this entire period,] 
 
 EXEGETICAL REMARKS. 
 
 Verses 1-3. The time of the penitential prayer 
 which led. to the vision, and the occasion whicli in- 
 spired it. In the first year of Darius, the son 
 of Ahasuerus. Concerning both Uarius the 
 Mede and his father Ahasuerus (Theodot. , Sept. , 
 Vulg., " Assuenis") or Astyages, see thelntrod. 
 § 8, note 4. The point of time referred to in 
 the text belongs to a period later than that of 
 the vision in the preceding chapter by more 
 than twenty years, or about B,C, 537;* cf, on 
 chap, V, 30 and vi, 1, — Of the seed of the 
 Medes, The uationality of the new nUer is no- 
 ticed, because the subject of the prayer which 
 follows, and also of the prophecy respecting the 
 seventy weeks of years vouchsafed in conse- 
 quence, was conditioned by the circumstance 
 that at the time when this incident transpired 
 in the experience of Daniel, he w.n.^i a Medo-Per- 
 nan svhject, and hence, liadsecn tht second icorJd- 
 power of his former vision replace the first. The 
 overthrow of Babylon by the Median king would 
 naturally lead him to meditate on the question 
 concerning the time of the restoration of Jeru- 
 salem and the realization of the further theo- 
 cratic hopes comiected with that event. In the 
 nature of the case, such meditations would con- 
 nect themselves at once with Jeremiah's pro- 
 phecy relating to the seventy years which were 
 
 • [This anachronism results merely from the author's at- 
 tempt to identify Belshazzar with Evil-Merodach, On the 
 theory which we have adopted this chapter follows in im- 
 mediate chronological order,] 
 
 to elapse, before Jerusalem, the desolate, should 
 be restored ; and such a reference was unavoid- 
 able in the case of a vir desideriorura (see v. 23, 
 Vulg. ), like Daniel, who searched the Scriptures. 
 — Which was made king. The passive "-'?" 
 denotes that he did not become king over the 
 Chaldsean realm in the ordinary way and by 
 right of inheritance, but that he reached the 
 throne in an extraordinary and violent manner, 
 through the agency of the victorious Persian 
 army (led by his nephew, Cyrus),— Verse 2, I 
 Daniel, understood (or "observed") in books 
 the number of years, i.e., I gave attention to 
 that question, meditated upon it. With regard to 
 ■'rjij"'2i a shortened HiphU-form like 1"?. chap. 
 X. 1, or like ri-"'"), for rnci~n. Job, xxxiii. 13, 
 cf. Ewald, Lehrh. § 127 a, 1* — The construction 
 with an accusative is similar to chap, x, 1 ; 
 Prov. vii, 7; xxiii. 1. Von Lengerke renden* it 
 incorrectly, " I sought understanding in the 
 books, in the number," etc., as if -r^z.~ were 
 here construed with 3, as in v. 23, and this 3 
 were then dropped before the more definite 
 1Dp^.-|-— The "books" (or "writings," ci-ic-) 
 
 * [It is simpler to make it at once an irregular Kal-fonn, 
 with Gesenlus,] 
 + [•' 1D0C (nwrniw) forms the objec. (o iri '"3 (/tm 
 
 derstooa) ; cf, Prov, vii, 7, Neither the placiugof n^'^£S2 
 
 (6j. boots') first, nor the Athnnch under this word, contro- 
 verts this view ; for the object is placed after * by books 
 because a further definition is annexed to it ; and the sepo* 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-27. 
 
 189 
 
 in which Daniel observed the number seventy, 
 and thus njade it the subject of his meditations, 
 were, according to the context, those which 
 would engage the attention of a captive, be fa- 
 miliar and adapted to him. They did not pro- 
 bably include the whole collection of O.-T. writ- 
 ings, the Torah, Xebiim, and Kethubim (as v. 
 Lengerke, Hitzig, Ewald. and other defenders of 
 the Maccabasan origin of the book suppose), nor 
 were they lunited to the letter of Jeremiah 
 (Jer. xxix., although the plural C'lESn might, 
 without difBculty. designate a single letter ; cf. 
 Jer. xxix. 25 ; 2 Kings xix. 14) which contained 
 the prophecy concerning the seventy years, but 
 they were simply a collection of prophetic writ- 
 ings which Daniel had at command. It cannot 
 be decided how great the extent of this collec- 
 tion was. Perhaps it was confined merely to 
 prophecies by Jeremiah — possibly including only 
 those which are now contained in chapters xxv. 
 and xxix. (to which Wieseler, Die 70 Woc/ien, 
 etc., p. 4, limits the D^"lEp, as being the par- 
 ticular rolls of writing in which these oracles of 
 Jeremiah were recorded), or extending to a 
 larger number, or even comprehending all that 
 are now found in the book of Jeremiah. Per- 
 haps it comprehended a larger circle of prophetic 
 and other writings, similar to the private collec- 
 tion which Jeremiah already must have owned 
 (cf. Hengstenberg. Beitrih/e, etc., p. 33 et seq.). 
 It is likely of itself that the Pentateuch was in- 
 cluded among the sacred books belonging to 
 Daniel, although no positive evidence of that 
 fact can be derived from vs. 11 and 13 of this 
 chapter ; for the mention of the nnin in those 
 passages does not prove that the prophet classed 
 them among the C"^"1Cp which are here referred 
 to.* — To what passage in Jeremiah's prophecies, 
 then, does Daniel allude ? Chiefly and jjrimar- 
 ily, no doubt, to chap. xxv. , from which the term 
 ri-'in, '' ruins," is evidently borrowed (see Jer. 
 xxv. 9, 11) ; but likewise to chap, xxix., the 10th 
 verse of which clearly refers back to chap. xxv. 
 11 et seq., and with which our prophet was 
 doubtless as well acquainted as with the former. 
 — Whereof the word of the Lord cetine to 
 Jeremiah the prophet. "l™8«, " whereof, in re- 
 gard to which " (namely, years); cf. the use of 
 "CS in the same sense in chap. viii. 26. n^'3"l';i 
 as found also in Ezra i. 1 . and in chapters xxvii. - 
 xxix. in the book of Jeremiah itself, is the later 
 form of the name. — That he would accomplish 
 seventy year in the desolation of Jerusalem ; 
 or. ''that seventy years should be full in the 
 ruins,"etc. ni'in. '• ruins, desolate condition ;" 
 cf. Lev. xxvL 31 ; Ezek. xxxvi. 10, 33 ; xxxviii 
 
 ration of the object from the verb by the Athnach is just- 
 ified by this consideration, th.^t the pa.'^sage contains two 
 statements, viz.. that Daniel studied the Scriptures, and that 
 his study was directed to the number of the years, etc." — 
 Keil ] 
 *[•* Q'^^CS,", Ta ^l^A[a. is not synonymous with 
 
 n^Z^n 3ri,ac vpat^at, but denotes only writings in the plural, 
 
 yet does not say that these writings already firmed a recog- 
 nized collection, so that from thi.? expression nothing can be 
 concluded regarding the formation of the O.-T. canon." — 
 
 13, etc. Our prophet, as appears in v. 2.5 a, re- 
 gards the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchad- 
 nezzar, in the year B.C. 587, as the terminus a 
 quo of the seventy years of desolation, while, 
 on the other hand, Jeremiah uttered his pro- 
 phecy relating to the seventy years (Jer. xxvi. 
 cf. xxix. 1 et seq.) as early as the "fourth year 
 of Jehoiakim," i.e., B.C. 005, or 19 years before 
 that date, and accordingly seemed to favor the 
 method which reckoned the seventy years from 
 the first conquest of Judaea by Nebuchadnezzar, 
 and ended them with Cyrus (606-536).* When 
 and how the end of the seventy years should be 
 realized, was therefore a question which would 
 engage his special attention when the Chaldaean 
 monarchy was supplanted by the Medo- Persian, f 
 — Verse 3. And I set my face unto the Lord 
 God, i.e., probably, heavenward (cf. Gen. xxi. 
 17; 1 Kings viii. 22; John xvii. 3); for the 
 turning of his face toward Jerusalem or the sito 
 of the temple (cf. vi. 11), would certainly not 
 be disregarded in this instance, when about to 
 pray for the restoration of the city and temple. 
 The name "J^S is used here to designate God 
 (instead of nin"'__ which is found in several MSS. ), 
 as in chap. i. 2; Ezra x. 3; Neh. i. 11; iv. 8, 
 and as in several places in the prayer itself, v. 
 4 et seq. — To seek by prayer and supplica- 
 tions; rather, "to seek prayer," etc. Prayer 
 is conceived of as an operation of the Divine 
 Spirit (cf. Zech. xii. 10 ; Rom. viii. 26), which 
 must be sought after or elicited from within, by 
 means of fasting, putting on mourning gar- 
 ments, etc. ; cf. 2 Sam. vii. 27 ; xii. 16 ; Ezra 
 ix. 3 ; Ecclus. xxxiv. 21 ; Luke ii. 37, etc. Upon 
 this subject see my Geschichte der Askese, p. 136 
 et seq. "^^P is "'prayer" generally considered 
 (Psa. bcv. 3), while Dilirnn. like n:nn, V. 20, 
 is " prayer for mercy, importimate, moving 
 prayer." 
 
 Verses 4^19. Daniel's prayer. In order to 
 justly appreciate the impressive beauty of this 
 prayer, and to understand its plan and aim, cf. 
 Ewald, p. 430 et seq. : "The motives that led 
 him to pray are scarcely indicated in the intro- 
 ductory statements, vs. 1-3, and must be dis- 
 covered in the nature of the circumstances. He 
 had long been deeply afflicted because the suf- 
 ferings of his people were protracted during so 
 long a period, and thus found and meditated on 
 those passages from Jeremiah in the Bible (?) ; 
 but the difficulty of understanding the Divine 
 meaning of the number, redoubled his grief. 
 He comprehended, however, that if the period 
 of Israel's punishment at the hand of God was 
 so protracted, and the mystery relating to him- 
 self and the whole nation was so hard to solve, 
 it must be charged solely to the consequences of 
 
 • [The discrepancy here stirmised by the author is entirely 
 imaginary, Daniel reckons the captivity precisely as Jere- 
 miah, namely from the fourth of Jehoiakirn, B.C. 60(i, when 
 he was himself tJiken away by Nebuchadnezzar (Dan. i. 1, 
 the inraMon having taken place the preceding year). Tho 
 present vision occurred B. C.5.3.S. when the captivity was 
 near its close. ''Jerusalem did not lie in ruins for seventy 
 years [the temple, however, certainly did] ; the expression is 
 not thus to be interpreted, but is chosen partly with regard 
 to the existing stste of Jerusalem, and partly with reference 
 to the words of Jerusalem." — Keil.\ 
 
 t [Keil combats at length the notion of Bleek and Ewald 
 that it was Daniel'i^ iinctiUimttj regarding the terminatioc 
 of the seventy years which moved him to prayer.] 
 
190 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 the former grossly wayward course of the peo- 
 ple as a whole, and in this concurrence of the 
 most incongruous emotions he sought and found 
 the proper plea to present before Gud. He does 
 not plead for ability merely to solve this numer- 
 ical riddle— the entire prayer contains no allu- 
 eion to this ; and what, indeed, is a mere num- 
 ber in the sight of God V The mystery of the 
 number is oppressive to the heart of this indivi- 
 dual supplicant who prays for light, and like- 
 wise to the whole nation, only because of other 
 and entirely different errors, darknesses, and 
 faults : and not until this supplicant has put 
 forth, all the powers of his soul in wrestling 
 with God for the removal of those general sins, 
 can he hope that the next uncertainty which 
 bows him down and troubles him shall be dis- 
 pelled by a gracious ray from the original source 
 of all light. Thus the moving stream of this 
 deeply agitated prayer gushes forth from a pro- 
 found sense that only when the most ear- 
 nest desire for renewed purification, forgive- 
 ness, and elevation at the hand of God shall 
 take possession of the people as a whole, 
 can Divine help be expected for the desolations 
 of Jerusalem, for which after all Daniel also 
 pleads. His words, resulting from the oppres- 
 sive darkne.s.s of the present and from a further 
 retrospect of all former history relating to' this 
 state, thus become at first the expression of a 
 true confession, and then of genuine confidence 
 and supplication. They become a sincere con- 
 fession in view of the present, vs. 4-10, but still 
 more so. vs. 11-14, in consequence of a retro- 
 spect of all fonner history, » hich is the more 
 proper in this connection, because the blame for 
 this exceeding great destruction and disintegra- 
 tion dates back, in the first instance, to the 
 older times ; but in vs. 15-19 the trustful prayer 
 and supplication for mercy become gradually 
 more fervent (at first in the name of the whole 
 people. V. 1.5 et seq., but ultimately in the name 
 of the individual supplicant himself, v. 17 et 
 seq.), until they cease, so to speak, in discon- 
 nected sighs, and as it exhausted with the last 
 glow of the fire (v. 19)." — However ar.propriate 
 we may find this analysis to be in general,* we 
 are nevertheless obliged to enter a decided pro- 
 test against the presumption of a Jlaccab^an 
 composition of the prayer, which forms its back- 
 ground. The proof of this presumption is 
 found by Ewald, Hitzig, v. Lengerke, etc., in 
 rhe similarity Vietween this praj'er and the peni- 
 tential prayer found in Ezra ix. 6 et seq. ; Neh. 
 i. 0-11 and L\. et seq., Bar. i. 14-ii. 19. which 
 unquestionably exists, and which they believe 
 indicates the imitation of those passages by an 
 alleged pseudo-Daniel, who lived at a much 
 later time. The points of contact referred to, 
 however, are in part merely indirect and acci- 
 dental, such as sprang naturally from the gen- 
 eral type of thought produced by the period of 
 the captivity and the age immediately subse- 
 quent to it. Other features belonging to them 
 in common are more specific and direct ; but in 
 these cases the prayer before us must be re- 
 garded as the original, instead of the others (as, 
 
 *Cf. the similar, but more simple analysis by Melancthon 
 which i« addutvU bekiw. in conm-ction with the hoiiiiletical 
 gnggestions. It di\ itlen the whole prayer iii:«f the two partt; 
 (1) of the cMnftiilo (ve. 4-14) and [i) of the con-iulatiu (vs. 
 13-19). 
 
 e.g., =^-En nra, vs. 7, 8, of. EzraLx. 7 ; r-Jn^io, 
 
 V. 9, cf. Neh. ix. 17; also the combination "cm 
 kings, princes, fathers, and all the people of the 
 land,' V. 6, which is exactly repeated in Neh. 
 ix. 32. and again in ix. 34, where [as here in v. 
 8] "all the people of the land " is omitted, etc.). 
 The more verbose and diffuse style of these 
 prayers, and especially of those found in Nehe- 
 miah and Baruch, is of itself sufficient to arouse 
 the suspicion at a glance, that Daniel's prayer, 
 with its comprehensive brevity and freshness, 
 must be the original (cf. particularly Z.ndel, 
 Kritisehe Unterss., etc., p. 191, whose e.'^position 
 has not been controverted in a single feature by 
 anything adduced by Ewald, p. 485). The fact, 
 moreover, that it represents the sufferings of 
 Israel as deserved, but does not allude with a . 
 syllable to the damnable character of the human 
 agent who executed the Divine punishment, nor 
 yet to the raging of Israel's oppressors, which 
 still continued, and to the Divine judgment 
 which was certainly impending over them — all 
 this is surely not conformable to the idea that 
 this section is a compilation made in imitation 
 of older models and dating as late as the Mac- 
 cabaean age. '" It is certainly conceivable that 
 an author writing in the midst of the sufferings 
 of the Maccabajan period, might occasionally 
 avail himself of the opportunity to remind the 
 people that their affliction was partly deserved, 
 because of their general sinful conduct toward 
 the God of their fathers, and thus attempt to 
 remove their bitterne.ss of heart m view of the 
 fact that God had permitted such misery to 
 come upon them. But it does not seem natural 
 that he should fail to strengthen the courage of 
 his nation by a direct reference, to say nothing 
 of a passing allusion, to the excessive wicked- 
 ness of the course of the persecuting despot, 
 the inaiHu:. at a juncture when they took their 
 stand upon the ground of that very law of theii 
 fathers for which they suffered. Still more un- 
 natural is it that here, where practical encour- 
 agement was needed in a lime of decisive and 
 terrilile conflicts, he should neglect this for the 
 mere purpose of keeping up a conformity to the 
 prayers of Ezra and Nehemiah, which originated 
 in circumstances of a tutiiUy lUffrreiit r/mrricter 
 and involved a reference to the enrlier fact of 
 the conquest and destruction of Jerusalem" 
 (Kracichfeld). Cf. in addition the remarks; in 
 the Introd. ^ 6, respecting the relation of the 
 book of Daniel to the %vritings of the period 
 subsequent to the captivity, which refer to it ; 
 and also the exposition of the several passages. 
 
 Verses 4-10. The. introduclioit. A ])eniten- 
 tin! cnnfoision ■/ da in the name of the people. 
 And I prayed .... made my confession, 
 and said, "'^''rn, "to confess, acknowledge," 
 us in V. 20 ; Ezra x. 1. — O Lord, the great and 
 dreadful God, keeping the covenant and 
 mercy. The same address to the mighty and 
 terrible God. but who is good .and merciful when 
 His conditions are met, occurs also in Xeh. i. 5 ; 
 with this difference only, that the article is care- 
 lessly omitted before "n, the second object of 
 1?3ir, in the latter passage, while in the present 
 instance and in Neh. ix. 32 and Deut. vii. 9, it 
 is retained.— Verse 5. We have sinned, and 
 have ccmmtted niquity, arid have done 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-27. 
 
 19'i 
 
 wickedly, and have rebelled. Properly, "and 
 
 sinned and rebelled." for the l in "uJ"!"")"^ is 
 probably to be retained ; its omission from 
 several JISS. is explained from the desire to as- 
 similate this passage to the parallels vs. 10 and 
 1 Kings viii. 47. The Hiphij y—::-r„ " to sin, 
 do wickedly." is used instead of the more 
 usual Kal y~- ; cf. xi. o'3 ; Neh. ix. 33 ; Psa. 
 cvl. G. — By departing from thy precepts ernd 
 from thy judgments. The infinitive -m is 
 used as a continuation of the v. Jiiiit., as in v. 
 11; cf. Neh. ix. 8. Vi ; Esth. iii. 13; ix. 1, 13, 
 IG ; vi. 9, etc. — Verse G. The prophets, which 
 spake in thy name to our kings, our princes, 
 and our fathers, etc. The " ' fathers " in this 
 place and in v. 8. as well as in Jer. xliv. 17, 21, 
 denote the ancestors of the Israel of that day, 
 including all but those who were of royal and 
 princel.v blood ; cf. the comprehensive " and to 
 all the people of the land," which immediately 
 follows. The same language occurs in Xeh. ix. 
 32, where, however, the " prophets and priests" 
 are also specially included, between the princes 
 and the fathers — an extension which clearly re- 
 veals the thought of a later age, and which ap- 
 pears the more superfluous, inasmuch as both pro- 
 phets and priests might unquestionably be com- 
 prehended in the tenn ■■ fathers " (cf. Judg. xvii. 
 10; xviii. 19). — Verse 7. O Lord, righteous- 
 ness belongeth unto thee, but unto us confu- 
 sion of faces, i.e., the confusion which depicts 
 itself on the face (by blushing) because of our 
 sin and the consequent disgrace and tribulation ; 
 cf. the familiar use of •,:;-i;, and the passage ! 
 Ezra ix. 7. which paraphrases the thought here 
 presented. — As at this day (so frcm time imme- j 
 morial). In ~^n f.'S' S does not indicate the 
 indefinite temporal sense of "about, at" (as v. 
 Lengerke, Hiiveniick, etc., think), but that of 
 comparison, as always in this form of speech ; 
 cf. v. 15 ; Neh. ix. 10; Jer. xxv. 18. etc. Con- 
 sequently the expression of God's righteousness 
 and the contrasted being put to shame or dis- 
 grace of Israel are both described as having al- 
 ways been apparent and as being still evident. — 
 To the men of Judah, and to the inhabitants 
 of Jerusalem. Vs. lG-18. which represent Jeru- 
 salem as being in ruins, show clearly that this 
 reference is not to inhabitants of Jerusalem 
 who were contemporarj' with the prophet iBert- 
 holdt, V. Lengerke, Stahelin. etc.). — Verse 8. O 
 Lord, to us belongeth confusion of face, etc. 
 cf. Jer. iii. 2.5 ; xiv. 20 ; Neh. ix. 34, etc. — Verse 
 9. Though (rather "for") we have rebelled 
 against him. ^;~~'5, as in v. 5. The clau.se 
 with ^3 serve« to explain why the mercy and 
 forgiveness of God (""in^ ;~ ; cf. Neh. ix. 17, and 
 nn'pp, Psa. cxxx. 4) are referred to. namely, be- 
 cause the children of Israel need merc.y, etc, 
 before all else, since they are guilty of rebellion 
 against God. The thought is still farther de- 
 veloped in the following verse. — Verse 10. 
 Neither (rather "and we") have we obeyed 
 the voice of the Lord our God, to walk in 
 his laws ; cf. Jer. xliv. 23 ; 1 Kings viii. 61 ; 
 Luke i. etc. The ri~"~ here mentioned differ 
 from the ,— r of the next verse merely in the 
 form of the word, the latter comprehending the 
 DOmmandments. i.e., the several manifestations 
 
 of God's will in a united whole. The prophet* 
 accordingly appear as the gunrdinna, teachers, 
 and enforcers of the law ; cf. Isa. xxi. 11, whers 
 the term - '^~ is applied to them ; Jer. vi. 
 17; Ezek. xxxiu. 2; Mic, vii. 4, etc., which de- 
 signate them by C"'ES- 
 
 Verses 11-14. Continuntinn* Rtference to 
 the past hinttjry of the nation. Therefore the 
 curse is poured upon us, and the oath. As in 
 other places the anger of God (Jer. xlii. 18 ; 
 xliv. 6 ; 2 Chron. xii. 7 ; xxxiv. 21, etc.), so here 
 the ciu'se which represents it, is characterized 
 as, so to speak, a fiery hail (Gen. xix. 34 ; Ex. 
 iv. 33 ; Nah. i. (>) which is poured out on the 
 sinner. It is, moreover, not a simple curse, but 
 stands connected with an oath, which supports 
 and strengthens it ; cf. Num. v. 21; Neh. x.30 ; 
 Psa. xcv. U; Heb. iii. 11, 18; vi. 17.— That is 
 written in the law of Moses the servant of 
 God. Lev. xxvi. Metseq. ; Deut. xxviii. 15 et 
 seq.; xxix. 19. Concerning the designation as 
 the servant of God, cf. Ex. iv. 10; xiv. 31 ; 
 Num. xi. 11 ; xii. 7 ; Josh. i. 2 ; Heb. iii. 5. See 
 also v. 5, %vhere the same predicate is applied 
 to the prophets. — Verse 12. And he hath con- 
 firmed his words, which he spake. C""!;", usu- 
 ally " to raise up," here sigmfies "to preserve 
 intact, to maintain, to confirm in act ; " cf. Num. 
 XXX. 14, 15.— Instead of "'"'"^1 the Keri haa 
 n^^, referring back to the curse, t. 11 ; but all 
 the ancient versions and also the parallels Neh. 
 ix. 8; Bar. ii. 3 support the plural, — Against 
 us, and against our judges ; literally "oij/us," 
 etc. ^-"^t'»-', a comprehensive term denoting 
 "our superiors" generally; cf. Psa. ii. 10; 
 cxlviii. II, and above, vs, G and 8, the separa- 
 tion of this idea into "kings and princes," — 
 By bringing upon us a great evil, etc.; rather, 
 " that he would bring upon us," etc.; cf. Lam. 
 i. 12: ii. 17; Ezek. v. 9. etc.— Verse 13. As it 
 is written in the law^ of Moses, edl this evU ia 
 come upon us; rather, "as all this evil is writ- 
 ten in the law of Moses, that is coine," etc.f 
 rs before "■;""-? serves to introduce the sub- 
 ject, as in 2 Kings x. 6 ; Jer. xiv. 4 ; Ezek. xhv. 
 O.J Concerning "i''^'?*? cf. Isa. xiv. 24 b. — Yet 
 made Ture not our prayer before the Lord our 
 God; rather, "yet conciliated we not the face 
 of the Lord," etc., — who prepares for our just 
 punishment. It appears from the following 
 verse that this neglect of propitiating his anger, 
 hence an obstinate and hardened persistence in 
 sin, was the immediate cause that brought mis- 
 fortune to the nation. With regard to '•'■^ '12n» 
 E which literally signifies ' ' to stroke one's 
 face, to smooth its stem fuiTows," cf. Ex. xxxii. 
 11 ; 1 Sam. xiii. 12 ; 1 Kings xiii. G, etc.— That 
 we might (or " should") turn from our iniqui- 
 ties, and understand (or " observe ") thy truth. 
 
 * [" The confession of sin disides itself into t\vo sectionfl. 
 Vers. 4-10 stat« the transgression and the )^iilt, while vera. 
 11-14 refer to the punishment from God for ttiis guilt. Ver. 
 o forms the introduction." — £"(?/.•] 
 
 t [.\?ainst this construction, however, is the difference il 
 
 ger.der of ^^P3 and ,"17"".] 
 
 X [The subject, however, is here rather "stated ab-wlut4l$ 
 j\s concerns all this evil, thufl it has como upon ns,"' — Kiiit.\ 
 
192 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 The truth of God which was not observed by 
 the people is His immutability, by Tirtue of 
 which He actually permits the punishment 
 threatened against the sinner to be inflicted — 
 hence His faithful adherence to His pledges 
 from a negative point of view, which is ident- 
 ical with His punitive justice (cf 1 John i. 9). 
 Hitrig's adoption of a hendiadys, "that observ- 
 ing thy faithfulness, we should turn from our 
 sins." is unnecessary. — Verse 14. Therefore 
 hath the Lord watched upon the evil, i.e., 
 '■ He cared for it, was concerned about it ; " cf. 
 Jer. i. 13 ; xliv. 27.— For the Lord our God is 
 righteous in all his vrorks Tsrhich he doeth ; 
 literally, " o« the (/round of all his works" 
 (vbr-^-is-jr); cf. Neh. ix. 33. nics -if», 
 " which he doeth," is aorist, like Jon. i. 14 (not 
 pret., "which he has done"). — For (rather 
 "and") we obeyed not his voice, i.e., despite 
 that we obeyed not ; cf. the similar expression, 
 with 'Pl sil, in V. 13. 
 
 Verses 15-19. Conclusion. The petition it- 
 self in its intensity and imjxfi'tunity, ichicJt in- 
 crease from sentence to sentence. That hast 
 brought thy people forth out of the land of 
 Egypt with a mighty hand; a glorious and 
 striking proof of the grace and mercy which 
 Sod formerly manifested towards his people ; cf . 
 Ex. XX. 2, etc.; Psa. cv.; cxiv. etc. — And hast 
 gotten thee renown, as at this day, i. e. , by that 
 wonderful act of deliverance hast acquired re- 
 nown that continues to this day ; cf. Jer. xxxii. 
 20; Neh. i. 10; ix. 10.— Verse 16. O Lord, 
 according to all thy righteousness .... let 
 thine anger . . . be turned away, i.&, accord- 
 ing to the displays of thy righteousness. mplSi 
 whether it is to be regarded as the plural of 
 rp~:i, as a majority hold, or as the plural of a 
 singular Pl^, which is Hitzig's view (cf. Isa. 
 xli. 10 ; xlii. 6, 21), certainly denotes "proofs 
 of righteoiisness" and not of mercy ; but it is 
 decidedly erroneous, and involves a gross weak- 
 ening of the sense of the Scriptures, to assign 
 the meaning "mercy" to the Old-Test term 
 '■ righteou.sness," in a single instance.* — From 
 thy city Jerusalem, thy holy mountain. The 
 opposition is the more appropriate, as in Daniel's 
 time nothing remained of Jerusalem but its site, 
 its mountain. — Jerusalem .... (are become) 
 a reproach to all that are about us j cf. Psa. 
 Ixxix. 4. — Verse 17. Now therefore, O our 
 God, hear. PIBSI is a conclusion from v. 16 
 i, and does not seiwe to resume v. 15. — The 
 prayer of thy servant, and his supplications. 
 Daniel applies the designation 'j'^?? to himself 
 in full consciousness of the mediatorial position 
 occupied by him, as by Moses and the earUer 
 prophets (of. vs. 11, 5). — Cause thy face to 
 shine upon thy sanctuary that is desolate. 
 The ruined temple here takes the place of the 
 lity and the mountain which were mentioned 
 Before , indicating that the prayer constantly in- 
 creases in fervor and importunity, and addresses 
 
 * [■' np"!- means the great deeds done by the Lord for 
 
 his people, among which the siprns and wonders aecompany- 
 tn'j rheir exodne from Efiypt take the first place, so far as 
 therein Jehovah gave proof of the righteouBness of hU cov- 
 enant promise." — K«tl.\ 
 
 God with motives whose effective charactei 
 steadily grows stronger. — For the Lord's sake, 
 i.e.., for tliine own sake, for thy name's sake 
 (v. 10). The noun is repeated, to the neglect of 
 the pronoun, for the sake of emphasis, as id 
 Gen. xix. 24, and as often in the usage of th« 
 New Test., e.g., Rom. xv. 5, ; Eph. ii. 21, etc. 
 — Verse 18. O my God, incline thine ear, 
 and hear; open thine eyes, etc. The Kethib 
 nnjDB is to be retained, in opposition to the 
 Niphalizing Keri npS ; cf . v. 19 ; Psa. xli. 5 ; 
 Isa, vii. 11; xxxii. 11. — The thought of the 
 phrase " incline thine ear " (cf. Psa. Ixxxviii. 3 ; 
 Ixxxvi. 1 ; cii. 3; cxvi. 2, etc.), is also frequently 
 expressed in the plural, " thine ears," e.g., Psa. 
 cxxx. 2 ; cf. Isa. Ux. 1 ; Ezek. viii. 18 ; Psa. 
 xxxiv. 16; 1 Pet. iii. 12; Jas. v. 4. Luther's 
 translation generally disregards this distinction, 
 and in almost every instance employs the plural, 
 even where the original has the singular. — And 
 behold our desolations (niaaiD, as in v. 26, 
 instead of the former " -"^J^, v. 2 ; cf. Isa. Ixi. 
 4) and the city w^hich is called by thy nEune, 
 literally, " upon which thy name is called ;" cf. 
 Jer. vii. 10 ; xxv. 29 ; xxxiv. 15 ; Psa. xlviii. 
 3, 9, etc. — For w^e do not present (lit. "lay 
 down ") our supplications before thee for our 
 righteousness. On the expression nn J^Bri) 
 " to lay down or pour out supplications at one's 
 feet," cf. V. 20; Jer. xxxviii. 26. ["The ex- 
 pression is derived from the custom of falling 
 down before God in prayer." — Keil.] On the 
 thought cf. Isa. Ivii. 12; Iviii. 2; Neh. ix. 19, 
 27, 31, etc.— Verse 19. O Lord, hear ; O Lord, 
 forgive ; O Lord, hearken, etc. The two-fold 
 repetition of the name Adonai, " Lord," denotes 
 the highly importunate and almost uncontrol- 
 lable character which the prayer assumes at the 
 close; cf. Isa. vi. o; Jer. vii. 4; xxii. 29. — 
 And do it, defer not. It cannot be proved that 
 Daniel intended to refer to the long delay at- 
 tendant on the fulfilment of Jereminh's pro- 
 phecy of the seventy weeks by the expression 
 "defer not" (cf. Psa. xl. 18; Ixx. 0), as Ewald 
 thinks. The expression is not suflBciently defi- 
 nite for this; and at any rate, nothing in favor 
 of the Maccabsean origin of this passage can be 
 deduced from it, — For thine own sake, O my 
 God ; for thy city and thy people are called 
 by thy name. The explanatory clause "for . . . 
 are called by thy name," implies that '|-.?'2? is 
 equivalent to ^?5e; V.^^ (Isa. xlviii. 9; Psa. 
 xxiii. 3; xxv. 11), and therefore signifies, "for 
 the sake of thy honor, of thy renown " (cf . on 
 V. 18). 
 
 Verses 20-23, Arrivnl of the angel Gabriel, 
 who was sent from God to interpret Jeremiah's 
 pro]iheci/ of the .terenty wee/iJi. And 'while I 
 wras speaking, and praying, etc. This does not 
 mean, "before I ceased praying"— for the 
 prayer had evidently reached its conclusion with 
 V, 19 — but rather, " I was concluding my re- 
 marks, I was just speaking the last words,'' etc, 
 Cf, Isa. xxviii. 4, — My supplication , . . for 
 the holy mounlain of my God ; properly, " on 
 the basis (or ground) of the holy mountain." 
 The preposition i', by virtue of its fundamental 
 meaning "over," may signify "against" (v 12) 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-37. 
 
 193 
 
 Ba well as '" for." According' to vs. IC and 17 
 the " holy mountain" includes the " holy city " 
 (Matt. iv. 5) and the temple. — Verae 21. Yea 
 (lit., "and"), while I was (yet) speaking in 
 prayer ; rhetorical epimakpsis or brief repeti- 
 tion, desi^rued to favor the connection — Even 
 (or ■' and " ) the man Gabriel, vrhom I had seen 
 in the vision at the beginning I or " formerly "j, 
 a reference to chap. viii. 15 et seq. , where the 
 designation of the angel as a "man" was ex- 
 plained as being derived from his human form. 
 Concerning Hinrz see on chap. viii. 1, — Being 
 caused to fly swiftly; rather, "come to me 
 with Hying speed. " The expression ^"? ^'^^ 
 is difficult. The rendering, " wearied with an 
 extended (,or rapid) course," which is adopted by 
 Ibu Ezra, Gesenius, etc. (substantially also by 
 Kranichfeld, " very wearj'") appears to be sup- 
 ported by the circumstance that the same root 
 py, which always signifies '"to weary, become 
 exhausted," lies at the bottom of both words. 
 The sense of "being wearied," however, will 
 not apply to angels generally, nor is it appropri- 
 ate in the present instance, where the "P? 
 'rs«2^ of the foUowing verse clearly alludes to 
 the rapidity of the angel's coming. This rapid 
 approach does not indicate that he ran swiftly 
 (Havemick, v. Lengerke, etc.), but denotes 
 hasty flying, with lightning speed, as may be 
 seen (1) from the root r;""". which is unquestion- 
 ably related to qi5, "to flj'," and therefore 
 may involve that idea; (2) from the testimony 
 of the ancient versions, which unanimously ex- 
 press the idea of flying rapidly (Sept. Td\ei 
 Os,Murvui: ; Theodotion, -eroueior ■ Vulg., cito 
 •eolans, and also Syrus) ; (3) from the fact that 
 the Scriptures frequently represent the angels 
 as flying -a trait which is not confined to the 
 New Test. (Rev. xiv. 6), but is found in the Old 
 Test. also, as Isa. vi. 2 et seq. ; Judg. xiii. 20 ; 
 Psa. civ. 4. etc. , demonstrate, despite the asser- 
 tion to the contrary of Hitzig. Havemick. and 
 others icf. al.so JIatt. xxviii. 3 etc.).* — About 
 the time of the evening oblation, or about sun- 
 down (Num. xxviii. 4). This theocratic and 
 Levitical designation of time finds a simple ex- 
 planation in the prophet's yearning recollection 
 of the sacrifice that was offered at that hour in 
 the temple-worship, and therefore does not in 
 any way militate against the belief that this 
 chapter originated during the captivity. It is 
 
 * [Keil holds that these terms, Ciy^S C]??3, " belong 
 from their position to the relative clause, or specially to 
 ■'n'^5<'l {I had fteen), not to "Syi, since no ^ound can be 
 
 perceived for placing the adverbial idea before the verb." 
 This is also countcnnnceii by the Masoretic intcrpunrtion. 
 Keil accordingly refers the phrase to Daniel himself, as being 
 utterly exhausted; aud compares eh. viii. 1" et seq., 27, 
 " because Gabriel, at his former Cijming to liim, not only 
 helped to strengthen him, bntalso pave him understanding." 
 etc. The Pi>ithet, however, as applied to Daniel, seems verr 
 Inept and vague here, especially following the definiLe phrase 
 *' at first." Stuart maintains that PT^ essentially nu'aiis 
 
 "T 
 
 to hasten, and that it bears this signification here : but the 
 Dsage of the word does not sustain this souse. Under these 
 circumstances we can probably do no better than, with our 
 author, to abide by the interpretation of the old translators, 
 and regard both terms either as directly from S^J or from 
 D^^ a cognate of that root.] 
 
 no more remarkable, as uttered by the captive 
 Daniel in the reign of Darius Medus, than it 
 would be if a Christian youth of the Middle Ages 
 who had fallen into the power of the Saracens, 
 should, after being separated from scenes of 
 Christian worship for many years, still have 
 spoken of matins, or vespers, or the enmpletorium. 
 Cf. supra, on chap. vi. 11. — Verse 32. And he 
 informed me, or "gave me to tmderstand." 
 Thus it is rendered, correctly, by most exposi- 
 tors ; cf. 1^3n in chap. viii. 16. Hitzig's ver- 
 sion, " and he became aware " — namely that the 
 time of evening sacrifice was not yet past, aud 
 therefore that Daniel had just finished his even- 
 ing prayer — is entirely too forced. — I am now 
 come iorth, namely from God, before whom 
 Gabriel usually stands (Luke i. 19 ; cf. also Job 
 i. 12), That he should noio come forth (nPTi 
 like John xiv. 11) denotes that Daniel's importu- 
 nate prayer had caused his being sent ; cf. the 
 next verse. — Verse 33. At the beginning of 
 thy supplications the ccmmandment (rather, 
 " a word ") came forth, i. e. , a decree '■"^^'^^ as in 
 Job iv. 13 ; Isa. ix. 7, etc.)intended to comfort 
 and encourage thee (aud consequently to answer 
 thy prayer). It was not " a commnndment," for 
 this could only have been laid on the angel, and 
 not on Daniel, who is nevertheless exhorted '"to 
 attend to the word " (^^'^3). Hitzig renders it 
 correctly, "a decree, an oracle, which is re- 
 corded verbally in vs. 24-37." — For thou art 
 greatly beloved. m^'On, synonymous with 
 mi'^n"™^S, "man of costlinesses, of joys," 
 i.e., well-beloved, a favorite (Luther, "beloved 
 man, beloved and precious;" Ewald, " a loved 
 sweet one."). The "»»'/• desideriorum " of 
 Jerome is misleading ; for "il^''3n certainly 
 does not relate to the prophet's anxiety to under- 
 stand the mysteries of God {'^ quod pro desitlerio 
 tuo Dei secretu aiidire merenrix, et esse cunscius 
 futurormn"). With far greater correctness Je- 
 rome himself compares, in remarks immediately 
 preceding, the predicate ~']'!"'~'^, "the favorite 
 of God," which was applied to Solomon (3 Sam. 
 xii. 'i~>) ; and several moderns have also adduced 
 the cognomen of Titus, "amor et deliciir yciieris 
 liiiiiuiiii,'" with equal ju.stice.*— Therefore under- 
 stand thou (or " observe ") the matter ( "word " ), 
 and consider the vision. " The transition from 
 -p; to yizr\ denotes a slight variation of mean- 
 ing in the fundamental idea. The difference is 
 not greater than exists between l^'l itself and 
 ns-;^, tlie latter of which = •^iTn, ' revela- 
 tion,' the substance or soul of the spok<".n word " 
 (Hitzig). t 
 
 ♦ [" The sentence, 'for thou art a ni.in c^reatly beloved,* 
 docs not contain the rtason for Gabriel's coinin;^ in haste, 
 but for the principal thought of the verse, the going forth, 
 of the word of God imme.iiately at the beginning of Daniel's 
 l)rayer." — A'eiV]. 
 
 + L**~i5"l?2n stands not for revelation, but is the rwio#% 
 the appearancti of the angul by whom the word of God w.ia 
 communicated to the prophet. rii<"l'*3 is acconlingly not 
 
 the contents of the word Hpoken, but the form of its coni- 
 mnnication to Daniel. To both— the word and the form of 
 its revelation — Daniel must g.ve heed. This revela:ion was^ 
 moreover, not comuiunicated to him in a vision, hut while 
 In hifl natural cousciousaeas.** — KeU.^ 
 
]9i 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Verses24-27. The interpretat' on of the seventy 
 weeks of yeari>. Seventy weeks are deter- 
 mined. Literally, are " cut off ; " for this is the 
 proper meaning of ~rin:, in like manner as V'tU 
 primarily signifies "to cut, to sharpen to a 
 point," and then " to conclude, determine ; " cf. 
 Job xir. 5 ; Isa. x 22 ; 1 Kings xx. 40. The 
 Vulgate, influenced by t ra/io/JcjiSz/ffni', Matt. xxiv. 
 32, has " abbreriatf. Kiirit,'" which conflicts with 
 the context. Hitzig, on the contrary, is correct 
 when he rejects the idea of "dividing" into 
 two sections, which might seem to accord with 
 V. 2.0 et seq. . and instead applies the cutting off 
 to the "sum of the time" as a whole, in conse- 
 quence of which he paraphrases, " a section of 
 time (consisting) of seventy years is appmnted." 
 -The construction is the familiar one of the im- 
 personal passive with an accusative (cf. Gen. 
 XXXV. 20 ; Ex. xiii. 7 ; Isa. xxi. 3 ; also supra, 
 on V. 13). Entire!}' too artificial is the view 
 which Wieseler adopts, that- "^T in v. 33 is the 
 subject, while the seventy weeks form the pre- 
 dicate — " the word is cut off at seventy weeks." 
 This view is opposed further, by the fact that 
 ^rn; cannot in this place denote the idea of 
 " being abbreviated. "—-■'J'Sr 3"?:'f , "seventy 
 weeks." This cannot possibly denote seventy 
 sveeks in the ordinary sense, or 400 days; for 
 the number has an obvious relation to the sev- 
 enty years of Jeremiah, v. 2, and the brief limit 
 of 400 days is not suited to serve as a mystical 
 paraphrase of the period of three and a half 
 years. Moreover, according to the descriptions 
 in chapters vii. and viii., the three and a half 
 years were throughout a period of suffering 
 and oppression, while in v. 25 et seq. the lat- 
 ter and more extended subdivision (amoimting 
 to sixty-two weeks) of the seventy weeks is 
 characterized as being comparatively free from 
 sufferings. Finally, the three and a half years 
 evidently reappear in v. 27, m the form of 
 the •' half -week " during which the sacrifices 
 and oblations were to cease, etc. ; and this 
 undeniable identity of the small fraction at 
 the end of the seventy weeks with ,the three 
 and a half years of tribulation, heretofore 
 described, removes it beyond the reach of 
 doubt that the seventy weeks are to be re- 
 garded as sme.nty weeks of years, and there- 
 fore as an amplification of the seventy years 
 of Jeremiah. Such a prophetic or mystical 
 transformation of the seventy years into as 
 many periods of seven years each is not unpar- 
 alleled in the usage of the ancients; cf., e.g., 
 the remarks of Mark Varro, in Aul. Gellius, 
 iV. A. III., 10: ''Sejnm nndecimain annoriim 
 hebdomadi-m ingressum esse et ad evm diem septit- 
 a(/inta hedfimadds librorum conscripsisse ; " also 
 Aristotle, PoKt., VII. 16 ; Censorin., dedie naUdi, 
 C. 14. It was, however, peculiarly adapted to 
 the prophet's purpose, and was especially intel- 
 ligible to his readers, inasmuch as the Mosaic 
 law (Lev. xxv. 2, 4 et seq.; xxvi. 34, S.l. 43; 
 cf. 3 Chron. xxxvi. 31) had design.ated every 
 seventh year as a sabbath of the land, and had 
 introduced the custom of dividing the years 
 into hebdomads, which thus became familiar to 
 every individual io the Jewish nation during all 
 subsequent ageis. The thought that instead of 
 •evenly years seven times seventy were to 
 
 elapse before the theocracy should be restored 
 in all its power and significance, and that, con- 
 sequently, an extended period of delay should 
 precede the advent of the Messianic sera, is " an 
 integral feature in the mode of conception 
 which prevaOs throughout the book " (Kranich- 
 feld). It should also be observed that the idea 
 weeks, as the principal idea, is placed before thq 
 numeric^d idea for emphasis : " weeks (of years, 
 not simple years), seventy in number, are deter- 
 mined," etc. The masculine form of the noun 
 occurs also in chap. x. 2, 3 ; cf. Gen. xxix. 27 
 et seq.; Lev. xii. 5.* — Upon thy people and 
 upon thy holy city. "Thy" is used in the 
 sense of ''near thy heart, dear and precious 
 unto thee;" cf. v. 30; chap, xii 1. As the 
 people of Jehovah (v. 10) is also Daniel's peo- 
 ple (v. 30), so is Jerusalem ?iis city, his favorite 
 city. It may have been, in addition, his native 
 place ; but this circumstance cannot be deter- 
 mined from this passage ; see the Introd. § 3, 
 at the beginning. The predicate " holy " was 
 deserved by Jerusalem, even when in ruins, and 
 without regard to the length of the period dur- 
 ing which it was desolate, since by virtue of all 
 its history in the past, and in view of its impor- 
 tance for God's kingdom in the future, it was 
 absolutely " the holy city," cf. vs. lU-20; Isa. 
 lii. 1 ; Matt. iv. 5. — To finish the transgres- 
 sion and to make an end of sins. The infini- 
 tives with '? which follow, to the end of the 
 verse, "direct attention, with a view to com- 
 fort, to the blessed experiences connected with 
 the close of the period in which the people and 
 the city were then languishing." thus denoting 
 from the outset that the Vision is concerned 
 with the realization of the Messianic hopes of 
 Israel, in the time when " Zion's warfare " shall 
 be accomplished (Isa. xl. 2 et seq.)— in short, 
 that the prophetic remarks of the angel acquire 
 a Messianic character from this point. — Theo- 
 dot., Hengstenb.. v. Leng., Wiesel., Kninichf., 
 etc., punctuate the Kethib J'^Bn sbsi, and 
 read " to seal np the transgression." which, ac- 
 cording to V. Lengerke, signifies " to forrjicc the 
 transgression," and according to Kranichfeld, 
 means "to hinder or restrain the sin." The 
 former rendering, however, would lead to an 
 unsuitable tautology with V' lESb ; and the 
 idea of '■restraining {coiiibere) sin" would be 
 more properly expressed by i^^ ; cf. Job xiv. 
 17; Hos. xiii. 2. The idea of "restraining," 
 moreover, has not been presented by a single 
 one of the more ancient translators, not even 
 by Theodotion. It is better, therefore, to read 
 xijb with a majority of modems, and to re- 
 gard this as standing for nbwi, expressive of the 
 idea of completing or filling up. This view is 
 also supported by the parallel C.7n,1, as it 
 should be read, with the Keri and all the 
 ancient versions, excepting that of Theodotion; 
 cf . chap. viii. 23 ; Isa. xvi. 4 ; xxxiii. 1 , etc. 
 
 * [Keil mnintninR that neither the gender nor position of 
 C^y-t) is here significant : but it is certain that the masc. 
 plnr. nowhere else occurs, except at chap. x. 2, 3. where it 
 is .iefined by the ndtlition of C'Ja"^. rfn.V". E\en Stuart, 
 who dues not apply this prophecy to the Messianic age. can- 
 didly admits that /teptades of years can only be designated 
 by this expression.! 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-27. 
 
 I'Jo 
 
 The " making- full of sin," i'.S. , of the measure 
 of sin, is substantially identical with the finish- 
 ing of the transgression, from which it differs 
 only in expressing the idea more forcibly. The 
 Kethib -Fn^l (similarly Theodotion also: 
 riw a(j>payiaai dfiap-iai;) is decisively rejected 
 by the single fact that cnik^i^ " and to seal 
 up," is repeated in this passage, and in a sense 
 that differs materially from what it would beiir 
 in the former half of the verse. It is certainly 
 possible to refer (with Kranichfeld) to chap, vi, 
 18; xii. 4; Deut. xx.xii. 84: Job ix. 7; xxxvii. 
 7, in support of this rendering, which would 
 perhaps add to S<-r?, "to seal up, to hinder," 
 the idea of a still more effective sealing up or 
 of a more complete banishment. The sense of 
 " filling up," however, which is secured by chap, 
 viii. 23, and by which the language of the whole 
 verse gains a harmonious variety and multifor- 
 mity, is far more likely to prove correct ; and, in 
 addition, the .substitution of DrnbT for rrnbl in 
 the preceding line would, in and of itself, be an 
 exceedingly probable error on the part of a 
 copyist, which might be easily comprehended. — 
 To make reconciliation (rather "expiation") 
 for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting right- 
 eousness. These closely united memljers stand 
 related to each other as antecedent and conclu- 
 sion, or as a negative and a positive statement 
 of the same fact. They form the central point 
 of the acts of gracious blessing wTought by God. 
 and both are introduced nlike by the two infini- 
 tive clauses which precede, and appear to be 
 conjoined and brought to a common conclusion 
 by those which follow. According to this, 
 tliree pairs of actions, or three double numbers, 
 were designed in this verse, as Gesenius, Mau- 
 rer, and Hitzig correctly observe ; and for this 
 reason the disjunctive accent i- seems less suit- 
 able after '15 than it would have been after 
 nKHn. The intimate collocation of V" 1E2 
 with " PI'-? S*^-" is warranted, further, by 
 the fact that, without doubt, God is regarded 
 as the efficient cause of both these results, and 
 particularly of the "expiation" (literally "cov- 
 ering over ") of sin ; cf. Psa. xxxii. 2 ; Ixv. 4, 
 etc. — Righteousness, which is a characteristic 
 of the Messianic period in other prophecies also 
 (cf. Isa. liii. 11 ; Jer. xxxiii. 15 et seq.; Mai. 
 iii. 20), is here described as " everlasting," in 
 harmony with the eternal character of Messiah's 
 kingdom ^cf. chap. ii. 44; vii. 18. 27; Isa. li. 
 5-8). It is of course not to be limited to the 
 sphere of a merely extenial ( Levitical and theo- 
 cratic) righteousness, as even Hitzig acknowl- 
 edges, when he observes that external righteous- 
 ness cannot be regarded as separate from in- 
 ternal in any case. — And to seal up vision and 
 prophet (marg.), and to anoint the most holy 
 (rather, "a holy of holies"). The relation be- 
 iweea these final members of the whole series 
 of Messianic results to be secured is that of 
 the internal to the external, of the ethical to 
 the ritual, or of religion to worship. Kranich- 
 fcld's remark is incorrect, when he observes that 
 the third pair in the gracious series occupies an 
 inverse relation to the first, in view of its form, 
 inasmuch as the latter proceeds from the ante- 
 
 cedent to the consequent, while that method is 
 here reversed (namely, the sealing of prophecy 
 precedes the anointing of the most Holyi." But 
 Hitzig, Bleek, etc., are no less at fault, when 
 they assume that the anointing of the most 
 Holy is mentioned after the sealing of prophecy, 
 and at the end of the entire series, because it 
 liad not been foretuld by Jeremiah, while the 
 other features had, directly or indirectly, formed 
 the subject of the Messianic promises with that 
 prophet. The opinion that the " sealing of vi- 
 sion and prophet " denotes specifically the con- 
 firmation of Jeremiah's prophecy respecting the 
 seventy years (as v. Lengerke, Wieseler, Kamp- 
 hausen, etc., also hold) in chap. xxv. and xxix. 
 is wholly untenable, since the terms II'H and 
 »^?:, without the article, evidently do not refei 
 to any particular prophet or prophecy, but 
 rather to the prophetic institution and its visions 
 relating to the prospective salvation in general. 
 The idea is, that everything in the form of pro- 
 phetic visions and predictions which had been 
 produced in the course of theocratic develop- 
 ment from the time of Moses (S"':: and "("'n 
 are collective and general; cf. chap. xi. I'll 
 should receive " sealing," i.e.. Divine confirma- 
 tion and recognition, in the form of actual ful- 
 filment (cf, 1 Kings xxi. 8; Esth. viii. 8).j 
 Jeremiah's prophecy cannot be intended, eithei 
 exclusively, or even by way of pre-eminence (as 
 Ewald thinks), because it does not mention the 
 expiation of s n and the establishing of everlast- 
 ing .Messianic righteousness, which nevertheless 
 are here particularly emphasized. The sense is 
 clearly general, similar to that found in New- 
 Test, passages like Acts iii. 19 ; x. 4:^ ; 2 Cor. i. 
 20, etc. — The prospect of an "anointing of the 
 most Holy," which is presented at the close, or 
 
 * ["The Bix statements (represented by the intinitives 
 with *) are divided by Maurer. Hitzig. Ivranichfeld. and 
 others:, into three pas-sages of two members e;ich, thu.« : 
 After the e.vpiratioii of seventy weeks theie ?hall ( 1 ) be com- 
 pleted the measure of sin : (2j the sin shall be covered and 
 righteousness brought in : (y) the prophecy shall be fulfilled, 
 and the temple, which was desecrated by Ajitiochus, shall 
 again be consecrated. The Maaoretos, however, seem to have 
 already conceived of this threefold division by placing the 
 Athnaeh under D'^cbi' pTIfc (the fourth clause) ; but it 
 
 resta on a false construction of the individual members, 
 especially of the first two passages. R.ither we have two 
 three-membered sentences before us. This appears evident 
 from the arrangement of the six statements. I.e.. that the 
 first three statements treat of the taking aw( y of sin, and 
 thus of the bringing in of everlasting righteou.' ness, with its 
 consequences, and thus of the positive deliverance, and in 
 such a maimer that in both clas.ses the three members stand 
 in reciprocal relation to each other : the fourth statement 
 corresponds to the first, the fifth to the second, the sLxth to 
 the third — the second and the fifth present even the same verb 
 2r^n." — Keil. It is not necessary, however, to assume that 
 these results were all to await the expiration of this entire 
 period : they were only to be in the process of taking place 
 during or after it : iu a word, this was to be the final period 
 of the Jewish economy, in or at the e'nd of u hich all these 
 consimimations were to take place.] 
 
 t [" But for this figurative use of the word ' to seal ' no 
 proof-pas-^ges are adducted from the O. T. .\dti to this 
 that the word cannot be used here in a ditTerent sense from 
 that in which it is used in the second passage. The sealing 
 of the prophecy corresponds to the sealing of the transgres- 
 sion, and must be similarly understood. The prophecy ia 
 sealed when it is laid under a seiU. so thnt it can no longer 
 actively show itself '" {Keil) : and corresixintlingly transgres- 
 sion is sealed, when its further demonstration is prevented 
 In short, both are to be suppressed after that dale ; trana- 
 prcssion by the Atoning Sacrifice^ and pro;ihecy by the cloM 
 of the O.-T. canon.] 
 
196 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 rather, " unto an anointed one, a prince," etc. 
 The expression "1^1 Stsn corresponds to S^'J 
 13"T at the beginning of the angel's remarks, 
 and therefore probably denotes the promulga- 
 tion of a Divine decree rather than of a royal 
 edict (as Dereser, Hiivemick. Weigl, etc., con- 
 ceive with refere.nce to the edict of Artaxerxep 
 Longinianus, ivlich commanded that the re- 
 building of Jerusalem should be commenced). 
 The latter idea would require that '^^'^ should 
 be connected with -;-;, in order to its clear 
 expression ; and the observation of Hitzig is 
 probably correct : "Gabriel could not speak so 
 objectively, and with composure, of the decree 
 of a heathen king that would imply his right to 
 dispose of the holy city ; such a decree would 
 no more be a I^T in the mind of a theocrat 
 than the confederacy in Isa. viii. 12 would be a 
 ^"fp-" — Moreover, ^^-j cannot denote a decree 
 at all, but rather a prophetic statement, an 
 oracle, which in this instance promises the 
 restoration of Jerusalem. This Divine predic- 
 tion concerning the rebuilding of the holy city 
 cannot differ materially from the repeated pro- 
 phecy by Jeremiah (chap. xxv. and xxix.), 
 which foretold the desolation of Jerusalem dur- 
 ing seventy years, and the subsequent restora- 
 tion of the exiles and punishment of their Chal- 
 dsean oppressors. Although the restoration of 
 the theocracy, and especially the rebuilding of 
 Jerusalem, are not expressly mentioned in the 
 latter prophecies, these features are yet impli- 
 citly included in the prediction, chap. xxv. 12 et 
 seq., concerning the judicial visitation of the 
 Chaldaeans and the re-adoption of Israel ; and 
 in chap. xxix. 10 the gracious visitation of the 
 Jews is described dii-ectly as a restoration to 
 their place, i.e., their country. It is not neces- 
 sary, therefore, to seek for a prophecy by Jere- 
 miah that predicts the rebuilding of Jerusalem 
 in more literal and explicit terms. If such a 
 passage be found in Jer. xxx. 18, or xxxi. 38 
 (Hitzig, Ewald, Bleek, Kamphausen, etc.), it is 
 nevertheless unnecessary to assume that Daniel 
 here refers only to that prophecy (which was 
 probably composed after the destruction of 
 Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar, B.C. 588, ac- 
 cording to chap. xxxi. et seq.). It is more 
 probable that our prophet made no chronologi- 
 cal distinction between Jer. xxix. (a letter com- 
 posed about B.C. 598) and the more extended 
 prophecy in chap. xxx. and xxxi. They (and 
 also chap. xxv. ) were probably regarded by him 
 as belonging, upon the whole, to the same 
 period and the same circle of prophecies, name- 
 ly, that of the overthrow of the kingdom of 
 Judah which covered eighteen to twenty years, 
 beginning with the first conquest of Jerusalem 
 by Nebuchadnezzar in the fourth year of Jehoi- 
 akim, or B.C. (!05, and ending with the destruc- 
 tion of the city in B.C. 588. His starting-point 
 for the calculation of the seventy years thus 
 naturally became uncertain and vacillating, 
 and for that very reason became the inciting 
 cause of the prophecy under consideration. See 
 supra, on v. 2.* — It would conflict with the 
 
 * [Few will be disposc<l to ndopt njl interpretation that 
 conies to so vai^ie a conclusion, when the very object 
 of these added verses is evidently ti furnish a deftnitc 
 
 rather of a most Holy ( p '•^"IP, without the 
 article) is evidently a solemn act of worship, 
 which is substantially equivalent to the restora- 
 tion of the theocratic worship as a whole. It 
 is the anointing with oil or theocr.itic consecra- 
 tion of the mcrificiid nltnr of the New Covenant, 
 of the IMessianic community of the redeemed, 
 the pure sanctuarj', which shall no more be pro- 
 faned, that, according to chap. viii. 14 (cf. vii. 
 25 ; ix. 17), shall take the place of the desecrated 
 aud defiled altar of the Old Dispensation. From 
 Lev. viii. 11, comp. with Ezek. xliii. 20, 2(5, 
 where a consecration of the altar of burnt-of- 
 ferings by means of an act of anointing is de- 
 scribed (in Lev.. 1. c, with oil, in Ezek., 1. c, 
 with the blood of the sacrifice), and also from 
 Ex. xxix. 37 ; xxx. 29 ; xl. 10, where the sacri- 
 ficial altar is expressly designated as the — ~p 
 ^"r 7P. it is evident that the altar of sacrifice is 
 here intended, instead of the holy of holies in 
 the temple at large, or even the Messiah himself 
 {sinictus sanctorum), as Syrus, the Vulgate, and 
 others suppose. — The prophecy under considera- 
 tion has been twice fulfilled, — at first externally 
 and in a literal sense, by the actual restoration 
 of the Old-Test, services in the temple with 
 their bloody offerings of animals, which came 
 to pass three years after they had been inter- 
 rupted by Antiochus Epiphaues in the Maccabae- 
 an age (1 Mace. iv. 54-59),* and afterward in the 
 antitype by the historical introduction of the 
 more perfect sanctuary and worship of the New 
 Covenant, whicli were likewise foretold by the 
 prophet Zechariah ichap. iii. 9) and whose sacri- 
 ficial altar is Christ, having become such through 
 the cross which he anointed and consecrated by 
 his own exalted priestly saci'ifice and blood, f 
 
 Verse 25. Know therefore and imderstand. 
 This exhortation is intended to introduce the 
 more detailed explanation of the relation of the 
 seventy year-weeks to the yet unexpired seventy 
 years, and also to the subject of the earlier 
 theocratic promises which follows. It directs 
 the notice of both the hearer and the reader to 
 the importance of the disclosures now to be 
 made, and to the duty of subjecting them to 
 serious and thoughtful consideration ; cf. o 
 01 a; (n.)rrm.ii' jwi-i.i, Matt. xxiv. 15. — From the 
 going forth of the commandment (or " word ") 
 to restore and to build Jerusalem, imto the 
 Messiah the Prince shall be seven iireeks ; 
 
 • [Keil justly objects to this interpretation of the fulfil- 
 ment that " it is opi'osed by the acttca! fact, that neither in 
 the consecration of Zerubbabel's temple, nor at the reconse- 
 cr.'ition of the altar of burnt-offering desecrated by Antio- 
 chus, is mention made of any anointing. According to the 
 definite, uniform tradition of the Jews, the holy anointing 
 oil did not e.vist during the time of the second temple." The 
 term "anoint," however, may here be taken in the meta- 
 phorical sense of redeJUatint/.] 
 
 t [Keil likewise, after adducing several exegetical reasons 
 against the interpret.ition oi '• most holy " here as referring 
 to the temple, altar, or any of the sacred utensils, finally 
 concludes that "the reference is to the anointing of a new 
 eanctuar>', temple, or most holy place." This, however, 
 makes the wliole expression metaphorical, while all the as- 
 sociated phrases are taken in a .sense more or less literal. It 
 seems to us that the i-ejection of the old reference of the 
 language here to the Messiah, on the ground of the absence 
 of the article, is rather hasty : for surely the words may 
 jti-tly be rendered " to anoint a most holy " (one as well as 
 tUln^/\. and thus really refer to the inauguration of the Head 
 of the New Dispensatinn. The expression is doubtless to be 
 explained in conformity with the simila*" phraseology of 
 the verses immediately loll-.iwing. 1 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-27. 
 
 197 
 
 general nsage to take -''™V? ii an adverbial 
 sense and to connect it with the following verb, 
 no as to obtain the sense "to build Jerusalem 
 again," since only ;:i™ in the Kal is used to 
 designate our •• again" {rarsus, iteruin) in other 
 places (£ind also here, in the latter half of the 
 verse). Wieseler's rendering, "to lead back," 
 i. f . , the people, is opposed in part by the harsh- 
 ness of such an objective supplement, and partly 
 by the impossibility of showing that this pas- 
 Rage refers directly and exclusively back to Jer. 
 xmx. 10, where -■'■w~J certainly occurs in the 
 sense of "to lead back." The second half of 
 the verse, moreover, refers only to a rebuilding 
 of the city {~~:::/l :1CP), and not to a reduc- 
 tio pojJiiU erulii, which is decisive in favor of a 
 restoration, i.e., of bringing back out of the 
 Rtate of desolation; cf. Ezek. xvi. 55. — Who is 
 designated by 1^31 Il'^STp, the "anointed one, 
 the prince " (or, as it may be rendered with 
 equal correctness, the " anointed prince ; " cf. 
 Ewald, Le/irb., p. 741), in the sense of the pro- 
 phet ? Certainly not the Messiah of Isrml in an 
 immediate and primary .<^ense, as the Jewish 
 and orthodox exegesis has generally lield, do%\Ti 
 to the latest time. He would scarcely have 
 been referred to as " an anointed prince" with- 
 out the article ; nor would Daniel have intro- 
 duced Him after the brief interval contained in 
 the iirst seven of the seventy year-weeks, since 
 he always places the advent of the Me.ssiah in 
 the distant future, when the fourth and last 
 world-kingdom shall fall — which is especially 
 apparent in chapters ii, and vii. * The reference 
 is probably to a prince contemporar.v with Dan- 
 iel and already well known, who was destined 
 to exert a powerful influence in favor of the 
 theocracy, and to fulfil the special Divine pur- 
 pose relating to the Israel of that day (about 
 forty-nine or fifty years after the destruction of 
 
 chronolof^Ciil determination of the period spok<*n of. lyeil, 
 a1thoilc;ta no advocate of a strict literal fulfilment of thip 
 passage, justly remarks that '*all such references {to Jere- 
 miah) are excluded by the fact that the an:.iel names the 
 comm:uidment for the restoration of Jerusalem as the tei'- 
 mt>tu.i a qno for the seventy weeks, and could thus only 
 mean a word of (rod whoso ^oins forth was somewhere de- 
 termined, or could be determined, just as the appearance of 
 the Anoint*'d Prince is named as the termination of the 
 seventy weeks. Accordingly. ' the going forth of the com- 
 mandment to restore,' etc, must be a factum coming into 
 visibility, the time of which could without difficulty be 
 known — a word from God respecting the restoration of 
 Jerusalem, which went forth by means of a man at a defi- 
 nit*" time, and received an observable historical execution." 
 This last remark effectually disposes of the author's exegesis 
 regarding "^1 here.] 
 
 • [This last argument is certainly out of place, for Daniel 
 does not place the personage in question at an interval of 
 only seven weeks, but of seven and sixty-two weeks, i.e., all 
 but at the close of the entire period of the prophecy. So 
 likewise in the next verse. .\s to the objection against the 
 reference to the Messiah, both here and in the following and 
 preceding verses, on the ground of the absentx^ of the arti- 
 cle, this is greatly, if not wholly, made up by the conntriic- 
 ttoii oi the noun with an idjunct, w^hich in Hebrew often 
 makes a word really deliuite. so that the article is readily 
 dispensed with. Indeed, the simple term JT^CS, MtmsUih, 
 even anarthrous, is so emphatic that none but the Great 
 Prophet of Dent, xviii. IS (where K"^— 3 is in like manner 
 
 rendered definite only by the adjunct term) can well be 
 thought of. Accordingly, those interpreters who have for- 
 saken this old and widely-.accepted reference, have signally 
 failed to adduce any other historical personage to whom it 
 can be fitly applied.] 
 
 Jerusalem I — hence, without doubt, to Cyrns, 
 who is designated as Jehovah's Ma.shiach in Isa. 
 xlviu. 1 also. Cf. Kranichfeld, p. 327: "Ra- 
 ther, the person referred to appears as a differ- 
 ent prince, who has a theocratic dominion, and 
 is endowed with the spirit of Jehovah for his 
 calling ; cf 1 Sam. xvi. 13 et seq. ; x. 1. U et 
 seq. But since the special mention of the fea- 
 ture of anointing in the case of the ordinarj-, 
 i.e., non-Messianic national kings who came in 
 contact with Israel would be strange, it is pro- 
 per to search for a heathen prince, who became 
 prominent as the promoter of the theocracy, 
 and especially so, because of his relation to the 
 Messianic hopes before referred to. As such a 
 one, and unique in this respect, the theocratic 
 literature conceives of Kortsh. the victor from 
 the east who effected the return of Israel from 
 the exile. He is expressly designated in Isa. 
 xlv. 1 as the Mashiach of Jehovah. He appears 
 in the first year of the reign of Darius Medus 
 over Babylon, therefore at the time of the 
 vision, and was then at least the victorious 
 leader of the armies of Darius. We are com- 
 pelled to decide for him, in interpreting the 
 -,-". n"'™?a of Daniel's description. He was 
 regarded as the executor of the will of Jehovah 
 already referred to, agreeably to the description 
 which immediately follows, .and in harmony with 
 the theoratic hopes which Israel based on him. 
 Having realized other prophetic expectations, 
 the author regarded him af. the agent who should 
 bring about the restoration and the rebuilding 
 of Jerusalem ; and consequently, the writer ex- 
 pressly confirms these expectations, since he 
 merely separates from them the direct Messianic 
 idea, which he finds himself obliged to refer to 
 a more distant future, in view of the course of 
 political events." * — The " Mashiach Nagid," 
 
 • IKeil'B remarks on this point seem to us so satisfactory 
 that we transcribe them in full. ''The words "113! n^'w^ 
 are not to be translated an anointed one, a pytnce (Ber- 
 tholdt) : for n'^'.r'i cannot be on adjective to ^^3!, be- 
 cause in Hebr. the ailjective is placed after the snlistantive, 
 with few exceptions which are inapplicable to this case ; cf. 
 in Ewald's Lehrb., % 29.3 b. Nor can n'^ir?3 be a participle : 
 till a prince {in) anointed (Steudel). but it is a noun, and 
 T^3t is connected with it by apposition ; an anointed ont 
 
 {who is at the same time) a prince. According to the O. T., 
 kings and priests, and only these, were anointed. Since 
 then, rr^UJO is brought forward as the principal designa- 
 tion, we may not by T'aD think of a priest^prince, but 
 only of a prince of the people ; nor by n^THJJS of a king, 
 but only of a priest ; and by T^31 rflCKl we must nndei^ 
 
 stand a person who, first and specially, is a priest, and in 
 addition is a prince of the people, a king. The separation 
 of the two words in ver. 20. where T13j is acknowledged 
 
 as meaning a prince of the people, leads to the same conclu- 
 sion. This prie.st-king can neitlier beZenibbabel (according 
 to many old inteniretors). nor Ezra (Steudel). nor Onias III. 
 ( Wieseler) : for Zerubbahel the prince was not anointed, and 
 the priest Ezra and the high-priest Onias were not princes 
 of the people. Nor can Cyrus be meant here, as Saadias, 
 Gaon., Bertholdt. Von T^engerke. Maurcr, Ewald, Hitzig, 
 Kranichfeld, and others, think, by a reference to Is.a. xlv. 1 ; 
 for, supposing it to be the case that Daniel had reason from 
 Isa. xlv. 1 to call Cyrus n'^UT'S— which is doubted, since 
 
 from his epithet irT^'w^S. //'S (Jehovah's) f77io/;i(ed, whict 
 Isaiah uses of Cyrus, it does not follow, of course, that He 
 
UIS 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 accorclingly, is in himself merely a type of the 
 Messiah, corresponding to the person introduced 
 in Isii. xlv., but is not Christ Himself (correctly 
 rendered hy Saad., Gaon. , Bertholdt, Von Leng , 
 Hitzig-, Bleek. Kamph. . etc. . with the exception, 
 however, that they generally reject the typical 
 Messianic sense as well as the direct reference to 
 Christ). This typical forerunner of Christ, the 
 first restorer of the theocracy in the age of 
 Daniel itself, is placed by the prophet at the 
 close of the first cycle of seven Sabbatic years, 
 and hence after the expiration of the first jubi- 
 lee-period which had elapsed since the prophetic 
 activity of Jeremiah, while he assigns sixty-two 
 additional weeks of years (or nearly nine jubilee- 
 Iieriods) to the interval of tribulation that an- 
 nounced and prepared for the coming of the 
 genuine antitypical Christ. * Several expositors 
 attempt to substantiate the direct Messianic 
 interpretation of T'^" n^C)3, by placing the 
 seven weeks referred to in this passage after 
 the sixty-two weeks which follow (Von Hof- 
 mann. Wieseler in the Giittinger Gelehrten- 
 Aiizeiycii. 1.S4B. Delitzsch, etc.), and thus "reck- 
 on the contents of the seventy backward ; " but 
 if Daniel had jiref erred this order he would 
 certainly have noticed the sixty-two weeks first 
 and the seven weeks afterwards, and, moreover, 
 the ime week in v. 27 cannot be suitably pro- 
 vided for. Finally, all that has been heretofore 
 observed against the direct Messianic interpre- 
 tation of that expression, militates against their 
 view. Upon the whole, cf. the "history of the 
 exposition" in appendix to exeget. remarks. — 
 And three-score and two weeks ; the street 
 
 should be named n''!li?3 the title ought at least to have 
 
 T 
 
 been n""'!.''^ T'3'', the n"^",r'3 being an adjective fol- 
 lowing n^nr, because there is no evident reason for the 
 
 express precedence of the adjective definition. 
 
 '■ The O. T. knows only one who shnll be both priest and 
 kins in one person (Psa, ex. 4; Zcch. vi, 1-3), Christ the 
 Mes.sias (John iv. 25), whom, with Hiivernick, Henpsten- 
 berg, Hofmann, Auberlen, Delitzsch, and Kliefoth, we here 
 understand by the ""^31 rT''j;?3, because in Him the two 
 essential requisites of the theocratic king, the anointing and 
 the appointment to be the "I'l^"! of the people of Ckid (cf. 
 
 1 Snm. X. 1 ; xiii. 14 : xvi. 13 : xxv. oO : 2 Sam. ii. 4 : v. 2 
 sell.), are found in the most perfect manner. The.se requi- 
 sit*.s are here attributed to Him as predicates, and in such 
 a manner that the being anointed goes before the being a 
 prince, in order to make prominent the spiritual, priestly 
 character of His royalt.v, and tt) desi^ate Him, on the 
 ground of the pro})ljecics, Isa. Ixi. 1—3 and Iv. 4, as the per- 
 son by whom 'tlie sure mercies of David' (Isa. Iv. y) shall 
 be realized to the covenant people. The absence of the 
 definite article is not to be explained by saying that n^i',!;^! 
 
 somewhat as n?3y, Zech, iii. 8 ; vi. 12, is used Kar' k^o\, as 
 a no^nen propr. of the Messiah, the Anointed ; for in that 
 case T^32 ought to have the article, since in Hebrew we 
 
 cannot say Tl'^Z Til, but only Tlb'Sn "ill. Much ra- 
 
 I T - ■ T ' ^ -T - ■ T 
 
 ther the article is wanting, because it shall not be said : till 
 the Meaiia/i, wl'tt is pi'iJtce, but only, till une coine» who is 
 Unomted and at the same time pHHCe, because He that is to 
 come is not detinitely designated as the expected Messiah, 
 but must be made prominent by the predicates ascribed to 
 Him as a personage altogether singular.''] 
 
