Daniel · Chapter 4

V. 1. Nebuchadnezzar the king-Daniel here sets down another strange relation in the words of the king’s own proclamation, sent to all his vast kingdoms, and questionless put into the king’s archives, and court-rolls. Peace be multiplied-All health and happiness; this was always the form of salutation among the eastern nations.

Verse 1. Nebuchadnezzar the king, unto all people] This is a regular decree, and is one of the most ancient on record; and no doubt was copied from the state papers of Babylon. Daniel has preserved it in the original language.

Verses 1-3. Nebuchadnezzar the king, unto all people, &c. — He addresses the proclamation, not only to his own subjects, but to all to whom the writing should come. Peace be multiplied unto you — May all things prosperous happen unto you. The Chaldee is, Your peace be multiplied: a usual form of addressing the subjects of this vast empire. I thought it good to show the signs, &c., that the high God hath wrought toward me — Namely, by signifying to him future things of so extraordinary a kind, as could not naturally have been supposed to happen; and in bringing to pass some of them upon himself in a most wonderful manner. How great are his signs, &c. — “The king’s repeated experience had extorted from him the sublime confession contained in this verse; the latter part of which is a fine display of the infinite power and dominion of the true God.” — Wintle.

1-3. On Nebuchadnezzar see Introduction, III, 3, (1); for his “decrees,” note Daniel 3:29; on “peoples, nations, and languages” see Introduction, III, 2. A great quantity of Nebuchadnezzar’s inscriptions have been recovered. The form of address, “Peace be unto you,” so common even to this day in Arabic, has not been found in Assyrian (Prince). Of course, however, in repeating speeches or “decrees” all ancient historians, and even modern writers down to the middle of the nineteenth century, usually gave them in their own language and not verbatim. On the term “Most High God” (verse 2, R.V.) see notes Daniel 3:13-15, 26. If an official letter or decree such as this should be found among the cuneiform records, in which under his own royal seal the “King of the Four Quarters of the World” should declare his own mistakes and ignominy, how it would amaze our Assyriologists! (See Introduction, II, 3, 4.) The noblest prophets of Judah could hardly voice more clearly the loftiest Hebrew hopes than does this Babylonian king. “Nothing less than a real change of heart could cause such a confession as this” (Wesley). Indeed the central thought of the entire Daniel apocalypse is here put in the lips of Nebuchadnezzar and later repeated by Darius (Daniel 6:26; compare Daniel 2:44).

Verse 2. I thought it good to show] A part of the decree was a recital of the wonders wrought by the hand of the true God in his kingdom and on his person.

Verses 1-3. Nebuchadnezzar the king, unto all people, &c. — He addresses the proclamation, not only to his own subjects, but to all to whom the writing should come. Peace be multiplied unto you — May all things prosperous happen unto you. The Chaldee is, Your peace be multiplied: a usual form of addressing the subjects of this vast empire. I thought it good to show the signs, &c., that the high God hath wrought toward me — Namely, by signifying to him future things of so extraordinary a kind, as could not naturally have been supposed to happen; and in bringing to pass some of them upon himself in a most wonderful manner. How great are his signs, &c. — “The king’s repeated experience had extorted from him the sublime confession contained in this verse; the latter part of which is a fine display of the infinite power and dominion of the true God.” — Wintle.

1-3. On Nebuchadnezzar see Introduction, III, 3, (1); for his “decrees,” note Daniel 3:29; on “peoples, nations, and languages” see Introduction, III, 2. A great quantity of Nebuchadnezzar’s inscriptions have been recovered. The form of address, “Peace be unto you,” so common even to this day in Arabic, has not been found in Assyrian (Prince). Of course, however, in repeating speeches or “decrees” all ancient historians, and even modern writers down to the middle of the nineteenth century, usually gave them in their own language and not verbatim. On the term “Most High God” (verse 2, R.V.) see notes Daniel 3:13-15, 26. If an official letter or decree such as this should be found among the cuneiform records, in which under his own royal seal the “King of the Four Quarters of the World” should declare his own mistakes and ignominy, how it would amaze our Assyriologists! (See Introduction, II, 3, 4.) The noblest prophets of Judah could hardly voice more clearly the loftiest Hebrew hopes than does this Babylonian king. “Nothing less than a real change of heart could cause such a confession as this” (Wesley). Indeed the central thought of the entire Daniel apocalypse is here put in the lips of Nebuchadnezzar and later repeated by Darius (Daniel 6:26; compare Daniel 2:44).

V. 3. How great are his signs-Nothing less than a real change of heart could cause such a confession as this! Nebuchadnezzar was now old, had reigned above forty years, and seen as much of the world as most men ever did. And yet never ‘till now, did he admire surprizing events, as the signs and wonders of the high God!

Verse 3. How great are his signs!] There are no preternatural signs like his! His wonders—miraculous interferences, are mighty—they surpass all human power. He is the Sovereign of all kings, and his dominion is everlasting; and every generation is a proof of his all-governing influence. These are very fine sentiments, and show how deeply his mind was impressed with the majesty of God.

