Daniel · Chapter 2

V. 1. In the second year-This was properly in the fifth year of that king’s reign, but in the second year after Daniel had been brought before the king. Dreams-It was one dream, but of many parts.

Verse 1. The second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar] That is, the second year of his reigning alone, for he was king two years before his father’s death. See Clarke’s notes on “Daniel 1:1”. This was therefore the fifth year of his reign, and the fourth of the captivity of Daniel.

Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams wherewith his spirit was troubled] The dream had made a deep and solemn impression upon his mind; and, having forgotten all but general circumstances, his mind was distressed.

Verse 1. In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar — That is, according to the Babylonian account, or the fourth according to the Jewish; that is, in the second year of his reigning alone, or the fourth from his first reigning jointly with his father. Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams — Having subdued all his enemies, and firmly established his throne, it is probable he was thinking upon his bed (see verse 29) what should come to pass hereafter: what should be the future success of his family and kingdom, and whether any, or what, families and kingdoms might arise after his own: and as our waking thoughts usually give some tincture to our dreams, he dreamed of something to the same purpose, which astonished him, but which he could not rightly understand. The dream affected him strongly at the time; but awaking in confusion, he had but an imperfect remembrance of it; he could not recollect the particulars. It is said he dreamed dreams, because though it was but one continued dream, it contained divers scenes of affairs, being a description of the succession of the four monarchies which were to continue, under different forms, unto the end of the world. Wherewith his spirit was troubled — The Hebrew expression, wjwr µ[pttw, denotes that his spirit was violently agitated, or in such consternation as to affect his body, and disturb his rest. And his sleep brake from him — Or, went from him, as a like phrase is rendered Daniel 6:18.

Verse 1. In the second year of Nebuchadnezzar, after he ascended the throne, according to the Chaldaic account, which was the fourth according to the Hebrew account. Nebuchadnezzar is thought by some to have reigned awhile with his father, as Solomon did with David. He is called king when he first came against Jerusalem. 2 Chronicles 36:6.

1. In the second year — See note Daniel 1:1. “By the most natural way of counting, the three years were the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar, his first year, and his second year, precisely as our Saviour’s three days in the grave were Friday, Saturday, and Sunday” (Trumbull). Many scholars by a slight change of the text read “twelfth” instead of “second.” Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams — Dreams had a great influence on the Assyrian and Babylonian kings, as their inscriptions prove. (See also note 4:5-7.) The god of dreams, Makhir, is often referred to. The dreams recorded of various kings, and especially the Babylonian “Dream Books,” show that apparitions of animals were considered especially fateful — the appearance of a lion, a jackal, a dog, a mountain goat, a stag, etc., each containing a supernatural portent for good or evil. (See Jastrow, Babylonian Religion, pp. 329-351, 402-404.) The records of Assurbanipal, for example, are rich in such omens. The deity appears in a dream to encourage the king; he sends him a message spoken to a priest in a vision and another written on the disk of the moon; he even, on one occasion, appears to Gyges, king of Lydia, the enemy of the king, and commands him to pay homage to his servant Assurbanipal, which command is at once obeyed. So Merodach is said to have appeared in dreams to Nabonidus, the father of Belshazzar, directing and guiding him.

V. 2. The astrologers-Who pretended great skill in natural, and supernatural things. The sorcerers-Or necromancers, who used diabolical arts. Chaldeans-This name the magicians assumed as being national, and most noble.

Verse 2. The magicians] µymcrj chartummim. See Clarke’s note on “Genesis 41:8”.

The astrologers] אשפים ashshaphim. Perhaps from ãvn nashaph, to breathe, because they laid claim to Divine inspiration; but probably the persons in question were the philosophers and astronomers among the Babylonians.

The sorcerers] מכשפים mechashshephim. See Clarke’s note on “Deuteronomy 18:10”; and “Exodus 22:18”; and “Le 19:31”, where several of these arts are explained.

The Chaldeans] Who these were is difficult to be ascertained. They might be a college of learned men, where all arts and sciences were professed and taught. The Chaldeans were the most ancient philosophers of the world; they might have been originally inhabitants of the Babylonian Irak; and still have preserved to themselves exclusively the name of Chaldeans, to distinguish themselves from other nations and peoples who inhabited the one hundred and twenty provinces of which the Babylonish government was composed.

Verse 2. Then the king commanded to call the magicians and the astrologers — Concerning the meaning of these two words, see note on Daniel 1:20. Daniel and his companions were not called among them; perhaps because the Chaldeans despised them as youths and strangers, and would not have them thought equal in knowledge to themselves. And the sorcerers — This word is always taken in an ill sense by the sacred writers, signifying a sort of necromancers, that through diabolical arts pretended to an acquaintance with departed spirits, from ãck, præstigiis uti, to use deceitful tricks, or enchantments. They were, perhaps, not very unlike the sortilegi, or fortune-tellers of the ancient Romans; and exercised themselves in various sorts of juggling tricks, or enchantments, which were supposed to be performed by the assistance of demons: see note on Isaiah 29:4. And the Chaldeans — The Chaldeans were so much addicted to the study of the motions of the heavenly bodies, and to make prognostications from thence, that the word Chaldean is used, both in Greek and Latin writers, for an astrologer. Diodorus, lib. 2., speaking of the Chaldeans, says, They employ their whole time in philosophy and divination, and are trained up to them from their childhood: and Strabo, lib. xvi, makes a distinction, and observes, that the word is sometimes applied to the nation, sometimes to the sect. Curtius, lib. 5. cap. 1, describes them thus: “Chaldæi siderum motus et statas temporum vices ostendere soliti:” “The Chaldeans are accustomed to show the motions of the stars, and the appointed changes of times:” and Cicero, De Divin., p. 4, “Chaldæi — diuturna observatione siderum scientiam putantur effecisse, ut prædici posset quid cuique eventurum et quo quisque fato natus esset:” “The Chaldeans, by the long observation of the stars, are thought to have formed a science, whereby may be foretold what is about to happen to every one, and to what fate every one is born.” These passages may serve to show the opinion that was commonly entertained of these Chaldeans; and therefore we shall be less surprised to find, at verse 4, this name, according to the general sense of it, used for the magicians of every sort. To show the king his dreams — Dreams were often considered by the heathen as giving particular intimations of the will of Heaven; and hence the expression of Homer, in his first Iliad, Kai gar t’ onar ek Diov esti, For dreams descend from Jove. And in the beginning of his second Iliad, he has, by a bold and beautiful prosopopœia, conveyed the will of Jupiter to Agamemnon in a dream, investing Oneirov (a dream) with all the qualities of a divine messenger. Diog. Laert. makes mention of a dream of Socrates, whereby he foretold his death within three days; and most of the schools among pagan philosophers gave credit to dreams, and considered them as revealing the will of the gods: see Wintle.

Ver. 2. Call the hariolites or aruspices, those who used incantations, being diviners. The magicians, those who affected to know all the secrets of philosophy. The astrologers, those who affected necromancy, or converse with the dead: by some they are called aruspices. The Chaldeans, professors of astronomy, engaged in deciphering the book of fate. All these were to interpret to the king his dreams.

2. The magicians — This is a “good Babylonian word” (Fr. Delitzsch) and is found in connection with several other good Babylonian terms. Hommel adds to Delitzsch’s references to the Babylonian magicians (kardamu) this passage: “They [certain deities?] break the kardami if they give not a right decision.” Babylonian and Persian magic seems to be of Median origin (Noldeke). The Magi, so famous in classical times, were already so powerful in the sixth century B.C. that king Nabonidus gives to himself as one of his greatest titles “Chief Magus,” if that indeed is the meaning of Rab-mag (Jeremiah 39:3). On the death of Cyrus one of these Magi (Gaumata) actually seized the throne, and so strong was the fear of these magicians upon the people that the whole empire was shaken by the insurrection. The magic formulas which have come down to us are positively innumerable. I suppose in the British Museum alone there must be a thousand tablets which give warnings concerning the old woman or the black cat or the black dog. As Budge has said, the ancient Babylonian passed his entire life in perpetual terror of evil spirits and demons and the wizards who could control them. The following fragments of texts from King’s great work (Babylonian Magic, 1896) show the constant supplications of king and people: —

O merciful goddess, I beseech thee to stand and harken to my cries. I am afraid; I tremble and am cast down with fear.

O Marduk, lord of lords, thou art compassionate; I am weak… may they never approach me, the magic of the sorcerer or the sorceress. May there never approach me the evil of dreams; of powers and portents of heaven and earth. The incantations of the wizards, and magical charms to be used against these, are given in great detail. Lenormant believed that the different classes of magic workers mentioned in this verse corresponded exactly to the different orders among the Babylonian magicians. Other Assyriologists do not recognize this similarity, yet it cannot be doubted that there were wonder-workers corresponding, at least generally, to each class named here: magicians (khartummim), probably wise men in general; astrologers, or “enchanters” (assaphim); sorcerers, perhaps “horoscopists” (Prince), that is, drawers of horoscopes or prognosticators (Bevan), etc. Assurbanipal, in one text, mentions the interpretation of dream visions as the special business of the mahe (magha, magi). The Assyrian generals were always accompanied in every campaign by the asipu, who is mentioned here, that is, the “dreamer,” or “mutterer,” on whose interpretation of the signs of heaven the movement of the troops depended. The Chaldeans are named here and in verse 10 as if they merely constituted one division of these magicians. They were really not an order of magicians, but the ruling race in Babylon at this time; though the fact that the wise men of the court would naturally come from this race points to the easy possibility of all the literati being called, by the conglomerate alien races with which Babylon was populated, by the name Chaldean, “doer of great deeds.” (See Introduction, II, 8.) One Greek version, which many scholars believe to represent the original text of the LXX., in this verse speaks of the Chaldeans properly as a race: “The magicians, astrologers, and sorcerers of the Chaldeans.” In verse 27, where the list is given again, the Chaldeans are omitted.

V. 3. To know-He remembered the fact in general, but could not repeat it perfectly. Yet it had left such an impression on him, as put him in great perplexity. The Lord hath ways to affright the greatest men in the world, in the midst of their security.

V. 4. In Syriack-That is in the Chaldee tongue, for Syria or Aram is sometimes taken in a large sense, containing, Assyria, Babylon, Mesopotamia, Phoenicia, Palestine, 2 Kings 18:26. From hence all is written in the Chaldee language, to the eighth chapter.

Verse 4. Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriac] tymra aramith, the language of Aram or Syria. What has been generally called the Chaldee.

O king, live for ever] חיי לעלמינ מלכא Malca leolmin cheyi. With these words the Chaldee part of Daniel commences; and continues to the end of the seventh chapter. These kinds of compliments are still in use in the East Indies. A superior gives a blessing to an inferior by saying to him, when the latter is in the act of doing him reverence, “Long life to thee.” A poor man, going into the presence of a king to solicit a favour, uses the same kind of address: O father, thou art the support of the destitute; mayest thou live to old age!—WARD’S Customs.

Verse 4. Then spake the Chaldeans to the king in Syriac — The ancient Chaldee and the Syrian language were the same: see Genesis 31:47; 2 Kings 18:26; Ezra 4:7. This language is found in its greatest purity in the books of Daniel and Ezra. The following part of the chapter, from this verse, is written in Chaldee, and so on to the end of the seventh chapter: the reason of which seems to be, that what is said from hence to the end of that chapter, relates chiefly to the Chaldeans, or the inhabitants of Babylonia; whereas what follows, from the beginning of the eighth chapter, refers mostly to the Jewish people, and therefore is written in Hebrew.

4. In Syriac — This does not show that the writer of Daniel thought the Chaldeans spake Syriac or Aramaic. It is more probably a late marginal note, stating that at this point the Aramaic section of the book began.

Verse 5. Ye shall be cut in pieces] This was arbitrary and tyrannical in the extreme; but, in the order of God’s providence, it was overruled to serve the most important purpose.

Verses 5, 6. The king said, The thing is gone from me — That is, he could not recollect the substance, much less all the particulars of it; some traces of it, however, must have remained in his mind, by which he thought the whole might be brought back to his remembrance, if his wise men could give him any clew to his dream, or hit, any way, upon the subject of it. This, without doubt, was the state of his mind; for unless some traces of his dream, however imperfect, had remained in it, his wise men would have endeavoured to impose upon him, and have told him any dream they could devise. If ye will not make known the dream, ye shall be cut in pieces — Literally, be made into pieces. So Syriac; that is, utterly destroyed, as the LXX. and the Vulgate render it. A kind of punishment, of which other places in Scripture make mention: see the margin. And your houses shall be made a dunghill — That is, shall be entirely pulled down, and never rebuilt. The ground of this threatening of the king is, that the eastern nations esteemed it a very grievous punishment inflicted upon any one to efface his memory, which in a great measure would be done by pulling down his house, and preventing its being ever rebuilt. The LXX. read, oi oikoi umwn diarpaghsontai, your houses shall be plundered, and the Vulgate: your houses shall be confiscated, or taken for the king’s use. This proud king seemed determined to exercise the bitterest acts of cruelty against his magicians, and to blot out the very traces of their memory, if they did not gratify his unreasonable but anxious wishes. We meet with a like denunciation from this haughty monarch, Daniel 3:9. But if ye show the dream, &c., ye shall receive gifts — As I have threatened you with death, and the destruction of all you have, if you do not perform what I require: so I promise you honour and great rewards if you do perform it.

Ver. 5. Your houses shall be made a dunghill, or be demolished, as Theodotian reads; and his is the only Greek version extant. Desirous of being exact as far as possible, in the illustration of these prophecies, as far as critics have given light, I have procured two copies of Theodotian’s work, with a variety of others on this book.—Daniel wrote the first chapter, and to the fourth verse of the second chapter, in the Hebrew language. Chapters eight to twelve are also in the Hebrew; the others, which concerned chiefly the affairs of Babylon, are written in the Chaldee.

5. Rather, “The word is gone forth from me” (R.V., margin; also verse 8). The king’s decision was final, that the dream as well as the interpretation must be given or those who laid claim to supernatural wisdom should be cut limb from limb (compare Ezekiel 16:40, and 2 Macc. 1:16) — which was, with stoning, a customary punishment with the Babylonians — their houses being turned into rubbish heaps and therefore dunghills (Ezra 6:11; 2 Kings 10:27; compare Records of the Past, 1:27-43). If this be literal history, it suggests either that a sign of the king’s future insanity was already showing itself (chap. iv) or else some previous friction had occurred between him and his religious advisers, this test serving as an excuse to get rid of them. The latter seems far more probable than that the king believed the magicians knew the dream but treasonably refused to tell it (Thomson). Such acts on the part of absolute sovereigns who find themselves being interfered with by influential subjects are not at all rare. Behrmann cites a parallel instance from Arabian history. A king of Yemen was visited with a dream which caused him great anxiety. So he summoned his sages and said to them, “I have had a dream which has frightened me and which I cannot forget; tell it me, and its interpretation.” The wise men answered, “Repeat to us the dream, and we will tell you the interpretation.” “No,” said the king; “for if I tell you the dream, I cannot be sure of the truth of your explanation. He who does not know the dream without being told cannot know what it means.”

Verses 5, 6. The king said, The thing is gone from me — That is, he could not recollect the substance, much less all the particulars of it; some traces of it, however, must have remained in his mind, by which he thought the whole might be brought back to his remembrance, if his wise men could give him any clew to his dream, or hit, any way, upon the subject of it. This, without doubt, was the state of his mind; for unless some traces of his dream, however imperfect, had remained in it, his wise men would have endeavoured to impose upon him, and have told him any dream they could devise. If ye will not make known the dream, ye shall be cut in pieces — Literally, be made into pieces. So Syriac; that is, utterly destroyed, as the LXX. and the Vulgate render it. A kind of punishment, of which other places in Scripture make mention: see the margin. And your houses shall be made a dunghill — That is, shall be entirely pulled down, and never rebuilt. The ground of this threatening of the king is, that the eastern nations esteemed it a very grievous punishment inflicted upon any one to efface his memory, which in a great measure would be done by pulling down his house, and preventing its being ever rebuilt. The LXX. read, oi oikoi umwn diarpaghsontai, your houses shall be plundered, and the Vulgate: your houses shall be confiscated, or taken for the king’s use. This proud king seemed determined to exercise the bitterest acts of cruelty against his magicians, and to blot out the very traces of their memory, if they did not gratify his unreasonable but anxious wishes. We meet with a like denunciation from this haughty monarch, Daniel 3:9. But if ye show the dream, &c., ye shall receive gifts — As I have threatened you with death, and the destruction of all you have, if you do not perform what I require: so I promise you honour and great rewards if you do perform it.