 * [How ill the chronological elements of tlie prophecy ac- 
 cord with the n-ference of this anointed one and prince to 
 C.\Tus, is evident from the fact that the author is obliged to 
 sever Daniel's conjoined statement (7+1)2) in order to elfect 
 anyrhing like an agreement. Yet even thus the historical 
 fultllmeut hiis to be vaguely presumeit, and cannot be defi- 
 aiteiy verilied.] 
 
 shall be built again, etc. ; rather, "and (dur- 
 ing) three-score and two weeks (it> shall return 
 (or 'be restored ') and be built." * This period 
 of sixty-two weeks, ihe " result of subtracting 
 the significant seven at the beginning, and of 
 one to be reserved for the end," covers the time 
 during which the heathen world-kingdoms suc- 
 ceed each other, down to the fourth and most 
 godless power, which is to attempt to entirelj 
 suppress the Divine kingdom of the Old Cove- 
 nant that had meanwhile been perfectly restored, 
 although with much labor, but which b3' that 
 very effort secured its own destruction through 
 the Messianic judgment (cf. viii. 11 et seq. ; 'i'i 
 et seq., and the preceding parallels). The sub- 
 ject of nii:3"l ^'l-?!, which must be supplied, 
 is doubtless Jerusalem, in analogy with the 
 former half of the verse, where the same idea 
 is presented in an active form. The specifica- 
 tion of time, O"! C"iS'i" aiJ'l'i"'', which precedes 
 in the accusative, " marks the limits of the 
 period, within which, at different times, the 
 building was prosecuted " (Hitzig). — The limi- 
 tation of this period, beginning a new clause as 
 it does, is properly preceded by an Athnach. 
 which serves to divide the verse. The method 
 adopted by the ancient translators, by Luther, 
 and by a majority of subsequent expositors (in- 
 cluding Hengstenb , Hiivem., Auberl., Ziindel, 
 etc. — but not Kranichfeld, Kliefoth, and FoUer), 
 divides the verse so as to connect the " sixty-two 
 weeks with the preceding clause, despite the 
 Athnach, and thus obtains sixty-nine weeks as 
 the time that should elapse before the coming 
 of the anointed prince ; but it is evidently based 
 on the desire to give a direct Messianic bearing 
 to the passage. It is opposed (1) by the fact 
 that the sixty- two weeks are repeated in v. 26, 
 where they are preceded by the article, which 
 clearly marks them as an independent period ; 
 (2) that the clause ""^l -Vitl thus occupies a 
 very abrupt and bare position, being without 
 any designation of time, while the preceding 
 clause hits two ; (3) that the sense of the writer 
 clearly is that the rebuilding and restoration 
 had not begun before the sixty-two weeks, 
 whUe he evidently regards the seven weeks as a 
 period of desolation and ruinous neglect of the 
 city which afterward was to be built (cf. Hitzig, 
 p. 100; also Kliefoth. p 328 et seq j.f— The 
 
 * [The only justification of this translation, which separ- 
 ates the two periods of seven weeks and sixty-two w-eeks, 
 assigning the former as the ternutnts ad qiteui of the 
 1 Anointed Prince, and the latter as the time of rebuilding, 
 lies m the Masoretic interpnnction, which places the Athnach 
 between them. Some adduce also the fact that ttie 1 con- 
 nective is likewise at the point, and not at 2T,irr. But 
 
 these arguments, especially the latter, are not conclumve ; 
 and the rendering in question involves a harsh construction 
 of the second member, being without a projinsition. It is 
 better, therefore, and simpler, to adhere to the Authorized 
 Version, wiiich follow-s all the older translations. Keil. in- 
 deed (although admitting that the Masoretii: |>unctuat!on is 
 neither authoritative nor decisive), dep irts from it, but en- 
 deavors to extricate himself from the chronological ditllcnl- 
 ties resulting by his interiiretation of these " weeks" ns not 
 being heptades'of years. Stuai-t, too, insists upon the Slaso- 
 retic separation, but he is thereby led into a maze of inter- 
 pretation from which he confesses he sees no satisfactory 
 exit.] 
 
 t [These arguments, however, have little weight : ford, 
 the sixty two weeks are still "an inilependent period." 
 namely, that following the seven weeks of rebuilding, i.tf., 
 coveriiig the whole period of the restored city do\vn to the 
 
CHAP. IX. 1- 
 
 19S 
 
 street shall be built again, aad the \7all, even 
 in troublous times; rather, (with) street and 
 ditch, but in troublous times. f^'^'^l 2^^^.. a 
 combination that suggests ^ni nmn, Isa. xxvi. 
 1. is evidently an adverbial apposition to the 
 subject S^;'.j:^~"^ ; and there properly signifies 
 "street-and-ditch-%vise," i.e., with streets and 
 ditches. It was not to be a wretched, confused, 
 and scattered, as well as a defenceless mass of 
 houses, but was to be arranged in streets, and 
 to be surrounded \rith a fortified (wall and) 
 ditch. [" l"n~ means the street and the wide 
 space before the gate "' (Keil. who adds "before 
 the temple," but this la.st is by no means cer- 
 taiJi-)] T'^'C is regarded by most modems, and 
 certainly with justice, as synonymous with the 
 Chald. '<"^""'.r?. "ditch." This rendering is in- 
 directly supported by the ancient versions also, 
 which hare "wall" (Sept., Theodot. : oiKoinuri- 
 &i/r:frn' ~/nraa Kai — ep(rf/,^-of ; Vulgate; " ?'?/r- 
 jum tfdificiihitur phitea et muri"). Hitzig arbi- 
 trarily asserts that the verb n-"L: will not 
 admit of such an interpretation of ■^'T^n- On 
 his view, the word is synonymous with ~')\^,> 
 Ezek. xli. 12, and gives the meaning "accord- 
 ing to street imd court." Hofmann adopts a 
 similar rendering, " extension and bounded 
 space," as do also Kliefoth and Fiiller, " open- 
 ing and limitation." Grotius, on the other 
 hand, conceives of an " aqueduct," Dathe, of 
 the Divine " judgment," and several others take 
 ynni as a parenthetic supplement, signifying 
 "and it is determined" (decided), or, "as it is 
 determined" (Hitzig, in Stud. u. Krit.. 1833, 
 Hengstenb., Hiivernick, Von Lengerke, Wiese- 
 ler, Kranichfeld). * — """RJn pi^^^ expresses the 
 reason why so long a time is required to build 
 and restore, and therefore stands in an adversa- 
 tive relation to the preceding (T="but, how- 
 ever"). The historical commentary on this 
 "but in troublous times" is found in the narra- 
 tives of Ezra and Xehemiah, respecting the fre- 
 quent disturbing and interruption of the rebuild- 
 ing of the walls of Jerusalem in the time of the 
 Persian kings ; cf. especially Neh. ix. 36, 37. 
 
 appearance of the Anointed One and Prince : (2) the panse 
 before the statement of the rebnildinK of the ''street and 
 wall" is jn-tified and even required by the fact that this is 
 evidently a resumption of the former declaration of the 
 '■building: of Jenlsalem : " (3)80 far from this period of 
 rebuilding being delayed till some '-ubsequent event, it is 
 Bet forth as the very initial terminuJt a quo of the entire 
 prophecy. We may add, that the subdivision of the sixty- 
 nine weeks into two portions of seven and sixty-two weeks 
 respectively perfectly corresponds with the a.'wignment, in 
 the same connection and order, of two distinct events, 
 lamely, the completed reconstruction for the former por- 
 tion, and the Messianic advent for the latter. If, on the 
 :ontrary view, v.-e appropriate the sixty-two weeks to the 
 reconstruction-period, we fall into several exegetical contra- 
 lictions ; {i ) we confound it with the Messiah-jJeriod, which 
 -s descri(>ed in very different terms, ver. 2(i ; (2) we leave no 
 special transaction for the preceding seven years ; (3) we 
 make the ile.ssijih i>eriod \astly too long for its d.^'=i>ite limi- 
 tation in ver. ST. Other difflculties of a histor-al charac- 
 ter win be adduced presently.] 
 
 ♦ [We suece-t. as best suited to the etymological import 
 of these two terms, as well as their proverbial antithesis and 
 adverl<iai adjecrtion to the sentence, the sense of '• court and 
 alley." I.e., broad square, and close street ; to denote the 
 oomplcte restoration of the city, with all ita places of resort 
 and thoroughfare.] 
 
 '" The city was inhabited in t^he second year of 
 Darius Hystaspis (Hag. i. 4), but had neithei 
 walls nor gates (cf. Zech. ii. 8, 9) ; up te that 
 time the enemies of the Jews had prevented the 
 building of the temple and of the walls either 
 by cunning or by force (Ezra iv. 4, 5. 12, 23 et 
 seq.). In the twentieth year of Artaxerxes 
 Longimanus the walls and gates had again been 
 destroyed (Neh. i 3) ; and the renewed building 
 succeeded only imder manifold precautions : 
 
 • Neh. iii. 33 ; iv. 1, 2 et seq. ; vi. 1 et seq." * (Hit- 
 zig). Any reference of the ex]>ressiou to dis- 
 turbances encountered in the building up of the 
 church, or the New-Test, kingdom of God, can 
 only be admitted in a typical sense, since the 
 primary reference of the passage is solely to 
 Jerusalem in the period following the captivity. 
 When Kranichfefd, p. 829, declares that P'i^?^ 
 D"'r;>~ is " the modifying factor connected with 
 oracles like Jer. xxxi. 38; Isa. liv. 11; Ix. 10; 
 Ezek. xlv. 6; xlviii. 8, 15 et seq.," he thereby 
 substantially contradicts his ordinary interpre- 
 tation of the passage, which is only typically 
 Messianic, and he is guilty of an inconsequent 
 vacillation in the direction of the strict ilessi- 
 anic theory. 
 
 Verse 20). And after (the +) threescore and 
 two weeks shall the Messiah be cut o£f; 
 rather, "an anointed one." Smce the period 
 covered by the sixty-two weeks (or 434 years) is 
 preceded by the seven weeks (or forty-niue 
 years) according to the above, the event here 
 predicted must faU into the last of the seventy 
 weeks in v. 24. as the ne.xt verse expressly 
 states. Hence the n"",l"2 who is to be cut off 
 during that final year-week cannot possibly b6 
 identified with the ~'}\ '?^"'rr whom the pre- 
 ceding verse introduced already on the expira- 
 tion of the secenth of the seventy weeks of 
 years.t Instead of an "anointed prince," wo 
 
 ■are here referred simply to an " anointed one." 
 who is, moreover, placed in such an intimate 
 relation to "the city and the sanctuary " in the 
 second halt of the verse — i.e., to Jerusalem and 
 the temple located there — that he is brought 
 into sharp and clearly defined contra.st with the 
 " prmce " and people who destroy that city and 
 its sanctuary. A high prient nf Ltnid is evi- 
 dently intended, whom the people of the forei^'n 
 and hostile prince "cuts off" (CTir"^), i.e., 
 "destroys, kills" (cf. Gen. ix. 11; Deut. xx. 
 20; Jer. xi. 19; Psa. xxxvii. 9; Prov. U. 22; 
 
 ♦ [That the reconstruction of the cit)' wall, however, waa 
 coiupleted at this last date is certain from Xeh. vi. 15. This 
 was B. C. 44fi. The temple had been rebuilt a long time, 
 Ezra vi, 15. B. C 517. During Nehemiah's administration 
 the whole process of restoration was evidently etfected. It 
 is impossible, thei efore. to protract this perioii over the sixty- 
 two year-weeks, as the author seeks to do. The historical 
 interpretation here fails completely. From whuiever point 
 of -time we reckon the first forty-nine years, they certainly 
 included this work of reconstruction.] 
 
 t [The article here only shows that the period in question 
 agrees in general with that similarly stated in the prejed- 
 ing verse. That the>^ do not exactly coincide is clear from 
 the fact that the terminua oil quern of the two is differently 
 stated: in the one it is "till the Messiah,'' in the other, 
 down to his '■ ctttting off." The difference in time is accu- 
 rately detined by the following verse.] 
 
 i [This objection to the identification of the }ffui/itach in 
 both cases is entirely obviated by the above note of tba 
 variation in *he limits of the two chronological terms.] 
 
200 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 I. 31, etc.).* And since the hostile prince is 
 niiequivocaUy characterized in both vs. 2(; b and 
 27 as the niler of the antitheistic and anti- 
 Christian world-power, and as the originator of 
 the blasphemous and sacrilegious horrors which 
 already appeared in chap. vii. 25 ; viii. 1 1 et 
 seq. , it will evidently be appropriate to regard a 
 high priest who fell at the hands of heathen 
 persecutors in the period of religious oppression 
 under the Seleucidfe as the " anointed one," in 
 whose death the prophecy before us was prim- 
 arily, although but typically, fulfilled. Such a 
 person is found in the high priest Onias III. 
 who was murdered by Andronicus, the governor 
 under Epiphanes, according to 2 Mace. iii. 31 et 
 seq.; iv. 1 et seq., and to him the prophecy 
 may be referred with the highest probability 
 that the interpretation is correct. According to 
 2 Mace. iv. 34 et seq., the slaying of this 
 anointed one took place before the second cam- 
 paign undertaken by Epiphanes against Egypt, 
 and shortly before the king arrived at Tyre on 
 his return from Cilicia (ct. ibid., vs. 22, 30, 44; 
 chap. V. 1). Hence, it certainly transpired be- 
 fore the abuse of the city and its sanctuary by 
 the same king, a feature with which the descrip- 
 tion in this verse harmonizes well upon the 
 whole [but with some fatal exceptions] . A dis- 
 crepancy exists in a chronological aspect only 
 ■between that event and the statements in the 
 prophecy ; for, while the sixty-two weeks of 
 years extend, when reckoned from the end of 
 the first seven year-weeks or B.C. 539, to B.C. 
 105 or into the reign of the Asmonsean Aristo- 
 bulus I. or his successor Alexander Jannieus 
 (after 105), the murder of Onias by Andronicus 
 took place as early as 141 or 142 of the aira of 
 the Seleucidae, i.e.. B.C. 171 or 172, and there- 
 fore in the fifty-third week of years after B.C. 
 539. Consequently, if it be conceded that all 
 the remaining assumptions are correct, it must 
 be acknowledged that the prophecy is not con- 
 sistent with itself in a chronological aspect, or 
 that the prophet saw events belonging to differ- 
 ent periods in a single comprehensive view — in 
 other words, that he conceived of a catastrophe 
 in the historical future, which was decidedly 
 important to the nations concerned, as belong- 
 ing to a period, later by a number of years (per- 
 haps ten weeks of years, or seventy years) than 
 it actually transpired. Cf. iufra, eth.-fund. 
 principles, etc. Nos. 1 and 2.f — The following 
 
 * [Keii insists that ri*i5* does not necessarily denote a 
 
 violent death. But the passages adduced by the author are 
 Bufficient to establish this as the general meaning. The 
 "orthodox^' interpretation of this clause as referring to the 
 cmcifi.^ion of the Messiah is certainly well sustained.] 
 
 t [This admission of failure to meet the chronological 
 terms of the prophecy sufficiently points out the fallacy of 
 the author's interpretation. The Anointed one of this verse 
 can be no other than that of the preceding verse. "The 
 circumtitance that in ver, 26 n*^llf T3 has neither the article 
 
 nor the addition ^*133 following it appears to be in favor 
 of this opinion. The absence of the one as well as of the 
 other denotes that rj^T2i?2, after what is said of Him in 
 
 consideration of tlie connection of the words, needs no more 
 special description. If we observe that the destruction of 
 the city anil sanctuary is so connected with the Maxhiach 
 that we must consider this as the immediate or first conse- 
 quence of the cutting off of the MankUtch, and that the 
 destruction shall be brought alxiut by a ynglu, then by 
 MtuhUich we can understand neither a secular prince or 
 tdntSt nor simply a high priest, but only an anointed one who 
 
 diverging interpretations are to be rejected : (1) 
 That adopted by Eichhom, Corrodi, Wieselor, 
 Hitzig, Kamphausen, etc., which comes especi- 
 ally near our own ; they regard the anointed one 
 as being Onias, but reckon the sixty-two year- 
 weeks, which closed at the time of his death, 
 from B.C. 604 instead of 539, so that the first 
 seven weeks are not to be counted ( ?;. or rather, 
 are included in the sixty-two (?) — since 604- 
 434 actually results in 170, the number of the 
 year in which Onias died ; (2) The similar view 
 of WieseliSr (Gdtt. Gd.-Anz. 1840) and of De- 
 litzsch (upon the whole that of Hofmann also, 
 Wei'is. nnd Erf., p. 303 et seq.), which holds 
 that Onias is the anointed one, at whose cutting 
 off the sixty-two weeks of years from B.C. 004 
 were to have expired ; but that the seven weeks 
 are to be placed after the year-week which be- 
 gan with the year of his death — hence are to be 
 reckoned from B.C. 104 (cf. on the impossibility 
 i of this assumption, supra, on v. 25); (3) The 
 opinion of Bleek, Maurer, v. Lengerke, Roesch, 
 Ewald, etc., that the anointed one who was cut 
 off was not the high priest Onias, but the king 
 Seleucus IV. Philopater, of Syria, who was 
 killed by the usurper Heliodorus in B.C. 170 ; 
 this opinion involves still greater chronological 
 difliculties than the former, inasmuch as the 
 sixty-two weeks of years, when reckoned back 
 from B.C. 176, would extend to B.C. 610; and 
 it is opposed, moreover, by the inadmissible 
 character of an attempt to explain '!'^"'r'3 by 
 "king;" (4) That of Bertholdt, who believes 
 that the passage refers to the death of Alexander 
 the Great ( !), who left no heir ; (5) The assump- 
 tion of Kranichfeld, that the anointed one is the 
 Messiah of Israel, as in Psa, ii. 2 ; Isa. Ixi. 1, 
 and therefore not identical with the " anointed 
 prince " of v. 25, but not less distinct also from 
 Onias, the murdered high-priest of Maccaba^an 
 times; (0) The orthodox churchly view which 
 identifies the " anointed one " with the "anoint- 
 ed prince " of the preceding verse, and believes 
 that both denote Christ, whose sufferings and 
 death are said to be predicted in a similar man- 
 ner by sb ps*"! CT^B"), as in Isa. liii. (held among 
 moderns, «.^., by Havern., Hengstenb. , Auberl., 
 Pusey [KeU] , etc. ) ; (7) The assertion by Klie- 
 foth (on Zech. xiii. 7 and also on this passage) 
 that the anointed one is Christ, but only in the 
 final stage of his work and government among 
 the kingdoms of the earth ; and further, that 
 the passage, " Uke Luke xvii. 25; 3 Thess. ii. 
 7. describes the relation to the world and man- 
 kind which Christ shall occupy by reason of the 
 great apostasy before the end of the world, as 
 prophecy leads us to expect." — But not for him- 
 self; rather, " and he has no one," i.e., "for his 
 helper, his deliverer from death ; " or " he has 
 
 stands in such a relation to the city and sanctuary, that with 
 his being ' cut off' the city and the sanctuary lose not only 
 their piotcction and their protector, hut the sanctuary also 
 loses at the same time, its character as the sanctuaiy which 
 the Mashiach had given to it. This is suitable to no Jew- 
 ish high-priest, but only to the Messias whom Jehovah 
 anointed to be a Priest-King after the order of Melchizedek, 
 and placed as Lord over Zion, his holy hill. We ngree theie- 
 fore with H:tvcrni<k. Hcncrstenberg. .\ulicrlen. nnd Kliefoth, 
 whi' r'L'ard the M'tt'hin'li <if this verse as identical with the 
 Mtinl'i'flt Naiiiil of V( r. 2.5 as Christ, who, in the fttllest 
 sense of the wtrd, is the Anointed, and we hope to cstablLsh 
 this view more fully in the following exposition of the his 
 toncal reference of this word of the ant^^l." — A'ei/]. 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-27. 
 
 201 
 
 nothing, there remains nothing to him " (^v l^», 
 namely ""'Hp, cf. Filler and Kranichfeld on 
 this passage). This "b V?" meets with an ex- 
 traordinary variety of interpretations, based re- 
 Bpectiyely on the different explanations of n^'.l"'!- 
 Theodotion ; Aa' Kp:ija ovk fcra' iv airu ; Jerome : 
 " et noil erit ejus populus qvi eum neyatums est " 
 (in like manner also Grotius, and a majority of 
 Roman Catholic expositors) ; Bertholdt : '" and 
 he (Alex, the Gr. ) shall have no successor; " v. 
 Lengerke, Roesch, Bleek, Ewald, etc: "and 
 he (Seleucus Philopater) shall have no succes- 
 sor ;" VVieseler : " and he (Onias) shall have no 
 son;" Auberlen : '"he, Christ, shall have no 
 adherents ; " Hofmann, Hengsteub. , Kranichf. , 
 Kliefoth (and similarly also Calvin, Junius, Eb- 
 rard) : "he, Christ, shall possess nothing, shall 
 be without possessions, and be deprived of 
 everything;" Hofmann (in Weks. unel Erf.): 
 '■ and there shall not be to the people," i.e., an 
 anointed one. the people shall have no Messiah ;* 
 Havernick : ".and not for himself, i.e.. for his 
 own sake," — supply, "shall the Messiah die, 
 but for the benefit of mankind, which is to be 
 redeemed ; " Michaelis. E. C. Schmidt (in Paulus' 
 Meynorabil. VII. 51), Wie.ieler (in GOtt. Gel.-Am., 
 1846), Hitzig : " and he is not, i.e., Onias " ( — 
 ib V? consequently = ':.:"», cf. Gen v. 24). 
 Upon the whole cf. Kliefoth. p. 357 et seq. 
 Since the forcible cutting off of an anointed 
 one is concerned, we are obliged to regard that 
 explanation as being most consistent with the 
 context, which supplies ""V"r. perhaps (cf. 
 Psa. vii. .3 ; 1. 22; Isa. v. 29) after Vj VS"". It 
 does not differ materially from that advocated 
 by Hofmann, Hengstenberg, Kranichfeld, etc., 
 which supplies D'l^S'; ; for whoever has no de- 
 liverer or helper is also without power, ^^^thout 
 posses.sions, \vithout anything whatever. We 
 differ from those expositors only in regarding 
 the anointed one who is described as being with- 
 out possessions and helpless, not directly as the 
 Messiah, but more immediately as his type, the 
 Jewish high priest who was killed in the course 
 of the Antiochian persecution, — in short, in 
 substituting the typical Messianic theory for the 
 direct (in which we agree substantially with 
 Ftiller). — And the people of the prince that 
 shall come shall destroy the city and the 
 sanctuary, and the end thereof shall be with 
 a flood; rather, " and the people of a prince.f 
 who shsill come and end with overflowing,! shall 
 
 • [Keil's interpreution is siibstantinlly like this namely : 
 *' it is not to Him, viz., that which he must have, to be the 
 J/iwAioc-A.'*] 
 
 t [On the contrary, n^3] is here rendered definite by the 
 
 epithet or adjective following, and therefore may properly be 
 translated "the prince." It simply "omits tlie article be- 
 car.ee it is different from that in ver. 25, and the article 
 would give a wrong sense, or at least the insertion of it 
 would make it dubious to the reader, inasmuch as it would 
 naturally refer him to the T*a: in ver. 26. The T^3^ 
 here is merely a heathen prince acting in a civil (rather 
 militury) capacity, in distinction from a n^'t^TS who be- 
 longs to the people of God."— .*^/;/aj'/]. 
 t [This rendering of r]I3!iJ3 *^22p^ is quite unjustifiable. 
 
 It is not a correlative douse ajtpeiided to JtSn as a 
 
 destroy the city and the sanctuary." The words 
 evidently refer to a catastrophe which follows 
 immediately on the cutting off of the anointed 
 one. The "coming prince" (S<3'"! 1^3:) who 
 approaches to cause destruction to the city and 
 the sanctuary, or more exactly, who comes aa 
 the ruler of the people that brings ruin and de- 
 struction, is doubtless, therefore, the Old. -Test 
 antichrist, or the antitheistic horn of the earlier 
 visions (chap. vii. 21, 25 ; viii. 11 et seq. ; 24 et 
 seq.), and consequently Antiochus Epiphanes, 
 Stan (=!tia'^ "??*) describes this ruler as com- 
 ing at the head of his army in a Jiostile character 
 (cf. v<13 in i. 1 ; viii. G; xi. 10, 13, 15, 16, 40, 
 41), and the deiinite article indicates that his 
 coming was a familiar fact to the prophet, as 
 having formed the subject of his earlier predic- 
 tions. * The participle is therefore not employed 
 without a purpose (Hofmann, Weiss, und Erf., 
 I. 304), nor does it refer to DP, "people" 
 (SchoU, Ebrard). It does not signify Epiphanes' 
 "succession" to his predecessor Seleucus 
 (Roesch, Maurer), nor denote the future "ap- 
 pearing" or mysterious presence of the New- 
 Test, antichrist, in the sense of 2 Thess, ii. 9 (Klie- 
 foth). — The ending of this prince " with over- 
 flowing " is probably not materially different 
 from the " pouring out of annihilation and 
 judicial punishment upon the desolator," at the 
 close of the following verse. 'I??, "a flood, 
 an overflowing," accordingly denotes the judg- 
 ment inflicted Og God in his anger ou the impious 
 1^33 (Wieseler, Kliefoth), or, more probably, 
 since in that case a genitive ^IX (cf. Prov. xxvii. 
 4) would properly be required in order to define 
 the sense more clearly, it is used sensu belUco to 
 denote an overflowing with warlike hosts, which 
 should lead to the end of his life, i.e., his anni- 
 hilation (chap. xi. 45; cf. vii. 20). Cf. the ex- 
 actly similar use of 'IV'? in chap. xi. 10. 22, 20, 
 40, and in Isa. viii. 8, together with C|0^2i 
 np~S Isa. X. 22. — Here again we are obliged to 
 reject a number of diverging explanations, and 
 
 further definition of the "T^a^, but an imlepeudent state 
 ment as to the result of that prince's coming. The suffirt in 
 iSp doubtless refers to the 1^3r, but in an objective not a 
 
 subjective sense : it is the end xchkh he caxtue^, not any 
 which he is to suffer. It is thus precisely parallel with the 
 yp of the clause immediately follo\ving. Tliis view is con- 
 firmed by the article in C|t2S3, w-hich commentators have 
 
 overlooked or misapplied, but which is here, as often, equi- 
 valent (like the Greek article) to a personal pronoun, q.d. 
 ** in his oversowing," evidently the military campaign or 
 n^nb^ immediately subjoined. The whole phrase thus 
 
 indicates that the invasion should issue in the destruction of 
 Jerus.ilem. This was certainly not done by Anticchua 
 Epiphanes.] 
 
 • [The inconsistency of this explanation of the article 
 after the above statement that it3n = 5513"^ ^tr;5< is obvi- 
 ous. It is not a Hebrew idiom to use the article with a, par- 
 ticiple or adjertive in order to point out something well 
 known ; for that purpose the article should (also) be prefixed 
 t^i the associiited nntiti. It is evidently employed here sim- 
 ply in order to render definite the othermse indefinit* 
 
 n"33, i.e., ho is nov a present or a past, but ft futvft 
 prince.] 
 
202 
 
 THE PROPHET DAXIEL. 
 
 especially that of Hitzig, v. Lengerke, etc., who 
 refer the words to a warlike expedition under- 
 taken bv Autiochus Epiphanes, instead of one 
 that should break in upon him like a flood and 
 annihilate him ; that of Ewald, who obtains 
 the sense "who comes with his host overflow- 
 ing" (or "in overflow") by a violent emenda- 
 tion, inasmuch as he substitutes ^v'D?, "and 
 his host," or isni, -'and his line of battle" 
 (after Prov. xxx. 27), for iSpl; that of Gese- 
 nius, Rosenmiiller, Roesch, etc., who take Cl^'i^? 
 in the sense of "suddenly, like a flood ; " that 
 of Auberlen, Hiivernick, Delitzsch, etc., who re- 
 fer the suifix in T^p_ to the city and sanctuary, 
 rather than to the "prince;" "their destruc- 
 tion shall come by overflowing," etc.* — And 
 unto the end of the war desolations are deter- 
 mined ; i.e.. the devastating of the city and 
 sanctuary are to continue to the end of the war- 
 like alarms excited by their impious oppressor, 
 as a matter that is determined by God. "OniQ 
 designates that state of war which begins with 
 cutting off the anointed one, and eventually re- 
 sults in the destruction of the city and the sanc- 
 " tuary (so, correctly, RosenmliUer, Hofmann, 
 Ewaid, Fiiller, etc.). Others read, " and to the 
 end shall be war, the determined desolations," 
 in which method Ti^"'.:: "-^I^l is cither taken 
 as an apposition (Havem. , v. Leng. , Maur., 
 Wieseler, Hitz. , Auberlen), or as an explanatory 
 clause to the foregoing, with the conjunctions 
 omitted in the connection (Kranichfeld, Klie- 
 foth), and in connection with which still further 
 differences of opinion exist with regard to the 
 meaning of TP., some expositors referring it to 
 the end of the prince (Wieseler), some to the 
 end of the sanctuary (Hiiv., Aub.) or of the 
 period of the seventy weeks — hence, to the last 
 year-week of the seventy (v. Lengerke, Hitzig), 
 and some even to the end of all things, the 
 "absolute end" (Kliefoth). The reference of 
 y^:^ to the exterminated prince is evidently the 
 only one in harmony with the context, which 
 thus identifies it with the ISp of the preceding 
 clause ; bnt it is more appropriate to regard it 
 in the sense of a stat. coiistr., "to the end of 
 the war," because of the more regular and con- 
 nected character of the arrangement of the 
 sentence.! "?":'j; is also the construct state of 
 ru"n-, which recurs at the close of the follow- 
 ing verse, and here probably denotes the same 
 idea as in chap. xi. 30, and Isa. x. 23 ; xxviii. 
 22, viz. : " determination, destiny, what is or- 
 dained." A " determination of the desolations" 
 
 * [These latter interpretations are refuted in detail by 
 Keil. whose objection^, however, do not apply to tlie cxpla- 
 natinn-* which are suf.'gc6ted above.] 
 
 t (Keil admits the grammatical jiropriety of this render- 
 in:;, but objects that ' ' in the preceding sentence no mention 
 i- expressly made of war; and if the war which consisted 
 in the destruction of the city be meant, n?3n2?p ought to 
 have the article." These arguments are of no force, as 
 "'Cnb^ >s definite by reason of its construction with ^[l^' 
 uid the war Itaelf was already distinctly alluded to in the 
 tl==-l 
 
 (niJa^a as in v. 18 ; cf. on that passage) is a 
 decree that aims at desolations and has them 
 for its object. Ewald : " the decision respect- 
 ing the horrors." i.e., the decision of God at the 
 judgment of the world, which relates to the 
 horrible actions and devastations of Autiochus, oi 
 which serves to punish them (?). Hofmann and 
 Kliefoth are still more arbitrary : "a determined 
 measure of desolations, which is thus limited 
 and confined." — [This language was not fulfilled 
 in any appropriate sense by Antiochus, who 
 aimed merely at the suppression of Jehoyah's 
 worship, but left the city and sanctuary unin- 
 jured. It seems to us that the old interpretation, 
 which refers it to the last war with the Romans 
 when Titus seemed compelled by providence to 
 persist in his attack till the temple itself was 
 demolished, is the only adequate one. This was 
 the retribution that eventually followed the re- 
 jection and murder of their Messiah by the 
 Jews. ] 
 
 Verse 27. And he shall confirni the cove- 
 nant with many for one week ; rather, "make 
 a strong covenant."* etc. This sentence (intro- 
 duced by an explicative ror) is obviously an 
 explanation and more particvilar illustration of 
 the statements in the preceding verse. Its sub- 
 ject is neither the indefinite "it" (Fuller), nor 
 the "one week" (Theodot., Dereser, Hiivern., 
 Von Leng., Hengstenb., Hitz., Auberl.), but, 
 beyond all question, T'j;, which governs the 
 preceding sentence as a logical subject, is finally 
 included in isp., and is the prominent subject 
 of consideration, from v. 26 * (thus, correctly. 
 Berth., Maur., Wiesel., Ewald, Kranichf., Klief., 
 etc.). j It is observed, therefore, with regard 
 to the anti-Christian prince of the final world- 
 power, that " he shall confinn the covenant as 
 to many," i.e., "that he shaU enter into a 
 strong, firm covenant with many ; " for the 
 Hiphil ^^33"^ which occurs elsewhere only in 
 Psa. xii. 5, and there signifies " to be strong, to 
 exhibit strength," in this pliice doubtless ex- 
 presses the transitive idea of strengthening, and 
 in connection with the idea "covenant," involves 
 more particularly the notion of "confirming or 
 establishing." The many (^-^a-i with the arti- 
 cle) with whom the strong covenant is made by 
 the jirince are obviously the numerous apostate 
 Jews, who were induced by the heathen tyrant 
 to break their covenant with God and disobey 
 His law. according to 1 Mace. i. 10 et seq., and 
 thus to enter into an antitheocratic alliance that 
 was bostQe to God, /f/' one letek; i.e., during a 
 
 * (The connection is onnecessary. The expres.sion 
 r^13 ■■'a^m properly and fairly signifies: "he shall 
 confirm a covenant," which naturally implies one already 
 mndo 1 
 
 t [On the contrary it seems to ns that the subject of this 
 
 clause is not the -^32 just spoken of, bnt the n"'r^ 
 T"31 preceding, or, more definitely, the n'^'^tt jnet bo- 
 fore ; for (1) this (as Hengstenberg rightly says) is the pre- 
 dominant or principal subject of the entire passage ; and 
 (■i) each of the other portions of the seventy wciics ia 
 directly referred to that personnge, so that this final week 
 will not fill up the number appropriately if olhcrwiso re- 
 ferred. The objections of Keil to this intenTetation are 
 unimportant. Moreover, the prophecy is not hist.iricallj 
 applicable to Antiochus, but does correspond to the term of 
 the Messiah's ministry ; as we shall endeavor to show.] 
 
CHAP. IX 1-27. 
 
 2^3 
 
 oreek of rears {"^ "•?, accusative of time). Cf . 
 the allusion.? to thit fact in chap. xi. 32 (where 
 f^"!^ is employed in the same antitheocratic 
 Ben.se as here), in xi. 33 (where the transgressors 
 of [Jehovah's] covenant, the "^"^3 ^?"''r"!'?, are 
 the same as the -^?~ in this place), and also in 
 chap, viii. 10 et seq., where the stars that were 
 trodden under foot by the little horn may like- 
 wise represent the breakers of the covenant who 
 are here mentioned (cf. also viii. 24 et seq.).* — 
 A great diversitj' of opinion respecting the 
 meaning of the "covenant" exists among the 
 representatives of the theory which makes 
 "ins ^''-'il" the subject of "I'^Jn. In illustra- 
 tion of this. cf. Hitzig, '"the one week of years 
 shall make the covenant — i.e.. the adherence to 
 the faith in Jehovah, and to the theocratic law 
 — ?tard for many ; " Hofmann (t<c/inflbewei.'i. II. 
 2), " the one week of years shall confirm many 
 in the covenant through tribulation and the 
 trial of their faith" (similarly. Rosenmuller, 
 before Hofmann); Von Leugerke, '"A week 
 shall confirm a covenant to many, through the 
 seductive arts of Antiochus ; " Hengstenberg, 
 Havernick, Auberlen, etc., "the one week, or 
 rather the events belonging to it, especially the 
 death of the Messiah referred to in v. 20, will 
 lead to the conclusion of a new, strong, and 
 firm covenant with m.iny," etc. — And in the 
 midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice 
 and the oblation to cease j i.e. , during one half 
 of the week. y"I2T "^T! might of itself sig- 
 nify the middle of the week ; but the following 
 
 "3" ~r~ shows that something transpires dur- 
 ing the llJn "^n, which naturally belongs to 
 the close of the whole period of oppression here 
 described, viz. : the punishment and aiiuihil.a- 
 tion of the impious persecutor. For this reason 
 
 CT ''.Zrt must rather denote half of the week, 
 and more particularly the .second half, and it 
 therefore corresponds to the three and a half 
 years of persecution of chap. vii. 25; and r''S"i"'^ 
 — for which no other appropriate subject can be 
 found than that of the preceding verb ~"??7 — 
 can therefore express no other sense than that 
 of '"causing to cease" during the period in 
 question. The impious madman causes to cease 
 during that period the ■^"-'r' l^?!. the bloody 
 and unbloody offerings, which are mentioned 
 representatively for idl the sacrifices required by 
 the theocratic ritual, as being the two principal 
 classes of offerings under the Mosaic economy, 
 
 * [T)ic passages adduceil by the tiuthor, especially xi. 22, 
 do not sustain the meaning he here assigns to ri'^"^S, which, 
 
 unless specially qualified, always refers to Jehovah's cove- 
 nant as contained in the Law. Moreover, as Keil justly 
 observes, '*3''3^b- with the article, signifies the many. 
 
 i.e.. the great mass of the people in contrast ^vith the few.'' 
 But the ma.ss of the Jews did not apostatize in the time of 
 Anliochns. Still more inept is Keil s application: "That 
 nngodly piince shall impose (m the mass of the people a 
 Ftrong covenant that they should follow him and trivc them- 
 gelves to him as their Gnd." The languaee of the text can 
 only have its appropriate fulfilment in the mission of the 
 Redeemer, which was a '■onil>letion of God's covenant with 
 the race of man. How this took place during the last of the 
 •evcuty w ceks we will presently show.] 
 
 I in a similar manner as that in which T'ttr". 
 " the daily," was employed in chap. viii. 11 to 
 express this concrete individualizing and com- 
 prehensive .sense.* The expression here em- 
 ployed cannot be taken to refer to the supersed- 
 ing of the Old-Test, institution of sacrifices by 
 the New-Test, worship iu spirit and in truth, as 
 being based on the perfect expiatory sacrifice of 
 Christ (against Hiivernick, Hengstenb. , Auberl., 
 etc.) ; for the verb 7";-.rn would not have been 
 . suited to express that idea, and, moreover, the 
 i .nil offering (cf. v. H) would hardly have been 
 passed by without mention in that case. Klie- 
 foth emphasizes correctly, " that in this place 
 the 1^3^ of V. 26 mu.st be considered the sub- 
 ject, and that the observation here relates not 
 to the abrogation, but merely to the suspension 
 of the sacrifices ; " but he afterward arbitrarily 
 applies the passage to a temporary suspension 
 .and suppression of the eucharist as the sacrifice 
 of the New Covenant, to be caused by the anti- 
 christ in the last age of the church. — And for 
 ihe overspreading of abominations he shaU 
 make it desolate; rather, "and abominations 
 of desolation shall be on the wing." This 
 ;^rp S"2^pZ C):s i";'' constitutes the actual 
 climax of the many difiiculties presented in this 
 passage, the real crtix inteiyritiim. which has 
 produced almost as many explanations as inter- 
 preters. Probably all those methods of expla- 
 nation are to be at once rejected and avoided 
 which contradict the most ancient quotation 
 and tran.slation of the words in the originally 
 Hebrew Maccabiean book (chap. i. :>i ; cf. Matt, 
 xxiv. 1.5 : Mark xiii. 14). and the corresponding 
 testimony of the most ancient translators, the 
 Sept., Theodotion, and the Vulg.ate. All these 
 render -J?"^"^ CijT^p'i: by "abominations of 
 desolation" (1 Mace, 1. c, to jiiiXvyiia ri/r 
 ilij/iii.inf:(.)r -^ Sept., Theodot.., Sf^iAv}/iia Tuv eptmu- 
 nn.ir ,' Vulg., (ihomiiiiitio de.wlaUonis). which 
 probably resulted from the influence of priuii- 
 tive traditions that were certainly correct in the 
 main. -^".2'; was accordingly regarded as a 
 genitive from the beginning, and probably by 
 the author himself— not, however, as a genitive 
 of possession, but as a genitive of description ; 
 or, what amounts to the same thing, it was con- 
 sidered an ajypositioii to the preceding plural 
 C^S^iJ", in support of which the analogy of 
 '2~» r^tin in chap. viii. 8 may be adduced on 
 the one hand (as also the similar coimection of 
 that plural with a singular in Jer. xlix. 11), and 
 on the other, the appositional combination 
 c;^-?3 flpSJ" in chap. vui. 13 (cf. also 1~Sn 
 
 * [Or, on the usual Messianic interpretjition, Christ shall 
 forever do away with the Levitical sacrifices by the one per- 
 fect offering of himself (Heb. vii. 27; i.\. I'i-lJ, 26). On 
 this view, it matters little whether we render "'^n '' in the 
 
 midst,'' or "during half." for ourLord's ministry was a pro- 
 cess of snpersedure of the legal sacrifices, which culminated 
 in his death, and ( should we even er;mt the author's posi- 
 tion, that the latter hti.M of the week is Intended) was finally 
 carried ont by the release of Gentiles fr iin the Lcviiical 
 economy (Acts xi. 18). The author's objections, as to the 
 sense of Ti^^SCri, etc., are inconclusive. Stuart thinks 
 
 that "chap, vii, 11 settles the que tion " that Antiochus ij 
 i referred to ; but the language there employed is veiy dlil«r- 
 ent.] 
 
204 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL 
 
 CH-, 1 Chron. xxvii. 5).* The plural Ci^lplD 
 (for which, however, the writer of 1 Mace., 1. c, 
 substituted the sing. f^Pr, p&iAvyua, possibly 
 with design, because the abomination of idola- 
 try with which Epiphanes desecrated the temple 
 was chief in his mind) at all events denotes 
 " abominations, horrible things," and more par- 
 ticularly abominable things from a religiuus 
 point of view, abominable idolatries, what is 
 loathsome in the domain of Divine worship, 
 '■ ren abemiinanda od cultuyn Deorinti spectantes ;" 
 cf. xi. 31 ; xii. 11. In like manner as this 
 meaning of C^ljlpa is adequately secured by 
 the ,iii£/.i'j,ua or abomiiiatio of the ancient trans- 
 lators, so that of cacfi, by which it denotes 
 " ravager or desolation," is evidently established 
 by their Ipijiujaic. This rendering may be sub- 
 stantiated by a comparison with ritt^O in the 
 preceding verse, and also with rii'Sn in Ezek. 
 xxxvi. 3 (cf. C?3'r, " to be desolate, uninhab- 
 ited," Lam. i. 4 ; 2 Sam. xiii. 20), and accords 
 as well with the context as does the idea of an 
 "object to be stared at, or of terror" — hence 
 "what is terrible, dreadful," — by which Hitzig, 
 Evvald, el al. , prefer to render the term (by vir- 
 tue of a one-sided application of the fund, mean- 
 ing of cau.". "to stare, shudder"). If these 
 considerations are accordingly sufficient to es- 
 tablish for cairtt flp'd the sense of "abomin- 
 ation of desolation " = "desolating abomination 
 of idolatry, hideously devastating nature of the 
 idolatrous service," there remains only the diffi- 
 cult ^133 bJ"! to be interpreted. The ancient 
 versions are agreed in rendering ci^D by ispov^ 
 tcmplum, and also in not connecting it as a Stat, 
 comtr. with the following term, but taking it 
 separately as a slat, absol, and reading it ^"2- 
 It might be difficult to raise any material objec- 
 tion against this departure from the Masoret. 
 punctuation, since it is only too easy to conceive 
 of p;3 as astat. coiutr., and thus reach the ordi- 
 nary reading, in view of the temptation to 
 obtain the sense of "wings of abomination, 
 hideous wings," which is suggested by passages 
 like Zech. v. 1, 9. Moreover, the interpretation 
 of Ct^S by " sanctuary" has an almost irresisti- 
 ble though indirect support in the irrcpvyiov roi' 
 if/j'/) of Slatt. iv. .1. q::, in itself equivalent to 
 "screen, covering, roof" (from which fund, 
 meaning all others, e.y., wing, tassel, edge, bor- 
 der, etc., are readily derived), might without 
 difficulty become the customary term to desig- 
 nate tits roof of the temple or the " pinnacle of 
 
 * [The author's construction of the words in question, 
 although sanctioned by such eiirly authority, is wholly un- 
 gnimmatical. There is but one translation possible ; On a 
 wing of nbomtnattonst shall be a dehotator. The t]:2 aptly 
 designates the eagles of the Iloman army, which were used 
 as idolatrous inmpes : and tlio •' dcsolator," which was 
 **over'' them, of course, is the army itself or the comman- 
 der. This is in pointed agreement with our Lord's warning. 
 Matt. xxiv. \:i ; which, of course, must be regarded as a cita- 
 tion of this passage from the Sept., as mihHtinitiaUi/ agree- 
 ing with its sense. I'he fact that the destruction of the 
 city and temple by Titus did not immediately follow the 
 Crudflxion is uo objection to this interpretation of the 
 clause, which is altogether parallel, both in import and 
 phrVMOlogy. with the dise of the preceding verse.] 
 
 the temple" (Matt., 1. c.), and afterward be 
 applied, with equal adaptation, to the entir( 
 edifice of the temple (in view of its elevated site 
 and its prominent buildings), by virtue of a 
 synecdoche analogous to that which prevails in 
 the Latin with reference to tectum, and in the 
 Greek (cf. Matt. viii. 8) in the use of "rt-jti. If 
 this view should not seem objectionable, it will 
 not be necessary to limit the sense of q;; so as 
 to apply to the roof -pinnacle, summit, or high- 
 est point of the temple (Gesenius, HengsteD 
 berg, etc.), nor yet to -violently amend C):3 bj" 
 by supplying bj'inD^, with J. D. Michaelis. I* 
 will then be possible to render it simply by, ' ' and 
 on the -wing, i. e. , the temple, " and to regard the 
 " desolating idolatrous abominations found on it 
 as any symbols or utensils of idolatrous worship 
 -whatever, whether idols, altars erected to their 
 worship, or other similar fixtures. See espe- 
 cially Bleek, Jahrb. f. d. Theol, 1860. p. 93 et 
 seq. * — We adduce, by way of illustration 
 merely, several of the more recent and notice- 
 able of the many interpretations rejected in 
 favor of the above (with reference to which 
 Hitzig, p. 168, observes somewhat coarsely, but 
 not without wit, and, were he to assign to his 
 own a principal place among them, not incor- 
 rectly, that "the expositors themselves are here 
 lying-in in the weeks, and being delivered of all 
 manner of -^^^pX' "). Hitzig interprets, "and 
 annihilation, even to its full consummation, is 
 poured out on the extreme point of the horrible 
 abomination " (by which expression is desig- 
 nated the idolatrous altar, which, according to 
 1 Mace. i. .59, was erected on the altar of burnt- 
 offerings by Antiochus) ; Ewald, " and above 
 shall be the horrible wing of abominations," i.e., 
 "the wing-shaped (! ?) point of the heathen 
 altar shall appear over" the ruined altar of 
 Jehovah ; Wieseler, " and a desolator shall arise 
 against the wing of abominations ; " Von Len- 
 gerke, "the desolator comes upon the pinnacle 
 of abomination " (also Hengstenberg. Maurer, 
 Reinke) ; de Wette, "the abomination of the 
 desolator shall stand on the pinnacle of the tem- 
 ple ; ". Hiivernick, " on the head (or summit) of 
 the abominations is a desolator ; " Auberlen, 
 ' • and because of the desolating wing of abom- 
 inations .... the curse (?) shall drop down 
 upon the desolate;" Delitzsch, "and indeed, 
 because of the desolating wing of abominations 
 (which .spreads over the temple and the altar), 
 the sacrifice shall be abolished ; " Hofmann, 
 " and upon the covering of the desolating idola- 
 trous institutions (i.e., on the new plate which 
 Antiochus caused to be placed on the profaned 
 altar with a -view to the offering of heathen 
 sacrifices) the sacrifice shall be interrupted for 
 half a week ; " FiiUer, "and over the covering 
 of abominations stands a desolator ; " Ebrard, 
 
 • [Blcek, in the passage here cited, shows, as Keil well 
 argues, that qi5 is "used only of that which is extended 
 horizontally (for end or extremity), but never of that which 
 is extended perjtendicnlarly {for peak)." Nor, as Keil con- 
 tinues, can the use of it in the latter sense be (-roved ficm 
 the mtpvyiov of Matt. iv. .5: Luke iv. 9: for the genitive 
 ToO ifpoy. not I'ooii. shows that not a pinnacle or summit of 
 the temple edifice itself is meant, but a wing or adjoining 
 bnililing of the sanctuary. To the latter alone, indeed 
 coulil access have been liad by our Lord on the occasioi 
 referred to. I 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-27. 
 
 205 
 
 Cliefoth, "and a destroyer comes on the wings 
 of idolatrous abominations " (so formerly Reich- 
 el. Stud. V. Kritiktii. 1848, and also Kranich- 
 feld [and substantially Keil]) ; Jahn, Ilcrmencu- 
 tic. Append., p. 101), {Tesenius(7'//«<(/«;'.). '"deso- 
 lation comes upon the horrible wing of the 
 rebel's host ; " [Stuart. " and a waster shall be 
 over a winged fowl of abominations,"' i.e., the 
 winged statue of Jupiter Olympius placed by 
 Antiochus in the temple], etc. — Even until 
 the consummation, and that determined shall 
 be poured upon the desolate; rather, "but 
 (only) until extirpation and judicial punishment 
 shall be poured out upon the desolator," i.e., the 
 abomination of desolation shall continue only 
 nntil the Divinely determined judgment shall be 
 poured out upon the desolator. The i in "IST 
 may be rendered by " and indeed" (as -\ epexe- 
 gelicmii), or by " but yet ; " in either case this 
 closing sentence serves to limit the idea. It 
 points out, in a comforting manner, how long 
 the abomination of desolation should continue 
 in the sanctuary, certifying that it could be 
 maintained no longer than the providence of 
 God should permit.* "The thought that the 
 events of the entire period of severe tribulation 
 in question are controlled by a Divine decree 
 which predetermines their end and results was 
 already expressed for the comfort of the pious 
 in the niKSis n-i^n: of v. 20, and was also 
 implied by "Pn;, v. 24" (Kranichfeld). The 
 combination "^"n^l '"'?? is taken verbatim 
 from Isa. x. 23 ; xxviii. 22, and signifies, as in 
 those passages. " utter extinction (annihilation) 
 and consummation," — a heudiadys which de- 
 notes a " Divinely determined annihilation, 
 extirpation imposed as a judicial punishment." 
 This two-fold idea forms a unit in the intimate 
 blending of its shades of meaning, and is the 
 subject of the verb "^Pri ; for 1> is not in this 
 in.stance a preposition governing the two sub- 
 stantives, but a conjunction, signifying " until 
 that," as elsewhere "1^? '? I cf. Gen. xxxviii. 
 11 ; Hos. X. 12. The annihilation that was 
 determined "drops down, is poured out" on 
 the -*?-,' the impious desolator, as the curse 
 and the oath were to descend upon the guilty 
 Israelites, v. 11 ; cf. P"'.?, which does not 
 
 materially differ from ''^^~n.:l '""^ri ** ^^^ ^' 
 ready been shown.— BKin, the Kal participle of 
 D":™'. is probably equivalent in substance to 
 55™^, the Piel partic. of the same verb (cf. 
 chap. viii. 13; xii. 11 with chap. xi. 31).f Like 
 th.it, it signifies "desolating, the desolating 
 (agent), desolation," and probably does not pri- 
 
 * [Rather, it shows that the abominable object should 
 remain even tilt the complete desolation. Keil'a objection 
 to the use of nJ") as a conjunction, that '• though ~7 is 
 
 so used, 1>1 is not," has little force.] 
 
 t (Such a confusion of Kal and Piel is quite unauthor- 
 ized. S?212 must here, as everywhere else, be treated as 
 
 passive, dexolate. It is certainly parallel with Tl'D'S'^tS 
 
 of the preceding verse, as the conuectiou with ,"I2"in3 in 
 both ilistance:^ sh twa.] 
 
 marily designate the person of the antichrist, 
 but rather both antichrist and his host (cf. v. 
 20. "the people of a prince') — hence, the 
 aggregate of the power that opposed God led 
 Israel into aposta.sy and desecrated its sanctu- 
 ary, and upon which the Divine judgment was 
 for that reason poured out. Hitzig arbitrarily 
 ^ remarks (as did Ewald and Hofmann before 
 him) that -tt",r does not designate the tyrant 
 who resisted God, but rather the idol-altar 
 erected by him or the heathen religion gener- 
 ally, against which destruction and judgment 
 are here denounced, as being horrible to any 
 Israelite in its nature. 
 
 APPENDIX 
 
 Belating to the history of tlie eocpoiition of vb. 
 24^27. 
 
 I 
 1 . Jewish exposition in pre- Christian times ia 
 united in referring this section to the Maccabje- 
 an ajra of tribulation under Antiochus Epiphanes.' 
 This is established beyond controversy by the 
 iiiW/.vyua epoiKJaeur of 1 Mace. i. ,54, which cor- 
 responds to 0'5~'Q ai^lp".!", V. 27. and in that 
 place denotes the smaller idol-altar (fiuudf, v. 59) 
 erected by Antiochus Epiphanes on the altar of 
 burnt-offerings. It is no less clearly indicated 
 by the maimer in which the Sept. renders this 
 paragraph, and supplements it with vaiious ad- 
 ditions that obviously relate to the Maccabaean 
 period. In this connection the mode of express- 
 ing the time indicated at the beginning of v. 26 
 is especially instructive. • • And after threescore 
 and two weeks," reads in that version, ' ' inrn i-ra 
 Kai eiidntiijKovra Kal f^i/Kuvra th'o," i.e., after 1.39 
 (67 + 02) yeari^ This was doubtless intended 
 to designate the year 139 of the a;ra ot the 
 SeleucidEB (B.C. 174) as the time at which began, 
 the apostasy of the Jews who had been seduced 
 by Antiochus ; cf. 1 Maco. i. 11 et seq. ; 2 Mace, 
 iv. 9 et seq. See also Wieseler, Lie 70 ^Vnrhen, 
 etc., p. 201; Havernick, Komnnnt., p. 387 et 
 seq. — Several expressions in the New Test, 
 appear to Indicate that shortly before the advent 
 of Christ the Jews again began to look for the 
 fulfilment of the prophecy in question in tlie 
 future ; e.g., Luke ii, 38 (cf. v. 24), -iioci'icxiiuti'oi 
 '/ I'TfiGinii' 'lefH^rnn'/ifii ; Matt, xi, 3, o iffxuinrnr, ^ 
 designation of the Messiah that probably origin- 
 ated in a misunderstanding of SS~ in v. 26 (cf. 
 Wieseler, p. 150) ; and also the allusions to the 
 " abomination of desolation," v. 27, contained 
 in the eschatological prophecies uttered by the 
 Saviour (Matt. xxiv. 10 ; M.ark xiii. 14) and by 
 St. Paul (2 Thess. ii. 3 et seq.), which could 
 only be understood by their contemporaries, in 
 case a Messianic character were assigned to the 
 paragraph before us, and consequently, in case 
 its fulfilment were not exclusively looked for in 
 the events of the Maccabaean period. *--Jose- 
 
 * Cf. the observation of Meliincthon on the pas-sape, 
 which is certjiinly not incorrect upon the whole (p. Sfti) ; 
 ^^AcJudmU quidem' post luinielein /acilUi fitic obnei-vatio 
 aintorum, prttserltm qvum in en popitlo Mtrertiotet tempora 
 diliqenttfr ttnnoutreni et ntnlct eJt'^ent loiKjcpvi. Nehemian, 
 qui Danielein senern videt-at fidiiU^ceii.^, Alejrft/tdritm seiiea 
 vidil ^y) .... ^ituc'tn qui CltfiatUJH infitiitem ife\fa- 
 vitins-inn, vidit tldntenceuit senex, qui 3la"-'(lnKtnn riilciatlt. 
 Talef Biri tempt/re, quo ChriHtu.i nntiin e-\t, iutetlt^xenint, an. 
 twn hie priTjlnitoH exaete Quadrare ad Chri-^ti udveiitum^^ 
 
206 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 phuB also bears witness that this Messianic-es- 
 chatological inteqjretation was current among 
 the Jews of his day. in the repeated instances 
 where he states, or at least implies, that the 
 terrible incidents connected with the Jewish 
 war and the destruction of Jerusalem by the 
 Romans were predicted by the prophet Daniel ; 
 e.g., Ant.. X. 11. 7 : '-Daniel also wrote concern- 
 ing the Roman government, and that our coun- 
 try should be made desolate by them (o"' i-' 
 avTu^ 'ui/fiu-dyae-ai); " De Bell. Jud., IV. 5. 2, 
 where be applies the term '■ anointed one," v. 
 26, and again the expression "anointed one and 
 
 prince," v. 25, to the high priest Aaanus whom 
 the Idumjeaus murdered ; and Vi' Belt Jud-.V!. 
 5, 4, where the mysterious oracle "that then 
 should their city be taken, when their temple 
 should become four-square " seems to refer back 
 to V. 27 (where they perhaps read J^-"J instead 
 of 5inC), etc. It is less certain whether any 
 direct reference to this section is contained in ; 
 the celebrated passage, I)e BeU. Jud. , VI. , 5, 4, wc 
 Kara rov naipoi' tKeifov an-u ri/c ^upac ti<; aL'ri.ii' 
 a/tict rf/( otKovtiii-r,(. In that case the parallel 
 records in Tacitus, Hist., V. 13 and Suet., Ve-ip., 
 4, must, of course, be likewise rooted in the pro- 
 phecy of Daniel that is before us. Concerning 
 this question see HiiTemick, p. 390, who, how- j 
 ever, probably finds too much in the passage, 
 since he refers the ai>;it vin olnovfiiv. directly to 
 the -l^?l of V. 25 and 26.* 
 
 2. The interpretation of Josephus, which ap- 
 plies the prophecy to the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem in A.D. 70 and to Titus as the S3~ -;i3:. 
 V. 26, seems to have been accepted, with scarcely 
 an exception, by the later Jeics of the Talmudic 
 ;era and the time immediately subsequent. The 
 principal witness to this fact is Jerome (on v. 
 24 et seq. ; T. K, 2 ed. Vallars., p. 694). The 
 " Hebraji" of his day calculated the 490 years 
 or seventy weeks of years from the first year of 
 Darius or B.C. 539 indeed, but none the less as- 
 signed their conclusion to the age of Jesus, even 
 finding his death predicted therein (probably in 
 the nill"?2 r~2";, V. 26), since they held that 
 " non erit illius imperium, guod putabat se re- 
 demturnm " (as it should be read, instead of 
 " qiifxl imtabant se reteiityros," which is a later 
 emendation). They also found a prediction of 
 the approach of the Roman army under Ves- 
 pasian and Titus, in the same place. Several 
 added even the rising under Barcocheba or the 
 three years' (three and a half years) war against 
 Hadrian : " Nee ignm-aimis, quosdam illorum di- 
 eere, quod una hehdmwda. de quii. scriptuin e»t: 
 confimiabit pactum multis hebdomada una. dinda- 
 iur VespaMano et Hadriano, guod juxta huitonam 
 Josep/d Vespasianus et Titus tribus annis et sex 
 meitsibus pacem cum Judais fer.criit t. Tres atttem 
 anni et sex menses sub Hadriano suppiitantur, 
 quando Hieriisiilrm oninino subrersn est. et Juda- 
 onun 'jens caterratim cmsa, itn vt Jnda-iB qtwque 
 finiius peUerentur."—'Ihe two Gemaras also re- 
 fer this prophecy to the war against Vespasian ; 
 the Babylonian in Nasir, c. 5 ; San/iedr., c. 11, 
 and the Jerus alem in Kelim. c. 9 ; and several 
 
 • fit is iicrhaps to thcw proijheciei' I'f Daniel in a Beneral 
 waj- thot Jostpluis likewise alliules in the references to an 
 ancient prediction that the city nhniiW be destroyed in a 
 tivU war, De Hell. Jiul., IV. H, :i ; VI., 2, 1.] 
 
 Talmudic and Rabbinical traditions are likewis* 
 based oi. thai interpretation, e.f/.. that the Tar- 
 guinist had neglected to translate the Hagio- 
 grapha. because it was taught in them that ' ■ tht 
 Messiah should be cut off" (v. 26. See Light- 
 foot, J{»r. Uebr. ad Luc. xix. 11 ; Schottgen, 
 JInr. Ilehr., p. 211) ; and that the Jlessiah actu 
 ally came at the time when Jerusalem was de 
 stroyed and the temple desolated, but as a suf- 
 ferer and in disgnise (Glassener, D( ganin . Jud 
 Mess. p. 23 ss. ; Corrodi, Krit. Gesch.des Chilias 
 mtis, I. 284 et seq.).— It was reserved for the 
 later period of the middle ages to introduce 
 several new and more independent explanations 
 beside this variously modified Messianic inter- 
 pretation of the prophecy ; e.g., by referring the 
 ~rT. nira to Cyrus (Saad. Gaon., Rashi, Jac- 
 chiad ), or to Nehemiah (Ibn-Ezrai or the high- 
 priest Joshua (Levib.-Gers. ). Cf. Mi.Uer, Jnda- 
 v)m, pp. 321, 342 et seq. ; Carpzov, in his ed. of 
 Raymond Martini's Pugiofidei, p. 233.— It was 
 customary to follow the Seder 01am Rabba in 
 reckoning the seventy weeks from the first de- 
 struction of the temple to the second ; see Aben- 
 dana, in the Spicileg. ad Michl. Jophi: '■ Heb- 
 domades hce sept, sunt septimante aniiorum quad- 
 ringentorum nonnginta, iidemque sine dvbio a 
 d^astatione primi ad demstationem secundi tern- 
 pli, quia sept, anni fuei-e aiptivitntis Babyhnicee, 
 et quadringenti nginti anni. quibus futura erit 
 domiis secunda in siructvra sua : atque sic ma- 
 jores nostri erposuere in Seder Olam." By this 
 method of reckoning, the "1^" «'■??:, v. 25, is 
 accordingly made to apply to the period of Jere- 
 miah's prophecy respecting the seventy years' 
 exile or to the year B.C. 588. Ibn-Ezra alone 
 departs from this method, by referring that ex- 
 pression concerning the going forth of the oracle 
 (V. 23) to Daniel, and consequently assigning the 
 beginning of the 4!)0 years to the year B.C. 53£ 
 and extending the first seven weeks of years be- 
 longing to that period, to Nehemiah. the re- 
 storer of the temple, or to the twentieth year 
 of Artaxerxes. Concerning these Eabhinical 
 methods of reckoning, and at the same time, 
 concerning their fundamental incorrectness and 
 untenable character in a chronological point of 
 view, cf. Chr. B. Michaelis. Anuut. nbermr. III. 
 320 et seq. Individual Rabbins in modem times 
 were convinced of the incorrectness of this usu- 
 al anti-Messianic interpretation, as appears from 
 the noteworthy expres.Kion of the Venetian chief- 
 Rabbin Simon Luzzato. concerning this passage, 
 as recorded by Wolf in the BiUiuth. Uebr., III. 
 1228. According to him, "the consequence of 
 a too extended and profound investigation on 
 the part of Jewish scholars would be that they 
 would all become Christians ; for it cannot be 
 denied that according to Daniel's limitation of 
 the time, the Messiah must have aheady ap- 
 peared. But that Jesus was the true Messiah 
 he felt himself unable to accept as certain." _ 
 
 3. The Christian expositors of the older time 
 regarded the directly Messianic bearing of the 
 passage as being generally incontrovertible, and 
 especially the npplication of niu:^ r'S" to 
 Christ the crucified, as also the reference of the 
 " restoring and building " of the city and tem- 
 ple in V. 25 to the establishing of the church oi 
 the New Covenant ; cf. Barnabas, Ep. , c. 10 : 
 
CHAP IX. 1-27. 
 
 207 
 
 yeypaTTTai yap Kal la-rm^ eSi^nudt]/^^ enwrn^joviitvr/^. 
 o'LKo6oaJi^i]a£Tai raof i^foi- fi'tio^wf i—l tu oi'6aa7i 
 Ki'iiiov. K7/.. The different exegetes varied ex- 
 ceedingly, however, in the mode of reckoning 
 the years.* Jerome, on this passage, already 
 mentions nine different methods of explaining 
 them : (1) that of Jul. Africanus, who reckoned 
 the 490 years from Xehemiah, or the 20th year 
 of Artaxerxes. to the death of Christ, but in 
 connection with this committed the error of 
 reckoning by Jewish lunar years (resulting in 
 only 465 solar years) ; (2i Three different the- 
 ories of Eusebius, who (a) dates the first sixty- 
 nine weeks from the return of the Jews in the 
 reign of Cyrus to the death of Alexander Jau- 
 naeus, the high priest and king, and Pompey's 
 invasion (B.C. SyC-BC. 64; thus in Dem. ev.. 
 VIII. 2, 55 et seq.) ; or (J) from the second year 
 of Darius Hystaspis (B.C. 520 to the birth of 
 Christ (ibid, and C'/tronic. 01. 184); or, (c) re- 
 gards the last week as a period of seventy years, 
 and attempts to calculate from the resurrection 
 of Christ ; (8) that of Hippolytus, who counted 
 si.xty-nine mystical weeks (comprising more than 
 seven years each) from the first year of Cyrus 
 to the incarnation of Christ, and declared that 
 the last my,stical week denotes the future period 
 of the antichrist, which is connected with the 
 end of the world ; (4) that of ApoUinaris of 
 Laodicea, who reckoned the 490 years from the 
 birth of Christ (" rti exitu Verbi," v. 25), and 
 therefore expected the coming of the antichrist 
 and the end of the world about a century after 
 his day, in the " last week ; " (5) that of Clem- 
 ens Alex, who extended the seventy weeks of 
 year.s, in the face of all chronology, from the 
 fir.st year of Cyrus to the second year of Vespa- 
 sian (B.C. 560- A. D. 70); (6) that of Origen, 
 who denies the possibility of any more exact 
 chronological estimate, and therefore assumes 
 4yuO years instead of 490, reaching from Adam 
 to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus (not 
 indeed in vol. X. of his Stromitta, which Je- 
 rome cites, but in his Tract. XXI V. on Matthew 
 c. 24) ; (7) that of Tertullian (mlc. Jiidiws, c. 8), 
 who reckons the 437i years from the first year 
 of Darius Nothus (whom he strangely identifies 
 with Darius Medus) to the birth of Christ, and 
 fifty- two and a half from that event to the de- 
 struction of Jerusalem, thus obtaining 490. — 
 Jerome himself expresses no opinion respecting 
 the mode of reckoning to be observed, but seems 
 to favor that of Africanus, which he preferred 
 to all the others, and probably not without rea- 
 son. That method is likewise adopted by Chry- 
 sostom, Theodoret, Isidore of Pelusium, Euthy- 
 naius Zigabenns, and generally by a majority of 
 expositors in the Oriental church, but few of 
 whom asf.ume an independent position. Among 
 the latter are, e.f/., Cyril of Jerusalem (Catech. 
 xii. ID), who attempts to extend the seventy 
 
 * On tni« \>ouit, c-f. KeiiRch, Die jtatrUtischen herech- 
 nutiffen der 7U Jahriotn-hen Daniein, in the TUbintjer 
 Tlteol. QuaruiUcnriJc, lt>68. No. iv., p. 535 et te.i. ; also 
 Reinke, DU Me/tttanOtcfieit Weinsafjutifjen, iv. 1, 3Mt et seq. 
 The (Statements of the latter are, however, padly in need of 
 c-rrection ant] FUiipIenientin^ by l^o^e of Ueusch. 
 
 \\.n tvhiition to Keiisch's treatise, Keil refers to the follow- 
 ing KVinimariew . " for the period of the Middle Ages and of 
 more modem times, .\br. Colovii EfeVaa*? tfieoln(/ica Ue xeptu- 
 aijinta (teptiVA.viis DantelfJi. in the Bihiia iUn^tr. ad Dan. 
 U., und IIuv( niick's MIiKt.)ryof the Interpretation," in his 
 CoTument., p. 3S0 sq. ; and for the most recent ]ierio<l, 
 R, Ba.^kmann, ' on the Book of LtanieL,' in the Theoiog. 
 itwiim u.'KrUikim, 18(13, III., p. iTi sq.'] 
 
 weeks of years from the sixth year of DariuB 
 Medus to the birth of Christ, but violates his- 
 torical accuracy by identifying Darius Medus 
 with Darius Hystaspis ; Ephraem Syrus who 
 places the restoration of Jerusalem in the be- 
 ginning of the sevenrieth week and the destruc 
 tion by Titus at its close, without entering or » 
 more careful calculation m other respec;s; 
 Polychronius, a brother of Theodore of Mopeu- 
 estia, who reckons the first seven weeks from 
 Darius Medus to the ninth year of Darius Hy- 
 staspis, when Zerubbabel's temple is said to have 
 been completed, the sixty-two weeks from the 
 twentieth year of Artaxerxes to the birth of 
 Christ, and the final week from that date to 
 Titus, while the death of Christ falls in its cen- 
 tral point; Basil of Seleucia (Orat., 38 in t. 85 
 of Migne's Patrol.), who calculates the first 
 sixty-nine weeks from the completion of the 
 walls of Jerusalem in the twenty-eighth year of 
 Xerxes (!) to the resurrection of Christ, and 
 identifies the seventieth week with the first seven 
 years after the resurrection, while he declares 
 the abomination of desolation erected in the 
 middle of that week to have been the familiar 
 attempt of Caligula to erect his image in the 
 temple. — Among the later expositors of the 
 Latin church, Augustine, follott-ing the example 
 of Jerome, avoids every independent and detail- 
 ed calculation of the seventy weeks. He con- 
 tents himself with finding a fulfilment of the 
 leading fe,atures of the prophecy Dan. ix. 24 et 
 seq., in the earthly work of Christ and in the 
 judgment of Jerusalem, and expres.sly rejects 
 (especially in Ep. 199 " (le fine sa'culii") the 
 opinion of those who looked for two periods 
 of seventy weeks of years, the first of which 
 should reach to Christ's advent in the flesh, and 
 the second to the end of the world. This as- 
 sumption of a double period of seventy weeks 
 of years, or of an Old-Test, and typical realiza- 
 tion of the prophecy, followed by a New-Test. 
 antitypical fulfilment, was advocated as late as 
 the sixth century by the unknown Arian author 
 of the so-called Qpiis imperj'ectum in Matthaion. 
 Sulpicius Severus {Cliruii., II. 21) extends the 
 sixty-nine weeks from the thirty-second .year of 
 Artaxerxes I. to Vespasian, or from the restora- 
 tion of the temple to its second destruction. His 
 contemporary, Julius Hilarianus, appears in his 
 Chronolvgia «. Ubellus de miindi duratione (in 
 Migne. t. 13, p. 1098) as the forerunner of the 
 modem critical exposition, in consequence of 
 his denial of the direct Messianic character of 
 the prophecy, whose fulfilment he places in the 
 age of Autiochus and the Maccabees ; but he 
 commits the gross chronological blunder of .as- 
 signing 434 years ( := 62 weeks) to the interval 
 between the return of the Jews under Zerub- 
 babel and the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. 
 while the period between B.C. 536 and B.C. 175 
 really amounts to but 361 years ! Prosper Aqui- 
 tan in his Clironicon adopts the view advocated 
 by Eusebius in the DemonMr. evangelica and the 
 Chron. (see supra. No. 2 A), and accordingly 
 reckons the sixty-nine weeks from the building 
 of the temple under Darius to Herod the Gr. and 
 the birth of Christ. Finally, the venerable Bede 
 adopts substantially the view of Julius African- 
 us {Libdl. de temporuni ratione, c. 7). as do«t 
 also Thomas Aquinas (Comm. in Dan., in Opp 
 t. XIII. ed. Antverpj. 
 
808 
 
 THE PROPHET DAXIEL. 
 
 4. The erpositors of modern times, and more 
 particularly of prerationalistic times, are agreed 
 in recognizing the Messianic bearing of this pro- 
 phecy, but differ exceedingly in their modes of 
 reckoning the seventy weeks, or, what amounts 
 to the same thing, in their interpretations of 
 -]--[ Stsia, V. 2.1.* As the tenninvs a quo of 
 the seventy weeks they accept one of the follow- 
 ing dates : 
 
 «. The time of the first prophecy by Jeremiah 
 (Jer. XXV. 11 et seq. )', or the fourth year of Je- 
 hoiakim's reign ; thus Harduin ( Chroml. Vet. 
 Test., Amstel.. 1T09, p. 592 sa.); A. Calmet 
 (Dmert. sur ks 70 semaines de Daniel, Dis- 
 tertt., p. 1); A. Collins {The scheme of liberal 
 prophecy, I. 109). 
 
 b. The time of Jeremiah's secmid prophecy 
 (Jer. xxix. 10) or the fourth year of Zedekiah ; 
 so Seb. Mimster. Vatablus (and also several ex- 
 positors belonging to the last centuries in the 
 Middle Ages, e.g. , Lyranus, in the PostiUa, Raym, 
 Martini, Fugio fid., 2, 209, etc.). 
 
 c. The date of Daniel's prophecy itself (chap, 
 ix. 1), and hence the first year of_ the reign of 
 Darius Medus over Babylon, B. C. 539 ; so J. H. 
 Jungmann (Cassel, 1081) ; J. Koch {Entsiegelter 
 Daniel. II., §206, and Kune Anfangsgritiideder 
 Chronologic. II. 24), J. D. Michaelis {Versuch 
 iiber die 70 Wochen Daniels, GKJtt. and Gotha, 
 1770 ; cf . his Epistula de Septuag. hebckmi. ad 
 Jo. Pringle. London, 1773); Matth. Hassenkamp 
 ( Versiich einer neuen Erklurvng der 70 Wochen 
 Daniels, Lemgo, 1772) ; Velthusen (Muthma^- 
 sungen iiber die siebenmal siebenzig Jahre beim 
 Daniel ix. 24-27, Hanover, 1774). 
 
 d. The first year of the reign of Cyrus. B.C. 
 560 ; Calvin, CEcolampadius, I'Empereur, Coc- 
 ceius, Matth. Bervaldua {Chronicon «». auctori- 
 tate constitutum. III. 7), B. Blayney {A disserta- 
 tion by way of Inquiry into Daniel's seventy 
 Weeks, Oxford. 1775), H. Uri (Sept. hebdoma- 
 duni, quas Gabriel ad Manielem detulerat, in- 
 terpretatio. paraphnisis, cmnputalio, Oxford, 
 1788), also Dathe, Hegel, etc. , in their commen- 
 
 e. The second year of the reign of Danus Hys- 
 taapl? (B.C. 520), or the year of the prophe ies 
 of blessing by Haggai (i. 1 et seq. ; ii. 1 et seq.) 
 and Zechariah (i. 1 et seq. ; iii. 8 et seq. ; vui. 
 7 et seq.); so J. Driedo (De scripti^s et dogmati- 
 bus ecdesiasticis, c. 5). Com. Jansen (Concord, 
 evangel., c. 122), J. A. Bengel (Ordo temporum, 
 etc., Stuttgart, 1741). 
 
 /. The second year of the reign ot Danus No- 
 thus (B.C. 423| ; so J. J. Scaliger (De emendat. 
 temporum, 1. 4), S. Calvisius (Opus chronohgi- 
 ctim). 
 
 g. The second year of the reign of Artaxerxes 
 Longimanus; so Luther (D. PropJiet Daniel 
 deutsch, etc., vol. 41, p. 247, ed. Erl.), Melanc- 
 thon (Comm. p. 891), Sal. Glossius [Philol. sacra). 
 
 h. The seventh year of Artaxerxes Longima- 
 nns, or the date of the first decree by this king 
 to rebuUd Jerusalem (Ezra vii. 1 ; viii. 11 et 
 Beq.); so Abr. Calov (De Septuag. sej}timanis 
 my-sterimn. Viteb., 1663 ; Dibl. illustr., I., p. 119 
 Bs. ). M. Geier, in the Comm., Isaac Newton 
 (Ohservations. etc. ), J. R. Rus (Diss, de Sept. 
 hehdom. Danielis, Jenaj, 1740), H. Benzcl (/>MS. 
 df 70 hebdd. Danielis, in t he Syntagma dts- 
 
 • CI. Bertholdt, Daniel, II. p., 587 et aeq. 
 
 serlntt., 11., 31 as.), H. Prideaux (Connectiont, 
 etc.), Alex. Sostmann [CommeiU. chrond. pkHd. 
 et extget. in orac. Dan. ix. 24r-27. Lugd. B. 
 1710), S. Deyling (Profjr. ad Dan. ix. 24 ss., 
 Lips., 1724), J. G. Franck (yocuin systema 
 chronologia funda.mentalis, Gott. . 1778). J . C. 
 Dnderleiu (/««««««. Theol. chr., II., p. 530 ss.). 
 i. The ticentieth year of Artaxerxes Longim- 
 anus, or the date of the scctmd ed'ct by that 
 king (Neh. ii. 1, 7 et seq.); so Luther (Dass 
 Jesus Christus ein giborner Jude sei, vol. 29. p. 
 71 et seq., ed. Erl. ),* H J. Oflft-rhaus (DissertaU 
 de 70 septimanis Danielis, Groning.. 1756), 
 J G. 'Reiaheck (Betrachtungen iiber die Augsb. 
 Confession, III., 39), S. S. Weickhmann (Carmen 
 Danielis de 70 hebdd. Christo vindicai.. Prog., 
 Viteb., 1772), Starke (Synops., p. 2614). 
 
 k. The tenth or eleventh year of Artaxerxes 
 Longimanus, or the earlier dat e by about ten 
 years assigned to his second edict, on the ground 
 of his co-regency with his father Xerxes ; so 
 Dion. PetaMivLB {Doctrina teinjy])., L. 12, c. 29; 
 Mtionarium tempih. II., 3, c. 9). Camp. Vitiinga 
 [De Septuag. hebdom. Dan. adeers. Marsha- 
 mvm, Observatt. sacr., II., p. 290 ss.), C. B. 
 Michaelis (in Annntt. vberior., etc.). 
 
 I. The second year of the reign of Xerxes , 
 so J. E. Faber (Jesus ex natalium opportunitate 
 Messias, Jense, 1772, p. 125 ss.). 
 
