Daniel · Chapter 1

Verse 1. In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim] This king was raised to the throne of Judea in the place of his brother Jehoahaz, by Pharaoh-necho, king of Egypt, 2 Kings 23:34-36, and continued tributary to him during the first three years of his reign; but in the fourth, which was the first of Nebuchadnezzar, Jeremiah 25:1, Nebuchadnezzar completely defeated the Egyptian army near the Euphrates, Jeremiah 46:2; and this victory put the neighbouring countries of Syria, among which Judea was the chief, under the Chaldean government. Thus Jehoiakim, who had first been tributary to Egypt, became now the vassal of the king of Babylon, 2 Kings 24:1. At the end of three years Jehoiakim rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar, who, then occupied with other wars, did not proceed against Jerusalem till three years after, which was the eleventh and last of Jehoiakim, 2 Kings 23:36.

There are some difficulties in the chronology of this place. Calmet takes rather a different view of these transactions. He connects the history thus: Nabopolassar, king of Babylon, finding that one of his lords whom he had made governor of Cœlesyria and Phœnicia had revolted from him, and formed an alliance with the king of Egypt, sent Nebuchadnezzar his son, whom he invested with the authority of king, to reduce those provinces, as was customary among the easterns when the heir presumptive was sent on any important expedition or embassy. This young prince, having quelled the insurrection in those parts, marched against Jerusalem about the end of the third or beginning of the fourth year of the reign of Jehoiakim, king of Judah. He soon took the city, and put Jehoiakim in chains with the design of carrying him to Babylon; but, changing his mind, he permitted him to resume the reins of government under certain oppressive conditions. At this year, which was A.M. 3398, the seventy years of the Babylonish captivity commence. Nabopolassar dying in the interim, Nebuchadnezzar was obliged to return speedily to Babylon, leaving his generals to conduct the Jewish captives to Babylon, among whom were Daniel and his companions.

Verses 1, 2. In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim came Nebuchadnezzar, &c. — See notes on 2 Kings 24:1-4. And the Lord gave Jehoiakim into his hand — He took Jehoiakim prisoner, and put him in chains, with a design to carry him to Babylon; but he having humbled himself, and submitted to become tributary, he was restored to his kingdom. “At this time,” says Lowth, “Jehoiakim having become tributary to the king of Babylon, consequently the seventy years of the Jewish captivity and vassalage to Babylon began.” With part of the vessels of the house of God — Some of the vessels were still left, which Nebuchadnezzar seized when he carried Jeconiah captive: see the margin; which he carried into the land of Shinar — That is, he carried the vessels, and not, as some would understand it, the captives also; for Jehoiakim only is mentioned, who died, as we have seen, in the land of Judah. Shinar was the original name of the country about Babylon, (Genesis 11:2,) and it was still sometimes called by this name by some of the prophets: see the margin. And he brought the vessels into the treasure-house of his god — Of his idol Bel, (see note on Jeremiah 50:2,) from whence they were taken by Cyrus, and delivered to Zerubbabel, Ezra 1:7, 8. To this agrees the testimony of Berosus, who tells us that Nebuchadnezzar adorned the temple of Bel with the spoils of war which he had taken in that expedition: see Joseph. Antiq., lib. 10. cap. 11.

Verse 1. In the third year of Jehoiakim—Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem. Some think that Nebuchadnezzar took Jehoiakim the third year, but that while on his way to Babylon he made submission, and was restored; for the fourth year of Jehoiakim was the first of Nebuchadnezzar. Others solve this difficulty by supposing a year, or part of a year, to be lost in the expedition to Egypt, for Nebuchadnezzar was engaged against the Egyptians when informed of his father’s death, and with a few light troops he crossed the deserts to Babylon, received the crown, and returned to the war. Hence this slight variation from Jeremiah 25:1, strengthens the truth of scripture history, by showing that the prophets had no correspondence with each other.

1. De Wette, Kuenen, etc., have called the date given in this verse “obviously false,” “a striking and characteristic misstatement,” because it makes the first year of Nebuchadnezzar coincide with the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim (608-597 B.C.), while Jeremiah (Jeremiah 35:1; 46:2; compare 2 Chronicles 36) makes it coincide with Jehoiakim’s fourth year. But Jeremiah almost certainly calls Nebuchadnezzar, who was only crown prince at the time of the Palestinian campaign (605 B.C.), “king” proleptically, which is a very permissible usage (Behrmann). Moreover, Jeremiah may be conceived as reckoning the accession year of this king as his first year, according to Jewish custom, while the author of Daniel, according to ordinary Babylonian usage, may have counted his first year as not beginning until the following New Year’s Day. (See our Introduction, III, 5; Society Biblical Archaeology, January, 1900.) On this supposition all contradictions vanish, the third year of Jehoiakim being the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar and his fourth year synchronizing with Nebuchadnezzar’s official “first year.” For Nebuchadnezzar see our Introduction, III, 3, (1); for Babylon see Introduction, III, 4. The cuneiform meaning of this name is “Gate of God,” but the discoveries at Kom Ombo, 1894, show Babylon spelt “Balbal,” with an evident play on the Semitic lblb, “confound.” (Compare Genesis 11:9.)

V. 2. With part of the vessels-In this expedition Nebuchadnezzar carried away some captives, among whom were Daniel and his friends. His god-Baal, or Bell, and Nebo, which words they put into the names of their kings and favourites.

Verse 2. Part of the vessels of the house of God] He took the richest and finest of them for the service of his god Bel, and left what were necessary for carrying on the public worship of Jehovah, (for he did not attempt to alter the civil or religious constitution of Judea;) for leaving Jehoiakim on the throne, he only laid the land under tribute. The Chaldeans carried these sacred vessels away at three different times. 1. In the war spoken of in this place. 2. In the taking of Jerusalem and Jeconiah a few months after, 2 Kings 24:13. 3. Eleven years after, under the reign of Zedekiah, when the city and temple were totally destroyed, and the land ruined, 2 Kings 25:8-15.

The land of Shinar] This was the ancient mame of Babylon. See Genesis 11:2.

The treasure house of his god.] This was Bel, who had a splendid temple in Babylon, and was the tutelar god of the city and empire.