6-9. Gifts are promised to anyone who can tell the dream and its meaning, while the strong affirmation of the magicians that they could give a true interpretation if they only knew what the dream was is characterized as lying and corrupt words used simply with the desire to “buy the time” and postpone punishment for their false pretenses until perhaps the king might relent, or a more lucky day for them should come. But the king affirms that he will not relent; the threat which had gone forth from him was irrevocable, and if they failed to do what he demanded there was but one decree or law for them — the sentence, or punishment, of death.

Verses 7, 8. They answered, Let the king tell his servants the dream — But this the king could not do; and yet, unless he could do it, they could not proceed one step toward the gratifying of his desires. The king said, I know of a certainty that ye would gain time — “You only want to protract the time, either that the dream may return, or that my uneasiness may be dissipated, and that, occupied in other affairs, I may think no more of the dream. But I will have from you immediately a positive answer, and a precise explication.” However tyrannical this may appear in the king, his reasoning must be allowed to be very just and right: for if the astrologers could obtain from their gods the knowledge of future events by the explication of a dream, certainly the same gods could have made known to them what the dream was. The original expression means, to buy, or redeem, time, and may be properly applied to men’s using their utmost endeavours to free themselves out of some imminent danger, or difficulty, gaining time being of considerable advantage to that purpose.

6-9. Gifts are promised to anyone who can tell the dream and its meaning, while the strong affirmation of the magicians that they could give a true interpretation if they only knew what the dream was is characterized as lying and corrupt words used simply with the desire to “buy the time” and postpone punishment for their false pretenses until perhaps the king might relent, or a more lucky day for them should come. But the king affirms that he will not relent; the threat which had gone forth from him was irrevocable, and if they failed to do what he demanded there was but one decree or law for them — the sentence, or punishment, of death.

Verse 8. That ye would gain the time] The king means either that they wished to prolong the time that he might recollect it, or get indifferent about it; or that they might invent something in the place of it; or make their escape to save their lives, after having packed up their valuables. See Daniel 2:9.

Verses 7, 8. They answered, Let the king tell his servants the dream — But this the king could not do; and yet, unless he could do it, they could not proceed one step toward the gratifying of his desires. The king said, I know of a certainty that ye would gain time — “You only want to protract the time, either that the dream may return, or that my uneasiness may be dissipated, and that, occupied in other affairs, I may think no more of the dream. But I will have from you immediately a positive answer, and a precise explication.” However tyrannical this may appear in the king, his reasoning must be allowed to be very just and right: for if the astrologers could obtain from their gods the knowledge of future events by the explication of a dream, certainly the same gods could have made known to them what the dream was. The original expression means, to buy, or redeem, time, and may be properly applied to men’s using their utmost endeavours to free themselves out of some imminent danger, or difficulty, gaining time being of considerable advantage to that purpose.

6-9. Gifts are promised to anyone who can tell the dream and its meaning, while the strong affirmation of the magicians that they could give a true interpretation if they only knew what the dream was is characterized as lying and corrupt words used simply with the desire to “buy the time” and postpone punishment for their false pretenses until perhaps the king might relent, or a more lucky day for them should come. But the king affirms that he will not relent; the threat which had gone forth from him was irrevocable, and if they failed to do what he demanded there was but one decree or law for them — the sentence, or punishment, of death.

V. 9. But one decree-I will not retract my sentence.

Verse 9. If ye will not make known the dream, &c., there is but one decree for you — No alteration will be made as to my declaration; and you have nothing to expect but the execution of the sentence which I have passed upon you. For ye have prepared lying and corrupt words — The king’s meaning seems to be, that he found by their behaviour, they were ready, in case he told his dream, to invent and give some kind of plausible interpretation of it; or such a one as might, in some way or other, be applicable to whatever events should follow it: in short, that he found their pretended knowledge to be all imposture, since, if they were able to foretel things not yet come to pass, they might certainly tell things already past, and so inform him what was the subject of his dream. Till the time be changed — Till there be such an alteration of things, that neither my dream, nor your interpretation, may be thought of any more. Or, as some think, this may be spoken of the wise men framing excuses, in order to delay their punishment, in hopes there might be some change in things, or in the king’s mind, whereby they might escape it. From what he says, however, in the conclusion of the verse, it seems to be rather an insinuation, that they intended to forge or invent an interpretation of his dream, not being able to show the true interpretation of it.

6-9. Gifts are promised to anyone who can tell the dream and its meaning, while the strong affirmation of the magicians that they could give a true interpretation if they only knew what the dream was is characterized as lying and corrupt words used simply with the desire to “buy the time” and postpone punishment for their false pretenses until perhaps the king might relent, or a more lucky day for them should come. But the king affirms that he will not relent; the threat which had gone forth from him was irrevocable, and if they failed to do what he demanded there was but one decree or law for them — the sentence, or punishment, of death.

Verse 10. There is not a man upon the earth] The thing is utterly impossible to man. This was their decision: and when Daniel gave the dream, with its interpretation, they knew that the spirit of the holy gods was in him. So, even according to their own theology, he was immeasurably greater than the wisest in Babylon or in the world.

Verses 10, 11. The Chaldeans answered, There is not a man upon the earth that can show the king’s matter — Here the wise men are driven to acknowledge their inability, and their excuse is, that they could indeed tell what dreams signified, if the dreams were told them; but as to telling what a person had dreamed, it was above the power of any art or knowledge but that of the gods, who knew all things. But this reasoning was weak, and showed the king’s accusation to be just, namely, that they had prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before him; or, that their business and skill were only to invent or affix such interpretations of dreams as they thought suitable, without having any real knowledge at all of future things.

10-13. The magicians in utter desperation now appeal to the king’s sense of justice and to the lack of precedent, “forasmuch as no king, be he never so great and powerful” (R.V., margin) had ever demanded such a “hard thing,” which was absolutely impossible excepting to the highest deities, which have no intercourse with man. The king is, or pretends to be, very furious at this insinuation of injustice, and their confession of inability to meet the fair test proposed (note verse 5) and sends forth his edict of death against the entire order of “wise men,” to which order Daniel and his friends belonged (verse 13). So Herodotus says Astyages crucified the Magi who had advised him unwisely, interpreting wrongly the portents

(128) — which could only mean, he thought, either that the magicians were impostors, that they were willfully deceiving him, or else that they had lost the favor of their gods, and in either case they ought to die.

Verses 10, 11. The Chaldeans answered, There is not a man upon the earth that can show the king’s matter — Here the wise men are driven to acknowledge their inability, and their excuse is, that they could indeed tell what dreams signified, if the dreams were told them; but as to telling what a person had dreamed, it was above the power of any art or knowledge but that of the gods, who knew all things. But this reasoning was weak, and showed the king’s accusation to be just, namely, that they had prepared lying and corrupt words to speak before him; or, that their business and skill were only to invent or affix such interpretations of dreams as they thought suitable, without having any real knowledge at all of future things.

10-13. The magicians in utter desperation now appeal to the king’s sense of justice and to the lack of precedent, “forasmuch as no king, be he never so great and powerful” (R.V., margin) had ever demanded such a “hard thing,” which was absolutely impossible excepting to the highest deities, which have no intercourse with man. The king is, or pretends to be, very furious at this insinuation of injustice, and their confession of inability to meet the fair test proposed (note verse 5) and sends forth his edict of death against the entire order of “wise men,” to which order Daniel and his friends belonged (verse 13). So Herodotus says Astyages crucified the Magi who had advised him unwisely, interpreting wrongly the portents

(128) — which could only mean, he thought, either that the magicians were impostors, that they were willfully deceiving him, or else that they had lost the favor of their gods, and in either case they ought to die.

Verses 12, 13. For this cause the king was angry and very furious, &c. — The king, in his rage and fury, probably did not think of sending for Daniel, which made Daniel try to get admission to the king, verse 14, to prevent his own destruction, as well as that of the other wise men. And they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain — Though, as it appears, they had not been summoned with the wise men of Chaldea. This was extremely unjust to Daniel and his companions; for it is highly probable they would have received no share of the gifts, and rewards, and great honour, which the other wise men would have received could they have told the king’s dream, therefore they ought not to have been involved in their punishment. But those concerned in the execution of the decree, being armed with power, did not attend to the voice of justice: absolute power, indeed, too seldom does.

10-13. The magicians in utter desperation now appeal to the king’s sense of justice and to the lack of precedent, “forasmuch as no king, be he never so great and powerful” (R.V., margin) had ever demanded such a “hard thing,” which was absolutely impossible excepting to the highest deities, which have no intercourse with man. The king is, or pretends to be, very furious at this insinuation of injustice, and their confession of inability to meet the fair test proposed (note verse 5) and sends forth his edict of death against the entire order of “wise men,” to which order Daniel and his friends belonged (verse 13). So Herodotus says Astyages crucified the Magi who had advised him unwisely, interpreting wrongly the portents

(128) — which could only mean, he thought, either that the magicians were impostors, that they were willfully deceiving him, or else that they had lost the favor of their gods, and in either case they ought to die.

V. 13. Daniel and his fellows-Daniel and his fellows were not called, because of their youth, which the Chaldeans despised. Here it is observable:

1. The magicians confessed, that knowledge and revelation must come from God, and therefore what Daniel did, was not of any human strength.

2. That the Lord held the governor’s hands, so that he did not slay Daniel presently with the first.

3. That Daniel by his prudence and piety, saved all the magicians lives.

Verse 13. They sought Daniel and his fellows] As the decree stated that all the wise men of Babylon should be slain, the four young Hebrews, being reputed among the wisest, were considered as sentenced to death also.

Verses 12, 13. For this cause the king was angry and very furious, &c. — The king, in his rage and fury, probably did not think of sending for Daniel, which made Daniel try to get admission to the king, verse 14, to prevent his own destruction, as well as that of the other wise men. And they sought Daniel and his fellows to be slain — Though, as it appears, they had not been summoned with the wise men of Chaldea. This was extremely unjust to Daniel and his companions; for it is highly probable they would have received no share of the gifts, and rewards, and great honour, which the other wise men would have received could they have told the king’s dream, therefore they ought not to have been involved in their punishment. But those concerned in the execution of the decree, being armed with power, did not attend to the voice of justice: absolute power, indeed, too seldom does.

10-13. The magicians in utter desperation now appeal to the king’s sense of justice and to the lack of precedent, “forasmuch as no king, be he never so great and powerful” (R.V., margin) had ever demanded such a “hard thing,” which was absolutely impossible excepting to the highest deities, which have no intercourse with man. The king is, or pretends to be, very furious at this insinuation of injustice, and their confession of inability to meet the fair test proposed (note verse 5) and sends forth his edict of death against the entire order of “wise men,” to which order Daniel and his friends belonged (verse 13). So Herodotus says Astyages crucified the Magi who had advised him unwisely, interpreting wrongly the portents

(128) — which could only mean, he thought, either that the magicians were impostors, that they were willfully deceiving him, or else that they had lost the favor of their gods, and in either case they ought to die.

Verse 14. Captain of the king’s guard] Chief of the king’s executioners or slaughter men. Margin, ayjbt br rab tabachaiya, chief of the butchers, he that took off the heads of those whom the king ordered to be slain, because they had in any case displeased him. “Go and bring me the head of Giaffer.” The honourable butcher went and brought the head in a bag on a dish. It was Herod’s chief butcher that brought the head of John the Baptist in a dish to the delicate daughter of Herodias. This was the custom of the country. No law, no judge, no jury. The will or caprice of the king governed all things. Happy England! know and value thy excellent privileges!

Verse 14. Then Daniel answered with counsel and wisdom — This seems to be better rendered in the Vulgate, namely, Tunc Daniel requisivit de lege atque sententia ab Arioch — Then Daniel inquired of Arioch concerning the law and decree, namely, which the king had made for destroying the wise men: that is, he inquired the reason of the decree and judgment issued against them; for as he had not been called in unto the king with the other wise men, he probably was ignorant of all that had passed with regard to the king’s dream. The word µ[c, here rendered wisdom, usually signifies an edict, or public decree, set forth by authority. Captain of the king’s guard — “Literally, chief of the king’s executioners. Greek, arcimageirw, the chief butcher [or chief cook.] The term ayjbc br, may probably mean, the leader of the guard appointed for capital punishments. Nor does this office seem to have been at all infamous; for Arioch had free access to the king, as we find, verse 25: see also 1 Samuel 15:33. And perhaps his office might be to execute any of the king’s commands on his subjects, whether they related to honour or dishonour, to life or to death. The same title is given to Nebuzar-adan, 2 Kings 25:8; and from the character of the commander, it seems to mean a person of the first authority over the soldiery. Mr. Bruce (Trav., p. 455) speaks of an officer, called the executioner of the camp, whose business it was to attend at capital punishments; and this belonged only to a detachment of the royal Abyssinian army.” — Wintle.

14-16. Daniel, having been informed of the decree, addresses Arioch (Iri-Aku) the captain, or rather “chief executioner,” of the royal bodyguard — an officer well known from the inscriptions (tabihu) — so wisely: diplomatically asking, “Why is the decree so cruel [or, bitter] on the part of the king?” that, although opposing the decree (for to “answer” always means “to take the opposite side,” Behrmann), he learns from this officer the entire story, and immediately, either in person or by petition, addresses Nebuchadnezzar, asking for a definite time, which is not named, with the implied promise that if this is given him he will show to the king the meaning of his dream.

Verses 15, 16. Why is the decree so hasty from the king? — So precipitate, or, as Wintle renders it, so urgent, to slay the innocent, who were never called, and knew nothing of the matter? The word hpxjhm, here used, signifies both hasty and pressing. So the Syriac. The LXX. render it, h anaidhv, shameful; the Vulgate translates the verse thus: He (namely, Daniel) asked him who had received authority from the king, for what reason so cruel a sentence had gone forth from the presence of the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel — Acquainted him with the whole affair, of which, it is evident, he knew nothing before. Then Daniel went in — Or, went up, as l[ properly signifies; that is, either to the palace or throne of the king; and desired of the king that he would give him time, &c. — The king’s anger was now abated; and withal the providence of God was visible, in inclining the king’s heart to allow Daniel that favour which he had before denied to the magicians; and that he would show the king the interpretation — Daniel promised this, in confidence that God, to whom he intended to make application by prayer, would discover to him both the dream and its interpretation. Doubtless God inspired him with a persuasion to this purpose.

14-16. Daniel, having been informed of the decree, addresses Arioch (Iri-Aku) the captain, or rather “chief executioner,” of the royal bodyguard — an officer well known from the inscriptions (tabihu) — so wisely: diplomatically asking, “Why is the decree so cruel [or, bitter] on the part of the king?” that, although opposing the decree (for to “answer” always means “to take the opposite side,” Behrmann), he learns from this officer the entire story, and immediately, either in person or by petition, addresses Nebuchadnezzar, asking for a definite time, which is not named, with the implied promise that if this is given him he will show to the king the meaning of his dream.

Verse 16. That he would give him time] That is, that he might seek unto God for a revelation of the thing. The Chaldeans dared not even to promise this; they would only pledge themselves for the interpretation, provided the king would furnish the dream. Daniel engages both to find the lost dream, and to give the proper interpretation.