 A great difference of opinion prevailed also 
 with reference to the particular teminus ad 
 griem of the prophecy referred to Christ, inas- 
 much as (a) some, following Eusebius, Cyril of 
 Jerusalem, Jacob of Edessa, and othpr ancient 
 churchly expositors, extended the seventy weeks 
 merely to the death of Christ, others (b) con- 
 tinued them to the time of his presentation in 
 the temple (Jungmann. Sostmann, etc.), others 
 (c) to his baptism in the Jordan or to his anoint- 
 ing (Melancthon, Calvin, Vitringa ; also \V. 
 Whiston, Dissertation upon Daniel's weeks, 
 London, 1725>, still others (cf) to the year of our 
 Lord's death (Luther, Calov, Prideaux, Buddeus, 
 H. Ecd. Vet. Ti.. p. 854 ss.), and others finally 
 (e) included the more general spread of the 
 Gospel in the years immediately following the 
 Saviour's death in the series of the seventy 
 weeks (Petavius. Bengtl, J. Brunsmann, etc.).— 
 Various methods were adopted in order to ob- 
 viate, by means of exact calculation, the dis- 
 crepancy between the termin. a quo and ad 
 quern, which was either too large or too small. 
 According to Bertholdt, p. 574 et seq., they may 
 be designated as follows : 
 
 (1). The method of parcdlelism by which the 
 seven and the sixty-two weeks were reckoned 
 from the same point of time, or by which these 
 periods were not regarde I as successive in their 
 order, but as contemporaneous with each other 
 (Haiduin. Jungmann. Collins, Marsham, etc.). 
 
 (2). The merhod of intercalation which con- 
 sisted in interpolating intervals of greater or less 
 extent between the several periods of hebdo- 
 mads, and especially between the sixty-ninth 
 and seventieth weeks (I'Empereur, Newton, 
 Koch, Beer, Uri, etc.). 
 
 (3). The method of tranposition by which 
 the first two periods of hebdomads were enum- 
 
 * Luther, however, confouluis Artaxerxes I., who figures 
 in the book of Nehemmh. with C.iml..v.ses. cf. also the work. 
 Von elm Juden una iliren Liigen. vol. M, pp. ISO et seq.. 
 Hi et seq. 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-27 
 
 209 
 
 erated in inverted order, i.e.. the sixty two first, 
 and the seven afterward (thus, in imitation of 
 TertuUian, Theodoret, etc., some of the most 
 recent expositors, especially Hof mann, Delitzsch, 
 Wieseler, etc.). 
 
 (4). The analogical method which estimates 
 the hebdomads in the several sections by an un- 
 equal standard, e.g., regarding the seventieth 
 week as a '■^ sfptimaiia magiia" or Jubilee 
 period of forty nine years (Newton, Frank; 
 similarly Calmet, A. Kluit {Vaticininm de Mes- 
 Ha duce primarium s. explic. Sejyt. hebdd. Dan.. 
 Mediol., 1774], and already many of the church 
 fathers mentioned above, as Eusebius, Poly- 
 chronius, etc.). 
 
 (5). The method of reckoning by lunar years 
 of 354 days, without an intercalated month 
 (Hassenkamp and J. D. Michaelts — after the 
 precedent of Jul. Africanus and his patristic 
 successors) . 
 
 (6). The method of cowubm^by juUlee periods 
 of fifty years each, by which the seventy years 
 appear to be exactly equal to 500 years (Sost- 
 mann and others). 
 
 (7). The method of reckoning by Chaldee 
 years'of 3(i0 days, by which the seventy hebdo- 
 mads are reduced to 483 years (Pet. Brinch, 
 Diss, chroml.-eritiea de 70 hebdomadd. Danielis, 
 Hafn., 1702). 
 
 (8). The mystical method of enumeration, 
 which seeks either to limit or extend the sev- 
 enty weeks of years by the use of a year of any 
 abnormal and my.stical length. Hippolytus and 
 others led the way in the ancient church in this 
 method; and following them we have J. J. 
 Hainlinus {Clams sacror. teniporum. Tub., 1G1I2, 
 aud Sol temporuni s. Clironol. mystica. Tub., 
 lU47i; Bengel, Thube, Crusius Ulypomnemata 
 in thmlo'jiam prophetimm). Amonsj them Hain- 
 lin assumed snorter years than the ordinary, 
 giving them 343 days each, and thus obtained 
 4U0 Julian years for the seventy weeks. Ben- 
 gel, Thube, etc., on the other hand, sought to 
 amplify, and therefore fixed the length of a 
 mystical year at 1-,-,',- solar years, and thu.s ob- 
 tained 555 J years for the period of seventy 
 weeks. 
 
 5. The critico-rationalistic or anti- Messianic 
 expositors of recent times may be divided into 
 two principal classes : 
 
 A. That of the emendators who adopt a vio- 
 lent course, and seek to remove the chronological 
 difficulty by means of exegetical or critical as- 
 sumptions of a more or legs arbitrary character, 
 e.g., {1) by the assertion that the seventy weeks 
 are ordinary weeks and therefore 490 days, and 
 extended from the d.ay of the vision to the time 
 of Cyrus and of laying the foundations of the 
 temple (thus the Eng.-work, A free Inquiry into 
 DanieVs vui/m or Proj^hecy of tlie Seventy Weeks, 
 London, 1776 ; cf. Bertholdt, p. 554 et seq. ) ; 
 (2) by the assertion that Daniel, who wrote 
 after the time of Cyrus, predicted to the people 
 an impending second destruction of the recently 
 restored temple in this prophecy, which was 
 therefore not fulfilled (Eckermann, Theol. Bei- 
 trdge, I. 1, p. 132 et seq.) ; (3) by the assumption 
 that vs. 25-27 are the gloss of some 7Y(i«j_ (Franz 
 L;)wenheim. Ingnisitio critica exegetica in diffi- 
 eult proj'h. Dun., c. ix., etc. Wirceb., 1787) ; 
 (4) hy several less important changes in the read- 
 in'.' of V. 24 or 25, such as were proposed by 
 14 
 
 Schmidt (in Paulus' ilemoi ahilia, VII. , 41 et seq.), 
 Velthuaen, J. D. Michaelis, Jahn, et al. Tha 
 first (with whom Baumgarten-Crusius agrees, 
 Bibl. Theol., p. 370) reads v. 24, a"'?="^" =-?=';:'' 
 ' ' seventy, yea, seventy years " (which is in- 
 tended to indicate the duration of the exile), 
 and then translates v. 25, "from the present 
 time to the Messiah are seventy, seven, sixty, 
 and two weeks," which is interpreted to mean 
 that ' ' twice seventy years may elapse before his 
 advent" (!). Velthusen (Muthmassungen iibei 
 die siebenmal 70 Jahre de^ Daniel, Han- 
 over, 1774) reads v. aS 2"i5=c' n^ar O-rr- 
 J. D. Michaelis ( Versuch iiber die 70 Jahr- 
 wochen Daniels, Gutt., 1771) emends the sam«" 
 passage so as to read -"'^r'r-l '^?r'? ""'?-■?■• 
 Jahn {Herm. sacra. Append., t. I.), on the other 
 hand, reads v. 24, like Schmidt, Ci:;3 Oii'Za 
 (the seventy years of the captivity), and then 
 renders V. 25 njar Diyar (70 x 7 or 4SI0 years, 
 which reach from Cyrus to B.C 64), and adds 
 in addition =1:™^ a^ffid D^S^ri (Le., seventy 
 years, to A. D. 7 or 8, and sixty-two years, to 
 the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus). 
 
 B. The more considerate and scientific ex- 
 positors of the critical school conceive of the 
 passage as belonging to the times of Antiochu* 
 Epiphanes, and as a Vnticinium ex ecentu relat- 
 ing to that age. In this view they were pre- 
 ceded by numerous Jewish and a few Christian 
 representatives of the Maccaba^an interpreta- 
 tion (e.g.. by Julius HUjirLanus, about A.D. 400 ; 
 by Marsham, an Englishman [Canon chron., p. 
 (jlO ss.], the Jesuit Harduin [0;^). selecta, p. 
 593 ss.; cf. Kohler, De Harduin noea sed inepta 
 interpretatione vatic, apmi Dan. de 70 hebd., 
 Altorf, 1721], and the English free-thinker Ant. 
 Collins [Scheme of- Liter<d Pro^)hecy, Lond., 
 1726]). So Corrodi (Krit. Qesch. des Ghilinsnius, 
 p. 247 et seq., and Freiniiithige Vcrsiiche iiber 
 verschiedene in Tlievlogie und biblische Krilik 
 einschligende Materien, p. 42 etseq.), who, how- 
 ever, introduced much that is arbitr.117 in devel- 
 oping his scheme. He renewed, for instance, 
 the questionable expedient of transposing the 
 weeks [see No. 4 (3)], reckoning first sixty-two 
 hebdomads from the beginning of the captivity 
 to the first invasion of Judaja by Epiphanes, then 
 seven hebdomads from the date of the composi- 
 tion of the book of pseudo-Daniel to the Mac- 
 cabasan Messiah, who, it is alleged, was expected 
 to appear about the year B.C. 115, and finally 
 inserting a single hebdomad between the two 
 former periods, to which last week he assigns 
 the actual persecutions, which involved, e.g.. the 
 murder of Onias III., the interruption of the 
 sacrifices, etc. — Another representative of this 
 tendency is Eichhom {AUgem. Bibliuthek de) 
 biblisehen Literatur, III., 761 et seq.) who follows 
 the method by parallelism [No. 4 (1)] rather 
 than that of transposition, calculating the first 
 seven hebdomads backwards from the edict of 
 Cyrus in B.C. 536 to the destruction of Jerusa 
 lem by Nebuchadnezzar, but reckoning the sixty- 
 two weeks forward from the fourth year of .Je- 
 hoiakim (B.C. 605) to Ant. Epiphanes. and tha 
 final week from the death of Onias to the res- 
 toration of the temple services by Judas Mao- 
 
210 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 cabaaus. — Eichhom's hypothesis found an ad- 1 
 herent in v. Ammon. who adopted it in his ; 
 Biblischc Theohgie (U. 217 et seq. ) with hut few , 
 changes ; but Bertholdt opposed it with keen 
 criticism, and advanced instead the following 
 explanation : "seventy weeks of years are de- 
 termined upon the Jews until the expiation of 
 their sin [i. e., to the dedication of the temple by 
 Judas Maccabjeus). and, more particularly, from 
 the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnez- 
 zar to the reign of Cyrus, forty-nine years or 
 seven weeks of years ; within a period of sirty- 
 two further weeks of years Jerusalem is to be 
 rebuilt (hence to the time of Epiphanes). At 
 about the end of these sixty-two weeks (? !) 
 Alexander the Gr. dies, without leaving a natur- 
 al successor. Afterward Jerusalem is desolated 
 by Antiochus Epiphanes, who forms an alliance 
 with numerous apostate Je%vs, that continues 
 during nearly a week of years. At the middle 
 of that week he interrupts the temple services 
 and erects the statue of Jupiter Olympus on a 
 wing of the temple — until death overtakes him." 
 So far as the chronological order of the seven 
 and sixty-two weeks is concerned, this exposi- 
 tor is therefore not a parallelist, but a represen- 
 tative of the theory that they denote successive 
 periods. To obviate the exorbitant interval of 
 sixty-two weeks of years between B.C. .136 and 
 B.C. 175, he assumes that, as a whole, the state- 
 ments by the oracle respecting time " are not to 
 be taken mathematically, but prophetically and 
 indefinitely " (p. 613) ! — Bertholdt's theory is 
 accepted by Griesinger (Ktue Ansidd ilcr Auf- 
 stlUe im Bitch Dnniel, 181.5, p. 92) and substan- 
 tially also by Bleek. The latter (Theolxj. 
 Ztitsclir. of Sclileiermacher. deWette. and L icke, 
 1.S22, and Jahrhb. f. d. ThedUtgU, 1860) differs 
 from Bertholdt in several particulars, c..'/., in not 
 dating the commencement of the first seven 
 weeks of years from the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem, but from the prophetic oracle of Jeremiah, 
 chapters xxv. and xxix, , and in extending the 
 sixty-two weeks exactly to the death of Seleu- 
 cus Philopater (the H^w^ without a successor, 
 V. 26). But they are entirely agreed in placing 
 the seven, sixty-two, and one weeks in succes- 
 sion to each otlaer, and in most positively reject- 
 ing every parallelism or transposition of these 
 periods, as being contrary to the sense of the 
 vision {Jnhrbb., etc., p. 83). — H. L. Reichel {Die 
 ■cier Welti-eiche des Propheten. Daniel, in the 
 Theol. Stud. u. Krit., 1848) and Kamphausen in 
 Bunsen's Bibehrerk advocate views similar to 
 those of Bleek, excepting that the latter holds 
 that the "anointed one" of v. 26 denotes the 
 high priest Onias, instead of Seleucus Philopater. 
 . — Several others, however, again made use of 
 parallelisms, e.g., Rosch (Die 70 Jnhriroch- 
 en des Buch^s Daniel, geiiau chronohgisch 
 Wichgemexen, Stud. u. Krit., 1834), v. Lengerke, 
 and Hitzig. The first takes the year B.C. 609 
 as the starting-point of the tiro parallel epochs 
 a.s being the year which the alleged pseudo- 
 Daniel assumed for the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem. The seven weeks of years, beginning at 
 that date, were to continue until the commence- 
 ment of the reign of Cyrus. B C. 560. and the 
 «ixty-two weeks until the death of Seleucus 
 Philopater, the "anointed one who should be 
 cut off j " but this period is lengthened by the 
 
 addition of eight farther weeks, which reach to 
 B.C. 120 or to John Hyrcanus. the political 
 Messiah of Judaism in the Maccabsean period. 
 Von Lengerke likewise regards the seven and 
 the sixty-two years as being parallel, but dateg 
 them from B.C. 588. The sixty- wo were to ex- 
 pire with the murder of Seleucus Philopater, 
 the "anointed one," v. 26 (although this is said 
 to involve an error of 21-22 years in the reckon- 
 ing of pseudo-Daniel, since the 434 years, it 
 calculated from 588. would, in fact, reach to 
 B.C. 154), and the seventieth week was to reach 
 from 170 to the death of Antiochus in B.C. 164. 
 There is consequently a gap of about six years 
 between the close of the sixty-second week and 
 the beginning of the last! Hitzig subjects this 
 hypothesis of v. Lengerke to a searching criti- 
 cism, but on his part, likewise adopts an arbi- 
 trary explanation based on parallelisms. He (a) 
 inserts the seven weeks of years between B.C. 
 588 and 539 ; (A) the sixty -t« o weeks or 434 
 years, on the other hand, are reckoned back- 
 ward, from B.C. 172 to B.C. 606. the year in 
 which Jeremiah uttered his prophecy respecting 
 the seventy years ; (c) the seventieth week ex- 
 tends from" April, B.C. 170, to the end of March, 
 164, and the murder of Onias. the " anointed 
 one," V. 26, falls in the beginning of this last 
 week. This hypothesis comes nearest to that of 
 Eichhom, from which it differs merely in reck- 
 oning the seven weeks forward from 588, and 
 the sixty-two backward from 172. while Eich- 
 hom counts the .seven weeks in a retrograde 
 order, and the sixty-two progressively. — A pe- 
 culiar mode of reckoning was adopted by Ewald, 
 which may be characterized as the abbreviating 
 method. It first reckons the seven weeks of 
 years from B. C. 588 to 539, and the sixty-two 
 weeks from thence to B. C. 105, but then assumes 
 a shortening of the latter period of 434 years 
 by seventy (which reduction, it is alleged, was 
 formerly indicated in the text itself by a note 
 after v. 25 or v. 27 that has now been lost), and 
 by this method returns to the year B.C. 175, in 
 which the " anointed one was cut off," i.e.. in 
 which Seleucus Philopater died — and approxi- 
 mately at the same time, the year in which the 
 momentous last week began, which extends 
 from B.C. 174 to 167 (p. 424 et seq.). — Wieseler 
 in substance (in his treatise. Die 70 ^Yochen, 
 formerly followed the method of parallelism 
 etc., Gottingen, 1839), but at a later period pre- 
 ferred a peculiar modification of the transposing 
 method (in his review of the Times of Daniel, 
 by the duke of Manchester, Giitt. Get- Am. , 
 1846). In the former instance he reckoned the 
 sixty-two weeks from B.C. 606 to B.C. 172, and 
 the last week from 172-165, and regarded the 
 seven weeks as not admissible or to be counted be- 
 side the other sixty-three (pp. 102 et seq. ; 123 et 
 seq. ) ; but in the latter, while he continues to reck- 
 on the sixty-three weeks from B.C. 606-165. he 
 places the seven weeks after them, as represent- 
 ing the period which was to elapse between the 
 week of severe tribulation and the advent of 
 the Messiah (the 1^3: "'^r "?, v. 25, who is to be 
 carefully distinguished from the '^'r'? men- 
 tioned in V. 26, where Onias is intended). This 
 period, which must not be calculated with 
 mathematical exactness, but is to be interpreted 
 spiritually, denotes a jubilee cycle, that has 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-37. 
 
 211 
 
 grown from a period of fifty years into one of 
 more than 150 years, since Christ was bom 160 
 years after the date of its beginning (p. 131 et 
 seq.). Wieseler's modification of the transpos- 
 ing method may be denominated the lenytltciuiif/ 
 hypothesis, in contradistinction from Ewald's 
 abbreviating method. It obviously forms the 
 point of transition to the Messianic conception 
 jf the text, and is intimately connected with 
 the views of several representatives of the 
 typical-Messianic interpretation in the latest 
 'times. 
 
 6. The most recent Messianic es^positors are 
 divided into two classes, who advocate re- 
 spectively a direct-Messianic interpretation of 
 the proi>hecy, or one that is merely typically 
 Messianic. * 
 
 A. To the former class belong Less {Beioeis 
 der WiiJii-heit der cliristlicheii lielii/ion, p. 275 
 et seq. ), Sack {Apologetik, p. 388 et seq. ), Scholl 
 iCommentatio de Sept. liehrhnvidibns Ddnielis, 
 Francof. , 1831), Dereser, Havernick. Hengsten- 
 berg, Allioli, Reinke, Stawars, Sepp, Weigl, Aub- 
 erlen, Duke George of Manchester, Pusey, Klie- 
 f oth, etc. [including the great body of English and 
 American expositors, with the almost sole excep- 
 tion of Moses Stuart] . In general, they are agreed 
 in referring both the 1^?: ^'^r?' ^- -'^' '^"'^ ^^^ 
 ni3'5, V. 36, to Jesus Christ, but they differ 
 considerably as to the special terminus a giio of 
 the prophecy, or its terinians ad (/iiein. A ma- 
 jority regard the twentieth year of Artaxerxes 
 Iiongimanna. or B.C. 4.55 (Neh. i. 1 ; ii 1) as 
 the starting point of the seventy weeks or the 
 date of the ^ST S27a. They count sixty-nine 
 weeks of years, or 483 years, from that date to 
 the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius, 
 twenty- eight asr. Dionysius, or 783 a. u. c. (Luke 
 iii. 1), when the three and a half yeai-sof public 
 activity on the part of our Lord began. They 
 consequently place the Saviour's death and re- 
 surrection in the middle of the last week, and 
 refer the ib psi n^:i-?3 t"3',v. 2G, to his cru- 
 cifixion. The remaining three and a half years 
 are regarded as a more or less variable terminus, 
 admitting of no precise chronological determina- 
 tion, but rather transpiring indefinitely in the 
 course of the founding of Christianity (so Less, 
 Sack, SchoU. Dereser, Hiivemick, Hengstenberg, 
 Allioli, Reinke). Modifications of this theory 
 are advocated (1) by Fr. Stawars (-Die Wei.<.sa- 
 guny Daniels ix. 34-27 in Dezug nnf dfis Tanf- 
 jahrjesu, in the 2'iihinger 'Iheol. Qtiartiilsc/irift, 
 1868, No. III., p. 416 et seq.), who translates 
 -|:T SSb p, V. 35, '-from the fulfilment of 
 God's promise to rebuild Jerusalem," and con- 
 tends that that promise was fulfilled in connec- 
 tion with the rebuilding of Jerusalem as a city^ 
 under Nehemiah, in the year 458 ; from that 
 time to twenty-six fer. Diony.sius 483 years or 
 sixty-nine weeks elapsed, and immediately af- 
 terward, in Jan. 37. Jesus was baptized in the 
 Jordan by John ; (2) by Auberlen and Pusey, 
 who begin the seventy weeks in B. C. 458, or the 
 seventh year of Artaxerxes Longimanus (Ezra 
 vii. 7), instead of the twentieth year of that 
 reign, and thus obtain the twenty-sixth year of 
 onr eera as the c lose of the sixty-nine weeks, or 
 
 • Cf. Kllcfoth, Daniel, p. 329 et Beq. 
 
 the time of our Lord's baptism ; (3) by Sepp 
 (Leben Jesu. I., p. 248 et seq., second ed, ), who 
 regards Ezra as the spiritual rebuilder of Jeru- 
 salem, and therefore reckons from the year B.C. 
 460. locating the baptism of Jesus in the yeai 
 778 a. u . c. , or A.D. 25 ; (4) by Weigl ( Ueher dai 
 uahre Geburts- und Sterbe-jahr Jesu C/irisii, 
 Part I., p. 103 et seq.), who renders the words 
 at the commencement of v. 25 " from the cfe- 
 cution of the command to rebuild Jerusalem," 
 etc. . and begins the seventy weeks with the year 
 B.C. 453, thus obtaining the year 783 a u. c. , or 
 A.D. 30, as the time of our Lord's baptism ; (5) 
 by Duke George of Manchester (in the work re- 
 viewed by Wieseler, Tlie times of Daniel, chrono- 
 logical and prophetic(d, examined with relation to 
 the point of contact betieeeii sacred and profane 
 chronology, Lond. and Edinb., 1845), who takes 
 the first year of Darius Medus as the terminus a 
 quo of the seventy weeks — identifying that 
 monarch with Darius Nothus, like Tertul- 
 lian, Scaliger, Calvisius, etc. — and therefore 
 calculates the 490 years from B.C. 424, which 
 brings him to A.D. 60, the year in which the 
 Christians fled from the besieged citj' of Jerusa- 
 lem, and in which the Christian church was 
 really founded. He assumes an eutirely dif- 
 ferent terminus a quo for the sixty-nine weeks, 
 namely B.C. 444, the alleged first year of Cyrus, 
 whom he believes to have Uved in the fifth in- 
 stead of the sixth century before Christ (! !). 
 The sixty-nine weeks, or 483 years, intervened 
 tween that year and Christ's death on the cross 
 in March, A.D. 38; (6) by Kliefotb, who goes 
 back to the mystictd theory of reckoning, and 
 accordingly extends the seven weeks from the 
 edict of Cyrus in B.C. 537 to the advent of 
 Christ, regardless of the fact that that period 
 does not consist of seven weeks of years, nor o£ 
 seven centuries, nor of any cycle whatever, 
 whose aggregate of years is divisible by seven 
 — the sixty-two sevens from Christ to the time 
 of the great apostacy, or of the antichrist at the 
 end of earthly history (during which period of 
 indefinite duration the church is to be " built" 
 and "restored," or brought back to God), and 
 finally, the last week from the great apostacy to 
 the appearing of Christ, the last judgment, and 
 the consummation of the world. 
 
 D. Hofmann, Delitzsch, Fuller, Ebrard, and 
 Kranichfeld [also substantially Keil] adopt the 
 typically Mesnianic interpretation. The former 
 three also favor the transposing theory followed 
 by Wieseler (1846), inasmuch as they assign to 
 the seven weeks of years a placa after the 63 ■¥■ 
 1 weeks. They reckon the latter from B. C. OOG 
 or the fourth year of Jehoiakim to the time of 
 the Maccabees (and more particularly, the sixty- 
 two weeks from 606-172. and the one week 
 from 173-165), regarding the events of the a;ra 
 of the Antiochian persecution and the Maccabae- 
 an revolt as types and preflgurations of the his- 
 tory of the founding of Christianity ; and they 
 describe the seven weeks of years as a period of 
 unmeasured length, whose beginning is coinci- 
 dent with the " going forth of the word to build 
 Jerusalem," i.e., with the first preaching of the 
 Gospel in the time of Christ and the apostles, 
 while their end is connected with the judgment 
 of the world and the advent of Christ ! There 
 is therefore, on this theory, a "' breaking of the 
 thread," or a hiatus, between the sixty thre« 
 
212 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 and the seven weeks amounting to about 160- 
 190 years, and, in addition, an extension of the 
 last seven weeks into periods of mysterious 
 length ; in other words, the aid of inttrcidntiuii, 
 and of mysitkal enumtratlon is superadded to 
 that of transpositum [of. supra, No. 4, (2), (3j, 
 and (t!)]. These are employed at least by Hof- 
 mann and Delitzsch, who do not even shrink 
 from the venturous experiment of amplifying 
 the seventy weeks into quadratic Sabbatic 
 periods,* whUe Fuller, more soljer and consi- 
 derate, but assuredly not less arbitrary, inter- 
 prets the six weeks as being wholly future, and 
 as belonging to the distant end of the world. 
 He endeavors to render this inordinate hiatus 
 conceivable by the assumption that Daniel saw 
 the post-Macedonian antichrist, Antiochus Epi- 
 phanes, and the post- Roman antichrist of the 
 last times perspectively as one. — Ebrard avoids 
 every method of transposition, but does not 
 _ escape violently altering the text (in a review of 
 Fiiller's Daniel, in the Guterslohe Allgem. liteiiir. 
 Auzeiger, Oct., 1808, p. 207, and earlier, in his 
 Offenbarung Johaniiis, p. 07 et seq.), in his en- 
 deavor to demonstrate the typically Messianic 
 tense of the passage. Supported by the ampli- 
 fying version of the Sept. (see supra. No. 1), he 
 reads D''":'£ in v. 25 a (soil. S'??"-?), instead 
 of niSjia, or he asserts that a"'??".; was omitted 
 after C^ynii; through the inadvertence of a 
 copyist. He farther holds that v. 24 states, in 
 general terras and round numbers, that seventy 
 weeks of years were to elapse from the begin- 
 ning of the captivit}' to Christ, and, by the method 
 described above, obtains the more exact state- 
 ment in V. 25, that 7-h70 = 77 weeks of years 
 should intervene between the edict of Cyrus 
 (538; and Christ, and sixty-two weeks between 
 the building of the city " with street and wall " 
 by Nehemiah (B. C. 440) and Christ (six years 
 earlier than the Christian jera). The time from 
 Christ's birth to his death or the thirty-five 
 years of his life on earth, in which he particu- 
 larly includes the three and a half years of his 
 official activity, are conceived by him as the 
 former half of the last week, the whole of 
 which is said to be a '' larger mystical" week; 
 and its latter half ' ' reaches to the mystical 
 three and a half years of the Apocalypse, which 
 e.'ctend to the return of Christ." — Kranichfeld 
 does less violence to the text than any of those 
 referred to. Avoiding transposition, parallel- 
 isms, and emendations, he reckons the first seven 
 weeks of years from the prophecy of Jeremiah, 
 chap. xxix. , and from the destruction of Jerusa- 
 lem in B.C. 588 (cf. supra, on v. 25), the sixty- 
 two weeks from the end of the former seven or 
 the time of Daniel's vision in B.C. 539, and re- 
 gards the ~"j: n''r'^i ■y- 25, who stands at the 
 beginning of the sixty-two weeks, as represent- 
 
 • Cf . Delitzsch, p. 284, " If the seventy weeks are not re- 
 garded ft6 t^imple, but rather as quadrated Sabbatic periods, 
 it follows that 70 X 4t* or 34^i0 .years are to intervene be- 
 tween the fourth year of Jehoiakim and Christ, whose pani- 
 Eia is considered as one such period. Consequently, if .3,595 
 years be added to that aKffregate, as havincr passed from the 
 creation to the fourth year of Jehoiakim, the suirKestive 
 amount will result in about TO^'O years (diminished by only 
 twenty-five years) as the duration of the world. For u 
 triticism of this view cf. Klicfoth, p. 337 et seq. 
 
 ing Cyrus, whUe the n"C."73, v. 26, who appcan 
 at their close, is supposed to denote Christ. This 
 theory consequently postulates a gap of more 
 than a century between the Maccabsean period, 
 which bounds the sixty-two weeks (and to whose 
 suiferings the prophetic descriptions of v. 26 b 
 and 27 refer), and the time of Christ, the " an- 
 ointed one who was to be cut oif," v. 26 a, 
 which interval was unnoticed by the prophet, in 
 harmony with the law of perspective vision.* 
 
 The assumption of this interval between the 
 close of the sixty-two weeks and the opening of 
 the New-Test, aira of salvation does not con- 
 stitute the feature which forms our only objec- 
 tion to Kranichfeld's theory ; for, without some 
 such interval the prophecy would lose its genu- 
 inely prophetic character, and instead of being 
 an idea] description, possessing the future, it 
 would present a calculation of arithmetical ex- 
 
 * [Keil thus classifies the various interpretations: *'l. 
 Most of the church fathers and the older orthodox interpre- 
 ters find prophesied here the appearance of Chri.st in the 
 flesh. His deatii, and the destruction of Jei-usalem by the 
 Romans. This view is in our time fully and at length de- 
 fended by Hiivemick ( Comvi.), Hengstenberg ( Chrislol., III. 
 1, p. 19 sq., 2d ed.), and Auberlen {Der Proph. Dame!, etc., 
 p. lO^j sq., Sd ed.), and is adopted also by the Catholic 
 theoloiriau Laur. Reinke {Die ifefifian. We^fsag. bti rte» gr. 
 u. kl. 't'roph. des A. T., IV. I, p. 2U(i s(].), am' by Dr. Pusi'y, 
 of England. 2. The majority of modem (continental) in- 
 terpreters, on the other hand, refer the whole passage to the 
 time of Antiochus Epiphanes, This view presents it-self in 
 the Alexandrian translation of the prophecy, more distinctly 
 in Jidius Htlarianus (about A.D. 4UU) ( Chronoivgia s. UbeUus 
 tic mundi dutalione. in Jlipne's Biltliolh. cler. vnh\, t. 13, 
 p. 1098), and in several rabbinical interpreters, but was first 
 broufrht into special notice by the rationalistic interpreters 
 Eichhom, Bertboldt, v. Lent'erke, Maurer, Ewald. Hitzig, 
 [Rosenmiiller]. and the mediating theologians Bleek. Wies- 
 eler {/Me 70 M'ochen u. die (j3 Jahricoclien des Proph. 
 Daniel, Giitt.. 1839. with which compare the retractaticn 
 in the GiJUtnger. Gel. Anzeiger, 1840, p. 113 sq.), who 
 arc followed by Liicke, Hilgenfeld, Kranichfeld [Stuart], 
 and othei-s. This verse has been defended byHofmann {Die 
 70 Ji'hre rfeJ* Jer. u. die 70 Jahrwochen den Daniel, 
 Niirnb.. 18;J6, and Wtitisag. u. ErfiUltntg, as also in 
 the Hi-kriftbeic). Delitzsch (art. Daniel in Herzog's Real- 
 enct/kl. vol. III.), and ZilndeHinthe Ki Uischen UnlerSH.), hut 
 with this essential modification, that Hofmann and Delitzsch 
 have united an eschatological reference to the primary his- 
 torical reference of vers. 25-87 to Antiochus Epiphanes, in 
 consequence of which the prophecy will be perfectly accom- 
 plished only in the appearance of antichrist and the final 
 comiiletion of the kingdom of God at the end of the days. 
 3. Finally, some of the church fathers and several modem 
 theologians have interpreted the prophecy eschatologically, 
 as an announcement of the development of the kingdom of 
 God at the end of the exile on to the perfecting of the king- 
 dom by the second coming of Christ at the end of the days. 
 Of this view we have the first germs in Hippolj-tus and Apol- 
 linaris of Laodicea, who. having regard to the prophecy 
 of .\ntichrist, ch. vii. 25, refer the statement of ver. 27 "f 
 this chap, regarding the last week to the cud of the world, 
 and the first half of this week they regard as the time of the 
 return of Elias, the second halt as the time of antichrist. 
 This view is for the first time definitely stated in the Berie- 
 hura Bible. But Kliefotb, in his Comm. on Daniel, was 
 the fii-sl who sought to investigate and establish this opinion 
 e.xegetically, and Leyser (in Herzog's Beulenc., XVIII.. p. 
 .383) has thus briefly stated it : ' The seventy CI" p:L". i.e., the 
 
 Koxpoi of Daniel (ch. ix. 24 sq.), meastired by sevens, withia 
 which the whole of God's plan of salvation in the world will 
 be completed, are a symbolical period with reference to the 
 seventy years of exile prophesied by Jeremiah, and with the 
 accessory notion of oecumenicity. The seventy is again 
 divided into three periods : into seven (till (Christ), sixty-two 
 (till the aiJostasy of antichrist), and one, 2?^lw, the last 
 
 world, i:riii, divided into 2 x 3>i times, the rise and fall of an- 
 tichrist.' '' With the last view Keil's own interpretation es- 
 sentially agrees. The great objection to it is that it mixes 
 the literal with the mystical import of the prophecy, and 
 fails to yield any exact fulfilment of the definite uumberi 
 of the text!. 
 
CHAP. IX 1-27. 
 
 213 
 
 BctnesB (cf. tue following section. No. 1). Our 
 difficulty consists in the circumstance that the 
 ■■ anointed one who should be cut off," t. 26 n, 
 is held to be Jesus Christ, the Messiah, who was 
 exalted through humiliation and sufferings to 
 glory, while everything subsequently mentioned 
 in the immediate context (the "'prince" who 
 should "destroy the city and the sanctuary," 
 the '■ covenant with many " confirmed by him, 
 the interruption of the sacrifice and oblation, 
 the introduction of the abomination of desola- 
 tion, and the judicial punishment of the de- 
 Etroyer) had its complete historical fulfilment 
 in the events of the period of persecution and 
 oppression under Antiochus, and serves merely 
 as a typical illustration of the times of suffering 
 and of the judgments under the New Covenant. 
 The continuity of the prophetic description ap- 
 pears to be painfully broken by this application 
 of V. 26 a to Christ, when the predictions of v. 
 26 b and v. 27 are simultaneously referred [by 
 Kranichfeld. etc.] to the Maccabaean epoch. In 
 addition to this contradiction of the context, 
 this method of interpretation involves the logical 
 inconsequence of a vacillation between the 
 typical and the direct Messianic theory of ex- 
 position, or of an obscure intermixture of the 
 prefigurative and the antitypicaJ. 
 
 EXCURSUS. 
 (BY THE AMERICAN BBVISOR.) 
 
 [Identification of the HUtorical Periods com- 
 prised within tJie " Seventy Weeks" in 
 Daniel ix. 34-27. 
 Seventy heptades have been decreed [to tran- 
 spire] upon thy nation, and upon thy holy city, 
 for [entirely] closing the [punishment of] sin, 
 and for sealing up [the retributive sentence 
 
 Last Eeform begun 
 [late in Snmmer] B. C. 410. 
 
 Edict published at 
 
 Jerusalem, 
 
 July, B. C. 459. 
 
 against their] offences, and for expiating guiit. 
 and for bringing in [the state of] perpetual 
 righteousness, and for sealing up [the verifica- 
 tion of] vision and prophet, and for anointing 
 Holy of Holies. And thou shalt know and con- 
 i sider [that] from [the time of the] issuing of a 
 , command for restoring and building [i. e. , for re- 
 I building] Jerusalem till [the coming of] Mes- 
 siah priuce [shall intervene] seven heptades, and 
 sixty and two heptades ; [its] street shall return 
 j and be built [i.e., shall be rebuilt], and [its] 
 j fosse, and [that] in distress of the times. And 
 I after the sixty and two heptades Messiah shall be 
 cut off, and nothing [shall be left] to him ; and 
 people of the coming prince shall destroy the 
 city and the holy [building], and his end [of 
 fighting shall come] with [or, like] the flood, and 
 until [the] end of warring [shall occur the] de- 
 crdt-d [result] of desolations. And he shall 
 establish a covenant for the many [during] one 
 heptade, and [at the] middle of the heptade he 
 shall cause to cease sacrifice and offering ; and 
 over a wing [i.e., eagle as an ensign] of abomi- 
 nations [i.e., idolatrous images], [shall preside 
 the] desolator, and [this shall continue] till com- 
 pletion, and a decreed [one that] shall pour out 
 upon [the] desolate. 
 
 I have been unable to satisfy myself of the en- 
 tire consistency of any of the foregoing interpre- 
 tations of this remarkable prophecy, and would 
 therefore propose a partly new elucidation, in ac- 
 cordance with the preceding literal translation 
 and the following diagram. In doing this I 
 need not dwell upon the minor peculiarities o£ 
 phraseology, which have been fully treated al- 
 ready. 
 
 Christ Baptized, 
 August, A. D. 26. 
 
 
 7w. =49y. 1 
 
 62 weeks = 434 years. 
 
 1 w. = 7 y. 
 
 70 heptades = 490 years. 
 
 6»X years. 
 
 62 weeks = 434 years. 
 
 Half *. 
 
 JeicK rejected, 
 
 September, 
 
 A. D. 32. 
 
 R<ifoi-m Completed, 
 learly in Spring] B. C. 405. 
 
 Christ Sacrificed, 
 March 18, A. D. 29. 
 
 Sequel. — Jemaalem razed by the Romans, A. D. 70. 
 
 In verse 24 we have a general view of the last 
 great period of the Jewish Church (see the mid- 
 dle line in the diaijrmn). It was to embrace 
 four hundred and ninety years, from their per- 
 manent release from Babylonian bondage, till 
 the time when God would finally cast them off 
 for their incorrigible unbelief. Within this space 
 Jehovah would fulfil what he had predicted, 
 and accomplish all his designs respecting them 
 under their special relation. The particulars 
 noted in this cursory surve.v are, first, the con- 
 clusion of the then existing exile (expressed in 
 
 three variations, of whlr.h the la.st 'phraso, " ti 
 piating guilt," explains the two former, "i?lo* 
 ing the sin " and " sealing up offences ; ") naxl 
 the fulfilment of ancient prophecy, by u»h<srin]^ 
 in the religious prosperity of Gospel kiines ; and, 
 lastly, as the essential feature, the consecration 
 of the Messiah to his redeeming office. 
 
 The only " command " answering to that of 
 verse 25 is that of Artaxerxes Longiraanus, is- 
 sued in the seventh year of his reign, and re- 
 corded in the seventh chapter of E/.ra, as Pri- 
 deanx has abundantly shown, and as many cri 
 
214 
 
 THE PROPHET DANTEL. 
 
 lies agree. At this time, also, more Jews re- 
 turned to their home than at any other, and the 
 iiter.al as well as spiritual " rebuilding of Jeru- 
 salem " was prosecuted with unsurpassed vigor. 
 The period here referred to e.Ktends "till the 
 Messiah" (see the upper line of the duiynim); 
 that is. as far as his public recognition as such 
 Ijy the Voice at his baptism, the ■"anointing " of 
 the previous verse; and not to his death, — as is 
 commonly supposed, but which is afterward re- 
 ferred to in very different language ; nor to his 
 hlrth — which would make the entire compa.ss of 
 the prophecy vary much from fourliundred and 
 ninety years. The period of this verse is dirided 
 into two portions of "seven heptades " and 
 "sixty-two heptades," as if the "command" 
 from which it dates were renewed at the end of 
 the first portion ; and this we find was the case. 
 Ezra, under whom this reformation of the St.ate 
 and religion began, was succeeded in the work 
 by Xehemiah, who, having occasion to return to 
 Persia in the twenty-fifth year after the com- 
 mencement of the work (Neil. xiii. 0), returned 
 '' after certain days," and found that it ha8 so 
 far retrograded that he was obliged to institute 
 it anew. The length of his stay at court is not 
 given, but it must have been considerable to al- 
 low so great a backsliding among the lately re- 
 formed Jews. Prideaux contends that his return 
 to Judaja was after an absence of twenty-four 
 years ; * and I have supposed the new reform 
 then set on foot by him to have occupied a little 
 over three years, which is certainly none too 
 much time for the task (see the lower line of 
 the (liiigrmn). The "rebuilding of the streets 
 and intrenchments in times of distress " seems 
 to refer, in its literal sense, to the former part 
 sspecially of the forty -nine years (compare Ne- 
 hemiah iv. ), very little having been previously 
 done towards rebuilding the citi/, although 
 former decrees had been issued for repairing the 
 temple ; f and, in its spiritual import, it applies 
 to the whole time, and peculiarly to the three 
 years of the last refonn. 
 
 The "sixty-two weeks" of verse 3(), be it ob- 
 served, are not said to commence at the end of 
 the "seven weeks" of verse 25, but, in more 
 gener.al terms, after the " distres.siug times" 
 during which the reform was going on ; hence, 
 they properly date from the end of that reform, 
 when things became permanently settled. It is 
 in consequence of a failure to notice this varia- 
 tion in the limits of the two periods of sixty-two 
 weeks referred to by the prophet (comp.are the 
 middle portions of the upper and of the lower 
 line in the dingram) that critics have thrown 
 the whole scheme of this prophecy into disorder 
 in applying to the same event such irreconcilable 
 language as is used in describing some of its 
 different elements. By the ravaging invasion of 
 foreigners here foretold, is manifestly intended 
 the destruction of Jerusalem by the Roman 
 troops, whose emperor's son, Titus, is here 
 styled a " prince " in command of them. The 
 
 • [Sec the ftrguments in his Connection, .sub anno 409. I 
 pla<-'e the whole prophecy ji year earlier.] 
 
 + [Namely, liy Cynis. the Sledo-Persaian conqueror of the 
 Babylonians, w ho thus ])ut an end to the '' seventy years* cap- 
 tivity,"' B. C. 5^^6, as in Ezra i. 1 ; and by Darin* Hystaspis, 
 who renewed Cyrus's decree (Ezra iv. 24), B.C. 518, "rescind- 
 ing its prohibition by his Immediate predeceaaors Cambyacs 
 and Smcrdia.] 
 
 same allusion is also clear from the latter part 
 of the following verse. l!ut thi.s event must not 
 be included within the seventy weeks ; because, 
 in the first jilace, the accomplishment wouhl not 
 sustain such a view, — from tlic decree, B. C. 
 4o9, to the de.structiou of Jerusalem. A. D. 70. 
 being five hundred and twenty-eight years ; 
 secondly, the langu.age of verse 24 docs not re- 
 quire it, — as it is not embraced in the ]mrp(>sus 
 for which the seventy weeks are there stated to 
 be appointed to Jerusalem and its inhabitants ; 
 and, lastly, the Jews then no longer formed a 
 link in the chain of eoclesia.stical history in the 
 Divine sense, — Christian believers having be- 
 come the true descendants of Abraham. At the 
 close of the verse we have the judgments with 
 which God would afflict the Jews for cutting off 
 the Messiah : these woiUd be so severe, that the 
 prophet (or, rather, the angel instructing him) 
 cannot refrain from introducing them here, in 
 connection with that event, although he after- 
 wards adverts to them in their proper order. 
 What these sufferings were, Josephus narrates 
 with a minuteness that chills the blood, afford- 
 ing a wonderful coincidence with the prediction 
 of Moses in Deut. xxviii. 15-68 ; they are here 
 called a ""flood," the well-known Scripture em- 
 blem of terrible political calamities (as in Isa. 
 viii. 7, 8 ; Dan. xi. 10, 22 ; N.ih. i. 8). 
 
 Verse 27 has g ven the greatest trouble tu 
 critics of any in the whole passage ; and, indeed, 
 the common theorj-, by which the seventy weeks 
 are made to end with the crucifixion, is flatly 
 contradicted by the cessation of the daily sacri- 
 ficial offerings at the temple, "" in the middle of 
 the week." AH attempts to crowd aside this 
 point are in vain ; for such an abolition could 
 not be said to occur in any pertinent sense before 
 the offering of the Great Sacrifice. e.specially 
 as Jesus him.self, during his ministry, always 
 countenanced their celebration. Besides, the 
 advocates of this scheme are obliged to make 
 this last " week " encroach upon the preceding 
 "sixty-two weeks," so as to include John the 
 Baptist's ministry, in order to make out seven 
 years for "confirming the covenant ; " and when 
 they have done this they run counter to the pre- 
 vious explicit direction, which makes the first 
 sixty-nine weeks come down "" io the Messiah." 
 and not end at John. By means of the double 
 line of dates exhibited in the above diagram, all 
 this is harmoniously adjusted ; and at the same 
 time the only satisfactory interpretation is re- 
 tained, that after the true Atonement, these 
 typical oblations ceased to have any meaning or 
 efficacy, although before it they could not con- 
 sistently be dispensed with, even by Christ and 
 his Apostles. 
 
 The seventy weeks, therefore, were allotted 
 to the Jews as their only season of favor or 
 mercy as a Church, .and we know that they were 
 not immediately cast off upon their murder of 
 Christ (see Luke xxiv. 27; Acts iii. 12-2fi). 
 The gospel was specially directed to be first 
 preached to them ; and not only during our 
 Saviour's personal ministry, but for several years 
 afterward, the invitations of grace were confined 
 to them. The first instance of a ""turning to 
 the Gentiles " proper w.is the baptism of the 
 Roman centurion Cornelius, during the fourth 
 year after the resurrection of Christ. In this 
 interval the Jewish people had shown their de- 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-27 
 
 215 
 
 twrmiueii opposition to the New " Covenant " 
 by imprisouing the Apostles, stoning Stephen 
 to death, and otficially proscribing Christian- 
 ity through their Sanhedrim : soon after this 
 martyrdom occurred the conversion of Saul, 
 who ■• was a chosen vessel to bear God's name 
 to the Gentiles " : and about two years after 
 this event the door was thrown wide open for 
 their admission into the covenant relation of the 
 church, instead of the Jews, by the vision of 
 Peter and the conversion of Cornelius. Here 
 ne find a marked epoch, fixed by the finger of 
 God in all the miraculous circumstances of the 
 event, as well as by the formal apostolical 
 decree, ratifying it, and obviously forming the 
 great turning-point between the two dispen- 
 sations. We find no evidence that "many" 
 of the Jews embraced ChrLstianity after this 
 period, although they had been converted in 
 great numbers on several occasions under the 
 Apostles' preaching, not only in Judiea, but also 
 iu Galilee, and even among the semi-Jewish in- 
 habitants of Samaria ; the Jews had now reject- 
 ed Christ as a nation with a tested and incon-i- 
 gible hatred, and, having thus disowned their 
 God, they were forsaken by him, and devoted 
 to destruction, as the prophet intimates would 
 be their retribution for that "decision." in 
 which the four hundred and ninety years of this 
 their second and last probation in the Promised 
 Land would result. It is thus strictly true that 
 Christ, personally and by his Apostles, " estab- 
 lished the covenant," which had formerly been 
 made, and was now renewed, with maiiti of the 
 chosen people, for precisely seven years after 
 his pullic appear.ince as a Teacher; in the very 
 middle of which space He superseded forever the 
 sacrificial offerings of the Slosaic ritual by the 
 one perfect and sufficient OfEering of His own 
 body on the cross. 
 
 In the latter part of this verse we have a 
 graphic outline of the terrible catastrophe that 
 should fall upon the Jews, in consequence of 
 their rejection of the Messiah ; a desolation that 
 should not cease to cover them, but by the 
 extinction of the oppressed nation ; it forms an , 
 appendix to the main prophecy. Our Saviour's 
 language leaves no doubt as to the application 
 of this passage, in His memorable warning to 
 His disciples, that when they should be about 
 to " see the abomination of desolation spoken of 
 by Daniel the prophet, stand in the holy place." 
 they should then "flee into the mountains" 
 (Matt. xxiv. 1.5. 10 ; comp. xxiii. 'iV>. oS), in order 
 to save themselves from that awful ^' cvitsiitiana- 
 tioti " of ruin, which he also pointed out as the 
 " determined " fate of that impenitent city, 
 after it should have endured the " desolating " 
 ravages of a siege unparalleled in rigor and suf- 
 fering, besides being "left desolate" by the 
 ab.iadonment of their God. The destined peri- 
 od of fulfilment arrived, and Josephus, who wit- 
 nessed it, tells us that the standards of the 
 Roman army, who held sacred the shrined silver 
 eagles that surmounted their banners, were 
 actually placed, during the capture, in the tem- 
 ple, opposite the eastern gate, and there sacri- 
 ficed to {De Bell. Jud., VI. li, 1). Equally exact, 
 if the view proposed above is correct, are all the 
 Bpecifications of this wonderful prophecy. 
 
 In ths preceding in vestigation several chrono- 
 logical points have been partially assumed. 
 
 which entire satisfaction with the results ob- 
 tained would require to be fully proved. A 
 minute investigation of the grounds on which 
 all the dates involved rest would occupy too 
 much space for the present discus.sion ; I shall, 
 therefore, content myself with determining the 
 two boundary dates of the entire period, truso 
 ing the intennediate ones to such incidental 
 evidences of their correctness as ma.v have beeri 
 afforded in the foregoing elucidation, or may 
 arise in connection with the settlement pro- 
 posed. * If these widely distant points can be 
 fi-xed by definite data independently of each 
 other, the correspondence of the iiiterfal will 
 afford strong presumption that it is the true 
 one, which will be heightened as the subdivi- 
 sions fall naturally into their prescribed limits ; 
 and thus the above coincidence m the character 
 of the eeents vriU receive all the confirmation 
 that the nature of the case admits. 
 
 1. The date of the Edict. I have supposed 
 this to be from the time of its taking effect at 
 Jeru.salem, rather than from that of its nominal 
 issue at Babylon ; the difference, however, — 
 being only foui- months, — will not seriously 
 affect the argument. ■ Ezra states (chap. vii. 
 8), that "he arrived at Jerusalem in the fifth 
 month (Ab, our July-August) of the seventh 
 year of the king " Artaxerxes. Ctesias, who 
 had every opportunity to know, makes Arta- 
 xerxes to have reigned forty-two years, and 
 Thucydides states that an Athenian embassy, 
 sent to Ephesus in the winter that closed the 
 seventh year of the Peloponnesian war, was 
 there met with the news of Artaxer.xes' death, 
 n-i'iiuutj'oi . . . ^Apra^tji^riv . . . i^fwffri r£ih'//K6~a 
 {narii ••jttf) Toi'TOD tuv xi'^'V'*^ irt'/ €i'T?/ctT)^ Sell. 
 Ffloj)., IV 50. Now this war began in the 
 spring of B.C. 4ijl, as all allow (Thuc. ii. 2), 
 and its seventh year exph'ed with the spring of 
 B.C. 424 ; consequently, Artaxerxes died in the 
 winter introducing that ye.ar, and his reign 
 began some time in B.C. 4(50. This latter his- 
 torian also states that Themistocles, in his flight 
 to Asia, having I een driven by a storm into the 
 Athenian fleet, at that time blockading Naxos, 
 managed to get safely carried away to Ephesus, 
 whence he dispatched a letter of solicitation to 
 Artaxerxes, then lately invested witli royalty. 
 reuari .iani'/e, oira [lidl. Peli/p., I. loT). The 
 date of the conquest of that island is B.C. 40(5, 
 which is, therefore, also that of the Per.sian 
 king's accession. It is now necessary to fix the 
 senxon of the year in which he became king. If 
 Ctesias means that his reign lasted forty-two 
 full years, or a little over rather than under 
 that length the accession must be dated prior 
 to the beginning of B.C. 400 ; but it is more in 
 accordance with the usual computation of reigns 
 to give the number of current years, if nearly 
 full, and this will bring the d;i^e of accession 
 down to about the beginning of summer, B C. 
 406. This result is also more in accordance 
 with the simultaneous capture of Naxos, which 
 can hardly have occurred earlier in that year. 
 I may add, that it likewise explains the length 
 assigned to this reign (forty-one years) by Ptol- 
 emy, in his Astrouomiceil Canon, although ha 
 has misled mi dern compilers of ancient history 
 
 • rOn the^e chronoloeical elements, see Browne's Ordo 
 Sacloritm, p]i. iVi and 9(i-107.1 
 
2] 6 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 by beginning it in B.C. 465. having apparently 
 himself fallen into some confusion, from silently 
 annexing the short intermediate periods of an- 
 archy sometimes to the preceding and at others 
 to the ensuing reign. The ".seventh year" of 
 Artaxerxes. therefore, began about the summer 
 of B.C. 400, and the "first [Hebrew] month" 
 (Nisan) occurring within that twelvemonth, 
 gives the foUowing March-April of B.C. 4.39 
 as the time when Ezra received his commission 
 to proceed to Jerusalem for the purpose of exe- 
 cuting the royal mandate. 
 
 2. T/ie date of the conversion of Cornelius. 
 The solution of this question will be the deter- 
 mination of the distance of this event from the 
 time of our Saviour's Passion ; the absolute 
 date of this latter occurrence must, therefore, 
 first be determined. This is ascertained to have 
 taken place in A.D. 29, by a comparison of the 
 duration of Christ's ministry with the historical 
 data of Luke iii. 1-23 ; but the investigation is 
 too long to be inserted here. (See Dr. Jarvis'e 
 Introduction to the History of the Church.) A 
 ready mode of testing this conclusion is by ob- 
 serving that this is the only one of the adjacent 
 series of years in which the calcirlated date of 
 the equinoctial full moon coincides with that of 
 the Friday of the crucifixion Passover, as any 
 . one may see — with sufficient accuracy for ordi- 
 nary purposes — by computing the mean luna- 
 tions and week-day back from the present time. 
 This brings the date of Chnst's baptism to A. D. 
 25 ; and the whole tenor of the Gospel narra- 
 tives indicates that this took place in the latter 
 part of summer. Other more definite criteria 
 of the season cannot be specified here. 
 
 The chief chronological difBculties of the Acts 
 occur in the arrangement of the events associ- 
 ated with Cornelius's conversion, and arise from 
 the vague notes of time (or, rather, absence of 
 any definite dates) by Luke, between the account 
 of the Pentecostal effusion (chap. ii. 1) and the 
 death of Herod Agrippa the elder (chap. xii. 23) ; 
 indeed, but for the periods noted by Paul in 
 Gal. i. and ii. it would be utterly impossible to 
 adjust minutely the dates of this portion of the 
 history. As it is, the subject is almost aban- 
 doned by most chronologers and commentators 
 as hopelessly obscure and uncertain ; but there 
 is no occasion for such despair. The death of 
 Herod is ascertained (by the help of Josephus. 
 Antig.. XIX. 8, 2) to have occurred in the early 
 part of the year A.D. 44, between which time 
 and the Pentecost of A.D. 29 is an interval of fif- 
 teen years, covered by the incidents contained in 
 chapters ii.-xi. of the Acts. The visit of Paul, 
 Bpokeu of by him as his second to Jerusalem 
 (Gal. ii. 1), appears at first sight to be the same 
 with that narrated in Acts ii. 30. since there is 
 no mention of any intervening visit ; it was 
 made in company with Barnabas, and the 
 ■• revelation " (Gal. ii. 2) might answer to the 
 prediction of the famine by Agabus (Acts xi. 28), j 
 which caused the journey. Now in that case it 
 is certain that the date of this visit (" fourteen 
 years after") is not reckoned from that of his 
 former visit (Gal. t 18), for then it would have 
 occurred at lea.st seventeen years (144-3) after 
 liis conversion, which would be two years more 
 than the whole interval between this second visit 
 and the Pentecost referred to ; it is, therefore, 
 reckoned from his conversion, which mikes his 
 
 journey to Damascus, on which he was converted 
 occur one year (15 — 14) after this Pentecost. 
 This is corroborated by two ancient ecclesiastical 
 traditions, one of which states that Paul was 
 converted in the year after the Ascension, and 
 the other refers the martyrdom of Stephen 
 (which was so connected with Paul's persecuting 
 journey to Damascus, as not to have preceded it 
 many months) to the close of the same year in 
 which Christ suffered. If, on the other hand, 
 as the best authorities mostly agree, the second 
 visit spoken of in Gal. corresponds with that de 
 scribed in Acts xv., as the similarity of the sub- 
 ject debated at the time (the obligation of 
 Mosaism) especially indicates, then we are at 
 liberty to apply the natural interpretation to the 
 intervals there given, and we shall thus have 
 the visit in question occurring seventeen years 
 after the conversion of Paul. Now, the date of 
 the visit referred to in Acts xii. is known to be 
 A.D. 44, and if we allow the reasonable space 
 of three years for the first missionary journey, 
 as recorded in the intervening chapters (Acts 
 xiii. , xiv. ), and the considerable stay at Antioch 
 upon its close (xiv. 28), we shall stUl have, as 
 before, an interval of one year between the 
 Crucifixion and Paul's conversion — a space, for 
 all that we can see, sufficiently ample for the 
 events related. 
 
 Paul's first visit (Gal. i. 8) must naturally be 
 reckoned in like manner from his conversion, as 
 it is mentioned to show the length of his stay 
 in Damascus and its vicinity, and is put in con- 
 trast with his intentional avoidance of Jerusa- 
 lem on his conversion (ver. 17) ; we have thus 
 the date of this same visit in Acts ix. 2(i fixed 
 at A.D. 33, four years after the noted Pente- 
 cost. I need not here discuss the length nor 
 precise time of the visit into Arabia (Gal. i. 17), 
 nor the exact mode of adjusting this passage 
 with Luke's account in the Acts ; these points 
 are capable of easy solution, and do not require 
 the supposition of some intervening visit in 
 either narrative. Neither need I stop to recon- 
 cile the mention of travels in Syria (Gal. i. 21) 
 with the sea voyage direct from Cassarea to Tar- 
 sus (Acts ix. 30) ; the visit to Jerusalem occu- 
 pied only fifteen days (Gal. i. 18), and there is 
 nothing here to disturb the above dates. 
 
 Most chronological schemes, blindly following 
 the order of Acts ix. and x.. without taking into 
 special consideration this interval of three years 
 spent by Paul at Damascus, have placed the 
 conversion of Cornelius after that apostle's re- 
 turn to Tarsus, the arrangers being apparently 
 actuated by a desire to fill up the period of fif- 
 teen years by sprinkling the events along as 
 widely apart as possible for the sake of uniform 
 intervals. But several considerations present 
 themselves to my mind which cause me to think 
 this arrangement erroneous. In the outset, the 
 question arises on this supposition. What were 
 the other apostles doing these three years ? Was 
 nothing going on at Jerusalem or in Judfea worth 
 recording? But this interval is not thus left a 
 blank by the sacred historian. Luke says (Acts 
 ix. 31), "Then had the churches rest," etc. ; 
 that is, as I understand it, during these three 
 years, the persecution stirred up by Saul aftei 
 the martyrdom of Stephen being an-ested bj 
 the conversion of that enemy, the Christian 
 societies generally enjoyed ^eat quiet and proB 
 
CHAr. IX. 1-27. 
 
 217 
 
 penty. I cannot discover any pertinent cause 
 for this remark, unless we suppose it to refer to 
 the period succeeding this event. The same 
 idea is carried by the mention of the travels of 
 Peter " through all parts " (verse 3'J), evidently 
 during this season of outward peace, when his 
 presence was no longer needed to sustain the 
 Church at Jerusalem. It was during this tour 
 that Peter was called to preach the Gospel to 
 Cornelius ; the year succeeding the conversion 
 o' Saul was probably spent by Peter in building 
 up the society at the metropolis, his tour appar- 
 ently occupied the summer of the year follow- 
 ing ; and in the third year Paul, on his visit to 
 Jerusalem, finds Peter returned thither. This 
 affords convenient time for all these occurrences, 
 and connects them in their natural order. 
 Lastly, under this view we can readily explain 
 the plan of Luke's narrative in these chapters: 
 after tracing the history of the Church (specially 
 under the conduct of Peter) down to the perse- 
 cution by Saul, he takes up the subject of this 
 opponent's conversion, and does not quit him 
 until he has left him in quiet at home — hence 
 his omission of all reference to these three years 
 as being unsuitable to his design of continuity ; 
 he then returns to Peter, and narrates his doings 
 in the interim. This parallel method of narra- 
 tion is proved by the resumption of Paul's his- 
 tory in chapter xi. 19, where Luke evidently 
 goes back to the time of Stephen, in order to 
 show wliat the dispersed evangelists had been 
 accomplishing during the four years succeeding 
 that martyrdom, and thus connect the preach- 
 ing to the Gentiles with the latter part of that 
 period (ver. 20 1 ; and this again prepares the 
 way for the visit to Antioch of Paul, who had 
 lately returned to Tareus. j 
 
 Ic is true, in this scheme there is made an 
 interval of ten years between the establishment 
 of the Church at Antioch and the visit of Paul 
 to Jerusalem, about the time of Herod's death ; 
 but it is much better to place such an interval, 
 during which no incident of striking moment 
 occurred, after the Gospel had become in a 
 measure rooted in the community, than to inter- 
 sperse considerable periods of uninteresting 
 silence in its early planting, when matters 
 which, had they transpired afterward, would be 
 passed by as trivial, were of the greatest impor- 
 tance in the history. Intimations are given 
 of the general prosperity of the cause, and 
 there was no occasion to present the de- 
 tails of this period, until some remarkable 
 event broke the even course of occurrences. 
 Such an event was the visit of Paul, and espe- 
 cially the contemporaneous conduct and fate of 
 Herod ; and the latter account is accordingly 
 introduced in the twelfth chapter by the phrase, 
 K«r' tKttvov ds Tov naipoi', always indicative of 
 some fresh occurrence after a period of compar- 
 ative monotony and silence. Nor is this in- 
 terval left entirely devoid of incident ; it is in 
 fact filled up by the account of the preparation 
 for the famine. It was " during those days " 
 that the prophet Agabus visited Antioch from 
 Jerusalem ; some time after his arrival, he pre- 
 dicted the famine, and it is plainly intimated 
 that the fulfilment did not take place immedi- 
 ately, but several years afterward, " in the days 
 of Claudius Casar." Tnat emperor, therefore, 
 was not reigning at the time of its utterance, 
 
 and as the famine took place in the fourth year 
 of his reign (Josephus, Ant.. XX. 5, 2, compared 
 with I. 2), there is here an interval of at least 
 four years sUeutly occurring between two closely 
 related incidents of this period.- The '-whole 
 year " during which Paul preached at Antioch 
 (Acts xi. 26) is reckoned from his call thither by 
 Barnabas, but does not extend to his visit to 
 Jerusalem ; it only covers his first labors con- 
 fined to the city itself (after which he itinerated 
 in the neighboring regions of Syria, Gal. i. 21), 
 and extends merely to about the time of the 
 arrival of Agabus. The above interval of ten 
 years was occupied by Paul in such labors as are 
 referred to in 2 Cor. xi. 23-27. 
 
 We thus arrive at the conclusion, based upon 
 internal evidence, that the admission of the 
 Gentiles by the conversion of Cornelius occurred 
 near the close of Peter's summer tour, in A. D. 
 32 ; we cannot be far from certainty in fixing it 
 as happening in the month of September of that 
 year.] 
 
 ETHICO-FUNDAMES'TAL PRINCIPLES RELATED 
 TO THE HISTORY OF SALVATION, APOLO- 
 GETICAL REMARKS, AND HOMILETRAL 
 SUGGESTIONS. 
 
 1. A truly unbiassed apprehension of the 
 sense of the prophecy respecting the seventy 
 weeks of years will succeed in demonstrating 
 a typical reference to the Messiah only rather 
 than any direct allusion. * The general charac- 
 ter of the language in the introductory passage, 
 V. 24, opens a prospect, indeed, of events such 
 as are elsewhere foretold only in prophecies that 
 are directly Messianic in their nature ; but these 
 events are here assigned to a time immediiitdy 
 mbneqxtent to the end of tlie seventy ioeeks of 
 years, which are made to begin with Jeremiah's 
 121 concerning the seventy years, or at about 
 the commencement of the captivity (B.C. GOO 
 or 588). The prophet consequently saw the 
 Messianic period of deliverance in a much closer 
 proximity than its actual distance from his time 
 would justify, and he connected it intimately 
 with the aera of persecution under the Seleucidae, 
 which he saw in spirit as the closing period of 
 the series of seventy sevens of years, as pro- 
 phetically revealed to him. The theocratic seer, 
 who could not calculate by centuries, but only 
 by Sabbatic periods or cycles of jubilees, ex- 
 pected the advent of the Messianic deliverance 
 after seventy Sabbatic years should have ex- 
 pired, instead of removing it to the distance of 
 five or six centuries, f The limit assigned by the 
 prophet certainly testifies to his wonderful range 
 of vision, and exalts him far above his contem- 
 poraries in the captivity, none of whom would 
 have been likely to remove the beginning of the 
 Messianic sera to any considerable distance be- 
 
 • [On the contrary, thet« is good reiison to believe that this 
 remarkable prophecy sURtained the faith of the pious Jews 
 in their anticipations of the near approach of the liedeem- 
 ers coming (cf. Mark i. 15 ; Luke ii. a6, 3S), as it has since 
 been a powerful argument to prove his actual advent at the 
 time predicted (ct. Gal. iv. 4: 1 Pet. i. 11).] 
 
 + [The learned and pious author does not seem to be aware 
 how nugatory such a misconception on the part of the holy 
 seer would render this prophecy, the markeil pecuharity of 
 which is that it designates the time of the evtots predicted,] 
 
21S 
 
 THE PROPHET D.iXIEI,. 
 
 youd the close of the Babylonian captivity ; but 
 it still falls below the hiatoriail measure of the 
 distance between Jeremiah's prophecy and the 
 New-Test, fulfilment by 100-110 years. — or, in 
 other words, instead of extending into the time 
 of Christ, it merely reaches to the age of John 
 Hyrcanus and his immediate successors. The 
 principal stations in the course of pre-Christian 
 development were doubtless sufficiently ap- 
 parent to the prophet, and upon the whole, 
 were seen as separated from each other by pre- 
 cisely the interval which actually resulted in the 
 progress of events. In his younger contem- 
 porary Cyrus, the "anointed prince," v. 25, he 
 recognized the introducer and founder of a 
 period of rcbitire salvation for the people of 
 God (a period which should bring a restoration 
 of Jerusalem, although for the time an imper- 
 fect, troubled, and oppressed restoration), and 
 therefore saw in that prince a first typical fore- 
 runner of the Messiah. He saw a farther pre- 
 fatorj- condition to the coming of the Messiah 
 in the religious persecutions and antitheocratic 
 abominations, with which the descendant of a 
 royal Javanic house should afflict Israel in the 
 distant future, slaying the anointed high priest 
 (Onias III., B.C. 173), and even interrupting 
 the theocratic worship for a time and desecrat- 
 ing its sanctuary ; and he fixed the interval be- 
 tween the former positive and this later nega- 
 tive preparation for Messiah's coming, with ap- 
 proximate correctne&s, at sixty-two weeks (i.e., 
 the diiference between the first seven, which 
 had already expired at his time, and the mo- 
 mentous last week of the seventy — a number of 
 years which certainly exceeds the actual his- 
 torical interval between ad's) and 175 or between 
 Cyrus and Epiphanes by seventy years.* But 
 the additional interval of more than one and a 
 half centuries or twenty-three to twenty-four 
 weeks of years, which, according to the Divine 
 purpose, was to intervene between the typical 
 ui'.: fr Tfiv xpiiyrijv of the Maccabsau age and the 
 advent of Christ, escaped his vision while rang- 
 ing in the distance. In the limitation of his 
 earthly and human consciousness f he did not 
 suspect that the Spirit of prophecy did not re- 
 veal to him any immediate, but only indirect 
 preparations and types of the Messianic a;ra. He 
 does not see the abysmal gap of renewed wait- 
 ing during nearly two hundred years, which 
 sep.orated the bright exaltation of the victorious 
 JIaccabjean sera from the still more glorious and 
 iieaveuly period in which the New Covenant 
 should be established ; and the prophets and ob- 
 servei's of prophetic predictions immediately 
 subsequent to him, probably noticed no more of 
 that interval than did he Icf. the Eth. -fund, 
 principles on chap. vii. No. 2). The pious theo- 
 cratic searchers of the Scriptures in the Mac- 
 cabsan period, and probably in the Ifiter stages 
 of that period, who had themselves begun to 
 experience a painful consciousness of the de- 
 scent into the gap which Daniel had overlooked, 
 were probably the first to arrive at an under- 
 
 • Cf. Bleek. in the JahrbUcher f. deutitche T/ieologie^ 
 ISiil). p. S4; Beichel, in Slwl. u. A'lUiten, 1848, pp. 737, 
 748 et scq. 
 
 T [It shoul.1 rather be borne in mind that this is not a 
 question of Daniel's subjective intuition into the future; 
 thi» dates in question were those explicitly given him by Ga- 
 briel commiaaloned direct from heaven for that very pur- 
 pose.] 
 
 standing of the merely typical nature of th« 
 contents of vs. 2(3 and 27, thus being taught to 
 look for a more perfect and enduring realizatior 
 of that oracle. Cf. Kr,iuichfeld, p. 8:37; "This 
 natural difference between the prophet's concep- 
 tion of events and their historical reality would 
 ultimately lead to the inference that a farther 
 realization of the jjrophecy was to be expected,* 
 inasmuch as the Creciau empire, and more par- 
 ticularly that of Antiocbus Epiphanes, did not 
 appear as the last of the heathen monarchies, 
 and the final supremacy of the Messianic king- 
 dom of God was not yet introduced. Instead 
 of charging the prophetic idea as such with be- 
 ing untrue in this respect, or of rejecting it 
 without farther investigation as not having been 
 fulfilled, the thoughtful circles among the peo- 
 ple would probably treat that idea as Ilaggai, 
 Zechariah, Malachi. and Daniel himself treated 
 the Messianic hopes of Jeremiah or Isaiah, that 
 were connected with the return from the cap- 
 tivity, since the prophetic description had been 
 so remarkably fulfilled in other respects. The 
 internal evidence demonstrated that the idea 
 was in itself incontrovertibly true, and it was 
 regarded as such, while its realization in the 
 light of historical facts jvas referred to a more 
 distant future. In like manner Christ unites 
 the description of the Messianic future with its 
 conflict, and its triumphs with his own time, and 
 connects with the latter the thought of the erec- 
 tion of Messiah's kingdom ; while the New- 
 Test. Apocal.vpse, from its historical point of 
 view, connects it with a still later time. Christ 
 simply regards the destnictiou of Jerusalem and 
 the end of all things, joined to the triumph of 
 God's kingdom, as a comprehensive whole, on 
 the authority of Daniel's description ; and he 
 consequently designates the present ;. erta iMatt. 
 xxiv. 31 and parallels) as the time in which the 
 picture of the eschatological future should be 
 realized, f The apostles imitate him in expect- 
 ing the end of the world in the age in which 
 they lived ;| but the Revelator's field of vision 
 lay beyond that yevid, and beyond the destruc- 
 tion of Jerusalem. That such a transfer and re- 
 ference from one period to another (which, aa 
 compared with its predeces.^'or, is to bring a 
 more complete, and ultimately, a full realiza' 
 tion) is possible, without degrading the prophe 
 tic idea and destroying its value, is implied in 
 the very character of the genuine prophetic 
 oracle, as being esstiitiaUy coiitpre/ieiisive in itt 
 nature, even though the tcriter nuiy primarilff 
 have intended it to refer only to some particular 
 event in the progress of history. — The reference 
 of the prophecy respecting the future tribula- 
 tion was doubtless accepted in the beginning of. 
 
 * [It is difficult to see how a discoverj' of Daniel's own 
 error on the point in question should lead his readers either 
 to entenain ^eater faith in his predictions or to seek for ji 
 more correct interpretation of them than he was able to attain 
 himself.] 
 
 t [There is this essential difference, however, as to tho 
 I>oii)t at issue between thi-se eschatolofrieal sayings of our 
 Lord and this of Daniel, that Christ expressly disclaimed any 
 revelation or even knowledge of the " times and seasons '' of 
 the events predicted ; whereas the prophecy before us i? a 
 pure series of such chronological notanda. Indeed our 
 Lord in these very utterances §xi>licitly refers to this identi- 
 cal passage of Daniel as affording the only clue that he 
 gives to the date of their occurrence.] 
 
 t [This assertion is often made by expositors, but it if 
 directly conti-adicted by Paul's emphatic lang'jage in Si 
 Thess. ii. 1 seti.I 
 
CHAP. IX. 1-27. 
 
 210 
 
 the Maccabsan epoch, and amongf others, liy the 
 writer of the first book of M-accabees ; but the 
 Jewish Sibyl mny serve to show that despite 
 such reference, the circumstances of the times 
 might make way for another interpretiition in 
 each instance, since, as early as about B.C. 140. 
 and at the time of a newly founied hereditary 
 Je\nsh-nation;J dynasty', it makes the ten horns 
 of Dan. vii. end beyond the Epiphanes with 
 Demetrius I., finds the little horn in Alexander 
 Balas. who seized the throne of the Seleucida;, 
 instead of referring it to Antiochus Epiphanes, 
 and no longer regards the world-controlling 
 power of the Jewish theocracy as bound to the 
 ruin of the dead Hellenic influence, which is 
 characterized in mild terms, but to the power of 
 the hated Roman empire. The Romans, whom 
 the Septuagint substitutes for the -^P2 in Dan. 
 xi. 31, are here directly and practically installed 
 in the place of the fourth world-kingdom of 
 Daniel, in which position we afterward meet 
 them in Josephus and the New Testament." 
 Concerning the latter point cf. Hilgenfeld, Die 
 ■ludkchc Apokulyptik, pp. 69 et seq., 8-i et seq. , 
 and also supra, § 6, note 3, of the Introd. to this 
 work. 
 