Verses 1, 2. In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim came Nebuchadnezzar, &c. — See notes on 2 Kings 24:1-4. And the Lord gave Jehoiakim into his hand — He took Jehoiakim prisoner, and put him in chains, with a design to carry him to Babylon; but he having humbled himself, and submitted to become tributary, he was restored to his kingdom. “At this time,” says Lowth, “Jehoiakim having become tributary to the king of Babylon, consequently the seventy years of the Jewish captivity and vassalage to Babylon began.” With part of the vessels of the house of God — Some of the vessels were still left, which Nebuchadnezzar seized when he carried Jeconiah captive: see the margin; which he carried into the land of Shinar — That is, he carried the vessels, and not, as some would understand it, the captives also; for Jehoiakim only is mentioned, who died, as we have seen, in the land of Judah. Shinar was the original name of the country about Babylon, (Genesis 11:2,) and it was still sometimes called by this name by some of the prophets: see the margin. And he brought the vessels into the treasure-house of his god — Of his idol Bel, (see note on Jeremiah 50:2,) from whence they were taken by Cyrus, and delivered to Zerubbabel, Ezra 1:7, 8. To this agrees the testimony of Berosus, who tells us that Nebuchadnezzar adorned the temple of Bel with the spoils of war which he had taken in that expedition: see Joseph. Antiq., lib. 10. cap. 11.

2. Compare 2 Kings 23:35; 24:4; 2 Chronicles 36:5-8; Jeremiah 27:19, 20. Shinar — Probably the Hebrew form of the archaic name for Babylon (Konig). Treasure house — Nebuchadnezzar and other Babylonian kings in many inscriptions speak of storing up in the temple silver, gold, precious stones, and rare treasures, as well as captives. (See Introduction, III, 4.)

V. 3. Of the eunuchs-These were chief among the king’s servants; and they are called eunuchs, because many of them were such. And of the princes-Here was fulfilled what the prophet Isaiah had foretold, Isaiah 39:7.

Verse 3. Master of his eunuchs] This word eunuchs signifies officers about or in the palace, whether literally eunuchs or not.

Verses 3, 4. And the king spake unto Ashpenaz, master of the eunuchs — One of the chief officers of his palace; the officers that attended about the persons of the eastern kings being commonly eunuchs, (a custom still practised in the Ottoman court,) such being employed as guardians over the women which the kings kept for their pleasure. That he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and, or rather, even, of the king’s seed — The conjunction copulative being often used by way of explication. And thus Isaiah’s prophecy was punctually fulfilled, Isaiah 39:7. Children in whom was no blemish — He was directed to make choice of such as were comely, and had no defect or deformity of body, to which the Hebrew word µwam, here used, is chiefly applied, answerable to the Greek mwmov. But by the subsequent characters in the verse, it should seem that the young men were to be as complete in every respect as was possible, perfect in their mental as well as corporal powers. The greatest care seems to have been required as to the accomplishments of their minds, and on this account three several expressions are made use of, the particular force of each of which it may not be easy to ascertain. “Perhaps,” says Mr. Wintle, “the first relates to the best and most excellent natural abilities; the second, to the acquisition of the greatest improvements from cultivation; and the third, to the communication of their perceptions in the happiest manner to others.” He translates the clause as follows: Ready of understanding in all wisdom, and of skill in science, and expert in prudence. Or, more generally, the expressions may only signify that they were to be such as had been instructed, and had made proficiency, in every thing that was taught in the land of Judea. And such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace — Not only being of a strong constitution to endure the fatigue of long waitings, in or near the royal presence, during which they were not permitted to sit down; “but qualified for every business in which they might be employed, and to do credit to the situation in which they were to stand.” And whom they might teach the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans — As Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, so we are not to wonder that Daniel was taught the learning of the Chaldeans; and that he so far excelled in it, as to be placed at the head of the magi: see Daniel 4:9. It must be observed that the word µydly, rendered children in the beginning of this verse, does not signify persons in a state of childhood, but refers to those of more advanced years. The expression is applied to Rehoboam’s counsellors, 1 Kings 12:8, who cannot be thought to have been mere children. Nor can we suppose Daniel and his companions to have been less than eighteen or twenty years of age at this time, as may be concluded from Daniel’s being put into considerable posts in the government soon after.

Ver. 3. Ashpenaz the master or prince of the eunuchs. Daniel being placed under his care, has occasioned a belief that Daniel was emasculated, and so made a eunuch.

3. Ashpenaz — Compare Genesis 10:3. This name as it stands is not Babylonian, but resembles Persian. It is found in several inscriptions of the Persian period. However, one recension and various early quotations, made probably from the original LXX., give a very different name here, Abiesdri, or Abriesdri, which Lenormant partially unites to the Hebrew, making the name Assa-ibn-zir, “the goddess has molded the germ.” Master of his eunuchs — That is, courtiers. This title even Hugo Winckler, as late as 1890, supposed to be a mere Hebrew fiction, being, as he thought, absolutely unknown at the Assyrian or Babylonian court; but Mr. Pinches, in 1889, found on a brick in the British Museum this very name as a title of one of the highest Babylonian officials, the Hebrew Rab-sarisim (or Sar-sarisim, verses 7, 10), corresponding almost exactly with the Babylonian Rabu-saresu, “chief of the chiefs.” Noldeke has also found this as an hereditary title on a recently discovered Phoenician inscription (Revue des Etudes Juives, 1895, p. 119). Of the king’s seed, and of the princes — This may refer to the children of the Babylonian king and his nobles. The word for “princes” is generally regarded as Persian.

V. 4. The learning and the tongue-The Chaldeans were skilled above any other nation, in natural philosophy. Their tongue differed from the Hebrew in dialect and in pronunciation, which they learned that they might be the more acceptable to the king, and court.

Verse 4. Children] ילדים yeladim, youths, young men; and so the word should be rendered throughout this book.

Skilled in all wisdom] Rather, persons capable of every kind of literary accomplishment, that they might be put under proper instruction. And as children of the blood and of the nobles mere most likely, from the care usually taken of their initiatory education, to profit most by the elaborate instruction here designed, the master of the eunuchs, the king’s chamberlain, was commanded to choose the youths in question out of such.