Verses 15, 16. Why is the decree so hasty from the king? — So precipitate, or, as Wintle renders it, so urgent, to slay the innocent, who were never called, and knew nothing of the matter? The word hpxjhm, here used, signifies both hasty and pressing. So the Syriac. The LXX. render it, h anaidhv, shameful; the Vulgate translates the verse thus: He (namely, Daniel) asked him who had received authority from the king, for what reason so cruel a sentence had gone forth from the presence of the king? Then Arioch made the thing known to Daniel — Acquainted him with the whole affair, of which, it is evident, he knew nothing before. Then Daniel went in — Or, went up, as l[ properly signifies; that is, either to the palace or throne of the king; and desired of the king that he would give him time, &c. — The king’s anger was now abated; and withal the providence of God was visible, in inclining the king’s heart to allow Daniel that favour which he had before denied to the magicians; and that he would show the king the interpretation — Daniel promised this, in confidence that God, to whom he intended to make application by prayer, would discover to him both the dream and its interpretation. Doubtless God inspired him with a persuasion to this purpose.

14-16. Daniel, having been informed of the decree, addresses Arioch (Iri-Aku) the captain, or rather “chief executioner,” of the royal bodyguard — an officer well known from the inscriptions (tabihu) — so wisely: diplomatically asking, “Why is the decree so cruel [or, bitter] on the part of the king?” that, although opposing the decree (for to “answer” always means “to take the opposite side,” Behrmann), he learns from this officer the entire story, and immediately, either in person or by petition, addresses Nebuchadnezzar, asking for a definite time, which is not named, with the implied promise that if this is given him he will show to the king the meaning of his dream.

Verses 17, 18. Then Daniel went to his house — Which, it seems, was near the palace, that he might there be alone with his God; for from him alone, who is the Father of lights, he expected this important discovery. Nor did he only pray for it himself, but engaged his companions also to unite their supplications to his. That they would desire mercies — Chaldee, a[bml ˆymjrw, et misericordiam petendam esse, that mercy must be asked, of the God of heaven — In applying to God for any blessing, all our dependance must be on his mercy and compassion, for we can expect nothing by way of recompense for our merits. Concerning this secret — Namely, that it might be discovered unto them. Observe, reader, whatever is the matter of our care, or occasions us trouble or fear, we must spread before God in prayer; for God gives us leave to be humbly free with him, and in prayer to enter into the detail of our wants and burdens. The danger here equally threatened Daniel and his friends, and therefore it was fit they should all join in prayer for the averting of it. And here we see the power and efficacy of united addresses to Heaven, and the important benefits which the fervent prayers of a few holy men may sometimes bring down upon a multitude. Daniel’s prudence, and his piety, with that of his friends, were the means of saving the lives of all the wise men of Babylon!

17-19. Daniel joining in prayer with his companions to the one God, whose knowledge and power extend everywhere — the God of heaven (Genesis 24:7), who can alone reveal secrets (Amos 3:7; Deuteronomy 29:29) — has the mystery opened to him in a dream or night vision. (Compare verse 28.) Thomson says, “This is the first record of concerted prayer” (Matthew 18:19). He regards this prayer as intercessory, being offered for the deliverance of the other wise men as well as for themselves. (See verse 29.)

Verse 18. That they would desire mercies] For this Daniel had requested a little time; and doubtless both he and his three companions prayed incessantly till God gave the wished for revelation; but whether it was given that same sight, we do not know.

Verses 17, 18. Then Daniel went to his house — Which, it seems, was near the palace, that he might there be alone with his God; for from him alone, who is the Father of lights, he expected this important discovery. Nor did he only pray for it himself, but engaged his companions also to unite their supplications to his. That they would desire mercies — Chaldee, a[bml ˆymjrw, et misericordiam petendam esse, that mercy must be asked, of the God of heaven — In applying to God for any blessing, all our dependance must be on his mercy and compassion, for we can expect nothing by way of recompense for our merits. Concerning this secret — Namely, that it might be discovered unto them. Observe, reader, whatever is the matter of our care, or occasions us trouble or fear, we must spread before God in prayer; for God gives us leave to be humbly free with him, and in prayer to enter into the detail of our wants and burdens. The danger here equally threatened Daniel and his friends, and therefore it was fit they should all join in prayer for the averting of it. And here we see the power and efficacy of united addresses to Heaven, and the important benefits which the fervent prayers of a few holy men may sometimes bring down upon a multitude. Daniel’s prudence, and his piety, with that of his friends, were the means of saving the lives of all the wise men of Babylon!

17-19. Daniel joining in prayer with his companions to the one God, whose knowledge and power extend everywhere — the God of heaven (Genesis 24:7), who can alone reveal secrets (Amos 3:7; Deuteronomy 29:29) — has the mystery opened to him in a dream or night vision. (Compare verse 28.) Thomson says, “This is the first record of concerted prayer” (Matthew 18:19). He regards this prayer as intercessory, being offered for the deliverance of the other wise men as well as for themselves. (See verse 29.)

Verse 19. Then was the secret revealed—in a night vision.] Daniel either dreamed it, or it was represented to his mind by an immediate inspiration.

Verses 19-23. Then was the secret revealed — It is generally thought that this secret was revealed to Daniel only, and that in sleep, by a dream, or, as it is here termed, a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven — He does not stay till he had told what had been revealed to him to the king, and seen whether he would own it to be his dream or not; but, being confident it was so, and that he had gained his point, he immediately turns his prayers into praises. As he had prayed in full assurance that God would do for him what he asked, so he gives thanks in full assurance that he had done it, and in both he has an eye to God as the God of heaven. Daniel answered and said — “In the latter part of this and the next three verses, Daniel celebrates the praises of the Almighty in a simple, but truly sublime and animated strain of warm and unaffected piety, makes especial mention of his wisdom and power, and illustrates the display of those attributes in several instances, apposite to the subject and occasion.” — Wintle. For wisdom and might are his — His wisdom appears in ordering the great affairs of the world, and his might, or power, in bringing them to pass. To the same purpose Jeremiah styles him, great in counsel, and mighty in work, Jeremiah 32:19. And he changeth the times, &c. — The great changes of the world are brought to pass by removing kings and translating their dominions to others; by raising some empires, and pulling down others. Of this, Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, which was then revealed to Daniel, contains several signal instances, as it comprehends the succession of the four great monarchies of the world. He knoweth what is in the darkness, &c. — The most secret things are manifest to him; he discerns them while they yet lie hid in their causes, and discovers and brings them to light at the proper time. I praise thee, &c., who hast given, or, because thou hast given, me wisdom and might — Namely, the means and power of saving myself and others from the greatest danger.

17-19. Daniel joining in prayer with his companions to the one God, whose knowledge and power extend everywhere — the God of heaven (Genesis 24:7), who can alone reveal secrets (Amos 3:7; Deuteronomy 29:29) — has the mystery opened to him in a dream or night vision. (Compare verse 28.) Thomson says, “This is the first record of concerted prayer” (Matthew 18:19). He regards this prayer as intercessory, being offered for the deliverance of the other wise men as well as for themselves. (See verse 29.)

Verse 20. Wisdom and might are his] He knows all things, and can do all things.

Verses 19-23. Then was the secret revealed — It is generally thought that this secret was revealed to Daniel only, and that in sleep, by a dream, or, as it is here termed, a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven — He does not stay till he had told what had been revealed to him to the king, and seen whether he would own it to be his dream or not; but, being confident it was so, and that he had gained his point, he immediately turns his prayers into praises. As he had prayed in full assurance that God would do for him what he asked, so he gives thanks in full assurance that he had done it, and in both he has an eye to God as the God of heaven. Daniel answered and said — “In the latter part of this and the next three verses, Daniel celebrates the praises of the Almighty in a simple, but truly sublime and animated strain of warm and unaffected piety, makes especial mention of his wisdom and power, and illustrates the display of those attributes in several instances, apposite to the subject and occasion.” — Wintle. For wisdom and might are his — His wisdom appears in ordering the great affairs of the world, and his might, or power, in bringing them to pass. To the same purpose Jeremiah styles him, great in counsel, and mighty in work, Jeremiah 32:19. And he changeth the times, &c. — The great changes of the world are brought to pass by removing kings and translating their dominions to others; by raising some empires, and pulling down others. Of this, Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, which was then revealed to Daniel, contains several signal instances, as it comprehends the succession of the four great monarchies of the world. He knoweth what is in the darkness, &c. — The most secret things are manifest to him; he discerns them while they yet lie hid in their causes, and discovers and brings them to light at the proper time. I praise thee, &c., who hast given, or, because thou hast given, me wisdom and might — Namely, the means and power of saving myself and others from the greatest danger.

20-23. In a hymn of praise Daniel blesses the all-powerful One (compare verse 11), whose name is above the name of Bel, or Nebo, or any other heathen God; who is not dependent on lucky days (verse 9), but who changes times and seasons at his will; who controls all earthly sovereigns; who alone has wisdom and who gives it to those who appreciate it and cherish it; who has light in himself (compare 1 Johni, 5); from whom nothing can be hidden (Psalm 139:12), and who hath given to his servant the answer to his prayer. Rothi Bibi Sanguria, on the basis of this verse, declared, “Light is his [the Messiah’s] name.”

V. 21. He changeth-God can make the sun go back or stand still, as in Ahaz and Joshua’s time, it is the great part of God’s power and prerogative to change times. Daniel here attributes that to God, which Heathens attributed to nature, or chance. God only, that made all by his power, doth rule, and over-rule all by his providence.

Verse 21. He changeth the times] Time, duration, succession are his, and under his dominion. It is in the course of his providence that one king is put down, and another raised up; and therefore he can distinctly tell what he has purposed to do in the great empires of the earth.

Verses 19-23. Then was the secret revealed — It is generally thought that this secret was revealed to Daniel only, and that in sleep, by a dream, or, as it is here termed, a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven — He does not stay till he had told what had been revealed to him to the king, and seen whether he would own it to be his dream or not; but, being confident it was so, and that he had gained his point, he immediately turns his prayers into praises. As he had prayed in full assurance that God would do for him what he asked, so he gives thanks in full assurance that he had done it, and in both he has an eye to God as the God of heaven. Daniel answered and said — “In the latter part of this and the next three verses, Daniel celebrates the praises of the Almighty in a simple, but truly sublime and animated strain of warm and unaffected piety, makes especial mention of his wisdom and power, and illustrates the display of those attributes in several instances, apposite to the subject and occasion.” — Wintle. For wisdom and might are his — His wisdom appears in ordering the great affairs of the world, and his might, or power, in bringing them to pass. To the same purpose Jeremiah styles him, great in counsel, and mighty in work, Jeremiah 32:19. And he changeth the times, &c. — The great changes of the world are brought to pass by removing kings and translating their dominions to others; by raising some empires, and pulling down others. Of this, Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, which was then revealed to Daniel, contains several signal instances, as it comprehends the succession of the four great monarchies of the world. He knoweth what is in the darkness, &c. — The most secret things are manifest to him; he discerns them while they yet lie hid in their causes, and discovers and brings them to light at the proper time. I praise thee, &c., who hast given, or, because thou hast given, me wisdom and might — Namely, the means and power of saving myself and others from the greatest danger.

Ver. 21. He changeth the times and the seasons. The God of heaven was not bound by any law of fate; he can do what he pleaseth among the armies of heaven, and the inhabitants of the earth. This was a homestroke at the Chaldaic astrology.

20-23. In a hymn of praise Daniel blesses the all-powerful One (compare verse 11), whose name is above the name of Bel, or Nebo, or any other heathen God; who is not dependent on lucky days (verse 9), but who changes times and seasons at his will; who controls all earthly sovereigns; who alone has wisdom and who gives it to those who appreciate it and cherish it; who has light in himself (compare 1 Johni, 5); from whom nothing can be hidden (Psalm 139:12), and who hath given to his servant the answer to his prayer. Rothi Bibi Sanguria, on the basis of this verse, declared, “Light is his [the Messiah’s] name.”

Verses 19-23. Then was the secret revealed — It is generally thought that this secret was revealed to Daniel only, and that in sleep, by a dream, or, as it is here termed, a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven — He does not stay till he had told what had been revealed to him to the king, and seen whether he would own it to be his dream or not; but, being confident it was so, and that he had gained his point, he immediately turns his prayers into praises. As he had prayed in full assurance that God would do for him what he asked, so he gives thanks in full assurance that he had done it, and in both he has an eye to God as the God of heaven. Daniel answered and said — “In the latter part of this and the next three verses, Daniel celebrates the praises of the Almighty in a simple, but truly sublime and animated strain of warm and unaffected piety, makes especial mention of his wisdom and power, and illustrates the display of those attributes in several instances, apposite to the subject and occasion.” — Wintle. For wisdom and might are his — His wisdom appears in ordering the great affairs of the world, and his might, or power, in bringing them to pass. To the same purpose Jeremiah styles him, great in counsel, and mighty in work, Jeremiah 32:19. And he changeth the times, &c. — The great changes of the world are brought to pass by removing kings and translating their dominions to others; by raising some empires, and pulling down others. Of this, Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, which was then revealed to Daniel, contains several signal instances, as it comprehends the succession of the four great monarchies of the world. He knoweth what is in the darkness, &c. — The most secret things are manifest to him; he discerns them while they yet lie hid in their causes, and discovers and brings them to light at the proper time. I praise thee, &c., who hast given, or, because thou hast given, me wisdom and might — Namely, the means and power of saving myself and others from the greatest danger.

20-23. In a hymn of praise Daniel blesses the all-powerful One (compare verse 11), whose name is above the name of Bel, or Nebo, or any other heathen God; who is not dependent on lucky days (verse 9), but who changes times and seasons at his will; who controls all earthly sovereigns; who alone has wisdom and who gives it to those who appreciate it and cherish it; who has light in himself (compare 1 Johni, 5); from whom nothing can be hidden (Psalm 139:12), and who hath given to his servant the answer to his prayer. Rothi Bibi Sanguria, on the basis of this verse, declared, “Light is his [the Messiah’s] name.”

Verse 23. I thank thee and praise thee] No wonder he should feel gratitude, when God by this merciful interference had saved both the life of him and his fellows; and was about to reflect the highest credit on the God of the Jews, and on the people themselves.

Verses 19-23. Then was the secret revealed — It is generally thought that this secret was revealed to Daniel only, and that in sleep, by a dream, or, as it is here termed, a night vision. Then Daniel blessed the God of heaven — He does not stay till he had told what had been revealed to him to the king, and seen whether he would own it to be his dream or not; but, being confident it was so, and that he had gained his point, he immediately turns his prayers into praises. As he had prayed in full assurance that God would do for him what he asked, so he gives thanks in full assurance that he had done it, and in both he has an eye to God as the God of heaven. Daniel answered and said — “In the latter part of this and the next three verses, Daniel celebrates the praises of the Almighty in a simple, but truly sublime and animated strain of warm and unaffected piety, makes especial mention of his wisdom and power, and illustrates the display of those attributes in several instances, apposite to the subject and occasion.” — Wintle. For wisdom and might are his — His wisdom appears in ordering the great affairs of the world, and his might, or power, in bringing them to pass. To the same purpose Jeremiah styles him, great in counsel, and mighty in work, Jeremiah 32:19. And he changeth the times, &c. — The great changes of the world are brought to pass by removing kings and translating their dominions to others; by raising some empires, and pulling down others. Of this, Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, which was then revealed to Daniel, contains several signal instances, as it comprehends the succession of the four great monarchies of the world. He knoweth what is in the darkness, &c. — The most secret things are manifest to him; he discerns them while they yet lie hid in their causes, and discovers and brings them to light at the proper time. I praise thee, &c., who hast given, or, because thou hast given, me wisdom and might — Namely, the means and power of saving myself and others from the greatest danger.

20-23. In a hymn of praise Daniel blesses the all-powerful One (compare verse 11), whose name is above the name of Bel, or Nebo, or any other heathen God; who is not dependent on lucky days (verse 9), but who changes times and seasons at his will; who controls all earthly sovereigns; who alone has wisdom and who gives it to those who appreciate it and cherish it; who has light in himself (compare 1 Johni, 5); from whom nothing can be hidden (Psalm 139:12), and who hath given to his servant the answer to his prayer. Rothi Bibi Sanguria, on the basis of this verse, declared, “Light is his [the Messiah’s] name.”