 2. Despite the repeated specific references to 
 tacts .ind circumstances in the Maccaba^an ajra, 
 ^he prophecy before us is no mticiiuinn cx eceiitu, 
 that was invented in that age ; for the want of 
 agreement between its statements and the actu- 
 al conditions of that time is far more general 
 than their corre-spondence.* It is (1) a funda- 
 nental non-agreement between the prophecy 
 <nd the fulfilment, that the sixty-two weeks 
 if years, if reckoned from the end of the seven 
 *'eeks. or from B.C. 538, in harmony with the 
 context and the evident sense of the prophecy, 
 extend down to B.C. 105, while the whole of the 
 Antiochian-MaccabEean catastrophe, which forms 
 the contents of the last week of years, was 
 ended at least seventy j'ears earlier ; and (against 
 Ewaldi the text contains no indication whatever 
 that the period of 434 years or sixty-two weeks 
 Is to be shortened by seventy years or ten weeks 
 )f years. Further (2), the murder of the high 
 priest Ouias, which we are compelled to regard 
 IS the JIaccabsean or typical fulfilment of the 
 ^,.„.^ r"^S", V. 36, did not transpire exactly in 
 the beginning of the sixty-ninth or last week, 
 but somewhat earli'^r, in the year 141 ae. Sel., 
 which was still included in the sixty-second week 
 <,cf. 2 Mace. iv. 7 et seq.; xxiii. 34). The pre- 
 dictio r of V. 26, "and after the threescore and 
 two weeks shall an anointed one be cut off." 
 does not therefore harmonize exactly with the 
 corresponding fact in the Maccabaian historj- 
 (cf. supra, on that passage ; also Kranichfeld, 
 p. 309 et seq. ) ; and if not Onias, but Seleucus 
 Philopater is to be understood as denoted by the 
 " anointed one who was cut off," as Bleek, Mau- 
 rer, Roesch, v. Lengerke, Hitzig, etc., contend, 
 the chronological discrepancy becomes still 
 giea,tei. To this must be added (.3) that the 
 
 • [This effort of the author to turn to advantage in one 
 tTlrection an acknowledged failure in another, i.s inffeniuuR, 
 but unfortunately, if true, would prove too much ; for ;f the 
 prf phecy does^ nut tally with its alleged fnlfiiment it i... 
 thereby shown not only to have been not written after the 
 event, but to have been nv true prophcLy at aii.] 
 
 temple and the altar did not remain in the pro- 
 faned condition to which Antiochus EpiphanoB 
 had reduced them during "half a week or 
 three and a h.alf years, but only during thre* 
 J ears and a few days (see Eth.-fund. principles, 
 etc., on chap. vii. Xo. 3, i), and fiuially (4), that 
 the detailed description of this desecrated state 
 and of the "abomination of desolation," v. 27, 
 which stood on the sanctuary while thus pro- 
 faned, does not correspond more exactly to the 
 statements in 1 Mace. i. , than the allusions to the 
 judicial punishment of the imtitheistic madman, 
 which are found m the close of the same and 
 the preceding verse, accord precisely in any way 
 with what history records concerning the end of 
 Antiochus Epiphanes. In order to be understood 
 by his contemporaries, a Maccabajan pseudo- 
 Daniel would have clothed his allusions in a very 
 different form, and would have made them 
 everywhere less equivocal. The surroundings 
 of the vision concerning the seventy weeks, and 
 the preparations for it would likewise have re- 
 ceived a diflterent form at his hands ; and the 
 fei-vent penitential and intercessory prayer, by 
 which the Spirit of prophecy was invoked and 
 the Divine exposition of Jeremiah's oracle was 
 
 I secured, this especially would have been differ- 
 ent in both contents and form, from what it is 
 in vs. 4-19, had it been invented by a pseudo- 
 
 ) Daniel. Instead of revealing a relationship to 
 the similar prayers in the books of Ezra and 
 Xehemiah, which were written immediately 
 after the captivity, it would have displayed a 
 character more nearly like that of the far more 
 verbose and prolix apocryphal writings which 
 originated during the last pre-Christian centuries, 
 such as Baruch, Ecclus. , Judith, and the addi- 
 tions to Esther and Daniel ; cf . , in addition to 
 Bar. 1. 14-ii. 19 (regarding which see above, on 
 V. 4et seq.), especially Ecclus. li. ; Jud. ix.; Tob. 
 iii. and xiii. ; Ezek. iii. 1 et seq.; and also the 
 Prayer of Azariah, Dan. iii. 20 et seq. Nor 
 would the alleged pseudo-Daniel of the Mac- 
 cabaian age have been likely to omit from a 
 prayer written to favor a tendency, every allu- 
 sion to the raging of the enemies of God's peo- 
 ple, which still continued at his time, since that 
 prayer would unquestionably be designed to 
 contribute to the quickening of the religious 
 and national zeal and courage i cf . e.rj. , the prayer 
 of Judith, chap. ix. which has already been re- 
 ferred to, and see again the remarks on v. 4 et 
 seq.). 
 
 3. The praetienl fundamental thoiiglit, and t?i6 
 central idea of this section is to be looked for 
 neither In Daniel's penitential prayer and fer- 
 vent intercession for his nation only, nor yet 
 merely in the equally serious and comforting 
 disclosures of the vision of the weeks. It is 
 rather contained in the relation of the two con- 
 stituent elements to each other, i.e., in the 
 causal connection of the prayer, as the expres- 
 sion of a disposition of the heart, that showed 
 it truly prepared to receive Divine revela- 
 tions concerning the salvation connected with 
 the future of God's kingdom, with the revela- 
 tion itself that was thus obtained. Inasmuch 
 as that preparation of the heart reaches its 
 highest point in the disposition which constitutef 
 the prophet a ri~^!:n "J'^N (v. 23), a Godlov- 
 ing favorite of God, a needy, contrite, humble, 
 
220 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 and therefore worthy object of the yearning 
 love of the Father of mercies, it may be said 
 that this expression in v. 23, whicli states in a 
 brief and striking manner the reason why the 
 following prophetic disclosures are vouchsafed 
 to the prophet, contains the central and funda- 
 mental thought of the whole chapter. More- 
 over, since by that very expression the prophet 
 is characterized as an anxious searcher after the 
 goal of the history of the Old-Test, empires, 
 and as one of those humble and self-abasing 
 servants of God, to whom He granted the most 
 extended view of the future of His kingdom,* 
 in reward of their humility and their faithful in- 
 vestigations in the documents containing His re- 
 velation of salvation, the nature of genvine 
 prophecy under the Old Dispensation, as being a 
 lon(fing and anxious preparation for the future 
 ■manifestation of deliverance in Chi-ist may be 
 found to have been characterized in this section, 
 and to have been exemplified in one of the most 
 prominent instances in the collective develop- 
 ment of Old Testament. The theme for the 
 horailetical treatment of the chapter as a whole 
 might therefore read : " Daniel, the favorite of 
 God ; the leader and founder of that series of 
 pious ' watchers' (-;jocn5fx''/i£i'"', Luke ii. 25, 38) 
 which reached to the time of Christ ; the ex- 
 ample and teacher of the only Divinely attested 
 method of ' searching the Scriptures ' (John v. 
 39) ; the model possessor of the Spirit in which 
 the Scriptures are to be read and pondered ; the 
 ideal prophet in the sense indicated by Peter" 
 (1 Pet. i. 10, 11 ; TzepX tj^ auvT/piac; £^E^yrr/oav Kal 
 t^T)pEVVTiGav 7Tpo(j)yTai ol Trepl Tijg eig vfiaQ x^P^'^^K 
 TrpOiptjTevoavTec, Epzm'uvTEC ftf TLva 7/ Trnlav Kaipbv 
 iir/Aov TO £v ahrol^ nvzvua xp^otov ■KpofiaprvpOfievov 
 Ta Et^ ;^;pfffrov -Ka-QiifiaTa Kal rH^ fisra rnvra rSd^nf). 
 If a proper use were made of the key afforded 
 by 1 Pet. , 1. c. , to arrive at a correct understand- 
 ing of the chapter and a correct estimate of the 
 Messianic position of the prophet, thus securing 
 the weapons with which to energetically refute 
 the current rationalistic prejudice that Daniel 
 no longer represented a normal and healthful 
 stage of ijrophetic development, but rather one 
 in which it had already begun to degenerate and 
 to be " apocalyptically diseased," a sermon 
 framed on some such plan would be able to 
 achieve truly powerful results, both in a prac- 
 tical and an apologetic point of view. In view 
 of the extraordinary wealth of matter, it might 
 be well to divide it into two themes for sermons, 
 in order to treat it thoroughly ; for instance, let 
 one sermon treat of the sjririt in which the 
 Scriptures should be read and the mysteries 
 contained in them be approached (vs. 1-23), and 
 another bear upon the principal feature disclosed 
 by the Scriptures when thus perused, viz. • the 
 fundamental law of all the histmy of salvation — 
 " through sufferings to glory " (vs. 24-37). 
 
 * Cf. Fuller, Der Propliet Daniel, p. 204, " We hear 
 Daniel repeatedly ch-tracterized as a Jewel of great value in 
 the sight of fiod. Hence, for the reaetm that Daniel is pre- 
 cion.s with God, the latter meets his petitions and wishes 
 kindlj-, and makes disclosures to him which would not 
 otherwise have been imparted. If his nation may find com- 
 fort and eneouratrement in these disclosures at a later day, it 
 Is to know to wliom it is indebted for them, and to learn that 
 a man upon whom rests the favor of Uod may be a blessinR 
 to his peop e during snl sccjiient centtiries. For Daniel is 
 not merely the instrument Ihrouyli wliirlt, but also the man 
 /or rrho^e Hake God imparts this revelation, which possesses 
 Isicaleulablc value for Daniel's nation for centuries to come.*' 
 
 4. Homiletical suggestions on particular pat 
 sages. On v. 2 et seq., Jerome : "In cinere el 
 sacco postulat impleri. quod promiserat Deus ; 
 non quo esset incredulus futurorum, sed ne secur- 
 itas negligentiam et ne<jligentia pureret offen- 
 sam." — Melancthon : " Ltiatnsi Deus promisit 
 beneficia corporaliu rel spiritualia, iamen precibus 
 ■vult exerceri fidan, et viilt crescere poenitentiam 
 sicut iitquit Zachanas : C'onvertimini ad riie, et, 
 ego convertar ad vos, etc. Et orat Daniel d« 
 restituenda Ecclesia ; ita nos qnoqve officiamuT 
 vera dolore propter Ecclesia calamitates et oremus, 
 ut Deus enm augeat, gubernet et servet." Spener : 
 ^-(Penitential sermons on Daniel's penitential 
 prayer) : ' ' All the Divine prophecies are obscure 
 before their fulfilment, and can only be appre- 
 hended through special industry in the light of 
 Divine truth ; therefore, ' whoso readeth, let him 
 understand' (Matt. xxiv. 14)." — Starke: " Ii 
 Daniel read prophetic writings, although him- 
 self a prophet of the Most High, how silly is it 
 to imagine that we can know everything of our- 
 selves ! Thence it results that dreams and false 
 imaginings are taken for God's word (Ezek. xui. 
 3 et seq. ) .... It is certainly the duty of a 
 Christian to exercise his faith continually in 
 prayer ; but when a special promise by God ia 
 before him, he should arouse himself to that ex- 
 ercise more fully (Acts iv. 24) ; for there are 
 many promises which include the condition of 
 true repentance and obedience to God, either ex- 
 pressed or implied," etc. — J. Lange : '' Promise, 
 prayer, and fulfilment always belong together 
 (Psa. xxvii. 8)." 
 
 V. 4 et seq. , Melancthon : " Daniel fa tetur pcc- 
 catn populi et tribuit Deo landem jnstitia, quod 
 juste puniverit popvlum. Deinde petit remis- 
 siuncm peccatorum et reductioncm popndi. Est 
 ergo vera contritio, agnoscere iram Dei adtersus 
 nostra peccata, expavescere jyropter iram Dei. do- 
 lere quod Deiim offenderimus, tribuere in taudetn, 
 quod juste nos puniat, et obedire in pamis. — iWc 
 Iamen satis est peccata noscere, intueri ptrnas, sed 
 iiccednt quoque con.iolatio. Ergo Daniel non solum 
 doctrinam cnntriticmis proponit, sed addit partem 
 alteram. Docet suo exemplo petero et expectare 
 veniam propter mismem-diam et pretmissiones." 
 — Starke: "A conception of God's punitive 
 justice is necessary, in order that man may 
 more fully recognize the guilt of his sin, ,and 
 may not lull himself into a mistaken security 
 with the comforting thought of His mercy. . . . 
 But despite this there is no other nor better 
 comfort in the agony of sin, than God's good- 
 ness and mercy, through which alone we can 
 obtain forgiveness by faith." — Huvemick : "At 
 the same time, the prayer of the prophet was 
 not merely one that proceeded from him as an 
 individual, but one offered by him as a mediator 
 of the whole nation, in whose name he now cried 
 to the Merciful One. We may therefore ascribe 
 a liturgical character to it with entire justice, 
 and thus explain the frequent borro%ving of 
 former expressions in which it abounds." 
 
 Verses 11-14, Calvin : " Danid hie significai, 
 non dsbere videri absurdum, quod Deus multo sit 
 asperior in electum popvlum. quant in gentei 
 profanas ; quia scilicet major eral impietas illiua 
 populi quam gentium omnium, propter ingratitu- 
 dinem, pro^iter contumacinm, propter indomnbil- 
 em illam pervicaciam. Quvm ergo superarint 
 ItraelitcB gentes omnet et malitia ct ingratitudin 
 
CHAP. X. 1— rs. 1. 
 
 2L'l 
 
 el omni genere scelerum, Daniel hie prtsdicat, 
 merito turn duriter ipsos affligi." — Geier : " The 
 greater the favor shown by God toward a nation 
 or country, the gfreater will aftenvard be the 
 punishment which follows on its ing-ratitude 
 (Deut. xxxii. 18, 22 et seq. ). " — Spener : 
 ' ■ Divine threatenings are recorded in order that 
 man be deterred from sinning, and also that an 
 evidence of God's righteousness and truthfulness 
 may be drawn from their realization. — Without 
 repentance, all other means to avert the wrath 
 of God are useless. He that should endeavor to 
 quench the fire with one hand, while pouring oil 
 on it with the other, would increase the fire 
 more than his attempt to quench it would dimin- 
 ish it (Jer. ii. 2:1)." 
 
 Verse ..t et seq., Starke : " Where genuine re- 
 pentance exists it fills the heart, so that it can- 
 not avoid breaking out in humble confession, 
 and that repeatedly (Jer. vi. 11). — When man 
 humbles himself under a sense of God's wrath, 
 recognizes that the punishment was deserved, 
 and flies to Divine mercy for refuge, God 
 transforms His wrath and displeasure into 
 grace (Psa Ixxsi. 14, 15). — If the church, and 
 even everj' single member belonging to it, bears 
 the name of Christ, it fqjlows that this is the 
 most powerful motive to hear our [irayer for the 
 church which we can present to God (cf. Acts 
 iv. 27 et seq )." — Hiivemick : "As the strongest 
 motive for a father to be careful for his child, 
 is that it is called by his name — and that not in 
 conformity with a custom having no significance, 
 but asa sign that it belongs to him and must be 
 considered as his property, — so the prophet here 
 expresses his confidence in the grace of God 
 most beautifully by the feature that he refers to 
 the citi/ ithich in culled hi/ the name of Ood. the 
 city of Jehovah, the great King, which is founded 
 in eternity (Psa. xlvi. ij ; xlviii. 2, 9 ; Ixxxvii. Hj." 
 
 Verses 20-28, Jerome : " Non piypuli tiintvm 
 peccatn, sea et sun repUait, quia uiius e popiilo 
 est; sine humiliter. quum peccatum ipsen-iiife- 
 cerit. sejungil populo jieccatori, ut ex humilitate 
 veniiim conseqnatur." — Id. (on chap. x. 11) : 
 ^' Congruenter ' vir desideriorum' vacatur, qui 
 iiistantia precum et afflictione, corporisque jeju- 
 niarumqus duritie cupit scire veiitura tt Dei se- 
 cret n cognoscere. " — Starke : "The prayer that is 
 poured out before God for our personal wants 
 and the common need is never unheard (Psa. 
 xci. 15). — What will God not do for the sake of 
 man I The princes of heaven are obliged to 
 render Him ser\-ice and reveal His will to the 
 faithful, that they may be strengthened in faith 
 and hope (Heb. i. 14). — True Christians imitate 
 the angels, who seek to instruct each other more 
 
 and more in the ways of God, till they all arrive 
 at the unity of the faith and of the knowledge 
 of the Son of God (Eph. iv. 13; 1 Pet. i. 13)." 
 — Fjlier (see the note connected with No. 3). 
 
 Verses 34-27, Melancthon : " Primum re- 
 futat hie locus errorem Judanrum de lege reti- 
 nenda et de regno politico Christi. Si erit perpe- 
 tuajiistifia. item: si ChriHus occidetur, sequitur 
 legem Mosakam noii retiiieitdam e~ise, nee fore 
 mundanumregnum. — Secundo tradit testimonium 
 depassione Christi. — Tertio cum poUtiajam de- 
 sierit, ita ut nullos habeat duces, nullos prophftas, 
 nulla trihuum discrimitia (cfr. Hos. iii. 4 8.), con- 
 stat impletum esse dictum Jacob : Non auferetur 
 sceptrum de Juda, donee venerit Sfdrator (Gen. 
 xlix. 10). Necesse est igitur, veni^se Salvatorem." 
 — Starke : " If everlasting righteousness shall 
 be brought back, it follows that man has once 
 possessed it, but has lost it. — 'ttTiile Christ is the 
 true High-priest who atones for all men, and 
 the great Prophet who has revealed the \vill of 
 God concerning our salvation, He is also the 
 true King, who has the power to place his aton- 
 ing blood to our credit, and to protect His be- 
 lieving followers." — Havemick : " The com- 
 plete expiation of the great and numerotis sins 
 of Isr.ael shall take place in the time of Messiah, 
 the true High-priest ; but His coming shall be 
 delayed untU after the expiration of the period 
 that was indicated. But precisely because the 
 sins of the people were as the sand of the sea, 
 so that Daniel himself confessed their enormity 
 (vs. 4-19), it was necessary to provide a perfect 
 and wholly complete expiation, in contrast with 
 that which had hitherto been made in the tem- 
 ple at Jerusalem, which was the mere foreshad 
 owing of the future reality. The eyes of Daniel 
 and of Israel were not to linger on the temple 
 only, whose restoration the prophet so anxiously 
 desired ; they were to Uft their eyes up farther, 
 to Him who was to come, who is both the true 
 temple, and the priest who ministers in it " — 
 Fuller: " MoauwhOe the principal concern was 
 that Israel should happily escape from the trib- 
 ulation caused by the Old-Test, antichrist. 
 When that was realized, it might be inquired 
 why the seven weeks of years did not begin ('? 
 — rather, why Messiah did not come !) — At a 
 later period, John, the New-Test. Daniel, ap- 
 peared with his Revelation, which continued to 
 build on the foundations laid by Daniel, and de- 
 scribed the troubled times of the New-Test, an- 
 tichrist, together with the deliverance from 
 them, being designed to render the same service 
 to the New-Test, people of God, which Daniel's 
 prophecy formerly rendered to God's people un- 
 der the Old Covenant." 
 
 t. The prophet's last vision, containing the most thormigh description of the future sufferings of 
 Isi'ael, and of its ultim<ite Messianic exaltation. 
 
 Chapters X-XII. 
 
 a. The appearance of the anga on the banks of the Tigris, as preparatory to the tubseqiient uropheeies 
 
 and introductory to them. 
 
 Chaps. X. 1-XI. 1. 
 
 1 lu the third year of [to] Cyrus king of Persia, a thing [word] w.as revealed 
 unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar ; and the thing [word] loou 
 
THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 true [truth], but [and] the time appointed [warfare] was long [great] : and ht 
 understood the thing [word], and liud understanding of [in] the vision [api)ear- 
 ance.] 
 
 2 In those days I Daniel was ' mourning three full weeks." I ate no pleasant 
 
 3 bread, neither came flesh nor wine in [to] my mouth, neither did I anoint mj 
 self at all till three whole weeks were fulfilled. 
 
 4 And in the four and twentieth day of [to] the first month, as [and] I was by 
 
 5 [upon] the side of the great river, which [it] is Iliddekel, then [and] I lifted 
 uj) mine eyes, and looked [saw], and, behold, a certain [one] man clothed in 
 
 5 linen [linens], whose [and his] loins were girded with fine gold of Uphaz ; his 
 body also [and his body] vjas like the beryl, and his fiice as the appearance of 
 lightning, and his eyes as lamps of fire, and his arms and his feet like in colour 
 to [the aspect of] polished brass, and the voice of his words like the voice of a 
 
 7 multitude. And 1 Daniel alone saw the vision [appearance] ; for [and] the men 
 that were with me saw not the vision [appearance]; but a great quaking fell 
 upon them, so that [and] they fled to hiile [iu hiding] themselves. 
 
 8 Therefore [And] I was left alone, and saw this great vision [appearance], and 
 there remained no strength in me; for my comeliness was turned in [upon] me 
 
 9 i«to corruption, and I retained no strength. Yet [And] heard I the voice of his 
 words: and when [as] I heard the voice of his words, then [and] was 1 in a deep 
 
 10 sleep [stupified] on my face, and my face toward the ground [earthj. And, be- 
 hold, a hand touched me, which [and] set nie upon my knees and wpore the palms 
 
 11 of my hands. And he said unto me, Daniel, a man greatly beloved, under- 
 stand [have understanding in] the words lliat I speak unto thee, and stand up- 
 right : for unto thee am I now sent. And when he had spoken [at his speaking] 
 this word unto [with] me, I stood trembling. 
 
 12 Then [And] said he unto me. Fear not, Daniel; for fi-oni the first day that 
 thou didst set [give] thy heart to understand, and to chasten thyself before thy 
 
 13 God, thy words were heard, and I am [have] come for [at] thy words. But [And] 
 the prince of the kindom of Persia withstood [was standing in front of] me one 
 and twenty days: but [and], lo, Michael, one of the cliief [first] princes, came 
 
 14 to help me; and 1 remained there with [beside] the kings of Persia. Now 
 [And] I am [have] come to make thee underst.'iiid what shall befall th}" people 
 in the latter [sequel of the] days: for yet the vision is for mawj days. 
 
 15 And when he had spoken [in his speaking] such like [like these] words unto 
 [with] me, I set [gave] my face toward the ground [earth], and I became dumb. 
 
 16 And, behold, one like the similitude of the sous of men [man] touched [touch- 
 ing upon] my lips : then [and] I opened my mouth and spake, and said unto 
 him that stood before ine, O my lord, by the vision [appearance] my sorrows 
 
 17 are turned upon me, and I have retained no strength. For [And] how can the 
 servant of this my lord talk [speak] with this my lord? for [and] as for rae 
 [I], straightway there remained [would stand] no strength in me, neither is 
 there breath left in me. 
 
 18 Then [And] there came again and touched me one like the apjiearance of a 
 
 19 man, and he strerigthened me, and said, man greatly beloved, fear not; 
 peace he unto thee ; be strong, yea [and], be strong. And when he had spoken 
 unto [in his speaking with] me, I was strengthened, and said, Let my lord 
 speak ; for thou hast strengthened me. 
 
 20 Then [And] said lie, Knowest thou wherefore I [have] come unto thee? and 
 now will I return to fight with the prince of Persia: and luhea I am gone forth, 
 
 21 [then] lo, the prince of Gra?cia shall [has] come. But I will show [tell] thee 
 that which is noted [recorded] in the scripture of truth : and tliere is none that 
 
 1 holdeth with me in [upon] these things, but Michael your prince. Also [And] 
 I, iu the first year of [to] Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to 
 etrengthen him. 
 
 ORAMM.4.T1CAL NOTES. 
 
 [' ■'""'"n here sittnifies coyillnuerl.—- The phrase is iweuliar, Z'^fZ' Z^VZ^, literally, sevens datjs, the lattei 
 
 oelng ill cpLXe;?oticiLl appo-Jition. It is here used in coiitr»ft with chap. ix. 'i^ et aeq., to tshow that literal wooka, and nol 
 bebdonindi'^ of y^ars. are intended.] 
 
CHAP. X. ]— XI. 1. 
 
 O'^S 
 
 PREFATORY REMARKS 
 
 Coneerning the final vision of Daniel (chap, x.- 
 xii.) as a tchole. 
 
 The last section of the prophetically visional 
 part of this book falls into three clearly defined 
 subdivisions of unequal leu^h. and was there- 
 fore not inappropriately treated by .the person 
 who divided the Holy Scriptui-es into chapters. 
 It is not only the most comprehensive, but. be- 
 cause of its form and contents, also the most re- 
 markable and difficult among the prophetic por- 
 tions of the book. Having been composed-later 
 than the three preceding visions, namely subse- 
 quent to the captivity and when the return of 
 the exiles had already begun (see on v. 1), it 
 supplements their contents, and develops them 
 still farther — especially those of the second vi- 
 sion (chap, viii.) and of the third (chap. ix. ). 
 The development of the fourth and last world- 
 power to the stage of anti-Chri.?tianity. which 
 was described with special interest in those two 
 chapters, is now illustrated more fully than in 
 any former instance, and at the same time, the 
 ultimate triumph of the kmgdom of God over 
 that and all other opposing powers is brought 
 into a clearer light and portrayed in more glow- 
 ing colors than heretofore. The relation of the 
 section to chap. vii. as serving to complement 
 and still farther develop its subject, becomes 
 especially prominent in this bright closing scene; 
 while the prophec}' is in so far complementary 
 to chapters viii. and ix. as it describes the deve- 
 lopment of the anti-Christian world-power in 
 predictions distinguished by a greater fulness of 
 detail — to say nothing of the similarity between 
 its preparatory scenery and that of chap. viii. 
 and also of ix. 20-3:j. The section serves to 
 complete the visions of chap. viii. by describing 
 more exactly the hostile relations in which the 
 various constituent sections of the fourth world- 
 power stood to each other, as already symboli- 
 cally indicated in chap. viii. 23 et seq.; and par- 
 ticularly by showing how the holy land, which 
 lay between the contending sections of the 
 divided empire, in some ca.ses was drawn indi- 
 rectly into suffering, and in others was made the 
 object of direct attack. In like manner this 
 vision becomes complementary to that in chap. 
 ix. since it fills the outline of the sixty-two 
 weeks and also of the one final week of tribula- 
 tion [?|, which were but briefly referred to in 
 that chapter, with a wealth of contents, that 
 displays a growing animation and interest as the 
 description draws near to the close of the sixt.y- 
 second and the beginning of the last week. In 
 tracing the particular manner of the develop- 
 ment of the anti-Christian power out of the 
 fourth and last world-monarchy, there seems to 
 have been the occauonal intercention of a later 
 fiand, which dreoo the prophe-y with sharper lines 
 and adapted it nwre fully to th( xuhstqiient facts 
 connected icilh its historical fulfilment, than had 
 been done in the general outline irkich icas revealed 
 to the prophet.* The statements in v. 5 et seq., 
 concei-uing the geographical position of the two 
 most powerful sections of the great divided Ja- 
 vanic world-empire, and also concerning the di- 
 
 * [We have repeatedly objectetl to tnis hypothesia of a 
 lat«r mtcrpolation us purely aiibjective aud gratuitous.] 
 
 rection taken by the various expeditions for con- 
 quest which their rulers organized, the repeated 
 attempts to unite the contending dynasties by 
 means of matrimonial alliances, the insurrec- 
 tions and treasonable plots against individual 
 sovereigns, etc.. can hardly be regarded other- 
 wise than as interpolations on the part of a pious 
 Jewish apocalyptist of the Maccaba;an age, al- 
 though it may be impossible at this day to ven- 
 ture a definite estimate respecting the propor- 
 tion of the whole section chap. xi. 5— 45 that 
 originated with Daniel, or as to how much is to be 
 credited to the subsequent reviser (see the exeget. 
 remarks on the several passages, particularly on 
 vs. 5, 6, 8, 14, 17, 18,25, 2T, etc., and pre-em- 
 inently on -v. 40 et seq.; and cf. supra, Introd. 
 § 1, note 3, and § 4). While, for reasons that 
 have been given (cf. Introd. t; 4. note 1), we de- 
 cidedly reject the hypothesis that the entire sec- 
 tion chap. X. l-.xii. 18. excepting only the first 
 four verses of chap. xii. , is spurious, we regard 
 the theory that chap. xi. has been interpolated 
 as above suggested, as necessary, chietiy because 
 details characterized by such unusual precision 
 as is found in that chapter, seem to conflict 
 with the nature of genuine and healthful pro- 
 phecy, and with the analogy of all the remain- 
 ing prophecies in the history of Old-Test, revela- 
 tion.' We are entirely agreed with Kranichfeld 
 (p. 340 et seq.) in holding that the nature or the 
 ■"self-evident canon" of prophecy requires 
 " that the prediction should not usurp the place 
 of hi.storical development itself, i.e.. that it should 
 not adduce such future dates, as cannot be con- 
 nected with the time of the prophetic originator, 
 as the unfolding of a religious <ir moral idea ani- 
 mated by the operations of God — although in 
 other respects a pai-ticularizing description may 
 offer any amount of detailed representations in 
 illustration, limited only by the confines estab- 
 lished by that canon." We cannot, however, 
 agree with him in believing that the entire vi- 
 sion before us, and especially that part con- 
 tained iu chap. xi. , must be regarded " ' by that 
 canon " simply us a dereioping of the ideas con- 
 tained elsewhere in the book. The many surpris- 
 ing details of that chapter do not appear to an 
 unbiassed mind as the mere development of 
 former thoughts, but rather as concrete state- 
 ments respecting the political aud family his- 
 tory of the Seleucidse and the Ptolemies, such 
 as no other Old-Test, prophet would have .at- 
 tempted to furnish, even approximately, and 
 such as conflict with the spirit of Old-Test, pro- 
 phecy in general. We are certainly not com- 
 pelled by anj- merely subjective reason to assume 
 
 * [That the prophecies in question are unique in this par- 
 ticular may reiuli.y be conceded without any impeachment 
 of their genuinenii-ss. The w-hole book is remarkable for ita 
 vividness and personality of delineation. The details were 
 so striking that Cyrus tiie Great and -\lexftnder the Great 
 are traditionally reported to have recognized their own 
 portraits immediately. But the same is measurably true of 
 other specificatiiins in O.-T. prophecies, although not on so 
 extended a scale. Even the name of Cyrus is mentioned by 
 Isaiah nearly two ceutnries before his time ; yet few. among 
 evangelical interpreters at least, would on that account pro- 
 nounce those paasages a forgery. The author's reasoning 
 for the rejection of the authenticity of these predictions of 
 Daniel is entirely uncritical. Hengstenberg. in his w-ork on 
 the Genniaenett of the Book of Daniel (Kdinb. translation, 
 sec. xii.), adduces other example* of enual definiteness in 
 I 0,-T. prophecy, and meets this whole objection fully. The 
 vague manner iu which our author adduces the argument 
 gives very little opportunity to do more than make this gen- 
 eral demurral to his \iews on this point.] 
 
S24 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 an interpolation of the text of Daniel in this 
 place, after having' rejected that theory in every 
 other instance. The only reason which prevents 
 us from defending the genuineness of this clos- 
 ing section is based on the analogy of all the 
 balance of O.-T. prophecy, which in no case af- 
 fords a similar example of specific and detailed 
 description of the future (cf . Tholuck, Die Pro- 
 p/ieten iind ihre Weixsngi/ngen, p. 105 et seq. ; 
 Die Crremen einer Priidiktion — an investigation, 
 however, which seems to require a more strict 
 apprehension). 
 
 The whole section divides itself, as has al- 
 ready been observed, into three parts, the first 
 of which describes the general circumstances 
 that conditioned the new vision, and also the in- 
 troductory features of the vision itself (consist- 
 ing in the appearance of a mighty angel, which 
 at first excited the prophet's alarm and terror, 
 but subsequently exercised a comforting and ex- 
 alting influence over him), chap. x. 1-xi. 1. The 
 special description of the future having been 
 thns introduced is taken up by the second part 
 and carried forward from the unfolding of the 
 Persian world-empire, then upon the stage, to 
 the highest point of conceited power developed 
 by the antitheistic tyrant who ultimately sprang 
 from the Javanic world-monarchy, and who be- 
 came the antichrist of the Old Testament (chap, 
 xi. 2-45). * Finally, the third part describes the 
 triumph, the deliverance, and the exaltation of 
 God's people in the Messianic period, and, if it 
 does not certify the nearness of that aera of ul- 
 timate prosperity, it j'et conveys the assurance 
 
 * [Keil takes a different view of this whole prophecy, 
 with :\ view to obviate any sudden transition, either from 
 the Persian monarchy to the Antiochian tyranny, or from 
 that to the final consnmnlation of the kingdom of God. 
 *'TUe angel of the Lord will reveal to Daniel, not what shall 
 happen from the third year of Cyrus to the time of Antio- 
 chus. and further to the resurrection of the dead, but, accord- 
 ing to the express declaration of chap, .x, 34, what shall 
 happen to his people C^?2"n r''"in50, i.e., in the Mes- 
 sianic future, because the prophecy relates to this time. In 
 the -^"1"' r'^"inK takes place the destruction of the 
 
 world-power, and the setting up of the Messianic kingdom 
 at the end of the present world-aeon. All that the- angel 
 says regarding the Persian and the Javanic world-kingdoms, 
 and the wars of the kings of the north and the south, has 
 its aim to the end-time, and serves only to indicate briefly 
 the chief elements of the development of the world-king- 
 doms till the time when the war that brings in the end shall 
 burst forth, and to show how, after the overthrow of the 
 Javanic world-kingdom, neither the kings of the north nor 
 those of the south shall gain the possession of the dominion 
 of the world." But this last would certainly seem to be a 
 very inadequate reason for so great a detail of political de- 
 lineation. Hence, after pursuing the exposition of the mid- 
 dle portion of this prophec.v especially, Keil concludes thus; 
 '"From this comparison this much follows that the pro- 
 phecy does not furnish a prediction of the historical wars of 
 the Seleucidte and the Ptolemies, but an ideal description of 
 the war of the kings of the north and the south in its gen- 
 eral outlines, whereby, it is true, diverse special elements of 
 the prophetical announcement have been historically fal- 
 filled. but the historical reality does not correspond with the 
 contents of the prophecy in anything like an exhaustive 
 manner." Accordingly he everywhere exaggerates the minor 
 discrepancies that occur between the prophecy and the his- 
 tory of .\ntiochus in particular, with a view to enhance this 
 Idealistic theory. The indetiniteness and inconsistency of 
 thus carrying on at once a double line of interpretation ren- 
 ders his scheme on the whole very unsatisfactory. Yet it is 
 in pnrsuance of hie general theory concerning the absence of 
 * "icsiirn on the prophet's part to particularize the history or 
 the Jews as such. To a certain point this theory is doubt- 
 teas true : but he carries it so far as to render the predictions 
 rather symbolical than real. The discrepancies upon which 
 he chie.ly relies for the support of his view we will examine 
 ta detail as they occur.] 
 
 that its approach is determineil by immutabla 
 measurements and conditions fixed by God 
 (chap. xii. l-l-J). — The exorbitant length of the 
 intermediate part, exceeding, as it does, the ag- 
 gregate of the others nearly two-fold, might be 
 adduced as an additional and highly proVjable 
 evidence of its interpolation, as suggested above * 
 
 EXEGETICAL REMARKS. 
 
 Verse 1. TJie time and significance of the vi- 
 sion. In the third year of Cyrus king of 
 Persia — therefore B.C. 536 or 535 [probably, 
 534], later than any other date in the book (cf. 
 on chap. i. 31). It is significant and instructive, 
 as bearing on the subject and design of the vi- 
 sion, which dwells with special interest on the 
 aspect of affairs subsequent to the Persian domi- 
 iiion. that when it was imparted to Daniel, he 
 had already lived under Medo-Persian rule dur- 
 ing several years. Cf. Kranichfeld, p. 340 : 
 "After a series of prophetic announcements by 
 Daniel had received a genuine prophetic fulfil- 
 ment during the time of the exile itself, and, 
 on the one hand the newly confirmed return of 
 the exiles had been but lately realized, while on 
 the other, the DTSn t]i::^ which had been pre- 
 dicted instead of the Messianic glory, was feel- 
 ingly demonstrated, e.g., by the disputes with 
 the Samaritans, by the interruption of the build- 
 ing of the temple (cf. Ezra iii. 8 with iv. 8), and, 
 aboie all, by the continued aversion of the su- 
 preme Persian powers (cf. Dan. x. 13, 20), it 
 now became the interest of the seer to devote 
 special attention to the last heathen empire of 
 the earth, the only one remaining to be demon- 
 strated, and to present theocratically this last 
 characteristic picture of hostility, in colors that 
 would constantly impress its nature, and in such 
 detail as the confidence springing from the un- 
 varying success of the past would justify. 
 Thoroughly convinced as he was, on the ground 
 of his own observation and of the teaching of 
 earlier prophecy that the Javanic west would 
 eventually displace the east in the dominion of 
 the world, and that at the same time the ulti- 
 mate form of heathen government would appear 
 in connection with the former, he would natur- 
 ally not regard the transient Persian empire, 
 which had indeed been adequately characterized 
 at its very beginning, as the 3"i""n ri'^'ins (cf. 
 
 X. 14; ii. 28; viii. 19) upon which prophecy 
 elsewhere dwells by preference, but would rather 
 con.sider the final form of heathen power over 
 the theocracy in that light." — Hitzig inquires 
 ' ' Why Daniel was stUl at Babylon in the third 
 year of Cyrus ? Why so pious a theocrat, and 
 so devoted a lover of Jerusalem and the holy 
 land, had not returned thither ? 'NMiy he should 
 seem to place himself among the despisers of 
 
 * [On the contrary, the fact that in chap. xi. this detail in 
 so minutely drawn out, is a strong proof of the genuineness 
 of this portion, ftjr it is precisely here that the same arch- 
 enemy, the Antiochian antichrist, is most vividly depicted, 
 who constitutes the prominent and culminating figure in all 
 the preceding visions. The whole chapter evidently revolves 
 around this, which is likewise the central point of the entire 
 book. It is moreover in exact conformity with the spirit of 
 O.-T. prophecy to dwell thus at length upon the nrnre.it type 
 of all the Uibieaux in the future of God's people, and' tc 
 touch more lightly and dimly upon the more distant features.] 
 
CHAP. X. 1— XI. 1. 
 
 y2* 
 
 the holy mountain and among the apostates 
 (Isa. Ixv. 11 ; Ixvi. o), by disregarding the ex- 
 horta.ions of Isa. ii. to return (Isa. xlviii. 20; 
 lii. 11 et seq. )?" — to all of which the simple 
 aiLswer is. that while ranking as a highlj- esteem- 
 ed and intluential officer of the state, even under 
 Per-sian rule icf. chap. vi. 39), he must have 
 been persuaded that he would be able to render 
 his nation more important service with regard 
 to the rebuilding of their city and temple, were 
 he to remain behind to represent them at the 
 court, than he possibly could were he to accom- 
 pany them on their return to Judsa. As a 
 secondary consideration his somewhat advanced, 
 age may have intiuenced his decision (despite 
 Ezra iii. 12 1, cf. Hfivernick on the passage. — 
 Unto Daniel, whose name was called Belte- 
 shazzar. Cf. i. 7; ii. 20; iv. 5; v. 1-2. Both 
 names are given in this place, for the reason, 
 probably, that the two -fold relation which the 
 prophet occupied I being connected with the Old- 
 Test, people of God, and also filling an official 
 station at the court of the world-kingdom) and 
 which is thus indicated, constituted the feature 
 by which he was enabled '• to view the history 
 of the conflict of Israel with the world-power, 
 and to record for the benefit of his people what 
 might be expected from the latter" (Fiiller). — 
 And the thing was true j or, " and the word is i 
 truth," I.e., the word of God which was revealed 
 to the prophet, and which, unlike the words of 
 so many false prophets of that time (Jer. xxix. 
 8 et seq . 15), is not a lying and deceptive word, 
 but truth, that is worthy of credit and shall 
 surely come to pass ; cf. 2 Sam. vii. 28 ; 1 Kings 
 viii. 20 ; also below, v. 21 ; xi. 2; xii. 7. — But 
 the time appointed was long; rather, "".and 
 great tribulation," supply, "' formed its subject" 
 ;t;3 S^^ is an additional predicate of "i21,T 
 (cf. Gen. xi. 1; Isa. vii. 24; Jer. xxvi. 2). 
 Maurer renders it correctly : " 'j '■^^nnieuluynvo- 
 Ciitnr ah argameitto" and also de Wette : " and 
 refers to great wretchedness." H^S here de- 
 notes "warfare, oppression, trouble," exactly as 
 in Isa. xl. 2; not "bravery, might" (Vulg., 
 Syr. ). nor " e.xertion," as if the great effort put 
 forth by the prophet while receiving the revela- 
 tion were alluded to (Hiivern. ), and least of all, 
 " ministering," as Ewald strangely conceived, 
 referring to the numerous angels whom he re- 
 garded as being engaged in this new revelation 
 with industrious energy and care (!). — And he 
 understood the thing, and had understanding 
 of the vision ; rather. " observed the word, and 
 gave attention to the yision." 1"? is not an 
 imperative (v. Lengerke, Ewald), but an infini- 
 tive with a perfect signification. * The construc- 
 tion with an accusative of the object is similar 
 to that in chap. ix. 2 ; cf. xii. 8. The following 
 ~;"3, although milel, is not an imperative (as v. 
 Lengerke supposes, but a noun, which has the 
 . accent here on the first syllable, because of the 
 ticcented 12 that immediately follows; cf. Ezek. 
 xix. 14. The probable design of the statement ' 
 that Daniel gave careful heed to what was ; 
 revealed was to emphasize the highly significant 
 and profoundly important subject of the vision 
 _ — _ 
 
 • [Keil, however, agrees with Geseniua and Furst in re- 
 g.'xr'iing ilas an anomalous ttiird per.s. iikisc. fritter.] 1 
 
 10 
 
 from the outset, and also to give assurance ol 
 the credibility of the prophet's narrative. 
 
 Verses 2, 3. The frame of mind of Daniel and 
 his outward deportment vhile reccicing the re 
 velation. Verse 2. In those days I Daniel 
 was mourning three full w^eeks. The tidings 
 respecting the discour.aging state of aifairs 
 among the Jews, who had returned to the holy 
 land, which may have reached Daniel about this 
 time, may be regarded as the probable cause of 
 his sadness. An especial cause of grief to him 
 probably lay in the fact, that as the intervention 
 of the Samaritans had interrupted the building 
 of the temple since the second year after the 
 return of the exiles (Ezra iv. 4 et seq. ; cf. iii. 
 8), the latter were prevented from observing the 
 Passover in a la^vfiil manner. His attention 
 would be especially directed to that fact, since 
 according to v. 4, the period of three weeks 
 spent by him in mourning and fasting was in- 
 cluded in the very month of the feast of the 
 Passover, so as to precede the date fixed for the 
 beginning of that fea.st (which continued from 
 the 14th to the 2]stNisan, the "tir.st month" 
 of the Jewish year) by twelve days, and to ex- 
 tend three days beyond its close — to the 24th 
 Nisan.— a-'p-; S^'^'fi'. The addition of S^a";. 
 which is designed to indicate the full or enume- 
 rated measure of the weeks (cf. our " three full 
 weeks "), is hardly intended to contrast with the 
 weeks of years which are implied in chap. ix. ; 
 for the contrary cf. Gen. xxix. 14 ; xii 1 ; Num. 
 xi. 20 et seq.; Jer. xxvi. 3, 11, etc.* — I ate no 
 pleasant bread, ril'in Onj, " bread of pleas- 
 ures, of desires," is doubtless a contrast to the 
 "bread of affliction," Dent. xvi. 3, i.e., to the 
 unleavened bread which was eaten during the 
 Passover. Hence, the first expression of his 
 grief mentioned by Daniel is that he abstained 
 from the use of leavened bread, or from eating 
 the ■';p. 'i or rpS^.f Luther's rendering, "I 
 ate no dainty food," is therefore mistaken and 
 inexact; and also Bertholdt's, "I abstained 
 even from the use of bread." — Neither came 
 flesh nor wine in my mouth. A genuine fast, 
 in which all dainty, attractive, or luxurious 
 viands were avoided ; cf . Gen. xxvii. 2o ; 2 
 Sam. xii. 20; Isa. xxii. 13, etc. — Neither did 
 1 anoint myself; another characteristic indica- 
 tion of a sorrowful disposition, cf. Ecc. ix. 8 ; 
 Psa. xxiii. 5 ; Isa. Ixi. 3, etc. — Hitzig's view is 
 .substantially correct : " The design of his 
 mourning was not to support prayer and inter- 
 
 * [In these phra.ses Q^^Q"! is doubtles.s. as Geseuius ex- 
 plains, to be regarded as an accusative of limitation, the 
 precedint; noun being in the absohite. and not the construct 
 state. Yet even thi.s appo.sitional relation seems to limit the 
 D'^y'Q'.r, whether the latter be regarded as a noun = weeks 
 
 or even simple = seven to the usual hebdomadal sense. It 
 thus .stands really, though perhaps not intentionally, in con- 
 trast with the undetined CJl^.T of chap. ix. ^4-27, and 
 
 leaves the word in that passage to be interpreted by the ex 
 iguncies of the context.] 
 t [*■ But this contrast is not well fonnded, for the fl'iS^ 
 
 (niileoveiied calet) of the Pa.ssover was not (notwithstand- 
 ing Deut. xvi. :i) bread of sorrow, but pure, holy bread, 
 which D.aniel did not eat, in opposition to the law, for three 
 weeks. Un^ is not to be limited to bread in its narrower 
 sense, but denotca/ood generally." — Keil.] 
 
.'26 
 
 THE PROPHET DAXIEL. 
 
 cession as in chap. ix. (for which reason it does 
 not assume its appropriate garb, cf. Psa. xxxv. 
 13, 14), but rather to prepare to receive a revela- 
 tion. However, the writer by no means enter- 
 tains the opinion that asceticism could secure or 
 compel a revelation ; for in that case the means 
 employed would have been increased, particularly 
 as the vision was delayed. Daniel rather con- 
 fines himself to abstinence from worldly enjoy- 
 ment, in order to maintain the serious frame of 
 mind in which the desired revelation should be 
 received, and which is the only one that may 
 hope to be blessed with a revelation." 
 
 Verses 4-7. Ueaignation of the, special time 
 and place. Description of the appeantnce of the 
 nnfjel who conrei/s the revelation. And in the 
 four and twentieth day of the first month. 
 Since, according to Esth. iii. 7, the ' ' first month ' ' 
 was Nisan (cf. also 1 Mace. vii. 49 ; ix. 3), and 
 since bj' vs. 13 and 13, the mourning and fasting 
 . of Daniel began precisely twenty-one days be- 
 fore the present date — therefore on the third 
 Nisan, — the special reason why he commenced 
 such exercises on that particular day may pro- 
 bably be found in the fact that the 1st and 
 8d Nisan were still observed, at the period 
 of the captivity, as they were already in the 
 time of Saul and David, as the festival of the 
 \ew-year or of the first new moon in the year ; 
 and it was of course luisuitable for him to fast 
 while that joyous festival continued (cf. 1 Sam. 
 XX. 18. et seq.; xxvii. 34. with ii. 19, vi. 29). — 
 I w^as by the side of the great river, which is 
 Hiddekel. It cannot be easily determined 
 whether he was there in vision merely, as in the 
 similar case, chap viii. 2 (see on that passage i, 
 or likewise in body. The latter opinion (Ha- 
 vem., V. Leng., JLaurer, Hitzig, Kliefoth, Fid- 
 ler) appears to be preferable, in view of the 
 subsequent mention of Daniel's companions on 
 the bank of the river. — Concerning Sijlin, i.e., 
 probably, the "swift, tearing" (from p^^)l as 
 the Scriptural designation of the Tigris, cf. 
 Gesen. -Dietrich, s. v., and also the expositors of 
 Gen. ii. 14. The latter passage, moreover, clearly 
 asserts the distinction between the Hiddekel 
 and the Euphrates, which is observed through- 
 out the Old-Test, generally, and thereby demon- 
 strates the mistake of Syrus, who regards the 
 in in this place as denoting the Euphrates. — 
 Virse 5. Then I lifted up mine eyes and looke d, 
 etc., exactly as in the vision on the banks of the 
 Eulieus. chaji. viii. 3. — And behold a man 
 clothed in linen. The descriptiou begins with 
 his clothing, hence proceeds from without in- 
 ward (contrary' to the method of, e.g. , Matt. xvii. 
 2 ; xxviii. 3). White linen (3"'"?, from "?» 
 cf. Ezek. ix. 2) was the garb of priests, especi- 
 ally of the high -priests (cf. Lev. xvi. 4, 23 ; vi. 
 3 with Isa. xliii. 28), and therefore symbolizes 
 hoUnefis ; the addition of golden ornaments de- 
 notes •princely rank. The person here described 
 was therefore at all events a -~p ~i'^ (cf. Isa. 
 xliii. 28) or holy angelic prince, and more parti- 
 cularly, was identical with the " man's voice be- 
 tween the Ulai," chap. viii. 16, which directed 
 Gabriel to interpret the vision for Daniel in that 
 place, since according to chap. xii. G, he hovered 
 over the ricer. It was shown on the former pas- 
 
 sage, that the angel who uttered that command 
 need not necessarily have been superior to Ga- 
 briel, but that he may have belonged, as well at 
 the latter, to the class of archangels or C"","i" i 
 and he may be regarded as the compeer of 
 Michael as well, despite v. 13, where he refers 
 to the aid he received from the latter against 
 the prince of Persia. Hence, he was a tldrd 
 angel-prince besides Gabriel and Michael, whose 
 name, however, is not given ; and it is there- 
 fore vain to search for the specific name he bore. 
 Hofm>ann, Auberlen and FiiUer conceive of this 
 angelic prince as being the power of nature 
 which operates for the kingdom of God in the 
 entire heathen world, or as the good principle in 
 the world-poicer, which is identical with the 
 (>fi7f ^-ui', 2 Thess. ii. (i ; but they fail to establish 
 exegetically. and in an adequate manner this 
 identity, as well as the chai'acter ascribed to the 
 angel. Concerning the modicum of truth which 
 may nevertheless underlie this opinion, see Eth.- 
 fund. principles, etc.. No. 1. — The identity of 
 this angel with Michael, which Ki'anichfeld as- 
 sumes, is opposed by the manner in which 
 Michael is represented as not being present, in 
 vs. 13 and 21. It is more probable that he was 
 identical with Gabriel (Ewald et al. ) ; but the 
 appearance of the latter on his entrance in chap, 
 viii. is described in different terms, and, more- 
 over, the name of Gabriel is not expressly men- 
 tioned ; cf. infra, on v. 13. — Whose loins were 
 girded with fine gold of Uphaz ; i.e., with the 
 finest and most valuable gold ; cf. Psa. xlv. 8, 
 "gold of Ophir." The identity of teiS and 
 "i^pis, which is assumed by, e.g., the Vtilg., 
 Chald., and Syr. (but not by Theodot.). is op- 
 posed by the different form of the name, and by 
 the impossibility of transforming - into x.* The 
 country here referred to (and in Jer. xii. 8) was 
 probaWy a region in the south or east, and per- 
 haps adjoining to Ophir, which abounded in 
 gold, and like the latter, constituted a principal 
 source from whence the people of hither Asia 
 derived their precious metals in ancient times. 
 The theory which seems best recommended is 
 that of Hitzig, who combines the Saner, name 
 ripdcd = liypluisiK. with the supposition based 
 on that etymology, that the country derived its 
 name from a colony which came to Arabia FeUx 
 from the river Hyphasis in India. Cf. Nagels- 
 bach on Jer., 1. c, concerning this question. — 
 Verse 6. His body also was like the beryl, or 
 " crysolite," hence having the golden lustre of 
 topaz or amber, which shone through his garb 
 of white linen. With regard to ".l"'"^.""" — whose 
 primary signification was doubtless " the sea " 
 ( = Sanscr. tarisha), and which afterward became 
 the name of the celebrated colony of Phoenician 
 merchants located in Spain ne.ar the Mediter- 
 ranean sea, and still later was emploj'ed to de- 
 signate the precious stone brought from thence, 
 which the Sejit and Josephus terra the xi""^""'^"i 
 with probable correctness — see Hitzig on Ezek. 
 i. 10; Gesen. -Dietrich in the Ilaiidirurti rbiich ; 
 and also my obsers'ation on Cant. v. 14. — And 
 his face as the appearance of lightning ; cf. 
 Ezek. i. 13 ; Matt, xxviii. 3. On the comparisoc 
 
 • [The predominant opinion, nevertheless, among scholan 
 ideutitius Ophir with Uphoz.l 
 
CHAP. X. 1— XI. 1. 
 
 227 
 
 of Ms eyes with lamps of fire cf. Rev. i. 14, 
 which passage is wholly imitated from the one 
 
 before us And his arms and feet like in 
 
 colour to polished brass; rather, "arms and 
 feet like the gleam of glowing brass." n;n~^' 
 which primarily denotes the " place of the feet," 
 is here synonymous with S"^.*?'^, " feet," as ap- 
 pears from the mention of m^lT, "arms," in 
 the same connection ; for why, if the arms 
 glowed like brass, should the plnce only of the 
 feet present the same appearance and not rather 
 the feet themselves ? (against Kranichf eld, etc. ). * 
 — iip, the attribute of "'.^Ti:, together with 
 V^lS (cf. Num. xi. 7), is taken from Ezek. i. 7. 
 It denotes brass in a glowing and liquid or mol- 
 ten state ( ibp, a fuller form of the more usual 
 ip, light, swiftly moving, volubilis), not merely 
 *' shining or gleaming " brass (Ewald. etc.), nor 
 yet " brass of the smelting furnace," as Hitzig 
 assumes, putting entirely too artificial a sense on 
 the idea. Cf., however, the parallel Rev. i. 15, 
 OL -zofh^ avrnv bfioiot x^^'^ X'^^-^t^^^'^ *^C ^^ KUfilvu 
 -e~vpi>nivu. — And the voice of his vrords like 
 the voice of a multitude, or "of a roariug." 
 ■(i'in iip primarily signifies the " voice (sound) 
 of a roaring," and may denote the roaring of the 
 sea, of the stormy waves of the ocean, or of a 
 great multitude of people (Theod. , Vulg., Syr., 
 and also modems, e.g., Kranichf eld, FiiUer, 
 etc.). The parallels, Ezek. i. 34 (C^X: iip? 
 D"2~); xliii 2 ; Isa. xvii. 12 ; Rev. i. 15, deter- 
 mine in favor of the former interpretation. The 
 terrified prophet does not at first recognize what 
 the speaker says in so dreadful a voice, either 
 here or in v. 9. Cf . the analogous circumstance 
 iu chap. viii. 13 <(. — Verse 7. The men that 
 ■were with me aaw^ not the vision ; a feature 
 similar to that connected with the conversion of 
 St. Paul, Acts i-x. 7; xxii. 11. It is impossible 
 to determine who the prophet's companions 
 were : they may as well have been the servants 
 of the highly esteemed •' prince " Daniel (chap, 
 vi. 21), as associates of a different rank. — But a 
 great qu aking fell upon them ; evidently because 
 they haird the dreadful sound of the roaring, 
 although they saw nothing ; cf . Gen iii. 8 ; Am. 
 iii. (I ; Acts ix. 7.f — They fled to hide them- 
 selves; rather, ""they fled hiding themselves. " 
 Sinna. properly, "while hiding themselves," 
 a periphrase of the gerund ; cf. Gesenius, T/ie- 
 eaur., p. 175 a. The infinitive with i would 
 have expressed the somewhat different idea, 
 '• they fled to hide themselves ; " cf . 1 Kings 
 xxii. 25 ; 2 King.s xix. 11. 
 
 Verses 8-11. IVte impression made on Daniel 
 by the appearance of the angel. His temporary 
 s upor, and subsequent and gradual restoration. 
 I , . . . saw this great vision. The same 
 
 • [Kei], however contends that rri^n^'O, jitace of feet^ 
 
 does not stand tor feel, but denotes that part of the human 
 frame where the feet are : and the word indicat€=i that not 
 the feet alone, but the under parui of the body shone like 
 burnished brass.] 
 
 t [Keil thinks that " the voice was not heard till after 
 Daniel's companions had fleil ;" but this ia by no means cer- 
 tain from the t«xt.l 
 
 language is used with reference to the appear- 
 ance of the Lord in the burning bu.sh to Moses, 
 Ex. iii. 3. — My comeliness was tiu-ned in me 
 into corruption; rather, " the color of my face 
 was changed into disfigurement for me." 
 Literally, "and my brightness," etc. (thu.=i 
 Ewald et al). ^^,■^, "brightness, freshness of 
 color," here corresponds to the Chald. '"'^^ 
 chap. V. 6, 9 ; vii. 28. ^is*, "on me," seems to 
 be a Chaldaism employed as a periphrase for the 
 dative, and therefore to be equivalent to ^):>* 
 (unlike v. 10). It is hardly to be separated 
 from the verb and to be immediately con- 
 nected with ''li""', thus periphrasing the genitive 
 (against Hitzig). — rin"i'?35, properly, "to de 
 struction ; " cf. 2 Chron. xx. 23. The following 
 context indicates the nature of this destruction 
 or disfigurement, by stating that the loss of 
 color was joined to faintness and a total loss of 
 
 strength Verse 9. Then w^as I in a deep sleep 
 
 on my face, i.e., in a stupefied state, during 
 which a total loss of his senses and of conscious- 
 ness %vas depicted on his countenance. — And my 
 face (sank) tow^ard the ground; i.e., the loss of 
 consciousness was not momentary, but was pro- 
 tracted during some time, and brought him to 
 the groimd on his face. With a strange arbi- 
 trariness Hitzig finds "an attention to trivial 
 details that border closely on the comical " in 
 the statement that the face was toward the 
 ground ; as if the frequent expression -"2S 
 n-^-,St (Gen. xix. 1 ; xHi. 6) or ."^S in.^-.p^i 
 (Gen. xxxui. 8, etc.) did not likewise indicate 
 the apparently general use of ~^"]S< in this 
 sense ! On the subject cf. chap. viii. 17. — Verse 
 
 10. And behold, a hand touched me. The 
 stunned prophet is not able to say whose hand 
 it was ; but the tenor of the entire representa- 
 tion shows, beyond the reach of doubt, that it 
 was the hand of the same person who had 
 hitherto been in his presence (cf. viii. 18 ; Ezek. 
 ii. 9). Kranichfeld (see above, on v. 5) is there- 
 fore in error when, after having assumed that 
 the angel described above was Michael, he re- 
 gards the one who now appears and henceforth 
 addresses Daniel as being Gabriel (as do Hiiver- 
 nick, Hengstenberg, etc.). Such a multiplication 
 of persons is unnecessary, and is opposed by the 
 total silence of the author with regard to the 
 names of the appearance here introduced. 
 Maurer, Hitzig, v. Hofmann, Fuller, Kliefoth, 
 etc., correctly hold to the identity of the angel 
 who touches Daniel with the one introduced in 
 V. 5. — Set me (rather "shook me") upon my 
 knees and upon the palms of my hands ; a 
 constr. prtpgnans, for "shook me and helped 
 me." etc. The couching position which he ac- 
 cordingly assumed at first is the natural posture 
 of one who is stunned and overwhelmed with 
 awe in the presence of a superior being. — Verse 
 
 11. O Daniel, a man greatly beloved. See on 
 chap. ix. 23. — For imto thee am I novi sent; 
 namely, sent at this precise moment, a.'^ the ser- 
 vant of God and the bearer of a message of 
 blessing and comfort. The angel designs by 
 this encouraging address not merely to induce 
 Daniel to arise to an erect position, but al.=o tc 
 
223 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 fix his attention on the words about to be spoken. 
 
 I stood trembling — in fenrfiil expectation of 
 
 the things to which he should listen ; of. Ezra 
 X. 0. 
 
 Verses 12-14. The angeVs statement respect- 
 iiig the design of his coining and the reason of 
 his ddini to that time. Cf. chap. ix. 23. —For 
 from the first day (therefore from the third 
 Nisan, according to v. 4) that thou didst set 
 thine heart ; properly " gavest thy heart ;" cf. 
 Eccles. i. 13, 17. — To understand, and to 
 chasten (or "humble") thyself before God. 
 V. 14 a states what Daniel desired to under- 
 stand, \-iz. : the future experiences of his peo- 
 ple. He sought to obtain the knowledge of this 
 by humbling himself before God in fasting, etc. 
 Consequently njT ni:?n~il V"'^ may be con- 
 sidered a hendiadys. to the extent to which the 
 implied verbal idea is co-ordinated. — And I am 
 come for thy ■words, i.e., in consequence of the 
 words of thy prayer to which reference has just 
 been made. On ^■'■]:"13, "nccording to thy 
 words," cf. for instance, Esth. i. 12 ; iii. 15 ; 
 viii. 14 ; 1 Kings xiii, 1, etc. The perfect '^^^*^' 
 " I have come," denotes that the coming of the 
 angel, which had already been determined on at 
 the beginning of the prophet's prayer, had only 
 then become an accomplished fact. The delay 
 in his coming, which was caused by the inter- 
 ference of a hostile angelic power, is accounted 
 for in the following verse. — Verse 13. But the 
 prince of the kingdom of Persia withstood 
 me one and twenty days. 01B fiisbtt ^ip- 
 Jerome observes correctly, although upon a pos- 
 sibly inadequate exegetical foundation ; " lule- 
 tur milii Ilia esse angelus, cni Penis ereditn eM, 
 fuxta illiid gnod in Deuteronomio (xxxii. 8, Ixx) 
 leiiimus : ' Qunndo dicidebat AUissimns geuteJi et 
 disseminnhat filiog Adam, statiiit terminos geii- 
 itium jiuet^i nume^ um angelorum Dei.' 1st i sunt 
 principes, de quibus Paulics apostolus loquitur: 
 ' Hiipientiam loquimur inter per fectos, quavi nul- 
 lus principvm sceculi hnjua cognovit ; si enim cog- 
 novissent, minquam Dominum gloriw crucifixis- 
 aent.' Reatitit autemprinceps,i.e., angdua Per- 
 sarum, faciens pro credita sibi proeincia, ne 
 captieorum omnis popnlus dimitteretur." This 
 interpretation is supported, and that of Calvin, 
 Hiivernick, Kranichfeld, et al.. which takes 1p 
 in the sense of ' ' king, earthly and human sove- 
 reign," is opposed by the following considera- 
 tions: (1) in chap. xi. 5, where ''V is unques- 
 tionably employed in the latter sense, the con- 
 nection is entirely different from the character 
 of the present passage, where the D''"l"3n which 
 immediately follows obviously denotes angelic 
 princes ; (3) the Persian kings, on the other hand, 
 are termed C"!B "^Sb'p at the end of the verse; 
 (3) the idea of an angel's conflict with a human 
 king seems very inappropriate ; (4) the angel 
 Michael was Israel's " prince," i.e., guardian an- 
 gel, according to v. 21 ; chap. xii. 1 ; and coiTe- 
 eponding to this, the prince of Persia who is 
 here noticed, and the prince of Graicia men- 
 tioned in v. 20, were, without doubt, the angels 
 of Persia and Javan respectively ; (5) the idea 
 of guardian angels over entire realms, whether 
 f li.'tndly or hostile in their disposition toward the 
 
 theocracy, is attested by various Old-Test, par- 
 allels, particularly by Isa. xxiv. 31 (see Knobel 
 on that passage) ; Isa. xlvi. 2 ; Jer. xlvi. 2.5 ; 
 xlix. 3 (where the gods of heathen nations tak^' 
 the place of the guardian angels) ; Deut. xxxil 
 8 ; and P.sa. xcvi. 4, Ixx. ; also Bar. iv. 7 and 
 Ecclus. xvii. 17 (where i/yin-fji for seems to desig- 
 nate an angel prince, exactly like ~'~ in this 
 passage), — to say nothing of New- Test, passages, 
 such as 1 Cor. viii. 3 ; x. 20 et seq. — The with- 
 standing or resisting during twenty-one days ia 
 obviously to be understood seiisu /losfjfo' ("I3;3' 
 as in Prov. xxi. 30; cf. 2 Sam. xviii. 13), with- 
 out, however, involving the idea that the Persian 
 court, or any earthly locality whatever, was the 
 scene of such opposition or warfare (as, e.g., 
 FiiUer assumes). That adrer.iari may more 
 probably have taken place in super-mundane 
 regions ; and that this was the case seems to 
 have been attested by parallels like 1 Kings 
 xxii. 19 et seq. ; Job 1. 6 ; ii. 1 et seq. ; Luke x. 
 18; xxii. 31. Hofmann {Schriftbew.. I. '386 et 
 seq.) and FiiUer hold that "the prince of the 
 kingdom of Persia " does not denote an actual 
 guardian angel of that realm, but any evil spirit 
 whatever, who may have sought to exert an in- 
 fluence on the decisions of the Persian king, 
 while on the contrary the angel who appeared to 
 Daniel sought to counteract that influence by his 
 own, as being more beneficial to Israel ; * but 
 this opinion is altogether too artificial, because 
 it supposes two spiritual powers — the one good 
 and the other evil — in every case (a "court- 
 angel" and a "royal court-devil," iu the lan- 
 guage of Starke), as exerting influence over the 
 ruler of a kingdom. Moreover, the idea of the 
 spirit ruling at a court, as being either good or 
 bad, either peaceful or warlike, has too modem 
 an aspect, and is foreign to the modes of concep- 
 tion that were current among the ancient Orien- 
 tals. The strongest argument against this opi- 
 nion, however, consists in the consideration that 
 the title D^IS DUba 13, and farther on, the 
 appellations Vl ">? and C:ip (Michael, the 
 prince of Israel ; v. 21, cf. v. 20), imply a more 
 intimate connection, a mach closer and more 
 constant relation between the angel and the cor- 
 responding nation than is involved in a merely 
 temporary influence over the governmental pol- 
 icy of any particular ruler. A spirit who may 
 have exercised a temporarj' control over the 
 decisions of one or more Persian kings could not 
 on that account simply be designated the ~'i! 
 D^S. The angel who is thus entitled must be 
 considered the constant patron of the Persian 
 
 * Cf. eppecially Fuller on this pas.=;age, p. 274 : '* The 
 question is, which of the two spirits shall succeed in exer- 
 cising the greater influence over tlie Persian court and king. 
 It becomes an object to g;iin the consent of the Persian king 
 and the holders of power under him, that ho may decide 
 thus or othenvisc .... It is conceivable that in such a 
 case the gootl spirit, who operated on the world-ruler, would 
 occupy a more difficult position, and be engaged in a 
 harder task than the evil spirit, to whom the heart of the 
 natural man. to say nothing of the heart of a heathen, is 
 more accessible than it is to the former. It was then that 
 Michael came to his support i<y causinp:, as Hofmann re- 
 marks (as above, p. 2!^8). the relations which CjTus had as- 
 sumed toward the Jewi-h people to operate on that king, 
 and to gain increased influence orer his incUnatiolu and 
 views," etc. 
 
CHAP. X. 1-XI. 1. 
 
 22G 
 
 nation and state, as much so as Michael was the 
 constant patron of Israel, having been known as 
 such in the age of Joshua (Josh. v. 13) as well 
 as in that of Daniel, and still later, in that of 
 the New-Test, apocaljptist (Rev. vii. 7 ; Jude 
 V. 9). For additional thoughts on the subject 
 see on vs. 20, 21, and the Eth. -fund, principles. 
 And lo, Michael, one of the chief princes ; 
 properly, " one of the first" (a't'jisi.n), i.e., of 
 the most emiaent ; cf. 1 Chron. xviii. 17, and 
 also bin^n "isn, chap. xu. l. The name Michael, 
 '■^ quis sicut Deus" (cf. , e.g., Ex. xv. 11; Psa. 
 Izxxix. 7), and also the name of Isaiah's prophetic- 
 contemporary "3"' ?a (— n^i:"'>3) is, according to 
 Haneberg's correct observation (in Reusch's 
 Thiol. LiUrnturlil., 1867, No. 3, p. 72), "a name 
 that sounds like a decided monotheistic protest 
 against every undue exaltation of the angelic 
 dignity." It expresses still more strongly than 
 the similar name of Gabriel (cf. on viii. 16), the 
 idea of God's incomparable and assisting power, 
 as whose instrument the angelic being who bears 
 this name must be regarded (Kranichfeld ). His 
 " coming to help " is probably to be conceived 
 of as an armed intervention, and supported by 
 celestial hosts, as is suggested by the preceding 
 warUke phrase ^'l^.^b "'9^', and as the term 
 ^'!^?'7^ in ^- 20 indicates stUl more clearly. 
 Michael must be conceived of in this place as 
 battling at the head of an angelic host, as in 
 Josh. V. 14 and Rev. xii. 7 ; cf. also Gen. xxxii. 
 2 ; 2 Kings vi. 17, and other references to hosts 
 of celestial angels. How little this belligerent 
 attitude of Michael comports with the view of 
 Hofmann and Fiiller, that the speaker was a 
 special "good spirit of the heathen world- 
 power,'' whose battle with the prince of Persia 
 was fought in the circles of the Persian court, 
 will be apparent at once. Concerning the theory 
 of the older exegetes and also of Hiivernick, 
 which directly identifies Michael with Christ, see 
 Eth. fund, principles. No. 1, and also on chap, 
 xii. 1. — And I remained there itrith the kings 
 of Persia; rather, "and I became superfluous 
 there," etc., namely, because another who was 
 still more powerful than I had relieved me, and 
 now represented me in the resistance to be 
 made to the prince of Persia. The angel says 
 that his presence became superfluous " with 
 the kings of Persia" because he refers to all the 
 powers who operate at the head of the Per- 
 sian empire, including both the earthly and 
 the super-earthly, the guardian spirit and the 
 king beside his chief officers (cf. Isa. xxiv. 21 
 et seq. ; Ivii. 9 ; Psa. Ixxxii. 6 ; also the more 
 extended signification of "kings " [= great ones, 
 mighty ones], which occurs, c.(/. , in Ps.a. ii. 2; 
 Job xxix. %') ; Ezek. xxvi. 7 ; 1 Kings xi. 24). The 
 
 difficult 0"i2 "wb'a bss D3 inn:ii3 -pss-i must 
 
 probably be explained in this way (with Ewald 
 and partly also with Hitzig). The explanation 
 offered by others, "and thus it happened that I 
 remained or turned during an extended period 
 with the kings of Persia " (Vulg. : '' et epo reman- 
 ti ibi,^' etc. ; Syr., Dereser, Ilosenm., Kraniohf., 
 etc.), U opposed by the fact that ^~"" does not 
 properly signif}- "to remain behind," but "to 
 lemidn over, to be superfluous" (at the most, it 
 
 might be possible to adduce Gen. xxxii. 25 in 
 
 support of the former meaning) ; and also that 
 the construction of the sentence does not justify 
 its being regarded as a supplement or comple 
 mentary explanation of the remainder of the 
 verse. The translation of Luther, Geier, Winer, 
 Gesenius, Hiivernick, etc. : "and I gained the 
 (Licendimcy, or the nct'try, with the kings of 
 Persia," is likewise at variance with the general 
 usage of ^^12. Tb''. explanation of Fuller (and 
 Hofmann [also Keilj), "and I then maintained 
 my place beside the kings of Persia," certainly 
 accords better with the usage ; but it is opposed 
 by the consideration adduced above, concerning 
 the assumption of two angelic powers who con- 
 tend for the greatest influence over the Persian 
 king. Nor can it be understood on that theory 
 why the plural E "'^-^ was used instead of the 
 singular; for, although the opinion that the 
 writer intended Cyrus together with his succes- 
 sors, hence the entire Persian dynasty, by his 
 '■ kings of Persia," has recentl.v become .an espe- 
 cial favorite (being accepted likewise by Fiiller 
 and Hofmann), it seems to us so improbable in 
 itself, that even the adoption of the theory which 
 asserts the Maccabcean origin of the book, could 
 scarcely serve to establish it (cf. especially Hit- 
 zig, who contends for the more extended signifi- 
 cation of "^?3^ upon substantial grounds). The 
 Sept. (and Theodot. ) renders the passage cor- 
 rectly with regard to its meaniug : nai airbv 
 (SC. T(H' M/|'aVT/) Kart'/t-or i'/,T/ //f7u ror (t,)\'oi— n^" 
 liaai'/nnc Ilf/jtJr. — Verse 14. lam come to make 
 thee understand what shall befall thy people 
 in the latter days. Cf. the introductory words 
 of Jacob's blessing, Gen. xlix. 1 ; also Num. 
 xxiv. 14. Concemiug Cp'^n rii"ins as a desig- 
 nation of the Messianic future (the "' issue of 
 the ages," Fiiller), cf. on chap. ii. 28. The 
 "end of the indignation," mentioned in chap, 
 viii. 19, is not materially different from this end 
 of (pre-Messianici days. — -For yet the vision is 
 for many days; rather, "for yet a vision for 
 those days, " supply "I now bring, am about to 
 reveal." Q^'p'^n, the days, those days. viz. : the 
 latter days just mentioned, ^iy is probably to 
 be taken (with Fuller and C. B. Michaelis) as 
 referring indirectly back to the two preceding 
 visions which treated of the latter days, hence 
 to chapters viii. and ix. (cf. especially chap. viii. 
 19 b and chap. ix. 33 et seq.). Consequently 
 the angel now brings pet an eschatological pro- 
 phecy, i/et a vision of the last times which forms 
 the final and most specific revelation. None of 
 the other interpretations yield a clear sense thai 
 agrees with the context, e.g., that by Hitzig: 
 " but it is yet continually a prophec.y for ages ; " 
 by Hiivemick, " for the prophecy to be imparted 
 to thee shall extend to this time " (similarly 
 Kranichfeld: " -[-j-, exceeding the present and 
 the immediate future in its range ") ; the highly 
 artificial one by Cocceius : " erpectntio j>ri»iiis- 
 sionia itdhitc proteldbitur, riempe per ista teinpora, 
 guce partiin c. 8, partita c. 9 descripta s-unt," 
 etc. 
 
 Verses 15-17. The prophet's renewed conster- 
 jtdti^/ii, in conseqtieiice of the rerereritial awe fell 
 by him in the pretence of his super-h ii/nan visitor, 
 who therefore now assumes an increusinyly human 
 
230 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 bearing (see v. 10 a ; cf. v. 18 a) I 
 
 set my face toward the ground and became 
 dumb ; the same attitude of reverential awe as 
 in Luke xviii. 13 ; xxiv. 5. — The prophet's dumb- 
 ness was twice removed by the comforting inter- 
 ference of the ang-el (v. l(i et seq. and v, ID); 
 but he afterward remained speechless, excepting 
 that he asked the brief question in chap. xii. S, 
 — And behold one like the similitude of the 
 sons cf men touched my lips, or. "like the 
 sons of men he touclied my lips ; " the subject is 
 not indicated here (and in v. 18), which does 
 not, however, permit a doubt to arise that the 
 one " after the similitude ... of men '' is iden- 
 tical with the angel who was hitherto present. 
 Sist ■'^a ma-S serves to recall the a;» -1=3, 
 
 chap. vii. 13, as Oi« n»n;33 in v. 18 recalls 
 the similar expression in chap. viii. 15. An 
 identity with Gubfiel, however, cannot be estab- 
 lished on this repeated assurance of the angel's 
 manlike appearance (against Kranichf.). — The 
 touching of the lips (for the purpose of unseal- 
 ing and opening them) is similar to the incident 
 in Isa. vi. 7; Jer. i. 9. — O my lord, by the 
 viiiion my sorrows are turned upon me. 
 There is uothiug strange in the form of the pro- 
 phet's address to the angel, which terras him 
 " my lord," particularly since the angel belonged 
 to the class of " chief princes ; " cf. Josh. v. 14 ; 
 •ludg. vi. 13. With regard to n"'"i:r, " sor- 
 rows," properly, "pains." cf. Isa. xiii 8; xid. 
 3; 1 Sara. iv. 19. ""1^^, "my sorrows" (cf. 
 Psa. xviii. 24), characterizes the acuteness of the 
 terrified sensation alluded to raore impressively 
 than could have been done by -"'"I''? merely ; 
 and since the term Ls obviously employed in a 
 tropical sense only, it does not sound strange 
 from the lips of a man (against Hitzig), and 
 does not require to be obviated by means of put- 
 ting an unusual sense on ^"^^2, e.g., by ''my 
 ^'o/;i?« tremljled in me" (Yulg., Luther. Berth., 
 Hiivemick, F..ller). or by '"my features were 
 changed'' (Ewald, following Psa. xlix. 15). — 
 Verse 17. And how can the servant of my 
 lord talk, etc. '^j'^n, as in 1 Chron. xiii. 3, a 
 Chaldaisiu for '^1"?*. — As for me (properly "and 
 I " ) straightway there remained no strength 
 in me, neither is there breath left in me; i.e., 
 the pon-er to stand and breathe regularly (1 
 Kings X. 5; Josh. ii. 11) departed from rae 
 afresh. The renewed consternation described 
 in these words was not as great as the former, 
 'ji V. 9; the "ceasing of the breath" was not 
 m a literal sense as in 1 Kings xvii. 17, but only 
 figurative, as in the similar form of speech. 
 Cant, V. 6, — A majority of recent expositors cor- 
 rectly regard this second member of the verse 
 as no longer belonging to Daniel's address to 
 the angel ; for if it were still included, the 
 words "there is no strength in me" would have 
 been employed twice in close proximity (v. 10 b 
 and here) and in nearly the same form. More- 
 over, the incident of the two following verses 
 requires a suitable preparation. — Fiiller, how- 
 ever, is entirely too artiticiid when he includes 
 the words "and I — ''in Daniel's explanation 
 to the augi/1. but excludes everything else, to 
 the close of his remarks. 
 