Verses 3, 4. And the king spake unto Ashpenaz, master of the eunuchs — One of the chief officers of his palace; the officers that attended about the persons of the eastern kings being commonly eunuchs, (a custom still practised in the Ottoman court,) such being employed as guardians over the women which the kings kept for their pleasure. That he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and, or rather, even, of the king’s seed — The conjunction copulative being often used by way of explication. And thus Isaiah’s prophecy was punctually fulfilled, Isaiah 39:7. Children in whom was no blemish — He was directed to make choice of such as were comely, and had no defect or deformity of body, to which the Hebrew word µwam, here used, is chiefly applied, answerable to the Greek mwmov. But by the subsequent characters in the verse, it should seem that the young men were to be as complete in every respect as was possible, perfect in their mental as well as corporal powers. The greatest care seems to have been required as to the accomplishments of their minds, and on this account three several expressions are made use of, the particular force of each of which it may not be easy to ascertain. “Perhaps,” says Mr. Wintle, “the first relates to the best and most excellent natural abilities; the second, to the acquisition of the greatest improvements from cultivation; and the third, to the communication of their perceptions in the happiest manner to others.” He translates the clause as follows: Ready of understanding in all wisdom, and of skill in science, and expert in prudence. Or, more generally, the expressions may only signify that they were to be such as had been instructed, and had made proficiency, in every thing that was taught in the land of Judea. And such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace — Not only being of a strong constitution to endure the fatigue of long waitings, in or near the royal presence, during which they were not permitted to sit down; “but qualified for every business in which they might be employed, and to do credit to the situation in which they were to stand.” And whom they might teach the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans — As Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, so we are not to wonder that Daniel was taught the learning of the Chaldeans; and that he so far excelled in it, as to be placed at the head of the magi: see Daniel 4:9. It must be observed that the word µydly, rendered children in the beginning of this verse, does not signify persons in a state of childhood, but refers to those of more advanced years. The expression is applied to Rehoboam’s counsellors, 1 Kings 12:8, who cannot be thought to have been mere children. Nor can we suppose Daniel and his companions to have been less than eighteen or twenty years of age at this time, as may be concluded from Daniel’s being put into considerable posts in the government soon after.

Ver. 4. The tongue of the Chaldeans. Daniel, it is highly probable, understood the Syriac, as it seems to have been both the court and the current language of the east. 2 Kings 17:26. But the literature of the Chaldeans abounded with astrology, and all the superstition of gentile science. True; and as Daniel refused to comply with the command to eat of the king’s meat, we ought to suppose he equally refused to study the mysteries of error; for no man who scripturally believes in providence, can believe in astrology. All books of this kind the gentiles burnt on their conversion to christianity. Acts 19:19.

4. These youths, who were selected to be schooled in “the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans” in the royal palace, were perfect physically, and with a pleasing presence — a quality which was especially appreciated at the Babylonian court — having good intellectual faculties, being quick to learn with able powers of discrimination, possessed of easy manners and the polite accomplishments essential to courtiers. Jephet Ibu Ali, the Kararite, in his comments, says that they had ability, that is, “force of patience, to stand before the king and abstain from expectorating!” The ordinary “tongue” of the Chaldeans was, of course, the Babylonian, which comes to us in the cuneiform inscriptions, although several languages, including Aramaic and Assyrian, must have been studied in the schools of this period, as is shown by the contract tables and magic formulas. The Babylonian literature was very extensive, as also the trade and political relations of the court with far distant nations. (See Introduction, III, 2.) Assurbanipal’s library, which he says was “for the instruction of my subjects,” was that of the palace school, and the students were instructed in mathematics, botany, zoology, astronomy, astrology, and the literary use of their own and various other languages, being especially drilled in the study of the ancient religious texts, which were written in a dead language (Sum-Akk.). It may be that the Sumerian, or ancient Babylonian, is meant as the particular tongue of the Chaldeans or “wise men.” These “Chaldeans” were the dominant race who in the sixth century B.C. and for centuries afterward monopolized the highest priestly and learned offices. It is not strange that the words “Chaldean” and “sorcerer” became almost synonymous terms, “for the magic art formed so large a part of the Babylonian religion that it can almost be considered its characteristic feature” (Zimmern). In later times the Chaldeans practiced necromancy of the grossest kind, and most abominable to pious Jews. The word may be used here, however, in the earlier sense, “learned men.” (See Introduction, II, 8.)

V. 5. The king’s meat-Such as he had at his own table.

Verse 5. A daily provision] Athenæus, lib. iv., c. 10, says: The kings of Persia, (who succeeded the kings of Babylon, on whose empire they had seized,) were accustomed to order the food left at their own tables to be delivered to their courtiers.

So nourishing them three years] This was deemed a sufficient time to acquire the Chaldee language, and the sciences peculiar to that people. I suppose they had good introductory books, able teachers, and a proper method; else they would have been obliged, like us, to send their children seven years to school, and as many to the university, to teach them any tolerable measure of useful and ornamental literature! O how reproachful to the nations of Europe, and particularly to our own, is this backward mode of instruction. And what is generally learned after this vast expense of time and money? A little Latin, Greek, and mathematics; perhaps a little moral philosophy; and by this they are entitled, not qualified, to teach others, and especially to teach the people the important science of salvation! To such shepherds, (and there are many such,) the hungry sheep look up, and are not fed; and if all are not such, no thanks to our plan of national education.

Verse 5. The king appointed them a daily provision of the king’s meat — Such as he had at his own table; wherein his humanity and bounty appeared toward them the more conspicuous, they being captives. So nourishing them, &c. — The Vulgate renders it, Ut enutriti, &c.; that, being nourished three years, they might afterward stand in the presence of the king. It seems from what is here said, that the Chaldeans entertained a notion that a diet of the best sort contributed both to the beauty of the body and the improvement of the mind.

5. Meat — Rather, dainties.

V. 6. And Azariah-Probably all of the royal lineage of Judah.

Verse 6. Now among these] There were no doubt several noble youths from other provinces: but the four mentioned here were Jews, and are supposed to have all been of royal extraction.

Verses 6, 7. Among these were Daniel, Hananiah, &c. — All their names had some affinity with the name of Jehovah, the God whom they worshipped. Daniel signifies, God is my judge, or the judgment of God; Hananiah, God has been gracious to me, or, one favoured of Jehovah; Mishael, the powerful one of God; Azariah, the help of Jehovah, or, Jehovah is my succour. In like manner, the prince of the eunuchs, in changing their names, as a mark of dominion and authority over them, gave them such as had an affinity with the names of the gods of the Chaldees; Belteshazzar, the name given to Daniel, being derived from Bel, or Baal, the chief idol of Babylon, and signifying the treasurer of Baal, or, the depositary of the secrets, or treasure, of Baal. Shadrach, according to some, means the inspiration of the sun; being derived from shada, to pour out, and rach, a king, a name given to the sun by the Babylonians. Meshach, derived from a Babylonian deity called Shach, or from a goddess called Sheshach, is thought to signify, He who belongs to Shach, or Sheshach. Abed-nego imports the servant of the shining light, or, as Calmet thinks, of the sun, or the morning star, unless the word should be written Abed-nebo, referring to the idol so called, which gave name to several distinguished personages among the Babylonians: see Isaiah 46:2. It is certain from Herodotus, lib. 1., that the Chaldeans worshipped Jupiter Belus, Venus, and other idols, or the same under other names; and from these it is probable that the names were given, according to Chaldee usage, to these young men.