Verse 24. Destroy not the wise men] The decree was suspended till it should be seen whether Daniel could tell the dream, and give its interpretation.

Verses 24, 25. Therefore Daniel went in unto Arioch — Daniel, having been thus divinely instructed, was desirous to save the lives of the wise men of Babylon, who were unjustly condemned, as well as his own; and, being now prepared, he goes immediately to Arioch, and bespeaks the reversing of the sentence against them. Though there might be some among them, perhaps, who deserved to die, as magicians, by the law of God; yet that which they here stood condemned for was not a crime worthy of death or of bonds: and others of them probably employed themselves in laudable studies, and searches after useful knowledge. Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste — Or, very speedily, as the Syriac reads it; and said, I have found a man that will make known unto the king, the interpretation — Jerome remarks here the manner of courtiers, Qui cum bona nunciant, sua videri volunt, who, when they relate good things, are willing to have them thought their own, and to have merit ascribed to themselves. But Daniel was far from assuming any merit to himself, and therefore ascribes entirely to God the ability which he had to make known to the king the dream and the interpretation of it.

24-26. Daniel’s first thought was to save the Babylonian wise men, so he hurries to Arioch (see verse 14), who obtains for him an audience with the king. Arioch’s speech would indicate that he did not know of Daniel’s previous visit or “petition” to the king. (See verse 16, LXX.) The absence of Daniel in verse 2, and all the later circumstances, would suggest that at this time the Hebrew children were not “standing before the king” in their old place of honor (Daniel 1:19) while the forgetfulness of Daniel shown by Nebuchadnezzar (compare Daniel 1:20) is surprising. Does this lend color to our previous suggestion, that the king wanted a chance to frighten the magicians into a position of subordination more than he wanted to hear his dream? (note verse 5.) This might also account for the additional humiliation placed upon the Magi when he appointed this youth to be the head of their order (verse 48).

Verses 24, 25. Therefore Daniel went in unto Arioch — Daniel, having been thus divinely instructed, was desirous to save the lives of the wise men of Babylon, who were unjustly condemned, as well as his own; and, being now prepared, he goes immediately to Arioch, and bespeaks the reversing of the sentence against them. Though there might be some among them, perhaps, who deserved to die, as magicians, by the law of God; yet that which they here stood condemned for was not a crime worthy of death or of bonds: and others of them probably employed themselves in laudable studies, and searches after useful knowledge. Then Arioch brought in Daniel before the king in haste — Or, very speedily, as the Syriac reads it; and said, I have found a man that will make known unto the king, the interpretation — Jerome remarks here the manner of courtiers, Qui cum bona nunciant, sua videri volunt, who, when they relate good things, are willing to have them thought their own, and to have merit ascribed to themselves. But Daniel was far from assuming any merit to himself, and therefore ascribes entirely to God the ability which he had to make known to the king the dream and the interpretation of it.

24-26. Daniel’s first thought was to save the Babylonian wise men, so he hurries to Arioch (see verse 14), who obtains for him an audience with the king. Arioch’s speech would indicate that he did not know of Daniel’s previous visit or “petition” to the king. (See verse 16, LXX.) The absence of Daniel in verse 2, and all the later circumstances, would suggest that at this time the Hebrew children were not “standing before the king” in their old place of honor (Daniel 1:19) while the forgetfulness of Daniel shown by Nebuchadnezzar (compare Daniel 1:20) is surprising. Does this lend color to our previous suggestion, that the king wanted a chance to frighten the magicians into a position of subordination more than he wanted to hear his dream? (note verse 5.) This might also account for the additional humiliation placed upon the Magi when he appointed this youth to be the head of their order (verse 48).

V. 26. Belteshazzar-By this name of Belteshazzar he had given Daniel, he took courage as if he might expect some great thing from him: for the word signifies the keeper of secret treasure.

Verses 26-29. The king said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar — See note on Daniel 1:7; Art thou able to make known to me the dream? &c. — The king seems to have questioned whether he could make his promise good. The less likely, however, it appeared to the king that Daniel should do this, the more God was glorified in enabling him to do it. Daniel answered, Cannot the wise men, &c. — Daniel’s words, as here translated, bear the interrogative form; but not in the original. They seem to be more accurately translated by the LXX., To musthrion o basikeuv eperwta ouk esti sofwn — anaggeilai tw basilei, The mystery concerning which the king inquires, it does not belong to the wise men, &c., to declare to the king. Or, as the Vulgate has it, “the wise men cannot declare.” But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets — Daniel assumes nothing to himself, but gives the glory to God alone, whose knowledge, as he tells the king, infinitely exceeds that of all the wise men of Chaldea, and of the gods, or demons, which they consulted, or worshipped. And at the same time he also, with great generosity, pleads the cause of the wise men, who could not tell the dream; alleging in their excuse, that such knowledge was not attainable by any mere human ability; and that he should have been as much at a loss as they, had not God been pleased to reveal it unto him: see

24-26. Daniel’s first thought was to save the Babylonian wise men, so he hurries to Arioch (see verse 14), who obtains for him an audience with the king. Arioch’s speech would indicate that he did not know of Daniel’s previous visit or “petition” to the king. (See verse 16, LXX.) The absence of Daniel in verse 2, and all the later circumstances, would suggest that at this time the Hebrew children were not “standing before the king” in their old place of honor (Daniel 1:19) while the forgetfulness of Daniel shown by Nebuchadnezzar (compare Daniel 1:20) is surprising. Does this lend color to our previous suggestion, that the king wanted a chance to frighten the magicians into a position of subordination more than he wanted to hear his dream? (note verse 5.) This might also account for the additional humiliation placed upon the Magi when he appointed this youth to be the head of their order (verse 48).

Verse 27. Cannot the wise men] Cannot your own able men, aided by your gods, tell you the secret? This question was necessary in order that the king might see the foolishness of depending on the one, or worshipping the other.

The soothsayers] One of our old words: “The tellers of truth:” but גזרינ gazerin is the name of another class of those curious artists, unless we suppose it to mean the same as the CHALDEANS, Daniel 2:2. They are supposed to be persons who divined by numbers, amulets, &c. There are many conjectures about them, which, whatever learning they show, cast little light upon this place.

Verses 26-29. The king said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar — See note on Daniel 1:7; Art thou able to make known to me the dream? &c. — The king seems to have questioned whether he could make his promise good. The less likely, however, it appeared to the king that Daniel should do this, the more God was glorified in enabling him to do it. Daniel answered, Cannot the wise men, &c. — Daniel’s words, as here translated, bear the interrogative form; but not in the original. They seem to be more accurately translated by the LXX., To musthrion o basikeuv eperwta ouk esti sofwn — anaggeilai tw basilei, The mystery concerning which the king inquires, it does not belong to the wise men, &c., to declare to the king. Or, as the Vulgate has it, “the wise men cannot declare.” But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets — Daniel assumes nothing to himself, but gives the glory to God alone, whose knowledge, as he tells the king, infinitely exceeds that of all the wise men of Chaldea, and of the gods, or demons, which they consulted, or worshipped. And at the same time he also, with great generosity, pleads the cause of the wise men, who could not tell the dream; alleging in their excuse, that such knowledge was not attainable by any mere human ability; and that he should have been as much at a loss as they, had not God been pleased to reveal it unto him: see

27-30. The one God of heaven, who has power in Babylonia as well as in Palestine, has chosen to reveal his will to Nebuchadnezzar, and the secret of its meaning, which the wise men were correct in saying could only be discovered miraculously, is now supernaturally made plain to Daniel in order that “the interpretation might be made known to the king” (R.V.), who might thus be led to honor the most high God. (Compare verse 47 and Ezekiel 28:26.)

V. 28. What shall be-Observe the prophet’s wisdom, he does not fall abruptly upon the dream, but first prepares this lofty king for it, and by degrees labours to win him to the knowledge of the true God.

Verse 28. There is a God in heaven] To distinguish him from those idols, the works of men’s hands; and from the false gods in which the Chaldeans trusted.

In the latter days.] A phrase which, in the prophets, generally means the times of the Messiah. God is about to show what shall take place from this time to the latest ages of the world. And the vision most certainly contains a very extensive and consecutive prophecy; which I shall treat more largely at the close of the chapter, giving in the mean time a short exposition.

Verses 26-29. The king said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar — See note on Daniel 1:7; Art thou able to make known to me the dream? &c. — The king seems to have questioned whether he could make his promise good. The less likely, however, it appeared to the king that Daniel should do this, the more God was glorified in enabling him to do it. Daniel answered, Cannot the wise men, &c. — Daniel’s words, as here translated, bear the interrogative form; but not in the original. They seem to be more accurately translated by the LXX., To musthrion o basikeuv eperwta ouk esti sofwn — anaggeilai tw basilei, The mystery concerning which the king inquires, it does not belong to the wise men, &c., to declare to the king. Or, as the Vulgate has it, “the wise men cannot declare.” But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets — Daniel assumes nothing to himself, but gives the glory to God alone, whose knowledge, as he tells the king, infinitely exceeds that of all the wise men of Chaldea, and of the gods, or demons, which they consulted, or worshipped. And at the same time he also, with great generosity, pleads the cause of the wise men, who could not tell the dream; alleging in their excuse, that such knowledge was not attainable by any mere human ability; and that he should have been as much at a loss as they, had not God been pleased to reveal it unto him: see

27-30. The one God of heaven, who has power in Babylonia as well as in Palestine, has chosen to reveal his will to Nebuchadnezzar, and the secret of its meaning, which the wise men were correct in saying could only be discovered miraculously, is now supernaturally made plain to Daniel in order that “the interpretation might be made known to the king” (R.V.), who might thus be led to honor the most high God. (Compare verse 47 and Ezekiel 28:26.)

Verses 26-29. The king said to Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar — See note on Daniel 1:7; Art thou able to make known to me the dream? &c. — The king seems to have questioned whether he could make his promise good. The less likely, however, it appeared to the king that Daniel should do this, the more God was glorified in enabling him to do it. Daniel answered, Cannot the wise men, &c. — Daniel’s words, as here translated, bear the interrogative form; but not in the original. They seem to be more accurately translated by the LXX., To musthrion o basikeuv eperwta ouk esti sofwn — anaggeilai tw basilei, The mystery concerning which the king inquires, it does not belong to the wise men, &c., to declare to the king. Or, as the Vulgate has it, “the wise men cannot declare.” But there is a God in heaven that revealeth secrets — Daniel assumes nothing to himself, but gives the glory to God alone, whose knowledge, as he tells the king, infinitely exceeds that of all the wise men of Chaldea, and of the gods, or demons, which they consulted, or worshipped. And at the same time he also, with great generosity, pleads the cause of the wise men, who could not tell the dream; alleging in their excuse, that such knowledge was not attainable by any mere human ability; and that he should have been as much at a loss as they, had not God been pleased to reveal it unto him: see

27-30. The one God of heaven, who has power in Babylonia as well as in Palestine, has chosen to reveal his will to Nebuchadnezzar, and the secret of its meaning, which the wise men were correct in saying could only be discovered miraculously, is now supernaturally made plain to Daniel in order that “the interpretation might be made known to the king” (R.V.), who might thus be led to honor the most high God. (Compare verse 47 and Ezekiel 28:26.)

V. 30. But-But that the interpretation may be manifest to the king, and that thou mayest be better instructed and satisfied in thy mind.

verse 30. The modesty and humility of Daniel, in this whole address to the king, are highly deserving of our notice and imitation. The soothsayers, here mentioned, were not noticed among the several sorts of pretenders to wisdom, named in verse 2. The word so rendered, derived from rzg, to cut, is thought by some to signify either the aruspices, who examined the liver and entrails of beasts by cutting them open; or those diviners who, by the disposition and combination of numbers, made amulets, or charms, by which they pretended to foretel future events. Rabbi Jacchiades favours the latter opinion, supposing that the aruspices were scarcely known in the East. And maketh known what shall be in the latter days — Or, what shall come to pass hereafter, as it is expressed verses 29, 45. O king, thy thoughts came into thy mind upon thy bed — Daniel, by way of introduction to his telling the king what had been the subject of his dream, informs him of what he meditated, or thought, before he fell asleep, namely, that he revolved in his mind what should be the future condition of the vast empire which he had erected by his various conquests. This surely must have excited in Nebuchadnezzar a great admiration of the God whom Daniel worshipped.

Verse 30. This secret is not revealed to me for any wisdom that I have more than any living — Namely, to merit such a discovery, or qualify me for receiving it. No praise is due to me on this occasion. Observe, reader, it well becomes those whom God has highly favoured and honoured, to be humble and low in their own eyes; and to lay aside all opinion of their own wisdom and worthiness, that God alone may have all the praise of what they are, and have, and do. But for their sakes that shall make known the interpretation to the king — For the sake of Daniel’s brethren and companions in tribulation, who had by their prayers helped him to obtain this discovery, and so might be said to make known the interpretation; that their lives might be spared, that they might come into favour and be preferred, and that all the people of the Jews might fare the better in their captivity for their sakes. This is the sense of the words, according to the common translation; but the marginal reading is thought by many to be more agreeable to the context, which if we follow, the meaning of the clause is, “Not for any wisdom of mine, but that the king may know the interpretation,” &c. “The impious king,” says Jerome, “had a prophetic dream, that, the saint interpreting it, God might be glorified, and the captives, and those who served God in captivity, might receive great consolation. We read the same thing of Pharaoh; not that Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar deserved to see such things, but that Joseph and Daniel, interpreting them, might be preferred to all others.” And, as Jerome observes afterward, “That Nebuchadnezzar might admire the grace of divine inspiration, he (Daniel) not only told him the dream which he was favoured with, but even the secret thoughts of his heart previous to the dream.”

27-30. The one God of heaven, who has power in Babylonia as well as in Palestine, has chosen to reveal his will to Nebuchadnezzar, and the secret of its meaning, which the wise men were correct in saying could only be discovered miraculously, is now supernaturally made plain to Daniel in order that “the interpretation might be made known to the king” (R.V.), who might thus be led to honor the most high God. (Compare verse 47 and Ezekiel 28:26.)

Verse 31. A great image] Representing the four great monarchies.

Verse 31. Thou, O king, sawest, and behold, a great image — “It appears, from ancient coins and medals, that cities and people were often represented by figures of men and women. A great, terrible human figure was therefore a proper emblem of human power and dominion; and the various metals of which it was composed not unfitly typified the various kingdoms which should arise. It consisted of four different metals, gold, and silver, and brass, and iron, mixed with clay; and these four metals, according to Daniel’s own interpretation, mean so many kingdoms; and the order of their succession is clearly denoted by the order of the parts; the head and higher parts signify the earlier times, and the lower parts the latter times. Hesiod, who lived two hundred years before Daniel, spoke of the four ages of the world under the symbols of these metals; so that this image was formed according to the commonly received notion, and the commonly received notion was not first propagated from hence.” — Bishop Newton. This image, whose brightness was excellent, stood before thee — This image, says Grotius, appeared with a glorious lustre in the imagination of Nebuchadnezzar, whose mind was wholly taken up with admiration of worldly pomp and splendour; but the same monarchies were represented to Daniel under the shape of fierce and wild beasts, chap. 7., as being the great supporters of idolatry and tyranny in the world. And the form thereof was terrible — The success which accompanied their arms made them feared and dreaded by all the world.

31. Daniel recalls the forgotten dream as that of a mighty glittering colossus whose “appearance” was terrible. (Compare Daniel 3:1.)

Verse 32. Head was of fine gold] The Babylonish empire, the first and greatest.

Breast and his arms of silver] The Medo-Persian empire, under Cyrus, &c.

His belly and his thighs of brass] The Macedonian empire, under Alexander the Great, and his successors.