 Verses 18, 19. T?ce prnjyhet is touched ana 
 strengthened for the third time, and more effec- 
 tually than before (cf. vs. 5 and 16). The being 
 touched and strengthened three time-s by the 
 angel (in which old-churchly exegetes, e.g., 
 Ephraem, etc., sought to find an allusion to the 
 Trinitj') was certainly not accidental ; cf. the 
 conflict of Christ in Gethsemane, Matt. xxvi. 
 38 et seq. ; his being tempted thrice in the des- 
 ert. Matt. iv. 1 et seq. ; also such passages as 
 John xxi. 15 et seq. ; Acts x. 16 ; 3 Cor. xii. 8 
 et seq., etc. Hitzig, howevei, being utterly 
 unaware of the profound mystical meaning of 
 • the description, thinks that " the broad repre- 
 sentation that he was gradually invigorated, at 
 first to speak himself, and afterward to listen to 
 speech (v. 16 b, 19 b), has a manufactured ap- 
 pearance, and does not impress." — Like the 
 appearance of a man ; cf. on v. 10. — Verse 19. 
 Peace be unto thee j be strong, yea, be strong. 
 
 "![)! P-'H ; of. T?»<;! riq, Josh. i. 6, 7, 9 ; and 
 with regard to the repetition of the verb, as 
 strengthening the idea, cf. Jer. x. 25 ; li. 34, 
 etc. — For thou hast strengthened me, viz. • 
 sufficiently to enable me to listen with courage- 
 ous composure to all that is to be revealed, not 
 excepting even what is calamitous and terrible. 
 Verse 20 — chap. xi. 1. Solemn and circumstiin- 
 tial introduction of the svbseyuent detailed 
 descH'ptU.iii of the future, connected with an 
 encouraging reference to the constant readi- 
 ness of God to assist Israel, despite the serious 
 character of the situation of the time (and par- 
 ticularly, despite the dangers which threatened 
 from the direction of Persia and Javan). — Enow- 
 est thou wherefore I ccme unto thee ? i.e., art 
 thou aware of the serious and highly important 
 character of the message which 1 am to deliver 
 unto thee ? Dost thou sufficiently estimate the 
 tremendous earnestness of the situation, in con- 
 sequence of which my mission became neces 
 sary ''. — And novi will I return to fight with 
 the prince of Persia. That is, the peaceful 
 service of disclosing the future unto thee, in 
 which I am now engaged, forms but a brief in- 
 terruption to the great war which I must con- 
 tinue steadily to wage against the guardian 
 spirit of the Persian power. With regard to 
 ^r??") considered as denoting an actual warfare 
 rather than a mere altercation or dispute in the 
 council of the angels of God (as Bertholdt and 
 others think), see on v. 13. — And when (as 
 soon as) I am gone forth, lo, the prince of 
 Graecia shall come. The " going forth " in 
 this passage, as often in descriptions of warlike 
 incidents (e.g.. Josh. xiv. 11 ; 1 Kings ii. 7; 1 
 Sam. viii. 20; Isa. xiii. 12; Zech. xiv. 10), cer- 
 tainly denotes a going forth to battle rather than 
 the mere departing from a locality (Hofmann, 
 Fiiller, etc.). The observation does not, how- 
 ever, refer to his going forth to meet the prince 
 of Persia, but a going forth to other conflicts 
 after the war with the latter shall have been 
 brought to a close ; or, in other words, it de- 
 notes a going forth out of the war against the 
 prince of Persia (so Jacchiad. , Bertholdt, Hit- 
 zig, Kranichfeld, etc. — correctly). The sense is 
 therefore : " Scarcely shall the Persian war be 
 ended, when the Greek arises against me ; the 
 conflict with the Grajcian world-power .shall be 
 immediately consequent on the war with that of 
 
CHAP. X. 1— XI. 1. 
 
 231 
 
 Persia." * Cf. the similar contrasting of S**^ 
 and 5{nr in 2 Kings xi. 5, 7. Hofmann's exposi- 
 tion of the passage is altogether too labored : 
 " The prince of the Graicians enters into the 
 quarrel against the prince of the Persians, from 
 which the angel retires ; but, after the Persian 
 empire has fallen, the angel renews the conflict 
 with the new adversary, and, as in the former 
 instance, is supported by Michael, the prince of 
 Israel" (Schriftbew., I. 290; cf. Weissng. und 
 ErfuUting, I. 312 etseq.). Hofmann, however, 
 properly rejects V. Lengerke's view, on which 
 the coming of the prince of GriEcia must be 
 regarded as victorious, and leading to the defeat 
 of the angel. Hitzig, on the other hand, comes 
 especially near to the latter theory, in his ven- 
 turesome assertion that the angelic prince who 
 converses with Daniel, and who is to battle 
 against Persia and afterward against Greece, 
 represents the gnardinn spirit of Egypt, as of a 
 power that had been friendly to the Jews in 
 former ages and that especially made common 
 cause with them against Syria ( = Javan) in the 
 period of the Seleucidas! — a bold hypothesis, 
 that has no support in the context, and that is 
 absolutely incompatible with the expressions of 
 Eacred awe and reverence which Daniel made 
 use of toward this celestial 'i'^, according to v. 
 5 et seq. Daniel would have been an idolater 
 of the coarsest kind had he rendered such hom- 
 age as is described in this chapter, and particu- 
 larly in vs. Hi- 1 9, to the angelic patron and 
 representative of Egypt (whom he assuredly 
 regarded as a dfnmonic power inimical to God, 
 no less than those of Persia and Javan). And a 
 possible Maccabasan pseudo-Daniel would have 
 been still less likely than the Daniel of the ajra 
 of the captivity, to involve himself in the guilt 
 of so gross a violation of the monotheistic prin- 
 cijjle and of disobedience to the first command- 
 meut in the decalogue. — Verse 21. But I will 
 sh^w thee that which is noted in the Scrip- 
 ture (or book) of truth. Z^S, "but still," a 
 strong adversative particle, serves here to intro- 
 duce the antidote to the fears for the theocracy 
 excited by v. 20 — in the shape of a comforting 
 allusion to the ultimate welfare and blessing 
 which are awaiting God's people according to 
 the book of Divine providence, despite all the 
 conflicts and sufferings that must precede them. 
 Properly, " in a book of truth, " i.e., in a Divine 
 document upon which " the yet umrevealed 
 (Dent, xxxii. o4) fortunes of nations (Rev. v. 1) 
 as well as of individuals (Psa. cxxxix. 16) in the 
 future are entered" (Hitzig). Cf. the books of 
 judgment in chap. vM. 10, and also the terra 
 r?2S in chap. xi. 3, which briefly comprehends 
 the contents of the book of truth. — And there 
 is none that holds ixrith me in these things ; 
 rather, " and yet there is none that exerts him- 
 self with me against these," i.e., again.st the 
 guardian angels of Persia and Javan, the die- 
 monic patrons of the heathen world-powers. On 
 "" p.^nri?a, exerting oneself with another, bat- 
 
 * [Yet "we mu?t not, with Kranichfeld, supply the 
 clause, *to finiither more extensive contlct,' because this 
 supplement Is arbirr.iry ; but rather, with Kliefoth, interpret 
 the word generally, as it stands, of the going out of the an- 
 gel tii fight for the people of God, without e.\ctuding the 
 war with the \ rince of Persia, or limicmg it to this wur " 
 'Ke:l).] 
 
 tling beside one. supporting one, cf 1 Sam. iv. 
 9; 2 Sam. x. 12. The participle characterizes 
 the action, although future, as nevertheless 
 being constant. — But (only) Michael your 
 prince, — namely, in the sense of Josh. v. 13 et 
 seq. ; cf. supra, on v. 13. The sentence "and 
 there is none .... your prince," taken as a 
 whole, is not intended to justify the greatness 
 of the sufferings through which Israel must pass 
 (Hofmann), or the long duration of the prospec- 
 tive conflict with the world-powers (Fuller) ; it 
 simply aims to place in a clearer light the help 
 afforded by the grace of God, which requires no 
 foreign support in order to protect, and eventu- 
 ally to fully deliver Israel" (Kranichl). The 
 sentence would still express the idea of the self- 
 sufficiency of the good spiritual powers in the 
 kingdom of God. which require no aid from the 
 world, and also of their ability to effect all 
 things, even if it were made (as Fiiller proposes) 
 dependent on ^b ""??, and consequently if (in 
 disregard of the accentuation) it%vere translated, 
 "But I will show thee that which is noted." 
 
 etc.. '■ and the absence of one to help 
 
 me," etc. In that case, however, it would pre- 
 sent two very dissimilar objects of the angel's 
 remarks as co-ordinate with each other, the for- 
 mer of which is very general in its character, 
 and the latter equally specific ; and this render- 
 ing would not obviate the incongruous relation 
 between the contents of the former half of the 
 verse and those of the latter, which exists in 
 any case.— Chap xi. 1. Also I in the first year 
 of Darius the Mede, even 1, stood to confirm 
 
 and to strengthen him, or, " -is I also 
 
 stood by him as a supporter and helper ; " pro- 
 perly, " and I also." "^^S*] begins a new sen- 
 tence (cf. Psa. XXX. 7 ; Job xix. 20) which does 
 not stand in an adversative relation to the pre- 
 ceding verse (Hitzig), nor serve to explain it 
 (Luther, etc.), but which is compnratice. It 
 describes the relation by which the angel who 
 now speaks and Michael, the prince of Israel, 
 assisted each other, as being reciprocal. "'~?7 
 serves to repeat the "^r?*, without regard to 
 
 .sequence, "and I my utandiiig wns as 
 
 his support," etc. Cf. Job ix. 27 ; Zeph iii. 20 ; 
 and respecting the use of ""? seiisii bellico s. 
 militnri cf. supra, v. 13 and chap. viii. 25. — jj 
 "to him." Hiivemick and Hitzig propose to 
 refer this particle to '■^'l^"'.'! rather than to 
 Michael, because the strong terms TH'O and 
 P"!n? are supposed to warrant the conclusion 
 that the one to whose support he came was a 
 being inferior to the a.ssisting angel, which would 
 not apply to the relation of the latter to Michael. 
 But in view of all the teaching of this section, a 
 martial angelic prince may well be in occasional 
 need of the aid and support of another, without 
 being inferior to the latter on that account ; and 
 in support of the view that Michael, the guar- 
 dian angel of Israel, was oliliged to put forth 
 special efforts in behalf of his wards, and there- 
 fore required the assistance of other good augelio 
 powers to an unusual degree, precisely "in the 
 first year of Darius the Mede," or at the period 
 when the world-power passed from the Chaldse- 
 ans to the Medo-Persians, it will be sufficient to 
 
232 
 
 TUE PKOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 refer to chap. vi. and to chap. is. 1 et seq. (cf. 
 Zech. i. 12). CE. Hofmann, Schriftbetc, I. 289, 
 and also FiiUer, p. 279 : " The first verse of 
 chap. xi. is thus intimately connected with the 
 last verse of chap. x. ; and it was unwise to 
 separate them, and thereby to confuse the train 
 of thought (by referring li to Darius the Mede). 
 If it be asked, what interests were at stake in 
 the first year of Darius, the an.swer will be, the 
 position which the new dynasty should occupy 
 toward tlie people of Israel. And it may be seen 
 from the narrative in chap. \-i. that efforts were 
 made in that particular year to place it in a hos- 
 tile attitude toward that people. It was in that 
 juncture that the good angel of the world-power 
 stood by Michael, the prince of Israel, until he 
 prevailed ; in the coming conflict Michael shall 
 support him." 
 
 ETHICO-FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES RELATED 
 TO THE HISTORY OF SALVATION, APOLO- 
 GETICAL REMARKS, AND HOMILETIUAL 
 SUGGESTIONS. 
 
 1. The characteristic and leading feature of 
 the contents of this section is angelological in its 
 nature. An angelic being is introduced and de- 
 scribed in an unusually minute and life-like man- 
 ner, whom we ( see on vs. 5 and 1 8) cannot regard 
 as being identical with the Gabriel of chapters 
 viii. and ix. , nor yet with Michael, to whom he 
 repeatedly refers in the communications ad- 
 dressed by him to Daniel; but the important 
 disclosures made by this being respecting the 
 nature and functions of several leading repre- 
 sentatives of the angelic world, and the exalted 
 rank and powerful influence within that world 
 claimed by him, no less than his tremendous in- 
 fluence on the fortunes of earthly empires, jus- 
 tifv the careful description of which he is the 
 object (vs. .5-7). as well as the expressions of 
 profound reverence addressed to him by Daniel 
 (according to vs. 8-11 ; 15-19). These expres- 
 sions, together with the counteracting efforts of 
 the angel called forth by them, by wh'ch he 
 designed to strengthen and encourage the terri- 
 fied and overwhelmed prophet, are analogous to 
 the incidents connected vrith the appearance of 
 Gabriel to Daniel in chap. viii. 15 et seq. ; but 
 while the prophet's fainting and his restoration 
 by Gabriel occurred but once in that instance 
 (see on v. 18), the same features appear thrice 
 in this connection, leading to the conclusion 
 that this nameless angelic prince is of extraordi- 
 nary importance, and at least equals, if he does 
 not outrank Michael, the " captain of the Lord's 
 host" (Josh. V. 13). As the latter comes to his 
 assistance (vs. 13, 21), so he affords aid to that 
 prince in return (chap. xi. 1) in the conflict with 
 the ' ' princes " of Persia and Javan, the angels 
 who fight against God at the head of the heathen 
 world-power. The latter likewise appear to be 
 possessed of exalted power, and therefore as ter- 
 rible spiritual beings who are dangerous to the 
 kingdom of God and its representatives. They 
 are powerful diemons who bear the name CiiC 
 "princes, archangels," by virtue of their influ- 
 ential rank in the kingdom of darkness, with as 
 much propriety as do Gabriel. Michael, etc. , by 
 virtue of their position in the kingdom of light. 
 
 The power of the evil angels, however, is only 
 transient and perishable. like that of the em- 
 pires over which they rule, while the angelic 
 princes of light, Michael and the nameless one, 
 who stand in the service of God. triumph over 
 them all in succession, although the victory may 
 only be achieved by effort and determined con- 
 flict. 
 But who is this nameless one, this mysterious 
 
 being, to whom not even the predicate ^'^ is 
 applied, although doubtless belonging to him, to 
 say nothing of a definite nomen propriuni being 
 assigned to him ? — Are we, in connection with 
 many older expositors (e.j., Vitringa, C. B. 
 MichaeUs, Rambach, Starke, etc.), to identify 
 him with Christ, the '' uncreated angel of the 
 Lord," whom Daniel repeatedly addressed as 
 
 ''IlK, and whose description is said to be strik- 
 ingly similar to that of the " Son of man " in 
 chap, vii 13 et seq. (with which compare espe- 
 cially vs. 16, 18), and also to that of Christ in 
 the Apocalypse (Rev. i. 13-18 ; x. 1-0) ? Thia 
 opinion is at all events more probable than that 
 of the interpreters who identify Michael instead 
 with Christ (Melancthon, Geier, Jo. Lange. Neu- 
 bauer, Dinput. de Michaele archangelo, Hiiver- 
 nick, etc. ) ; but it is opposed, and the created 
 nature of the angel is implied, by the following 
 considerations : (1) he describes himself in v. 11 
 as a mesnenger sent from God to bear a Divine 
 message to Daniel (similar to Gabriel in chap, 
 viii. l(i et seq. ; ix. 30 et seq. > : (2) his difficulty 
 in combating the protecting angels of the world- 
 powers, even necessitating his being supported 
 by other angelic princes, contrasts strongly with 
 the manner in which the former visions describe 
 the triumph of Christ over the world-empires 
 opposed to him ; see especially chap. ii. 44 et 
 seq. and chap. vii. 13, 22, 26 ; (3) the circum- 
 stance already noticed in v. 10, that the address 
 " my lord," together with the other features of 
 the description which aim at the exaltation and 
 glorifying of this angel, are elsewhere applied to 
 angels who were certainly created ; e.g., in Josh. 
 V. 14. to the captain of the Lord's host ; Judg. 
 vL 13, to the angel who appeared to Gideon; 
 Judg. xiii. 8, to the angel whom Manoah saw ; 
 cf. also Rev. xix. 10 ; xxii. 8 et seq. We shall 
 consequently be compelled to assume that the 
 messenger sent from God to Daniel, as here in- 
 troduced, was an angel proper, and distinct from 
 the Son of God (see Jerome, Theodoret, and a 
 majority of church fathers, on this passage). 
 But what position of rank and power is to be 
 attributed to him. or — in case he is at once co- 
 ordinated with Michael and Gabriel in these 
 respects (as we have done on v. 5). and is there- 
 fore regarded as an archangel — what particular 
 office and functions are to be assigned to him, is 
 after all a difficult; question, and can hardly be 
 answered with full exegetical certainty. The 
 range of the angel's activity would become too 
 limited if he were identified with the third of the 
 archangels mentioned by name in the Old Test., 
 beside Gabriel and Michael, viz. : with the Ra- 
 phael of the apocryphal book Tobit. or if he 
 were degraded to the rank of a mere guardian 
 angel over Egypt (Hitzig; see on v. 30). On 
 the other hand, his authority would become too 
 extensive, and his position too exalted, if he were 
 conceived of as the mighty governor of all earthly 
 
CHAP. X. 1— XX. 1. 
 
 233 
 
 nature, the Divinely appointed ruler and spiri- 
 tual g\iide of the whole terrestrial world, thus 
 assigning to him a sphere similar to that occu- 
 pied by the demiurge of the Gnostics, or the 
 ••earth-spirit" of Goethe in his prologue to 
 F'liiist, or to that given by the ingenious natural 
 philosopher, Max Perty (in his work iiber die 
 myatlsriieii ErscheiiiHiigeii cUr memcldicheii Na- 
 tiir, 18(i2), to the (jeodivmoii., the regent of our 
 planet, who Ls regarded as the spiritual principle 
 that presides over the earth, the human race, 
 and the development of both. To assume such 
 an earth-spirit, which is neither Scriptural nor 
 natural, and which h-is no support even in the 
 magical and mystical phenomena of human life 
 (cf . the thorough criticism of this hypothesis in 
 t. Giesebrecht's lecture on Das Wund-er in der 
 deutschen GeschicJitbesehreibung neuerer Zeit, 
 Stettin, 1868, p. 10 et seq.), would be to disre- 
 gard the tenor of this section, as certainly as it 
 characterizes the angel as being decidedly super- 
 natural, and at the same time (in v. 5 et seq. ) 
 endows him with external attributes of his rank 
 such as would be but poorly ad.apted to the posi- 
 tion and functions of a telluric planetary spirit. 
 — Accordingly, it any particular explanation 
 whatever of the nature and office of this angel 
 is to be attempted, the opinion of Hofmann 
 which was noticed above, on v. 5, is to be de- 
 cidedly preferred to all others ( Weismgung uitd 
 Erfmung, I. 'i\i et seq. ; Schriftbeieeis, I. 287 
 et seq. ). That opinion has also been adopted 
 by Auberlen (Dniiiel. etc., p. 67), Fuller, Baum- 
 garten, Luthardt, Riggenbach (on 3 Thess. ii. 
 6), and others. It assumes that the angel in 
 question represents " • the go<jd spirit of the heathen 
 world-power," while the '• princes " of Persia and 
 Javan opposed by him and Michael, represent 
 the evil principle which is hostile to God, and 
 which manifests itself in the development of 
 the heathen world-power. The former is that 
 " power in nature which operates in favor of 
 God's kingdom throughout the heathen world," 
 the '•good spirit, which is to promote in the 
 heathen world the realization of God's purpose 
 of salvation ; " the latter are powers opposed to 
 God, who seek to cross and neutralize the plans 
 of God and of the good angel, which aim at the 
 salvation of the world. The former is the re- 
 straining principle {to narix"^', 2 Thess., 1. c. ) 
 which restrains and prevents the ascendancy and 
 prevalence of the height of Satanic wickedness 
 in human history ; the latter, on the contrary, 
 endeavor to hinder ami retard the progress of 
 the kingdom of God. We regard this view as 
 harmonizing well with the contents of the chap- 
 ter before us. and can permit a partial departure 
 from it only in so far as (1 ) we must consider it 
 doubtful whether St. P.iul intended to definitely | 
 and consciously allude precisely to the angel here j 
 described bj' the word mnxur or Kare xor\ (2) I 
 so far as we regard the conflict of the angel with 
 those foes as an acttiid irarfare in the invisible ' 
 regions of the .spirit-world, and not as a mere 
 supplanting in the favor of the king and his ! 
 court, because of the termini bellid employed in I 
 vs. VA and 20 et seq. ; (:l) so far as we are com- 
 pelled to regard the foes against whom the angel 
 contended, as being the actual spiritual protec- 
 tors of the world-kingdoms in question, and as 
 dEemonic powers or Satanic angels, who have 
 entered on a permanent connecticm with the 
 
 kingdoms over which they rule, in consequence 
 of which they stemd or fall with them (ct. on v. 
 IS). The idea of guardian angels, or, more 
 exactly, the idea of certain daemonic spiritual 
 beings (a; ){/.;« '^urar, 2 Cor. xii. 7| as being at 
 the head of the antitheistic world-monarchie.i 
 and as fundamentally opposed to Michael, the 
 prince of the theocracy, is not only countenanced 
 by the leading authorities of the older exegetical 
 tradition (Luther, Melanc, Calov, Geier, C. B. 
 Michaelis, Starke, and in substance also Jerome, 
 Theodoret, and the older Eom.on Catholic ex- 
 positors, excepting that they mistake the Satanic 
 evil character of the " princes " of Persia, etc., 
 to a greater or less extent), but it is likewise 
 based on all the passages in both the Old and 
 New-Test. Scriptures, which represent the gods 
 of the heathen world as dsemons, and conse- 
 quently, the heathen lands or states over which 
 they rule and exercise spiritual authority as 
 being provinces of the kingdom of darkness (cf. 
 the ex]>ositors of 1 Cor. viii. 6 ; x. 20 et seq. , 
 especially Kling, vol. 7 of the New-Test, part of 
 the Bible- work)." 
 
 2. This estimate of the contents of the chap- 
 ter does not affect its credibility, nor does it 
 oblige us to conclude that the section originated 
 at the hands of a pseudo-Daniel in the Macca- 
 beean age. Fuller's remarks on these points, p. 
 272 et seq., are especially pertinent. We trans- 
 fer to this place an epitome of this author's 
 apology for lie doctrine of angels, as contained 
 in this section, although it is connected with 
 views that diverge somewhat from ours, and 
 that especially contain no correct estimate of 
 the idea of guardian angels : ' ' This is the mean- 
 rag of our text. Shall we coiLsider it a rabbini- 
 cal idea and a Jewish fable ? I caimoteven find 
 that it is entirely foreign to our modem concep- 
 tions. Do we not frequently speak of the spirit 
 that reigns in the influential circles of a court '? 
 Is it not well under-stood that propositions which 
 conflict with that spirit have no prospect of be- 
 ing approved, unless the prevailing spirit should 
 be superseded by a different one ':' That is 
 exactly what the text affirms — although cer- 
 tainly with a difference ; for our age speaks of 
 spirit without understanding a personal spiri- 
 tual being by that term. ' Spirit ' is a current 
 word in its mouth, but it becomes embarra.«sed 
 when asked how it conceives of spirit. As (iod, 
 in the consciousness of modern times, has taken 
 
 • IThe vagueness and indecision of this interpretation of 
 the " prince '• in question is no less an objection to it than 
 its evidently hejithenish character. The author's arguments 
 adduced above against the common view which identities 
 this angelx prince with Christ himself are entirely incon- 
 clusive: for (1) Jesus likewise calls himself a metseitt/er of 
 God (John iii. 17, 34) ; (2) the Son of CrOil himself did not 
 disdain angelic aid (Matt. iv. 11; Luke xxii. 4-^); (o) the 
 other O.-T. instances cited (especially Josh. v. 14) are clearly 
 allusions to the Mes-sianic theophany. *' This heavenly 
 form has thus, it is true, the shining white talar common to 
 the angel. E?A.*k. ix. J), but all the other features, as prede- 
 scribed — the rhining of the boily. the brightness of his 
 countenant^e. his eyes like a lamp 'of fire, arras and feet like 
 glittering brass the sound of his speaking — all these point 
 to the revebition of the ,•^^,'^^ "123, the glorious appear- 
 ance of the I.urd. Ezek. i., and teach us that the Is'iS seen 
 
 by Daniel was no common angel-prince, but a manifestation 
 of Jehovah, i.e., the Logos. This is placed b<^yond a doubt 
 by a comparison witti Rev. i. iri-lo, where the form of the 
 Son of man, whom John saw walking in the midst of tl^e 
 golden candlesticks, is described like the glorious appear- 
 ance seen by Ezeldel and Daniel '" (Keil).l 
 
234 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 refuge in the guise of a universal spirit, of which 
 it nia.v be affirmed that it is, and that it is not, 
 with equal propriety, so the spirits are involved 
 in a similar predicament ; they have dissolved 
 into vapor. The Scriptures, however, teach a 
 different doctrine. They have and know a per- 
 isi'/i'tl (Jod and personal spirits, and teach that 
 tlie latter include some who do the will of God, 
 while others resist it. If we assume accordingly 
 tliat such spirits exUt, it will not surprise any 
 mind that they should be active and influential 
 (of. Gen. xxxii. 1 et seq. ; 2 Kiugs vi. 17, etc.). 
 .... According to the Scriptures as a whole, 
 the angels are the agents through whom God gov- 
 erns the world, and they are concerned in many 
 things where we do not suspect their presence. 
 The only new feature in the passage is that they 
 are employed in influencing the decisions of the 
 rulers of the world ; but this is not surprising, 
 since they are concerned to realize or prevent 
 the Divine purposes. The world-power inter- 
 feres in the fortunes of Israel ; should God 
 quietly look on while His will is counteracted ? 
 lu such a case he opposes the evil spirit by His 
 spirit, so that spirit combats against spirit," etc. 
 — Auberleu expresses ideas exactly similar, p. 
 67 : "The Holy Scriptures only ask of us that 
 we should take in a real sense the language we 
 are accustomed to employ in a figurative sense, 
 respecting a conflict of the good and the evil 
 spirit in man. Similar ideas prevail in 1 Sam. 
 xvi. 13.15 ; 1 Kings xxii. 23 ; the Satanic influ- 
 ences with which we become better acquainted 
 through the words of Jesus and the apo.stles are 
 nothiug different in their nature. This does not 
 irgue that the freedom of human action is there- 
 by destroyed ; for the influence of spirits over 
 the inner nature of man is not irresistible, and 
 their principal attention may perhaps be given 
 to the shaping of external cu'cumstauces. The 
 question concerning the relation of the Divine 
 government to the freedom of man does not be- 
 come more difficult by the additional feature of 
 the service of angels, but, on the contrary, be- 
 comes more intelligible." — Cf. also Blumhardt, 
 Ueber die Leh re von den Engeln, in Vilmar's Pas- 
 tond-Theol BUittern. 1865, I. p. 33 : " If Christ 
 is presented to us as he who shall reign until all 
 his foes are made the footstool for his feet, his 
 reigning is always realized through the means 
 of angels who are sent forth, and over whom is 
 placed a special angel, Michael being prominent 
 among them : and the fact that so little is said 
 respecting the persons of the warring angels, 
 who must be regarded as constantly reappear- 
 ing, produces in us the more positive and ele- 
 vating impression, as it is always the same bat- 
 tle Iiora the beginning and down to the consum- 
 mation of God's kingdom, when he shall have 
 put down all opposing rule, and all authority and 
 power il Cor. xv. 24). In this light we learn to 
 losi^ sight of the strangeness of a name also, e.g. , 
 that of Michael ('who is like God?'), and see 
 that the names found in the Scriptures have not 
 the slightest connection with the follies of the 
 Jewish doctrine concerning angels, which in- 
 cludes extended registers of angels' names. But 
 we also learn how easy it is, when the Word is 
 carefully and thoroughly studied, to set aside 
 the sneering objections of opponents, who judge 
 everything superficially by its appearance, and 
 are ready to throw it into the himber-rnom nf 
 
 superstitions, if we only guard against being 
 moved from our simplicity by the power of a 
 worldly wisdom that overlooks the kernel of 
 everything." 
 
 3. Nor does the chapter contaui anything aside 
 from the doctrine of angels that is not well 
 adapted to the time of Daniel, and to the cap- 
 tive prophet Daniel as its author. This has 
 already been shown "with reference to several 
 particulars. It only remains to call attention to 
 the alleged "historical improbability" contained 
 in V. 1, that Daniel did not return to the holy 
 land with Zerubbabel and Joshua, as being a 
 circumstance that on the contrary lends very 
 Uttle support to the Maccaba;an-tendency hy- 
 pothesis. For while it is a sufficient explanation 
 of that fact that the aged and esteemed prophet 
 remained at Babylon for the special purpose of 
 promoting the welfare of his compatriots and of 
 the theocracy (see on that passage), it is cer- 
 tainly improbable that a writer of the Macca- 
 bsean period, who should have invented this nar- 
 rative in the interest of a tendency, would have 
 left his hero in a strange land, among the many 
 indifferent and apostate ones (cf. 1 Mace. i. 13 
 et seq. ; xliv. 55), when a suitable opportunity 
 was presented for his return, and while his own 
 heart was animated with a glowing love for the 
 "pleasant land" ("i^a"7".^) chap. viii. 9; xi. 
 16). — The zeaXons fasting ot Daniel (v. 2 et seq.) 
 serves as little as the circumstance above re- 
 ferred to, to render probable the composition of 
 the chapter in the Maccabjean age ; for the pro- 
 phet's fasting does not bear an ascetic and work- 
 righteous character, such as was adapted to the 
 spirit of the later Judaism, and especially to the 
 Alexandrian Judaism, inasmuch as the cause of 
 the gracious acceptance of the supplicant while 
 yearning for deliverance, is shown by v. 13 to 
 have been, not his fasting, but the fervent and 
 persistent prayer which accompanied it. In this 
 character of a mere accompaniment and outward 
 sign of sorrow because of national and religious 
 misfortunes, fasting (together with related 
 usages connected with mourning, e.g., abstain- 
 ing from anointing, the wearing of sackcloth, 
 sitting in ashes, etc.) was practised, long prior 
 to the captivity, by the earliest representatives 
 of the prophetic order, such as Elijah, Joel, 
 Isaiah, etc. (cf. 1 Kings xvii. 6 ; xix. 4 et seq. ; 
 Joel i. 14; ii. 13; Isa. xx. 3 et seq.); so that 
 the similar conduct of Daniel, which becomes 
 additionally appropriate in view of its being con- 
 nected with the occurrence of the feast of the 
 Passover, does not seem remarkable or untimely 
 in the least. — In opposition to Hitzig's assertion 
 that the remarks of the angel in chap. x. 21; 
 xi. 1, contain an allusion to the political rela- 
 tions of Egypt with Syria and Palestine in the 
 Maccabaian period, see supra, on these pas- 
 sages. 
 
 4. The ■lonnHetieal treatment of the chapter 
 wUI have regard primarily and principally to its 
 angelological features. In this respect attention 
 will naturally be directed less to the nature and 
 employment of the angels brought to our notice 
 than to their relation to the designs and modes 
 of operation of the Picine proridi nee which em- 
 ploys them as instruments in its service. 7'/ie 
 influence of Oud on the fortunes of the world- 
 empires and the decisions of t/ieir rulers, as being 
 
CHAP. XI. 2-45. 
 
 exerted thr»ugli the afjency of angels, and as em- 
 ploying the jiower of the mighty princes of the 
 spirit- trorld for the welfare of 7111111 — such wUl 
 probably be the theme of a meditation ou the 
 contents of the section as a whole. In connec- 
 tion with this it will be proper to refer to pas- 
 sages like Paa. xxxiv. 3 ; ciii. 30 et seq. ; Heb. 
 i. 14. etc., .ind to illustrate and enforce them in 
 their profound truth and comforting power, by 
 the subject of this chapter. 
 
 Homilctical suggestions on pai-ticular passages : 
 On V. 1, Melancthon : " Nova vi^io exhibetur jam 
 Daniel, non solum ut ipse et caleri pii in hoc prte- 
 senti perieriio conjirmentur, sed etiam et posteritas 
 piramnneiilur de pracipnis mutntionibus imperi- 
 orum etde iis adnmitntibus, qua Judrrtf, impende- 
 
 bant Hnbes Ecdesice imnginem, quam 
 
 Jjeus milt et exerceri affiietionihus et fide expec- 
 tare liberationem. Et cum liberat, tameii even- 
 tus -non respondent nostris conjecturis. Cum 
 Cyri beneficium Jmpeditum esset, postea magis 
 conspici potuit. a Deo gubernari hanc liberatio- 
 7i,em, cum tot impedimenta incidissent, quae huma- 
 nis consiliis toUi non poterant." 
 
 Ou V. 3, Jerome : ' ' Secundum anagogen vero 
 doc dicendum est, quod qui in luctu est et sponsi 
 luget absentiam, non comedit panem desiderabi- 
 Lm, qui de ccelo descendit, neque solidum capit 
 f-ibum. qui intelligitur in came, nee bibil ninum, 
 quod latificat cor hominis, nee exfiilarat faciem 
 tn oleo (Ps. civ. 15). Boe autem jejunio sponsa 
 impetrabiles facit laerimas, quondo sponsus fuerit 
 ablatvs ab ea." etc. — Cramer: "To fast and 
 prepare the body is indeed a proper external dis- 
 ;ipliue, not to deserv'e something thereby, as the 
 Papists do, but in order to a stUl better prepa- 
 ration ; Matt. VL IT et seq." 
 
 On V. 4, Geier : "Juxta huncflumum sefiiisse 
 •licit prophda, jejunio hactemis maceratus preci- 
 ousque racans devotis, sine dubio, ut animum 
 nonnihil recrearet hac loci jucundioris contempla- 
 tione, si quidem ad huj'ismodi finviorum ripas 
 timani nonnunqvam dnntur colles, calles aut 
 nuci arboribus consiti, tibi undarum suaviter au- 
 diuiitur susurri ndioque non exigua .nrnul suppe- 
 ■iitatur ansa reculendi benejicia tarn creationis, 
 }uam conservationis redemtionis," etc. Cf. Psa. 
 oxxxvii. 1 et seq. ; Ezek. i. 1 etc. 
 
 On V. 8 et seq., Calvin : " Dexis non idea ter- 
 ret suos, quoniam ipsum oblectet nostra periur- 
 ^atio, sed quoniam id nobis utile est, quia scilicit 
 
 nnnquam erim'us idonei ad discendum, nui came 
 nostra prorsus subacta. Hoc autem necesse fieri 
 'oiolento modo propter pervicaciam nobis ingeni- 
 <«»!."— Starke : •' Behold in this the goodness 
 and friendliness of God, who not only knows 
 how to terrify, but also causes the terrified onee 
 to be comforted and strengthened ! " 
 
 On V. 11, Theodoret : Ka'/M avrbv oh Ba?-ac!ap, 
 (i/J.(i AavitfX' 70 /til' yap yv XaAdaiuv, to de 
 'E,.?pa/wv bvotta' Kal to fiev vno ei'GE,3uv eri^^, rb 
 di {'TO fh'arrelSfJv —pntjerei^t/. — Starke : "It is dif- 
 ficult for a timid and sorrowful heart to appro- 
 priate to itself the Divine comfort ; wherefore 
 God sometimes calls them by name ; cf . Acts x. 
 31." 
 
 On v. 13, Jerome (see .supra, on that passage). 
 — Melancthon : " Angelus pins luirrat Danieli, 
 se dimicasse cum principe Persarum. i.e., cum 
 diabolo moliente dissipationes regni Pcrsici. Etsi 
 enim ignoramus, quomodo inter se pugnent boni 
 et mali spiritus, tamen certamina esse non dubium 
 est, sice disputation e fiant. site aliis tnodis. Ait 
 ergo bontis Angelus repressmn a se esse malum 
 spirifum, qui Camhysen jurenem et atilicos impios 
 incitabat, vel ad delendam gentem Judaicam, vel 
 ad interficiendum Daniekm, vel ad alias malas 
 actiones tentandas, qum novos motus in regno al- 
 Uitiirm erant." — Auberlen, Blumhardt, Fuller 
 (see supra, No. 3). 
 
 On V. 15 et seq., Starke : " If needless terror 
 and alarm can deprive a pious soul of his speech, 
 is it a wonder that wicked persons shall be dumb 
 when Christ addresses them with the words, 
 Friend, how camest thou in hither, etc. '? (Matt. 
 xxii. 13). — If God does not first open our lips, 
 either directly or indirectly, we shall be nnable 
 to speak what pleases Him (Rom. viU. 36 ; x. 
 15)." 
 
 Ou v. 20 et seq., Melancthon : '■'■ Hiec exempla 
 ostendunt satis mquictam fuisse proeinciam. 
 Fuerunt igitur et angeUrrum certamina, quimalos 
 spiritus, sedilionum et discordiarum inflamma- 
 tores depeUebant." — Starke: ''When one king- 
 dom of the world has been destroyed, Satan wUl 
 reign through another ; and thus the church is 
 compelled to contend constantly against the 
 prince of this world, until all kingdoms shall 
 belong to God and Christ. — The fact that the 
 power of angels is limited appears from their 
 requiring the assistance of others." 
 
 0. Detailed prophetic descriptiott of the Persian and Qrcecian world-kingdoms, and also of the king- 
 doms which should arise from the latter, together toith their conflicts. 
 
 Chap. XI. 2-45. 
 
 2 And now will I shew thee the truth. Behold, there shall stand i(p yet three 
 kings in [to] Persia; and the fourth shall be far richer than they .all: and by 
 [accordiiiii' to] liis strength through [by] his riches he shall stir u]) all [the 
 whole] ag^ainsi [with] the realm of Grrecia [kingdom of Javan]. 
 
 3 And a iniuhly king [a king, a hero] shall stand up, that shall rule with great 
 
 4 dominion [rule], and do according to his will. And when he shall stand uj), 
 his kinadom shall be broken, and shall be divided [partitioned] toward the four 
 winds of heaven [tlie heavens] ; .and not to his posterity, nor according to his 
 dominion [i-nle] which he ruled: for his kingdom shall be plucked up, even for 
 [and given to] others besides those [these]. 
 
i!36 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 5 .And the. kiiif; of tile south shall be strong, and [become] one of his princes : 
 and he shall be stronfj above liini, and have dominion [rule] ; his dominion 
 
 6 [rule] shall be a great dominion [rule]. And in [to] the end of years they shall 
 join [associate] themselves together ■ for [and] the king's daughter [daughter o? 
 the king] of the south shall come to the king of the north to make an agreement : 
 
 I: 
 
 but Hmd] she shall not retain the power of the arm ; neither shall he stand, noi 
 '] his arm; but [and] she shall be given m^j, and they that brought her, and 
 e that begat her, and he that strengthened her in these [the] times. 
 
 7 But [And] out of a branch [shoot] of her roots shall one stand up in his 
 estate [basis, i.e., stead], which [and he] shall come with an army [to the force], 
 and shall enter into [come in] tlie fortress oi' the king of the north, and shall deal 
 
 8 against [do with] them, and shall prevail [strengthen himself] ; and shall also 
 carry captives [cause to go in the captivity] into Egypt their gods, with their 
 princes [anointed ones], and with their precious [prized] vessels of silver and of 
 
 9 gold; and he' shall continue [stand] more years than the king of the north. So 
 the king of the south shall come into his kingdom [And he shall come into the 
 kingdom oi the king of the south], and shall return into his own land [ground]. 
 
 10 But his sons shall be stirred up [strengthen themselves], and shall assemble 
 a multitude of great forces : and one shall certainly come, and ovei'flow, and 
 pass through ; then [and] shall he return, and be stirred up [or, they shall 
 
 11 strengthen themselves], even to his [or, their] fortress. And llie king of the 
 south shall be moved with choler [become very bitter], and shall come forth 
 and fight with him, even with the king of the north : and he shall set forth [cause 
 to stand] a great multitude ; but the multitude shall be given into his hand. 
 
 12 And when he hath taken aivay the multitude [or, the multitude shall be taken 
 aiKay\ his heart shall be lifted iq) [or, raised tip] ; and he shall cast down [cause 
 to fall] many ten thousands : but [and] he shall not be strengthened hy it. 
 
 13 For [And] the king of the north shall return and shall set forth [cause to 
 stand] a multitude greater than the former, and shall certainly come after cer- 
 tain [at the end of the times the] years with a great army [force] and with much 
 
 1-t riches. And in those times there shall many stand iqy against the king of the 
 south : also [and] the robbers [sons of tyrants] of thy people shall exalt them- 
 selves [be lifted wjo] to establish [cause to stand] the vision ; but [and] they 
 shall fall [be stumbled]. 
 
 15 So [And] the king of the north shall come, and cast up [pour out] a mount 
 [mound], and take [catch] the most fenced cities [city of defences] ; and the 
 arms of the south shall not Mi'^/tstand, neither [and, i.e., or] his chosen people 
 
 10 [the people of his choice], neither shall there he any strength to rt'i^Astand. But 
 
 And] he that cometh against [to] him shall do according to his own will, and 
 
 none shall stand before him ; and he shall stand in the glorious land [land of 
 
 17 comeliness], which [and] by his hand [he] shall be consumed. He shall also 
 [And he shall] set his face to enter [come] with the strength of his whole king- 
 dom, and upright ones' with him ; thus [and] shall he do : and he shall give 
 him the daughter of [the] women, corrupting [to corrupt, or, destroy] her ; but 
 
 18 [and] she shall not stand on /u'« sirfe, neither [nor] be for him. After this [And] 
 shall he turn his tacc unto the isles, and shall take [catch] many; but a prince 
 [general] for his own behalf [iiis reproach] shall cause the reproach offered by 
 him [for him] to cease ; without his own reproach he shall cause it to turn upon 
 
 19 [to] him. Then [And] he shall turn his face toward the fort [fortresses] of his 
 own land ; but [ami] lie shall stumble [be stumbled] and fall, and not be 
 found. 
 
 20 Then [And] shall stand up in his estate [on his basis, i.e., stead] a raiser of 
 taxes in [one causing the exactor to pass through] the glory of the kingdom : but 
 within itiw days [and in single days] he shall be ilestroyed [broken], neither 
 [and not] in anger nor in battle. 
 
 21 And in his estate [on his basis, i.e., stead] shall stand up a vile [despised] 
 person, to whom [and on him] they shall not give the honour o^ the kingdom : 
 but [and] he shall come in peaceably [with tranquillity], and obtain [or 
 
 22 strengthen] the kingdom by flatteries. And luith the arms of a [the] flood shall 
 
CHAP. XI. 2-45. 237 
 
 they be overflown from before liira, anil sliall be broken; yea [anl], also the 
 
 23 prince of the covenant. And after the leatjue nuide with [from the covenanting 
 to] him he shall worli deca'nfulli/ : for [and] he sliall come np, and shall become 
 
 24 strong with a small people. He shall enter [come] peaceably [with tranquillity] 
 even upon [and with] the fattest places of the province; and he shall do that 
 which his fathers have not done, nor [and] his fathers' fathers ; he shall scatter 
 amoncj [to] them the prey, and spoil, and riches; yea, and he shall forecast 
 [devise] his devices against the strong holds, even [and i/tai] for [till] a 
 time. 
 
 25 And he shall stir up his power and his courage [heart] against tJte king of the 
 south with a gi-eat army [force] ; and the king of tne south shall be stirred up to 
 [the] battle witli a very great and mighty army [force] ; but [and] he shall not 
 
 26 stanil : for they shall forecast [devise] devices against him. Yea [And], thei/ 
 that feed [eat] of the portion of his meat [dainty food] shall destroy [break] 
 
 27 him, and his army [force] shall overflow; and many shall fall down slain. And 
 both these kings'hearts [the kings, their heart] shall be to do mischief [wrong], 
 and they siiall speak lies [falsehood] at [over] one table ; but it shall not pros- 
 per: for yet the end shall he at [to] the time appointed. 
 
 2S Then [And] shall he return into his land with great riches ; and his heart 
 shall be against the holy covenant ; and he shall do exploits and return to his 
 
 29 own land. At [To] the time appointed he shall return, and come toward [in] 
 
 30 the south : but [and] it shall not be as the former, or [and] as the latter. For 
 [And] the ships of Chittini shall come against [in] him ; therefore [and] he shall 
 be grieved [dejected], and return, and have indignation against the holy cove- 
 nant ; so [and] shall he do ; he shall even [and he shall] return, and have intelli- 
 gence witli them that forsake the holy covenant. 
 
 31 And arms shall stand on his part [from him], and they shall pollute the sanc- 
 tuary of trength [the stronghold], and shall take [cause to turn] aivaij the 
 daily [continual] sucrijice, -dud they shall place [give] the abomination that 
 
 32 maketh desolate. And such as do wickedly af/ainst [the wicked doers of] the 
 covenant shall he corrupt [pollute] by flatteries: but [and] the people that do 
 
 33 know their [its] God shall be strong^ and do e.qdoits. And i/iey that under- 
 stand amomj [the prudent of] the people shall instruct [understand for the] 
 many ; yet" [and] they shall fall [be stumbled] by the sword, and by flame, 
 
 34 by ca])tivity, and by spoil, many days. Now [And] when they shall fall [be 
 stumbled], they shaU be holpen [helped] with a little help : but [and] many 
 
 35 shall cleave [be joined] to them with flatteries. And some of them of under- 
 ■ standing [the prudent] shall fall [be stumbled], to try [lit., smelt in] them, and 
 
 to purge [purify], and to make them white, even to [tdl] the time of the end: 
 
 36 because it is yet for a [to the] time appointed. And the king shall do accord- 
 ing to his will ; and he shall e.\alt himself, and in.agnify himself above every 
 go"l, and shall speak marvellous [distinguished] thinr/s against tlie God of gods, 
 ami shall prosper till the indignation be accomplished [fail] : for tlial that is 
 determined shall be done. 
 
 37 Neither shall he regard [And he will not have understanding upon] the God of 
 his fathers, nor [and upon] the desire of women, nor regard [and he will not have 
 
 38 understandintt upon] any god : for he shall magnify himself above all. But in Ilis 
 estate [And on his base, i.e., stead] shall he hoiwur [give glory to] the god of forces 
 [stroncrholds] ; and [toj a god whom his fathers knew not shall he honour [give 
 glory]"with gold, and [with] silver, and with precious stones [stone], and plea- 
 
 39 sant things. Thus [And] shall he do in the most [forti-esses of] strongholds 
 with a strange god, whom he shall acknowledge and increase [increase to ac- 
 knowlediie] ^citli glory : and he shall cause them to rule over [the] many, and 
 shall divide the land for gain [distribute ground with a price]. 
 
 to And at [in] the time of the end shall the king of the soutli push at [wage war 
 with] him : and the king of the north shall come against him like a whirlwind 
 [will storm upon him], with chariots [chariot], and with horsemen [horses], and 
 with many ships [boats] ; and he sliall enter [come] \\\to tlie countries [lands], 
 
 41 and shall overflow and pass over. He shall enter also [And he will come] iu^c 
 
238 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 the glorious land [land of comeliness], and many countries shall be oveithrowii 
 [stumbled] : but [and] these shall escape out of his hand, even Edoni, and Moab, 
 
 42 and the chief [first] oi' tlie children of Ammon. He shall stretch foitli his haiul 
 also [And he shall send his hand] upon [in] the countries [lands] ; and the lan<l 
 
 43 of Egypt sliall not escape [be for an escaped one, i.e., exempt]. But [And] he 
 shall have ])o\ver [rule] over the treasures of gold and of silver, and over all the 
 precious [pleasant] tilings of Egypt : and the Libyans and the Ethiopians shall 
 
 44 be at [in] iiis steps. But [And] tidings out of the east and out of the north 
 shall trouble him: therefore [and] he shall go forth with great fury to destroy, 
 
 45 and utterly to make away [devote to extermination] many. And he shall 
 plant tlie tabernacles [tents] of his palace [pavilion] between the seas in [at] 
 the glorious holy mountain [holy mountain of comeliness] ; yet [and] he shall 
 come to his end, and none shall help him. 
 
 8 
 
 LEXICAL AND GRAMMATICAL NOTES. 
 
 [1 U""l^^?3. literally equities^ hence a compact as to what is agreed upon as right between the parties. It here seems 
 fo refer especially to the terms or provisos of the alliance, the marriage being one of the main conditions or considera- 
 tions, — "^ The pronoun is emphatic. — ' Q"i"nZ31 probably, like QTlCl?^ above, contains an allusion to the rights of a 
 contract, and may therefore signify allie8.'\ 
 
 EXEGETICAL REMARKS. 
 
 Verse 2. Touching upon the last kings of Per- 
 sia in a hasty and summary review. And now 
 will I show thee the truth. tTSS, see chap. x. 
 21. — Behold, there shall stand up yet three 
 kings in Persia; i.e.. doubtless, after the pre- 
 sent king-, hence after Cyrus (see chap. x. 1), 
 there shall be three more Icings of Persia, — the 
 Persian state shall have three more kings. The 
 author therefore assigns altogether four kings 
 to Persia, fi'om which, however, it by no means 
 follows that he '* knew " only that number ; nor 
 can it be shown from Ezra iv. 5. 7 that the 
 writer of that book knew of four Persian kings 
 (Hitzig, Ewald). * The number four is rather to 
 be regarded as a symbolic number, exactly like 
 that of the wings and heads of the leopard in 
 chap. vii. G (see on that passage), which indi- 
 cates that the development of the kingdom in 
 question is completed, and is, to that extent, 
 parallel with the number of the world-monar- 
 chies and with other significant quadruples ; cf. 
 Eth.-fuud principles, etc., on chap. ii. No. 3.f — 
 And the fourth shall be far richer than they 
 all J rather, '• shall acquire greater riches," etc. 
 This fourth one does not denote the last of all 
 the Persian kings, Darius Codomannus, but the 
 fourth from the beginning (or, in other words. 
 
 * ["Moreover, this assertion (thut the O. T. only knows 
 of four Persian king.-?) is not at all correct ; for in Neh. .xii. 
 22, besides those four, there is ment:on made also of a 
 Darius, and to the Jews, in the age of the Maccabbees there 
 was well known, according to 1 Mace. i. 1, hIso the name of 
 the Inst Persian king, Diirius, who wad put to death (de- 
 feated) by Alcxuntler.'' — Keit.] 
 
 t [This interpretation is altogether vague and unneces- 
 sary. The mrjining obvimrsly is not that there should there- 
 after be only funr more Persian kings in all, but merely that 
 the next three should bring down the history ns far as the 
 prophetic vision extended in this regard, i.e., down to the 
 breaking out of the conflict tjetween Fertda and Greece. 
 Thus "the three kings who shall yetClSy) arise are the 
 three succe^'^irs of Cjtus viz.. Canibyses, the pseudo-Smer- 
 dis, and Darius Hysta-spis : the fourth is then Xerxes, with 
 whom all that is saiil retrarding the fourth perfectly agrees. 
 Thus Havernick, Ebrard, Uelitasch, Auberlen, and Kliefoth 
 Interpret."— AVW.i 
 
 the third of the three just mentioned),* and 
 therefore Xerxes, as pseudo-Smerdis, is probably 
 not included, and Cyrus, Cambyses, and Dariu.s 
 Hystaspis are considered the first three. The 
 characteristic noticed in this place applies well 
 to Xerxes, as he became especially famous be- 
 cause of his immense riches (Herodotus, III. 
 96 ; IT. 87-29), and as his expedition into Greece 
 obscured those of his father by the excessive 
 greatness of his armament. The significance of 
 this fourth member of the old Persian dynasty 
 (whose identity with Xerxes was naturally not 
 .vet apprehended by the prophet [?] . especially 
 as the angel did not see fit to state his name) is 
 th.at he represents, on the one hand, the acme 
 of the development in power of the kingdom in 
 question, and, on the other, the beginning of its 
 dissolution. — And by his strength through his 
 riches, or, "when he has become strong through 
 his riches, ir.ptnr^, an infinitive (cf. 2 Chron. 
 xii. 1 ; also infra, v. 4, and chap. viii. 8, 23), is 
 not co-ordinated with the following """f 72, but 
 is placed above it. — He shall stir up all against 
 the realm of Greecia, i.e., "'stake all." jsn, 
 properly, " the all," i.e., all that has been men- 
 tioned, all the immense treasures and forSes re- 
 ferred to. 1''<^, properly, •■ shall excite, stir 
 up," does not allude so much to inanimate treas- 
 ures as to the subjects of this king as Ijeing the 
 objects of his exciting activity ; cf. v. 25 ; Job 
 xli. 2; Jer. 1.9.-1]; ri'l^r"? tlN is not properly 
 " against the realm of Javan," but " to the 
 realm," etc. ; PS serves to introduce the accusa- 
 tive denoting the direction of the movement. — 
 It accords fully with the position of the seer 
 prior to Xerxes, that Greece (with regard to 
 Javan, cf. on chap. >'iii. 21) should be repre- 
 sented as a kingdom. A Maccaba^an writer, who 
 might aim to sketch the history of that king, 
 and of his expedition against the Greeks, would 
 
 * [This computation is manifestly inconsistent, for it con 
 founds the "fourth" with the one juat said to ue the 
 third.] 
 
CHAP. XI. 2-45. 
 
 239. 
 
 assuredly have known, and indicated, that at 
 that time Javan was not yet a ri2;tt. 
 
 Verses 3, 4. Alexander the Great eind 7(w im- 
 mediate successors. * And a mighty king shall 
 stand up. "123 "j;", a herioc, warlike king ; 
 cf. "^Z'i rs, Isa. ix. 5, and also the symbolic 
 description of Alexander's martial greatness in 
 chap. viii. 5 et seq. , 21. """i " ^^ stands up," 
 i. e. , comes up and presents a warlike and threat- 
 ening appearance ; cf. vs. 4, 14, and also v. 1. 
 - And do according to his will. Cf. chap, 
 viii. 4 and infra, v. llj. The sovereign arbitra- 
 riness with which Alexander ruled all the [ler- 
 sous of his time is likewise attested by Curtius, 
 X. 5, 3.5 : " Fortnnam solus omnium mortidium 
 in potestate !tabuit." — Verse 4, And when he 
 shall stand up ( rather, "when he has stood 
 up "), his kingdom shall be broken, and shall 
 be divided toward the four winds of heaven. 
 
 IT???^ is probably to be closely connected with 
 the idea presented by "i^J in the preceding 
 verse: ^^ and ichen" or, "and as soon as he 
 shall have stood up" (Von Lengerke, Fiiller, 
 etc.) ; so that the brief duration of Alexander's 
 reign is here indicated. Others, e.g., Haver- 
 nick. Kranichfeld, Ewald, etc., render it, "and 
 when he shaU stand in his power, when his 
 power has reached its highe.st point " (Luther) ; 
 but this view is questionable, because of the 
 entirely too pregnant meaning which is thus 
 attributed to -,-^-s. Hitzig's assertion that iq; 
 in this place is synonymous with the Syr. t;-, 
 "to depart in death, to die," and that the fol- 
 lowing ^5".3fl (with which cf. chap. viii. 8) is 
 not pas.sive in its signification, and therefore 
 does not denote "to be Iroken," but " to break 
 apart," must certainly be rejected. — On the 
 phrase, " be divided toward the four winds of 
 heaven." cf. the analogous symbolic description 
 in chap. viii. 8. — And not to his posterity, 
 namely, "shall it be divided;" they shall not 
 be benefited by the division, but shall be en- 
 tirely deprived of their patrimony, thus realiz- 
 ing a feature that was common in the early 
 experience of the theocracy, 1 Sam. xv. 28 ; 2 
 Sam. iii. 10 ; 1 Kings xi. 11 ; xiv. 7-10; xv. 29 ; 
 xvi. 3 et seq. ; xxi. 21. It is well known that 
 this actually was the case with Alexander's sons, 
 Hercules (whose mother was Barsina. and who 
 was murdered by Polysperchon) and Alexander 
 (a Ulius posthumus. bom of Roxana. and likewise 
 murdered). Cf. Diodorus, XIX. 105; XX. 28; 
 Pausan., IX. 7; Justin., XV. 2; Appian, Si/r., 
 C. 51. — Nor according to his dominion which 
 he ruled, " shall the divided kingdom be ; " on 
 the contrary, it shall present a painful picture 
 of impotence ; cf . 'HDZ sii in the parallel, 
 chap. viii. 22. — For his kingdom shall be 
 plucked up, even for others besides those. 
 S3!t isb'?, to the exclusion of those, i.e., of 
 
 • [*■ From the conflict of Persia with Greece, the nngcl 
 (ver. 3t passes immediutely over to the founder of the Grje- 
 ' cian (Macedonian) world-kingdom; for the prophecy pro- 
 cetjds not to the prediction of historical details, but men- 
 tions only the elements or fact4jrs which constitute the 
 histtirical development. The eviteditinn of Xer.ves aeainst 
 (ir(.ece brings to the foreground the world-histnrical conflict 
 between Persia and Greece, which led to the destruction of 
 the Persian kin.sdom by Alexander the Great." — JCeit.] 
 
 I the natural heirs and rightful successors of this 
 ruler. Concerning the phrase, " to be torn out, 
 uprooted," cf. on chap. iv. 12, 12; also Job xiv. 
 7 et seq. ; Isa. vi. 10, etc. 
 
 I Verses 5, 6. The first Seleucidee and Lagid<e. 
 While the prophetic description, upon the whole, 
 has hitherto confined itselif to general outlines 
 and has not materially deviated from the ordi 
 nary methods of prophecy, it begins at thL" 
 point to assume a suspiciously specific character, 
 which arouses the thought that later hands may 
 
 ■ have improved on the prophecy by interpolating 
 various features of detaU. The fact that only 
 the two states, emanating from the great Graj 
 cian world-empire, which bordered immediatelj 
 on the "pleasant land," are more carefully fol. 
 lowed in their further development, is not, in- 
 deed, enough to arouse this suspicion, for the 
 other kingdoms of the Diadochi might have been 
 passed over as too unimportant in their rela- 
 tions with the theocracy. It was, mtireover, to 
 be expected that Israel should be alternately 
 oppressed by a southern and a northern neigh- 
 bor, in view of the similar parts taken in earlier 
 prophecies by the Assyrio-Babyloniau north on 
 the one hand, and by Egypt in the south, on the 
 other (cf., e.g., Isa. xxx. ti; xliii (i ; Jer. iii. 12, 
 18; vi. 22; xlvi. 20, 24; Zeph. ii. l:', ; Zech. x. 
 10, 11). But the manner in which the transac- 
 tions between the two kingdoms, whether peace- 
 ful or hostile in their character, are described 
 with regard to their changeful course, is too 
 exact, and covers too extended a succession of 
 reigns and events, to find even a remote parallel 
 in any other part of the prophetic literature of 
 the Old-Test, canon.* The unique character of 
 the section in this respect was recognized at an 
 early period, and has been made use of by the 
 opponents of the authenticity and genuine pro- 
 phetic dignity of the book [e.g.. early by Por- 
 phyry), in order to attack its character, and has 
 also been employed for apologetic purposes, in 
 order to demonstrate the inspired character of 
 the prophecy, and the astonishing exactness 
 with which its predictions corresiwnded with 
 the actual development of the dominion of the 
 Seleucidse and the Lagidai. With this view it 
 is employed by Luther m his preface to Daniel 
 and in his exposition of chap. xii. (which begins, 
 according to his opinion, with chap. xi. 36 ; — 
 see vol. 41, pp. 2.52 et .seq., 294 et seq.); by 
 Venema, Commentarius nil Daniilis cap. XI. 
 5-XII. 3 (Leovard., 1752) ; by Hengstenberg, 
 Beitr., p. 173 et seq. ; and. generally, by a ma- 
 jority of orthodox expositors in ancient and 
 modern times. Cf. especially Ebrard, Die Of- 
 fenb. Joh., p. 81 et seq., where a thorough 
 
 * [Ab we have already remarked, this peculiarity of detai] 
 does not argue a want of genuineness here. It is impossible 
 to sever this portion from the preceding and following pre- 
 dictions, which present no such "' suspicion* '^ features, 
 without making an irreparable hiatus in the prophecy as a 
 whole. Indeed this very p-irt constitutes the gist of the 
 entire disclosure, for it is this alone that iuiniediatey and 
 intimately concerns the theocracy. The unprecedented and 
 unparalleled character of the Antiochian persecution, as a 
 chapter in .lewnsh history, ju-stifies the minuteness and ear- 
 nestness of the portraiture. The rest of this prophecy 
 is but introduction and -sequel to this centr.d delineation. 
 The careful reader will note that Daniel does not give a 
 syllabus of secular history, but only sketches the course ol 
 those collisions which should affet% the retighntit status end 
 relations of Israel The character and conduct of th€ 
 Antiochian antichrist could not be fully appreciated wltl> 
 out a setting forth of these connections.] 
 
240 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 illustration of the harmony between the contents 
 of this section and the facts of history precedes 
 the remark : " For that very reason — this is the 
 internal design of the specializing- prophecy, 
 chap. sd. — the coming of the Macedonian tyrant 
 is connected with the age of Daniel by an un- 
 broken chain of the most particular events, that 
 it might be thoroughly apparent that no interval 
 for tlie coming of the Messiah and his rejection 
 sJiould intervene between the time of Daniel and 
 that tyrant." But Ebrard himself does not seem 
 to have remained permanently satisfied with this 
 mode of justifying the remarkably specific char- 
 acter of the prophecy on the supposition of a 
 higher plane of revelation ; for, in his review of 
 Fuller's commentary, he confesses that he " has 
 not yet found any exposition of chap. xi. that 
 was entirely satisfactory " (p. 387). — We shall at- 
 tend specially to Kranichf eld's view in the fol- 
 lowing exposition of the several passages. He 
 likewise contends for the genuine character of 
 the section throughout, but on the frequently 
 forced assumption that the modem exegesis ap- 
 plies what was indefinite and merely ideal in the 
 mind of the prophet to the facts of history in 
 the corresponding period in far too pointed a 
 manner. — And the king of the south shall be 
 (or "become") strong, ie., the ruler to whom 
 the south, or Egypt, has fallen ; cf. v. 8, where 
 the south is expressly designated as 3'^"i?'3 ; also 
 the Sept. on this passage, and Zech. vi. 6. — And 
 one of his princes ; and he shEtll be strong 
 above him ; rather. " but one of his princes — 
 he shall be strong above him. " With regard to 
 the partitive T? in 'i''^^ X^'^, cf. Gen. xxviii. 
 11; Ex. vi. 36; Neh. xiil 28. The subject, 
 " one of his princes," occupies a detached posi- 
 tion at the beginning (cf. Ezek. xxxiv. 19) ; the 
 copvila, however, restores the connei;tion : " (so 
 far as he is concerned) he shall still be stronger." 
 — Others (Luther, etc., Bertholdt, Rosenm., 
 Kranichfeld, Fiiller, etc.) regard the t in T31 
 T^"'^e; as the definite " and indeed, namely," and 
 refer the suffix to the subject of the preceding 
 verse : ' • and the king of the south, namely one 
 of his (Alexander's) princes, shall become strong." 
 This, however, is opposed by the lack of a de- 
 finite subject of P!n'!]1 in that case, and by the 
 jinanimous authority of the ancient versions, 
 which regard this second BTn^t as the predicate 
 of i-ni:; -^lan, despite the ^C/wMcA. Consequently, 
 the event to which the passage alludes is the 
 founding of the dynasty of the SeleucidiE in the 
 year B.C. 312, by Seleucus Nicator, the general 
 of Ptolemy Lagus (Diodorus, XIX. 55, 58; 
 Appian, Syr., C. 52),* who extended his domin- 
 ion from Phrygia to the Indus, and thus greatly 
 exceeded his former lord in power, approaching 
 to tlie position of power and greatness occupied 
 by Alexander himself more nearly than any 
 other of the Diadochi (Appian, Si/r., 55 ; Arrian, 
 Annb..\ll. 22. ft).— And (shall) have domin- 
 ion ; his dominion shall be a great dominion. 
 -1 i'^r*?? is the predicate, followed by the sub- 
 
 * [Keil lays ^eut Btresa upon the objection that Seleucua 
 was tint one of l'tolem>'a generals, as the text requires ; but 
 hi? own account of the history malces him out to have been 
 to at IcuBt for a tiine.J 
 
 ject -in regular order. The whole clause, how- 
 ever, is logically subordinated to i'f ^1 ; of. 
 Gen. xil 8. — Verse 6. And in the end of year! 
 they shall jo n themselves together. 7pil 
 C"^ri\ " and after the lapse of several years, " cf. 
 2 Chron. xviii. 3 ; also infra, vs. 8 and 13. The 
 subjects of the sentence are the kings of the 
 northern and of the southern kingdoms, and the 
 alliance referred to is the marriage of Antiochus 
 II. Theos (the son and successor of Antiochus 
 I. Soter, who had followed Seleucus Nicator 
 upon the throne of the Seleucidae as its second 
 possessor, B.C. 281-2G1, but who is wholly un- 
 noticed in this prophecy) with Berenice, the 
 daughter of Ptolemy Philadelphus (280-247), 
 the second of the line of Ptolemies. Antiochus 
 was obliged, on that occasion, to banish Loadice, 
 his»former wife and half-sister, and to disinherit 
 the children she had borne to him (Appian, Syr., 
 C. 55 ; cf. Jerome on this passage). It is im- 
 possible to doubt that this event is refeiTed to 
 in this place, in view of what follows, and Kran- 
 ichfeld therefore wastes his labor when he ob- 
 serves, with reference to Tlt2n I?'?, and with 
 an apologetic aim, that "it is an interpolation 
 to assume that Daniel here intended precisely a 
 king of Syria." — To make an agreement ; pro- 
 perly, " to make a straightening, to establish a 
 just and peaceful condition." Cf. DT}S"], v. 17, 
 and the corresponding iiKaia, 1 Mace. vii. 12. — 
 But she shall not retain the power of the arm ; 
 neither shall he stand, nor his arm ; i.e., pro- 
 bably, neither her arm nor his, which had 
 strengthened themselves by that union, shall be 
 able to retain the power thus acquired ; * their 
 union shall again be dissolved, and the political 
 alliance, with its strengthening influence upon 
 both kingdoms, shall thus be set aside. It 
 seems unnecessary, upon this view, to adopt 
 Hitzig's emendation, 1>'"1! ^1'??'^ ^<b1 (" his 
 [i. e. , the arm of Berenice] arms shall not stand," 
 which is held to be equivalent to " her father as 
 well as her consort, who were hitherto her pro- 
 tectors, shall forsake her), and also Kranichfeld's 
 rendering of 511^ j in the sense of hont, in sup- 
 port of which vs. 15. 23, and .31 may indeed be 
 adduced, but this is decidedly opposed by the 
 context, which treats solely of an intermarriage 
 and its immediate consequences, and not at all 
 of warlike events. It is likewise arbitrary to 
 take >T^T in the sense of " support, protector," 
 with Hiivemick, Von Lengerke, etc. , and ac- 
 cordingly to find the assistance to be derived by 
 Berenice from Egypt referred to in the former 
 half of the sentence, and in the latter half the 
 
 * [This substantially atrrees with the rendering nf Keil, 
 who, however, is rather refined in his view of the con- 
 struction : "The subject to ~?:T"l J<b is the 13: T^Ti; 
 and his, i.e., this king's help is his own daughter, who 
 should establish D^1X*'*3 by her marriage with the king 
 
 of the north. 1T*1T^ is a second subject subordinated or 
 
 co-ordinated to the subject lying in the verb : he tngelher 
 with htn help. We may not explain tlie passage : neither f-e 
 nor his help, because in this case i<^n could not be want 
 ihg, particularly in comparison with the following K*n."] 
 
CHAP. XI. 3-45. 
 
 241 
 
 aid rendered to her husband by Berenice herself. 
 ■'Arm" is intended in each case to simply de- 
 note the physical or political power of the respec- 
 tive ro\ ai personages, and consequently, in the 
 first instance, that of the Egyptian princess, and 
 in the next that of her consort. — But she shall 
 be giveu up and they that brought her, and 
 he that begat her, and he that strengthened 
 her in these times ; or, "he that begat her and 
 he that led her away in the times." \'^^^?'r' 
 '•they that brought her," denotes either the 
 " begetter " who is mentioned immediately after- 
 ward, and the one that "led her home," hence 
 her father and her husband (Havernick, Fuller, 
 etc. ), or the company of her followers, her train 
 when she left Egypt (Ewald), [or " who brought 
 her into the marriage" (Keil)). The word is 
 hardly to be taken, with Hitzig, as a categorical 
 plural, and thus to be limited to the husband. 
 op'n!^ properly signifies "he that holds her, 
 that obtains possession of her," i.e., her consort 
 (thus correctly Vou Leugerke and Hiivemick, 
 while Hitzig, Kranichfeld, [Keil], etc , contend 
 tor the rendering of P''ynC hy " maintaining or 
 supporting," which is too artificial).— niri"3i 
 '■ in tie times," is an idiom signifying " at that 
 time," i.e., when his critical situation obliged 
 hira to marry her. lC]"i "she shall be given 
 up, be given over to ruin, overthrown (in perni- 
 ciem traditiir)" is a very general expression that 
 does not necessarily imply death by violence ; 
 cf. I.sa. V. 12; also infra, v. 11. — The historical 
 commentary on the latter half of this verse is as 
 follows : As soon as Ptolemy Philadelphus had 
 died in B.C. 247, Antiochus Theos expelled 
 Berenice, and recalled the formerly rejected 
 Laodice. The latter, however, aimed at farther 
 revenge, and to achieve it she poisoned the 
 king, had her son by him, Seleucus II. Callini- 
 cus, declared his succes.sor, and sent assassins 
 against Berenice, who had fled to the sanctuary 
 of Daphne. The latter queen was slain, toge- 
 ther with her little son, and the hope of the 
 Ptolemies to behold one of their lineage on the 
 throne of the Seleucidfe was thus wholly de- 
 stroyed. Cf. Polyajn., VIII. 50 ; Ju.stin. , XXVII. 
 1 ; Appian, 1. c. — Kranichfeld vainly attempts 
 to shake the erident correspondence of this 
 series of facts with the language of the passage 
 by regarding ir^P as denoting a violent death, 
 and consequently as not harmonizing with the 
 natural death of Ptolemy Philadelphus.* He 
 farther translates ?''"'! in the sen.se of " host," 
 and attributes to n^K^zn the questionable 
 meaning, "the promotem of her marrriage" 
 (the " furtherers of the whole Delilah-like 
 match"), by all of which he obviously becomes 
 liable to the chiurge of arbitrary ' ' interpola- 
 tion," to a far greater degree than the opponents 
 
 * [Keil somewhat extends this objection : *' The prophecy 
 differs from the lubtoricil facts, not merely in regard to the 
 consequences of the events, but also in reir.ird to the matter 
 it-^elf ; for it speaks not only of the dau^rhter but also of her 
 father, being given up to death, while the natural death of 
 her father is in no way connected with that marriage, and 
 not till aft€r his death did the consecinences fatal to his 
 daughter and her chilti develop themselves." Such niceties 
 Df verifieation ni a prophecy so conci.se and incidental we 
 may sately leave to the candor of the reader.] 
 
 16 
 
 whom he accuses of that crime because they 
 frankly recognize the reference to those events. 
 
 Verses 7-9. PMemy Erergetes and Seleiicuf 
 Callinicu-s. But out of a branch of her roots 
 shall one stand up in his place (marg.). The 
 partitive Tp, as in v. 5. '^ 1?.:., "the sprout- 
 ing of her roots " (cf . Isa. xi. 1 ) signifies the 
 lineage, the immediate ancestry of Berenice ; 
 the person referred to was consequently the son 
 of her parents and her own brother, viz. : Ptol- 
 emy III. Evergetes, the successor of Ptolemy 
 PhQadelphus, B.C. 247-221. i:2, an accusa- 
 tive of the direction (cf. v. 2. at the end) ; in 
 vs. 20, 21, it is replaced by a definite ii3 b?. — 
 Which (or "and he") shall come with an 
 (rather, " against the ') army, and shall enter 
 into the fortress of the king of the north 
 S*:"'! 3"'n"jH signifies neither, "he shall come 
 to his host" (Hitzig), nor "he shall come to 
 power " (Hiivemick) ; the former rendering is as 
 forced as the latter is contrarj to the language 
 (owing to the missing article), 'jj; is rather 
 equivalent to against, and the " host " is that of 
 the northern king. The " coming into his for- 
 tress " which follows, designates the result of 
 the expedition as a whole, the taking of the 
 northern king's fortress by the king of the south. 
 It must, however, remain undecided whether 
 this " fortress " denotes specially the strongly for- 
 tified maritime city of Seleucia (as Hitzig thinks) . 
 It is more probable that '1>"'2 is used collec- 
 tively (cf. V. 19), and that therefore 2 8<^a does 
 not denote the eutering into the fortresses, but 
 only the arrival before them. — And shall deal 
 (or •• execute it") against them and prevail. 
 " Again.st them" refers to the subjects of 
 the northern kingdom, not to the fortresses. 
 With regard to ? "r^i "*o "^o t°i °' against 
 one," namely, according to pleasure, cf. Jer. 
 xviii. 2tj ; also the more definite in^l? ^~,^,^ 
 vs. 3, 30 ; chap. viii. 4. Concerning the mag- 
 nificent success achieved by Ptolemj' Evergetes 
 during his expedition against Syria (the conquest 
 of almost the entire Syrian realm from Cilicia 
 to beyond the Tigris, the taking of numerous 
 fortresses, and the slaying of Laodice, the rival 
 and murderess of his sister Berenice) cf. Appian, 
 Syr. , C. ti5 ; Justin. , XXVII. 1 ; Jerome on the 
 passage. — Verse 8. And shall also carry cap- 
 tive into Egypt their gods, with their princes 
 (rather " molten images "), etc. The suffix in 
 an'^nis and also in a,'l"'50: refers to the inhab- 
 itants of Syria, the same to whom Sn2 in the 
 preceding verse referred. D"^??? does not edg- 
 nify •' princes" in this passage (as it does, e.g., 
 in Josh. xiii. 21 ; Ezek. xxxii. 30), but " molten 
 images, cast images, brazen statues ; " and con- 
 sequently T'?- is employed in the sense which 
 is more generally denoted by '^c: (Isa. xli. 29 ; 
 xlviii 5) or H^D^ (Ex. xxxiL 4, 8; xxxiv. 17, 
 
 etc.). The express mention of the molten 
 images besides the gods arises from the fact that 
 the existence of the latter is made wholly de- 
 pendent on the former. The transportation of 
 
242 
 
 THE PEOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 the idols in itself is the significant evidence of 
 the total subjugation of an opposing kingdom 
 .'cf. Isa. xlvi. 1. 2 : Jer. xlviii. 7 ; xlix. 3 ; Hos. 
 X. 5etseq. ); and likewise the removal of the 
 ' ' precious vessels of silver and gold " which is 
 afterward noticed ("11 ^"?, genit. materia, 
 depending on the immediately preceding gen. 
 gaaUtdtis, or^-in -^Js), cf. Nah. ii. 10; Jer. 
 xxvii 18 et seq. ; Ezek. viL 19 et seq. ; Zeph. i. 
 18 ; Dan. i. 2. — The historical event which cor- 
 responds to this was the return of Ptolemy 
 Evergetes to Egypt, occasioned by a revolt, when 
 he carried away from Syria a booty of 4,000 
 talents of gold, numerous jewels, and 2,500 
 idol-statues, the latter including among their 
 number those which Cambyses had formerly 
 transported to Persia. It was the restoration 
 of these that secured to this third Ptolemy the 
 name of Evtfjyerr/^. Cf. Jerome on the passage, 
 and the Marmm' AduUtanum, the monument 
 erected by the victor in commemoration of his 
 deeds, which boasts that he had united Meso- 
 potamia, Babylonia, Persia, Susiana, Media, and 
 all the countries as far as Bactria, under his 
 Bceptre. In Wew of this exact correspondence 
 of our passage to the facts of history, which, it 
 IS alleged, occuiTed subsequently to the compo- 
 iition of the prophecy, the suspicion that the 
 oracle was conformed to the history appears to 
 be only too well founded, especially as Egypt 
 ^^'I'r-??) is expressly mentioned as the goal of 
 the magnificent triumphal march.* The pre- 
 dictions by other prophets relating to expedi- 
 tions that secured great booty and that captured 
 immense numbers of idol-images, e.g., those of 
 Isaiah, Jeremiah, Nahum, Ezekiel, etc., in the 
 passages cited above, are always associated with 
 very different surroundings, and present fewer 
 circumstances of detail to be particularly ful- 
 filled, f For this reason it cannot be admitted 
 that the neglect to mention the death of Laodice 
 forms a proof of the undimmed originality of 
 the prophecy (against Kranichfeld). — And he 
 shall continue more years than the king of 
 the north ; rather, " and shall abstain from the 
 king of the north (several) years." i.e., shall 
 refrain from waging war against him, shall leave 
 him in peace. Thus Hiivemick, Von Lengerke, 
 Maurer, Hitzig, etc. , correctly render the sense. 
 On the other hand, Syr., Vulg., Luther, Kran- 
 ichfeld, Fuller, etc., render : " and for years he 
 bhall maintain himself before the king of the 
 north," i.e., preserve his superiority over him, 
 firi.vealebit adcci-sus regem Aqvilonis (Vulg.). 
 This interpretation is opposed by the usage of 
 Tp ~0J in the sense of " to cease, abstain from 
 something," which occurs elsewhere also ; cf. 
 Gen. xxix. 35 ; xxx. 9 ; 2 Kings iv. 6 ; xiii. 18. X — 
 
 * [Surely the exact agreement of prophecy with hiptory 
 ought not to be an objection with any except those who 
 deny the possildlity of predit'tion at all. At other times the 
 lack (li this ygreeraent is made by the author the ground of 
 the same objection.] 
 
 t [This argument resolves itself simply into the conceded 
 fact that the pr-iphccy in question is unusually specific. 
 But what of that? Was not the Spirit of revelation com- 
 petent to impart particulars, if need be* The author's 
 reasoning is purely of a piece \vith the prefiumpUuim of 
 rationalism.] 
 