6, 7. It was quite the common thing for Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian kings to take new names themselves on special occasions, or give new names to members of the royal family. (Compare Genesis 41:45; 2 Kings 23:34; 24:17.) So Tiglath-pileser was also known as Pulu (compare 2 Kings 15:19); Shalmaneser, as Ulula’a; and Assurbanipal, when he placed the Egyptian prince Psammetichus at the head of a province, changed his name to Nebo-sezibani. Daniel (Hebrews, “God is my judge”) receives the name of Belteshazzar, probably a contraction of Bel-balatsu-usur, “Bel, protect his life” (Fr. Delitzsch). Most Assyriologists consider as hypercritical the remark of Professor Sayce that there is one letter wrong in the spelling of the Babylonian word corresponding to Belteshazzar, and that therefore we have here “a compound which has no sense and would be impossible in the Babylonian language.” It is now known that the Babylonian scribes even spelled the names of their own kings differently at different times, just as the Hebrew scribes spelled David one way in Kings and another in Chronicles. (See also note 4:8.) The companions of Daniel — who bear names meaning, respectively, “The Lord Jehovah is gracious,” “Who is like God” (or, “Who is what God is”), and “Jehovah is helper” — receive as new names Shadrach, Shudur-Aku (“Command of Aku” — Aku being the Babylonian moon-god); Meshach, a probable Babylonian original for which cannot be suggested; and Abednego, or rather Abed-Nebo (“Servant of Nebo”), a name which Sayce has himself found in an inscription of the fifth or sixth century B.C. The objection of Jewish copyists to writing the names of heathen deities may account for the change of consonants here. There are numbers of instances of Jews settled at Babylon taking Babylonian names. (See, for example, Records of the Past, 4:107; Zeits. fur Assy., 13:329, etc.)

V. 7. Gave names-That is, other names, relating to the idol-gods. Belteshazzar-So Daniel had the name of Belteshazzar, from the great Babylonian idol Baal or Bell. This was by the king’s command, and herein he put forth an act: of his sovereignty.

Verse 7. Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names] This change of names, Calmet properly remarks, was a mark of dominion and authority. It was customary for masters to impose new names upon their slaves; and rulers often, on their ascending the throne, assumed a name different from that which they had before.

laynd DANIEL signifies “God is my Judge.” This name they changed into rxavclb BELTESHATSTSAR; in Chaldee, “The treasure of Bel,” or “The despository of the secrets (or treasure) of Bel.”

hynnh HANANIAH signifies, “The Lord has been gracious to me,” or “He to whom the Lord is gracious.” This name was changed into Ërdv SHADRACH, Chaldee, which has been variously translated: “The inspiration of the sun;” “God the author of evil, be propitious to us;” “Let God preserve us from evil.”

lavym MISHAEL signifies “He who comes from God.” Him they called Ëvym MESHACH, which in Chaldee signifies, “He who belongs to the goddess Sheshach,” a celebrated deity of the Babylonians, mentioned by Jeremiah, Jeremiah 25:26.

hyrz[ AZARIAH, which signifies “The Lord is my Helper,” they changed into wgn dba ABED-NEGO, which in Chaldee is “the servant of Nego,” who was one of their divinities; by which they meant either the sun, or the morning star; whether Jupiter or Venus.

The vicious pronunciation of this name should be carefully avoided; I mean that which lays the accent on the first syllable, and hurries to the end, without attending to the natural division of the word Abed-Nego.

Verses 6, 7. Among these were Daniel, Hananiah, &c. — All their names had some affinity with the name of Jehovah, the God whom they worshipped. Daniel signifies, God is my judge, or the judgment of God; Hananiah, God has been gracious to me, or, one favoured of Jehovah; Mishael, the powerful one of God; Azariah, the help of Jehovah, or, Jehovah is my succour. In like manner, the prince of the eunuchs, in changing their names, as a mark of dominion and authority over them, gave them such as had an affinity with the names of the gods of the Chaldees; Belteshazzar, the name given to Daniel, being derived from Bel, or Baal, the chief idol of Babylon, and signifying the treasurer of Baal, or, the depositary of the secrets, or treasure, of Baal. Shadrach, according to some, means the inspiration of the sun; being derived from shada, to pour out, and rach, a king, a name given to the sun by the Babylonians. Meshach, derived from a Babylonian deity called Shach, or from a goddess called Sheshach, is thought to signify, He who belongs to Shach, or Sheshach. Abed-nego imports the servant of the shining light, or, as Calmet thinks, of the sun, or the morning star, unless the word should be written Abed-nebo, referring to the idol so called, which gave name to several distinguished personages among the Babylonians: see Isaiah 46:2. It is certain from Herodotus, lib. 1., that the Chaldeans worshipped Jupiter Belus, Venus, and other idols, or the same under other names; and from these it is probable that the names were given, according to Chaldee usage, to these young men.

Ver. 7. Belteshazzar. The Hebrew names were difficult for the Chaldeans to pronounce. Besides, it was usual for men to receive new names on their accession to honour and office.

6, 7. It was quite the common thing for Assyrian, Babylonian, and Egyptian kings to take new names themselves on special occasions, or give new names to members of the royal family. (Compare Genesis 41:45; 2 Kings 23:34; 24:17.) So Tiglath-pileser was also known as Pulu (compare 2 Kings 15:19); Shalmaneser, as Ulula’a; and Assurbanipal, when he placed the Egyptian prince Psammetichus at the head of a province, changed his name to Nebo-sezibani. Daniel (Hebrews, “God is my judge”) receives the name of Belteshazzar, probably a contraction of Bel-balatsu-usur, “Bel, protect his life” (Fr. Delitzsch). Most Assyriologists consider as hypercritical the remark of Professor Sayce that there is one letter wrong in the spelling of the Babylonian word corresponding to Belteshazzar, and that therefore we have here “a compound which has no sense and would be impossible in the Babylonian language.” It is now known that the Babylonian scribes even spelled the names of their own kings differently at different times, just as the Hebrew scribes spelled David one way in Kings and another in Chronicles. (See also note 4:8.) The companions of Daniel — who bear names meaning, respectively, “The Lord Jehovah is gracious,” “Who is like God” (or, “Who is what God is”), and “Jehovah is helper” — receive as new names Shadrach, Shudur-Aku (“Command of Aku” — Aku being the Babylonian moon-god); Meshach, a probable Babylonian original for which cannot be suggested; and Abednego, or rather Abed-Nebo (“Servant of Nebo”), a name which Sayce has himself found in an inscription of the fifth or sixth century B.C. The objection of Jewish copyists to writing the names of heathen deities may account for the change of consonants here. There are numbers of instances of Jews settled at Babylon taking Babylonian names. (See, for example, Records of the Past, 4:107; Zeits. fur Assy., 13:329, etc.)

