Notes

DANIEL

p. I, 1. 1. The third year. Yet it was the fourth year of Jehoiakim which coincided with the first of Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. xxv. 1). We see, however, from ii. I, that Nebuchadnezzar's dream came in his second year, after Daniel's three years' training (i. 5), so that the reference of i. I carries us back to the last year of Nabo-Polassar, when Nebuchadnezzar had not actually ascended the throne; though it is not improbable that he was associated with his father as sovereign.

p. 2, 1. 4. There is some doubt about the name Belteshazzar. It may be 'Beltis protect the king' (though in this case we should have a teth for a tav), but perhaps more probably it is 'Balatsu-usur' (protect his life), with the name of the deity, perhaps Bel, implied before it. Cp. the name Baladan. Shadrach, probably=command of Aku,' the moon-god. Meshach is more doubtful, but it may='Who is like Aku? Cp. Michael, 'Who is like God?' Abed-nego should, of course, be Abednebo, 'servant of Nebo,' perhaps due to a copyist's mistake; unless, indeed, it was intentionally altered, in the spirit which changed 'Baal' into 'Bosheth.'

p. 7, 1. 13. The king's dream of the colossal image, however we explain the Four Kingdoms, should be studied in close connection with Daniel's first vision (chap. vii.). To the heathen king those kingdoms appear in their splendour, and yet they are but a metal image in which no true life dwells. To the prophet there are four distinct living agencies, instinct with a terrible life for ill, yet alike in both it is shown how the kingdoms of this world are brought to an end at the manifestation of God's kingdom. To the king is shown a stone 'cut without

hands... and filling the whole earth,' as opposed to a statue wrought by human art; to the prophet comes the higher conception of a 'Son of Man,' the Manhood to be afterwards 'taken

into God.'

p. 9, 1. 20. If we may believe the LXX., the events of this chapter occurred in the eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign, after an inspection of his dominions from India to Ethiopia. On this view, the great image might mark the close of a period of conquest, and inaugurate a period of peace.

p. 12, 1. 9. 'Hats,' This would seem to suggest 'turbans,' but 'cloaks' is perhaps the true translation.

p. 12, 1. 14. At this point the LXX. inserts a prayer of Azariah, followed by the hymn we know as the 'Benedicite,' or the Song of the Three Children, which are included in our Apocrypha.

p. 12, 1. 25. the Son of God,' we must render 'a Son of (the) Gods,' R.V. The meaning which Nebuchadnezzar attached to this phrase is of course moulded by his Babylonian belief. He believed in a plurality of Divine beings, and is startled to find how far reaching was the power of a God of whom he recked not, who had sent His angel (v. 28), whose divinity in a sense he recognises, to deliver his worshippers. Christians who view the story of the miracle as absolute history may see in the Deliverer the only Son of God Most High. The wording of the Chaldee is of course what might be looked for from a heathen king.

p. 13, 1. 21. When at the height of his power, and apparently towards the end of his reign, another vision comes to the king, and Daniel explains to him in what terrible sort he is to learn the lesson that 'the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men.' While the king was in the very act of boasting of the Babylon which he had built for the honour of his majesty,' the doom fell, and for 'seven times' his dwelling was with the beasts of the field, and he ate grass like oxen. This was clearly a case of a disease occasionally met with, in which, while the inner human consciousness remains, the patient thinks he is changed into an

animal, and acts more or less in conformity with that fancy. In this state of dual consciousness the king remained, till, God's purpose satisfied, he is able to bless God, and his reason returns. Till then, we may suppose, a regency would be exercised by some of the Magians. The fact of modern cases is itself sufficient to show that the phenomenon is a perfectly credible one; and if it said that there is no reference to it in the inscriptions, we confess that we are no more surprised by this than by Sennacherib's silence as to God's judgment on his army. Yet Berosus mentions an illness of Nebuchadnezzar's, and Abydenus says that Nebuchadnezzar, when on the roof of his palace, was inspired by a god to declare the fall of the Babylonian empire at the hands of a Persian mule.'