 X [Keil likewise, though he admits that *^?D TD?"' 
 might well bear the sense 'A abstainijig from, yet adduces 
 
 Verse 9. So the king of the south shall com« 
 into his kingdom ; rather, " and he shall (now| 
 come into the kingdom of the king of the .south." 
 The subject obviously is the northern king, who 
 was mentioned at the close of the preceding 
 verse, for -?i'j "j?? is clearly a genitive depend- 
 ing on r^rb^ (against Kranichfeld). — And shall 
 return unto his oi«m land, i.e., to the northern 
 kingdom, to Syria. The reference to the expe- 
 dition against Egypt by sea (with a fleet that 
 was soon destroyed in a storm) and also by land, 
 which Seleucus Callinicus undertook about B. C. 
 240, or two years after the departure of Ptolemy 
 Evergetes from Syria, but which resulted in his 
 total defeat and hasty flight, is sufficiently 
 obvious; cf. Euseb., Chron., I. ijntG ; Justin., 
 XXVII. 2. 
 
 Verses 10-12. Seleucus Ceraumis and Antiochus 
 the Great agaiimt Ptolemy IV. Philoputer. But 
 his sons shall be stirred up (or " prepare for 
 war") and shall assemble a multitude of great 
 forces. If the Keri "1^;^^ is to be followed, it 
 is unquestionable that the suffix of this plural 
 refers back to the last named Syrian king Seleu- 
 cus II. Callinicus, and that his two sons. Seleu- 
 cus III. Ceraunus (B.C. 227-224) and Antiochus 
 III. the Great (224-187), are intended. It ia 
 reported concerning the latter, although only by 
 the somewhat credulous and hasty Jerome (on 
 the passage), that, in connection with his younger 
 brother, Antiochus. he made war on Egjpt ; but 
 it is hardly possible that be should have at- 
 tempted a war against Ptolemy Evergetes, who 
 lived and reigned until B.C. 221, three years 
 beyond the reign of Ceraunus. But the writer 
 does not probably intend to assert by ""?""] that 
 the warlike expedition undertaken by the bro- 
 thers was primarily and directly aimed against 
 Egypt. The verb is rather used in a compre- 
 hensive sense, so as to cover the campaign of 
 Seleucus Ceraunus (in which he met his death, 
 B.C. 224) against Attains of Pergamus. and also 
 that commenced several years afterward by 
 Antiochus Magnus, which was directed against 
 the indolent Ptolemy IV. PhOopater of Egypt ; 
 cf. Polyb., IV. 48 ; Appian. Syr.. C. 06 (Haver- 
 nick, Von Lennerke, Maurer, Hitzig. FiiUer, 
 etc., are substantially correct). This counter- 
 acts the attempt of Venema, Bertholdt, and 
 Kranichfeld to read T.^'^ with the Kethib, and 
 to understand Ptolemy Phdopater, the son of 
 Evergetes, by this "son." liy proving it to be 
 superfluous, and, moreover, to be conflicting 
 with the plural 1C?!*1 l^ir"'.. * — And (one) 
 shall certainly come, oveiflow, and pass 
 
 plausible rea.sons from I he context in favor of the sense to 
 nuind before. It is difficult, however, to see how this sig- 
 nification can be legitimately extracted from the words.] 
 
 * [The author's remarks sufficientl}' meet the objection of 
 Keil that " the announcement of the war of his (Callini'-ns") 
 sons with many hosts overflowing the land is not confirmed 
 by history ; " but to make all clear we add the followinii 
 from Stuart : *' The sons of Seleucus Callinicus were Seleu- 
 cus Ceraunus and Antiochus Magnus. The former of these 
 two began the war against Egyiit, in .\sia Minor, where 
 Egj-pt had tributary or allied provinces. He perished iu 
 the contest there. Antiochus Magnus then led on his army 
 toward Egypt ; and hence SflS St-^ in the singular. Th« 
 
 infin. being after the definite verb denotes the continued 
 advance of the army under Antiochus.'"] 
 
CHAP. XI. 3^5. 
 
 243 
 
 through (or "inundate ")• ^^^^ S*?^, a strong 
 description of the protracted but irresistible 
 advance, followed by a portrayal of the over- 
 flowing masses of warriors that recalls the simi- 
 lar description in Isa. viii. 8. Begiuning with 
 this point, the subject is singular, denoting 
 Antiochus the Great alone, who became king of 
 Syria after the death of his brother Seleucus 
 III., and after that of Ptolemy Evergetes became 
 the terrible and victorious foe of Egypt, whose 
 luxurious and cowardly king, Ptolemy Philo- 
 pater, quietly permitted him to take the fortress 
 of Seleucia on the Orontes, to capture Tyre and 
 Ptolemais through the treachery of Theodotus, 
 and finally to besiege the fortress of Dora during 
 a protracted period, while entering into a four 
 months' truce with him in connection with that 
 siege (Polyb. , V. 45-06). — Then shall he return, 
 and be stirred up (or, " and they wage war "), 
 even to his fortress. ICi can in no case de- 
 signate the return of Antiochus to Seleucia on 
 the Orontes, after concluding the truce above 
 referred to, in order to go into winter quarters 
 at that place (Polyb., V. 06), but rather, as ap- 
 pears from the verb. beUicum ^^3~"1 (as it must 
 be read with the Kethib, instead of •"'"'.^r"^, as 
 the Keri prefers) which immediately follows, it 
 denotes a renewal of his operations against the 
 Egyptians in the spring of 218. in the course of 
 which he surrounded the Egyptians in the strong 
 city of Sidon, to which they had advanced, con- 
 quered all Phoenicia and Palestine, and finally 
 established himself in Gaza (Polyb., V. 68-80). 
 "'"Q (as it should be read, or even "ll?-?, with 
 the Keri, but not n^')a, as KranichfeW desires), 
 " his fortress," doubtless refers to the great and 
 exceedingly strong city of Gaza, so that its suf- 
 fix points back to the king of the north, the 
 subject of :*J'^. It is arbitrary, however, to 
 assume a designed assimilation in sound be- 
 tween rA~'0 and ~?", as do Vuuema and Hitzig. 
 — Verse 1 1 . And the king of the south shall be 
 moved with choler, etc. On ~tt"iQr";T of. 
 chap. viii. 7. The king of the south who is 
 "moved with choler" is Ptolemy Philopater, 
 and his "coming forth," as here described, 
 denotes his moving to attack Antiochus the 
 Great in the year 217, with 70,000 foot, 5,000 
 horse, and 73 elephimts (Polyb.. V. 79). — And 
 he shall set forth a great multitude ; but 
 (rather, " and ") the multitude shall be given 
 into his hand. The southern king is the sub- 
 ject here likewise, whose success, as based on 
 the support of a great array, is described in this 
 and the following verse (not the king of the 
 north, as Ki'anichfeld supposes). -" VS:n de- 
 eign,ates the great host before described, at 
 whose head the aroused Egyptian king goes 
 forth, and 11>3~'T the host, of nearly equal 
 strength (62.000 foot. 6,000 horse, and 103 ele- 
 phants) with which the Syrian opposed him, 
 Hitzig arbitrarily assumes that instead of "'^_ 
 we should read p:"! ; so that the sense would 
 be, "and he (Ptolemy Philopater) gave the 
 great multitude into his own hand." — Verse 12. 
 
 [ And Tvhen he hath taken away the multitude, 
 
 1 his heart shall be lifted up ; rather, ' and the 
 multitude shall rise up i or " lift itself up "), and 
 his courage (or " heart ") mcrease." The ' ' mul- 
 titude " denotes the powerful host of the Egyp- 
 
 ' tians (-.:= -'5 ITS"' '^- ^1) which is now advanc- 
 ing ; * "his courage" 0-r\) is the courage cf 
 the hitherto cowardly, dissipated, and lustful 
 Ptolemy Philopater (cf. 2 Kings xiv, 10). The 
 Kethib C'"'^ is probably to be retained, instead 
 of replacing it by the Keri C"!"!, which is simply 
 an easier reading, "rrl is spoken of a warlike 
 "rising up" to battle, as in Isa. xxxiii. 10, — 
 And he shall cast down ten thousands (" my- 
 riads "). This occun'ed near Raphia (southwest 
 of Gaza), where Ptolemy Philopater inflicted a 
 heavy defeat on Antiochus the Great, in which 
 
 , the Sj-rians lost in killed 10,000 foot, :!00 horse, 
 and five elephants, and more than 4, OHO prison- 
 ers (Polyb., V, 80). — But he shall not be 
 strengthened by it; or, "but yet he shall 
 not become strong," i.e., inasmuch as he fol- 
 lowed up his victory very negligently (see Jus- 
 tin,, XXX. 1 : " Sj.oliassct rigaii Anti<c7ntm, si 
 fortiiiiiim rirtute juvhset ; " cf. Polyb., V. 87), 
 and immediately returned to Egypt after gar- 
 risoning the cities that had formerly Ijeen lost, 
 in order to resume his former dissipated life. 
 The Vulgate, " aed Hon pratakhit,^' is incor- 
 rect. 
 
 Verses 13, 14. Farther descHptinn of the tnir- 
 like deeiU nf Antitx/ivx Magnus. For the king 
 of the north shall return, and set forth i rather 
 "shall again .'^et forth") a multitude, greater 
 than the former. This new adventure falls 
 fully thirteen years after the defeat of Anti- 
 ochus near Raphia. Not until he had carried 
 on fortunate wars during an extended period 
 against the Parthians. the Bactrians. and even 
 to the borders of India, and until he had like- 
 wise conquered Asia Minor and the Thracian 
 Chersonnesus, did he turn his arms against 
 Egypt in B,C, 203, where Ptolemy Philopater 
 had recently died and left the throne to his sou 
 Epiphanes, a child of five years, who was placed 
 under the guardianship of the voluptuous and 
 cruel Agathocles. In league with Philip of 
 Macedon, who concluded a formal treaty for the 
 division of the Egyptian empire with him, he 
 advanced toward Egypt at the head of the im- 
 mense army which he had formed whUe engaged 
 in his protracted eastern wars, and which he 
 had especially strengthened by the addition of a 
 great number of Indian elephants, and suc- 
 ceeded in depriving it again of Phceuicia .and 
 southern Syria; see Justin., XXX. 2; XXXI. 
 1 ; Polyb., XV. 20; Jerome, on this p.issage. — 
 And shall certainly come after certain years ; 
 rather, "and toward the end of times he shall 
 come (repeatedly) during a period of year.s. " 
 The " times " at who.se end his annually re- 
 peated coming shall begin (3"'"^, during several 
 years, as in v, 8 b) are the thirteen years be- 
 
 * [Keil. however, somewhat arbitrarily declares that 
 " "IT^nn, with the article, can only be the hott of the 
 
 king of the north." He contends that "the meaning ii 
 this : ' As the multitude rises up, so his heart i^ lifted 
 up.' "1 
 
244 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 tween the battle near Raphia and the death of 
 Ptolemy Philopater (B.C. 217-204). —With a 
 great avmy and with much riches (rather, 
 " equipment "). In connection with this equip- 
 ment we are probably to conceive of the rich 
 treasures secured in past ware, in addition to 
 the Indian elephants. — And in those times there 
 shall many stand up against the king of the 
 south. Insurrections occurred in upper Egjpt 
 as early as the first year of the reign of Ptolemy 
 Epiphanes, occasioned by the bad administra- 
 tion and the cruelty of his guardian Agathocles ; 
 and these svere followed in subsequent years by 
 renewed insurrections, the revolt of subjugated 
 countries, etc. Before his eighth year had 
 expired, the king was obliged to conquer Lycop- 
 olis, a stronghold of the rebels (see Corjy. inscr., 
 III. 339 : Inset: of Rosettn, 20, 2(5, 28; Jerome, 
 on the passage). — Also the robbers of thy peo- 
 ple shall exalt themselves ; rather. " and crim- 
 iual sons of thy people .shall revolt." The literal 
 reading is, " and sons of the ravenous ones, of 
 the oppressors of thy people. " 2"'^"'~S denotes 
 persons who overturn the law and justice (of. 
 Psa. xvii. 4; Ezek. vu. 22 ; xviii. 10; Isa. xxxv. 
 9), hence violent persons, robbers. With regard 
 to the occurrence of two Stat, constr. in imme- 
 diate succession C^::^"?: t;). which must not be 
 strained so as to denote robbers' sons, robbers by 
 birth (Fiiller), cf. the examples collected by 
 Evvald (Le?irb., % 289 c). The oracle refers to 
 the league against Egypt, into which a large 
 number of Jews entered with Antiochus the 
 Great, and to theii' participation in his warlike 
 operations agamst that country, e.g., in his 
 attacks on the gaiTison which the Egyptian 
 general Scopas had left in the citadel of Jerusa- 
 lem (.losephus. Ant., XII. 3, 3). The theo- 
 cratic writer sternly condemns this partial revolt 
 to the Syrians as a criminal course or as common 
 robbery, because of the many benefits conferred 
 on the Jewish nation by the earlier Ptolemies.— 
 To establish the vision (rather, " %-isions "), 
 namely, the visions respecting the afflictions of 
 the Jews under Ant. Epiphanes already recorded 
 in chap. viii. and ix. , which could appropriately 
 be regarded as a consequence or punishment of 
 the revolt from the Egyptians as here described. 
 V'^ is used collectively in this passage, in the 
 sense of "what there is of prophecy, such 
 visions as exist." — But they shall fall. ^Vf?-. 
 does not probably denote stumbUng or falling in 
 a moral point of view (Hiivemick, etc.), but to 
 be unfortunate in war, to be oppressed politi- 
 cally and religiously, etc. The special event 
 referred to, whether a punishment imposed by 
 Scopas, in the shape of taking away various 
 nobles as hostages (cf. Polyb.. XVI. 39; Jose- 
 phus. Ant., XII. 3, 4), or otherwise, must remain 
 undetermined. It is not to be denied that at 
 any rate this particular passage presents a some- 
 what considerable discrepancy between the pro- 
 phetic text of the section and the corresponding 
 historical events ; cf. Kranichfeld on the pas- 
 sage, p. 368. * 
 
 • [It certainly may with justice ** be denied that there is 
 here su(;h a dixcrepnucy."' There is indeed, some indistinct 
 nesH, owing chiefly to onr inability to determine the exact 
 application of the" term "fall" here. It is clear, however. 
 
 Verses 15-19. Last wars and death of Anti- 
 ochiis Magnus. So (rather, "and") the king 
 of the north shall come, and cast up a mount, 
 and take the most fenced cities; rather, "a 
 strongly fortified city." The reference is proba- 
 bly to the siege and ultimate capture of Sidon, 
 into which " city of fortifications " (ri~.^3'^ "l""". 
 cf. Ewald, § 177 c) the Egyptian leader Scopas 
 had thrown himself after suffering a severe 
 defeat at the h.ands of Antiochus at Paneas, 
 near the sources of the Jordan, which reduced 
 his army to 10,000 men (B.C. 198). WTiile 
 Antiochus was carryi'jg on a war in Asia Minor 
 against Attalus in 'Jvj preceding year, Scopas 
 had again brought Crfie Syria under the domin- 
 ion of Egypt ; but ) j consequence of that terri- 
 ble defeat he wau deprived not only of that 
 province, but also of the whole of Palestine as 
 far as Gaza by the Syrian king. After endur- 
 ing a protracted siege in Sidon, in the course of 
 which an Egyptian army under Eropus. Meno- 
 cles, and Damoxenus had vainly attempted to 
 extricate him, he was compelled by hunger to 
 surrender himself into the victor's hands (Polyb , 
 XXVIII. 1; Livy. XXXIII. 19; Josephus and 
 Jerome, 1. c). The text, consequently, does 
 not expressly notice the repeated advance of the 
 Egyptians and the great battle near Paneas. but 
 contents itself with referring to the final results 
 of this new war, viz. : the capitulation of the 
 remaining Egyptian troops in Sidon. The idea 
 that '^?': ^^5 is used collectively (Theodot., 
 Syr., Vulg., Kranichfeld) must be rejected, be- 
 cause this event is so obviously referred to as 
 appears especially from the second half of the 
 verse. — And the arms of the south shall not 
 withstand, etc. ; an allusion to the unsuccess- 
 ful nature of the attempt made by the three 
 Egyptian leaders to come to the assistance of 
 the besieged Scopas. msiT is evidently used 
 in the sense of military forces (arms = army), 
 hence not as in v. G ; on the other hand, cf. vs. 
 22 and 31.— Verse 10. But he that cometh 
 against him shall do according to his own 
 will ; i. e. , Antiochus^ the victor of Paneas and 
 conqueror of Sidon, who now subjugated the 
 whole of Palestine (the " pleasant land " or 
 " land of beauty," — cf. on chap. viii. 9). — Which 
 by his hand shall be consumed ; rather, " and 
 destruction is in his hand." IT^? '"'??i ^s in 
 Isa. X. 32 ; cf. xliv. 20 ; Job xi. 14. If there 
 were no other reason, these parallels would b( 
 sufficient to show that ~b3 cannot here denote 
 ' ' to constimmate " (Luther) , nor yet " complete- 
 ness or totality." which would result in the 
 meaning, ' ' and it is lohotty in his hand," i. e. , the 
 glorious land (Hiivern., Von Leng., van Ess, 
 Fiiller, etc. ; also Bertholdt and Dereser, who 
 
 that it indicates a failure of their expectations : and of this, 
 in the case of the apcstate Jews referred to, history affords 
 sufficient confirmation. '• The apostasy of one party- among 
 the Jews from the law of their fathers, and their adoption 
 of heathen custxims contributed to brins about that oppres- 
 sion with which the theocracy was visited by Antiochus 
 Epiphanes"' (Keil). On the author's view, that these speci- 
 fications were interpolated into the prophecy by a later hand, 
 it is impossible to account for any such vagueness, much 
 less "discrepancy;" for the forger would certainly have 
 taken pains to conform his language to the w(U-kuown 
 facts.! 
 
CHAP. XI. a-45. 
 
 245 
 
 prefer, however, to read n32). * — Terse 17. He 
 shall also set hi.s face to enter ■with the 
 strength of his whole kingdom. " To set his 
 
 face "is equivalent to "fixing his aim" upon 
 something ; cf. 3 Kings xii. IS, and for the re.st 
 of the sentence, cf. Psa. Ixxi. 16 ; Isa. xl. 10. 
 Livy, XXXIII. 19, plainly asserts that Antiochus 
 was temporarily inclined to follow up his vic- 
 tories in Coeie-Syria and Phoenicia by a power- 
 ful attack on Egypt: " Omnibus regni viribus 
 cotini.TUK, cum iKi/eiites co]yia,i terrestvfs vmritim- 
 UK/jue ctimparfisset,'" etc. The same author re- 
 cords also an attack on the cities on the coast of 
 Cilicia and Caria belonging to Ptolemy, as being 
 an introductory step toward the execution of 
 that plan. The reference of the text to this 
 fact is so unequivocal, that all explanations 
 which do not accord with it must be rejected, 
 e.rj., that of Hiivemick, Von Leugerke, etc. : 
 '■ to come nf/aiiift the strength of his (the I^yp- 
 tian monarch's) whole kingdom ; " and of Fuller, 
 " to come in the poioer of his (Antiochus') whole 
 kingdom," which is interpreted to mean, that he 
 should secure the complete possession of the 
 royal power throughout Syria, and re-establish 
 its former limits. — And upright ones with 
 him ; rather, " and an agreement shall he make 
 with him." This rendering of "IB? C'lffiiT 
 ntj'i was adopted by the Sept. (nai awr/Ka^ ficr' 
 avToit Tvoiriacrai), Vulg. , Luther, Berth., Dereser, 
 Von Leng. , and Hitzig, although the two la.st- 
 named writers attempt emendations of the text 
 (Von Leng., ="'1^^':^ instead of a^"??'"'! ; Hit- 
 zig, •'^'r?'] instead of '"^'f J"!) which are entirely 
 uncalled for. It is certainly obvious that the 
 words refer to the treaty concluded in the year 
 198 between Antiochus and the defeated Ptol- 
 emy Epiphanes. by which Coele-Syria was left in 
 the hands of the victor, and in connection with 
 which the marriage of Cleopatra, the daughter 
 of Antiochus, with Ptol. Epiphanes was agreed 
 upon, although not consummated until five years 
 afterward (Polyb., XXVIIL 17 ; Josephus, Ant, 
 XII. 4, 1); see what follows. Such explana- 
 
 * [Keil aerain objects : '* Here also the historical events 
 fall far behind the contents of the prophecy, which points 
 v:> the complete subjnqatron of the king of the south, where- 
 as this war was carried on solely for the possession of the 
 Asiatic provinces of the Egyptian kingdom. Also the rising 
 up of many (S^i^"!, ver. 14) against the king of the south is 
 
 not historically verified ; and even the relation spoken of by 
 Josephus {AjlL. XII. ;^, 3) in which the Jews stood to Anti- 
 ochus tlie Great was not of such a kind as t^i be capable of 
 being regarded as a fulfilling of the 'exalting themst-lves ' of 
 the D'^^IB '^r2, ver. 14. Still less docs the statement 
 of ver. 16, that the king of the north would stand in the 
 glorious land, agree with the T^h^ interpreted of the con- 
 duct of Antiochus the Great against the Jews ; for, accord- 
 ing to Josephus (Ant., 1. c). he treated the Jews about 
 Jerusalem favorably, because of their own accoril they had 
 submitted to him. and had supiwrtcd his army: and he 
 pranted to them not only indulgence in regard to the obser- 
 vance of their religions ordin;inces, but also afforded them 
 protection."' These minute points of app.^rent variation are 
 sufficiently met by the explanations given above. We can- 
 not refrain, however, fr 'm observing here how completely 
 these seemintr discrepancies with the facts of history dis- 
 prove our author's theory of an interpolation of this part of 
 the prophecy by a later writer : for such n person would 
 surely have been careful to conform his writing scrupulously 
 tu the kjiowa historical dat,i.] 
 
 tions as the following must therefore be reject- 
 ed. '' and upright ones shall be with him," — i.e., 
 the Jews (!) — "and he shall succeed in if 
 (Gesenius, Winer, etc.) ; " and strong ones coma 
 with him, and he conducts it successfully " 
 (FilUer); or, "and uprightness with him. and 
 he shall accomplish it" (Hiivernick, Kranichf. ), 
 etc. — And he shall give him the daughter of 
 women, i.e., his daughter Cleopatra, who is 
 here designated as ''a daughter of the women " 
 (i.e., of her mother, gi'andmother, etc., who 
 were still employed with her education), proba- 
 bly on acMiint of her youth ; cf. Zech. is. 9, 
 where ri:riS«~13 in like manner denotes a young 
 ass-colt.* As Ptolemy himself was but seven 
 years old when this treaty was made, the agree- 
 ment primarily involves a betrothal only, the 
 marriage being postponed during five years to 
 B.C. 19if. — Corrupting her ; rather, "to destroy 
 it," i.e.. his league with Egj-pt; his purpose was 
 to ruin his former opponent and present ally, 
 nr'^na.jb is probably to be taken in this sense, 
 
 without substituting r'^n'i'nj for it with Hit- 
 zig, or, with others, referring the suffix to the 
 daughter. If the latter interpretation ("to 
 destroy her") were adopted, the 3 would cer- 
 tainly lose its telic signification, and become 
 consecutive: "so that he destroys her, so that 
 he ruins her in this way" (Kranichf.). but the 
 following clause does not accord with this view. 
 — But she shall not stand on his side, neither 
 be for him ; rather, ' ' but it shall not succeed, 
 nor re.sult to his advantage," i.e., Antiochus 
 shall not realize the expected benefits from the 
 agreement. Others, less appropriately, conceive 
 of Cleopatra as the subject, "«/i« shall not stand 
 on his side Cf), neither be for him ('?), but rather 
 take sides with her husband, the kingof Egypt ' 
 (cf. Jerome on the passage). The rendering 
 preferred by us is supported by tlie ex.actly simi- 
 lar expressions in Issi. viL 7 ; xiv. 34. f — Verse 
 18. And he shall turn his face imto the isles 
 (or coast-lands), andshall take many (of them). 
 The Kethib -"■^'Jl is to be retained in opposition 
 to the Keri C'u3"'^1, which is transferred to this 
 place from v. 17 for the sake of analogy. -"^T?' 
 i.e., "the isles and coast-lands" probably de- 
 notes the coasts of Asia Minor, which Antiochus 
 
 • [■' D'^lTSn, of wotneu, the plural of the class, as in 
 
 Judg. xiv. 5" (Keil). The plur. gives a kind of superlative 
 force, indicating her choiceness, beauty, etc.] 
 
 t [Still the construction proposed is harsh, for the subject 
 of the verb is naturally QTi'tn r3. Her destruction, " it 
 
 is true, was not the object of the marriage, but only its con- 
 sequence ; but the consequence is set forth as had in view, 
 so as forcibly to express the thought that the marriage could 
 lead, according to a higher direction, only to the destruction 
 of the daughter. The last clauses of the verse express the 
 failure of the measure adopted. The verbs are fern., not 
 neut. ; thus the meaning is : . . . ' she (the daughter) shall 
 not stand.' not be able to carry out the plan contemplated 
 
 by her father. The words ni~tl ib'^ibT t^b not stand 
 for "ib n*^nn Xb"!, 'she shall not be to him,"' or ' for him.' 
 In that case, R j must be connected with the verb. Ao 
 cording to the text, i3*J<b forms one idea, as IlID X? 
 
 impotent (cf. Ewald, § S70); 'she shall be a not for Mm, 
 i.e., he shall have nothing at all frou", her.'" — KeU.\ 
 
246 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 subjected to his power through the aid of his 
 fleet and army in the summer of 197, and also 
 Blacedon and Hellas, which were attacked and 
 conquered by him in the following year, after 
 having spent the intervening winter at Ephesus 
 and crossed the Hellespont in the spring ( Livy, 
 XXXIII. 19,98,40; Polyb., XVIII. 84).* -But 
 a prince .... shall cause the reproach of- 
 fered by him to cease; or, "but a general 
 (military leader) shall stifle his scorn." i.e., his 
 scornful and contemptuous declaration to the 
 Itoman ambassadors at a meeting in Lysimachia, 
 that " Asia did not concern them, the Romans, 
 and he was not subject to their orders" (Polyb. 
 and Livy, 1. c). The leader (l^^I^, as in Josh. 
 X. 24; Judg. xi. 6, 11) who stifled the scomful- 
 ness of the Syrian king (rT'3U:n, literally, "to 
 cause to cease " [to tench it to cease, Luther] ), 
 was Lucius Scipio Asiaticus, whose brilliant vic- 
 tory near Magnesia on the Sipylus in Lydia, 
 B.C. 190, enabled him to force Antiochus to 
 conclude an ii.imediate peace on very severe and 
 humiliating terras (Polyb., XXI. 14 ; Livy, 
 XXXVIII. 3S; Appian, Si/r., 38, 39, etc.).— 
 Without his own reproach he shall cause it 
 to turn upon him ; rather, ' ' he shall assuredly 
 give him back his reproach ; " he shall retaliate 
 by inflicting a more bitter reproach on his part. 
 '"33 in this place is synonymous with Tj^ or 
 SS""3, and does not signify "except that" 
 (Havemick).f — Kranichfeld attempts in vain to 
 obviate and obscure the manifest reference of 
 this representation to the defeat of Antiochus 
 near Magnesia, as being an artful ' ' fabrication 
 of history " on the part of the " positivists in 
 prophetic interpretation." — Verse 19. And he 
 shall turn his face toward the fort (" foi-ts ") 
 of his own land. These words are probably 
 ironical ; instead of advancing against the for- 
 tresses of foreign lands, he is thenceforward to 
 be employed only with those of his own realm, 
 perhaps in the direction of placing them in good 
 condition for defence. Fiiller's remark, that 
 here and in vs. 24, 31, and 39, QiTIJ'Q denotes 
 temples, which Antiochus was eventually obhged 
 to plunder, because of the distracting state of 
 his finances, is entirely too ai-tificial and without 
 adequate supjiort from the customary usage of 
 the term. History is acquainted with but a 
 single instance in which Antiochus pillaged the 
 temples, viz. : that of the temple of the Elymaic 
 Zeus, or Bel, in connection with which he was 
 slain, together with his warriors, in a rising of 
 ttie people ; and it is arbitrary to argue a num- 
 ber of similar acts from this single fact. X — But 
 
 * [Tet Keil insists that "this prophecy of the undertak- 
 ing of the king of the north against the islaniis has not its 
 historical fulfilment in the expedition of Antiochus the Grerit 
 fteain^t the coa-ts and islands of A^ia Minor and the Helles- 
 pont."] 
 
 t [Keil objects to the signification vwreover, assigned to 
 "^r "3, that "in all places where it is so rendered a negative 
 
 sentence goes before it. cf. Gen. .^liii. 3 ; xlvii. 18 ; Jude. 
 vu. 14, or a sentence asking a question with a negative 
 sense, as Auios iii. 3, 4. Hence "^P33 here has the idea of 
 
 exjcplloft, and can only be rendered after an affirmative 
 statement by fiowevtr. for tlie passage introduced by it 
 limits the .statement going Itefore.'*] 
 X [iJcvcrtheless, the plur. here is not to be strained to 
 
 he shall stiimble and fall, and not (or, ''nil 
 more") be found. Cf. what has just been re- 
 marked, and see Strabo, XVI. 1,18; Justin. , 
 XXXU. 2; Diodorus, Fmgm., 26, 39. 40.* 
 
 Verse 20. Seleiiciis Phili^viter, the .wn nnd svc- 
 cexnor of Antiochus Mugiiti.s, B.C. 187-17(1 
 'I hen shall stand up in his estate a raiser of 
 taxes (in) the glory of the kingdom; rather, 
 " one that causeth an exacter of taxes to pass 
 over " (marg. ), or ' " one that sendeth out a 
 driver," to the ornament of the kingdom. The 
 driver was obviously a collector of money, or of 
 tribute, and the person intended was the treas- 
 urer Heliodorus, who was sent out by Seleucus 
 Philopater (according to 2 Mace. iii. 7 et seq.) to 
 Jerusalem to confiscate the treasure in the Jew- 
 ish temple. r^-P^ "'"''!', " the splendor or or- 
 nament of the kingdom," doubtless designates 
 Jerusalem (as does also the "^X of Judasa, chap, 
 viii. 9i; cf. the similar laudatory terms applied 
 to that city in Psa. xlviii. 3 ; 1. 2 ; Lam. ii. 15. f 
 The accusative 1~n accordingly indicates 
 the direction rather than the measure (" who 
 cau.ses to pass through the extent (?) of the 
 land," FiiUer et al. ), and cannot in any case be 
 regarded as a nominative in apposition with the 
 subject ™.3i; Ti:?^, as Kranichfeld proposes, 
 who consequently translates: '' (one) who shall 
 lead drivers thither, the ornament of dominion." 
 — But in few days he shall be destroyed, 
 neither in anger, nor in battle. Soon after 
 Heliodorus was despatched to plunder the tem- 
 ple of Jehovah, B.C. 170 or 175, Seleucus 
 Philopater was suddenly and mysteriously re- 
 moved, possibly by poison which had been 
 administered to him by the same Heliodorus 
 lAppian, Syr., C. 45). The words "aftersome 
 (or ' a few ') days " doubtless refer to the brief 
 interval between the departure of that officer 
 and the king's death, rather than to the brief 
 duration of his reign of only twelve years, as 
 they are generally applied. | On the statement 
 
 e.xactncss, and the temple refeired to may very well be 
 taken as a representative of the native fortifications, t spe- 
 cially as it was .so vigorously defended as to cause the death 
 of the assailant.] 
 
 * [Keil still insists that " what is said regarding his return 
 to the fortresses of his own land and his owii throne, does 
 not so correspond with the historical Issue of the reign of this 
 iiing. that one would be able to recognize therein a predic- 
 tion of it." Tet such a prediction has actually been recog- 
 nized by interpreters of all apes.] 
 
 t [Keil, however, objects to " this interpretation of the 
 words as too limited. Ti;31 denotes, no doubt (2 Kings 
 x.xiii. 35), to collect gold and silver ; but it does not thence 
 follow that C3"ir, when silver and gold are not spoken of, 
 
 means to collect tribute. The word in general dcsignntea 
 the taskmaster who urges on the people to severe labor, 
 afflicts and oppresses them as cattle, r^j^'^ "ITn is not 
 
 synonymona with ^32n TT^S^. ver. 1(), but stands much 
 nearer to fl^Sb^ nin, ver. 21, and designates the glory 
 of t/ie kingdom. The glory of the kingdom was brought 
 down by 1^312. and "I'l^T,"! refers to the whole kingdom 
 
 of the king spoken of, not merely to the Holy Land, whiclt 
 formed but a part of his kingdom. By these oppressions of 
 his kingdom he prepared himself in a short time for destruc- 
 tion."] 
 
 t [Keil's objection : "The reference of these words, ' i?t 
 days felp,^ to the time after the pillage of the temple of 
 Jerusalem by Heliodorus is not only an arbitrary proceed 
 
CHAP. XI. 2^5. 
 
 247 
 
 that be was to be destroyed " neither in anger, 
 nor iu battle.' the remarks of Appian respect- 
 iug the mode of Philopater's death {i; (-i,ioi/.i/i;) 
 should be compared.* 
 
 Verses '.21-24. T/ie rise of Antiochns Epi- 
 phrinex; hk first Erjyptian campaign. And in 
 his estate shall stand up a vile person. ~": 
 does not probably denote " a despised one. whose 
 birth deprived him of every right to the throne " 
 iKranichfeld), but rather one who is deservedly 
 despised, who is despicable, morally contempti- 
 ble, thus corresponding to 2S*"?", Jer. vi. 30. 
 and contrasting with -9^'?. 1 Sam. xv. 9 (cf. 
 Hitzig on the passage). The symbolic descrip- 
 tion of the person herL> introduced, as a " little 
 horn." chap. vii. 8 ; viii. 9, is in any case appro- 
 priate. A contrast with the cognomen E-ujiivi/^ 
 was probably not intended, since the term ap- 
 pears to be one of the original constituents of 
 the section, rather than an interpolation ; for a 
 Maocaba;an interpolator would hardly have 
 avoided the temptation to avail himself of the 
 suggestion afforded by the famdiar perversion of 
 EriooiVif into 'E-iunvr/g to make use of a term 
 like "3r?, for instance (cf. 1 Sam. xxi. ](>; 
 Jer. xxix. 20 ; Hos. ix. 7).— To whom they 
 shall not give the honour of the kingdom ; 
 rather, '"to whom was not given," etc. — who 
 has seized the royal dignity instead, in opposi- 
 tion to the will of bis nation. Cf. the Eth. - 
 fund, principles, etc., on chap vii.. No. 3; and 
 with reference to the expression nz:" "in, cf. 
 1 Chron. xxix. 2.1 ; Psa. xxi. 0. — He shall come 
 in peaceably (or " unexpectedly "—~';!:™2, as 
 in V. 24 and chap. viii. 2.')) zuid obtain the king- 
 dom by flatteries ; rather, by •'dissimulations." 
 r"~"~;~ does not denote smooth speeches or 
 flatteriug words merely, but dissimulating words 
 and actions, a hypocritical and deceitful bearing 
 in both word and deed. It occurs in the same 
 sense iu v. 34. The historical tradition, indeed, 
 speaks only of the application of military force 
 by Antiochus. when seeking to obtain the Syrian 
 throne for himself, and of the assistance which 
 Eumenes and Attains rendered him to that end, 
 by expelling the usurper Heliodorus. But this 
 assuredlj- did not exclude the employment of all 
 manner of cunning arts aiid secret manceuverings. 
 which probably were the only means by which 
 he could secure the countenance of those kings 
 
 ing, biit is also contrary to the impoi't of the words, unce 3 
 in B*72'^S does not mean past,'^ has little force, even if 
 we accept his interpretation of w312 preceding; for that 
 
 term evidently constitutes a fresh date or startuig-iK)int.] 
 
 * [Kc'il once more lirKes that "of Seleucus Philopater, to 
 whom ver. 20 must refer, if the forc^^oint,' verses treat of 
 Antiochus the Great, nothing further is conimuiiicatcd than 
 that he. * qutoii paterntu clmW^un fiacta.-i atCmuUttni Syricp 
 . Oliet acceiJis^ft, pu^t otiosuia inttlmgtte (tdittoUuiH rebttH 
 Oestis nobitUaiuin annwum ttundeciin reffiaan/ was put to 
 death through the treachery' of Heliodorus. iniiuH ex pur- 
 yuratts i Livy. XLI. 19 ; cf . App., Syr., C. 45), and the mis- 
 sion of Heliodorus to Jerusalem to seize the treasures of the 
 temple, which is fabulously described in 2 Mace. iii. 4 ff. 
 The ~,Z^'^ (sAa/i be demrvijed) of this king S"';3^a 
 
 ^■^"nsi {within a few days) does not harmrnize with the 
 tact of his twelve yeaira' reign."] 
 
 of Pergamos. The difference between the lan- 
 guage of the passage and the historical fact is al 
 any rate inconsiderable ; and it is not necessary 
 to assume that to obviate that difficulty the Sept. 
 substituted the more appropriate "iPj'!!? oi 
 n;rbn2 for mpVpjnZi and translated it by 
 narifjxl Off fiacf/nt; iv K?.r/fioi'intjlf2 avr<n\ on the 
 ground th.at they ''could find no historical 
 equivalent for the former term " (against Kran- 
 ichfeld). — Verse 22. And -with the arms of a 
 flood shall they be overflown from before 
 him; rather, "and the overflowing power of 
 the host shall be swept away and broken before 
 him ; " literally, ' ' and the arms of the over- 
 flowing — before his face they shall be swept 
 away," etc. On nJ!^'.. cf. vs. 15, 31 ; on tl2'.i"i 
 cf. chap. ix. 26. The tropical expression TinT 
 ^?'?~. when taken as a whole, involves a meta- 
 phor that Ls not entirely unmixed, similar to 
 Cl^i'w w"!-, "the overflowing scourge," in Isa. 
 xxviii. 15. The "overflowing hosts " probably 
 represent in part the troops of Heliodorus. whom 
 Antiochus routed with the assistance of his Per- 
 gamenian allies, and in part the Egyptian forces 
 which sought to deprive him of Ccele-Syria soon 
 after his accession to the throne. " For after 
 the death of Cleopatra (v. 17), Eulaus and 
 Lenaius, the guardians of her son, Ptolemy 
 Philometor, demanded the cession of Ccele- 
 Syria. the dowry which had hitherto been 
 refused (Polyb.. XXVIII. 1; Diodor., Leg. 18, 
 p. U24 Wess. ; Livy, XLII. 49). Antiochus, on 
 the other hand, would not aclmowledge that his 
 father had promised such a dowry (Polyb., 
 XXVIII. 17), and therefore refused to grant 
 it. Finding that the Egyptians were preparing 
 for war, he took the initiative, and succeeded in 
 defeating the generals of Ptolemy between the 
 Casian mountains and Pelusium. On every cal- 
 culation, that event transpired in B.C. 171 " 
 (Hitzig). — Yea, also the (rather, "a'') prince 
 of the cove'aant; supply "'"'r"^., "shall be 
 broken." The person refen-ed to was probably 
 the high priest Onias III., who was put to 
 death by command of Antiochus Epiphanes in 
 the year 172, and hence about the time of the 
 war between that king and Ptol. Philometor. 
 He was denominated a I^^r? in chap. ix. 20 
 (see on that passage),* and here bears the title 
 of r"'";? ""'?■, "prince of the covenant," be- 
 cause he was the actual head of the theocracy 
 at that time ; cf. the repeated designation of 
 the theocracy by the term ""''".? in the follow- 
 ing verses, r.g., vs. 28 and 32 (thus correctly 
 Theodoret, Rosenm., Hitzig, Hofm., Fuller). A 
 majority of recent writers refer this expression 
 to Ptol. Philometor; but this is opposed (1) by 
 the fact that at the time which is here indi- 
 cated, that jirince was by no means in league 
 with Antiochus ; (2) that if it were really in- 
 tended to represent him as having entered into 
 such an alliance, it would have been necessary 
 to employ the words 1""'".3 l''3]", or rather "^3 
 
 * [The fact that he Is not here styled rT^*— ^ serves to 
 distinguish him from the persotln^o bo dcsignate'l there.] 
 
24S 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 iri-ia (cf. Gen. xiv. 13) ; (3) that the Egyptian 
 18 always designated as SSSn "fM in this chap- 
 ter, while, on the other hand, n^"";? always 
 refers to the theocracy. * — Verse 23. And after 
 the leag^ue made with him he shall work de- 
 ceitfully, I.e., as soon as he shall have estab- 
 lished friendly relations, and allied himself with 
 his defeated opponent, which his victory near 
 Pelusium enabled him to accomplish. Even 
 while the battle was raging, Antiochus dis- 
 played great kindness toward the Egyptians, 
 everywhere interfering to check the slaughter 
 by his soldiers, and thus won the hearts of his 
 foes (see Diodorus, E.xc. in Wess., p. 579). This 
 conduct seems to have subsequently been of 
 material value to him in the capture of Pelu- 
 sium, Memphis, and generally of all lower and 
 central Egypt (cf. Diodor., 1. c. ; Polyb., 
 XXVIII. 10 et seq. ; Jerome, on this passage). 
 — And shall come up, and shall become strong 
 (or " prevail ") with a small people, unexpect- 
 edly. Of. Jerome: " Ascendit Memphm et ibi 
 ex. more JEgyriti reynum aceipiens puerique {i.e., 
 Ptolemwi Philametoris) rebus se providere dicens, 
 cum modico pypulo mnnem ^-Egyptum subjugai'it 
 sibi, et abundantes atque uberrmas ingressus est 
 civitates." Several expositors propose to refer 
 ~??" to the king's invasion of Coele-Syria and 
 Palestine only, instead of understanding his 
 victorious march up the Nile as far as Memphis 
 (.e.g., Kranichfeld, Hofmann, Ewald, and espe- 
 cially Ftdler, who had already interpreted the 
 preceding n^'-an-,-;— )?2q as referring to the 
 league of Antiochus with the Pergamenian 
 kings Euraenes and Attains) ; but this inter- 
 rupts the regular progress of the narrative by 
 transposing an event from the beginning of the 
 war to the history of its close. n";bra, " unex- 
 pedly," is probably to be included in this verse, 
 as Von Lengerke, Hitzig, etc., propose. It 
 states that the victor hatl penetrated into the 
 heart of their country before the Egyptians 
 
 ' * [Keil objects that the interpretation of this cntting off 
 of the " prince of the covenant," as referring to the murder of 
 Onias III.. " is not warranted by the facts of history. That 
 murder doe.« not at all relate to the matter before us, not 
 only because the Jewish high-priest at Antioch did not sus- 
 tain the relation of a ' prince of the covenant,' but also 
 becp.iise the murder was perpetrated without the previous 
 knowledge of Antiochus, and when the matter was reported 
 to him, the murderer was put to death by his Cijmmand ^2 
 Mace. iv. .^6-^)." Still the fact remains that Onias was 
 slain by his agents, however much he disavowed or even 
 regretted the occurrence. To deny the propriety of the 
 epithet "prince of the covenant" as a title of the high-priest 
 is arbitrary, as also the interpretation : "We must, there- 
 fore, with Kranichfeld, understand ri'l^a 1^32, in unde- 
 fined generality, of covenant princes in general." There is 
 little force in Stuart's comment that the latter phrsse is 
 *' not the high-priest Onias. the prince of the Jewish coven- 
 ant, as Rosenmiiller maintains, for then Ti^i^Sn would of 
 
 coarse be employed. r^"l2 is designed for a mere adjec" 
 
 tjve of quality or condition here, and the article is omitted, 
 
 »s it is more generally in such cases If RosenmoUer 
 
 be in the riglit, the order of time would be inverted, and a 
 varepov Trpdrrpov must consequently be admitted in the 
 course of the narrative, which is improbable." " The 
 absence of the article in T'^-S is no proof against the 
 
 reference of the word to the holy covenant. The article is 
 wanting where otherwise the dctermir)ation is found from 
 the connection, e.g., ch. viil. 13" (Keil).] 
 
 were fully aware of the fact, or had made ar 
 rangements to resist his progress. Hitzig's 
 explanation, " vrith conMence (= n^iS) as if 
 he were not in an enemy's country, " is urmeces- 
 sary ; and also that offered by others, " with a 
 peaceful object" ("in the midst of peace," 
 F tiller). ^ Verse 24. Concerning nib'^'S. see 
 what immediately precedes. — And he shall 
 enter even upon the fattest places of the 
 province. The extraordinary fertility of lower 
 Egypt is weU known ; cf. Plin. . K N., XXI. 
 15: "■ ^gt/ptusfrugumferiUissima" etc. With 
 regard to the genitive combination np~^ "'jO'i;", 
 of., e.g., DIS ^?.i"'?N, Isa. xxix. 19. Concem- 
 ™S '"'PI'?, a "territorial jurisdiction or prov- 
 ince," see on chap. u. 48 ; iii. 3. — He shall scat- 
 ter among them the prey (rather "prey" — 
 without the article), and spoil, and riches. 
 This defines '' that which his fathers' had not 
 done, nor his fathers' fathers." It consisted of 
 an immoderate squandering, by which he not 
 only divided among his soldiers the money pro- 
 vided for carrying on the war, but al.so the 
 spoil of Pelusium and all other booty that had 
 been acquired. Even the Egyptians (to whom 
 B'T'i is perhaps to be specially referred) were 
 not excluded from his liberality. Thus he be- 
 stowed on each Greek a piece of gold at that 
 time, while at Naucratis, according to Polyb., 
 XXVIII. 17. His unusual liberality dui-ing this 
 campaign in Egypt is also attested by 1 Mace. 
 iii. 30. * — He shall forecast his devices against 
 the strong holds, even for a time. -""12312 
 unquestionably denotes fortresses in the proper 
 sense, or strong cities, rather than temples, as 
 Fuller supposes (cf. on v. 19). — It refers, e.g., 
 to the taking of Pelusium, and to the siege of 
 the fortified cities of Naucratis and Alexandria, 
 etc. (Polyb., XXVIII. 17-19).-ny-nyi, "and 
 that until a time," i.e., until a time that has 
 been determined by a higher power — for a time. 
 Cf. B''^D in V. 8, and the similar terms in vs. 6 
 and 13. 
 
 Verses 25-37. T/ie second Egyptian campaign 
 of Antiochxis Epiphanes. And he shall stir up 
 his power and his courage. Concerning 1>'^7i 
 cf. bsn lis-; in V. 2; also Psa. Ixxviii. 38; 1 
 Mace. ii. 24. — Against the king of the south. 
 This was not probably Ptolemy Philometor, but 
 his younger brother Ptolemy l?hyscon, who had 
 thrown himself, together with his sister Cleo- 
 patra, into the strong city of Alexandria, at the 
 time when Antiochus was conquering Egypt, 
 and had there been declared king in the stead 
 of his brother, who had fallen into the hands of 
 the Syrians. After the departure of Antiochus 
 
 * [" But to distribute money and spoil is nothing unheard 
 of, and in no way does it agree with the ' fatte-t provinces.' 
 The context decidedly refers to conduct which injured thf 
 fat provinces. This can only consist in S"|uandering and 
 dissipating the wealt'.l of this province which he had plun- 
 dered to its injury (anb ['■o th^rn], dativ. Incommndi). A 
 
 historical confirmation is found in 1 Mace. iii. 211-.31, To 
 bring the provinces wholly under his imwer he devised placi 
 against the fortresses that he might subdue them."— 
 Ktil.] 
 
CHAP. XI. 3-43. 
 
 249 
 
 I'occasioned by a revolt of the Tarsians and the 
 Mallotes in Cilicia), this usurper had probably 
 brought the entire kingdom into his power, as 
 seems to be implied in Livy, XLIV. 19 : ^^ Anti- 
 ochus, Syria; rex — per honestnm speciem ynnjoris 
 Ptolemm reducendi in, regnum, beUum cum min- 
 ore fratre ejus, qui turn Alexandream teiiebat, 
 yerens, " etfC. — But he shall not stand; for they 
 shall forecast devices against him; i.e., de- 
 spite the magnitude of his array, this Ptolemy 
 shall offer no resistance to the Syrian king 
 ("ibJ" si, cf. viii. 4, 7 ; 2 Kings x. 4), because 
 treason in his own camp (cf. what immediately 
 follows), of which his opponent is able to make 
 skilful use, shall cause his defeat. — Verse 26. 
 Yea, they that feed of the portion of his meat 
 shall destroy him. With regard to ^S^B, cf. 
 on i. 8. The l^arc "'b^S were of course mem- 
 bers of the royal household and servants of the 
 king, therefore serpents whom he had cherished 
 in his own bosom, like the traitorous "'"'7? '?** 
 in Paa. xli. 10 (John xiii. 18); cf. v. 27 and 2 
 Sam. ix. 11 et seq. ; xix. 29; 1 Kings ii. 7; 
 xviii. I'J, etc. — And his army shall overflow 
 (or "flow away, dissolve"); and m<my shall 
 fall dow^n slain. Concerning the " flowing 
 away," which is here equivalent to "dissolv- 
 ing, turning away to flee," cf. v. 22 ; also 1 
 Sam. xiv. IG, where 31731 expresses about the 
 same idea. On the second member of the sen- 
 tence, cf. Judg. ix. 40 ; 1 Chron. v. 22 ; 1 Jlacc. 
 i. 18. — The decisive victory of this *«!C»ftrf Egyp- 
 tian war (the I'livrtpa iooiW, 2 Mace. v. 1), which 
 Antiochus achieved over Physcon and Cleopatra, 
 was not gained on land, so far as we know, but 
 in a great and fortunate naval action near Pelu- 
 sium ; and r]12^."' li^nT seems to be applicable 
 only to a battle of the former kind, not to the 
 scattering or destruction of a fleet. Nor is 
 there anj' definite record of treason committed 
 against Ptol. Physcon by the Egyptians.* But, 
 after making due allowance for this discrepancy 
 [?J, the whole description seems more appropri- 
 ate when applied to the sewiid Egyptian cam- 
 paign of Epiphanes than when it is altogether 
 referred to the events of the former war, as 
 Ewald, Fuller, etc.. attempt to do. — V«rse 27. 
 And both those kings' heeirts shall be to do 
 mischief. This does not allude, probably, to 
 their evil designs against their enemy Physcon, 
 but to those entertained agaiiiM each other ; cf . 
 Prov. xxvii. 19; and on the term 3'"'^? (i-e., 
 literally, " belonging to do evil "), cf. Isa. i. 5; 
 Judges V. 9. The two kings themselves are cer- 
 tainly not Physcon and his victorious opponent 
 Epiphanes, nor yet the two brothers Philometor 
 and Physcon, but Antiochus and Philometor, 
 who were leagued against Physcon, and concern- 
 ing whom Livy (XLV. ll)aud Polyb. (XXIX. 8) 
 expressly state, that at that time thej- had taken 
 the field in company against the latter king. — 
 And they shall speak lies at one table. Prob- 
 ably an allusion to a particular incident which 
 
 * [The expression, " those wlio eat of hvi choice food pro- 
 bably meatiK Lennseus and Jiulaeus, the guardians and state 
 ministers of the young Vtolemy," the same persons alluded 
 to in the preceding verse as the members of his own court 
 cormpted by the britws of the Syrians. — Stuart.\ 
 
 is no longer known.* Their " speaking of lies " 
 was ntiturally a hypocritical profession of disin- 
 terestedness on the part of Antiochus, as if his 
 only concerc were to reconquer the kingdom 
 for his nephew Philometor (cui regnum quart 
 suis viribus nmulabut, Livy, 1. c. ), while the lat- 
 ter pretended reverence and gratitude toward 
 his uncle, but in his heart was anxious to have 
 him removed from his path. — But it shall not 
 prosper, i.e., their joint endeavor to overthrow 
 Physcon ; the latter, ott the contrary, retained 
 possession of Alexandria and of his usurped 
 crown. — For yet the end shall be at the time 
 appointed; rather, "for yet the end is (re- 
 served) to the appointed time." "The end," 
 namely of the Syrio-Egyptian wars, and conse- 
 quently of the sufferings of Judsea, which was 
 intermeiiiate between the contending kingdoms. 
 The time indicated by "I^i'si in v. 29 is not 
 identical with this fp., or " end of the appoint- 
 ed time," but rather that denoted by YP. ^'^.^^ in 
 V. 40, and by Tp, ^" in v. 35. 
 
 Verses 28-30. The third Egyptian campaign 
 of Antiochus. Then shall he return into his 
 land with great riches, i.e.. with much booty, 
 which he partly secured in Egj'pt, and p.artly 
 on hia homeward march through Judjea. which 
 was now in a state of insurrection. Cf. 1 Mace, 
 i. 19, 20; 2 Mace, v, 11 with Livy, 1. c— His 
 heart (shall be) against the holy covenant. 
 Cf. the detailed descriptions of the rapine and 
 other atrocities committed by Antiochus while 
 marching through Jud«a ; 1 Mace. i. 20-29 ; 3 
 Mace. V. 11-17. nip Tiiia denotes the theo- 
 cracy with reference to its territory and its 
 adherents. — And he shall do exploits ; rather, 
 "accomplish it," i.e., his malicious intention, 
 the design of his 23b. — Verse 29. At the time 
 appointed he shall return, and come toward 
 the south. ISlTSb, "at the appointed time." 
 i.e., the time appointed by Ood. The retereiice is 
 to the spring of the year B.C. 168, in which .Anti- 
 ochus began his third campaign against Egypt, 
 this time against the two Ptolemies, Philometor 
 and Physcon. The brothers had become recon- 
 ciled to each other in the preceding year, 
 through the influence of their sister Cleopatra, 
 and had made common cause .tgainst the Syrian, 
 whose conduct in leaving behind bim a strong 
 garrison in Pelusium had indicated his purpose 
 to secure a permanent influence over Egypt. 
 Incensed by the course of the Ptolemies, Anti- 
 ochus led a large army through Coele-Syria and 
 Palestine to Egypt iu the spring of 168 ( primo 
 vere, Livy, XLV. 11), and would have inflicted 
 heavy penalties on the brothers had not the 
 
 * [The phrase is sutTiciently jnstifiod by the hypocriti'.-al 
 alliance. *'.!( one table designates the dissembled amity 
 and intimacy of the parties, who said and did all they could 
 to mislead each other" (Stuart). Keil. after interpreting : 
 "The evil doing consists in this, that the one seeks to over- 
 throw imd destroy the other under the cloak of feigned 
 friendship ; for they eat as friends at one table, and ' speak 
 lie^ ' — the one tells lies to the other, professing friendship. 
 But their design shall not succeed : " yet captiously adds 
 "All interpretations of these words wliich are determined 
 by historical facta are arbitrary. The history of Antio'hus 
 Epiphanes furnishes no illu.strations for this." The above 
 league affords abundant presumption of these tacts, even U 
 I strictly understood.] 
 
250 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Romans interfered (cf. Livy. 1. c. ; Polyb. . 
 XXIX. 8; Justin., XXXIV. 3).— But it shall 
 not be as the former, or as the latter, i. e. , a 
 success similar to the triumphs of the iirst and 
 second expeditions shall not be realized ; cf. for 
 instance, v. 13.— ?^~?, " as — so also ;" cf. Ezek. 
 xviii. 4; Josh. xiv. 11 (Ewald, Lehrb., p. 851). 
 The two substantives are in the cus. adrerhinlift. 
 —Verse 30. For ships of Ohittim (QiPS Di^r> 
 shall come against him. The expression is 
 derived from Num. xxiv. 24, where Balaam pre 
 dieted the humiliation of Assyria through the 
 agency of ships of Chittim. In that place Grse- 
 cian ships were probably intended, but the 
 reference here is certainly to ships belonging 
 to the Romans, namely, the fleet of C. Popilius 
 Lajnas, which sailed to Egypt after the victory 
 over Perseus near Pydna (June 22d, B.C. 1G8J, 
 in order to prevent the Syrian king from subju- 
 gating that country, as he designed to do (Livy, 
 XLV. 10; Polyb., XXIX. 1). It is not neces- 
 sary to assume, with Beitholdt and Dereser, 
 that the "ships of Chittim " denote the Mace- 
 donian fleet which fell into the hands of the 
 Romans at the victory of Pydna, and was after- 
 ward employed by Lasnas for his voyage to 
 Egypt. Aside from the fact that Polybius and 
 Livy do not mention this fact, to designate ships 
 that had been taken by the Romans as Mace- 
 doiiiitn vessels would obviously be inappropri- 
 ate ; and, moreover, the customary usage 
 throughout this book would lead us to expect 
 2^?17 instead. The term CRS is very broad 
 and indefinite in its application, as appears 
 already from Gen. x. 4. It denotes all the 
 islands and coast-lands along the northern shores 
 of the Mediterranean sea. beginning with Cyprus 
 (which is referred to under that name in Isa. 
 xxiii. 1. 12 ; Ezek. xxvii. 0), and extending as far 
 as Spain, and therefore might appropriately be 
 employed to designate Rome or Italy in particu- 
 lar (cf. Knobel, Volkerta/el, p. 95 et seq.). The 
 Sept. is correct ('Puuaint)^ and also Jerome ; but 
 the latter overlooked the adjective nature of 
 O'^? (plur. of ^P3), and therefore inserted a 
 copula between the two nouns : " venient 
 super eiim tneres et Rmnaid."' — Therefore 
 shall he be grieved (rather, "discouraged") 
 and return. It is known that Popilius L^nas, 
 on meeting with Antiochus four miles from 
 Alexandria, did not grasp the hand extended 
 by the latter in greeting, but at once pre- 
 sented the message entrusted by the senate 
 to his care, and that when the king requested 
 time to consider its contents, the Roman drew 
 a circle about him, and did not permit him to 
 pass beyond it before he had given the desired 
 aniswer (Livy, XLV. 12; Polyb., XXIX. 11; 
 Appian, %/•., 60; Ju.stin., XXXIV. 3).— And 
 have indignation against the holy covenant : 
 .'io shall he do; or, "and shall accomplish it." 
 FiiUer says well, "The rage which 'le was un- 
 able to vent, on Egypt is now turned against the 
 holy covenant; in his displeasure he turns 
 against Israel, without being hindered " ('icyi. 
 as in V. 28). Several writers, among whom are 
 Rosenm. and Kranichfeld (the latter being 
 guided by his desire to render the prophecy 
 as dissimilar to the history as possible), take 
 
 the preceding -'^^, adverbially, and regard it 
 as qualifying Z~_\' : "and again he shall have 
 indignation." etc. z''^- however, is not used 
 as a mere auxiliary in any other part of this 
 
 1 section ; and the return of the northern king 
 from Egypt could not be passed over without 
 notice in this place, since not to have mentioned 
 it would have made Ejypt the scene of the sub- 
 sequent warlike operations in v. 31 a, which 
 would thus conflict with v. 31 J (cf. Hitzig on 
 
 I the pa,ssage). — He shall even return and have 
 
 I intelligence with them that forsake the holy 
 covenant ; rather, ' " and he shaU return, and 
 
 1 fix his attention on them," etc. The second 
 "and he retm-ns " denotes his journey to Anti- 
 och from Palestine, where he had halted by the 
 way. His "fixing attention" (;5 ",-ir!i ''^ ™ 
 V. 37 ; Job. xxxi. 1 ; Jer. xxxix. 12) on the 
 apostates from the covenant (r'll.S "'^T^ = 
 B":2^'iC, V. 14) is to be understood iu the sense 
 of affiliating with them, who became his favor- 
 ites and proteges, and for whom he endeavored 
 to erect a new and idolatrous system of worship ; 
 cf. 1 Mace, ii 18; 2 Mace. vi. 1. Also infra, 
 on V. 39. 
 
 Verses 31-36. Attack) on the sacved institu- 
 tions of the theocracy, and the persecution of its 
 faithful adherents by Antiochus. And arms 
 shall stand on his part; rather, "and armed 
 hosts of his shall remain," namely, in the holy 
 land. Consequently "i"I"r?l ^""^^T is used sub- 
 stantially as in V. 15, to denote the standing 
 still of an armed host (cf. the leaving of a 
 Syrian garrison in the citadel of Zion. which is 
 mentioned in 1 Maec. i. 34). The usual ren- 
 dering is, " and armed bands sliall arise from 
 him " — which, however, seems more appropri 
 ate and conformable to the context than Kran- 
 ichfeld's strange interpretation, "and accom- 
 plices (i.e., traitorous Israelites) shall stand up 
 through his influence " (!). 1-^'? probably does 
 not signify " at his bidding "(cf. 2 Sam. iii. 37l, 
 but is a partitive, or rather expresses depend- 
 ence on the possessor. — And pollute the sanc- 
 tuary of strength ; rather, "the sanctuary, the 
 stronghold. " The sanctuary is probablj' termed 
 the stronghold (tT3"3n, an apposition) in a spiri- 
 tual sense, as being the refuge and support of 
 Israel ; cf. Psa. xviii. 3 ; xxxi. 3-5 ; Isa. xxv. 
 4, etc., where Jehovah himself is termed Israel's 
 strong tower (Von Leng. . Kranichfeld. FiiUer). 
 The reference of the expression to the fortifica- 
 tions with which the second temple was cer- 
 tainly provided (1 Mace. vi. 7 ; v. 60) is less 
 probable. However, cf. 1 Mace. i. 37 ; 2 Mace. 
 vi. 4. — And shall take away the daily sacri- 
 fice. Cf. the parallels, chap. viii. 11-13 ; ix. 
 27; xii. 11; and with regard to the historic.il 
 fulfilment, cf. 1 Mace. i. 45, 54.— Verse 32. 
 And such as do wickedly ageiinst (or "by") 
 the covenant shall he cotrupt by flatteries ; 
 Hitzig: "the comJeniners of the covenant, its 
 accusers." The n"''!? ■S^"i";>3, however, are 
 evidently the same as the rill i^Tj in v. 30; 
 ri'^S is simply an accusative of specification; 
 cf. Ewald, Lehrb., § 288, 2 et seq. — qi;nn, pro 
 
CHAP. XI. 2-45. 
 
 251 
 
 perly, "to desecrate." here signifies "' to cause 
 to revolt." utterly to sever their union with the 
 theocracy, against which they had already 
 sinned. Consequently, the expression does not 
 involve a tautology, as if a successful effort 
 to lead such as had already cast off their al- 
 legiance to a])Ostatize were asserted. Kran- 
 ichfeld interprets very harshly and arbitrarily, 
 " and so far as the sinner against the covenant 
 is concerned, he shall pollute it (the covenant) 
 by his insinuating deportment." rip;n5. 
 '"with smoothnesses," i.e . with smooth words 
 and dissimulating arts (doubtless including de- 
 ceitful /)cw»i(«-.i, cf. 1 Mace. ii. 17 et seq. ) prob- 
 ably differs merely in form from np^p^ni in 
 V. 21 ; cf. V. 34. — But people that do kno'w 
 their God shall be (or "prove themselves") 
 strong i/.e., to resist his seductive efforts), and 
 do exploits I rather, "do it." Cf. vs. 17, 28, 
 30. and for the historical fulfilment, see 1 Mace. 
 i. 03 et seq. ; ii. 3 et seq. — Verse 33. And they 
 that understand among the people shall in- 
 struct (the) many. CJ" i;'i2'i"a does not de- 
 note " teac/iers of the people" (Dereser, Hitzig), 
 and the analogy of ^»^?'i"v3 in chap. ix. 22 is 
 not sufficient to establish that rendering. 
 ;iS^;p is rather to be taken as equivalent to 
 int(Ui(/tns (cf. Sept., Theodot. : ol afrerni /coi ; 
 Vulg, . (locti), in harmony with the usual intran- 
 sitive sense ;'':iiTl (see chap. i. 4, 17; ix. 13, 
 25). This rendering finds a special support in 
 the contrasting of the Bii'i2".^""C and the C"i"'f ~ 
 in chap. xii. 10. These understanding ones, 
 i.e., these genuine theocrats. e.g.., a Mattathias 
 (1 Mace. ii. 1 et seq,), an Eleazar (2 Mace. vL 
 18), etc., shall "impturt understanding (^:"^^% 
 cf. Joli vi. 24) to the many, i.e., the not incon- 
 siderable number of the " people that do know 
 their God," v. 33, who were faithful to the 
 covenant and capable of being saved, and of 
 whom 1 Mace. i. (io et seq. testifies that they 
 were somewhat numerous. — Yet they shall fall 
 by the sTword, and by flame, etc. " They," 
 viz. : the many who hearken to the voice of the 
 understanding ones, not the latter in person ; 
 see V. 35. For the narrative of the fulfilment, 
 see 1 Mace. i. 57 ; ii. 38 ; iii. 41 ; v. 13 ; 3 
 Mace. vi. 11.— Verse 34. Now when they fall 
 they shall be holpen with a little help, or, 
 
 "they shall obtain but little help" (S5^ ^TJ), 
 referring to the efforts of Judas Maccabajus (1 
 Mace. iii. 11 et seq. ; iv. 14 et seq.), which were 
 not sufficient to put an end to all the suffering 
 and persecution at a single stroke ; cf. , e.ij., 1 
 Mace. v. (50 et seq.— But many shall cleave to 
 them with flatteries, or " liypocrisies ; " i.e.. in 
 addition to the limited aid received by them, 
 the party of faithful adherents shall absorb 
 many impure elements, which associate them- 
 selves hypocritically (ripipbni, of. on v. 33) 
 with the " many. " It appeal's from passages 
 like 1 Maco. vi. 21 et seq. ; ix. 23, that this was 
 actually the case in the Maccabasan age, princi- 
 pally as a consequence of the bloody severity 
 with which Judas Maccabajus treated all apos- 
 tates [\ Mace. ii. 44 ; iii. 5. 8). — Verse 35. And 
 some of them of understanding (see v. 83) 
 
 shall fall, e.g., certain priests, 1 Mace. v. 67; 
 Eleazar. 2 Mace. vi. 18, etc., and Judas Macca- 
 bajus himself, etc. ";•-;; can have :ao other 
 meanuig in this place than that in which it 
 occurs in vs. 33 and 34. — To try ("smelt") 
 them, and to purge and to make them white 
 (or. "cleanse them"), even to the time oi thp 
 end; literally, "among them." This is a state 
 nieut of the Divine purpose in imposing the 
 specified sufferings. "Among them" (-"?), 
 i.e., not merely among the "understanding 
 ones," but also among their followers, among 
 the theocratic party as a whole, which, accord- 
 ing to v. 34, stood in some need of being sifted 
 and purified. '^■^.3? alludes to the separation or 
 removal of the dross that was expelled by thr 
 qTi:;, and 15?? to the polishing and brighten 
 ing of the metal that was thus freed from it*, 
 impure elements. " The threefold description 
 is also probably designed to indicate that the 
 purifying should be effected by various processes. 
 Not only are the pretended adherents to Jeho- 
 vah's party to separate themselves from His sin- 
 cere followers, but the latter themselves, incited 
 thereto by the example of steadfastness and self- 
 denial furnished by their martyrs, shall cast out 
 from themselves everything that is impure ; and 
 thej' shall succeed in gaining over all those who 
 share their convictions in their hearts, but have 
 been hindered by fear and timidity from avow- 
 ing an open connection with them. In like 
 manner a Nicodemus and a Joseph of Arima- 
 thjea were induced by the very death of Christ 
 on the cross to confess their allegiance to him, 
 — Thus Antiochus attempts to annihil.ite the 
 party among the Jews that is devoted to its 
 God, but succeeds only in contributiug to its 
 purifj-ing" (FiiUer). — The "time of the end " 
 IT,""~?) iovra to which the painful process of 
 purifying is to be continued, denotes, in the 
 sense of the prophecy, the end of the pre-Mes- 
 sianic period as a whole, as appears from chap, 
 viii. 17; ix. 27; but it coincides essentially 
 with the end of Antiochus himself. — Because it 
 is yet for a time appointed ; i.e., the period of 
 tribulation shall be protracted until then ; cf. v. 
 37. — Verse ofj. And the king shall do accord- 
 ing to his will. The "" can he no other than 
 the one hitherto represented, the antitheistic 
 persecutor of Israel, the king of the north, 
 Antiochus Epiphanes. It is therefore not Con- 
 stantine the Great (Ibn-Ezra, Jacchiad., Abar- 
 banel, etc.), or the Roman state as a whole 
 (Rashi, Calvin, etc.), or the New-Te.st. anti- 
 christ (Jerome, Theodor., Luther, CEcolamp. , 
 Geior, Calov, Kliefoth) — all of which interpreta- 
 tions contradict the context, and arbitrarily 
 interpose a hiatus of centuries between v. 35 
 and the closing verses of the chapter." — And 
 
 * [Keil contends for the last of the above views, in accord- 
 ance with his adopted theory of the tinal Antichriatiac 
 ■' little horn : " hnt his ar^ruments have little weight, in the 
 face of the adtiiitted identity of the persecuting *■ king ' 
 throughout this pas.sage. Hh chief point is this: "If the 
 contents ' >f vers. 3f>-4.^ lie beyond the end of the enemy who 
 has hitherto been spoken of. then ousht his destruction to 
 have been mentioned, especially since witl the words, ' to 
 the time uf the end, because yet for a time appointed.' ifr, 
 35. the words of ver. 27, 'for yet the end of the time ap- 
 pointed,' are resumed. All attempts to give to the formal 
 of these expressions, ver. 35, a dijl'ercnt moaning from thai 
 
252 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 magnify himself above every god, f. e. , subjec- 
 tively, in his proud imagination ; cf. 2 Mace. ix. 
 13; 2 Thess. ii. 4 ; also chap. viii. 25. Jerome, 
 Luther, FiiUer, et<;., render the words, "''against 
 every god;" but this interpretation of i? is 
 antagonized by its use in v. 37 J, where it is 
 likewise connected with ^^3"*^., but notedly in 
 the sense of ''above." — And shall speak mar- 
 vellous things against the God of gods. Of. 
 chap, vii, 8, "Zo'^ and concerning D'^-j?* ^?*, see 
 chap. li. 47. — And shall prosper, ^.f., in his 
 undertakings generally; cf. viii. 12, 24 et seq. 
 — Till the indignation be accomplished ; 
 namely, God's anger against His people, in 
 whose execution He employed Antiochus as a 
 scourge or "saw" (Isa. x. 15). Cf. viii. 19 ; ix. 
 27 ; and on the whole expression, see Isa. x. 23, 
 
 Verses 37-39. Description of the general god- 
 lessness of Antiochiis Epiphanes, without confin- 
 ing it to its relatiom to the theocracy. Neither (or, 
 "and not") shall he regard the god ("gods") 
 of his fathers, hence, shall manifest his impiety 
 even with reference to the requirements of the 
 religious sense of the heathen. This will include 
 his robbery of temples (Polyb., XXXI. 4), and 
 his efforts to destroy national bounds by tearing 
 down their several religious systems (Diodor. , 
 XXXI. 1 ; 1 Mace. i. 4;:Jj.*— Nor the desire of 
 women, nor regard any god; rather, "nor 
 the desire of women nor any god shall he 
 regard." In view of the connection D"''»C3 T"!?:)! 
 cannot possibly signify anything else than a god, 
 
 contained iix the latter, ver. 27 (Calovins. Geier, Kliefoth), 
 amount to verbally impossible interpretations." But surely 
 this phrase might be understood to refer to different points 
 of time, if the chanee in the connection required it. Even 
 this, however, ia not necessary. It is suflficient to apply it 
 to the general 'ssue of these troubles of the theocracy, and 
 thus room is stiU left to introduce the sequel of Antiochus's 
 career, which in fact did not take place till the controversy 
 about the Jewji^h worship was pretty well decided at Jeru- 
 salem by the first successes of the Maccabees.] 
 