Verses 32, 33. This image’s head was of fine gold — The Babylonian monarchy had arrived to the height of glory under Nebuchadnezzar, (see verses 37, 38,) who likewise improved and adorned the city of Babylon to such a degree as to make it one of the wonders of the world; so that this empire might justly be compared to a head of gold. His breast and his arms of silver — The second monarchy, of Medes and Persians, would be inferior to the first: see note on verse 39. His belly and his thighs of brass, his legs of iron — These emblems denoted the strength of the third and fourth monarchies, and the irresistible force with which they should subdue their adversaries. Iron and brass are the emblems of strength in the prophetical writings; and they were in other respects emblematical of these empires, as we shall see by and by. His feet part of iron and part of clay — By this was signified the Roman empire in its declining state, as will be shown presently.

32, 33. The dreamer dreams through the ages though he knows it not. In that sleep a thousand years were but as a watch in the night. “In the Parsee tradition Zoroaster was shown four trees, one of gold, another of silver, another of steel, and the fourth of iron, and he was told that these four trees represented four ages of the world (Bahman Yesht). Ovid sings of the ages of gold, silver, bronze, and iron (Metamorphoses); and though Hesiod (Works and Days) mentions five ages, he has for them only four metallic names — gold, silver, brass, and iron” (Terry). Compare also Dante, Inferno, 14:94, and Goethe, Das Mahrchen.

Verse 33. His legs of iron] The Roman government.

His feet part of iron and part of clay.] The same, mixed with the barbaric nations, and divided into ten kingdoms. See at the end of the chapter. See Clarke “Daniel 2:49”.

Verses 32, 33. This image’s head was of fine gold — The Babylonian monarchy had arrived to the height of glory under Nebuchadnezzar, (see verses 37, 38,) who likewise improved and adorned the city of Babylon to such a degree as to make it one of the wonders of the world; so that this empire might justly be compared to a head of gold. His breast and his arms of silver — The second monarchy, of Medes and Persians, would be inferior to the first: see note on verse 39. His belly and his thighs of brass, his legs of iron — These emblems denoted the strength of the third and fourth monarchies, and the irresistible force with which they should subdue their adversaries. Iron and brass are the emblems of strength in the prophetical writings; and they were in other respects emblematical of these empires, as we shall see by and by. His feet part of iron and part of clay — By this was signified the Roman empire in its declining state, as will be shown presently.

32, 33. The dreamer dreams through the ages though he knows it not. In that sleep a thousand years were but as a watch in the night. “In the Parsee tradition Zoroaster was shown four trees, one of gold, another of silver, another of steel, and the fourth of iron, and he was told that these four trees represented four ages of the world (Bahman Yesht). Ovid sings of the ages of gold, silver, bronze, and iron (Metamorphoses); and though Hesiod (Works and Days) mentions five ages, he has for them only four metallic names — gold, silver, brass, and iron” (Terry). Compare also Dante, Inferno, 14:94, and Goethe, Das Mahrchen.

Verse 34. A stone was cut out] The fifth monarchy; the spiritual kingdom of the Lord Jesus, which is to last for ever, and diffuse itself over the whole earth.

Verses 34, 35. Thou sawest till a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image, &c. — Here the whole image is represented as destroyed by a great stone falling upon its feet and breaking them to pieces, whereby the whole image was overset and broken. In like manner the kingdom of Christ, a kingdom of God’s own erecting, was to break to pieces and destroy the fourth and last empire, in which the remainder of the others was comprehended, and at length to put an end to all earthly rule, authority, and power, 1 Corinthians 15:24. The Jews, as well as Christians, agree that by the stone here is meant the Messiah, or his kingdom, and indeed it is a very apt description of it; for without any visible means, or adequate assistance of human power, it arose, prevailed mightily, and increased to a high degree of strength and greatness, and will still increase, until it become superior to, and swallow up, all the kingdoms of the earth. Then was the iron, the brass, &c., broken to pieces, and became like the chaff, &c. — There was no sign or remainder left of their former greatness. The same expression is used by Isaiah 41:15, where see the note. The expressions in both places allude to the thrashing-floors in the eastern countries, which were usually placed on the tops of hills. And the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, &c. — This denotes the advancement and increase of Christ’s kingdom, that it should from small beginnings proceed to fill the whole earth; as if a stone by degrees should grow to a mountain. Thus Christ is described as going forth conquering and to conquer, Revelation 6:2. Christ, the foundation of the church, is often described as a stone: see Isaiah 28:16; Zechariah 3:9, and the church in its flourishing state is represented as a mountain, Isaiah 2:2; Ezekiel 20:40; Revelation 21:10.

34. The artificial monster of human workmanship crumbles before the natural, divinely created, agent of its destruction, which, not by human but by divine power, falls upon it at a providentially chosen moment, striking it at exactly the right point to utterly overthrow and destroy it. This rock, cut out from the solid cliff without hands, is the symbol of the new Messianic kingdom before which all other kingdoms must fall. There is no significance in the stone’s striking the feet, unless it is to imply “that the Gentile powers represented by the image are not contemporaneous, but follow one upon another — the destruction of the fourth empire involves the complete overthrow of the Gentile supremacy” (Bevan). Farrar brings out the profound symbolism of this vision and how well it expresses “the surface glare, the inward hollowness, the inherent weakness, the varying successions, the predestined transience of overgrown empires.”

Verse 35. The stone—became a great mountain] There is the kingdom אבנ eben, of the stone, and the kingdom of the mountain. See at the end at the chapter. See Clarke “Daniel 2:49”.

Verses 34, 35. Thou sawest till a stone was cut out without hands, which smote the image, &c. — Here the whole image is represented as destroyed by a great stone falling upon its feet and breaking them to pieces, whereby the whole image was overset and broken. In like manner the kingdom of Christ, a kingdom of God’s own erecting, was to break to pieces and destroy the fourth and last empire, in which the remainder of the others was comprehended, and at length to put an end to all earthly rule, authority, and power, 1 Corinthians 15:24. The Jews, as well as Christians, agree that by the stone here is meant the Messiah, or his kingdom, and indeed it is a very apt description of it; for without any visible means, or adequate assistance of human power, it arose, prevailed mightily, and increased to a high degree of strength and greatness, and will still increase, until it become superior to, and swallow up, all the kingdoms of the earth. Then was the iron, the brass, &c., broken to pieces, and became like the chaff, &c. — There was no sign or remainder left of their former greatness. The same expression is used by Isaiah 41:15, where see the note. The expressions in both places allude to the thrashing-floors in the eastern countries, which were usually placed on the tops of hills. And the stone that smote the image became a great mountain, &c. — This denotes the advancement and increase of Christ’s kingdom, that it should from small beginnings proceed to fill the whole earth; as if a stone by degrees should grow to a mountain. Thus Christ is described as going forth conquering and to conquer, Revelation 6:2. Christ, the foundation of the church, is often described as a stone: see Isaiah 28:16; Zechariah 3:9, and the church in its flourishing state is represented as a mountain, Isaiah 2:2; Ezekiel 20:40; Revelation 21:10.

35. The little rock out of the mountain stirred by the invisible elemental forces hidden in the heart of nature is unseen, unnoticed, and absurdly unworthy of notice, as it begins to roll toward the vast and glorious image. But though coming silently and unobserved it is moved by a power strong and irresistible as that of gravitation itself, and striking the point of weakness inevitable in every human creation, the monster totters, the iron legs crush down upon the feet of clay, and the proud image lies a hideous ruin, crushed and pulverized into dust, which the wind blows away like chaff (compare Job 21:18; Psalm 1:4; 35:5), while the stone, as if having life in itself, grows, enlarges at the base and towers in height, till like a mighty mountain it fills the whole horizon of the sleeper’s sight. (Compare Expositor, 9:448.)

V. 36. And we-By this word we appears Daniel’s piety and modesty, or he declares by it, that he and his companions had begged this skill from God, and therefore he did not arrogate it to himself.

Verses 36-38. This is the dream, and we will tell the interpretation — Here again Daniel shows his modesty, allowing his friends a share in the honour of interpreting the dream, because the interpretation was obtained by their joint prayers to God. Thou, O king, art a king of kings — So Nebuchadnezzar is styled Ezekiel 26:7, because he had divers kings for his vassals and tributaries. And Daniel here addresses him as if he were a very powerful king, and his empire very large and extensive. For the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, &c. — The monarch might perhaps think, like some of his predecessors, that his conquests were owing to his fortitude and prudence: see Isaiah 10:13. But the prophet assures him, that his success must be primarily imputed to the God of heaven. Though most of the ancient eastern histories are lost, yet some fragments remain which speak of this mighty conqueror, and his extended empire. Berosus informs us, that he held in subjection Egypt, Syria, Phenicia, Arabia, and surpassed all the Chaldeans and Babylonians who reigned before him. Josephus, Philostratus, Megasthenes, and Strabo, assert, that he surpassed even Hercules, proceeded as far as Hercules’ pillars, subdued Spain, and led his army into Thrace and Pontus. But his empire was of no long duration, for it ended in his grandson Belshazzar, not seventy years after the delivery of this prophecy, nor above twenty-three years after the death of Nebuchadnezzar; which may be the reason why Daniel speaks of him as the only king, the rest being to be considered as nothing; nor do we read of any thing good or great performed by them. — Bishop Newton: see notes on Jeremiah 25:9, 11, 15-26, and 27:6-8. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, hath he made thee ruler over them all — The great monarchies assumed to themselves the title of being lords of the world; see Daniel 6:25, and 8:5; so the word oikoumenh, the world, commonly signifies the Roman empire, in the New Testament. Thou art this head of gold — Thou and thy family and thy representatives. The Babylonian therefore was the first of these kingdoms, and it was fitly represented by the head of fine gold, on account of its great riches, and the splendour and glory of its capital city, Babylon, which for the same reason was called the golden city, Isaiah 14:4, a golden cup, Jeremiah 51:7, and the lady of kingdoms, Isaiah 47:5, 7, where see the notes. The Assyrian is usually said to be the first of the four great empires, and the name may be allowed to pass, if it be not taken too strictly: for the Assyrian empire, properly so called, was dissolved before this time, and the Babylonian was erected in its stead; but the Babylonians are sometimes called Assyrians in the best classic authors, as well as in the Holy Scriptures. — Bishop Newton.

36-38. The head of gold is Nebuchadnezzar, whom God has made king of kings, putting all peoples of the world and the beasts of the field beneath his hand, and who, in himself, represented the Babylonian world-empire.

Verse 37. The God of heaven] Not given by thy own gods, nor acquired by thy own skill and prowess; it is a Divine gift. Power] To rule this kingdom.

And strength] To defend it against all foes. And glory.] Great honour and dignity.

Verses 36-38. This is the dream, and we will tell the interpretation — Here again Daniel shows his modesty, allowing his friends a share in the honour of interpreting the dream, because the interpretation was obtained by their joint prayers to God. Thou, O king, art a king of kings — So Nebuchadnezzar is styled Ezekiel 26:7, because he had divers kings for his vassals and tributaries. And Daniel here addresses him as if he were a very powerful king, and his empire very large and extensive. For the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, &c. — The monarch might perhaps think, like some of his predecessors, that his conquests were owing to his fortitude and prudence: see Isaiah 10:13. But the prophet assures him, that his success must be primarily imputed to the God of heaven. Though most of the ancient eastern histories are lost, yet some fragments remain which speak of this mighty conqueror, and his extended empire. Berosus informs us, that he held in subjection Egypt, Syria, Phenicia, Arabia, and surpassed all the Chaldeans and Babylonians who reigned before him. Josephus, Philostratus, Megasthenes, and Strabo, assert, that he surpassed even Hercules, proceeded as far as Hercules’ pillars, subdued Spain, and led his army into Thrace and Pontus. But his empire was of no long duration, for it ended in his grandson Belshazzar, not seventy years after the delivery of this prophecy, nor above twenty-three years after the death of Nebuchadnezzar; which may be the reason why Daniel speaks of him as the only king, the rest being to be considered as nothing; nor do we read of any thing good or great performed by them. — Bishop Newton: see notes on Jeremiah 25:9, 11, 15-26, and 27:6-8. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, hath he made thee ruler over them all — The great monarchies assumed to themselves the title of being lords of the world; see Daniel 6:25, and 8:5; so the word oikoumenh, the world, commonly signifies the Roman empire, in the New Testament. Thou art this head of gold — Thou and thy family and thy representatives. The Babylonian therefore was the first of these kingdoms, and it was fitly represented by the head of fine gold, on account of its great riches, and the splendour and glory of its capital city, Babylon, which for the same reason was called the golden city, Isaiah 14:4, a golden cup, Jeremiah 51:7, and the lady of kingdoms, Isaiah 47:5, 7, where see the notes. The Assyrian is usually said to be the first of the four great empires, and the name may be allowed to pass, if it be not taken too strictly: for the Assyrian empire, properly so called, was dissolved before this time, and the Babylonian was erected in its stead; but the Babylonians are sometimes called Assyrians in the best classic authors, as well as in the Holy Scriptures. — Bishop Newton.

36-38. The head of gold is Nebuchadnezzar, whom God has made king of kings, putting all peoples of the world and the beasts of the field beneath his hand, and who, in himself, represented the Babylonian world-empire.

V. 38. Made thee ruler-He hath given thee absolute dominion of all creatures, men and beasts within the bounds of thy vast kingdom. Thou-He was first in order, as the head is before the other parts, and the vision began in him, and descended downwards to the other three monarchies. He was the head of gold, because of the vast riches wherein this monarchy abounded, and because it stood longest, five hundred years, and was fortunate and flourishing to the last.

Verse 38. Thou art this head of gold] See on Daniel 2:31-34, and at the end. See Clarke “Daniel 2:49”.

Verses 36-38. This is the dream, and we will tell the interpretation — Here again Daniel shows his modesty, allowing his friends a share in the honour of interpreting the dream, because the interpretation was obtained by their joint prayers to God. Thou, O king, art a king of kings — So Nebuchadnezzar is styled Ezekiel 26:7, because he had divers kings for his vassals and tributaries. And Daniel here addresses him as if he were a very powerful king, and his empire very large and extensive. For the God of heaven hath given thee a kingdom, &c. — The monarch might perhaps think, like some of his predecessors, that his conquests were owing to his fortitude and prudence: see Isaiah 10:13. But the prophet assures him, that his success must be primarily imputed to the God of heaven. Though most of the ancient eastern histories are lost, yet some fragments remain which speak of this mighty conqueror, and his extended empire. Berosus informs us, that he held in subjection Egypt, Syria, Phenicia, Arabia, and surpassed all the Chaldeans and Babylonians who reigned before him. Josephus, Philostratus, Megasthenes, and Strabo, assert, that he surpassed even Hercules, proceeded as far as Hercules’ pillars, subdued Spain, and led his army into Thrace and Pontus. But his empire was of no long duration, for it ended in his grandson Belshazzar, not seventy years after the delivery of this prophecy, nor above twenty-three years after the death of Nebuchadnezzar; which may be the reason why Daniel speaks of him as the only king, the rest being to be considered as nothing; nor do we read of any thing good or great performed by them. — Bishop Newton: see notes on Jeremiah 25:9, 11, 15-26, and 27:6-8. And wheresoever the children of men dwell, hath he made thee ruler over them all — The great monarchies assumed to themselves the title of being lords of the world; see Daniel 6:25, and 8:5; so the word oikoumenh, the world, commonly signifies the Roman empire, in the New Testament. Thou art this head of gold — Thou and thy family and thy representatives. The Babylonian therefore was the first of these kingdoms, and it was fitly represented by the head of fine gold, on account of its great riches, and the splendour and glory of its capital city, Babylon, which for the same reason was called the golden city, Isaiah 14:4, a golden cup, Jeremiah 51:7, and the lady of kingdoms, Isaiah 47:5, 7, where see the notes. The Assyrian is usually said to be the first of the four great empires, and the name may be allowed to pass, if it be not taken too strictly: for the Assyrian empire, properly so called, was dissolved before this time, and the Babylonian was erected in its stead; but the Babylonians are sometimes called Assyrians in the best classic authors, as well as in the Holy Scriptures. — Bishop Newton.

36-38. The head of gold is Nebuchadnezzar, whom God has made king of kings, putting all peoples of the world and the beasts of the field beneath his hand, and who, in himself, represented the Babylonian world-empire.