V. 8. But Daniel purposed-There may be several weighty reasons assigned why Daniel did this.

1. Because many of those meats provided for the king’s table, were forbidden by the Jewish law.

2. Daniel knew these delicates would too much gratify the flesh.

3. He did not dare to eat and drink things consecrated to idols.

4. He was sensible, how unsuitable delicate fare would be to the afflicted state of God’s people.

Therefore he was herein a rare pattern of avoiding all the occasions of evil.

Verse 8. But Daniel—would not defile himself] I have spoken of this resolution in the introduction. The chief reasons why Daniel would not eat meat from the royal table were probably these three:—1. Because they ate unclean beasts, which were forbidden by the Jewish law. 2. Because they ate, as did the heathens in general, beasts which had been strangled, or not properly blooded. 3. Because the animals that were eaten were first offered as victims to their gods. It is on this account that Athenæus calls the beasts which here served up at the tables of the Persian kings, ieria, victims, lib. iv. c. 10, p. 145.

Verse 8. But Daniel purposed that he would not defile himself — The defilement here alluded to might arise either from the food being such as was prohibited in the law of Moses, or else what was offered to the idols of the Chaldees, or entreated to be blessed in their names: see 1 Corinthians 8:10, 20. With the portion of the king’s meat — It was the custom of most nations, before their meals, to make an oblation of some part of what they ate and drank to their gods, as a thankful acknowledgment that every thing which they enjoyed was their gift; so that every entertainment had something in it of the nature of a sacrifice. This practice, generally prevailing, might make Daniel and his friends look upon the provisions coming from the king’s table as no better than meats offered to idols, and therefore to be accounted unclean, or polluted: see the margin. Nor with the wine which he drank — Though wine was not prohibited in the Levitical law, yet Daniel might wish to abstain from it, chiefly from motives of temperance; or because it came from an entertainment wherein a libation was made of it to idols, he might think himself obliged to abstain from motives of conscience: see Wintle and Lowth.

Ver 8. Daniel—would not defile himself with meats ceremonially unclean, and which were often offered to idols. Acts 10:14. Galatians 2:12.

8. Wesley suggests as reasons for Daniel’s action that many meats were forbidden by Jewish law: the meats of the royal table had been probably consecrated to idols; at any rate they would too greatly gratify the flesh and were unsuitable to the afflicted state of God’s people. The Talmud declares that after the destruction of the second temple many Israelites would not eat meat, since it could no longer be offered on the altar according to the law; but in 9:3, and 10:3, the “fasting” is a preparation for expected revelations (as Exodus 34:28). Jephet Ibu (eleventh century) represents the spirit of the second century B.C., and perhaps earlier, when he explains, “They would not defile themselves with food prepared by Gentiles.” Behrmann points out, however, that there is no indication that the vegetable food they did eat was prepared by their own hands.

Verse 9. Now God had brought Daniel into favour and tender love, &c. — Hebrew, µymjrl, compassionate regard, or, bowels of compassion, which is also the sense of the same word, Daniel 2:18. It is a very strong expression, and denotes a kind of parental compassion, like that of St. Paul in his epistle to Philemon, verse 12, Receive him that is mine own bowels. We see a like instance of God’s care over Joseph, (Genesis 39:21,) when he was a poor captive, a prisoner, and destitute of all friends to support or comfort him: see Psalm 106:46, where, as here, the favour of men toward God’s people is attributed to his overruling and gracious providence over them. And, considering what important consequences frequently follow upon it, we may, with great reason, acknowledge the hand of God in it, whenever it takes place.

9-16. The Rab-saris objected to the proposed change of diet — to pulse (vegetables) and water — out of “favor and compassion” for Daniel (verse 9, R.V.), and for fear of his own life if the boys should attract attention by their inferior appearance and it should thus be discovered that the royal orders concerning food had been disobeyed; but finally his assistant (verse 11) consented to a ten days’ experiment, which was so successful that all objections were removed. Melzar (Hebrews, the Melzar) is probably not a proper name but an official title: “steward” (R.V.) or “chief butler” (Haugh) or “pedagogue’’ (Hitzig). Lenormant thinks it corresponds to the Amil-ussur, or “treasurer,” an official prominent at the Assyrian court; but later Assyriologists have derived it from mazzar, “overseer” or “guardian.”

Verse 10. The prince of the eunuchs said, I fear my lord the king — He objects that he should incur the king’s displeasure, and bring his life into danger, if he complied with Daniel’s request; the king having appointed what sort of meat and drink Daniel and his young friends should use, and having given no one authority to change it for any other, especially for a kind less calculated to preserve their health, and increase the strength and vigour of their constitutions, and beauty of their appearance. For why should he see your faces worse liking — Hebrew, µyp[z, skuqrwpa, as the LXX. render it, more sad and dejected, or meager and lean; than the children which are of your sort — Or, which are of your age, as the Hebrew word lyg signifies in the Arabic, and as the LXX. understand it. Probably, however, the word may include the condition also.

9-16. The Rab-saris objected to the proposed change of diet — to pulse (vegetables) and water — out of “favor and compassion” for Daniel (verse 9, R.V.), and for fear of his own life if the boys should attract attention by their inferior appearance and it should thus be discovered that the royal orders concerning food had been disobeyed; but finally his assistant (verse 11) consented to a ten days’ experiment, which was so successful that all objections were removed. Melzar (Hebrews, the Melzar) is probably not a proper name but an official title: “steward” (R.V.) or “chief butler” (Haugh) or “pedagogue’’ (Hitzig). Lenormant thinks it corresponds to the Amil-ussur, or “treasurer,” an official prominent at the Assyrian court; but later Assyriologists have derived it from mazzar, “overseer” or “guardian.”

Verse 11. Then said Daniel to Melzar] Melzar was an officer under Ashpenaz, whose office it was to attend to the food, clothing, &c., of these royal captives. Others think rxlm meltsar, master of the inn or hotel, the name of an office.

Verses 11, 12. Then said Daniel, Prove thy servants, I beseech, thee — To satisfy him that there would be no danger of any ill consequence, Daniel desires the matter might be put to a trial for ten days; and let them give us pulse to eat — The word µy[rzh, here used, seems to signify fruits or vegetables; or rather, according to the Greek interpreter, seeds in general. At the 16th verse the word is µyn[rz, seeds, and some MSS. read it so in this verse. The sense is doubtless the same in both places, and perhaps may be well enough expressed by that kind of nourishing seed called pulse. The LXX. render it, apo twn spermatwn, of seeds. “Pliny, in his Natural History, p. 380, mentions a kind of pulse, that is said to affect the temper of those that feed upon it, and to produce equanimity and gentleness. Various sorts of grain were dried and prepared for food by the people of the East, as wheat, barley, rice, and pulse. Of some of these was the parched corn, mentioned in Scripture, and the chief food of the labourers and poorer sort of people; and perhaps something of this kind of preparation might have been the choice of Daniel.” — Wintle.