Verses 1-3. Nebuchadnezzar the king, unto all people, &c. — He addresses the proclamation, not only to his own subjects, but to all to whom the writing should come. Peace be multiplied unto you — May all things prosperous happen unto you. The Chaldee is, Your peace be multiplied: a usual form of addressing the subjects of this vast empire. I thought it good to show the signs, &c., that the high God hath wrought toward me — Namely, by signifying to him future things of so extraordinary a kind, as could not naturally have been supposed to happen; and in bringing to pass some of them upon himself in a most wonderful manner. How great are his signs, &c. — “The king’s repeated experience had extorted from him the sublime confession contained in this verse; the latter part of which is a fine display of the infinite power and dominion of the true God.” — Wintle.

1-3. On Nebuchadnezzar see Introduction, III, 3, (1); for his “decrees,” note Daniel 3:29; on “peoples, nations, and languages” see Introduction, III, 2. A great quantity of Nebuchadnezzar’s inscriptions have been recovered. The form of address, “Peace be unto you,” so common even to this day in Arabic, has not been found in Assyrian (Prince). Of course, however, in repeating speeches or “decrees” all ancient historians, and even modern writers down to the middle of the nineteenth century, usually gave them in their own language and not verbatim. On the term “Most High God” (verse 2, R.V.) see notes Daniel 3:13-15, 26. If an official letter or decree such as this should be found among the cuneiform records, in which under his own royal seal the “King of the Four Quarters of the World” should declare his own mistakes and ignominy, how it would amaze our Assyriologists! (See Introduction, II, 3, 4.) The noblest prophets of Judah could hardly voice more clearly the loftiest Hebrew hopes than does this Babylonian king. “Nothing less than a real change of heart could cause such a confession as this” (Wesley). Indeed the central thought of the entire Daniel apocalypse is here put in the lips of Nebuchadnezzar and later repeated by Darius (Daniel 6:26; compare Daniel 2:44).

V. 4. Was at rest-When my wars were over, I sat down quiet, enjoying the spoils of my enemies.

Verse 4. I—was at rest] I had returned to my palace in Babylon after having subdued Syria, Phœnicia, Judea, Egypt, and Arabia. It was probably these great conquests that puffed him up with pride, and brought that chastisement upon him which he afterwards describes. See the dream of the emblematical tree explained.

Verses 4, 5. I Nebuchadnezzar was at rest, &c. — Nebuchadnezzar, “for the extent of his dominion, and the great revenues it supplied; for his unrivalled success in war; for the magnificence and splendour of his court; and for his stupendous works and improvements at Babylon, was the greatest monarch, not only of his own times, but incomparably the greatest the world had ever seen. At a time when he was at rest in his house, and flourishing in his palace;” having lately subjected to his empire Syria, Phenicia, Judea, Egypt, and Arabia, and returned to Babylon inflated with his success and victories, and being in the meridian of his glory, and thinking of nothing but enjoying in peace the fruit of his conquests, he was unexpectedly alarmed, and thrown into trouble and distress, by a prophetic dream which he here records. Thus God’s particular judgments often resemble the general one in their coming suddenly and unexpectedly, when men indulge themselves in carnal security.

4. In the original text this is the beginning of chapter 4. For the palace of Nebuchadnezzar see Introduction, III, 3, 4.

Verse 5. I saw a dream] See this dream circumstantially explained in the following verses.

Verses 4, 5. I Nebuchadnezzar was at rest, &c. — Nebuchadnezzar, “for the extent of his dominion, and the great revenues it supplied; for his unrivalled success in war; for the magnificence and splendour of his court; and for his stupendous works and improvements at Babylon, was the greatest monarch, not only of his own times, but incomparably the greatest the world had ever seen. At a time when he was at rest in his house, and flourishing in his palace;” having lately subjected to his empire Syria, Phenicia, Judea, Egypt, and Arabia, and returned to Babylon inflated with his success and victories, and being in the meridian of his glory, and thinking of nothing but enjoying in peace the fruit of his conquests, he was unexpectedly alarmed, and thrown into trouble and distress, by a prophetic dream which he here records. Thus God’s particular judgments often resemble the general one in their coming suddenly and unexpectedly, when men indulge themselves in carnal security.

Ver. 5. The visions of my head troubled me. The king believed that his dream was portentous of future events.

5-7. See notes Daniel 2:1, 2. In the coronation decree of Nabonidus recently found in the ruins of Babylon (see Babylonian and Oriental Record, September, 1896) this king, the father of Belshazzar, tells how Nebuchadnezzar appeared to him in a night vision accompanied by the Babylonian high priest carrying a drawn sword. Nabonidus tells Nebuchadnezzar a dream which had troubled him greatly, and Nebuchadnezzar interprets it for him, the high priest being, as it seems, the “medium” through which this conversation between the living and the dead king was carried on. In another night vision mentioned in the same decree the goddess “who can raise to life the dead” appears to him.

Verses 6, 7. Therefore made I a decree to bring in the wise men — As he did before, on a like occasion; but they did not make known unto me the interpretation — Though they had promised with great confidence, when consulted before, respecting his former dream, that if it were told them they would, without fail, interpret it. But the key of this dream was in a sacred prophecy, with which they were not acquainted, namely, Ezekiel 31:3, &c., where the Assyrian monarch is compared, as Nebuchadnezzar is here, to a tree cut down for his pride. Had they read and considered that divine record, they might perhaps have discovered the mystery of this dream. But Providence ordered it so, that they should be first puzzled with it, that Daniel’s interpreting of it afterward might redound to the glory of Daniel’s God.