V. 39. Another kingdom-This was that of the Medes and Persians, inferior in time for it lasted not half so long as the Assyrian in prosperity and tranquillity; yet, was this wonderful, rich and large for a time. Third kingdom-This was the Grecian monarchy under Alexander the great, called brass, because coarser than the other. Over all the earth-Alexander marched even to the Indies, and was said to conquer the world.

Verse 39. After thee shall arise another kingdom inferior to thee — “It is very well known, that the kingdom which arose after the Babylonian was the Medo-Persian. The two hands and the shoulders signify that the empire of the Babylonians should be destroyed by two kings. The two kings were the kings of the Medes and Persians, whose powers were united under Cyrus, who was son of one of the kings, and son-in-law of the other, and who besieged and took Babylon, put an end to that empire, and erected on its ruin the Medo-Persian, or the Persian, as it is more usually called, the Persians having soon gained ascendency over the Medes. The empire is said to be inferior, as being less than the former, according to the Vulgate translation, because neither Cyrus, nor any of his successors, ever carried their arms into Africa or Spain, so far as Nebuchadnezzar is reported to have done; or rather, as being worse, according to Castalio; for indeed it may be truly asserted, that the kings of Persia were the worst race of men that ever governed an empire. This empire, from its first establishment by Cyrus to the death of Darius Codomanus, lasted not much above two hundred years.” — Bishop Newton.

And another third kingdom of brass, which shall bear rule over all the earth — “The prophet,” says Jackson, in his Chronicles, vol. 1. p. 393, “having just mentioned this second kingdom, with great delicacy hastens to the third, because he would not tell the king that the second kingdom was to destroy his.” It is universally known that Alexander the Great subdued the Medes and Persians, and subverted their empire. This prince is said, by the author of the first book of Maccabees, “to be the first that reigned over Greece, after having smitten Darius the king of the Persians and Medes; to have made many wars, won many strong holds, and slain the kings of the earth; also to have gone through to the ends of the earth, and taken the spoils of many nations.” It is reported of this mighty conqueror, that “he built more than seventy cities, twelve of which, or, as Curtius intimates, eighteen, he named Alexandria; that his soldiers, though unarmed, were never afraid, while he was with them, of any armed forces. He engaged no enemy which he did not conquer, besieged no city which he did not take, and made attempts on no nation which he did not entirely subdue.” But all would not satisfy the vast cravings of his ambition, so that the Roman satirist with great justice observed of him,

“Unus Pellæo juveni non sufficit orbis;

Æstuat infelix augusto limite mundi.” — Juv. Sat. 10.

One world does not satisfy the Macedonian youth: he chafes unhappy, cooped in the narrow compass of the globe: see Wintle. The kingdom, therefore, which succeeded to the Persian was the Macedonian, or Grecian; and this kingdom was fitly represented by brass, for the Greeks were famous for their brazen armour, their usual epithet being, Calkocitwnev Acaioi, The brazen-coated Greeks. This third kingdom is said to bear rule over all the earth, by a figure usual in almost all authors. Alexander himself commanded that he should be called, The king of all the world; not that he really conquered the whole world, but that he had considerable dominions in Europe, Asia, and Africa, that is, in all the three parts of the world then known. Diodorus Siculus, and other writers, give an account of ambassadors coming from almost all the world, to congratulate him upon his success, or to submit to his empire: and then especially, as Arrian remarks, did Alexander appear to himself, and to those about him, to be master both of all the earth and all the sea. But this third kingdom must be considered as comprehending not only Alexander, but likewise the Macedonian princes who succeeded him. This will appear the more probable, because the former kingdoms comprehended all the succeeding princes of the same house and nation, even till the ruin of their empire, and its translation to the different prince and nation which succeeded to the sovereign power and dominion: see Bishop Newton, and Dr. Chandler’s Vindication of Daniel.

39. Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom shall be followed by a silver kingdom, inferior (or, literally, lower down; that is, nearer the ground) to that of the golden head, and it, in turn, by a brazen kingdom, to be followed by one of iron and miry clay (verses 40, 41). Expositors of the greatest ability and spiritual insight have differed in their interpretation of these four kingdoms. That the first world-empire is the Babylonian and that another is the Greek (Daniel 8:21) all admit; but of the other two empires no explanation can be given which is free from difficulty. The best that can be done is to choose the view which does not positively contradict either the statements of Daniel or the acknowledged certainties of history. We will now consider the three leading positions.

(1) The most attractive view to modern scholars is that the four empires are the Babylonian, Median, Persian, and Greek. In favor of this it is urged that, following the ordinary rules of historic interpretation, the description of the fourth empire — of iron, which was afterward broken, divided, and weak (verses 34, 35) — and of the fourth beast, with the ten horns (namely, ten kings, Daniel 7:24) among which sprung up a “little horn” which made war with the saints and took away the daily sacrifice (chaps. 7, 8), is clearly a description of the Greek empire, and of the little horn Antiochus Epiphanes, whose reign of guilt is so elaborately set forth in chap. 11. It is also said that the second empire must necessarily be Median, since Daniel himself makes Darius the Mede king of an independent world-monarchy (Daniel 5:31; 6) and therefore whatever history may say, we must interpret these visions from the prophet’s standpoint. Against this it may be said that, allowing the argument that the fourth monarchy cannot be Roman, and that the “little horn” in each chapter represents Antiochus Epiphanes, it still does not necessitate our making the second empire Median; it may be Medo-Persian, and the fourth empire that of the successors of Alexander. That Daniel did regard the Medes and Persians as a unit, so far as their kingdom is concerned, is clearly seen from the fact that the law of the kingdom, even under Darius the Mede, was the “law of the Medes and Persians” (Daniel 6:8, 12, 15), while, as Dr. Terry himself admits, Daniel’s statement that the two-horned ram denotes “the kings of Media and Persia” (Daniel 8:20) does show that “Daniel himself recognized Medes and Persians as constituting one monarchy” (Hermeneutics, p. 352). It will not do to say that the standpoint here “is manifestly in the last period of the Persian rule” (Terry); for Daniel himself states that this vision occurred not, as Terry assumes, “long after the Median power in Babylon had ceased to exist,” but in the reign of King Belshazzar (Daniel 8:1) — and surely, as Dr. Terry says, we should study these visions from Daniel’s point of view and “in the light of his own explanations and historical statements.” Daniel never distinguishes between the empire of Media and that of Persia, but invariably speaks of these empires as one. Neither the Book of Daniel nor the facts of history warrant us in assuming the existence of a Median empire between the Babylonian and Persian empires. Indeed, as Kamphausen says, “There never really was a Median world-kingdom, either before or after the fall of Babylon.” This is acknowledged by all. Therefore, if Daniel did declare the Median to be the second empire, he made a mistake. So Kamphausen frankly acknowledges. But such mistake ought not to be charged against him unnecessarily, especially in the face of his own declaration in the same book that the law and monarchy of the Medes and Persians were a duality in unity.

Daniel’s thought of the Medes and Persians as joint rulers of one kingdom is exactly that of the ancient writers, like Herodotus and Thucydides, who scarcely distinguished between these two peoples, and is also that of modern historians, who have before them all the facts of modern discovery. Maspero, without any thought of its bearing on a Bible statement, says: “The Median empire had fallen (549 B.C.), but it was a change of dynasty rather than a foreign conquest. Astyages and his predecessors had been kings of the Medes and Persians, Cyrus and his successors were kings of the Persians and Medes” (Histoire Ancienne, 1893, p. 564). Therefore, we are compelled by the facts of history, in perfect harmony with the words of Daniel himself, to make the second empire not Median, but Medo-Persian.

(2) The view that the fourth empire was Roman took its rise before the Christian era (as is seen from 2 Esdras, etc.), and continued to be so universally accepted by the Christian Church that Luther could say, with only a little exaggeration, “In this interpretation and meaning all the world agree.”

The most powerful argument in favor of this view is that from the days of Nebuchadnezzar until now there have been only four universal world-empires — the Babylonian, the Medo-Persian, the Greek, and the Roman. Many mighty emperors like Charlemagne and Napoleon have “hoped and plotted and warred and shed oceans of blood to form a fifth, but they have not succeeded; the fragments of the Roman empire still hold the field.” And this fourth empire corresponded exactly to the description of Daniel; for it was an Iron Empire, a beast with iron teeth, diverse from all which had preceded it, devouring and treading down the whole earth (Daniel 7:7, 27). Besides, it was “in the days of these kings” (Daniel 2:44), during the Roman dominion, that the prophesied Messiah came, and St. John, in his Apocalypse, means Rome when he speaks of the beast with the seven heads and ten horns.

However, in answer to this it may be said that the Bible writers are not concerned to lay out a map of the world’s history in which all future world-monarchies are mentioned, but (certainly in all other prophecies) confine themselves, so far as details are concerned, to the history which is near their own times and to the kings which have vital relations to Israel. It is entirely in accordance with this prophetic analogy that St. John, writing in the Roman period, should make very specific reference to the beastly Roman empire, but even if the seven-headed beast with ten horns which he describes (Revelation 13) be Rome, which is very doubtful (Milligan, Book of Revelation, 1895), that would by no means prove that the one-headed beast with ten horns which Daniel spoke of (Daniel 7:7, 19) referred to the same world-power. The same symbol is often used in Scripture of very different historic events (Terry, Biblical Hermeneutics, 1891). Indeed there are several other considerations which indicate that Daniel’s fourth empire could not be Rome. It was not the immediate successor of Alexander’s empire; it arose and had its chief field of operations in a different country from that of the other empires of Daniel; it was not Rome, but Syria, which touched most closely the life and fate of the Jewish people at the close of the Greek domination; it is not Roman kings whose life and acts Daniel describes most minutely, but Syrian kings; while the description of this fourth empire of Daniel as iron and miry clay, that is, as “mixed, composite, brittle, inadhesive, not unified and consolidated into one firm power,” does not properly describe the Roman empire at the beginning of the Christian era. Daniel prophesied that the kingdom of heaven should appear on the earth at a time when a kingdom, once strong, had become weak and divided, and when its unkingly kings, like the clay toes of the great image, could easily be smitten (Daniel 2:42). This is not a picture of Augustus and the Roman empire which was at the apex of its glory when Christ was born. “It was three hundred years later than Christ’s coming when the Roman empire was divided, and much later still when broken in pieces and made to pass away. But the stone smote not the legs of iron, but the feet, which were partly of iron and partly of clay” (Terry). Daniel’s fourth empire was to be destroyed, broken to pieces, and swept away upon the rise of the Messianic kingdom (verse 35); but historically this was not true of Rome. If it be said in reply to this that the deathblow was really given to the Roman empire when the Messiah came, but that it took two thousand years for it to die, and that while the fragments of this empire still remain in the earth, and the “little horn” yet rages, all these enemies of the kingdom will be destroyed in the future, when the Son of man comes the second time in the clouds of heaven; we would answer, with Bruston, that it is incredible, and contrary to all prophetic analogy, that, without saying a word of the first coming of Christ, Daniel should describe here the struggles of the Christian Church through long ages, ending with this thrilling picture of our Lord’s second advent. Nowhere else in the Old Testament is the second advent referred to, and it ought not to be read into this passage if it can be consistently interpreted, as it can, of his first coming.

(3) The third position to which we are forced by the unsurmountable objections to other views is that Daniel’s four kingdoms are Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Greek, and Syrian.

While objections can be made to this, for example, that the Medo-Persian empire was not “inferior” to the Babylonian (verse 39); the Syriac kingdom did not break in pieces and subdue all things (verse 40); the kingdom of God did not strike and crush this Syrian kingdom (verse 34) which had disappeared before Christ was born — the Messianic kingdom appearing not “in” but “after” the days of those kings (verse 44) — yet, instead of being vital and fundamental objections, these are mostly verbal criticisms, such as lie against all rival views. These seeming contradictions to our position are mostly due to the fact that a symbol cannot go on all fours, and a picture cannot apply to every minute section of the reality. (See note verse 40.)

Gutschmidt and other historians well see that “the fall of Perdiccas (321 B.C.) was really the end of the Perso-Macedonian empire founded by Alexander,” and that following this came the great empires of the Seleucidae and Ptolemies. The empire founded by Seleucus (who at least for a time became “arbiter of the world,” Mahaffy), was, together with the allied kingdom of Egypt (chap. xi), the fourth empire of Daniel. Not only was Seleucus a great king, and a terrible scourge upon the nations of the East, his very name meaning “conqueror,” but he was especially great and terrible to the Jews, and ruled over those very countries “which for nearly three hundred years had been the seat of empire for the three great prophetic dynasties before him” (Cowles).

V. 40. Fourth kingdom-This is the kingdom of the Romans, and was to last not only to Christ’s first coming, but under antichrist, to his second coming. This did break in pieces all other kingdoms, being too strong for them, and brought all into subjection to it, ‘till the stone fell upon it.

Verses 40-43. The fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, &c. — This description agrees well with the Roman empire, and the event answered the prediction; for the Roman was vastly more strong and extensive than any of the preceding three. As iron breaketh and bruiseth all other metals, so this brake and subdued all the former kingdoms. The metal is here different, and consequently likewise the nation must be different from the preceding. For the four metals must signify four different nations; and as the gold signified the Babylonians, the silver the Persians, and the brass the Macedonians, so the iron must necessarily denote some other nation: and it may safely be said, that there is not, and has not been, a nation upon earth, to which this description is applicable, but the Romans. The Romans succeeded to the Macedonians, and therefore, in course, were next to be mentioned. And as the two arms of silver denoted the two kings of the Medes and Persians, so the two legs of iron seem equally to have signified the two Roman consuls. The iron was mixed with clay; and the Romans were defiled with a mixture of barbarous nations. The Roman empire was at length divided into ten lesser kingdoms, answering to the ten toes of the image. These kingdoms retained much of the old Roman strength; so that the kingdom was partly strong and partly broken — It subdued Syria, and made the kingdom of the Seleucidæ a Roman province, in the year sixty-five before Christ; it subdued Egypt, and made the kingdom of the Lagidæ a Roman province, in the year thirty before Christ; and, in the fourth century after Christ, it began to be torn in pieces by the incursions of the barbarous nations. Mr. Mede, who was as able and consummate a judge as any in these matters, observes, “That the Roman empire was the fourth kingdom of Daniel, was believed by the church of Israel, both before and in our Saviour’s time; received by the disciples of the apostles, and the whole Christian Church, for the first three hundred years, without any known contradiction. And, I confess, having so good a ground in Scripture, it is with me tantum non articulus fidei, little less than an article of faith:” see his Works, book 4. ep. 6, p. 735, and Bishop Newton.

Daniel seems to divide this kingdom into three periods. The first is its strongest and flourishing state, which seems to be denoted by the iron legs: the second is the same kingdom, weakened by civil wars and the divided state of the empire, denoted by the feet, which were part of potter’s clay, and part of iron; for which reason the prophet tells us the kingdom shall be divided, though there shall be in it something of the strength of iron, because the iron was mixed with the clay: the third is the same empire in a yet further state of declension, during which one part of it was to be absolutely destroyed, denoted by the toes, the extremity of the image, and of consequence the last period of this fourth empire. As the toes of the feet were part of iron and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly broken — That is, one part of this divided empire shall remain, and the other part be entirely destroyed. And as the last period of this kingdom is denoted by the toes, this evidently intimates that the remaining part, which was not broken, should be divided into ten distinct kingdoms or governments. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, &c. — The conjunction of the Romans with the conquered nations, and afterward with the Goths, Vandals, and other barbarians, who subverted the empire, seems to be here intended: in consequence of which these ten kingdoms became a medley of people, of different nations, laws, and customs. But they shall not cleave one to another — Although the kings of the several nations shall try to strengthen themselves by marriage alliances, yet reasons of state, the desire of empire, and the different interests which they pursue, will prove stronger than ties of blood, and often engage them in contentions and wars with each other, and thereby weaken the common strength. As Tacitus observes, “Dominandi cupido cunctis affectibus flagrantior erit:” The lust of ruling will be more powerful than all the affections. “It is especially observable,” says Wintle, “that in the declining state of the Roman empire, intermarriages with the barbarians were frequent and distinguished, as may be learned from the histories of the times; but yet the cement would not hold so as to form any great kingdom, or even to prevent the impending fate of the empire.” But some explain the verse of the commotions and clashings that took place between the secular and ecclesiastical powers, after the kingdom was divided into ten parts, answerable to the ten toes of the image.