9-16. The Rab-saris objected to the proposed change of diet — to pulse (vegetables) and water — out of “favor and compassion” for Daniel (verse 9, R.V.), and for fear of his own life if the boys should attract attention by their inferior appearance and it should thus be discovered that the royal orders concerning food had been disobeyed; but finally his assistant (verse 11) consented to a ten days’ experiment, which was so successful that all objections were removed. Melzar (Hebrews, the Melzar) is probably not a proper name but an official title: “steward” (R.V.) or “chief butler” (Haugh) or “pedagogue’’ (Hitzig). Lenormant thinks it corresponds to the Amil-ussur, or “treasurer,” an official prominent at the Assyrian court; but later Assyriologists have derived it from mazzar, “overseer” or “guardian.”

Verse 12. Give us pulse to eat] הזרעים hazzeraim, seeds or grain, such as barley, wheat, rye, and peas, &c. Though a vegetable diet might have produced that healthiness of the system in general, and of the countenance particularly, as mentioned here; yet we are to understand that there was an especial blessing of God in this, because this spare diet was taken on a religious account.

Verses 11, 12. Then said Daniel, Prove thy servants, I beseech, thee — To satisfy him that there would be no danger of any ill consequence, Daniel desires the matter might be put to a trial for ten days; and let them give us pulse to eat — The word µy[rzh, here used, seems to signify fruits or vegetables; or rather, according to the Greek interpreter, seeds in general. At the 16th verse the word is µyn[rz, seeds, and some MSS. read it so in this verse. The sense is doubtless the same in both places, and perhaps may be well enough expressed by that kind of nourishing seed called pulse. The LXX. render it, apo twn spermatwn, of seeds. “Pliny, in his Natural History, p. 380, mentions a kind of pulse, that is said to affect the temper of those that feed upon it, and to produce equanimity and gentleness. Various sorts of grain were dried and prepared for food by the people of the East, as wheat, barley, rice, and pulse. Of some of these was the parched corn, mentioned in Scripture, and the chief food of the labourers and poorer sort of people; and perhaps something of this kind of preparation might have been the choice of Daniel.” — Wintle.

9-16. The Rab-saris objected to the proposed change of diet — to pulse (vegetables) and water — out of “favor and compassion” for Daniel (verse 9, R.V.), and for fear of his own life if the boys should attract attention by their inferior appearance and it should thus be discovered that the royal orders concerning food had been disobeyed; but finally his assistant (verse 11) consented to a ten days’ experiment, which was so successful that all objections were removed. Melzar (Hebrews, the Melzar) is probably not a proper name but an official title: “steward” (R.V.) or “chief butler” (Haugh) or “pedagogue’’ (Hitzig). Lenormant thinks it corresponds to the Amil-ussur, or “treasurer,” an official prominent at the Assyrian court; but later Assyriologists have derived it from mazzar, “overseer” or “guardian.”

9-16. The Rab-saris objected to the proposed change of diet — to pulse (vegetables) and water — out of “favor and compassion” for Daniel (verse 9, R.V.), and for fear of his own life if the boys should attract attention by their inferior appearance and it should thus be discovered that the royal orders concerning food had been disobeyed; but finally his assistant (verse 11) consented to a ten days’ experiment, which was so successful that all objections were removed. Melzar (Hebrews, the Melzar) is probably not a proper name but an official title: “steward” (R.V.) or “chief butler” (Haugh) or “pedagogue’’ (Hitzig). Lenormant thinks it corresponds to the Amil-ussur, or “treasurer,” an official prominent at the Assyrian court; but later Assyriologists have derived it from mazzar, “overseer” or “guardian.”

9-16. The Rab-saris objected to the proposed change of diet — to pulse (vegetables) and water — out of “favor and compassion” for Daniel (verse 9, R.V.), and for fear of his own life if the boys should attract attention by their inferior appearance and it should thus be discovered that the royal orders concerning food had been disobeyed; but finally his assistant (verse 11) consented to a ten days’ experiment, which was so successful that all objections were removed. Melzar (Hebrews, the Melzar) is probably not a proper name but an official title: “steward” (R.V.) or “chief butler” (Haugh) or “pedagogue’’ (Hitzig). Lenormant thinks it corresponds to the Amil-ussur, or “treasurer,” an official prominent at the Assyrian court; but later Assyriologists have derived it from mazzar, “overseer” or “guardian.”

V. 15. Fairer and fatter-The blessing of God upon homely fare, affords often more health and strength, than more costly fare to them that eat the fat, and drink the sweet.

Verse 15. At the end of ten days their countenances appeared fairer, &c. — The poor pulse, seeds, and roots, nourished and strengthened Daniel and his companions more than the rich food which the others ate from the king’s table nourished them. Although this might, in part, be the natural effect of their temperance, yet it must chiefly be ascribed to the special blessing of God, which will make a little go a great way, and a dinner of herbs more nutritive and strengthening than a stalled ox.

9-16. The Rab-saris objected to the proposed change of diet — to pulse (vegetables) and water — out of “favor and compassion” for Daniel (verse 9, R.V.), and for fear of his own life if the boys should attract attention by their inferior appearance and it should thus be discovered that the royal orders concerning food had been disobeyed; but finally his assistant (verse 11) consented to a ten days’ experiment, which was so successful that all objections were removed. Melzar (Hebrews, the Melzar) is probably not a proper name but an official title: “steward” (R.V.) or “chief butler” (Haugh) or “pedagogue’’ (Hitzig). Lenormant thinks it corresponds to the Amil-ussur, or “treasurer,” an official prominent at the Assyrian court; but later Assyriologists have derived it from mazzar, “overseer” or “guardian.”

9-16. The Rab-saris objected to the proposed change of diet — to pulse (vegetables) and water — out of “favor and compassion” for Daniel (verse 9, R.V.), and for fear of his own life if the boys should attract attention by their inferior appearance and it should thus be discovered that the royal orders concerning food had been disobeyed; but finally his assistant (verse 11) consented to a ten days’ experiment, which was so successful that all objections were removed. Melzar (Hebrews, the Melzar) is probably not a proper name but an official title: “steward” (R.V.) or “chief butler” (Haugh) or “pedagogue’’ (Hitzig). Lenormant thinks it corresponds to the Amil-ussur, or “treasurer,” an official prominent at the Assyrian court; but later Assyriologists have derived it from mazzar, “overseer” or “guardian.”

Verse 17. As for these four children] Young men or youths. Our translation gives a false idea.