5-7. See notes Daniel 2:1, 2. In the coronation decree of Nabonidus recently found in the ruins of Babylon (see Babylonian and Oriental Record, September, 1896) this king, the father of Belshazzar, tells how Nebuchadnezzar appeared to him in a night vision accompanied by the Babylonian high priest carrying a drawn sword. Nabonidus tells Nebuchadnezzar a dream which had troubled him greatly, and Nebuchadnezzar interprets it for him, the high priest being, as it seems, the “medium” through which this conversation between the living and the dead king was carried on. In another night vision mentioned in the same decree the goddess “who can raise to life the dead” appears to him.

Verses 6, 7. Therefore made I a decree to bring in the wise men — As he did before, on a like occasion; but they did not make known unto me the interpretation — Though they had promised with great confidence, when consulted before, respecting his former dream, that if it were told them they would, without fail, interpret it. But the key of this dream was in a sacred prophecy, with which they were not acquainted, namely, Ezekiel 31:3, &c., where the Assyrian monarch is compared, as Nebuchadnezzar is here, to a tree cut down for his pride. Had they read and considered that divine record, they might perhaps have discovered the mystery of this dream. But Providence ordered it so, that they should be first puzzled with it, that Daniel’s interpreting of it afterward might redound to the glory of Daniel’s God.

Ver. 7. The magicians, as in Daniel 2:2.

5-7. See notes Daniel 2:1, 2. In the coronation decree of Nabonidus recently found in the ruins of Babylon (see Babylonian and Oriental Record, September, 1896) this king, the father of Belshazzar, tells how Nebuchadnezzar appeared to him in a night vision accompanied by the Babylonian high priest carrying a drawn sword. Nabonidus tells Nebuchadnezzar a dream which had troubled him greatly, and Nebuchadnezzar interprets it for him, the high priest being, as it seems, the “medium” through which this conversation between the living and the dead king was carried on. In another night vision mentioned in the same decree the goddess “who can raise to life the dead” appears to him.

Verses 8, 9. But at the last Daniel came in before me — Whether sent for by the king, or brought by another, appears not, but he was last, that it might appear that he only, or rather, his God, who revealed them to him, had the true understanding of these secrets: for if he had come first, or before the rest had tried all their skill in vain, they would have been ready to affirm they understood the interpretation of the dream as well as he, and so God would not have had the glory of it; but now it was evident that the interpretation was from the Spirit of God enlightening the prophet. In whom is the spirit of the holy gods — Who is enlightened by the gods, or heavenly powers, with a supernatural degree of knowledge, such as none of the wise men of Babylon can attain to. The original words, however, may be rendered, the holy God, as they are in the Greek and Arabic: and it is probable that this king had now the one true God in his mind. O Belteshazzar, master — Or, chief, of the magicians, as Wintle translates the words. That he was superior to, or placed as a governor over, all the magicians, or wise men, see on Daniel 1:20, and 2:48. Because I know that the spirit of the holy gods — Or rather, of the holy God, is in thee, and that no secret troubleth thee — Or, is difficult to thee. The LXX. read, ouk adunatei se, is not impossible to thee. Thou art not at a loss to find out any secret thing whatsoever. Tell me the visions of my dream, and the interpretation thereof — Nebuchadnezzar tells the dream himself in the following words; so that the meaning of this sentence must be, Tell me the interpretation of the dream. The LXX. translate it thus: Hear the vision of my dream, which I saw, and tell me the interpretation thereof.

8. How remarkably similar is this to the account in chapter ii! Brown, in his recent Hebrew Lexicon, objects to the connection of the name Belteshazzar with Bel, as “inexplicable;” but see note Daniel 1:6, 7. Vigouroux (Dictionnaire, 5:1893) gives a number of abbreviations precisely similar to this in which the first term — the divine name — is omitted. The express statement of this verse, that Daniel was named after Nebuchadnezzar’s favorite god, seems to exclude such derivations as those of Strassmaier, and others, who would make the first term Belit or Balat. Most of the inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar were written in glorification of Bel, whom he calls “the joy of my heart.”

Verses 8, 9. But at the last Daniel came in before me — Whether sent for by the king, or brought by another, appears not, but he was last, that it might appear that he only, or rather, his God, who revealed them to him, had the true understanding of these secrets: for if he had come first, or before the rest had tried all their skill in vain, they would have been ready to affirm they understood the interpretation of the dream as well as he, and so God would not have had the glory of it; but now it was evident that the interpretation was from the Spirit of God enlightening the prophet. In whom is the spirit of the holy gods — Who is enlightened by the gods, or heavenly powers, with a supernatural degree of knowledge, such as none of the wise men of Babylon can attain to. The original words, however, may be rendered, the holy God, as they are in the Greek and Arabic: and it is probable that this king had now the one true God in his mind. O Belteshazzar, master — Or, chief, of the magicians, as Wintle translates the words. That he was superior to, or placed as a governor over, all the magicians, or wise men, see on Daniel 1:20, and 2:48. Because I know that the spirit of the holy gods — Or rather, of the holy God, is in thee, and that no secret troubleth thee — Or, is difficult to thee. The LXX. read, ouk adunatei se, is not impossible to thee. Thou art not at a loss to find out any secret thing whatsoever. Tell me the visions of my dream, and the interpretation thereof — Nebuchadnezzar tells the dream himself in the following words; so that the meaning of this sentence must be, Tell me the interpretation of the dream. The LXX. translate it thus: Hear the vision of my dream, which I saw, and tell me the interpretation thereof.