40. This was true of the Syrian kingdom especially in its treatment of the Jews. I do not imagine the remark is of great importance, but iron in Egypt was closely connected with the evil god Set, and used in liturgies which had to do with black magic. Assurbanipal mentions statues made of gold, silver, bronze, and alabaster. Iron was not used for statues. This new kingdom was “diverse” from all others.

V. 41. Divided-Partly strong, and partly weak; the Roman kingdom was divided, partly by their civil wars, partly when conquered provinces and kingdoms cast off the Roman yoke, and set up king’s of their own, and so the empire was divided into ten kingdoms or toes.

Verses 40-43. The fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, &c. — This description agrees well with the Roman empire, and the event answered the prediction; for the Roman was vastly more strong and extensive than any of the preceding three. As iron breaketh and bruiseth all other metals, so this brake and subdued all the former kingdoms. The metal is here different, and consequently likewise the nation must be different from the preceding. For the four metals must signify four different nations; and as the gold signified the Babylonians, the silver the Persians, and the brass the Macedonians, so the iron must necessarily denote some other nation: and it may safely be said, that there is not, and has not been, a nation upon earth, to which this description is applicable, but the Romans. The Romans succeeded to the Macedonians, and therefore, in course, were next to be mentioned. And as the two arms of silver denoted the two kings of the Medes and Persians, so the two legs of iron seem equally to have signified the two Roman consuls. The iron was mixed with clay; and the Romans were defiled with a mixture of barbarous nations. The Roman empire was at length divided into ten lesser kingdoms, answering to the ten toes of the image. These kingdoms retained much of the old Roman strength; so that the kingdom was partly strong and partly broken — It subdued Syria, and made the kingdom of the Seleucidæ a Roman province, in the year sixty-five before Christ; it subdued Egypt, and made the kingdom of the Lagidæ a Roman province, in the year thirty before Christ; and, in the fourth century after Christ, it began to be torn in pieces by the incursions of the barbarous nations. Mr. Mede, who was as able and consummate a judge as any in these matters, observes, “That the Roman empire was the fourth kingdom of Daniel, was believed by the church of Israel, both before and in our Saviour’s time; received by the disciples of the apostles, and the whole Christian Church, for the first three hundred years, without any known contradiction. And, I confess, having so good a ground in Scripture, it is with me tantum non articulus fidei, little less than an article of faith:” see his Works, book 4. ep. 6, p. 735, and Bishop Newton.

Daniel seems to divide this kingdom into three periods. The first is its strongest and flourishing state, which seems to be denoted by the iron legs: the second is the same kingdom, weakened by civil wars and the divided state of the empire, denoted by the feet, which were part of potter’s clay, and part of iron; for which reason the prophet tells us the kingdom shall be divided, though there shall be in it something of the strength of iron, because the iron was mixed with the clay: the third is the same empire in a yet further state of declension, during which one part of it was to be absolutely destroyed, denoted by the toes, the extremity of the image, and of consequence the last period of this fourth empire. As the toes of the feet were part of iron and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly broken — That is, one part of this divided empire shall remain, and the other part be entirely destroyed. And as the last period of this kingdom is denoted by the toes, this evidently intimates that the remaining part, which was not broken, should be divided into ten distinct kingdoms or governments. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, &c. — The conjunction of the Romans with the conquered nations, and afterward with the Goths, Vandals, and other barbarians, who subverted the empire, seems to be here intended: in consequence of which these ten kingdoms became a medley of people, of different nations, laws, and customs. But they shall not cleave one to another — Although the kings of the several nations shall try to strengthen themselves by marriage alliances, yet reasons of state, the desire of empire, and the different interests which they pursue, will prove stronger than ties of blood, and often engage them in contentions and wars with each other, and thereby weaken the common strength. As Tacitus observes, “Dominandi cupido cunctis affectibus flagrantior erit:” The lust of ruling will be more powerful than all the affections. “It is especially observable,” says Wintle, “that in the declining state of the Roman empire, intermarriages with the barbarians were frequent and distinguished, as may be learned from the histories of the times; but yet the cement would not hold so as to form any great kingdom, or even to prevent the impending fate of the empire.” But some explain the verse of the commotions and clashings that took place between the secular and ecclesiastical powers, after the kingdom was divided into ten parts, answerable to the ten toes of the image.

Ver. 41. Iron mixed with miry clay. The word in Theodotian, followed by the Vulgate, signifies earthenware. So it is in Montanus.

41. Internal divisions and consequent weakness grew more and more pronounced during every generation which followed the breaking up of Alexander’s empire. Perhaps the iron may symbolize the Seleucidae and the clay the Ptolemies.

V. 42. Broken-This was plain in the civil wars of the Romans, and the falling off of some countries, especially towards the end of it.

Verses 40-43. The fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, &c. — This description agrees well with the Roman empire, and the event answered the prediction; for the Roman was vastly more strong and extensive than any of the preceding three. As iron breaketh and bruiseth all other metals, so this brake and subdued all the former kingdoms. The metal is here different, and consequently likewise the nation must be different from the preceding. For the four metals must signify four different nations; and as the gold signified the Babylonians, the silver the Persians, and the brass the Macedonians, so the iron must necessarily denote some other nation: and it may safely be said, that there is not, and has not been, a nation upon earth, to which this description is applicable, but the Romans. The Romans succeeded to the Macedonians, and therefore, in course, were next to be mentioned. And as the two arms of silver denoted the two kings of the Medes and Persians, so the two legs of iron seem equally to have signified the two Roman consuls. The iron was mixed with clay; and the Romans were defiled with a mixture of barbarous nations. The Roman empire was at length divided into ten lesser kingdoms, answering to the ten toes of the image. These kingdoms retained much of the old Roman strength; so that the kingdom was partly strong and partly broken — It subdued Syria, and made the kingdom of the Seleucidæ a Roman province, in the year sixty-five before Christ; it subdued Egypt, and made the kingdom of the Lagidæ a Roman province, in the year thirty before Christ; and, in the fourth century after Christ, it began to be torn in pieces by the incursions of the barbarous nations. Mr. Mede, who was as able and consummate a judge as any in these matters, observes, “That the Roman empire was the fourth kingdom of Daniel, was believed by the church of Israel, both before and in our Saviour’s time; received by the disciples of the apostles, and the whole Christian Church, for the first three hundred years, without any known contradiction. And, I confess, having so good a ground in Scripture, it is with me tantum non articulus fidei, little less than an article of faith:” see his Works, book 4. ep. 6, p. 735, and Bishop Newton.

Daniel seems to divide this kingdom into three periods. The first is its strongest and flourishing state, which seems to be denoted by the iron legs: the second is the same kingdom, weakened by civil wars and the divided state of the empire, denoted by the feet, which were part of potter’s clay, and part of iron; for which reason the prophet tells us the kingdom shall be divided, though there shall be in it something of the strength of iron, because the iron was mixed with the clay: the third is the same empire in a yet further state of declension, during which one part of it was to be absolutely destroyed, denoted by the toes, the extremity of the image, and of consequence the last period of this fourth empire. As the toes of the feet were part of iron and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly broken — That is, one part of this divided empire shall remain, and the other part be entirely destroyed. And as the last period of this kingdom is denoted by the toes, this evidently intimates that the remaining part, which was not broken, should be divided into ten distinct kingdoms or governments. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, &c. — The conjunction of the Romans with the conquered nations, and afterward with the Goths, Vandals, and other barbarians, who subverted the empire, seems to be here intended: in consequence of which these ten kingdoms became a medley of people, of different nations, laws, and customs. But they shall not cleave one to another — Although the kings of the several nations shall try to strengthen themselves by marriage alliances, yet reasons of state, the desire of empire, and the different interests which they pursue, will prove stronger than ties of blood, and often engage them in contentions and wars with each other, and thereby weaken the common strength. As Tacitus observes, “Dominandi cupido cunctis affectibus flagrantior erit:” The lust of ruling will be more powerful than all the affections. “It is especially observable,” says Wintle, “that in the declining state of the Roman empire, intermarriages with the barbarians were frequent and distinguished, as may be learned from the histories of the times; but yet the cement would not hold so as to form any great kingdom, or even to prevent the impending fate of the empire.” But some explain the verse of the commotions and clashings that took place between the secular and ecclesiastical powers, after the kingdom was divided into ten parts, answerable to the ten toes of the image.

42. Even the toes, the extremities of the kingdom, shall have in them something of the strength of iron, but shall be “brittle” and easily cracked.

V. 43. Mingle themselves-By marriage, but they shall never knit well together, because ambition is stronger than affinity.

Verses 40-43. The fourth kingdom shall be strong as iron, &c. — This description agrees well with the Roman empire, and the event answered the prediction; for the Roman was vastly more strong and extensive than any of the preceding three. As iron breaketh and bruiseth all other metals, so this brake and subdued all the former kingdoms. The metal is here different, and consequently likewise the nation must be different from the preceding. For the four metals must signify four different nations; and as the gold signified the Babylonians, the silver the Persians, and the brass the Macedonians, so the iron must necessarily denote some other nation: and it may safely be said, that there is not, and has not been, a nation upon earth, to which this description is applicable, but the Romans. The Romans succeeded to the Macedonians, and therefore, in course, were next to be mentioned. And as the two arms of silver denoted the two kings of the Medes and Persians, so the two legs of iron seem equally to have signified the two Roman consuls. The iron was mixed with clay; and the Romans were defiled with a mixture of barbarous nations. The Roman empire was at length divided into ten lesser kingdoms, answering to the ten toes of the image. These kingdoms retained much of the old Roman strength; so that the kingdom was partly strong and partly broken — It subdued Syria, and made the kingdom of the Seleucidæ a Roman province, in the year sixty-five before Christ; it subdued Egypt, and made the kingdom of the Lagidæ a Roman province, in the year thirty before Christ; and, in the fourth century after Christ, it began to be torn in pieces by the incursions of the barbarous nations. Mr. Mede, who was as able and consummate a judge as any in these matters, observes, “That the Roman empire was the fourth kingdom of Daniel, was believed by the church of Israel, both before and in our Saviour’s time; received by the disciples of the apostles, and the whole Christian Church, for the first three hundred years, without any known contradiction. And, I confess, having so good a ground in Scripture, it is with me tantum non articulus fidei, little less than an article of faith:” see his Works, book 4. ep. 6, p. 735, and Bishop Newton.

Daniel seems to divide this kingdom into three periods. The first is its strongest and flourishing state, which seems to be denoted by the iron legs: the second is the same kingdom, weakened by civil wars and the divided state of the empire, denoted by the feet, which were part of potter’s clay, and part of iron; for which reason the prophet tells us the kingdom shall be divided, though there shall be in it something of the strength of iron, because the iron was mixed with the clay: the third is the same empire in a yet further state of declension, during which one part of it was to be absolutely destroyed, denoted by the toes, the extremity of the image, and of consequence the last period of this fourth empire. As the toes of the feet were part of iron and part of clay, so the kingdom shall be partly strong and partly broken — That is, one part of this divided empire shall remain, and the other part be entirely destroyed. And as the last period of this kingdom is denoted by the toes, this evidently intimates that the remaining part, which was not broken, should be divided into ten distinct kingdoms or governments. And whereas thou sawest iron mixed with clay, they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men, &c. — The conjunction of the Romans with the conquered nations, and afterward with the Goths, Vandals, and other barbarians, who subverted the empire, seems to be here intended: in consequence of which these ten kingdoms became a medley of people, of different nations, laws, and customs. But they shall not cleave one to another — Although the kings of the several nations shall try to strengthen themselves by marriage alliances, yet reasons of state, the desire of empire, and the different interests which they pursue, will prove stronger than ties of blood, and often engage them in contentions and wars with each other, and thereby weaken the common strength. As Tacitus observes, “Dominandi cupido cunctis affectibus flagrantior erit:” The lust of ruling will be more powerful than all the affections. “It is especially observable,” says Wintle, “that in the declining state of the Roman empire, intermarriages with the barbarians were frequent and distinguished, as may be learned from the histories of the times; but yet the cement would not hold so as to form any great kingdom, or even to prevent the impending fate of the empire.” But some explain the verse of the commotions and clashings that took place between the secular and ecclesiastical powers, after the kingdom was divided into ten parts, answerable to the ten toes of the image.

43. This refers most probably to the matrimonial alliances between the Seleucidae and the Ptolemies (compare Daniel 11:6, 17; Jeremiah 31:27), which were intended to strengthen the kingdom, but failed in their purpose.

V. 44. In the days of these kings-While the iron kingdom stood, for Christ was born in the reign of Augustus Caesar. And this kingdom is not bounded by any limits, as worldly empires are, but is truly universal. And it shall be for ever, never destroyed or given to others, as the rest were.

Verse 44. A kingdom which shall never be destroyed] The extensive and extending empire of Christ.

Shall not be left to other people] All the preceding empires have swallowed up each other successively; but this shall remain to the end of the world.

Verses 44, 45. And in the days of these kings — That is, kingdoms, or during the succession of these four monarchies; and it must be during the time of the last of them, because they are reckoned four in succession, and consequently this must be the fifth kingdom. Shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom — This can only be understood with propriety, as the ancients understood it, of the kingdom of Christ. Accordingly, his kingdom was set up during the days of the last of these kingdoms, that is, the Roman. The stone was totally a different thing from the image; and the kingdom of Christ is totally different from the kingdoms of this world. The stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, as our heavenly body is said (2 Corinthians 5:1) to be a building of God, a house not made with hands, that is, spiritual, as the phrase is used in other places. This the fathers generally apply to Christ himself, who was miraculously born of a virgin, without the concurrence of man: but it should be rather understood of the kingdom of Christ, which was formed out of the Roman empire, not by number of hands, or strength of armies, but without human means, and the virtue of second causes. This kingdom was set up by the God of heaven, and from hence the phrase of the kingdom of heaven came to signify the kingdom of the Messiah; and so it was used and understood by the Jews, and so it is applied by our Saviour in the New Testament. Other kingdoms were raised by human ambition and worldly power; but this was the work not of man, but of God: this was truly, as it is called, the kingdom of heaven, and (John 18:36) a kingdom not of this world; its laws, its powers were all divine. This kingdom was never to be destroyed, as the Babylonian, the Persian, and the Macedonian empires have been, and in a great measure also the Roman. This kingdom was not to be left to any other people; it was to be erected by God in a peculiar manner, to extend itself over all the nations, and still to consist of the same people, without any alteration or change of their name. What this people were to be, and by what name to be called, the prophet expressly declares Daniel 7:17, 18; they were to be the saints of the Most High. Of such was this kingdom to consist, and never to depart from them; a character which expressly determines the nature of the kingdom, and by whom it was to be erected and governed. This kingdom was to break in pieces and consume all kingdoms — To spread and enlarge itself, so that it should comprehend within itself all the former kingdoms. This kingdom was to fill the whole earth, to become universal, and to stand for ever. As the fourth kingdom, or the Roman empire, was represented in different states, first strong and flourishing, with legs of iron, and then weakened and divided, with feet and toes part of iron and part of clay; so this fifth kingdom, or the kingdom of Christ, is described likewise in two states, which Mr. Mede rightly distinguishes by the names of regnum lapidis, the kingdom of the stone, and regnum montis, the kingdom of the mountain. The first commenced when the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, while the statue continued on its feet, and the Roman empire was in its full strength, with legs of iron: the second, when the stone began to increase into a mountain, and to fill the earth, the Roman empire being in its last and weakest state. The image is still standing upon its feet and toes of iron and clay; and the kingdom of Christ is yet a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence. But the stone will one day smite the image upon the feet and toes, and destroy it utterly, and will itself become a great mountain, and fill the whole earth: or, in other words, The kingdoms of this world will become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever. We have, therefore, seen the kingdom of the stone; but we have not yet seen the kingdom of the mountain. Some parts of this prophecy still remain to be fulfilled; but the exact completion of the other parts will not suffer us to doubt of the accomplishment of the rest also in due season: see Bishop Newton.