In all visions and dreams.] That is, such as are Divine; for as to dreams in general, they have as much signification as they have connexion, being the effects of the state of the body, of the mind, or of the circumstances of the dreamer. A dream may be considered supernatural, if it have nothing preposterous, nothing monstrous, and nothing irregular. If the whole order and consequences of the things be preserved in them, from beginning to end, then we may presume they are supernatural. In such dreams Daniel had understanding.

Verse 17. As for these four children — The Hebrew is literally, As to these children, or young men, each of them four: to them God gave knowledge and skill in all learning and wisdom — That is, in all sorts of learning and knowledge. They became particularly skilful in those parts of the Chaldean learning which were really useful, and which might recommend them to the favour of the kings both of Babylon and Persia, and qualify them for places of trust under them; as Moses’s education in the Egyptian learning fitted him to be a ruler of God’s people. And Daniel had understanding in all visions and dreams — Daniel excelled the others in the gift of prophecy, and in his extraordinary skill in interpreting all sorts of visions and dreams, namely, such as were sent of God, and foreshowed future events, under the cover of certain images and representations, which required an interpretation in order to the understanding of their true signification. But we must not suppose that Daniel attained this skill by any study or rules of art. It was God’s supernatural gift unto him, as was the same kind of knowledge which Joseph possessed and manifested when he interpreted the dreams of Pharaoh, and those of the chief butler and baker.

17. God gave these four Hebrew youths “knowledge and skill in every kind of books” (Hebrews) The Hebrews wrote their books generally upon parchment, the Egyptians upon papyrus, the Babylonians upon clay tablets. These tablets were stored by hundreds of thousands in the palace library, and so arranged as to be easily accessible to visitors and students. The princes who were to be fitted for state offices would no doubt have a special post-graduate course differing from that provided for those who were to be priests or “magicians,’’ but the preliminary training might be the same in both cases. It seems strange to many that these boys who were so scrupulous about touching heathen food (verse 8) would so eagerly grasp the heathen learning; but they might not have seen that this was necessarily connected with idolatry. They certainly are not represented as accepting the religion of Babylon with its other wisdom. Visions and dreams — Both the Babylonians and the Hebrews believed that the divine will was often revealed to man through this agency. (See Daniel 2:1; Genesis 41:15; Numbers 12:6.) No doubt the study of omens and dreams was a prominent part of the curriculum of the Babylonian schools, and there is no reason to suppose that a Hebrew youth at this era would doubt its value, although in later ages heathen learning of every kind became abominable in their eyes.

Verse 18. Now at the end of the days] That is, at the end of three years, Daniel 1:5.

Verses 18-20. Now at the end of the days that the king had said he should bring them in — At the end of three years, see verse 5, the prince of the eunuchs brought them in — According to the king’s command. And the king communed with them — To try their proficiency. This shows the king’s ability and judgment, without which he could not have discerned their fitness for his service, and their excellence above others. He examined all candidates that applied, and preferred those that outstripped the rest. Therefore stood they before the king — They were in continual attendance in the king’s court. The same expression is used of Elijah and Jeremiah, as God’s servants and messengers, 1 Kings 17:1; Jeremiah 15:19. And the Levites are said to stand before the congregation to minister to them, Numbers 16:9. And in all matters of wisdom and understanding — In a general knowledge of things; that the king inquired of them — This is a further confirmation of the king’s noble endowments, and of his great care to choose only proper persons to be in offices of trust, namely, persons well qualified to serve him in the great affairs of the kingdom. He found them ten times better, &c. — Hebrew, tydy rc[, ten hands above, all the magicians and astrologers that were in his realm — The words may be understood of those that employed themselves in the lawful search of natural causes and effects, and of the regular motions of the heavenly bodies. For, inasmuch as Daniel made intercession to the captain of the guard, that the wise men of Babylon might not be slain, Daniel 2:24, we cannot suppose that all of them were such as studied unlawful arts and sciences, especially as he himself was afterward made master, or head, over them. These names are evidently to be taken in a good sense, as the magi, Matthew 2:1; and the astrologers were then nearly, if not altogether, the same as astronomers with us. In short, the words seem to comprehend those persons in general, that were distinguished in the several kinds of learning cultivated among the Chaldees. It cannot, therefore, be collected from these words, that Daniel applied himself to the study of what are called magic arts, but to the sciences of the Chaldees; in the same manner as Moses had, long before, applied himself to the study of the wisdom of Egypt. And in giving Nebuchadnezzar proof that Daniel excelled all the wise men in his realm in these branches of knowledge and wisdom, God poured contempt on the pride of the Chaldeans, and put honour on the low estate of his people.

18-20. At the end of a three years’ course of study (verse 5) the examination not only showed the fitness of these youths to stand before the king (verse 19), that is, as royal attendants (Bevan); but when questions were propounded on dark subjects their answers showed more insight than those of the king’s most aged and learned counselors. This statement probably has reference to the events related in chap. 2. This verse is so changed in various translations that Thomson would drop it out altogether as a later interpolation. Wyclif’s translation, though not of critical value, is curious enough to quote: “And eche word of Wysdam and vndirstondyng, that the Kyng axide of him, he fonde in him the tenthe folde ouer alle dyvynours and witch is that everen in alle the rewme of hym.”

V. 19. Before-Both in the presence chamber, and in the council chamber, to try their proficiency; this shews the king’s ability and judgment, how else could he discern their fitness, and their excellency above others.

Verse 19. And among them all] All the young noble captives from different nations.

Therefore stood they before the king.] It appears that only four were wanting.

Verses 18-20. Now at the end of the days that the king had said he should bring them in — At the end of three years, see verse 5, the prince of the eunuchs brought them in — According to the king’s command. And the king communed with them — To try their proficiency. This shows the king’s ability and judgment, without which he could not have discerned their fitness for his service, and their excellence above others. He examined all candidates that applied, and preferred those that outstripped the rest. Therefore stood they before the king — They were in continual attendance in the king’s court. The same expression is used of Elijah and Jeremiah, as God’s servants and messengers, 1 Kings 17:1; Jeremiah 15:19. And the Levites are said to stand before the congregation to minister to them, Numbers 16:9. And in all matters of wisdom and understanding — In a general knowledge of things; that the king inquired of them — This is a further confirmation of the king’s noble endowments, and of his great care to choose only proper persons to be in offices of trust, namely, persons well qualified to serve him in the great affairs of the kingdom. He found them ten times better, &c. — Hebrew, tydy rc[, ten hands above, all the magicians and astrologers that were in his realm — The words may be understood of those that employed themselves in the lawful search of natural causes and effects, and of the regular motions of the heavenly bodies. For, inasmuch as Daniel made intercession to the captain of the guard, that the wise men of Babylon might not be slain, Daniel 2:24, we cannot suppose that all of them were such as studied unlawful arts and sciences, especially as he himself was afterward made master, or head, over them. These names are evidently to be taken in a good sense, as the magi, Matthew 2:1; and the astrologers were then nearly, if not altogether, the same as astronomers with us. In short, the words seem to comprehend those persons in general, that were distinguished in the several kinds of learning cultivated among the Chaldees. It cannot, therefore, be collected from these words, that Daniel applied himself to the study of what are called magic arts, but to the sciences of the Chaldees; in the same manner as Moses had, long before, applied himself to the study of the wisdom of Egypt. And in giving Nebuchadnezzar proof that Daniel excelled all the wise men in his realm in these branches of knowledge and wisdom, God poured contempt on the pride of the Chaldeans, and put honour on the low estate of his people.