9. Daniel is here recognized as master of the magicians. (See note Daniel 2:48.) The otherwise unaccountable failure of the king to call on him first of all, instead of sending out a decree (verse 6) to bring before him all the other magicians, may perhaps be explained as a mere matter of literary form on the part of the narrator, the effect of Daniel’s success being heightened by the previous unsuccessful attempts of all the other wise men. However, if the king, through an attempt to centralize the worship (Sayce) or for any other reason, was at this time an enemy of the priests (Daniel 2:5, 24-26), this might possibly have been a scheme of his. It should also be remembered that one version, which was probably the original LXX., omits verses 6 and 7, which were evidently, therefore, not in the original text which it translated. This version says that immediately upon having his dream the king called Daniel and told it to him. It also gives an entirely different address to Daniel, although the phrase “the spirit of the holy gods is in thee” is not unnatural in a heathen ruler. (Compare Genesis 41:38, Hebrews)

Verse 10. I saw—a tree] This vision Nebuchadnezzar says made him afraid. What a mercy it is that God has hidden futurity from us! Were he to show every man the lot that is before him, the misery of the human race would be complete.

Great men and princes are often represented, in the language of the prophets, under the similitude of trees; see Ezekiel 17:5, 6; 31:3, &c.; Jeremiah 22:15; Psalm 1:3; 37:35.

Verses 10-16. I saw, &c. — The substance of what the king relates is, that he saw in a dream “a tree, strong and flourishing; [in the midst of the earth, or of his empire;] its summit pierced the clouds, and its branches overshadowed the whole extent of his vast dominions: it was laden with fruit, and luxuriant in its foliage: the cattle reposed in its shade, and the fowls of the air lodged in its branches, and multitudes partook of its delicious fruit. But the king saw a celestial being, a watcher, and a holy one, come down from heaven; and heard him give orders, with a loud voice, that the tree should be hewn down, its branches lopped off, and its fruit scattered, and nothing left of it but the stump of its roots in the earth, which was to be secured, however, with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field. Words of menace follow, which are applicable only to a man, and plainly show, that the whole vision was typical of some dreadful calamity, to fall for a time, but for a time only, on some one of the sons of men.” — Bishop Horsley. The whole of this allegorical dream is explained in the subsequent part of the chapter; and therefore it will only be necessary to notice here two or three of the singular expressions and particulars found in it.

1st, By the terms watcher and holy one, or, as the expression is, verse 17, watchers and holy ones, has generally been understood some principal angel, or angels, the angelical orders being described as always attending upon God’s throne to receive and execute his commands: see Psalm 103:20; Matthew 18:10; and notes on Ezekiel 1:11, 24. For which reason they are called the eyes of the Lord, Zechariah 4:10. But Bishop Horsley, in his sermon on the 17th verse, strongly combats, and seems to have fully confuted this opinion. His train of reasoning is too long to be inserted here, and indeed it is not necessary to insert it, the following short extract being quite sufficient to clear up the point. “Those who understand the titles of watchers and holy ones of angelic beings, agree, that they must be principal angels — angels of the highest orders; which, if they are angels at all, must certainly be supposed: for it is to be observed, that it is not the mere execution of the judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar, but the decree itself, which is ascribed to them. The whole matter originated in their decree; and at their command the decree was executed. The holy ones are not said to hew down the tree, but to give command for the hewing of it down. Of how high order, indeed, must these watchers and holy ones have been, on whose decrees the judgments of God himself are founded, and by whom the warrant for the execution is finally issued? It is surprising, that such men as Calvin among the Protestants of the continent — such as Wells and the elder Lowth in our own church — and such as Calmet in the Church of Rome, should not have their eyes open to the error, and impiety indeed, of such an exposition as this which makes them angels, especially when the learned Grotius, in the extraordinary manner in which he recommends it, had set forth its merits, as it should seem, in a true light, when he says, that it represents God as acting like a great monarch ‘upon a decree of his senate:’ and when another of the most learned of its advocates imagines something might pass in the celestial senate, bearing some analogy to the forms of legislation used in the assemblies of the people at Rome, in the times of the republic. It might have been expected that the exposition would have needed no other confutation, in the judgment of men of piety and sober minds, than this fair statement of its principles by its ablest advocates.

“The plain truth is, that these appellations, Watchers and Holy Ones, denote the persons in the Godhead; the first describing them by the vigilance of their universal providence, the second by the transcendent sanctity of their nature. The word rendered Holy Ones is so applied in other texts of Scripture, which make the sense of the other word, coupled with it here, indisputable. In perfect consistency with this exposition, and with no other, we find, in the 24th verse, that this decree of the Watchers and the Holy Ones is the decree of the Most High God; and in verse 13, God, who in regard to the plurality of the persons, is afterward described by these two plural nouns, Watchers and Holy Ones, is, in regard to the unity of the essence, described by the same nouns in the singular number, Watcher and Holy One. And this is a fuller confirmation of the truth of this exposition: for God is the only being to whom the same name in the singular and in the plural may be indiscriminately applied: and this change from the one number to another, without any thing in the principles of the language to account for it, is frequent in speaking of God in the Hebrew tongue, but unexampled in the case of any other being. The assertion, therefore, is, that God had decreed to execute a signal judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar for his pride and impiety, in order to prove, by the example of that mighty monarch, that ‘the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.’ To make the declaration the more solemn and striking, the terms in which it is conceived distinctly express that consent and concurrence of all the persons in the Trinity, in the design and execution of this judgment, which must be understood indeed in every act of the Godhead.”