 * [Keil objects. "This does not agree with Antiochus. 
 The iffoflea 4>poi'€lv i/Trepj/f^ai/ws which is said of him, 2 Mace. 
 ix. 12, is not an exalting of himself above every god. ' An- 
 tiochus was not an dfleo; ; he even wished to render the 
 worship of Zeus universal ; and that he once spoiled the tem- 
 ple does not imply his raising himself above every god ' 
 (Kliefoth). Of Antiochus much rather, as is said by Livy 
 (XLI. 30). ^ indmibus tanien ho?ie><ttsqHe rebiis fere reyins 
 erat animus, in urbinm lionis et deurnni cnitii.'' " But this 
 misses the main point of the portraiiure of this persecuting 
 tyrant throughout the entire series of these prophecies, 
 which is not wi much his utter godlessness and violence as 
 the direction of these iraiLs against the hitherto established 
 u^ges of his own subjects; Intolerance now first made 
 religion a crime, and foreign deities were now for the first 
 time forcibly imposed upon them. '" The next verse shows 
 that he had no regard for his country's gotls ; and his whole 
 ctjurse of hfe, his plundering the temple at Jerusalem, and 
 finally in Elymais, shows the reckless and impious charac- 
 ter of the tyrant. . . . The intimation here given, ofdiftre- 
 gardi'tfj the goda of Inn fathers, shows that the previous 
 Gnecian kings of Syria had a<:lopted the gods of the Syrian 
 nation ; while Antiochus, who had lived some yearsat Romp, 
 had learned to despise the Syrian gods, and to prefer the 
 Jupiter Olynipiufi and Xenias of the Greeks and Romans. 
 The establishment of the worship of the former at Jerusa- 
 lem, and of the latter at S;imaria, shows that Antiochus was 
 ambitious at times of imitating the Greeks and Romans" 
 (Stuart). For this he was naturally applauded by Pagan 
 historians, but the sacred seer penetrates the motives of 
 policy that led to these occasional freaks of so-called piet}'. 
 and paints his secret contempt for all religion. That the 
 person here described, however, was not wholly or exter- 
 nally irreligious is pmved by vers. .38, 39, which bring out 
 the precise point of his impiety, namely, its foreign charao- 
 irr.) 
 
 and does not, therefore, denote chaste conjugal 
 love (Luther, J. Gerhard, etc. , who support their 
 view by a reference to ku'/kiv -jn/iir, 1 Tim. iv. 
 3), or a love for women, susceptibility to amor- 
 ous emotions generally (Grotius), nor yet " the 
 supplications of women " (Dathe, Staudlin), or 
 '■ the favorites ot women," i.e., children (cf. Hos. 
 ix. IG ; Mic. i Ifi, etc. — thus Bertholdt). We 
 are to conceive, rather, of the goddess of nature 
 among the Asiatics, the Baaltis, Astarte, or 
 Mylitta of the Babylonians, the Persian Artemis. 
 and the Nanaea of the Syrians, This is the 
 more certain, as it is expressly reported of 
 Antiochus that he had inflicted a gross indignity 
 on the worship of this goddess (who is identical 
 vrith the "queen of heaven," Jer. vii. 18 ; xliv. 
 17 et seq.), by attempting to plunder a temple 
 of Artemis or Aphrodite in Elymais (Polyb., 
 XXXI. 11 ; Appian, Syr., c. f>6 ; 1 Mace. vi. 1- 
 4 ; 2 Mace. ix. 2). For this reason modem 
 expositors since J. D. Michaelis, Gesenius, Der- 
 eser, and Havemick are. with few exceptions, 
 agreed in applying the words to this divinity. 
 Concerning the designation as "'the desire of 
 women," cf. Isa. xliv. 9, where the heathen 
 gods in general are characterized as fii~1?:ni 
 "favorites."* — He shall magnify himself 
 above allj above everything, whether Divine 
 or human (the addition of ijill?' merely to Vjj 
 would be one-sided). Cf. 2 Thess. ii. 4 : f~' 
 Trti-ra /.fjoutrof ^tiijv tj Gt^ianfia. — Verse 38. But 
 in his estate shall he honour the god of 
 forces ; rather, ' ' but he shall honor the god of 
 fortresses in his place." C''i5S ri,!< is not 
 properly a nom. propr. : the god " Mauzzim " or 
 " Mfeusim " (Luther, following the Sept., Theo- 
 dot. , and the Vulg., which have Mauitiu, Mao- 
 zim), but rather, as appears from the repeated 
 mention in this chapter of D"^^??? (vs. 7, 10, 19, 
 31) or niT^ra (v. 15) or S'^'.??>a, it denotes a 
 martial god to whom the Syrian king paid 
 special reverence — a " god of fortresses or cas- 
 tles," who must be regarded as being Jupiter 
 Capitoliuus, because he is subsequently described 
 as formerly unknown to the Asiatics. There is 
 no question respecting the character of this 
 divinity, as being pre-eminently warlike, nor yet 
 respecting the special reverence which Epiphanes 
 entertained for hira. " To him, the Capitoline 
 Jupiter, were devoted the »polia opima; he was 
 called Jupiter Stator, because he brought the 
 Romans to a stand in answer to the prayer of 
 Romulus, when they fled before the Sabines. 
 But the surname Capitolinus accords fully with 
 
 • [Keirs defence of the absti-act interpretation is signally 
 weak: "A verbal proof that Q'>'i;d rTHTSn denotes 
 
 Anaitis or Adonis as the favorite deity of women has not 
 been adduced. For these words, desUlerinm niHtiernm, 
 denote not that which women de.sire. but that which womcc 
 possess which is desirable ; cf. nnder 1 Sara. ix. 20. But it 
 is impossible that this can be Anaitis or Adonis, but it is a 
 possession or precious treasure of women. This desirable 
 possession of women is without doubt tove .■ so that, as C. 
 B. Michaelis has remarked, the expres.sion is not materially 
 different from D^'j;r ^,"t^, the love of woineit, ^ Sam. i. 
 
 26." On the contrar.v. all the associated terms compel uv 
 Ut understand a concrete object of regard. As Keil hiinsell 
 admits, " The connection requires us to think of a dcirj', 
 because these words are placed between two expreSBions 
 which refer to the gods."] 
 
CHAP. XI. 3-45. 
 
 253 
 
 the god of fortresse.s ; for the capitol was, so to 
 speak, the seat of the Roman empire, the arx 
 omnium naiumum (Cicero, ]'<■)•;•., VII. 72), as 
 being the citadel of Rome, beside which stood 
 its temple. There the generals sacrificed and 
 paid their vows ; and when they returned from 
 their victories, they were taken thither in tri- 
 umph. — It is readily conceivable that Antiochus 
 should honor this foreign god ; he had learned 
 to know him and his worship while at Rome." 
 Antiochus did not, probably, regard the princi- 
 pal god of the Romans as distinct from the 
 Olympic Zeus of the Greeks, whom he adored 
 with a special zeal, according to Livy, XLI. 20 ; 
 Polyb. XXVI. 10 ; 2 Mace. vi. 2, and for whom 
 he caused a splendid temple to be erected at 
 Athens ; as a genuine Oriental syncretist he 
 rather identified the two. Probably the mag- 
 nificent temple which, according to Livy, XLI. 
 20, he began to build at his capital, Antiochia, 
 but which did not arrive at its completion, was 
 dedicated indifferently to both the Capitoline 
 and the Olympic Zeus, the principal god of the 
 Romans and the Greeks. The interpretations 
 which deviate from this are accordingly to be 
 rejected, e.g., that of several rabbins, Grotius, 
 Bertholdt, Stiiudlin, etc., who think of Man 
 (who was evidently not a god of fortre.sses, but 
 rather a god of battles), and that of Hitzig, who 
 proposes to read f^ T>"p n^j!«, not to render 
 " god of the sea fortress," and that it should be 
 referred to Melcarth or the Tyrian Heracles, 
 making only the latter sentence of the verse 
 to apply to Jupiter Capitolinus. The correct 
 view is advocated by Gesenius. Dereser, Von 
 Lengerke, Hiivemick, Maurer, Ewald, and, gen- 
 erally, by a majority of recent writers, among 
 them Vaihinger, Art. Maissim in Herzog's lienl- 
 Encykloj).* — 'i:3"b", "upon his basis," proba- 
 bly indicates that Antiochus should honor the 
 specified divinity " on its pedestal," hence in 
 the form of a statue or an idol-image (Bertholdt, 
 Havemick. Von Lengerke, Maurer, Hitzig, etc.). 
 A less probable opinion is that the words refer 
 to the temple of Jupiter at Rome, as being the 
 headquarters or seat of that god, to which 
 Antiochus forwarded gifts (Kamphausen) ; and 
 finally, the rendering " in his stead," which was 
 formerly current (Luther, Gesenius, de Wette, 
 and more recently Kranichfeld and Fuller), con- 
 flicts with the general usage and with the con- 
 
 • [Keil Rtill objects ; (1) " But according to the following 
 passage, this god < worshipped by the person in question ) was 
 not la2»)\vn to his fathers. That could not t>e said either of 
 Mars, Jupiter, or Melkart." Keil has overlooked the descrip- 
 tion of this deity, which Is not his ancestral god (although 
 even then it would doubtless mean, as in ver. 37, the deity 
 commonly •.vor^hipped in the country, i.e., Asiatic or Syrian), 
 but "a .«ra;iire god" (n;: niiit, ver. 39). (2) "Add to 
 
 this, * that if the statement here refers to the honoring of 
 Hercules, or Mnrs, or Zeus, or Jupiter, then therewith all 
 would be denied that was previously said of the king's being 
 destitute of all religion' (Kliefoth)." We cannot see that 
 this last discrepancy would lie at all improved by the iden- 
 tification with any other deity whatever. It simply shows 
 that the latter passjtge must not be so strictly interpreted. 
 (-3) ''The words thus in no respect l?) agree with Antiochus, 
 and do not permit us to thiuk of any definite heathen 
 deity." Strange then that the descriptive epith«t Q''72'^ 
 
 should have been added by the sacred writer if he had so 
 indefinite a worship in view, and stranger still that he 
 should go on to characterize that reverence by the particti- 
 ars given in this and the following verse.] 
 
 text, because the preceding verse did not confint 
 its statements to a single Oriental deity, in the 
 stead of which this new god was to arise, while 
 the sing, suffix in 1:3 can hardly be held to 
 possess a "distributive and illustrative" force 
 (cf. vs. 20, 21).* — And (the) god whom his 
 fathers knew not shall hs honor with gold 
 and silver, etc. This god with whom the 
 ancestors of Antiochus were not acquainted was 
 the god of fortresses just mentioned, not a dif- 
 ferent god (Hitzig), and still less gualiscungue 
 Deus aliiin (Venema). Livy, XLII. 6, expressly 
 mentions an embassy which Antiochus sent to 
 Rome with a votive offering of golden vessels 
 valued at 500 pounds (a portion of which would 
 naturally be placed in the temple of the princi- 
 pal god). — rriTp", "jewels, precioits articles of 
 
 small size," is here equivalent to mirT! ""r:?) 2 
 Chron. xx. 2.5. -Verse .39. Thus shall he do in the 
 most strong holds with a strange god ; rather, 
 " and he sh.all pursue the same course with the 
 fortifications of the fortresses as with the 
 strange god ; " i.e., he shall recognize and honor 
 them only, shall fi.x his attention on nothing 
 else, the fortresses are liis idnls. The words are 
 significant merely as an introduction to what is 
 to follow ; D5 in this place is merely a stronger 
 form of 3, cf. Job xl. 15 ; ix. 26 ; Psa. cxx. 4 ; 
 cxliii. 7 ; Ecc. ii. 16. By approving of this ex- 
 planation, which originated with Ewald, and 
 which we are compelled to consider the only 
 one that accords with the context, and that is 
 adequately supported by the general usage of 
 the liinguage, we reject the numei'ous render- 
 ings which deviate from it, that have been 
 imposed on the passage from of old, e. g. , Vulg. , 
 " Et faciei, nt mnnint Manzim cum Deo alieno, 
 quern rjognovit ;" Luther, "And shall greatly 
 honor those who aid him to strengthen Maeusim, 
 with the strange god whom he has selected ; " 
 Bertholdt and Dereser, "And shall store them 
 (the jewels) in the temples of the god of war; 
 all who hold with the strange god," etc. ; 
 Rosenmiiller, Von Lengerke, Havemick, "And 
 in the manner which has been described he 
 
 * [On this Keil's criticism seems in the main to be just : 
 '* "133 ^3' does not signify on hu foundation, pedestal, 
 
 because the remark that he honored the god on his pedestal 
 would be quite inappropriate, unless it had also been said 
 that he had erected a statue to him. 133 ^V has here tha 
 
 same meaning as in vers. 20, 21, and 7, 'in his place or 
 stead.' But the suffix is not, with Kliefoth. to be referred 
 to is ^y, 'in the place of all that which he did not 
 
 regard,' but it refers to {ni^i^ ^2, 'in the peace of every 
 
 god ; ' which is not overthrown by the objection that in that 
 case the suffix should have been in the jilur., because the 
 suffix is connected with the sing. HT^X. The ' god of for- 
 tresses ' is the personification of war. and the thought ia 
 this : He will regard no other god. but only war ; the taking 
 of fortresses he will make his god ; and he will worship this 
 god atjove all as the means of his gaining the world-power. 
 Of this war god as the o'jjectof deiticalion, it might be said 
 that his fathers knew nothing, because no other king had 
 made war his religion, his god, to whom be offered up in 
 sacrifice all, gold, silver, precious stones, jewels." We must 
 take exception, however, to the incongruous iJeaof this last 
 sentence respecting the deificaticui of an abstract passion ; 
 nor can we see that in any reas^mable or conceivable sensa 
 this could be said to charact^-rize the king in question — be ba 
 who he may — above all his forefathers.] 
 
254 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 shall proceed with reg-ard to the true feasts 
 together with the strange gods," etc. ; Maurer, 
 •' Et sic ilk versahitur in obtrudendo urbibus 
 miiiiitis Jove Capitoliiio^ qui agnovcril ilium" 
 etc. ; Krauichfeld (and similarly de Wette), 
 '• And he shall do it to the defensive fortresses 
 with the aid of the strange god ; " Fiiller, 
 '•And he is active for the fortifying of the 
 strong holds with the strange god ; whoso shall 
 acknowledge," etc. ; Kliefoth, " And he shall 
 act with the defensive fortress according to the 
 mind of the strange god ; whoso shall acknowl- 
 edge," etc. ; Hitzig and Kamphausen, " And he 
 shall provide for the defensive fortresses t\i\i 
 people of a strange god, ?'.«., heathen colonists " 
 (the two latter consequently transform DS into 
 D5) ; [Kcil, "With the help of this god, who was 
 unknown to his fathers, he will so proceed 
 against the strong fortresses that he will reward 
 with honor, might, and wealth those who ac- 
 knowledge him."] — Whom he shall acknowl- 
 edge and increase with glory ; rather, ' ' To him 
 who shall acknowledge (them), he shall make the 
 honor great ; " i.e., he shall confer great honor 
 on those who, like himself, adore the god of for- 
 tresses, and consequently make an idol of for- 
 tifications and war in general. The persons in 
 view are probably not the heathen .subjects and 
 military officers of the king, who naturally were 
 already devoted to this martial god and the 
 worshiiJ of fortresses, but primarily the Jews 
 who apostatized to that religion, such as, e.g. , a 
 Jason, Meuelaus, and others (3 Mace. iv. 10, 
 25; V. 15). — And shall cause them to rule 
 (or •■ be lords") among (the) many ; i.e., among 
 the great mass of their nation. Fuller, who 
 identifies the 3''3"in with those noticed in v. 33, 
 i.e., with the theocratic Jews, probably goes too 
 far in this ; but he is doubtless correct in distin- 
 "uishing the phrase "set them to be lords 
 miioiKj mmii/ " from " to make them lords over 
 m(cny."—:And shall divide the land for gain, 
 or "in reward," i.e., in recompense for their 
 apostasy. Nothing definite is stated with re- 
 ference to a division of lands among the apos- 
 tates by Antiochus in the passages that report 
 his briberies and promises. 1 Mace. ii. 18 ; iii. 
 30 et seq. ; but it can scarcely be doubted that 
 he employed this means also, and that espe- 
 cially such property as had been confiscated 
 from obstinate Jews was conferred on the apos- 
 tates. 
 
 Verses 40-45. Recapitulation of the weirlike 
 Cfireer e>f Antiochus Bpiphanes, not distinguish- 
 ing between his several campaigns against 
 Egypt, as was the case in v. 22 et seq., but 
 merely noticing the general character of his 
 attacks on that countrj-. and their unfortunate 
 results upon Judaja. The rather general char- 
 acter of this paragraph, which is analogous in 
 this respect to the descriptions of the future 
 drawn by earlier prophets, raises the expecta- 
 tion that these ver.ses will prove to be especially 
 original and free from interpolating additions — 
 an expectation that will be verified by the exe- 
 gesis of the several venses. Influenced by the 
 words Tk ~?r^, "and at the time of the end," 
 which appeared to relate to the final stages of 
 the reign of Epiph.ines, although the prophet 
 probaljly employed it in the same general sense 
 
 as in chap. viii. 17 (with reference to the clos- 
 ing period of the pre-Messiauic history in gen- 
 eral) ; and led astray to a no less extent by tha 
 example of Porphyry, who, according to Jerome 
 on this place, discovered the description of a 
 fourth and last Egyptian campaign in this para- 
 graph, which he .supposed to belong to the yeai 
 before that in which the reign of Autiochua 
 closed (B.C. 165),* a majority of modern exposi- 
 tors have also regarded these verses as a con- 
 tinuation of the historical narrative, whose spe- . 
 cial object was to describe the last warlike 
 operations of Epiphanes against Egypt, Phceui- 
 cia, and Armenia. The Maccabtean books make 
 no mention of these final wars of Autiochiis, 
 but report that he marched toward the east 
 only, namely, to Babylonia, Elymal's, and Per- 
 sia, and that he died in the latter country (see 
 1 Mace. iii. 37 ; vi. 1 et seq.) ; but this circum- 
 stance is explained, either by assuming that the 
 writer of those books deaignedly ig)u>red the wars 
 m question, especially the fourth Egyptian and 
 the Armenian campaigns (Hofmann, D( bellia al 
 Aiitiocho gestis), or by declaring that his repre- 
 sentations as a whole are not worthy of credit, 
 and for that reason giving the preference to Por- 
 phyry's statements as reported by Jerome (so 
 especially Fiiller on this passage, p. 338 et seq. ). 
 The report of Porphyry, however, appears rather 
 to have originated in a misapprehension of the 
 paragraph under consideration ; for the remain- 
 ing historians of the time, and particularly Livy, 
 Polybius, and Appian, are entirely ignorant of a 
 fourth Egyptian campaign of Epiphanes. and the 
 credibility of the Maccabsean books, especially 
 of the first, cannot be assailed upon the ground 
 of their statements respecting the final actions 
 and the death of Epiphanes, nor in any other 
 respect; see Wernsdorf, Be fide Mficeub., p. 5S 
 ss. , and Wieseler, Art. Antiochus Epipihanes in 
 Herzog's Real-Encykloji.. I., 386 et .seq. We 
 therefore agree with Dereser, Von Lengerke, 
 Maurer, Hitzig, Ewald, and Kamphausen, in re- 
 garding vs. 40-45 as being in fact a kind of 
 abbreviating and generaUzing resume of the 
 contents of vs. 33-39 ; but we explain this pecu- 
 liar feature by regarding that detailed narrative 
 of the militaiy career of Epiphanes, as the pro- 
 duct of the interi^olating activity of a pious Jew 
 in the Maccabasan period, while we consider vs. 
 40-45 as being a portion of Daniel's original pro- 
 phecies uttered during the a?ra of the Captivity, 
 which was left untouched upon the whole by 
 the interpolator.!— And at the time of the end 
 
 * Jerome, T. V., p. 8, p.-7a0: " Et hmc Porphyriits ad 
 Antiochum refert. quod mideciirm anno regiU .sui rm-siia 
 contra sororis Jilium, Plolemoium PliUontet"rem dimi- 
 caverit. Qui tiudieitu venire Antiochum congregaverit 
 nuilta populurutn miUia: f^ed Antioc/m^ quasi tempestus 
 ralida in <niTtt>us et in. equitibus et in classe magna ingres- 
 nus sit terras plnriinafi et transeundo nntvej-sa vestaverit; 
 veneritque ad terram inclf/tam, i.e., Juno'am . , . . et 
 arceni munierit dc^ruinin murornm civitatis et sic perrex- 
 erit in ..E'Jt/ptum. '— Cf. farther the statements respecting 
 the result of this experlitimi to Eg.vpt, ami resiiecting the 
 eonnecteil expeditions toward the north and east, p. Til : 
 •'. . . . Pugnafiv contra ..Sgy/ptius et Libgas .^t/tlojiiasqne 
 pertramiens audiet aibi ub A"uilune el Oriente pr^xlia i:oii- 
 citttri, unde et regrejliens capt ^radios resistent^s et omnem 
 in litore l-liienicis vastnvit pi'ov. Klani: cun/estimqnepergil 
 ad Artaxiam regem At nenttv, qui de Orientis partibUA 
 mnrehititr: et Interfectis pi-'rlmix de 'Ju.s exercilu, panel 
 tabeinnculiim xnnm in loco .ipedno. qui inter duo latissima 
 etiui estjlumina, Tigrim et Eupliratem (v. 46)." 
 
 t [The author's views here have evidently bet^ biashe^- 
 bv his favorite theory o( an interpolation of part of this pr> 
 
CHAP. XI. 2^5. 
 
 255 
 
 the king of the south shall push at him. On 
 
 VP. ris:^, see immediately above. njrtT^, " shall 
 push at," accords fully with the genuine pro- 
 phetic description of chap. viii. -1. The Egyp- 
 tian king clearly appears as the beginner of this 
 conflict, for he is mentioned before the northern 
 king. Consequently, on the assumption that a 
 fourth Egyptian war is here spoken of, it will 
 be necessary to hold that Ptol. Physcon and 
 Philometor, encouriirjed by their alliance with the 
 Bomann, had ventured to attack the Syrian. It 
 is hardly to be credited that the Koman histori- 
 
 phecy. But the whole prediction is consecutive and natur- 
 ally connected, without any repetition or redundancy. Keil, 
 atlmitting a primary reference of this passage to Antiochus, 
 argues against this supposition of a recapitulation or sum- 
 mary here. " If thus, according to ver. .35. the tribulation 
 with wh ich the people of God shall be visited by the hostile 
 king for their purificatioa shall last till the time of the end. 
 then the time of the end to which the prophecies of vers. 40 
 -^ ftill cannot designate the whole diu^tion of the conduct 
 of this enemyj but only the end of his reign and of his per- 
 secutions, in which he perished (ver. 40). On the contrary, 
 the reference to chap. viii. 17 avails nothing, because there 
 also yp r.r has the same meaning as here, i.e., it denotes 
 the termination of the epoch referred to, and is there only 
 made a more general expression by means of riTD than 
 
 hera, where by rS^3 and the connection with ver. 35 
 
 the «nd is more sharply defined. To this is to be added 
 that the contents of vers. 40—45 are irreconcilable with the 
 Euppo?ition that in thera is repeated in a comprehensive 
 form what has already been said of Antiochus. for here 
 something new is announced, something of which nothing 
 has been said before. This even Maturer and Hitzig have 
 not been able to deny, but nave sought to conceal as much 
 as possible,— Maurer by the remark : ^ Rasa HcriptureUerum 
 ac ncEvitts perfracfatas esse, extrernnm vera maiiuni operi 
 dufuiitse;^ and Hitzig by various turnings — -as it seems," 
 * but is not precisely acknowledged," ' the fact is nowhere 
 else communicated'' — which are obviously mere make- 
 Bhifts."" Stuart thus defends the belief in another and final 
 campaign of -\ntiochus : "Lengerke as.erts the entire nn- 
 probability of another and fourth invasion of Egypt and 
 Palest.ue, on the ground that .\ntiochus was too weak and 
 too poor to collect forces enough to carr>' on such a war 
 with success. But 1 Mace. i. 27 seq. shows us that after 
 Antiochus had heard of the notable defeat by Judas of his 
 general Seron, ' he was enraged, and gathered together all 
 the forces of liis kingdom, TrapcfloAiji' itr\vp^v <7i^o5pa, an 
 excee*lingly great encfimpiaeut.^ These he paid profusely, 
 while in an attitude of preparation f.jr active service, and 
 thus e.\h:iusted his treasury. 1 Mace. i. 28, 29. To Lysias, 
 his general, he left one- half of his troops (1 Mace. i. 34), 
 which amounted to 47,000 (v. 3!*). with orders to subdue and 
 partition out Palestine (vs. 35. 30t. H'ertt, then, Antiochus 
 was not. at that time. It is indeed true that neither .\ppian, 
 nor Polybius, nor Justin, nor Livy. nor Josephus have given 
 us any particulars about this latest war of Antiochus ; but 
 who that has read their Syrian histories does not know that 
 mere summaries scraps, and fra-.nnent3 are all that remain 
 of these writers in respect to Antiochus ? Josephus depends 
 on 1 Mace. ; and this is mainly confined to the e-xploits of 
 Judas and his brethren. Rosenmiiller very appositely re- 
 marks : *' Varemua omntiio inC€crr<t aliqua et continua de 
 rebus Antiocfd nan'atione, qiuE a su(e (zuui« scrtptore ali- 
 quo fide digno Uteris sii mandat: The argumentum a 
 Kitentio, sptcially in respect to ancient hisWfry. is far from 
 being cogent and satisfactory. On the other hand, the 
 accuracy of the statements in the book of Daniel, respecting 
 the domain of Ale,\ander"s successors, is on all hands ad- 
 mitted in other cases. Here it has narrated the events of 
 an expedition, in vs. 40-4.3. with its usual minuteness, and 
 Rliparently in good order. Why should this testimony be 
 lejected ? Nor does it stand alone. Jerome refers to Por- 
 phyrv-, who wrote against the book of Daniel, as paying with 
 respect t.3 vs. 40-J3. that they relate to the last war of 
 Antiochus. near the close of his life. . . . Let it be remem- 
 bered that Jerome does not s.iy a word to contradict this 
 statement, although it made for his favorite object to do so 
 if he could, inasmuch as he might then refer the pass.ige to 
 his favorite Anlickrist. I do n^it see why the testimony of 
 the book before us, the full confirmation of it by PorphjTy, 
 and the apparent consenting attitude of Jerome, do not 
 place the matter liefore us fairly out of the reach of destruc- 
 tive criticii'B.'"'] 
 
 ans, and especially Livy, should have been unin- 
 formed with regard to such a war, w.aged by 
 one ally against another.* — And he shall enter 
 into the countrie.s, i.e., into the countries ad- 
 joining to Egypt through which his march against 
 the latter kingdom would lead him, hence, into 
 Coele-Syria, Phoenicia, and Palestine. — And 
 shall overflo"w (or ""ilow along") and pass 
 (or "surge") over. The phrase employed 
 in V. 10, with reference to the war of Anti- 
 ochus Epiphanes against Ptolemy Philopater, 
 is entirely similar. — Verse 41. He shall enter 
 also — rathei. "and he shall enter" — into the 
 glorious land, and many countries shall be 
 overthro"Hrn ; rather, ' " and many shall be caused 
 to fall." The description is scarcely as concrete 
 as the parallel in chap. viii. 9-11, and m.ay there- 
 fore be an original prophecy with equal proba- 
 bility. The case differs in vs. 28, 31 et seq. 
 The ■ ' many ' ' who shall be caused to fall by the 
 northern king are probably countries or nations, 
 as appears clearly from b, and as the feiu, m3T 
 likewise indicates (namely, ""^".^"55), That plu- 
 ral is consequently not to be pointed msi., " ten 
 thousands " (Psa. xci. 7l, nor to be translated, 
 with Ewald, by " rabbins, teachers of high 
 grade," and that interpretation to be taken as 
 an evidence of the later composition of the book. 
 — But these shall escape out of his hand, 
 (even) Edom and Moab and the chief (or "' ker- 
 nel") of the children of Ammon. ""^S r"'l"S~ 
 11S5, properly, the principal power, the "first- 
 lings of the power " of the children of Ammon 
 (cf. Num. xxiv. 20 ; Jer. xlix. 85 ; Am vi. 1 ), 
 which probably relates to Rabbah, their chief 
 city, and the principal seat of their power. The 
 entire prophecy before us relative to the neigh- 
 bors of Israel does not bear the look of a nitic. 
 ex eoentii ; for although the Maccab^an book 
 (1 Mace. iv. 61 ; v. 8-S) notices the assistance 
 rendered to Epiphanes by the Edomites and .Am- 
 monites against the Jews, the mention of the 
 Moabites in this pLace is so much the more 
 remarkable, as that nation is never mentioned 
 after the captivity as maintaining an independ- 
 ent existence (Ezra ix. 1 and Xeh. xiii. 1 afford 
 no proof to contr-tdict this statement, since the 
 Moabites are not referred to in those passages 
 from a historical point of view, but dogmati- 
 calU", with reference to the passage in the law, 
 Deut. xxiii. 3), and since the name of the Moa- 
 bites had already been lost in the more conrpre- 
 hensive one of Arabians in the Maccabaian age. 
 It is not strange, on the other hand, that a pro- 
 phet of the time immediately subsequent to the 
 Captivit.y should adduce the nations of Edom, 
 Moab, and Ammon as leading representatives of 
 tribal hostility to the theocracy, — not remark- 
 able in the least ; cf. the older prophetic paral- 
 lels. Psa. X. 10 ; Isa. xi. U ; xxv. 10, 1-5. 16 ; 
 Zeph. ii. 8; Jer. xliii. ; xhx. l-(>; Ezek. xxv. 
 1-14 ; xxi. 20, 28, etc. Kranichfeld remarka 
 correctly: "The Edomites, like the Moabites 
 and Ammonites, showed themselves the most 
 persistent allies of the oppressors of Israel among 
 
 • [The inconclusiveness of this reasoning is evitlent. foi 
 as the Romans themselves were not directly involved in tbij 
 last campaign, a Roman histor-an may well hae heca 
 isnorant or indifferent respecting it,] 
 
256 
 
 THE PEOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 all its neighboring relatives ; and when the Chal- 
 dsean catastrophe broke in upon Judah, they 
 proved themselveR her most bitter enemies. 
 Fi-om that period, the complaint against this 
 treacherous nation, so regardless of fraternal 
 ties, is poured out more persistently, and the cry 
 for revenge upon it is repeated more urgently, 
 than against Babylon itself ; of. Obadiah ; Jer. 
 xlix. 7-32; Lam. iv. 21, 22; Ezek. xxv. 12-14; 
 XXXV. ; xxxvi. 5 ; Psa. cxxxvii. 7 et seq. ; Mai. 
 i. 1-3. Although Edom, Moab, and Ammon, of 
 all others, were connected with Israel by ties of 
 relationship, and therefore were bound to main- 
 tain cordial relations with it in the very nature 
 of their connection, it is precisely these nations, 
 the unnatural oppressors of Israel, that enter 
 into the conception of every theocrat, and espe- 
 ciallj- of the prophets, as the historical represen- 
 tatives of all hostility against the theocracy; 
 and as their subjugation revives the Messianic 
 hopes (Psa. xl. 10; Isa. xi. 14 ; xxv. 10), so the 
 picture of the bloody humiliation of Edom is 
 occasionally introduced to represent the Messi- 
 anic universal triumph in Isa. Ixiii. 1-6," etc. — 
 Verse 42. He shall stretch forth his hand also 
 upon the countries, i.e.. upon the aggregate of 
 the southern countries generally ; of. v. 41 a, to 
 which the words before us are related as a gen- 
 eralizing repetition. [?] — And the land of Eg3rpt 
 shsdl not escape.* "B^ibcb "'■'!'" S*i, proper- 
 ly, " shall not be among the escaped ones ; " cf. 
 Joel ii. 3 ; Jer. 1. 29 ; 3 Chron. xx. 24 ; Ezra ix. 
 14. — Verse 43. And he shall have power over 
 the treasures of gold and of silver, and over 
 all the precious things of Egypt. Cf. supra, v. 
 2S. where the great booty was mentioned which 
 Autiochus earned away on his return from the 
 second Egyptian campaign, while the statement 
 here is very general in its character, and notices 
 the confiscation of treasures in Egypt once for 
 all. — And the Libyans and the Ethiopians 
 shall be at his steps^ as enforced auxiliaries, 
 who were compelled to follow the victorious 
 king of the north, as was Egypt in former times 
 (cf. Ezek. XXX. .5; Jer. xlvi. 9). The fact that 
 this feature is recorded in no other authorities 
 is an additional evidence for the genuine charac- 
 ter of this prophecy (agarmst IIitzig).f Concern- 
 ing "'"5^'33, "in his following or train," cf. 
 the analogous 1^b3i_2, in Judg. iv. 10 ; v. 15 ; 
 also Ex. xi. 8. — Verse 44. But tidings ("ru- 
 mors") out of the east and out of the north 
 shall trouble (or "alarm") him; therefore he 
 shall go forth with great fury, to destroy and 
 utterly to make away many. The masculine 
 plural "~"-i7?1 is employed here, "in view of 
 the omission from the general idea of the state- 
 ment, of the subject which originates the rumors." 
 Cf. the analogous case in chap. ii. 33. The 
 " alarming rumors out of the east and north " 
 may. in fact, be referred to the expedition which 
 Antiochus undertook shortly before he died 
 (B C. IGG, or 147 aer. Sel. — see 1 Mace. iii. 37), 
 against the Parthians under Arsaces and against 
 
 * [N'n one can fail to see how inept and trivial this state- 
 ment winild be if a mere recapitulation of what had been 
 oefore declared so much more fiilly and explicitly.] 
 
 t [But a later interpolator would not have failed to ."seize 
 upon ?o remarkable a point, and would surely have incor- 
 porated it into his part, and ev«ii enlarged upon it from the j 
 hlfltorj at hia command.] 
 
 the Armenians under Artaxias, and which re- 
 sulted in at least the subjugation and capture of 
 the Armenian king (see Tacitus, Hist. , v. 8 ; 
 Appian, Si/r. 4.5. 4()). This thought is at any 
 rate less forced than that which refers the words 
 to the brutal treatment accorded to Jerusalem, 
 which was mentioned in v. 30 et seq., and also 
 to the alleged rebellion of the Aradians in Phos- 
 nicia, which is mentioned only by Porphyry in 
 the passage cited by Jerome (see note above ; 
 against Hitzig). It is, however, by no meana 
 necessary to regard this passage as a vatic, ex 
 eve.ntu ; on the contrary, it is exceedingly possi- 
 ble that the remarkable correspondence between 
 its statements and the historical fact that Anti • 
 ochus Epiphanes was recalled from his warlike 
 operations in the south by those insurrections in 
 the north and east, became the very occasion 
 which led the Maccabaean interpolator to intro- 
 duce into the preceding verses (22-39) allusions, 
 still more specific in character, to the history of 
 the wars of the antitheistic tyrant, with a view 
 to represent his entire career as having been 
 foretold by Daniel in all its successive stages. * — 
 Verse 45. And he shall plant the tabernacles 
 of his palace f between the seas in the glori- 
 ous holy mountain ; rather, ' ' between seas and 
 the mountain of the holy ornament." "^f 
 "■i^lP""'?^, the "mount of the holy ornament," 
 certainly denotes Mount Zion, the mount on 
 which the temple at Jerusalem was erected (cf. 
 i;;;, chap. viii. 9, and n;::n f "IH. ^s. 16, 41, 
 as designations of the holy land) ; and the plural 
 D""3'] must be regarded, with Hitzig, Kranich- 
 feld, etc. , and with equal certainty, either as a 
 poetical designation of the Mediterranean Sea 
 (cf. Job vi. 3 ; Ecclus i. 3), or, with Venema, 
 Fuller, and others, as denoting the two seas be- 
 tween which mount Zion is situated — the Dead 
 Sea and the Mediterranean, The latter view, 
 on which the plural is employed for the dual, is 
 the best recommended, on accovmt of the absence 
 of the article from 3^^"^. There is certainly no 
 reference to any locality outside of the holy 
 land, as Porphyry, 1. c. , held, referring the two 
 " seas " to the rivers Euphrates and Tigris, and 
 misunderstanding the choice poetical expression 
 ■inesf; ^bns, " tents of his palace " (cf. the cor- 
 responding Syr. word for 11BS, " palace," and 
 also Jer. xliii. 10, Targ.), to the extent of as- 
 suming a place between those rivers, and bear- 
 ing the name of Apedno, as the resting-place of 
 Antiochus while contending against the Armeni- 
 ans and Parthians ; or, as Dereser and Haver- 
 nick have interpreted it in modem times, ren- 
 
 * [On the contrary, had these clauses been introduced by 
 such an interpolator, he would surely have been more 
 definite in his allusions.] 
 
 t [" 5l33 of planting a tent, only here used instead of 
 
 the usual nt3I. to spread out, to set up, probably with 
 
 reference to the great palace-like tent of the Oriental ruler, 
 whose poles must be struck very deep into the earth. C£ 
 the description of the tent of Alexander the Great, which 
 was erected after the Oriental type, in Polyien , Strate;)., 
 IV. 3, '24, and of the tent of Nadir-Shah, in Roseumiillcr, J. 
 u. N. MorgeiLl., IV., p. .%4/. These tent-, were surrounded 
 by a multitude of smaller touts fur the .guards and servants, 
 a circumstance which explains the use of the pliixaL" — 
 KeU.\ 
 
CHAP. XI. 2-«. 
 
 257 
 
 dermg i'l?? correctly, but making the " mount 
 of the holy ornament" to designate the " mount 
 of the sanctuary of Xantea," which lies between 
 the Persian Gulf and the Caspian Sea, and near 
 which they believe Antiochus to have died, — a 
 view which Hitzig justly characterizes as '' a 
 monstrosity," and which is equally unfortunate 
 in iuteqjreting either — ~p""?^ "l~ or -'^■2^. — 
 But he shall come to his end, and none shall 
 help him. The death of Antiochus did not take 
 place in Juda?a itself, nor did it occur immedi- 
 ately after his final sojourn in that country, 
 when his camp was in the vicinity of Jerusalem 
 (having returned from the third Egyptian war 
 in B.C. 168. — On the location of his camp, 
 of. 2 Mace. V. 24 with 1 Mace. i. 29 et seq.),but 
 rather from two to three years later, in coimec- 
 tion with the campaign against the Parthians 
 and Armenians, and in the Persian town of 
 Tabaj (luJai). which Polyb., XXXI. 11, and 
 Porphyry, in Jerome on this passage, agree in 
 representing as the place of his decease ; cf. in 
 addition 1 Mace. vi. 4, 8.* So sudden a transi- 
 tion from the scene of the over-confident op- 
 pressor's sojourn in the holy land to that of his 
 irretrievable destruction, which did not take 
 place until after a considerable interval, is a 
 decided proof of the genuine prophetic character 
 of this passage, f A testimony of no less weight 
 is found in the analogy of the peculiar expres- 
 sion ~y i<~^ ''ZJ^ to the former descriptions in 
 chap. viii. 2.5 ; ix 26, and in the poetic, coloring 
 of the entire representation. As a characteristic 
 feature in the latter regard, we notice the words 
 lb -Tj ys- (cf. the shorter ib T^»"], chap. ix. 
 20). which serve as a transition to chap. xii. 1-S, 
 and form an expression that refers in very gen- 
 eral terms to the irretrievable and irrevocable 
 character of his destruction. It would be use- 
 less to look for an indication of insanity (Polyb., 
 I. c. ) or of painful disease (3 Mace. ix. 5, 9, 28), 
 as having preceded the death of Epiphanes, in 
 these words. 
 
 ETHICO-FUND.\MENTAT, PRINCIPLES RELATED 
 TO THE HISTORY OF SALVATION, APOLO- 
 GETICAL REMARKS, AND HOMILKTICAL SUG- 
 GESTIONS. 
 
 1. Our exegetical examination has resulted in 
 leading us to regard the opening and dosing 
 vernes of the section as having originated with 
 Daniel, or more particularly, those portions of 
 
 * [Stuart thus explains this seeming discrepancy : " But 
 why is the mentiun of Antiochus's encampment between 
 the ilediterranoau and Jerusalem here brought again to 
 view, after the speaker hai already followed him to the 
 East ? For the purpose of inipyeHsion^ I should say, rather 
 than from any necessity of the case. * Look at the con- 
 trast" ^the speaker would seem to s.iy) ; ^ now Antiochus 
 encamps in his lofty tent like a palace, meditating the over- 
 throw of the holy city and temple ; next we see him in dis- 
 grace, and even in the agonies of death, stricken by an 
 Invisible and irresistible hand.' The interest with which a 
 Hebn^w would survey this picture may be imagined, but 
 canuot well be de3Cril>ed."] 
 
 t [This remark uf the author is doubtless by way of con- 
 trast with the more definite and historically correct utter- 
 ances of the pre-'iuled interpolation preceding; aa if an 
 ine.xact — not to Siiy untrue — prediction were a sure mark 
 fi£ authenticity in a prophet I] . 
 
 17 
 
 the prophecy which relate to the development 
 of the Persian empire and to the first begin- 
 nings of the Javanic world-power (vs. 2^), to- 
 gether with those that refer to the Old- Test, 
 antichrist as the last representative of the Grae 
 cian world-kingdom (vs. 40—4.5) ; while we saw 
 cause to regard the portion intervening between 
 the two just indicated (vs. .5-39) as being com 
 posed of both genuine and interpolated e'.e 
 ments. It is impossible to assert that the inter 
 mediate section is spurious throughout, because 
 it affords many traces of original prophr.cy, 
 which may be recognized by the coraparativft 
 discrepancy of their statements with the cor- 
 responding facts in the history of the Seleuoidaa 
 and the Lagid^ (see, e.g.^ vs. 14, 19, 20, 34, 39). 
 By far the larger portion, however, seems to 
 have been inserted by a later hand, since the 
 parallels found in former descriptioES of the 
 future, viz, : chap. vii. 24, and ^nii. 9, — passages 
 which likewise refer to the period intervening 
 between Alexander the Great and /jitiochus 
 Epiphanes, — are exceeded by it to an almost in- 
 credible degree in regard to the specific charac- 
 ter of its predicted details." It follows the 
 succession of the Seleucid monarohe and their 
 conflicts with the Ptolemies with such conscien- 
 tious accuracy, that it may almofl be considered 
 an attempt to demonstrate t.^e ideal tenfold 
 number of the horns of the fourth beast in 
 chap. vii. 24, in the particulars of history. This, 
 however, becomes improbable from the circum- 
 stance that the number of the Syrian kings who 
 are mentioned is by no means exactly ten, but 
 that, on the contrary, their succession is fol- 
 lowed in a decidedly imperfect manner, as ap- 
 pears from the overlooking of Antiochus Soter 
 (see on v. 0), and from the confused interchange 
 of the earliest kings in general (see on vs. 5-9), 
 We observed in a former paragraph (Eth. -fund, 
 principles on chap. vii. No. 3, a) that it could 
 not be proven that the writer of this book as- 
 signs exactly ten kings to the period from Alex- 
 ander the Great to Antiochus Epiphanes, or 
 that he was acquainted with precisely /««)• kin^ 
 of Persia, and no more (see on chap. xi. 2). The 
 arrangement of the series of Seleucid kings ac- 
 cording to a numerically symbolic plan, can in 
 nowise be asserted, whether the chapter before 
 us be regarded as the genuine production of 
 Daniel throughout, or as enriched [?J bj' later 
 additions of the Maccabaean age. On the other 
 hand, there can be no question that it was tlie 
 design of the originator of this exact description 
 of the history of the Seleucidas and the Lagidaj, 
 whether Daniel himself or an inspired ['i\ readel 
 of his book in the Maccabajan period were that 
 writer, to demonstrate that the MancabEean pe- 
 riod, and it alone, formed the point in which 
 the entire series of prophecies in the book arc 
 centred, and consequently ihat it constituted 
 the immediate preparation for the Me.ssianio 
 period of salvation. It became necessary, '"on 
 the beginning of the predicted unexampled 
 
 * [We dismiss this theory of trte author by once mor^ 
 calling attention to the fact that these so-called interpola- 
 tions are so intimately blended as component parts with thfl 
 rest of the prophecy in which they are imbedded, that om 
 author does not attempt to eliminate them, or even dis 
 tinctly designate theui. To do so \s-onld result in enervat- 
 ing and dislocating the Wiiole. The authenticity of thi 
 entire passage must stand or fall together.) 
 
258 
 
 THE PROPHET D.iNIEL 
 
 trial, to enable the Jewish nation to trace, step 
 by step, that it was by the counsel of God that 
 it should begin under precisely those circum- 
 stances, and in precisely that juncture of the 
 progress of history" (Delitzsch). It was neces- 
 sary ■■ to connect the advent of the post-Mace- 
 donian tyrant with the time of Daniel by so 
 continuous a chain of the most particular events, 
 that it would be erident that no hiatus could 
 intervene between the time of D,aniel and that 
 tyrant, in -which the Messiah might appear " 
 (Ebrard; see supra on v. 5). Cf. also Fiiller, 
 pp. 3G3, et. seq., 3G8. 
 
 2. The fundamental ethical and Messianic 
 principle of the section coincides substantially 
 ^vith its aim, as it was pointed out in the pre- 
 ceding paragraph, and as we are compelled to 
 formulate it in common with nearly all the 
 orthodox expositors of recent times, despite our 
 doubts concerning its unimpaired genuineness. 
 God will not desert his people in the changing 
 fortunes of the world, or amid the tempestuous 
 thronging of the u.ations and the tumults of the 
 wars incited Vjy the monarchs of the earth. 
 Even though they be pressed during centuries 
 between mighty contending empires as between 
 two millstones, and be unable in their own 
 power to prevent the raging of such foes, God 
 will not permit them to be either ground or 
 crushed. He does not permit the chosen people 
 of His heritage to be overwhelmed, even though 
 the oppressor's power should reach its highest 
 stage, and though to his violent attempts to 
 suppress that people by force should be added 
 the most flattering arts of dissimulation and the 
 most dangerous spiritual trials (cf. v. 31 et seq. ). 
 Indeed, it is precisely when the need is highest, 
 that He comes nighest with His aid and deliv- 
 erance ; precisely when to human wisdom every 
 prospect of rescue has been lost, does the judg- 
 ment of God break in on the oppressor and 
 snatch him away to irretrievable ruin — " and 
 there is none to help him" (v. 45). The par- 
 ticularizing description of the tedious conflicts 
 between the kingdoms of the north and south 
 is evidently designed to illustrate these truths, 
 which are closely connected with the funda- 
 mental thought of chap. viii. These truths 
 would still constitute the ethical kernel of this 
 section, even if the portion that is probably in- 
 terpoLated, vs. 5-3'J (where the prophecy becomes 
 transformed into actual history), were conceived 
 of as being vhuUy expunged ; but they form its 
 leading thought in a more obvious sense, when 
 it is remembered that that portion is at least 
 largely composed of genuine prophecies relating 
 to the time between Alexander and Antiochus 
 Epiphanes. It must accordingly be admitted, 
 even on the assumption of the partially inter- 
 polated character of the section which we have 
 adopted, that the prophecy enters upon the 
 course of history from the Persian £era to the 
 Asmonacan period with an unusual fulness of 
 detail, and does this because it accorded with 
 the Divine purpose to afford the suffering con- 
 fessors of the latter epoch a strong certainty 
 that their artiictions constituted the woes, the 
 immediate precursors of the Measianic aera of 
 deliverance. To the extraordinary trials of the 
 Maccabsean age, the wise providence of God 
 designed to oppose a means of comfort and 
 strength possessing extraordinary power, in this 
 
 unusually specific portion of Daniel's prophe- 
 cies. " If that affliction was unique in it« 
 kind, is it wonderful that the people was armed 
 against it, .and strengthened to endure it, by 
 means that are likewise unique in their kind ? . . . 
 The war which Antiochus waged against Israel 
 was not like other wars. He aimed to destroy 
 its religion ; and therefore this war is repre- 
 sented as a contest against God and His service. 
 In such a war Israel stood alone and without 
 allies, in the resistance it opposed to the pow- 
 erful king .and his armies. In proportion as it 
 was deprived of ordinary means of power and 
 resistance, and was confined to the exercise 
 of confidence in the aid of its God, in that pro- 
 portion it was necessary to strengthen its trust ; 
 and this was accomplished by means of this 
 vmique detailed prophetic description of the 
 tribulation .and the history which should pre- 
 cede it" (Fiiller, p. 303; cf. Hofmann, Wcissag. 
 n. Erf., I. 313). — We have assumed that a 
 pious [!] theocratic investigator of the Scrip- 
 tures in that period of trial, affected and sur- 
 prised by the marvellously exact correspondence 
 between the prophecy and the history of hia 
 time, sought to give a still more direct form to 
 that correspondence, and to remove the last 
 remains of apparent discrepancy between the 
 prediction and the recent historical past, by in- 
 serting into the prophetic text a series of reiti- 
 cinia ex etentu ; but this can no more destroy 
 the incomparable value and the inspired charac- 
 ter of the prophecy before us, than, for in- 
 stance, the interpolations perpetrated on the 
 somewhat analogous predictions of the abbot 
 Joachim of Floris (f 1202) by later mystical 
 observers of the history of the Middle Ages, for 
 the purpose of adapting them as accurately as 
 possible to the facts in which they were realized, 
 can throw doubt upon the high prophetic en- 
 dowment of that personage [?], or can bring 
 into question the occurrence of really genuine 
 prophecies in his writings (cf. Neander, Kirchen- 
 gesch., vol. II., p. 451 et seq. ; Gieseler. II. 2, 
 p. 354, No. 8 ; 35(i, No. 9). The interpolating 
 activity of his later admirers did not destroy 
 the fame as a genuine prophet of that celebrated 
 apocalyptist of the twelfth century, who, as is 
 well known, foretold the rise of two new orders, 
 a preaching order and a contemplative order, 
 during the period immediately subsequent to his 
 own, and by that very means gave occasion to the 
 more strict (or spiritual) party among the Fitm- 
 ciscans in the thirteenth century to construct 
 as perfect a concordance as was possible be- 
 tween his predictions and the history of the 
 origin of their own order and that of the Do- 
 minicans; nor was his contemporary, S. Hilde- 
 gard (t 1107), who predicted the Reformation 
 and the order of the Jesuits (Epist., p. 160; cf. 
 Neander, itnil., p. 448 et seq.) deprived of her 
 fame as a richly endowed prophetess [?] , by the 
 interpolated additions which were doubtless 
 made to her prophecies at a later period.* With 
 equal, and stUl greater truthfulness, it may be 
 asserted th.at the prophetic and inspired charac- 
 ter of this book is not materially injared, in any 
 
 • The RevehUloiiei! of S. Brirlget ( t K'iS I miplit also be 
 nilduced as an example in point : likewise the t^ttatraiiui of 
 Nostradamus (t ISfilil. etc. [The Rationalistic tone of 
 these comparisons of ft book of Holy Writ with pseudo-apoo- 
 ryphal pretondera of modern tir les, is palpable.] 
 
CHAP. XI. 2^45. 
 
 259 
 
 way whatever, by the opinion that the present 
 section has received certain adaptations and 
 particularizing additions from a later hand, and 
 that by this opinion, c.f/., its accurate references 
 to the expedition of Ptol. Evergetes for con- 
 quest (vs. 7, 8), to the warlike operations of 
 Antiochus Magnus (vs. 11-19). and to the three 
 E^'yptian campaigns of Epiphanes (vs. 22-30) 
 are most readily explained." 
 
 3. This chapter apparently presents but few 
 points, or none at all, for practical or homiletical 
 treatment, as it is composed almost exclusively 
 of prophetic descriptions of special historical 
 events. Even the thought just presented, that 
 the wonderful adaptation of the prediction to 
 particular events, was conditioned upon the ex- 
 traordinary .severity of the Maccabsan suffer- 
 ings and oppressions, seems to afford but little 
 opportunity for practical and edifying applica- 
 tion. Instead of emphasizing that idea in a 
 one-sided manner, it will be better to seize on 
 the ethical centre of the entire prophetic his- 
 torical picture, or. in other words, on the truth 
 that God iriU not desert His people iind His holy 
 covenant in any of the storms and changing 
 events of the history of the nati/jns, but tltat He 
 inll send deliverance in the precite moment ichen 
 their need has reached itji highest point — and to 
 make this the starting-point and principal ob- 
 ject of study. The practical fundamental 
 thought of the section is consequently the same 
 in substance as that contained in Psa. xlvi. 2-6 : 
 " God is our refuge and strength, a very present 
 help in trouble. Therefore will we not fear 
 though the earth be removed, and though the 
 mountains be carried into the midst of the sea ; 
 though the waters thereof roar and be troubled, 
 though the mountains shake with the swelling 
 thereof. Still the city of God shall be glad 
 with its fountain [so Luther], where are the 
 holy tabernacles of the Most High. God is in 
 the midst of her; she shaU not be moved ; God 
 shall help her, and that right early." — The fun- 
 damental thought, reduced to a briefer form, 
 may also be expressed as follows : The Lord 
 causes the mighty millstones (the northern and 
 southern kingdoms) between which the people 
 of his heritage is placed like an insignificant 
 and impotent grain of com, to crush each other 
 rather than that object of their bitter oppres- 
 sion ; or. Where the need is highest, there is 
 God's aid nighest ; or, " For a small moment 
 have I forsaken thee ; but with great mercies 
 will I gather thee " (Isa. liv. 7 ; cf. Lam. v. 20; 
 Psa. xxxvii. 2."); Heb. xiii. 5, etc.). 
 
 JlomUettc suggestions ori, particular paitsages. 
 
 On v. 2, Melancthon, " Est hcfc prcedictio tes- 
 
 * [This apology of the author for the wTecks of this pas- 
 page after tlie e.xpiirgation from fiplirions additions — to an 
 ill-defined extent— is a vain plea. Once admit the fact of 
 such interpolations, in any considerable degree at least, and 
 the credit of the prophecy is irretrievably destroyed. Kvery 
 one will be at liberty to expunge ad iiiiUian what he fan- 
 cies to be a vaticinium ex epentu.} 
 
 timoninm illnstre, quod a Deo trnditam esst 
 Prophitanun doctriuam ostendit. Et quia pol- 
 licttiir liliirationem, significat Deo euro: esse hiinc 
 populttm, qui doctrinum propheticam amplecti- 
 tur. ConfirmantuT ergo pii, ne a Deo dejiciant, 
 ne ahjiciant Inijiis doctrines professioncm. Per- 
 tinet autem postrema pars Juijus longes concionis 
 etiam ad hanc ultiniam mundi aitatem et ad Ec- 
 clesice (Brumnas, quas tulit jam niuttis secculis ; 
 dum alibi Malunnetica rabies conatur prorsus 
 delere nomen Filii Dei, alibi reirnant Episcopi 
 ethnico more et studin ecclcsiasti^u negligunt, 
 sinunt extingid lucem Evangelii, proponunt idola 
 et lihidinei, injusle occidunt himiinei innoeentes 
 propter verce doctrinm professionem (therefore 
 the supplanting of Christianity by the Pope and 
 the Turks — a New-Test, counterpart to the ad- 
 vance of the northern and southern kingdoms 
 against Israel). H(tc mala pii considerent, ut 
 primum a Deo petant, vt ipse Ecdesiam siiam 
 servet, regat, foveat et augeat ; deinde si qni pos- 
 sunt aliquibus ^uineribus m^dei-i, annitantur pre 
 sua focatitine" etc. 
 
 On V. 33, Calvin: '■^ Htvc cireumstantia mag- 
 7i7im pondus in se continet, quia cidemus mxdtos 
 ad tempus satis virili esse et intrepido animo, 
 postea languescere et tandem etanescere, ut fiant 
 prorsus sui dissimiles. Angelas autem hie pro- 
 mittit fore insuperabilem constantiam eorum, 
 qui sustinebuntur Dei spiritu, ita ut non una 
 tantum die ml mense vel anno certent, sed sub- 
 inde cnUigant aniinos et nova eertamina, neque 
 unquam dffciant." — Cramer: "God supports 
 his own even in the most violent persecutions, 
 and preserves them from apo-stasy." — Starke : 
 "A real Christian must venture his body, life, 
 and all that he has, for the glory of God." 
 
 On v. 35, Calvin : " Sequitur, nullos pollere 
 tanta sanctimonia et puritate. quin adhuc resi- 
 deant in ipsis aliquee sordes. qua; purgationem 
 (xigunt, ita ut ipsis necesse sit transire per for- 
 nacem, et mnndari instar auri et argcnti. . Hoc 
 ad omnes Dei martyres extendilur. Unde etiam 
 videmus. quam insulse Papistic iniagineiitur 
 merita Sanctorum ad nos redumdare, quoiiiam 
 plus quam necesse erat pnesiiterint.''^ — Osiander: 
 " God has set a limit to every persecution, be- 
 yond which it cannot pass." — Starke: "The 
 trial is succeeded by the time of refreshing, and 
 the suffering by the time of rejoicing; Tob. iii. 
 31." 
 
 On V. 39 et seq. : "Upon the surface the 
 worshippers of the beast seem to prosper, but 
 they are eventually compelled to realize that 
 their honors and possessions are not eternal in 
 their duration, while the followers of the Lamb 
 shall enjoy evcrlastmg glory .... (On v. 44 et 
 seq. ) : Although God permits many an evil pur- 
 pose to be executed, His forbearance toward 
 the godless is always merely for a time ; Psa. 
 1. 21." 
 
260 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 c. Condition of the vision. The Messianic deliverance and glorifying of God's people, together with 
 a reference to tlte definite determination by God of tfie time at which the Messiah's coming tc 
 ddiver should transpire. 
 
 Chap. XII. 
 
 1 And at [in] that time shall Michael stand vp, the great prince which [who] 
 standeth for [ore;- against] «/ie children of thy people; and there shall he a time 
 of trouble, such as [which] never was' since there was a nation even to [till] 
 that same time: and at [in] that time thy people shall be delivered, every one 
 
 2 that shall he found written in the book. And many of them that sleep in the 
 dust [ground] of the earth [dust] shall awake, some' [these] to everlasting life, 
 
 3 and so^ne [these] to shame [reproaches] and [to] everlasting contempt. And 
 thei/ that be Avise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament ; and they that 
 turn [the] manv to righteousness, as the stars for ever and ever. 
 
 ■ 4 But [And] thou, Daniel, shut up the words, and seal the book, even to 
 [till] the time of the end : many shall run to and fro [run through the book], 
 and [the] knowledge [of it] shall be increased. 
 
 5 Then [And] I Daniel looked, and, behold, there stood other two, the one on 
 this side of the bank [iiither at the lip] of the river,' and the other [one] on that 
 
 6 side of the bank [hither at the lip] of the river.' And one said to the man 
 clothed in linen, which [who] was upon the w.aters ' of the river,' How long 
 
 7 [Till when] .shall it be to the end of these [the] wonders ? And I heard the man 
 clothed in linen, which [who] was upon the waters' of the river, when [and] 
 he held up his right hand and his left hand nnto heaven [toward the heavens], 
 and sware by him that liveth for ever, that it shall be for a time, times, and a 
 half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter [as (at) the finishing of 
 scattering] the power [hand] of the holy people, all these things shall be fin- 
 ished. 
 
 8 And I* heard, but I understood not [could not understand] : then [and] said 
 
 9 I, my Lord, what shall be the end [sequel] of these things .^ And he said, Go 
 thy way, Daniel ; for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the 
 end. 
 
 10 Many shall be purified [purify themselves], and made white [whiten them- 
 selves], and tried [be smelted] ; but the wicked shall do wickedly : and none 
 of the wicked shall understand ; but [and] the wise [prudent] shall understand. 
 
 11 And from the time that the daily [continual] sacrifice shall be taken away, and 
 the abomination that maJceth desolate set ^cp [to the giving of the desolate 
 
 12 abomination], there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. Blessed 
 is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and 
 
 thirty days. r in i i i 
 
 13 But [And] go thou' thy way till [to] the end he: for [and] thou shalt rest, 
 and stand in [to (at)] thy lot at the end of the days. 
 
 LEXICAL AND GRAMMATICAL NOTES. 
 [' nrT'n:, wm maOe tn exist, or mm gone through, contains tho idea of exhaustion.—' ns";n, strictly, the canal, 
 proiierly applied to the -Vite, but here used of any aUuvial stream.— = The reduplicated forms ^XJ-'ob ^J^?? seem to 
 tall special attention to the position of this being, which was not precisely defined before, ch. x. 5.-« The pronoun ll 
 emphatic.] 
 
 shall come to his end " without a helper." * In 
 
 EXEGETICAL BEMARKS. • [Kcil (as we have seen) makes the transition from the 
 
 Antiochian to the Messianic rera occur at an earlier point in 
 
 Verses 1-3. The Messianic deliverance and the the prophecy, and 'je"'^8es the connective force on^^^^ 
 
 . , . ^ . t i -i *• A»^ ..f +v.«t troductory clau'ie of the verse, espo'-ially tne ^ ot convccu- 
 
 jiidnment for eternal retribution. And at that '■ro""'-^ s v„«„t „,. intKrvni rin be admitted 
 
 /.■'.•' ^ ., ,. •*■]•„ 4.„j /„; AW tion. as a proof that no break or mterval can oe an mute a 
 
 time; i.e.. at the time ]ust indicated (xi. 40), ^^^^ This is an unnecessary straining of the phra-eology. 
 
 when judgment shall overtake the impious ^^ ^^^^ phrases of date, like Kinn nSa heie, nsually 
 
 oppressor, Antiochus Epiphanes, and when he . - •■ 
 
CHAP. XII. 1-13. 
 
 261 
 
 opposition to Havemick's attempt to interpret 
 8t*nn r.T:^ in the indefinite sense of '• once, at 
 a certain time," nearly all recent expositors 
 have justly contended: (1) that the copula t 
 connects this new designation of time most in- 
 timately with the preceding ; (2) that it is 
 impossible to regard the words <^'^~!1 a'1''3i 
 ■which Havernick adduces in comparison, other- 
 wise than as a reference to the time indicated in 
 the context immediately preceding; (3) that 
 the time referred to is immediately afterward 
 characterized as a time of trouble, which shows 
 with sufficient clearness, that, like the mention 
 ■of the n-b"'3™'a in V. 3 (cf . xi. 35), the allusion 
 is to the period of persecution under Antiochus 
 as heretofore described.* — Shall Michael stand 
 up, the great prince, which staudeth for the 
 children of thy people. This introdviction of 
 Michael as the heavenly ally and protector of 
 Israel (not as the Son of God or the Messiah 
 himself, — as Havernick, in accord with the older 
 exegesis, still supposes^, refers back to chap. xi. 
 1, and also to the preliminaries to the vision as 
 a whole in chap, x,, and especially to x., 13, 21, 
 in the same way as ^'^'^\} ~??^ refers to the 
 close of the preceding chapter. In both plaoes 
 n>23> is employed Keiisii bellkn, and denotes an 
 aimed and martial appearance (cf. xi. 14, 16, 
 etc.). 35, following T3>'n, serves to express 
 the idea of protecting oversight over. etc. , as in 
 Esth. viii. 11; ix. l(i. He "stands up" or 
 "stands there" for the children of thy people, 
 t. e. , he represents their interests in the way of 
 actively supporting them and of protecting 
 them ; cf. chap. x. 13.— And there shall be a 
 time of trouble, suoli as never was since there 
 ■was a nation even to that same time ; i.e., the 
 trouble of the faithful shall then reach its high- 
 est intensity, shall have reached its climax when 
 deliverance flnaUy arrives ; cf. chap. xi. 45 ; ix. 
 26, 27. On the relative clause nrr^n: sb -ir» 
 'i31, which describes this as a time of unheard 
 of, unprecedented trouble, cf. Ex. ix. 18, 24 ; 
 Joel ii. 3, and particularly Jer. xxx. 7, which 
 
 Indicate a tran.«;ition rather than a close Kequence, Cf. 
 Stuart, who instances especially Isa. xix. 2^3 ; xxvi. 1 ; and 
 even Dan. ii. 4-4.] 
 
 • [Keil, on the other hand, thinks that " STIPI r531 
 points back to yp PSa (ch. xi. 40)," which he interprets 
 
 as "the time of the end, when tlie hostile persecutor rises 
 up to subdue the whole world," i.e.. the final Antichrt.st. 
 The trans;tion appears to us precisely analogous to that 
 found in our Lord's cschatolo-acal discourse, Matt. xxiv. 
 29 ; Mark xiii. 24 : and it seems to stand h^re. as there, for 
 a connecting link between the near and the remote applica- 
 tion of the prediction. The distress of the Antiochian per- 
 secution, like that of the final siege of Jerusalem, is made 
 the symbol of the ecclesiastico-pulitical throes of the final 
 catastrophe, the downfall of Judaism being there the pre- 
 cursor of that of the world itself. The phrase, "Mn that 
 time," thus becomes parallel with the formula, •* In that 
 day," or, " In those days." " In the last day." etc., as a 
 stereotyped desiirnation of the Messianic tera. It is the 
 constant i>raciice of the prophet* to view these serie of 
 future events on the same plane and in the same perspec- 
 tive, the interval, as well that between the close of the Old 
 Dispensation and the introduction of the New, as that 
 between the establishment of the latter and its ultimate tri- 
 umph, being left out of view. There is thus always a meas- 
 ure of indcfin-.teness in the prophetical utterances on these 
 points, especially in the phraseology relating to these '* times 
 ai>d seasons,"! 
 
 latter passage seems to have served generally as 
 a prototype of the text. — And at that time thy 
 people shall be delivered. Kranichfeld re- 
 marks properly, that " the deliverance of Israel 
 ^''"."?~) which is here conceived of t\s accom- 
 plished under the direction of IXD^Ja, is coinci- 
 dent in fact with the descriptions of chap. vii. 
 18, 26 et seq., 14 ; ix. 24 ; and the entrance to 
 the Ancient of days 'vii- 13) of him who was like 
 the son of man, and who was the spiritually en • 
 dowed leader of Israel, i.e., the Mashiach, 
 sprung from Israel itself, receives notice aa 
 being the final result and attestation of the vic- 
 torious conflict maintained, under the invisible 
 direction of the angel bs:"-:, against the ad- 
 versary of the theocracy, who appears in the 
 history of the nations. The absolute identity 
 of the Mashiach with ;n;i?3, whose spiritual 
 endowments and official relation.s were similar 
 to his, does not, however, become manifest 
 from this observation — as Hiivemick and others 
 assert — despite the appropriate and well-founded 
 ajyplicat.ion of the description to the glorified 
 Sou of man in person, in the New-Test, Apoca- 
 lypse, — any more than the direct identity of 
 Satan, the adversary of God in the angelic 
 world, with the New-Test, antichrist, who 
 stands under his a^gis, can be demonstrated," — 
 Every one that shall be found wrritteu in the 
 book ; or, " whosoever .shall find himself re- 
 corded in the book," The .A V. is literal. On 
 ba in the sense of " whosoever, quicunque" cf. 
 Isa. xliii. 7 ; 2 Sam. ii. 23. Ttie book is the 
 same as that mentioned in the similar passage, 
 Isa. iv. 3, and hence, the book of life ; cf. on 
 chap. vii. 10. It is, of course, not to be re- 
 garded as a "list of liriny Israelites" (cf. Psa. 
 Ixix. 2!) ; Ex. xxxii. 32) ; nor, prol)ably, as a 
 " record of those who shall be delivered in the 
 decisive hour and be permitted to live." It is 
 rather a record of those who shall inherit eternal 
 life, a "list of the subjects of Messiah's king- 
 dom " (cf. Hitzig on the passage), of those iclio 
 shall stand ujyproved in the judgment, whether 
 they live until it transpires, or are raised from 
 the dead to meet it, according to v. 2. Hof- 
 mann (Sehriftbew., I. 209) is in substantial 
 accord \vith this view — the " Divine register of 
 Israel, upon which are entered aU who truli/ be- 
 long to Israel," — while Ftiller arbitrarily applies 
 the expression in this place to the "book of 
 truth," chap. x. 21. — Verse 2. And many of 
 them that sleep in the dust of the earth ; ra- 
 ther, " and many of them that sleep under the 
 earth; " literally, " many of the sleupers of the 
 
 dii^t-land." IpS-.ia-Nl, " land, earth of dust" 
 
 {i.e., the dust of the grave, cf. Psa. xxii. 16, 30 ; 
 Isa. xxvi. 19, etc), is substantially equivalent to 
 " earth -dust, soU ; " the 5" S< '^"•i^. are those 
 who sleep the sleep of death in that dust of the 
 earth ; cf. Psa. xiii. 4 ; Job iii. 13 ; Jer. Ii. 39, 
 57; and also the New-Test. Kiiiiuuivm. KCKoiiir,- 
 jiivnt. — Shall awetke, some to everlasting life, 
 etc. While all the ancient Christian expositors 
 regard this as referring to the fimeral resurrec- 
 tion of the dead, and, among modems, Haver- 
 nick, Hofmann, Auberlen, Ziindel, Kliefoth, 
 etc., still agree with that view, which makes 
 
2iy2 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 ''many "to be equivalent to "all" (or trans- 
 'ates, with Hofmann, Sc/iriftbew., II. 2, 549. 
 "and in multitudes shall they arise from the 
 world of the dead "), a majority of writers since 
 Bertholdt (also Kranichfeld, Fidler, Kostliu, in 
 JStud. und Krlt.. 1S(J0, No. 2, p. 2.32) hold that 
 the many who awake from their sleep belong 
 xolelt/ til the niition iif Israel ; as Fuller expresses 
 it, p. o.j!) : the resurrection of the dead foretold 
 in this place is " not the last and general resur- 
 rection, but a partial one which precedes that, 
 and is confined to Daniel's nation." It is mani- 
 fest, however, that the Snal and general resur- 
 rection is here intended, (1) because the expres- 
 sion, the " sleepers of the dust of the earth " is 
 far too general in its character, to admit of its 
 being limited to the deceased Israelites ; (3) be- 
 cause the mention of the eternal punishment of 
 the wicked in the closing words of the verse 
 would be incomprehensible, and ser\-e no pur- 
 pose, if they refer only to Israelites who are to 
 be punished eternally (see the context immedi- 
 ately below); (o) further, S"iZ"i, which primari- 
 ly implies the iurmeasurable extent of the mul- 
 titude of the resurrected dead (cf. Hofmann's 
 rendering: "in multitudes"), may as well 
 designate the entire world of dead arising from 
 their graves as a large fraction of it — in the 
 same way as -n/'/ni or o\ -o/./.o/ is frequently 
 employed in the New Test, as synonymous with 
 -'iiTtr; cf., c.ej.. Matt. XX. 28 ; xxvi. 28, with 1 
 John ii. 2 ; 1 Cor. xv. 23 ; Rom. v. IT), 16, ndth 
 v. 13 ; * (4) if the earlier prophetic parallels, Isa. 
 xxvi. Ul ; Ixvi. 24 ; Ezek. xxxvii. 1-15, actually 
 do foretell a partial resurrection which is con- 
 fined to Israel (which can by no means be posi- 
 tively established, since they rest, without ex- 
 ception, on the pre-supposition of an ultimate 
 resurrection of a^huen, cf . Hofmann, Schriftbev., 
 II. 2, 4(U et seq.), this "noil not involve that the 
 passage before us has a similar bearing; (5) on 
 the contrary, the expectation of a genered resur- 
 rection of the dead, whose existence is abun- 
 dantly evidenced in the Jewish apocalyptic litera- 
 ture (2 Mace. vii. 14) and in the New Test, (see 
 especially John v. 28 et seq. ; Acts xxiv. 15), 
 would require thrit there should not be wanting 
 Ijiisid testimonies to that-fact in the canoniad Old 
 Test, as icell, which would obviously be the case 
 if this passage referred exclusively to a particu- 
 lar resurrection of the Israelites ; (6) nor does 
 the intimate connection of the passage with the 
 preceding context, or, in other words, the con- 
 catenation of the eschatological prophecies in 
 vs. l-'S with the a!ra of the Autiochian-Macca- 
 baian troubles, as described in the preceding 
 chapter, militate against the universal character 
 of the resurrection in question. It is evident 
 that in the mind of the prophet that period of 
 trial was the immediate precursor of the end of 
 
 ■* Cf. Calvui on th.it passage: "Multos /tic ponit pro 
 OMNIBUB. ut certjim ent. Xeque Iufc tucutio dthet jiobif 
 ruidi-l nbsurda. Ann entm RABDINn oppuni' anuelus omni- 
 bus vel pauclfl, sed oj)poil!i UNI ; cfr, Rom. v. 16, 19." [Keil 
 observes that " the an^el has it not in view to prive a general 
 Btatcment resariiing the resurrection of the dead, but only 
 di.scloses on this i)riint that the final salvation of the people 
 shall not be limited to tl.ose still living at the end of the 
 great tribul.ition, but shall include also those who have lost 
 their lives durnig the iieriod of the tribulation," This, 
 however, seems an unneecssary liniitution of the •' many,'* 
 which Keil himself admits ''can only be rightly inter- 
 preted from the context." Stuart clearly argues that the 
 coiiucction gives it here the universal sense.} 
 
 the world. * As he viewed it, the end of the 
 persecution by Antiochus and the advent of the 
 Messiah to introduce a new and eternal period 
 of blessing were substantially coincident. He 
 saw nothing at all of the long series of yeaiB 
 that were to intervene between those Old-Test. 
 " teoes of the Mes.siah " and his actual birth and 
 incarnation, nor did he observe the many cen- 
 turies between His first and second advent, be- 
 tween the beginning of the end and the ultimate 
 end of all things, because it was inconsistent 
 with the nature of prophetic vision (cf. supra, 
 Eth.-fund. principles, etc., on chap. ix. No. 1). 
 The antitypical general judgment of all flesh 
 was identical with the typical judgment that 
 came upon the Old-Test, oppressor of God's peo- 
 ple, to his understanding ; and it is therefore 
 equally one-sided to deprive the judgment here 
 referred to of its universal character, and to re- 
 duce it to a special judgment over the good and 
 the wicked Israelites, as Bertholdt, Hitzig, and 
 the remaining rationalistic expositors contend, 
 — or to arbitrarily refer v. 1 to the deliverance 
 of Israel from the oppression of Antiochus, and 
 therefore interpret it typically and distinctively, 
 but vs. 3 and S to the general resurrection and 
 judgment, making them antitypical and eschato- 
 logical, so that an immense chasm between the 
 time of vs. 1 and 2 is postulated, of whose exist- 
 ence there is no indication in the text. Against 
 this arbitrary disruption of a description that 
 obviously forms a unit, see Hilgenfeld, Die Pro- 
 jiheten Ezra tmd Daniel, p. 84, and also Kran- 
 ichfeld, p. 402. A hiatus of centuries certainly 
 exists ; but it belongs between chajD. xi. 45 and 
 chap. xii. 1, and is of such a character that the 
 prophet could have been in no way conscious of 
 its presence. f — And some to shame, and ever- 
 lasting contempt. As the awaking "to ever- 
 lasting life " recalls Isa. xxvi. 19, so the arising 
 "to shame, to everlasting contempt" (TlStl'li 
 Stat, constr. of Ti'*'^!, similar to 11"?!, constr. 
 of lilST) suggests Isa. Ixvl 24. Cf. the New- 
 Test, expressions avao-acu; npiazuQ, John v. 29, 
 and rfdrarof iV-iTf^jof, Kev. xx. 14. — Fuller sup- 
 poses, very arbitrarily, that "the resurrection 
 to shame " is "merely a passing observation," 
 which might be omitted from the passage with- 
 out damaging its meaning. On the contrary, 
 the mention of the eternal shame and torment 
 which await the wicked at the judgment is a 
 leading thought, which was not only suggested, 
 but positively demanded, by the recent mention 
 of the helpless and irretrievable ruin of ihe 
 antichristian madman (xi. 45), and which de- 
 serves consideration as a leading proof that toe 
 judgment here foretold is not to be distinctively 
 Jewish, but universal in its character, precisely 
 because of this undeniable reference to chap. xi. 
 45 b; see supra. No. 2. — 'V^erse 3. And they 
 
 * [This view is unnecessary, and places the prophet in a 
 false light. Daniel does not explicitly say that the^e eventd 
 are simultaneous, if we have rightly apprehended and ex- 
 pounded his language. He did not indeed clearly appre- 
 hend the hrngth of the int*'rval. but we :ire not warranted 
 hi saying that he was not aware there was any. Much lesa 
 does he assert it.] 
 
 t [Keil of course disputes this interval at the place 
 assigned to it by our author. Stuart als<j is unable to dis- 
 cover it there. Both lay undue stress upon the conuoctmff 
 link. '* lu that time."l 
 
CHAP. XII. 1-13. 
 