18-20. At the end of a three years’ course of study (verse 5) the examination not only showed the fitness of these youths to stand before the king (verse 19), that is, as royal attendants (Bevan); but when questions were propounded on dark subjects their answers showed more insight than those of the king’s most aged and learned counselors. This statement probably has reference to the events related in chap. 2. This verse is so changed in various translations that Thomson would drop it out altogether as a later interpolation. Wyclif’s translation, though not of critical value, is curious enough to quote: “And eche word of Wysdam and vndirstondyng, that the Kyng axide of him, he fonde in him the tenthe folde ouer alle dyvynours and witch is that everen in alle the rewme of hym.”

V. 20. The king enquired-This is a farther confirmation of the king’s noble endowments, and of his great care whom he chose to be in offices of trust, namely persons excellently qualified to serve him in the great affairs of the kingdom. And thus did God pour contempt upon the pride of the Chaldeans, and put honour on the low estate of his people.

Verse 20. Magicians and astrologers] Probably the same as philosophers and astronomers among us.

Verses 18-20. Now at the end of the days that the king had said he should bring them in — At the end of three years, see verse 5, the prince of the eunuchs brought them in — According to the king’s command. And the king communed with them — To try their proficiency. This shows the king’s ability and judgment, without which he could not have discerned their fitness for his service, and their excellence above others. He examined all candidates that applied, and preferred those that outstripped the rest. Therefore stood they before the king — They were in continual attendance in the king’s court. The same expression is used of Elijah and Jeremiah, as God’s servants and messengers, 1 Kings 17:1; Jeremiah 15:19. And the Levites are said to stand before the congregation to minister to them, Numbers 16:9. And in all matters of wisdom and understanding — In a general knowledge of things; that the king inquired of them — This is a further confirmation of the king’s noble endowments, and of his great care to choose only proper persons to be in offices of trust, namely, persons well qualified to serve him in the great affairs of the kingdom. He found them ten times better, &c. — Hebrew, tydy rc[, ten hands above, all the magicians and astrologers that were in his realm — The words may be understood of those that employed themselves in the lawful search of natural causes and effects, and of the regular motions of the heavenly bodies. For, inasmuch as Daniel made intercession to the captain of the guard, that the wise men of Babylon might not be slain, Daniel 2:24, we cannot suppose that all of them were such as studied unlawful arts and sciences, especially as he himself was afterward made master, or head, over them. These names are evidently to be taken in a good sense, as the magi, Matthew 2:1; and the astrologers were then nearly, if not altogether, the same as astronomers with us. In short, the words seem to comprehend those persons in general, that were distinguished in the several kinds of learning cultivated among the Chaldees. It cannot, therefore, be collected from these words, that Daniel applied himself to the study of what are called magic arts, but to the sciences of the Chaldees; in the same manner as Moses had, long before, applied himself to the study of the wisdom of Egypt. And in giving Nebuchadnezzar proof that Daniel excelled all the wise men in his realm in these branches of knowledge and wisdom, God poured contempt on the pride of the Chaldeans, and put honour on the low estate of his people.

18-20. At the end of a three years’ course of study (verse 5) the examination not only showed the fitness of these youths to stand before the king (verse 19), that is, as royal attendants (Bevan); but when questions were propounded on dark subjects their answers showed more insight than those of the king’s most aged and learned counselors. This statement probably has reference to the events related in chap. 2. This verse is so changed in various translations that Thomson would drop it out altogether as a later interpolation. Wyclif’s translation, though not of critical value, is curious enough to quote: “And eche word of Wysdam and vndirstondyng, that the Kyng axide of him, he fonde in him the tenthe folde ouer alle dyvynours and witch is that everen in alle the rewme of hym.”

V. 21. Continued-in the court of Babylon until Cyrus, and then he was in the Persian court, and he lived in honour and high employment all that time, yea, after Cyrus began to reign. For Daniel 10:1, he had visions and revelations in the third year of Cyrus.

Verse 21. The first year of king Cyrus.] That is, to the end of the Chaldean empire. And we find Daniel alive in the third year of Cyrus, see Daniel 10:1.

DANIEL

Verse 21. And Daniel continued — Hebrew, yhyw, he was, namely, in the court of Babylon, known, employed, and held in reputation, under Nebuchadnezzar and his successors; even unto the first year of Cyrus — Till the monarchy passed from the Chaldeans to the Persians in the person of Cyrus, under whom also he maintained his authority. For the expression, unto, or till, the first year, is not intended to signify that he lived no longer; for it appears, from Daniel 10:1, that he lived at least till the third year of that monarch, in which year he had visions and revelations. He lived to see the promises of Isaiah and Jeremiah fulfilled, with respect to the deliverance of the Jews from their state of captivity in Babylon, which began to be accomplished in the first year of Cyrus, Ezra 1:1, and for the accomplishment of which we find Daniel very solicitous, Daniel 9:1,

2. This being so remarkable a year, the text takes notice that Daniel lived to that time, but does not say how much longer he lived.

Ver. 21. And Daniel continued to the first year of king Cyrus. He more or less enjoyed honours and office till that time: and what minister ever retained honours so long? He was about a hundred years of age when he died.

21. For Cyrus see Introduction, III, 3, (6). If continued (Hebrews, was) means in this connection “remained alive,” as many suppose, and as seems a very natural sense, then this verse contradicts 10:1. Several explanations are offered: certain words may have dropped out of the text (for example, “in the king’s court”); or “first” is a copyist’s blunder for “third;” or, as it was some time after the capture of Babylon before Cyrus took the title “King of Babylon” [Introduction, III, 3, (5); 4], this first year as king of Babylon might coincide with his third year as “king of Persia” (see Introduction, II, 8). While no explanation relieves the matter of difficulty, it is so incredible that a writer would have permitted a plain contradiction to remain uncorrected in his original treatise that it seems likely either that the author had a satisfactory explanation of the discrepancy or else that this verse, as Prince maintains, is a marginal note which has slipped by accident into the text.