2d, The command given by these watchers and holy ones may be considered as addressed to any of those creatures, animate or inanimate, that are to fulfil the Creator’s will; or the expression may be understood as being merely a prediction that the tree should be cut down, and its leaves shaken off, &c.: and the hewing down of the tree signified only the removal of it for a time, not its entire destruction, because while the root remained in the ground new shoots might break forth, and so the tree grow up again. When it is added, let the beasts get away from under it, the meaning evidently is, let not his subjects rely upon him for protection, for he shall not be in a condition to afford them any, or to be the author of any good to them. Nevertheless (it is further commanded) leave the stump of his roots in the earth — By which is signified, that Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom should be preserved to him, and that no one should seize upon it during his exile, or affliction. The words, with a band of iron and brass, were meant to give still further assurance that his kingdom should remain unshaken and sure to him, like things held firm and immoveable by iron or brass. The next expression, in the tender grass of the field, either alludes to the circumstance of the stump of a tree lying buried and neglected in the field, till it is overgrown with grass and herbs, and so is not noticed; or it is a transition from the sign to the thing signified, from the tree to Nebuchadnezzar, represented by it, the tree with its stump being lost sight of, and a person coming in its stead, to whom only what follows is applicable. Let his heart be changed from man’s — “It is hard to say what the real nature of this transformation was. The Syriac seems to incline to a change of the mind, and probably it means no more than that his heart, or the nature of his constitution, was made savage and brutish, either by a real madness, or by such a slovenly neglect of himself, or deprivation of the proper use of his speech and limbs, as might reduce him to a state like the beasts. There is a kind of madness called lycanthropy, wherein men have the fury of wolves.” — Wintle. See Univ. Hist., p. 964. Scaliger thinks this madness of Nebuchadnezzar is obscurely hinted at in a document of Abydenus, produced by Eusebius; wherein, having represented the king, from the Chaldean writers, to have fallen into an ecstasy, and to have foretold the destruction of that empire by the Medes and Persians, the author adds, that immediately after uttering this prophecy he disappeared; which Scaliger expounds of the king’s being driven from his kingly state, and the society of men: see Scaliger’s notes upon the Ancient Fragments in the appendix to his work de Emendatione Temporum. See also Houbigant and Calmet on the metamorphosis of Nebuchadnezzar. And let seven times pass over him — Literally, Till seven times be changed upon him, that is, seven years, for so the expression evidently signifies in several parts of this book, as we shall see hereafter.

Ver. 10. I saw—a tree. See the dream of Cambyses, in the note on Isaiah 4:2.

10-12. The king saw in his dream a lofty tree rising as it were out of the very center of the world, and continuing to grow until it reached the clouds and could be seen to the end of the earth. Its leaves were beautiful, its fruit abundant and good for food, and it was a protective shelter for all living creatures. This, of course, is a picture of the Babylonian empire which culminated in Nebuchadnezzar (verses 20-22; compare Ezekiel 31:3-14; Isaiah 14:12), who was absolute lord and guardian of this great world-empire (Introduction, III, 3). It is interesting to note that a “tree of life” is often seen in the religious pictures of Babylon.

Verses 10-16. I saw, &c. — The substance of what the king relates is, that he saw in a dream “a tree, strong and flourishing; [in the midst of the earth, or of his empire;] its summit pierced the clouds, and its branches overshadowed the whole extent of his vast dominions: it was laden with fruit, and luxuriant in its foliage: the cattle reposed in its shade, and the fowls of the air lodged in its branches, and multitudes partook of its delicious fruit. But the king saw a celestial being, a watcher, and a holy one, come down from heaven; and heard him give orders, with a loud voice, that the tree should be hewn down, its branches lopped off, and its fruit scattered, and nothing left of it but the stump of its roots in the earth, which was to be secured, however, with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field. Words of menace follow, which are applicable only to a man, and plainly show, that the whole vision was typical of some dreadful calamity, to fall for a time, but for a time only, on some one of the sons of men.” — Bishop Horsley. The whole of this allegorical dream is explained in the subsequent part of the chapter; and therefore it will only be necessary to notice here two or three of the singular expressions and particulars found in it.

1st, By the terms watcher and holy one, or, as the expression is, verse 17, watchers and holy ones, has generally been understood some principal angel, or angels, the angelical orders being described as always attending upon God’s throne to receive and execute his commands: see Psalm 103:20; Matthew 18:10; and notes on Ezekiel 1:11, 24. For which reason they are called the eyes of the Lord, Zechariah 4:10. But Bishop Horsley, in his sermon on the 17th verse, strongly combats, and seems to have fully confuted this opinion. His train of reasoning is too long to be inserted here, and indeed it is not necessary to insert it, the following short extract being quite sufficient to clear up the point. “Those who understand the titles of watchers and holy ones of angelic beings, agree, that they must be principal angels — angels of the highest orders; which, if they are angels at all, must certainly be supposed: for it is to be observed, that it is not the mere execution of the judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar, but the decree itself, which is ascribed to them. The whole matter originated in their decree; and at their command the decree was executed. The holy ones are not said to hew down the tree, but to give command for the hewing of it down. Of how high order, indeed, must these watchers and holy ones have been, on whose decrees the judgments of God himself are founded, and by whom the warrant for the execution is finally issued? It is surprising, that such men as Calvin among the Protestants of the continent — such as Wells and the elder Lowth in our own church — and such as Calmet in the Church of Rome, should not have their eyes open to the error, and impiety indeed, of such an exposition as this which makes them angels, especially when the learned Grotius, in the extraordinary manner in which he recommends it, had set forth its merits, as it should seem, in a true light, when he says, that it represents God as acting like a great monarch ‘upon a decree of his senate:’ and when another of the most learned of its advocates imagines something might pass in the celestial senate, bearing some analogy to the forms of legislation used in the assemblies of the people at Rome, in the times of the republic. It might have been expected that the exposition would have needed no other confutation, in the judgment of men of piety and sober minds, than this fair statement of its principles by its ablest advocates.