 2fi3 
 
 that be wise shall shine as the brightness of 
 the firmament. There is no more reason here 
 than in chap. xi. 33, 35, to translate S^i"2"4;"2ri 
 otherwise than " the wise, prudent, or under- 
 standing" ones. It does not characterize the 
 pious generally (who were designated as the 
 "many." ""?-• i^ chap. xi. 33, and who are 
 again mentioned by the same term in A of this 
 verse), but " those who were prominent among 
 the people by their piety, fidelity, and stead- 
 fastnes.s, wlio accomplished more than others by 
 word and deed, and suffered more than others 
 for the holy covenant" (Fuller). It is self-evi- 
 dent that the activity of .such theocraticaUy 
 wise or prudent persons would include the work 
 of teaching, but this does not involve the neces- 
 sity of rendering c-ji-u."": directly by " teach- 
 ers." This over-precise adaptation of the idea 
 is not established by the parallel 3''?'in "'p'^i::^, 
 nor by the designation of Jehovah's servant by 
 ;"'3w", in Isa. lii. 13 (against Hitzig). On the 
 other hand, the too general and diluted renc'er- 
 ing. " pious, well-disposed ones " (de Wette), has 
 no sufficient support, e.g., in Matt. xiii. 44 ; for 
 Christ's statement respecting the "righteous" 
 in general, that "they shall shine as the sun in 
 the kingdom of their Father," is a free applica- 
 tion, but not a translation or an explanation of 
 this pa,ssage. — On the comparison of the shining 
 of the "wise (1'~I~, properly, "to radiate 
 brightness, to shine brightly "; with that of the 
 bright arch of heaven (?^p~, " the firmament," 
 cf. the expositors on Gen. i. 0), see especially 
 Ex. xxiv. 10 ; also Ezek. i. 22, 20, etc. — And 
 they that turn (the) many to righteousness, 
 as the stars for ejex and ever. The words 
 ^"2~n ip"'~iQ seem to have been borrowed 
 from Isa. liii. 11, but do not on that account 
 justify the assertion of Krauichfeld, that only 
 originators of the righteousness mediated by the 
 2)riextly function, — hence prie.sts, "who take 
 away the sins of the people through the sacra- 
 fieiiU ceremonial " — are to be understood there- 
 by ; — a view concerning p^'lSn that is entirely 
 too contracted, and, at the same time, interpo- 
 lating in character, which finds no support either 
 in the former mention of theocratic sacrifices 
 (vii. 23; viii. 11, 13; ix. 26), or in the passage, 
 chap. ix. 24. — The stars are mentioned as sym- 
 bols of the heavenl.v condition of the righteous 
 who have been glorified after the image of God 
 in I Cor. xv. 40 et seq. ; Rev. ii. 2S ; cf. also 
 supra, on chap. viii. 10. 
 
 Verse 4. Condndiny exhortation of the prophe- 
 syiny angel. But thou, O Daniel shut up (or 
 "conce.al") the words, and seal the book. 
 The " words" and the " book " can hardly de 
 signate the entire book of Daniel's prophecies, 
 but refer merely to the final vision, chap. xi. 2- 
 xii. 3 (Hiivern., Von Leng. , Kranichf. , Fiiller, 
 etc., are correct!. On ^CO as denoting a lim- 
 ited section of connected writing, which occu- 
 pies a single roll. cf. Neh. i. 1 ; Jer. li. 63 ; also 
 supra, on chap. i-x. 2.* On criO. "to conceal," 
 
 * [Keil, on the ether hand, inclines (with Bertholdt, Hit- 
 sig, Aubeilen, KUefoth) to "understand by "nDDn the 
 
 — i.e., to preserve in secret, or not publish it — 
 and 2rn, " to seal," which is added to strength- 
 en the idea, see on chap. viii. (i. Neither of the 
 words was to be taken literally, of course 
 (against Hitzig). What the .angel required of 
 the prophet, and to which the latter doubtiesi 
 consented, was merely that lie should avoid any 
 intentional or inconsiderate publishing of the 
 prophecy, hence, that he should transmit it into 
 chaste, approved, and trustworthy hands, that 
 would be prepared to treat it in accordance with 
 its mysterious and awe-compeUing subject. — To 
 the time of the end; i.e., until the juncture 
 indicated in v. 1, to which the entire prophecy, 
 beginning with chap. xi. 2, is directed. — Many 
 shall run to and fro, and knowledge shall b i 
 increased ; rather, ' ' many shall search it 
 through, and the understanding shall become 
 great." ^acJa"^, properly, "they shall run 
 about," namely, for the pur'jiose of searching or 
 investigating ; cf. Jer. v. 1 ; Am. viii. 12; Zech. 
 iv. 10 ; 2 Chron. xvi. 9. The interpretation by 
 "wandering abont, roving about without a 
 guide " (as contrasted with the assured guidance 
 afforded by God's word), which was advocated 
 by J. D. Michaelis and Von Lengerke, cannot be 
 established ; nor can the sense of '" careful read- 
 ing," which was adopted by Maurer, Hitzig, 
 Kwald, etc., be demonstrated, despite the cita- 
 tion of the rabbinicid ~2'r, 2^23, " a line (of 
 reading), a straight line," which is alleged as 
 underlying the words in the text. — The whole 
 observation was evidently intended to assign a 
 reason for the exhortation to conceal the im- 
 parted prophec3', and treat it saci-edl.v, and to 
 prevent its falling into profane hands ; for that 
 prophecy w'as not unimportant and ordinary in 
 its character, but a means to secure to many, 
 who should zealouslj- examine it in the future, 
 a deeper insight into the ways of God, the con- 
 troller of aU earthly f'^rtunes. For that reason 
 it would be sinful to profane it. [" If Daniel, 
 therefore, must only place the prophecy securely, 
 that it may continue to the time of the end, the 
 sealing then does not exclude the use of it in 
 transcriptions, and there exists no reason for 
 thinking that the searching into it will take 
 place only for the first time in the end" (Keil).] 
 Verses 5-7. •Solemn averment, by oath, of the as- 
 sured realizing of the prophecy until a determined 
 point in the future — namelj', until the expira- 
 tion of the mystical three and a half years, to 
 whose close the prophet had already been re • 
 ferred, chap. vii. 25 (cf. viii. 14; ix. 27). The 
 recurrence of this comforting designation of 
 time indicate.s that the contents of these vereea 
 to the end of the chapter are designed tj form an 
 epilogue, not merely to the last prophetic vision 
 (chap, x.-xii. 3), but to the entire prophetic 
 
 whole book. For, as Kliefoth remarlcs, fhe angel will close, 
 ver. 4, the last revel.ition, and alon? with it the whole pro- 
 phetical worlc of Daniel, and dismiss him from his propheti- 
 cal ofllce, as he afterwards, ver. 13. does, after he has given 
 him, vers. 5-1'i. disclosures re£;arding the periods of these 
 wonderful things that were announced. He must seal the 
 book, i.e., guard it securely from dicfiguremeut^ ' till the 
 time of the end,' because its contents stretch out to the end. 
 Cf. ch. viii. 2ti, where the reason for the sealing is stated in 
 the words, ■ for yet it shall be for many days.' Instead of 
 such a statement as that, the time of the end is here briefly 
 named as the termhmt, down to which the revelation 
 reaches, in harmony with the cotitents of ch. xi. 411-xii. S, 
 which comprehends the events of the time of the end."] 
 
264 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 part of the book, and even to the whole book 
 
 itself. The new scene, however, which begins 
 with this verse, and serves to introduce the epi- 
 logue, obviously occupies a more intimate rela- 
 tion to the scene, chap. x. 4 et seq., which 
 introduces the last great vision, than to the 
 others, and may even be regarded as a resump- 
 tion of that scene, with but little modification. 
 Compare, on the one hand, the words indicating 
 a new beginning, " Then I, Daniel, looked," etc., 
 which recall chap. x. 5, and, on the other hand, 
 the circumstance that the principal person in 
 the former sceue, the mighty angelic prince, 
 "clothed in linen," still continues to be the 
 principal person in word and action (v. 6 et seq.), 
 although two other angels, who had not been 
 present hitherto, now appeared (as witnesses of 
 the oath to be taken by him ; see immediately 
 below), so that the number present was now 
 double its former size, when only Daniel and the 
 angelic prince in linen clothing were on the 
 scene. — And behold, there stood other two; 
 i.e., other than the one who had hitherto spoken 
 and who again resumes in v. 7, — other than the 
 priestly angelic prince in Unen garments, n^ir!?? 
 is certainly not used with reference to the 
 speaker introduced in v. 6 (Hengstenb. ), but 
 refers, as it always does, to what has been pre- 
 viously mentioned, so that it distinguishes two 
 other persons besides the angel who was thus 
 far the speaker ; and these enter into the pro- 
 phet's range of vision at this point. There can 
 be no doubt that these persons were likewise 
 angels ; and the following verses leave no room 
 to question that their number was precisely two, 
 that they might be recognized as witnesses to 
 the oath in v. 7 ; cf. Deut. xix. 15 ; xxxi. 38 ; 2 
 Cor. xiii. 1, etc. (thus correctly. Hitzig, Kran- 
 ichfeld, and in substance KUefoth also). It 
 would be useless, however, to venture any sup- 
 position as to who the two angels were, for the 
 simple reason that the writer did not see fit to 
 furnish their names. It is scarcely probable 
 that they were Gabriel and Michael, for Daniel 
 would certainly have noticed t/ieir presence, 
 since he had already mentioned these two chief 
 princes among the angels in several instances. 
 Probably angels of inferior rank are to be con- 
 ceived of, since they were capable of being wit- 
 nesses in the present case. Whether they were 
 identical with the two saints whom the prophet 
 heard conversing together in chap. viii. 13, or 
 not. must remain undecided. In any case, the 
 following theories, which conflict with the con- 
 text, must be rejected : (1) that one of the two 
 ^"";r'?* "was Gabriel, whose disappearance was 
 nowhere mentioned (Von Lengerke) ; (2) that 
 one of them was Gabriel, but the other was a 
 different angel, who was already introduced in 
 the fonner scene, chap. x. 5 et seq., but had not 
 yet been designated by name (thus Havemick, 
 who consequently finds the three angels of this 
 scene present in chap, x., without exception, 
 but without being clearly distinguished from 
 each other) ; (3) that the D^~ns were the guar- 
 dian angels or princes of Persia and Graecia, 
 mentioned in chap. x. 20 (Jerome, Luther, Gro- 
 tius, Sanctius, etc.); (4) that they were Judas 
 and Simon Maocabieus (! — so J. D. Michaelis) ; 
 (j) that they were the representatives of all who 
 
 in the future should wait for the kingdom ol 
 God and inquire after the time of its comuag 
 (Cocceius) ; (6) that they were a mystical per- 
 sonification either of the law and prophecy (thus 
 a gloss in the margin of the cod. Chisiitu.) or of 
 reason and imagination (rabbins, e.g., Jos. Jac- 
 chiades). M. Geier already remarks respecting 
 these and other theories of a similar character : 
 " Ilcec figmenta sunt hominum, textus auctorilatt 
 destituta." — The one on this side of the bank oi 
 the river, and the other on that side of the 
 bank of the river ; rather, "the one here on the 
 bank of the river, the other yonder on the bank," 
 etc. "IS";!!, usually the Heb. name for the Nile 
 (which in the Egypt, itself is called /or [Saiiid.jero , 
 Memf hit. jaro] ; cf. Gesen.-Dietr. , s. v., ^k"),i8 
 here used to designate the "great river " Tigris, 
 chap. X. 4. The reason is probably to be found 
 in the fact that at an early period "S"". had 
 acquired a purely appellative signification = 
 iiljn "njvl, as may appear from the poetic 
 use of 0"''^.'*'^ in the sense of "channels" (cf. 
 Job xxviii. 10; Isa. xxxiii. 21). It is useless 
 for Hitzig and Kranichfeld to deny the purely 
 appellative use of "is"] in this place, and to con- 
 tend instead that the Tigris is here termed the 
 Nile by way of metonymy — from which position 
 they deduce consequences of a more or less 
 arbitrary character ( the former, that this desig- . 
 nation reveals that the £ingel who had hithrf 
 spoken, and who now, v. G et seq., hoveft 
 over the water, was the giiardian spirit of Egy 
 [cf. on chap. x. 5] and also that the author i - 
 the entire book was of Egyptian descent [!] ; the 
 latter, that " the metonymical co-ordination •i 
 fact of the Nile, representing Egypt, and the 
 Hiddekel, the representative of the coming time 
 of trouble [?], was designed to indicate a second 
 Egyptian deliverance"*). — Verse G. And one 
 said to the taaja clothed in linen, etc. The 
 subject of "l^S*'! is certainly not " each of the 
 two, the one on this side and one on the other " 
 (Theod., Syr., Kranichl, Kliefoth), but rather 
 only one of them (D"?! "in?<7! Ibn-Ezra), as the 
 analogy of chap. viii. 13 clearly suggests, and 
 probably the one nearest to the prophet, on the 
 same side of the stream as the latter, and the 
 only one whom he could hear. This angel 
 represents the prophet himself in his inquiry, 
 similar to chap. viii. 13 (cf. v. 14) ; Jerome ii 
 therefore not in the wrong to that extent, when 
 he substitutes " f J dixi" for " f < dij:it (alter 
 eorum)" without further question. — Which 
 upon (or "above") the waters of the river; 
 supply "stood," or "hovered." This hovering 
 over the waters of the Tigris denotes a new 
 position, which was not meniioned in connec- 
 tion with the former introduction and descrip- 
 tion of the "man clothed in hnen," chap, x., 
 and with which chap. viii. IG is probably not to 
 
 ♦ [Keil (after Kliefoth ) thus moderates the latter popition : 
 *' The nvcr Hiddekel (Tigris) was a figure of the Persian 
 worid-power, through whose territorj it flowed (cf. for the 
 prophetic tyi)€, Isii. viii. 6. 7 : Psa. c.\xiv. 3. 4), and the 
 designation of the river as "^K*^, Xile, contains an allusion 
 
 to the deliverance of Israel from the power of Egypt, whicb 
 in itfi essence was to he repeated in the future.'^] 
 
CHAP. XII. 1-13. 
 
 205 
 
 be compared (see on that passage). The fact j 
 that the revealing angel hovered over the stream 
 was hardly for the mere purpose of placing him 1 
 between the two inquiring angels on its banks, 
 nor was it merelj designed to recall the brood- 
 ing of God's Spirit over the waters, Gen. i. 2 
 (Hitzig), but rather serves to designate the 
 mighty and swiftly flowing stream of the Tigris 
 — as formerly the sea (chap. vii. 2) — as a symbol 
 of the surging world of nations over which 
 '■ the good spirit o£ the world-power" exercises 
 sway as a beneficent and guiding principle of ' 
 order (so FiiUer, probably with correctness ; but , 
 he combines with it the extremely forced hy- 
 pothesis that the angels on the banks of the 
 river were intended to denote the two-fold end 
 of the world-period, hence the two manifesta- 
 tions of Christ, the first in lowliness and the 
 second in glory !) — How long to the end of the 
 wonders? i.e., "when C"^""?, here equiva- 
 lent to ^"tt) shall the end, the consummation, 
 come of the wondrous things foretold by thee ? " 
 The 7P. is evidently that referred to in v. 1 (cf . 
 chap. xi. 4.5), and therefore different from the 
 r^~ns«, " the last end," concerning which Daniel 
 makes inquiry in v. 8. The " wondrous things " 
 (nsiE) themselves are the extraordinary suf- 
 ferings and judicial punishments, whose instru- 
 ment Antiochus. the Old-Test. Antichrist, was to 
 become, and which are described at the end, 
 " "ginning with chap. xi. 30; of. the similar use 
 j.^^sic: in chap. viii. 2-t; xi. 30; and par- 
 .i.tilarly Isa. xxix. 14.— Verse 7. And he held 
 u.\i his right hand and his left hand. The 
 raising of b'>th hands was designed to impart a 
 sc'smn emphasis to the act of taking the oath ; 
 cf. Dent, xxxii. 40 ; Ezek. xx. 5. — And sware 
 by him that liveth for ever. Dbl3'""'na, cf. iv. 
 31 ; Deut. .1. c, and Rev. x. 6. "'H is an adjec- 
 tive, not a substantive, in this place. Cf. the 
 similar predicates connected with the names of 
 heathen gods also, e.g. . aeiZuoq iiedr in the iuscrip. 
 at Shakka (Bnrkhardt, Beisen, etc., pp. 147, 
 503) ; Rrn'/iimim; a'lun'j.iioQ on the Rosetta stone, 
 lines 4. 9, .54. In connection with the true God 
 Jehovah, the predicate inrena in atcnium has 
 the profounder significance, that He not only 
 lives for ever, but also fixes the limit of evil for 
 ever (Ewald, on this passage). — That for a time, 
 times, and a half ; (. e. , after a time, and two 
 times, and a half time, or, briefly, after three 
 and a h.Tlf (my.stical [rather, literal)) years; cf. 
 on chap. vii. 25. To this limitation of time, 
 wliich has become familiar from its former occur- 
 rence (cf. also chap. viii. 14; ix. 27), is now 
 added a further one, which, however, substan- 
 tially coincides with it : — and when he shall 
 have accoii pLshed to scatter the power of 
 the holy people ; rather, " and when the scat- 
 tering of a part of the holy people shall have 
 ceased." No material objection can be brought 
 to bear against this exposition of the words 
 -■^•^-ZV—\-[ yo: r-'s:-^, since 73". almost in- 
 variably has the meaning '" to scatter, disperse," 
 in tlie proj)/ietic usage (cf. Isa. xi. !2 ; >Ier. xiii. 
 14; li. 30, 23), while that of ■■ break, shatter," 
 seems to be confined more particularly to poetry 
 
 (cf. Psa. ii. 9 ; cxxxvii. 9), and further, since 
 the rendering of T' by "part, division," seema 
 to be adequately supported by parallels like 
 Gen. xlvii, 24 ; 2 Kings xi. 7 ; Neh. xi. 1. It is 
 not necessary, in order to obtain this meaning, 
 
 to change the pointing so as to read T?] ^"I^??! 
 -13^, as Hitzig proposes The correct view is 
 represented by Bertholdt, Dereser, Gesenins, 
 Haverniok, Von Lengerke, Ztuidel, and substan- 
 tially by Theodot. , Vulg. , Luther, etc., except- 
 ing only that the latter neglect to render T) by 
 " part," and either interpret it by " might, war- 
 like power, "or leave it altogether untranslated. 
 On the other hand, Hengstenberg, Hofmann, 
 Maurer, Auberlen, Kranichfeld, IMUer, Khefoth, 
 Ewald, etc., render : " AVhen the shattering of 
 the hand of the holy people shall have ceased " 
 (i.e., when its power shall have been entirely 
 broken). In support of this view it is usually 
 contended (with Hofmann, ll'f/s*. uiid Erf.^ I. 
 314 et seq. ) that the idea of reuniting the scat- 
 tered Israel, which occurs nowhere else in Daniel, 
 would be presented in this place without any pre- 
 paration whatever. This is as if the cliapter 
 under consideration did not present a number ot 
 other ideas, which are wholly new and have 
 never occurred previou.sly, e.g., the prophecy of 
 the resurrection in v. 2 ; the shining of the wise 
 like the brightness of the firmament, in v. 3; 
 and also the contents of v. 10 ; or as if the men- 
 tion in this book of the expectation that the dis- 
 persed people of God should be reunited, which 
 was so familiar to the earlier prophets, could be 
 in any way remarkable, when taken in connec- 
 tion with the correspondence, usually so thor- 
 ough, of the range of this prophet's ideas with 
 that of his predecessors (cf. Joel iii. 5 et seq. ; 
 Am. ix. 11 et seq. : Isa. xi. 12 ; Jer. li. 20 et 
 seq., etc., etc.).* It is entirely unnecessary to 
 adopt the historical reference to 1 JIacc. v. 23, 
 45, 53 et seq. ; 2 Mace. xii. 32, which Hitzig dis- 
 covers in this passage, and regards as a proof 
 that in this instance there is another vatic, ex 
 evcntu. There is not the slightest difficulty, 
 however, connected with the opinion that the 
 facts recorded in those passages of the Macca- 
 baean books (relating to the liringing back to 
 Judasa of the scattered Jews who lived in Gali- 
 lee and Gilead among the heathen, by Judas 
 and Simon Maccabasus), constituted a first typi- 
 cal fulfilment and historical exemplification of 
 the present prophecy. f—^ All this shall be fin- 
 ished. •~^^<";2, not the foregoing words, but 
 the things spoken of, the sum of the prophecy 
 beginning with chap. xi. 2 (inclusive of the con- 
 tents of chap. xii. 1-8). X 
 
 * [Keil defends the rendering of }^SI hy shatter, rather 
 than "scatter," and of 01^3 by completion, rather than 
 
 " ceaeing ; " hut the sense is not m.iterially different in 
 either case, if the prophecy refer to the persecution by 
 Antiochus, for the hour of striking for independence wai 
 coincident with that of the deepest oppression. The meta. 
 phorical signification of power for ~l\ however, seems pre- 
 ferable as being more usual and natural than that of pari ; 
 and the latter savors too much of a diplomat.c rendering.] 
 
 t [It may reasonably be objected to tliis reference that 
 it is too ijetty, and requires too special u rendering of the 
 words to be of any great valuo.] 
 
 t [The "fulfilment of all these things" obviously U 
 
266 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 Verses 8. 9. The propheps question concern- | 
 ing the final end, and the angel's encmiraging I 
 reply. And I heard, but I understood not, 
 namely, the information just imparted by the 
 angel, involving a two-fold designation of the i 
 time, and also including the statement, which [ 
 was especially incomprehensible to the prophet, 
 that at the expiration of the three and a half 
 times the dispersion of a part of Israel should 
 have reached its end. — What shall be the end 
 of these things? i.e., "which event is to be 
 the last of these ' wondrous things ? ' " (v. 6) ; 
 by the occurrence of what event shall it be pos- 
 sible to know that the last end of the entire 
 Kcries of the predicted troubles and judgments 
 has been reached ? — Hence the n"'nns;, concern- 
 ing which Daniel now inquires, does not directly 
 coincide with the fp to which the question of 
 the angel in v. 6 referred, but stands related to 
 ■it as the final point in a course of development 
 is related to a final period of extended duration. * 
 — Verse 9. And he said, Go thy way, Dan- 
 iel, etc. ~^, as in v. 1.3, an encouraging re- 
 mark addressed to the prophet, who had ap- 
 proached with anxious questioning; cf. Ecc. ix. 
 7. This parallel demonstrates, if there were no 
 other reason, that it is impossible to take ni.-j 
 in the sense of "to die, to die peacefully, to 
 lie down to sleep," in this place, as Bertholdt, 
 H.T.vernick, etc., propose. — For the ivords are 
 closed up (or "concealed") and sealed tUl •'je 
 time of the end. Cf. v. 4, where Di'C'in, 
 " the words," is evidently employed in the same 
 sense as here, namely, as designating the words 
 of the prophecy, chap. xi. 2-xii. 8. The state- 
 ment th.it these words are ' ' concealed and 
 sealed " till the time of the end, has, of course, 
 a different me.ining from the exhortation in 
 that pasSiige, "to conceal and seal" them. 
 While that exhortation was intended to warn 
 him earnestly against an inconsiderate desire to 
 publish and prostitute to common uses the state- 
 ments of the prophecy, the present reference to 
 their hidden condition {i.e., to the mysterious 
 nature of the revealed facts), is designed to en- 
 courage and to lead to Jmmble submis/tion to the 
 Divine guidance, wlime jyurposes cannot at first be 
 understood, f p. t"i5, however, has no other sig- 
 nification in this place than in v. 4, or than f p 
 in V. G. ]■ 
 
 cxplninpd by the more definite statement in vers. 11 and 12, 
 fnr the prophet's inquiry was expressly in order to elicit 
 puch an explanation. This is precisely analogous to our 
 Lord's eschiitoliigical data, Mfitt. xxv. 3.1. etc, ; where the 
 nearer event alone is chruiiolDf^irally determined, and the 
 final one left vague (Matt. xxv. 3fi).] 
 
 * [Keil likewise distinguishes between Vp and n*^"inX) 
 " ut neither his nor the author's distinction seems to be very 
 clear or well founded. In the present instance rT^irti^ 
 seems to denote the nearer sequel of the pressing emergen- 
 cies in immediate view, and "Tp the more distant consum- 
 
 matifin of the entire prophecy. If so, the angel does not 
 fully answer the inquiry of ver. H, but does Daniel's, by 
 - desifirnating only the terminus of the Antiochian history. 
 *' Hitzig is altogether correct in thus stating the (latter) 
 question : ' What, i.e.. which event is the uttermost, the 
 last of the risbC, that stands before the end ? ' " (Keil).] 
 
 t [In like manner the "closing ard sealing" (^rO and 
 
 Verses 10-12. Approximate* determination cij 
 the final point (the ni";nS) of the predicted de- 
 relopment, for the purpose of affording addi- 
 tional comfort and encouragement to the pro- 
 phet, in his anxiety to receive information. 
 Many shall be purified and made white, and 
 tried, rather, " shall purity and cleanse them- 
 selves, and shall be thoroughly tried." The 
 terms recur from chap. xi. 35, excepting that 
 they are differently arranged, and that the two 
 leading verbs, 112 "to purify," and -(3^ "to 
 cleanse," are to be taken in a reflexive sense, 
 corresponding to the Hithpael, while the third 
 tfYZ (Niph.) expresses the passive sense of beiug 
 thoroughly tried, or of being thoroughly puri- 
 fied (cf. Psa. xii. 7 ; Prov. xxx. 5). With each 
 of the verbs the idea of svffcring and persecut'^or, 
 on account of the faith is of course again in- 
 volved, as forming the media, of purifying. — 
 But the wicked shall do wickedly. The i in 
 ^JTi'-jni is adversative, and serves to contrast 
 the conduct of the wicked in the last time with 
 the contemporaneous course pursued by the 
 faithful. Cf. the free rendering of the passage 
 in Rev. xxii. 11. — And none of the wicked 
 shall understand ; but the wise shall under- 
 stand, namely, what is the meaning and ultimat« 
 aim of the predictions relating to the last time ; 
 consequently they shall then understand the 
 prophecy, and by its light shall be able to cor- 
 rectly interpret the signs of the time (cf. Matt, 
 xxiv. 32 et seq. ; Luke xxi. 28 et seq.), and ac- 
 cordingly, to act and regulate their conduct 
 with reference to the salvation of their souls, f 
 — Hitzig himself realizes that it would be ex- 
 ceedingly inappropriate to render D'"i''2"-?3 by 
 ' ' teachers " in this passage ; but why should 
 he arbitrarily refuse to assign to it the meaning 
 of " understanding ones," which is the only one 
 
 trn in both cases) can be no other here than in ver. 4. 
 "But since, according to ver. 4, Daniel himself must shut 
 up and seal the book, the participles in this clause, assign- 
 ing the reason for "Hj, cannot have the meaning of th* 
 
 perfect, but only ptixte what is or shall be done ; shut ni^- 
 they shall be (remain) till the time of the end ; thus thej 
 only denote the shutting up and sealing, which must be ac- 
 complished by Daniel The shuttin.g up and sealing 
 
 .... can only consist in thLs, that the book should be pre 
 served in security against any defacement of its contents, 
 so that it might be capable of being read at all times dowE 
 to the time of the end. and might be used by God's people 
 for the strengthening of their faith ; cf. ch. viii. 2ti." — Keil,'] 
 
 * [It is str.mge that a comnient.ator will persist in calling 
 this an ''approximate estimate," when its sole object was 
 to clear np uncertainty as to the duration of the events in 
 prospect, and when, accordingly, preci.se periods of time 
 are assigned in explicit and varied terms. Surely the whole 
 subject is designedly left in doubt if this language does 
 not definitely determine it.] 
 
 + [It is tiius true that history in a measure interprets 
 prophec.v, or rather enables the interpreter to give vivid- 
 ness and detail to predictions in themselves general and 
 ob.scm'e. So also seeing is better than reading a descrip- 
 tion, however clear. But it is not neces.sary to wait for 
 the accomplishment of prophecy in order to gain an intelli- 
 gent comprehension of its essential import. To maintain 
 this would be equivalent to denying any intelligible use of 
 language. Nor is it true, as many expositors assert, that 
 Daniel himself did not understand these prophecies. Ver. S 
 only menns that he did not clearly sec the application of tha 
 announcement in ver. 7 to the iireviuus prophetic declara 
 tions, especially the mode of computing the note of timr 
 there given. This point is cleared up by the paiticulai 
 Rjiecifications of the present communication, and Daniel ii 
 tlierefore tlismissed with a peaceful sense of full intolU 
 gence.] 
 
CHAP. XII. 1-13. 
 
 267 
 
 that can be admitted here, in the former pas- 
 sages (xi. 35 ; 3ui. 1), where it is no less appro- 
 priate ? — Verse 11. And from the time that 
 the daily sacrifice shall he taken away, and 
 an abomination that maketh desolate set up, 
 there shall be a thousand two hundred and 
 ninety days. On the construction of the words 
 131 ^31n ~?5''t which denote the beginning 
 of the 1290 days, cf., e.g., chap. ii. 16; v. 15 ; 
 Ecc. ix. 1 ; Jer. xvii. 10, etc. "l?^~, as appears 
 from the following Ptlb, which does not depend 
 on t"5 after the manner of the genitive, is not 
 an iniinitive, but a " relative asyndetic connec- 
 tion of the prxt. propheticum with C^5." The 3 
 IE ririb may be regarded as "expressing the 
 fateful purpose of God," and therefore as tak- 
 ing the place of the jussive imperfect, which 
 ordinarily serves that purpose (cf. xi. 18). — 
 The expression D^I^ T^P? is distinguished 
 from the synonymous CQCa yipffln, chap. xi. 
 31, and also from Oaoa D-^SlpO, solely by its 
 ^eater brevity, which may be indicated by the 
 combination ' ' desolating abomination " (cf . also 
 the substantially identical CaiS 5ICSn, chap. 
 *iii 13).* It seems to be inadmissible because 
 of the substantial identity of the expression with 
 those former parallels, to translate this passage, 
 with Wieseler (Die sidirig Woehen etc., p. 109) : 
 ' ' From the time that the daily sacrifice shall be 
 vaken away, tiU the (U'M'biting of the abomina- 
 tion, i.e., till the destraction of the idol-altar 
 RDd the rededication of the temple by Judas 
 Maccabsus." — It has alreatly been shown, on 
 chap. viii. 14, that the 1290 days are substan- 
 tially identical with the half year-week (ix. 27), 
 or with the three and a half times (vii. 25 ; 
 xii. 7), and that they involve a?i extension of 
 that period hy nbont half a month only (twelve 
 to thirteen days); and it was also shown on 
 that passage, that on the other hand the 2300 
 evening-mornings or 1,150 days shorten the same 
 period by about four months. According to all 
 the pass-iges relating to the period of three and 
 a half years as thus determined (in the one case 
 exceeding those years by a few days, in the 
 other falling below them by a few months), and 
 especially according to the present passage, the 
 terminus a quo for that period was the juncture 
 when the daily sacrifice was taken away, and 
 when the abomination of desolation was placed 
 in the sanctuary. Our passage is silent with re- 
 gard to the special termimis ad giiem, which 
 had in former passages been described as coin- 
 cident, on the one hand with the judgment of 
 the wicked author of such profanation (chap. 
 
 * [The nent Q?3;r, however, is not in itself synonymous 
 with the act. t?3U3^ : it here becomes equivalent to it only 
 Dy reason of the connection with l^^pUJ. "In ch. xi. 31, 
 Where the subject spoken of is the proceedings of the enemy 
 causing desolation, the abomination is viewed as D?2ffi^i 
 
 britiffing desolation ; here, with reference to the end of 
 those proceedings" (rather, with reference to the persecuted 
 BuflEerers as being profaned by it), "as U?aC brought to 
 isolation ; cf. on cb. ix. 27 " C Keil).] 
 
 vii 86 ; ix. 27), and on the other with the re- 
 dedication of the profaned sanctuary (chap. viii. 
 14) ; in other words, the revealing angel doe> 
 not precisely determine the final p&' it of the last 
 time of trouble (the ^"'10^, concerning which 
 Daniel inquired, v. 8).* He affords an indica- 
 tion, indeed, that a period of blessing should 
 ensue on the expiration of the mystical three 
 and a half years, by employing the beatitude of 
 the following verse : '" Blessed is he that wait- 
 eth," etc. ; but he refrains from determining 
 the exact point of time in which it should be- 
 gin. Upon this point his language is even un- 
 decided and equivocal, inasmuch as he fixes the 
 hmits of the intervening time, at first at 1290, 
 but afterwards at 1335 days — thus in the one 
 case exceeding the measure of exactly 1277 days 
 by thirteen, and in the other by fifty-eight 
 days. The troubled events of the Maccabsean 
 period, which might deserve notice as the points 
 of the beginning and the end of the historical 
 equivalent of the three and a half years, do no 
 present a satisfactory reason for such vacillat- 
 ing predictions ; for the exact period required 
 cannot be found in that epoch, however its lim- 
 its may be fixed. E.g., if, with Bertholdt. 
 Hiivemick, Von Lengerke, et al., its conclusion 
 is assigned to the day of rededicating the tem- 
 ple by Judas Maccabajus, or the 25th Chisleu 
 (Dec. loth) of the year B.C. 164 (1 Mace. iv. 52), 
 and the 1290 days are reckoned backward from 
 that date, their beginning wUl fall on June 10th, 
 B.C. 167, or more than five and a half months 
 earlier than the event which is generally re- 
 garded as marking the commencement of the 
 three and a half years (i.e., earlier than the 
 abrogation of the daily sacrifice on the 15th 
 Chisleu, 167 ; cf. 1 Mace. i. 54) ; nor will that 
 reckoning consist with the arrival in Jerusalem 
 of ApoUonius, the commissioner of taxes, which 
 might possibly be regarded as the introductory 
 event of the period in question ; for according 
 to 1 Mace. i. 29, his arrival took place only 
 about three months prior to the 15th Chisleu, 
 167, instead of 5th (cf, supra, on chap. vii.). 
 Further, the attempt to regard the Maccabsean 
 dedication of the temple as the characteristic 
 fact that marked the conclusion of the 1290 
 days, is antagonized by the circumstance that 
 the troubles of the Jews had by no means 
 reached their end at that time, since the dread- 
 ful tyrant Antiochus yet Uved, the citadel of 
 Zion was still garrisoned by enemies, their leader, 
 Lysias, who had gone to Antioch, was employed 
 in making prepaiation for farther extensive 
 operations, in order to wipe out the shame of 
 his former defeat by Judas, and, in addition, 
 the Ammonites, Edomites, and othey heathen 
 neighbors threatened the little band of Jews 
 led by the Maccabees with dangerous attacks 
 (cf. 1 Mace. iv. as, 41 ; v. 1 et seq. ).f If we 
 assume, with Hitzig, Bleek, Hofmann, Delitzsch, 
 
 * [After the precise.designation of the terminus ad quern 
 in the passage which our author last refers to, there seemed 
 to the prophet, or rather to his angelic in^itrnctor, no neeU 
 of its repetition here. Every reader would spontaneously 
 understand the period in question, dating from an idola- 
 trous installation, to continite till the removal of the offen- 
 sive and impious object. It is evidently the term of the 
 sacrilege.] 
 
 t [It ought to be observed, on the contrary, that the 1,290 
 days are not assigned as the limit of the troubles, but onljf 
 of the profanation.} 
 
268 
 
 THE PROPHET DAISTIEL. 
 
 Fiiller, etc.. that the (tenth of Epiphanea, which 
 took place somewhat later than the dedication 
 of the temple, ended the 1290 days, we are met 
 by the difficulty of ascertaining the date of his 
 death, which has not been preserved by any 
 historical authorities that have descended to our 
 times, and for that reason cannot be definitely 
 settled. That Epiphanes died precisely 140 
 days lifter the dedication of the temple, is a 
 mere assumption of Hitzig, Bleek, etc.. based 
 on a comparison of the 1150 days of chap. viii. 
 14, — which, it is asserted, extend exactly to the 
 dedication — with the 1290 days of the present 
 passage. This a.ssumption appears the more 
 uncertain, in proportion as, on the one hand, it 
 becomes impossible to exactly accommodate 
 those 1 1 50 day s between the desecration of the 
 temple and the ascertained date of its rededica- 
 tion (cf. on chap. viii. 14), and as, on the other 
 hand, it becomes difScult to reconcile the date 
 of the death of Antiochiis, as thus assumed, 
 with historical statements respecting his end 
 which have been preserved to us.* We are 
 accordingly compelled to abandon every attempt 
 to demonstrate an exact correspondence between 
 the time indicated in the text and the periods 
 of the JIaccabajan fera of persecution , and to re- 
 main content with the hypothesis that the 1290 
 days have a merely mystical and symbolical signi- 
 ficance, f The merely approximate character of 
 the correspondence between the prophetic meas- 
 urement of time and the chronological relations 
 of the history of its typical realization, with 
 which we were obliged to content ourselves in 
 a former in.stance, in connection with the 1150 
 days, returns here in a somewhat different man- 
 ner. In that instance we found a considerable 
 minus in comparison with the number 1277, and 
 here a smaller plm.X It wiU scarcely become 
 possible to ever assign a more definite reason 
 
 * The precarious character of all combinations bearing on 
 this question may appear from the following calculation by 
 Hitzig (p. aas et seq.) : " . ... Antiochus (1 Mace. i. 10) 
 ascended the throne in the year 1S7 x. Sel., .nnd he died (1 
 Mace. vi. l(i) in ihe year 149 ; consequently his reign falls 
 between April, B.C. ITft and March, l&j. Uut we possess a 
 y>\n of Seleueus bearing the number of the year PAZ (see 
 Eckhel, DoLtr. uum.^ III. 2".i2), which shows mat Seleueus 
 =till reifined at least at the beginning of the last quarter of 
 B.C. ITli. Antiochus became king during the mouth of Oc- 
 y^ber, 176, .it the earliest ; and it he reigned not quite twelve 
 years, according to Appian, Xi/r., c. H6, we may perhaps 
 regard the eleven years 1T5-Ib5 as being full, and obtain, in 
 ad»itiou. the fraction of the twelfth year by including a 
 remnant of 176 possibly, and certainly by adding the ftrst 
 .nonths of 161 (at !e:ist as far as April). Accordingly if, as 
 ve believe, the author referred in v. 11 to the death of An- 
 riochus as the end of the period, it follows that the latter 
 died 141) davs after the dedication of the temple (see on 
 viii. 14), on' the tifteenth to eighteenth day of the second 
 month 149 (Jewish), i.e., ou the thirteenth of the eighth 
 .Tlonth (Artemisius) 148 Sel. This result harmonizes e-xcel- 
 .ently with that coin, and also with Appian (.'). On the 
 otiier hand, when Eusebius (Chron. i. ;i4S) assigns eleven 
 years to the reign of Antiochus, from Olymp. 151, 3, to 
 Olymp. 154. 1, or from B.C. 174 to 164, there is an error, 
 not only with respect to the point of depirture, but also 
 with regard to the end, since the death of the king trans- 
 pired during the second half of the Olympiad ; Antiochus 
 died in Olymp. 153, 4." Bleek ventures a sunilar ealcula- 
 tloi {Ttteijliiii. ieilKlir.. p. 293 et seq. ), in which the words 
 '■ perhaps, probably, I believe," occur suspiciously often. 
 
 t [But this convenient refuge of the puzzled expositor is 
 rut olf by the repeated and varied form of the numbers so 
 absolutely given. If all was symbolical, why these changes, 
 <»ud why these jtarticnlar numbersyj 
 
 • [This excess or dcflciency is occasioned by the errone- 
 ous interpretation of the "2300 evening-mornings" as 
 being 1150 days (cf. on ch. viii. 14), and by taking the 
 three and a half veara too strictly.] 
 
 for this two-fold discrepancy than that the 
 seer's attention was to be emphatically called tc 
 the ripproximnlioa of the designation of time. 
 Cf. Kranichfeld also. p. 413. who justly observes 
 in opposition to the artificial attempts to ascer- 
 tain the exact historical grounds for the differ- 
 ence between the 1150 and 1290 days, which be 
 adduces, that "it is, moreover, an assertioii 
 which can never be exegetically establi.shed, 
 that the deliverance of the nation, the destruc- 
 tion of the foe. and the restoration of the order 
 of worship are everywhere in this book regarded 
 as separate in time. On the contrary, they 
 designate the same juncture of time at the end, 
 as seen in the prophet's perspective, which 
 appears from their indiscriminate application, 
 or in other words, from the substitution of one 
 for another; cf. vii. 25 with 26; viii. 14 with 
 25 et seq.; ix. 24 with 26, 27 ; xi. 45 with xii. 
 
 1 For the rest, the profanation of the 
 
 temple which an Antiochus Epiphanes imposed 
 on Israel during three years, continues to be a 
 historical exemplification of the facts revealed 
 to Daniel's prophetic vision, in the face of the 
 1290 days, and despite the fact that in the na- 
 ture of the case it accords but relatirdy witli 
 them in a formal aspect. " * — Verse 1 2. Blessed 
 is he that waiteth (or '• is steadfast to the 
 end") and cometh to the thousand three hun- 
 dred and five and thirty days. In view of 
 its connection with the foregoing, the meaning 
 of this exclamation can only be as follows : 
 "After 1290 days have expired, the tribula- 
 tion .shall end ; it shall not be completely ended, 
 however, until forty-five additional days (one 
 and a half months) have elapsed, hence, until a 
 total of 1335 days has been reached." Here 
 again we believe ourselves obliged to rest satis- 
 fied with finding a symbolic and approximate 
 value in the relation of the several numbers to 
 each other ; cf. the remarks on this point in a 
 former connection, Eth.-fimd. principles, etc., 
 on chap. viii. No. 1. Among the various at- 
 tempts that have been made to explain with 
 historical accuracy the difference of forty-five 
 days between the time fixed by v. 11 and that 
 given in v. 12, none have succeeded in realizing 
 an entirely satisfactory result: e.g., (1) that of 
 Hitzig, based on the assumption that the 1335 
 days extend to the reception from Tabje of the 
 tidings respecting the death of Antiochus, forty- 
 five (?) days subsequent to his demise ; (2) tha 
 
 * fit seems to ns that the following explanations of Stu- 
 art fairly and sufficiently meet the difficulties or "dis- 
 crepancies" raised by the author: '-The 1290 days are 
 more specific than the phra-^e. ■ time, times and a half,' in 
 ver. 7, and also in vii. 25. The latter (' time.' etc.) is, as it 
 were, a round number, three and a half first equalling the 
 one halt of the sacred number seven, and the fractional 
 part equalling the half of one year. In snch a case minute 
 exactness of course is not to be expected. But the thirty 
 additional days here (over 1260 days = forty-two months = 
 three and a half years) are doubtlef,s designed as an exact 
 account of time ilurmg which the detestable (desolatirgi 
 abomination continued in the temple. The terminux a quu 
 is the time when Antiochus first removed the daily sacrifice, 
 which probably was near the end of May or at the beginning 
 of June in B.C. 168. Judas llaccabajus removed this 
 f^p™! and purified the temple, Dec. 26th of B.C. 165, 
 making the time in question, i.e., three and a half years, aa 
 nearly as historv will enable ns to compute it. There can 
 harilly be room "for doubt that the statement in our text 1« 
 minut<'ly correct. The work of Judas there is th« urmi 
 nU8 ad quern of the period in question."] 
 
CHAP. XIL 1-13. 
 
 269 
 
 assamption of Fuller, that the loth Xanthicus 
 (April) of the year B.C. 164 ('■), when a letter 
 from Antiochus V. Eupator to the Jews reached 
 Jerusalem, aceording to 2 Mace. xi. , fl-hich con- 
 tained the welcome proffer of peace, marks the 
 end of the 1335 days; and (3) the theory of 
 Bertholdt, Havernick. Von Lengerke, Wieseler, 
 etc, , that while the 1290 days extended to the 
 dedication of the temple, the 1335 days reached 
 down to the death of Antiochus, forty-five days 
 afterward. Against the latter opinion it may 
 be objected that the interval between the dedi- 
 cation of the temple and the death of Antiochus 
 was unquestionably longer than forty-five days ; 
 or, in other words, that Epiphanes did not die 
 as early as the month of Shebat in the year 148 
 £B. Sel., as those scholars (including Wieseler in 
 Herzog's Real-Jiitci/khp., I. 387, Art. Antiochus) 
 assume, in contradiction of 1 Mace. vi. 10 (cf. 
 also Hitzig, p. 220, and FuUer, p. 357 et seq. ).* 
 The two former theories, on the other hand, are 
 open to the objeotion that the reception of the 
 news from Tabae of the king's death, and also 
 of the offers of peace from Antioch, were events 
 of far too little importance to lead the writer 
 (whether prophesying tx ecoitu, or by virtue of 
 a disclosure of the future from God) to assign 
 to either of them the dignity of marking the 
 fiual conclusion of aU troubles. The letter 
 from Eupator was merely an offer of peace, and 
 
 * [The author is far too positive concerning the irrecon- 
 cilabiUty of this period with the lieath of .\ntiochus, as the 
 following comjiutation by Stuart will suffice to show ; " It 
 appears from chap. .\i. 40—^4 above, that Antiochus made 
 another and final invasion of EfTypt. near the close of his 
 life, after which he marched against Palestine. Mattathias 
 and his sons, in the mean time, had been organizing the 
 party of the pious, and Antiochus was e.xceetlingly mdig- 
 nant at the efforts which they made anil the success with 
 which ihoy were attended. In 1 Mace. ii. 2G-37, we have 
 au account of the situation of Antiochus while in the 
 'glorious land.' His treasury was empty. He had already 
 robbed the temple of all which it contained that was of any 
 value, and he was necessitated to look to another quarter. 
 He left half of his army, therefore, with Lysias, one of his 
 favorite officers, and passed over the Euphrates in order to 
 ritle the countries of the East. First he went through and 
 subdued Armenia (ra^ knavm \topai^ V. 37), and then turned 
 off to rob the temple at Elymais, where he met nith dis- 
 grace, and finally with death. Not long aft«r the departure 
 of Antiochns Lysias began the contest in Palestine in 
 Berious earnest ; but Judas uniformly triumphed in all his 
 encounters ; and so decisive was one of them over Lysias, 
 that Judas proceeded to purify the temple and to restoie its 
 worship, 1 Mace. iv. 36 seq. All this must have occupied 
 some months ; .and the consecration of the temple took 
 place the 2")th of Dec. 165 B.C. Of course Antiochus had 
 had sulhcient time for his conquest in Armenia and for his 
 advance to Elymais before the winter had far advanced. 
 It was in early spj-ing that he undertook the robbery of the 
 temple in Elymais ; after which, on his retreat, the news 
 met him of total defeat in Palestine, and helped to increase 
 the malady under which he was then laboring. In 1 Mace. 
 vi, 1 seq., is an account of the close of the life of .\ntiochus, 
 aud of bis failure at Elymais. If we now count onward, 
 fl'om the consecration of the temple by Judas to the time 
 when Antiochus deceased, we shall perceive at once that 
 the period of l-i33 days is in all probability the period of 
 Antiochus' death. From the time that the daily burnt-offer- 
 ing was removed by ApoUonius, at the command of An- 
 tiochus, to the time of the reconsccration, were ISiH). From 
 the same iermiiius a quo to the death of Antiochus were 
 1335 days, i.e., forty-five days more than is included in 
 the preceding period. History has not anywhere recorded 
 the precise day of Antiochus' death ; so that we cannot 
 compare the passage before us with that. But we are cer- 
 tain as to the order of events, and as to the season of the 
 year, as well as the year itself, in which the death of this 
 king took place. Of the general accuracy there can be no 
 doubt ; and such are the chronological designations of this 
 book that we mry safely rely, in this case, on its minute 
 •curacy."] 
 
 and not the peace itself ; and at the time both 
 of its arrival and of the tidings from Tabse, the 
 horizon of Juda3a was far too dark to enable a 
 pseudo-Daniel, writing at that day, to an- 
 nounce the end of all the sufferings of his na- 
 tion a.s having already arrived, or as being 
 immediately at hand (cf. 1 Mace. iv. 35; vi. 17 
 et seq.), on the ground merely that such mes- 
 sages had been received. The mode of escape 
 from the difficulty that is adopted by Kirmss, 
 Bleek, Delitzsch, et al. , is however still more 
 questionable than the reference of the 1385 days 
 to any of the events that were adduced in sup- 
 port of the foregoing theories. It assumes that 
 some other fact of an encouraging nature, 
 which is no longer found in our historical docu- 
 ments, formed the tenninus ad qacia of the 
 1335 days of the prophet ; and is clearly nothing 
 more than an expedient prompted by embar- 
 rassment and helpless di.scouragement, which 
 feelings our theory of the merely symbolic value 
 of the designation of time serves to justify bet 
 ter than any other hypothesis. Cf. Kliefoth, 
 p. 514 : " In extending this period of 121)0 da.Ta 
 by forty-five, the design probabl.v was merely 
 to indicate that whoever should live in patience 
 and religious faith beyond the 1200 days, i.e., 
 beyond the death of the wicked oppressor An- 
 tiochus, should be accounted blessed. The 
 forty-five days are mentioned for the purpose 
 merely of expressing that idea of surviving, and 
 the form of the expression was governed solely 
 by a desire to retain the analogy of v. 11." Also 
 Kranichfeld, p. 416 : " The period of final con- 
 flict which leads to the victory is here described , 
 as being very brief, comparatively, for the pur- 
 pose of comforting and encotu'aging the pious 
 ones ; it is not measured by years, but merely 
 by fractious of months. The half of a cycle of 
 three months here takes the place of the limited 
 period in the mind of the writer, according to 
 ix. 26 ; vui. 25, etc. ; and by the arithmetical 
 measurement of time by days which is current 
 in this book, it obtains the forty-five days which 
 lie outside of the period of 1290 days or three 
 and a half times,'" etc. Cf. also the Eth. -fund, 
 principles. No. 2. 
 
 Verse 13. Concluding fxfiortation and pi'mni.se. 
 But go thou thy way (rather, " on ") till the 
 end. '"IPS*], properly, "and thou," with con- 
 clusive -,, but which may also be taken in an 
 adversative sense, because it leads over from the 
 foregoing to the close in an encouraging manner. 
 Ti?.^ "H^. is of course to be understood according 
 to the analogy of v. 9 : "go on, toward the final 
 point of the predicted events;" not "go thy 
 way " (Hitzig), nor yet "go toward iliy end" 
 (Havernick, Fiiller, Kliefoth, etc.), for 7P. is 
 clearly shown by the article to refer to the same 
 end as that mentioned in v. 9. — For thou shalt 
 rest and stand in thy lot at the end of the 
 days; i.e., thou shalt rest in the grave, in the 
 quiet sleep of death (cf. Isa. Ivii. 2, and supra, 
 V. 2). The meaning is, " that thou mavest rest, 
 and enter on thy lot," etc.. i.e., that thou may- 
 est receive thy portion of the inheritance at the 
 judgment of eternal recompense; cf. chap. vii. 
 18, 27 ; Rev. x.x. 6. The thought refers back 
 undeniably to vs. 2, 3, hence to the jSIess-ianic 
 recompense, of which Daniel also should par- 
 
270 
 
 THE PBOPHET DANIEL. 
 
 take, and a majority of interpreters recognize 
 that fact ; but they generally pervert the mean- 
 ing of T^yril, so as to malte it apply to the 
 resurrection (standing up) for the purpose of 
 being thus recompensed. The correct view in 
 this respect is advocated, e.(j., by Ewald, Kamp- 
 hausen, Kranichfeld, etc. — Hitzig's interpreta- 
 tion is very flat and exceedingly forced (in par- 
 tial imitation of Grotius and Dathej : " And 
 thou, go on to the goal, and thou mayest be 
 content (!), and attend to thy oiiice (!) for the 
 end of days." — [" ^'^'13, lot, of the inheritance 
 divided to the Israelites by lot, referred to the 
 inheritance of the saints in Ught (Col. i. 12), 
 which shall be possessed by the righteous after 
 the resurrection from the dead in the heavenly 
 Jerusalem. D^tt'l'n 7pb, to = at the end of the 
 days, i.e., not = d^Jp^T riins, in the Mes- 
 sianic (rather Antiochian) time, but in the last 
 days, when, after the judgment of the world, 
 the kingdom of glory shall appear.- — Well shall 
 it be for us if in the end of our days we too are 
 able to depart hence with such consolation of 
 hope ! " — Keil.] 
 
 ETUICO-FUNDAMENTAL PRINCIPLES BELATED 
 TO THE HISTORY OF SALVATION, APOLO- 
 GETICAL REMARKS, AND HOMILETICAL 
 SUGGESTIONS. 
 
 1. The fundamental dogmatic thought that is 
 I especially prominent in this closing section is 
 the future resurrection of the dead and their 
 eternal destiny, as predicted in vs. 1-3, and as 
 again repeated and confirmed in the closing 
 words of V. 13. That in the meaning of the 
 book this resurrection is not to be regarded as 
 confined to Israel only, but rather as universal 
 in its scope, has been shown in the remarks on 
 v. 2. It remains only to briefly answer the im- 
 portant question respecting the relation of that 
 prediction to the Maccab^an age, which prima- 
 rily aiforded a typical and preliminary realiza- 
 tion only of the prophecies of Daniel in general. 
 Is it necessary, for in.stance, to take the entire 
 prophecy in a fgiirative sense, as Dereser does, 
 and to apply it merely to a spiritual or national 
 resurrection of the nation from its former con- 
 dition of apparent helplessness and death ? * 
 Or are we, with Bertholdt, Hitzig, and the 
 remaining rationalistic exegetes, to charge the 
 prophet with having committed a gross error, 
 in conceiving of the end of the world, the resur- 
 rection, and the judgment as immediately con- 
 sequent on the death of Ant. Epiphanes ? — 
 Neither of the two would be coixect ; on the 
 contrary, we are again reminded of the perspec- 
 tive character of prophetic vision in this connec- 
 tion, according to which the interval between 
 the preliminary and the ultimate end was over- 
 looked, from the point of view occupied by the 
 
 * Cf. Dcrecer on the passage 1 " ilany Israelites who hved 
 during the persecution .... in rocky caverns, where the 
 dead were bestowed, or who peenied to lie in the dust like a 
 lifuleascorpee, ahfcll, ^oto jpeajc, awake to renewed life through 
 the goodness and powei- cf G-jd, and shall perform actions 
 hy which they shall lJ7e forever iu history. On the other 
 
 hand, ^he apostate Jews shulJ be branded with ever- 
 
 lasting sba'ne.^* 
 
 prophesying seer long before either came t< 
 
 pass. By virtue of this perspective vision, the 
 Old-Test, and the New-Test. Antichrifits become 
 one, which is true also of all the circumstancea 
 and results connected with their appearance. 
 '■ As Antiochus became a type of Antichiist, so 
 the oppression of the Old-Test, community of 
 God's people by him became a type of the op- 
 pression of the New- Test, congregation of the 
 people of God by the latter. And as little as it 
 surprises us that Joel iii. 1 et seq. should make 
 the preliminary signs of the end follow imme- 
 diately upon the pouring out of God's Spirit, 
 with which the last world-period begins, without 
 remarking the period intervening between them ; 
 or as easily as we can explain the fact that Amoa 
 is. should predict the restoration of the fallen 
 tabernacle of David and the final return of Israel 
 to its native land, immediately after the judg- 
 ment which he denounces upon the nation, thua 
 overlooking the whole of the immense period in 
 the course of which Israel indeed returned to ita 
 country, but was a second time expelled ty the 
 Romans ; or as little as we charge untruthful- 
 ness upon the prophet Ezekiel, when, in chap, 
 xxxvi. , he announces to the moimtains of Israel 
 the future return of the nation, and adds that 
 God would show greater kindness to them than 
 ever before, because this was not fulfilled on 
 their first return ; or as natural as we find it 
 that in chap. xi. Isaiah should connect a descrip- 
 tion of the glory and peace of Christ's kingdom, 
 which shall only be realized at His second com- 
 ing, with the words, '' there shall come forth a 
 rod out of the stem of Jesse," which are regard- 
 ed as bearing on the appearance of Christ in. 
 lowliness, thus viewing Christ's first and second 
 advents together ; so little should it surprise us 
 or seem incompatible with the nature of pro- 
 phecy, that the present prediction should repre- 
 sent the Seleucid persecution as being imme- 
 diately followed by the full and final deliverance 
 of the nation, without observing that a long 
 series of years intervenes between the two. . . . 
 Call it prophetic limitation, or whatever else we 
 will, it is nevertheless the manner of the pro- 
 phets ; and the fact that we find it exemplified 
 in the present instance is to us an evidence that 
 the prophecy is genuine. Why do its opponents 
 neglect to show how the prophecy respecting the 
 resurrection of the dead immediately after the de- 
 cease of Antiochus can be reconciled ^vith their 
 view concerning the composition of the book ? 
 If it was written immediately before the death of 
 Antiochus, what was there to excite the hope 
 that the time of blessing and the resurrection of 
 the dead should follow immediately afterward ? 
 And if it was felt that such a hope was war- 
 ranted, and it was 7iot realised, were men not 
 deceived ? Who would have attached further 
 value to such a mistaken prophecy '? — But if it 
 was composed after the death of Antiochus, it 
 becomes whoUy inconceivable that the false pri/phet 
 slimdd have compromised his pretended projyhecy 
 by THIS conchision. But the features that are 
 inconceivable on the presumption that the pro- 
 phecy is spurious, are readily explained on the 
 view that it was the actual Daniel who prophe- 
 sied thus, centuries before Antiochus. The 
 truth of his prophecy was in that case so incon- 
 testably assured in the time of Antiochus, that 
 
CHAP. XII. 1-13. 
 
 ^71 
 
 the apparent failure of its prediction concerning 
 the resurrection of the dead (or, more properly, 
 the delay of its fulfilment) was no longer suffi- 
 cient to cast a doubt upon it. In one word, this 
 passage of our book, usually considered so diffi- 
 cult, is so little worthy to be regarded as the 
 heel of Achilles in the case, that it rather con- 
 stitutes its .<itrength, before which its assailants 
 are put to shame" (Fuller, p. 343 et seq.). — It 
 should, however, be observed in this connection 
 that the leading idea in the prophecy in vs. 1-3 
 is not the prediction of the resurrection, but 
 rather the universal and eternal recompense to be 
 meted out to them. The rising of the many 
 " sleepers in the dust of the earth." as predicted 
 in V. 2, is at bottom a mere auxiliary thought, 
 or a preparation for the principal feature of the 
 prophecy, consisting in the promise of everlast- 
 ing life to the pious, and the denouncing of 
 everlasting shame and torment upon the wicked. 
 Inasmuch as the judgment upon the Old-Test. 
 Antichrist, as foretold in a former passage (chap, 
 xi. 45', forms, in a measure, the opening act 
 and point of commencement of this great recom- 
 pensing judgment, all subsequent instances of 
 such judgment must appear as a continued series 
 of displays of the Divine righteousness, whose 
 final conclusion at the last judgment wUl consti- 
 tute the highest and most perfect, but not the 
 only fulfilment of this prophetic passage. Among 
 such displays of God's justice may be reckoned 
 the end of the tyrant Herod and the destruction 
 of Jerusalem by the Romans, the subjugation of 
 the Eastern churches by Islamism and the over- 
 throw of the Middle-age Papal church by the 
 Reformation. — As the eternal recompense, so 
 the awaking of the dead, which forms its sub- 
 stratum and preliminaiy condition, reaches far 
 into the history of time and earth, extending 
 itself close to the historical position of our pro- 
 phet, even though Jesus Christ, as the first fruits 
 of them that sleep, began the blessed series of 
 those who shall have a part in the " resurrec- 
 tion of the just" (Luke xiv. 14 ; sx. 36; 1 Cor. 
 XT. 20 et seq.), and though, consequently. He 
 was the first who could say with entire truth, 
 " The hour is coming, and now is, when the 
 dead shall hear the voice of the Sou of God ; and 
 they that hear him shall live " (John v. 25 ; cf. 
 vs. 28, 29). Both the preliminary judgment of 
 the world, which is transpiring in the events of 
 history, and the ethical resurrection in Christ 
 Jesus of the spiritually dead, which is the basis 
 and pre-condition of the future resurrection of 
 aU flesh.^both these have their beginning at the 
 very point where the prophet's scope of v-ision 
 ends, and by that fact attest the truth and the 
 Divine origin of his predictions, to which the 
 Lord would assuredly not have repeatedly ap- 
 pealed and referred, had He not considered this 
 book equal, in its inspired character, to any of 
 the remaining prophets of the Old Covenant (cf. 
 the Introd. § 6). 
 
 2. The prophecy, which forms the second lead- 
 ing thought of this section, relates to the point 
 of time of the end. It repeats in substance the 
 mystical [?] measure of time noticed in a former 
 section, by which the Last severe trouble of God's 
 people should continue during three and a half 
 times, and adds a further period of one and a half 
 months, during which the last remnants of suf- 
 fering and trouble shall be removed. It was 
 
 shown above that the historical conditions of 
 the Maccabseau period afford but little counte- 
 nance to the as.sumption that these periods of 
 1290 and 1333 days were invented to accord with 
 the course of events in the experience of the 
 past. It was also shown in a former instance 
 (on chap. vii. So) that the underlying idea, which 
 is common to all the parallel mystical limitations 
 of time (the half-week, the three and a half 
 times, the 1150, 1290, 1335 days), is that the 
 time of suffering should be sliortencd, — that the' 
 time of tribulation should indeed begin, but 
 should be broken through at the middle, and by 
 the grace of God should quickly be brought to 
 its close. It is consequently a time to which 
 the words of the Saviour respecting the shorten- 
 ing of the days of tribulation (lio'/M.iu&ijuni, Matt. 
 xxiv. 22 ; Mark xiii. 20) wUl apply. It will be 
 sufficient to notice, in this connection, that this 
 mysterious period, which received a first ap- 
 proximate [!] fulfilment in the great religious 
 persecution of the Jews by Antiochus Epiphanes, 
 appeared a second time in the Jewish war, which 
 ended in the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus 
 (A.D. 66-70), and that a thiid and final fulfil- 
 ment of the same period is in anticipation, in the 
 last days before the return of Christ, according 
 to Rev. xii. 14 ; xiii. 5, when the church shall 
 be overtaken by a time of severe trial and puri- 
 fication. Cf. Auberlen (Daniel, p. 287), who, 
 somewhat vaguely and generally characterizes 
 the three and a half times as ' • the period of the 
 world-power, during which the supremacy over 
 the kingdom of heaven is given to the earthly 
 kingdoms," and then proceeds : " So, then, this 
 number is resumed in the Apocalypse, in order 
 to characterize the times of the heathen, during 
 which Jerusalem is trodden under foot, and in 
 which, con.sequently, the kingdom of God has 
 wholly lost its outward and visible existence in 
 the earth — hence the times from the Roman de- 
 struction of Jerusalem to the return of Christ 
 (more correctly, without doubt, the last and 
 most momentous epoch of that time, or the 
 epoch of the New-Test. Antichrist). Cf. Luke 
 xxi. 24, and Rev. xi. 2, both of which speak of 
 the treading under foot of the holy city by the 
 heathen, to continue, according to the former 
 passage, until the times of the Gentiles are ful- 
 filled, and, according to the latter, until forty- 
 two months! = 3A years = 12li0 days) are past. 
 To this negative designation Rev. xiii. 5 adds a 
 positive, according to which the forty-two 
 months denote the duration of the power of the 
 beast, i.e., of the world-power. The only re- 
 maining passage in the Apocalypse which men- 
 tions the 1260 days, chap. xi. 3, might likewise 
 be explained by this opinion. . . . The congre- 
 gation therefore finds room in the heathen world, 
 but it is also given over to the dominion of the 
 world-power ; it rests under the protection of 
 that power, but also under its pressure ; it is a 
 suffering and militant church to this day. Pre- 
 cisely this correlation of protection and oppres- 
 sion forms the specific feature of the relation of 
 the congregation to the world-power throug'nout 
 the history of the church." Delitzsch (p. 285) 
 is more cautious, that is, he avoids the excessive 
 extension of the three and a half times until 
 they cover a period of many centuries, and con- 
 tents himself with observing that " in the anti- 
 typical history of the last times, these measures 
 
272 
 
 THE PROPHET DANIEL. 
 
 of time, the three and a half years, 1390 and 
 1335 days, shall yet become important ; " and 
 Kliefoth (p. 503) contends for that interpreta- 
 tion of the three and a half times which holds ; 
 that they denote "the highest development of 
 the power of Antichrist, and his end," imme- 
 diately before the manifestation of Christ. 
 
 Probably the opinion of those is likewise not 
 to be at once rejected, who hold that there was 
 also a tyjjical relation between the three and a 
 half times of Daniel and the public life of Jesus, 
 ■which covered three to four years, whether they 
 regard the latter period as a period of coijtinued 
 ti'ial and suffering, which became more intense 
 toward its close (cf . Luke xiii. 6-9 : the three 
 years of laborious and vain attempts on the part 
 of the Lord to convert the barren fig-tree. Israel), 
 or whether they find in it the first half of the 
 mystical week mentioned in chap. ix. 27, and 
 let the second, which corresponds directly to the 
 three and a half years, follow immediately after- 
 ward (cf . supra, the history of the exposition of 
 chap. ix. 24-27). Ebrard has recently put forth 
 a particularly noteworthy effort to carry out the 
 latter of these views, with special regard to the 
 chronology of the leadii^ events in the life of 
 Christ, although his attempt involves much that 
 is artificial and axhitxary (ChristUche Dogmatik^ 
 2d ed.. II. 747; cf. his Kritik der emng. 
 Gcschichte, 3d ed., pp. 105, 196 et seq. ; — and 
 for a criticism of his views, cf. Biihring, in 
 Schenkel's Allg. kirchl. Zeitschrlft, 1867, p. 
 579). 
 
 3. Homiktical suc/gestkins. — As in the Oratio 
 esehatologicii by Christ (Matt. xxiv. par.) and 
 especially in its intermediate parts (vs. 29-36), 
 so in the present section there are two piincipal 
 questions whose investigation devolves on the 
 honiUetical student ; and they succeed each 
 other in the same order as in that section of the 
 gospels : (1) the question concerning the pre- 
 conditions and the course of the end of the world 
 and the final judgment (see vs. 1-3) ; and (2) the 
 question relating to the preceding development, 
 or to the time of the end of the world (see v. 5 et 
 seq. ). In answer to the first question, vs. 1-3 
 indicate that the .sufferings and sorrows of God's 
 people shall attain to an unprecedented height, 
 as a necessary preparation for their deliverance 
 by the Messiah ; and further, that the general 
 resurrection of all the dead, whether pious or 
 godless, forms a prerequisite and preparation to 
 pave the way for the judgment of the world, 
 which is to dispense eternal rewards and pun- 
 ishments. The revealing angel answers the 
 second question in vs. 7, 11, and 12. so far as to 
 state that the last times shall constitute a period 
 of suffering, through which the faithful ones 
 must urge their way, but which shall be short- 
 ened and broken through at the middle by the 
 grace of God, — in which is contained, at the 
 same time, a reference to the sudden .and unex- 
 pected introduction of the final time of the end, 
 or to the coming of the judge of the world like 
 a thief in the night (Matt. xxiv. 36, 42, 44; 
 Luke xxi. 34 et seq. ; 1 Thess. v. 3 et seq.). 
 The solution of both questions leads to an ex- 
 liortation to patient, contented, and watchful 
 waiting for the fulfilment of the prophecy re- 
 specting the last end (vs. 4, 9, 13 — cf. Matt, 
 xxiv. 33 et seq., 43 et seq. ; xxv. 1 et seq.). 
 Thus all the leading features of the Scriptural 
 
 doctrine of the last things (Mors tua, judicium 
 postremwn, gloria ccili, et dolor inferni, etc.) are 
 comprehended within the narrow limits of thia 
 chapter, and are there properly arranged for 
 practical and edifying discussion, either in a 
 single study or in several. 
 
 Single passages. 
 
 On V. 1, Luther : " This does not signify phy- 
 sical sufferings, which were far greater at the 
 de.struction of Jerusalem, in Rome, and in many 
 other cities and countries ; but the suffering of 
 souls, or the spiritual affliction of the church, as 
 prefigured by the sufferings of Christ. For phy- 
 sical sufferings are temporarj', and cease with 
 the body. But the question here is whether the 
 church shall fall or stand, which the devil had 
 attacked in two directions through the agency 
 of Antichrist : on the one hand, by an Epicurean 
 contempt for the sacraments and the Word uf 
 God, on the other, by the ten'ors and despair of 
 conscience, in which no proper comfort of the 
 graces (was found), but only wretched tortures, 
 which vexed men with the sufficiency of their 
 own doings and with their works (of which, how- 
 ever, the Epicureans and heathen know nothing) ; 
 hence, that it was time that Michael should 
 arouse himself, and not suffer Christendom to 
 be destroyed at its last.gasp, but to comfort and 
 collect it again by his beneficent word of grace." 
 — Melancthon : '''Semper opart et nobis notam 
 esse et infixam animis hane doctrinam, quod Ec- 
 elesia sit subjecta cruci, et cur nit suhjeeta. videli- 
 cit, quia mdt Deus intelligi ab EccUsia iram ad- 
 versus peccatum, qimm mundns contemnit. . . . 
 Agnoscant igitur pii Ecelesiw a:rnm?ms. et propter 
 Dei gloriam ac propriam salutem et publicam 
 necessitatem acrius incumbantin Ecangelii studi- 
 um, et toto pectore Deum inrocent, ut Ecclesiam 
 conservet, defendat, et aiigeat. — Quatnor autem 
 consolationes h. I. traduntur, qum piis omnibus 
 semper in conspectu esse debent : 1. Prima est, 
 quod Ecclcsia non sit penitus interitura, sed tunc 
 quoque in illis periculis duratura. 2. Secunda 
 consoUitio, quod ibi sunt fiitura Ecclesire membra, 
 ubicumque erunt amplectentes purnm Evangelii 
 doctrinam ; erit enim, ut inquit, dispersio popuU 
 (cfr. V. 7). 3. Tertia con.mlatio, quodinhis tantis 
 ])erici.dis habitura git Ecclesia difensorcm Filium 
 Dei (Michaelem). 4. Quarta consolatio est. quam 
 hie quoque proponit Angelus : Qmim O'rumno' 
 non sint futures perpetuev . hac spe faeilins ens 
 feramus, quod pits promittitur yloriosa liberatio 
 et aterna Itetitia ; impiis iiero 'denuntiantur 
 eeterni cruciatus." — Starke: "God permits the 
 persecution of His church to reach its highest 
 point that His help may be so much the more 
 glorious." 
 
 On vs. 2. 3, Jerome: " Opprcsso Antichristo 
 et spiritu Sali-atoris extincto salrabitur populus, 
 qui scriptus fuerit in libra Iiei, et pro diversitate 
 meritorum alii resurgent in titam ceternam. et 
 alii in opprobrium sempit^rnum. Magistri autem 
 habebunt similitudinern eali, et qui alios erudier- 
 unt, stellarum fulgori comparabuntur. NoN 
 ENIM BUPFICIT SCIRE SAPIENTIAM, NISI ET 
 ALIOS ERUDIAS ; TACITlTbQUE 8KRMO DOCTRI- 
 NiE, ALIUM NON iEDIFICANS (cfr. 1 Cor. xiv. 
 3 BS.), MERCEDEM OPEKIS RECIPERE KON 
 POTEST." — Melancthon : " FaciUut fcrinius hu- 
 jus fito' miserias, cum quasi vutam prospieimus, 
 et seimus aliquando MecUsiam ex tantis malii 
 eluctaturam esse Videmus nunc qiiidem 
 
CHAP. XII. 1-13. 
 
 973 
 
 mitere dmipatum, esse populum Dei : quare iion 
 procul abest resMcitatio mortuorum.'''' — Starke : 
 '• Since the faithful martyrs, who loved not 
 their lives unto the death, are to have the pre- 
 ference over others in the resurrection (1 Cor. 
 XV. 23 et seq.), should it contradict the righteous- 
 ness of God that the greatest persecutors of the 
 church, as the fii'st-bora sons of hell, should be 
 raised before the general resurrection of the 
 dead, and be the first to be cast into hell with 
 soul and body (comp. Rev. xix. 20 with Rom. ii. 
 9) ? — Forward, then, ye teachers of the Gospel ! 
 do not become wearied in your oiEce ! Rather 
 devote tongue, pen, and life to point men to 
 Christ as the true righteousness ! Suffer in 
 patience everything that the wicked world can 
 do to you on that account ! The magnitude of 
 your gracious reward is well worth such indus- 
 try and patience ! " On v. 4, Jerome : "'Etiatn 
 iit Apocalypsi Joannis liber tidetur xiguatut sep- 
 
 tem sigiilis intus et /oris Librum antem 
 
 ilium potest solvere, qui Scripturarum, sacrameiUa 
 cognovit, et intelligit cenigmata et verba tenebrosa 
 propter inysterioi'um magnitudinem, et interpre- 
 tatur parabolas, et oceiddentem littram transfert 
 in spirituM •cimfieantetn." — Osiander : " The 
 Divine prophecies are only then correctly under- 
 stood when they are in course of fulfilment (cf. 2 
 Pet. i. 20)." 
 
 On vs. 7, 11, 13, Melancthon: "■ McUb sunt 
 temporuni mirabili consiUo Dei oonstitutm. Et 
 quanquam Ckristus diem ilium noli patri notvm 
 esse inquit nee milt nos curiose qnarere certum 
 diem ant annnm, sed semper relut in stations 
 paratos expectare ilium Iwtissimum diem, quo se 
 ostendet vniverso Inimano generi et cnm sua 
 Ecdesia triumphabit ; tamen breritas hujus 
 mundi vane significata est." — Calvin: " Quam- 
 I'ii Daniel non stulta curiositnte inductus quo'si- 
 erit ex Angela de fine mirabilium, tamen non ob- 
 tinet, quod petebut, quia scilicet roluit Deus ad 
 modum alUjucm intdligi, rpiR pradixerat, sed 
 tamen aliquid manere occiiltinn, usquedum veniret 
 tnaturum plena remlittionis t-empus. Hax igitur 
 ratio est, cur Angelas non eaaudiat Danielem. 
 Pium quidem erat ejus cotum i^neguc enim optat 
 18 
 
 quicquam scire plus q nam jus esset), verum Deus 
 scit quid opus sit, ideo non concessit, quod opta- 
 bat." — Geier (in Starke) : "The last times will 
 be terrible and dangerous ; but they have their 
 definite hmits." 
 
 On V. 10, Theodoret : dlSk yap Set traaiv d;r/iuc 
 -pocKtlcdat rii \^ela, iiAA' ol fif:v voij^ove^ 6ta rij^ 
 avu-&€v avTo't^ x^PVyovfJ-evT]^ yvoioeug avv^aovatv, oi 
 de avofjLia aal 6voaE0Eig ov^givte^ ovdev tl>v kyKei- 
 fih'ui' votjcat dwrjoovrai, hrav 6e eTiOy Ta Tzpuyfiara^ 
 Ga^ut; ruf ~EfH Toi'Tuv fia-HijOovraL 7Tpo(f,r/rE(a(;. — 
 Luther : ' ' For however brightly and powerfully 
 the Gospel moves, and however strong the church 
 may be, there must still be heretics and false 
 teachers to prove her, in order that the approved 
 ones may be manifest ; and these same heretics 
 are fond of taking sides with kings and great 
 lords. Consequently the heretics wiU continue 
 
 to the end But to the godless he (ths 
 
 prophet, or, rather, his prophecy) is of uo ser- 
 vice, as he himself remarks : the wicked shall 
 remain wicked, and not regard it. For this pro- 
 phecy and similar ones were not written that we 
 might (beforehand exactly) know history and 
 the troubles of the future, so as to feed our 
 curiosity as with an item of news ; but that the 
 pious might comfort themselves and rejoice over 
 them, and that they should strengthen their 
 faith and hope in patience, as those that see and 
 hear that their wretchedness shall have an end, 
 and that they, delivered from sin, death, the 
 devil, and every evil, shall come to Christ in 
 heaven, in his blessed eternal kingdom." 
 
 On V. 13, Tubing. Bibel: "How blessed wUl 
 it seem to rest in the bosom of the Lord, after 
 the work of this life is done, until the day of 
 restitution shall come, when we shall arise, 
 every one to the gracious lot that shall fall to 
 him." — Starke: "At length the sufferings of 
 the faithful reach a joyous end ; then follow 
 rest and sweet refreshing, and finally a glorious 
 resurrection, when with their glorified bodies 
 they shall enter into the joy of their Lord." 
 Blessed is he who with Daniel shall receive a 
 similar lot. Amen. 
 
Date Due 
 
 18 -S? 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 4i 15 49 
 
 
 
 
 [m- 
 
 
 
 
 ,v .- 
 
 
 
 
 Wu; -'S 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 r 
 
 
 
 
 
 » 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 Mlk^^^ 
 
 Mb 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 
 _J