p. 18, 1. 18. In spite of some remaining difficulties, the history in this chapter receives striking confirmation from the monuments. Belshazzar was the eldest son of Nabonidus, the last king of Babylon, his mother being not improbably a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar (cp. vv. 2, 11, 18). He was also the commander-in-chief of his father's army. From a most important tablet, discovered by Mr. T. G. Pinches, which, however, is unfortunately mutilated in the latter part, we learn the following points. In the seventeenth year of Nabonidus, on Tammuz 14 (June-July), Cyrus entered Sippara without fighting, and Nabonidus fled. On Tammuz 16, Cyrus's general, Gobryas, entered Babylon without fighting. (In the case of so vast a city as Babylon we may fairly suppose that a considerable time must elapse before the whole could be occupied.) On Marchesvan 3 (Oct.-Nov.), Cyrus entered Babylon and established peace,' and Gobryas, his governor 'appointed governors in Babylon.' On Marchesvan 11, 'the son of the king died.' (Such is the reading of a somewhat doubtful clause by Mr. Pinches and other experts.) And from Adar 27 to Nisan 3 'there was lamentation in the country of Accad.' After the flight of Nabonidus, Belshazzar might well be spoken of as 'king,' and the statement as to his death in Daniel harmonises with that in the tablet; for the Bible

says nothing as to a storming of Babylon, and Belshazzar might have been assassinated by one of his own people, or killed in a riot in the streets as the foreign troops were marching in.

p. 22, l. 14. The puzzle attaching to the name of 'Darius the Mede' will now partially yield. All that the Bible says of him coincides exactly with what the tablet says of Gobryas. He was simply Cyrus's viceroy, and for the time exercised kingly power, till Cyrus himself took the reins. 'Darius' appointed 120 princes (vi. 1), just as Gobryas did. Gobryas might justly be styled a Mede, but how the name of Darius came to be applied to him is not clear. He may actually have also borne the name Darius, or there may be some scribal error.

p. 19, l. 17. Third ruler.' See vv. 16, 29. While Nabonidus lived he was first and Belshazzar second. The translation of A.V. and R.V. is, we think, perfectly right, as against that of R.V. margin. It is both the natural view of the 'Chaldee,' and also we know nothing of the existence of a triumvirate board among the Babylonians. It is said that the LXX. supports this latter view (but this only exists in one ninth-century MS.), and the pre-Christian version of Theodotion, so-called, takes the other view.

p. 22, 1. 2. Mene, Mene, Tekel, Upharsin.' It is not clear why the wise men could not read and interpret the writing on the wall. It may have been that it was in an unfamiliar script, but this seems highly improbable. More likely the apparent translation seemed to be nonsense, e.g., A Mina, a Mina, a Shekel and Perases' (these are weights, the last being literally 'halves,' e.g., of mina or shekel). Assuming such a translation to hold, what we have is clearly a cryptogram, the real meaning lying below the apparent sense. It will be noticed that, in Daniel's explanation, a double thought runs through the three cases. Thus Mene, lit. 'numbered,' carries the twofold thought of numbered out, completed. Tekel (probably altered from Tekil, for the assonance), 'weighed,' and (from another root) 'found wanting.' Upharsin in the explanation is changed to

Peres. The U is simply 'and,' and the plural is replaced by a singular. Here the play is more obvious. The root-meaning is that of 'breaking,' with a clear reference to the name Persia.

p. 23, 1. 13. 'den of lions.' However cruel this may seem, still at anyrate the death would be instantaneous. Yet even among the more merciful of the Assyrian kings, such tortures as impalement, flaying alive, and the like, were common.

p. 23, 1. 21. toward Jerusalem.' We have no earlier instance of this habit; but, in a later age, a Jew was directed, when uttering his daily prayers, to turn in the direction of the Holy of Holies. If he cannot, let him turn his face, or, if not even that is possible, let him fix his heart thereon.

p. 25, 1. 26. We must suppose that 'Darius,' a worshipper of Ormuzd, and in his way a monotheist like Daniel, was coming to the point of identifying Jehovah with the 'great giver of life,' whom he himself worshipped.

p. 27, 1. 10. were cast down.' A better rendering is 'were placed' (so R. V.), the reference being, not to the thrones of the Four Powers (vv. 3-7), but those for the 'Ancient of Days' and His ministers.

p. 27, l. II. 'Ancient of days.' So God is called (Ps. lv. 22), 'he that abideth of old.' The vision of an old man, with snowwhite hair and in white garments, is strikingly paralleled by that of the glorified Saviour as seen by St. John in Patmos (Rev. i. 14).

p. 27, 1. 26. 'Son of man.' Although this phrase had been previously used in a wider sense, as in Ps. viii. 4, we have here the first application of it to the coming Saviour, God manifested in the flesh. It will be noticed that though our Lord frequently calls Himself by this name in the Gospels, the Evangelists never use it of Him. It is worthy of notice that the title is found in the very parallel passage referred to above (Rev. i. 13, cp. xiv. 14).

p. 29, 1. 22. It is evident that in the very small space at our disposal we can only make the briefest remark on the subject of