“The plain truth is, that these appellations, Watchers and Holy Ones, denote the persons in the Godhead; the first describing them by the vigilance of their universal providence, the second by the transcendent sanctity of their nature. The word rendered Holy Ones is so applied in other texts of Scripture, which make the sense of the other word, coupled with it here, indisputable. In perfect consistency with this exposition, and with no other, we find, in the 24th verse, that this decree of the Watchers and the Holy Ones is the decree of the Most High God; and in verse 13, God, who in regard to the plurality of the persons, is afterward described by these two plural nouns, Watchers and Holy Ones, is, in regard to the unity of the essence, described by the same nouns in the singular number, Watcher and Holy One. And this is a fuller confirmation of the truth of this exposition: for God is the only being to whom the same name in the singular and in the plural may be indiscriminately applied: and this change from the one number to another, without any thing in the principles of the language to account for it, is frequent in speaking of God in the Hebrew tongue, but unexampled in the case of any other being. The assertion, therefore, is, that God had decreed to execute a signal judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar for his pride and impiety, in order to prove, by the example of that mighty monarch, that ‘the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.’ To make the declaration the more solemn and striking, the terms in which it is conceived distinctly express that consent and concurrence of all the persons in the Trinity, in the design and execution of this judgment, which must be understood indeed in every act of the Godhead.”

2d, The command given by these watchers and holy ones may be considered as addressed to any of those creatures, animate or inanimate, that are to fulfil the Creator’s will; or the expression may be understood as being merely a prediction that the tree should be cut down, and its leaves shaken off, &c.: and the hewing down of the tree signified only the removal of it for a time, not its entire destruction, because while the root remained in the ground new shoots might break forth, and so the tree grow up again. When it is added, let the beasts get away from under it, the meaning evidently is, let not his subjects rely upon him for protection, for he shall not be in a condition to afford them any, or to be the author of any good to them. Nevertheless (it is further commanded) leave the stump of his roots in the earth — By which is signified, that Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom should be preserved to him, and that no one should seize upon it during his exile, or affliction. The words, with a band of iron and brass, were meant to give still further assurance that his kingdom should remain unshaken and sure to him, like things held firm and immoveable by iron or brass. The next expression, in the tender grass of the field, either alludes to the circumstance of the stump of a tree lying buried and neglected in the field, till it is overgrown with grass and herbs, and so is not noticed; or it is a transition from the sign to the thing signified, from the tree to Nebuchadnezzar, represented by it, the tree with its stump being lost sight of, and a person coming in its stead, to whom only what follows is applicable. Let his heart be changed from man’s — “It is hard to say what the real nature of this transformation was. The Syriac seems to incline to a change of the mind, and probably it means no more than that his heart, or the nature of his constitution, was made savage and brutish, either by a real madness, or by such a slovenly neglect of himself, or deprivation of the proper use of his speech and limbs, as might reduce him to a state like the beasts. There is a kind of madness called lycanthropy, wherein men have the fury of wolves.” — Wintle. See Univ. Hist., p. 964. Scaliger thinks this madness of Nebuchadnezzar is obscurely hinted at in a document of Abydenus, produced by Eusebius; wherein, having represented the king, from the Chaldean writers, to have fallen into an ecstasy, and to have foretold the destruction of that empire by the Medes and Persians, the author adds, that immediately after uttering this prophecy he disappeared; which Scaliger expounds of the king’s being driven from his kingly state, and the society of men: see Scaliger’s notes upon the Ancient Fragments in the appendix to his work de Emendatione Temporum. See also Houbigant and Calmet on the metamorphosis of Nebuchadnezzar. And let seven times pass over him — Literally, Till seven times be changed upon him, that is, seven years, for so the expression evidently signifies in several parts of this book, as we shall see hereafter.

10-12. The king saw in his dream a lofty tree rising as it were out of the very center of the world, and continuing to grow until it reached the clouds and could be seen to the end of the earth. Its leaves were beautiful, its fruit abundant and good for food, and it was a protective shelter for all living creatures. This, of course, is a picture of the Babylonian empire which culminated in Nebuchadnezzar (verses 20-22; compare Ezekiel 31:3-14; Isaiah 14:12), who was absolute lord and guardian of this great world-empire (Introduction, III, 3). It is interesting to note that a “tree of life” is often seen in the religious pictures of Babylon.