44. In the days of these kings — That is, the kings of the fourth empire and, as all the symbols indicate, at the end of the empire and after the dividing process had greatly weakened it. At this period a new kingdom, like a mountain cliff, is to show itself for the first time and take the place of the artificially constructed kingdoms which had preceded it. This kingdom is to be an everlasting kingdom; it shall break in pieces and consume all these kingdoms. This cannot be taken literally. The Messianic kingdom did not literally break in pieces the Babylonian or the Medo-Persian or the Greek kingdom, for these had all been broken in pieces and destroyed ages before, as the book itself elsewhere states (Daniel 7:7, 11, 23; 11:4). These successive empires were not literally broken to pieces “together” (verse 35) but successively. This seeming discrepancy merely shows that symbols must not be pressed too far. The statue really represented successive and not contemporaneous empires, but when a statue, struck upon the feet, falls, it necessarily falls altogether. So, literally, the Messianic kingdom did not arise “in” the days of the Seleucid kings, but shortly after the dissolution of that empire (cir. B.C. 60). So, literally, it was not Christianity, but the power of Rome as the agent of Providence which smote the already crumbling toes of this image of successive world-empires. The emphasis, as is shown by the other symbols used, is not upon the direct assault of the new kingdom upon all these kingdoms (that is, the Babylonian, Medo-Persian, Greek, and Syrian), but upon the fact that it was to immediately follow these other world-empires from which the Jews had suffered so greatly, and to take their place. As Cowles says, the kingdom of Messiah was set up in the days of those kings “only in the sense of preparatory work done by the agencies of divine providence. The demolition of those kingdoms prepared the way for the formal, visible inauguration of Messiah’s kingdom. The visible inauguration and setting up followed this demolition, and was not strictly simultaneous. The language, which is very general, certainly admits this construction. The sense of the symbols seems to require it, and the genius of the entire vision sustains it.” Terry profoundly observes, “The truth is that in the overthrow of all those kingdoms — Babylon as well as Persia or Greece — the Most High God was setting up his kingdom by preparing the way of his Messiah.”

V. 45. And the gold-This denotes the small beginning of Christ’s visible kingdom, and the different rise of Christ from all other; his conception by the Holy Ghost, without father and mother, respectively as to his two natures. This stone, falling from the mountain, brake the image in pieces; for Christ is a stone that grinds to powder those it falls on: and he is a growing stone even to a mountain, and therefore will fill the earth.

Verse 45. The dream is certain] It contains a just representation of things as they shall be.

And the interpretation thereof sure.] The parts of the dream being truly explained.

Verses 44, 45. And in the days of these kings — That is, kingdoms, or during the succession of these four monarchies; and it must be during the time of the last of them, because they are reckoned four in succession, and consequently this must be the fifth kingdom. Shall the God of heaven set up a kingdom — This can only be understood with propriety, as the ancients understood it, of the kingdom of Christ. Accordingly, his kingdom was set up during the days of the last of these kingdoms, that is, the Roman. The stone was totally a different thing from the image; and the kingdom of Christ is totally different from the kingdoms of this world. The stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, as our heavenly body is said (2 Corinthians 5:1) to be a building of God, a house not made with hands, that is, spiritual, as the phrase is used in other places. This the fathers generally apply to Christ himself, who was miraculously born of a virgin, without the concurrence of man: but it should be rather understood of the kingdom of Christ, which was formed out of the Roman empire, not by number of hands, or strength of armies, but without human means, and the virtue of second causes. This kingdom was set up by the God of heaven, and from hence the phrase of the kingdom of heaven came to signify the kingdom of the Messiah; and so it was used and understood by the Jews, and so it is applied by our Saviour in the New Testament. Other kingdoms were raised by human ambition and worldly power; but this was the work not of man, but of God: this was truly, as it is called, the kingdom of heaven, and (John 18:36) a kingdom not of this world; its laws, its powers were all divine. This kingdom was never to be destroyed, as the Babylonian, the Persian, and the Macedonian empires have been, and in a great measure also the Roman. This kingdom was not to be left to any other people; it was to be erected by God in a peculiar manner, to extend itself over all the nations, and still to consist of the same people, without any alteration or change of their name. What this people were to be, and by what name to be called, the prophet expressly declares Daniel 7:17, 18; they were to be the saints of the Most High. Of such was this kingdom to consist, and never to depart from them; a character which expressly determines the nature of the kingdom, and by whom it was to be erected and governed. This kingdom was to break in pieces and consume all kingdoms — To spread and enlarge itself, so that it should comprehend within itself all the former kingdoms. This kingdom was to fill the whole earth, to become universal, and to stand for ever. As the fourth kingdom, or the Roman empire, was represented in different states, first strong and flourishing, with legs of iron, and then weakened and divided, with feet and toes part of iron and part of clay; so this fifth kingdom, or the kingdom of Christ, is described likewise in two states, which Mr. Mede rightly distinguishes by the names of regnum lapidis, the kingdom of the stone, and regnum montis, the kingdom of the mountain. The first commenced when the stone was cut out of the mountain without hands, while the statue continued on its feet, and the Roman empire was in its full strength, with legs of iron: the second, when the stone began to increase into a mountain, and to fill the earth, the Roman empire being in its last and weakest state. The image is still standing upon its feet and toes of iron and clay; and the kingdom of Christ is yet a stone of stumbling and a rock of offence. But the stone will one day smite the image upon the feet and toes, and destroy it utterly, and will itself become a great mountain, and fill the whole earth: or, in other words, The kingdoms of this world will become the kingdoms of our Lord and of his Christ, and he shall reign for ever and ever. We have, therefore, seen the kingdom of the stone; but we have not yet seen the kingdom of the mountain. Some parts of this prophecy still remain to be fulfilled; but the exact completion of the other parts will not suffer us to doubt of the accomplishment of the rest also in due season: see Bishop Newton.

Ver. 45. The stone was cut out of the mountain without hands. Christ, the chief cornerstone of the church, emanated from the bosom of the Father, and was born of the virgin—without hands. He also sent his gospel throughout the Roman world without regal support, and established his kingdom without acquainting the princes of this world with his design, and it shall encrease and enlarge till it has filled the whole earth.

45. Half of this verse should be joined to the one preceding and a new sentence should begin with “The great God hath.”

V. 46. That they should offer-This was strange, that so great a monarch should thus worship his vassal, which he did in consternation and admiration. But doubtless Daniel put a stop to it: though he could not hinder the king in his prostration, and in his word of command. And the king being instructed of Daniel, gives God all the glory in the next words.

Verse 46. The king—fell upon his face] Prostrated himself: this was the fullest act of adoration among the ancients.

Worshipped Daniel] Supposing him to be a god, or Divine being. No doubt Daniel forbade him; for to receive this would have been gross idolatry.

Verse 46. Then the king Nebuchadnezzar fell upon his face and worshipped Daniel — He was so astonished at hearing his whole dream declared and interpreted by Daniel with such exactness, and at finding such wonderful events foretold by it, that he was ready to think him more than man, (just as the Lycaonians and barbarians thought of St. Paul, Acts 14:13, &c., and 28:6,) and therefore prostrated himself before him, intending, as it should seem, to pay him some kind of adoration. It must be observed, however, that “doing reverence by prostration was not only an act of worship paid to God, but often given to kings and great men, in the times of the Old Testament: see 2 Samuel 9:6, and 14:33. It was likewise an expression of reverence paid to prophets on account of the sanctity of their office, and not refused by them, 1 Kings 18:7. Of this kind, probably, was the worship paid by the leper to Christ, (Matthew 8:2,) whom he took for a prophet. But when other circumstances were added to it, which made it look like divine worship, then it was refused to be accepted, as in the case of Peter, (Acts 10:25,) and of the angel, Revelation 19:10. The adoration here described seems to have been of this latter kind, being joined with offering incense, an act of worship peculiar to God alone: see Ezra 6:10. For this reason it is highly probable that Daniel refused the honours offered to him, and put the king in mind that he should give God the glory; as we find he does in the following verse.” — Lowth.

Ver. 46. Then the king—worshipped Daniel. He was so awed and overcome with the divinity that spake in Daniel, that he could not forbear this act of prostration. When the emperor Alexander was marching to punish the jews for not sending him supplies, Jaddua the highpriest came out to meet him in his full pontifical dress. The emperor fell down at his feet; and on being admonished by his generals for this act of degradation, he said that he had before seen this highpriest in a dream, who had promised to give him the keys of Asia. In like manner the Lycaonians wanted to offer sacrifices to Paul and Barnabas, when they had healed the lame man at Lystra. Acts 14:10-13. The elevation of Daniel proves how much the king was struck with the divine wisdom communicated to that distinguished prophet.

V. 47. God of gods-The supreme God of all the world, above Baal and all other gods. Lord of kings-The word in the Syriack signifies, high Lord, seeing he is the highest king of all the earth.

Verse 47. Your God is a God of gods] He is greater than all others. And a Lord of kings] He governs both in heaven and earth.

Verses 47, 48. Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of gods — Such a God as there is no other; above all gods in dignity, over all gods in dominion. And a Lord of kings — From whom they derive their power, and to whom they are accountable: the supreme Governor of the world, and Ruler of all the kings and kingdoms in it. And a revealer of secrets — One who sees and can bring to light what is most secret; seeing thou couldest reveal this secret — Couldest discover a matter, which it would have been impossible for thee to discover, if God had not revealed it to thee. Then the king made Daniel a great man — Or magnified him, as the original expression means. God made Daniel a great man indeed, when he took him into such intimate communion with himself, a much greater man than Nebuchadnezzar could make him; but because God had honoured him, therefore the king honoured him too. And gave him many great gifts — Which Daniel had no reason to refuse, since they put him into the greater capacity of doing good to his brethren in captivity. These gifts were no more than grateful returns from the king for the good services Daniel had done him, and were not desired or aimed at by Daniel, as the rewards of divination were by Balaam. And made him ruler over the whole province of Babylon — Which, no doubt, had a mighty influence upon the other provinces; and chief of the governors over all the wise men — Constituted him the chief ruler and inspector of them who were students and professors of learning and wisdom. We are not to suppose that this holy prophet, in the exercise of the office now assigned him, would give any countenance or encouragement to any who practised unlawful arts and divinations: rather he would do all in his power to abolish all such practices, and would instruct those of whom he had the oversight in the knowledge of the one living and true God, and in that wisdom which has him for its author and its end.

47. This verse proves that the “worship” of verse 46 was not to Daniel, but, as Augustine said, through him to the God whose representative he was; just as Nebuchadnezzar reverenced a living God behind the image to which he was accustomed to pour out libations. Of course Nebuchadnezzar’s words are no indication that he had turned monotheist. He was accustomed to use these titles when speaking of any one of the great Babylonian deities.

Verse 48. Made Daniel a great man] By, 1. Giving him many rich gifts.

2. By making him governor over the whole province of Babylon. And, 3. By making him the chief or president over all the wise men.

Verses 47, 48. Of a truth it is, that your God is a God of gods — Such a God as there is no other; above all gods in dignity, over all gods in dominion. And a Lord of kings — From whom they derive their power, and to whom they are accountable: the supreme Governor of the world, and Ruler of all the kings and kingdoms in it. And a revealer of secrets — One who sees and can bring to light what is most secret; seeing thou couldest reveal this secret — Couldest discover a matter, which it would have been impossible for thee to discover, if God had not revealed it to thee. Then the king made Daniel a great man — Or magnified him, as the original expression means. God made Daniel a great man indeed, when he took him into such intimate communion with himself, a much greater man than Nebuchadnezzar could make him; but because God had honoured him, therefore the king honoured him too. And gave him many great gifts — Which Daniel had no reason to refuse, since they put him into the greater capacity of doing good to his brethren in captivity. These gifts were no more than grateful returns from the king for the good services Daniel had done him, and were not desired or aimed at by Daniel, as the rewards of divination were by Balaam. And made him ruler over the whole province of Babylon — Which, no doubt, had a mighty influence upon the other provinces; and chief of the governors over all the wise men — Constituted him the chief ruler and inspector of them who were students and professors of learning and wisdom. We are not to suppose that this holy prophet, in the exercise of the office now assigned him, would give any countenance or encouragement to any who practised unlawful arts and divinations: rather he would do all in his power to abolish all such practices, and would instruct those of whom he had the oversight in the knowledge of the one living and true God, and in that wisdom which has him for its author and its end.

48, 49. If this means that Daniel was really appointed viceroy, or shalit, of the province and official head (rab?) of the order of Magi, he must very soon have lost that position (verse 13), which might have been arbitrarily given him out of temporary spite toward the Babylonian priests and taken from him when the king and these ecclesiastics became reconciled. (See note Daniel 2:5.) Zockler says, “What really was conferred on the prophet was probably merely a decisive influence over the administration of the province of Babylon.” For a time, at least, Daniel was “in the gate of the king.” This perhaps may only mean that he abode at the royal court, though, strictly speaking, the “gate” was the most sacred part of the temple or palace, and was, therefore, used for the highest judicial functions (Trumbull, Threshold Covenant). At Persepolis (Susa) on the doorways the king is represented rendering justice at the palace gate. A Babylonian tablet written in the twenty-eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar contains the challenge of a certain person to his opponent to bring his witnesses to the gate of the house Bel-idden, and testify, and so the most sacred city of the empire was named Babylon, “the gate of the gods.” The high court of Turkey is still called the Sublime Porte, or Exalted Gateway.

V. 49. And he set-He substituted them as lieutenants for the king’s service under Daniel, but Daniel sat in the king’s gate to be ready for the king’s chief business.

Verse 49. Daniel requested of the king, and he set Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego over the affairs of the province of Babylon] He wished his three companions promoted, who had shared his anxieties, and helped him by their prayers. They all had places of trust, in which they could do much good, and prevent much evil.

Daniel sat in the gate of the king.] That is, was the chief officer in the palace; and the greatest confidant and counsellor of the king. But whatever his influence and that of his friends was, it extended only over the province of Babylon; not through the empire.

Verse 49. Then Daniel requested of the king, and he set Shadrach, &c. — He used his interest for his friends, as became a good man, and procured places in the government for them, that they might be assisting to him in his office, and sharers in his honour, by whose intercessions, united with his own, so important a secret had been revealed to him: such a grateful sense had he even of that service! This preferring of them would not only be a great help to Daniel in his place and business, but would afford them many and great opportunities of being useful to their brethren in captivity. But Daniel sat in the gate of the king — Was a constant attendant at the king’s court: and as the expression may probably signify, was a kind of chief justice, hearing and determining such causes as were brought before him, and administering justice to the people.

48, 49. If this means that Daniel was really appointed viceroy, or shalit, of the province and official head (rab?) of the order of Magi, he must very soon have lost that position (verse 13), which might have been arbitrarily given him out of temporary spite toward the Babylonian priests and taken from him when the king and these ecclesiastics became reconciled. (See note Daniel 2:5.) Zockler says, “What really was conferred on the prophet was probably merely a decisive influence over the administration of the province of Babylon.” For a time, at least, Daniel was “in the gate of the king.” This perhaps may only mean that he abode at the royal court, though, strictly speaking, the “gate” was the most sacred part of the temple or palace, and was, therefore, used for the highest judicial functions (Trumbull, Threshold Covenant). At Persepolis (Susa) on the doorways the king is represented rendering justice at the palace gate. A Babylonian tablet written in the twenty-eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar contains the challenge of a certain person to his opponent to bring his witnesses to the gate of the house Bel-idden, and testify, and so the most sacred city of the empire was named Babylon, “the gate of the gods.” The high court of Turkey is still called the Sublime Porte, or Exalted Gateway.