Verses 10-16. I saw, &c. — The substance of what the king relates is, that he saw in a dream “a tree, strong and flourishing; [in the midst of the earth, or of his empire;] its summit pierced the clouds, and its branches overshadowed the whole extent of his vast dominions: it was laden with fruit, and luxuriant in its foliage: the cattle reposed in its shade, and the fowls of the air lodged in its branches, and multitudes partook of its delicious fruit. But the king saw a celestial being, a watcher, and a holy one, come down from heaven; and heard him give orders, with a loud voice, that the tree should be hewn down, its branches lopped off, and its fruit scattered, and nothing left of it but the stump of its roots in the earth, which was to be secured, however, with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field. Words of menace follow, which are applicable only to a man, and plainly show, that the whole vision was typical of some dreadful calamity, to fall for a time, but for a time only, on some one of the sons of men.” — Bishop Horsley. The whole of this allegorical dream is explained in the subsequent part of the chapter; and therefore it will only be necessary to notice here two or three of the singular expressions and particulars found in it.

1st, By the terms watcher and holy one, or, as the expression is, verse 17, watchers and holy ones, has generally been understood some principal angel, or angels, the angelical orders being described as always attending upon God’s throne to receive and execute his commands: see Psalm 103:20; Matthew 18:10; and notes on Ezekiel 1:11, 24. For which reason they are called the eyes of the Lord, Zechariah 4:10. But Bishop Horsley, in his sermon on the 17th verse, strongly combats, and seems to have fully confuted this opinion. His train of reasoning is too long to be inserted here, and indeed it is not necessary to insert it, the following short extract being quite sufficient to clear up the point. “Those who understand the titles of watchers and holy ones of angelic beings, agree, that they must be principal angels — angels of the highest orders; which, if they are angels at all, must certainly be supposed: for it is to be observed, that it is not the mere execution of the judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar, but the decree itself, which is ascribed to them. The whole matter originated in their decree; and at their command the decree was executed. The holy ones are not said to hew down the tree, but to give command for the hewing of it down. Of how high order, indeed, must these watchers and holy ones have been, on whose decrees the judgments of God himself are founded, and by whom the warrant for the execution is finally issued? It is surprising, that such men as Calvin among the Protestants of the continent — such as Wells and the elder Lowth in our own church — and such as Calmet in the Church of Rome, should not have their eyes open to the error, and impiety indeed, of such an exposition as this which makes them angels, especially when the learned Grotius, in the extraordinary manner in which he recommends it, had set forth its merits, as it should seem, in a true light, when he says, that it represents God as acting like a great monarch ‘upon a decree of his senate:’ and when another of the most learned of its advocates imagines something might pass in the celestial senate, bearing some analogy to the forms of legislation used in the assemblies of the people at Rome, in the times of the republic. It might have been expected that the exposition would have needed no other confutation, in the judgment of men of piety and sober minds, than this fair statement of its principles by its ablest advocates.

“The plain truth is, that these appellations, Watchers and Holy Ones, denote the persons in the Godhead; the first describing them by the vigilance of their universal providence, the second by the transcendent sanctity of their nature. The word rendered Holy Ones is so applied in other texts of Scripture, which make the sense of the other word, coupled with it here, indisputable. In perfect consistency with this exposition, and with no other, we find, in the 24th verse, that this decree of the Watchers and the Holy Ones is the decree of the Most High God; and in verse 13, God, who in regard to the plurality of the persons, is afterward described by these two plural nouns, Watchers and Holy Ones, is, in regard to the unity of the essence, described by the same nouns in the singular number, Watcher and Holy One. And this is a fuller confirmation of the truth of this exposition: for God is the only being to whom the same name in the singular and in the plural may be indiscriminately applied: and this change from the one number to another, without any thing in the principles of the language to account for it, is frequent in speaking of God in the Hebrew tongue, but unexampled in the case of any other being. The assertion, therefore, is, that God had decreed to execute a signal judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar for his pride and impiety, in order to prove, by the example of that mighty monarch, that ‘the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.’ To make the declaration the more solemn and striking, the terms in which it is conceived distinctly express that consent and concurrence of all the persons in the Trinity, in the design and execution of this judgment, which must be understood indeed in every act of the Godhead.”

2d, The command given by these watchers and holy ones may be considered as addressed to any of those creatures, animate or inanimate, that are to fulfil the Creator’s will; or the expression may be understood as being merely a prediction that the tree should be cut down, and its leaves shaken off, &c.: and the hewing down of the tree signified only the removal of it for a time, not its entire destruction, because while the root remained in the ground new shoots might break forth, and so the tree grow up again. When it is added, let the beasts get away from under it, the meaning evidently is, let not his subjects rely upon him for protection, for he shall not be in a condition to afford them any, or to be the author of any good to them. Nevertheless (it is further commanded) leave the stump of his roots in the earth — By which is signified, that Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom should be preserved to him, and that no one should seize upon it during his exile, or affliction. The words, with a band of iron and brass, were meant to give still further assurance that his kingdom should remain unshaken and sure to him, like things held firm and immoveable by iron or brass. The next expression, in the tender grass of the field, either alludes to the circumstance of the stump of a tree lying buried and neglected in the field, till it is overgrown with grass and herbs, and so is not noticed; or it is a transition from the sign to the thing signified, from the tree to Nebuchadnezzar, represented by it, the tree with its stump being lost sight of, and a person coming in its stead, to whom only what follows is applicable. Let his heart be changed from man’s — “It is hard to say what the real nature of this transformation was. The Syriac seems to incline to a change of the mind, and probably it means no more than that his heart, or the nature of his constitution, was made savage and brutish, either by a real madness, or by such a slovenly neglect of himself, or deprivation of the proper use of his speech and limbs, as might reduce him to a state like the beasts. There is a kind of madness called lycanthropy, wherein men have the fury of wolves.” — Wintle. See Univ. Hist., p. 964. Scaliger thinks this madness of Nebuchadnezzar is obscurely hinted at in a document of Abydenus, produced by Eusebius; wherein, having represented the king, from the Chaldean writers, to have fallen into an ecstasy, and to have foretold the destruction of that empire by the Medes and Persians, the author adds, that immediately after uttering this prophecy he disappeared; which Scaliger expounds of the king’s being driven from his kingly state, and the society of men: see Scaliger’s notes upon the Ancient Fragments in the appendix to his work de Emendatione Temporum. See also Houbigant and Calmet on the metamorphosis of Nebuchadnezzar. And let seven times pass over him — Literally, Till seven times be changed upon him, that is, seven years, for so the expression evidently signifies in several parts of this book, as we shall see hereafter.

10-12. The king saw in his dream a lofty tree rising as it were out of the very center of the world, and continuing to grow until it reached the clouds and could be seen to the end of the earth. Its leaves were beautiful, its fruit abundant and good for food, and it was a protective shelter for all living creatures. This, of course, is a picture of the Babylonian empire which culminated in Nebuchadnezzar (verses 20-22; compare Ezekiel 31:3-14; Isaiah 14:12), who was absolute lord and guardian of this great world-empire (Introduction, III, 3). It is interesting to note that a “tree of life” is often seen in the religious pictures of Babylon.

V. 13. A watcher-A holy angel, the instrument of God, to execute God’s judgments which the angels watch constantly to perform.

Verse 13. A watcher and a holy one] These are both angels; but, according to the Chaldean oracles, of different orders. They appear, according to their opinions, to be a kind of judges of human actions who had the power of determining the lot of men; see Daniel 4:17.

Verses 10-16. I saw, &c. — The substance of what the king relates is, that he saw in a dream “a tree, strong and flourishing; [in the midst of the earth, or of his empire;] its summit pierced the clouds, and its branches overshadowed the whole extent of his vast dominions: it was laden with fruit, and luxuriant in its foliage: the cattle reposed in its shade, and the fowls of the air lodged in its branches, and multitudes partook of its delicious fruit. But the king saw a celestial being, a watcher, and a holy one, come down from heaven; and heard him give orders, with a loud voice, that the tree should be hewn down, its branches lopped off, and its fruit scattered, and nothing left of it but the stump of its roots in the earth, which was to be secured, however, with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field. Words of menace follow, which are applicable only to a man, and plainly show, that the whole vision was typical of some dreadful calamity, to fall for a time, but for a time only, on some one of the sons of men.” — Bishop Horsley. The whole of this allegorical dream is explained in the subsequent part of the chapter; and therefore it will only be necessary to notice here two or three of the singular expressions and particulars found in it.

1st, By the terms watcher and holy one, or, as the expression is, verse 17, watchers and holy ones, has generally been understood some principal angel, or angels, the angelical orders being described as always attending upon God’s throne to receive and execute his commands: see Psalm 103:20; Matthew 18:10; and notes on Ezekiel 1:11, 24. For which reason they are called the eyes of the Lord, Zechariah 4:10. But Bishop Horsley, in his sermon on the 17th verse, strongly combats, and seems to have fully confuted this opinion. His train of reasoning is too long to be inserted here, and indeed it is not necessary to insert it, the following short extract being quite sufficient to clear up the point. “Those who understand the titles of watchers and holy ones of angelic beings, agree, that they must be principal angels — angels of the highest orders; which, if they are angels at all, must certainly be supposed: for it is to be observed, that it is not the mere execution of the judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar, but the decree itself, which is ascribed to them. The whole matter originated in their decree; and at their command the decree was executed. The holy ones are not said to hew down the tree, but to give command for the hewing of it down. Of how high order, indeed, must these watchers and holy ones have been, on whose decrees the judgments of God himself are founded, and by whom the warrant for the execution is finally issued? It is surprising, that such men as Calvin among the Protestants of the continent — such as Wells and the elder Lowth in our own church — and such as Calmet in the Church of Rome, should not have their eyes open to the error, and impiety indeed, of such an exposition as this which makes them angels, especially when the learned Grotius, in the extraordinary manner in which he recommends it, had set forth its merits, as it should seem, in a true light, when he says, that it represents God as acting like a great monarch ‘upon a decree of his senate:’ and when another of the most learned of its advocates imagines something might pass in the celestial senate, bearing some analogy to the forms of legislation used in the assemblies of the people at Rome, in the times of the republic. It might have been expected that the exposition would have needed no other confutation, in the judgment of men of piety and sober minds, than this fair statement of its principles by its ablest advocates.

“The plain truth is, that these appellations, Watchers and Holy Ones, denote the persons in the Godhead; the first describing them by the vigilance of their universal providence, the second by the transcendent sanctity of their nature. The word rendered Holy Ones is so applied in other texts of Scripture, which make the sense of the other word, coupled with it here, indisputable. In perfect consistency with this exposition, and with no other, we find, in the 24th verse, that this decree of the Watchers and the Holy Ones is the decree of the Most High God; and in verse 13, God, who in regard to the plurality of the persons, is afterward described by these two plural nouns, Watchers and Holy Ones, is, in regard to the unity of the essence, described by the same nouns in the singular number, Watcher and Holy One. And this is a fuller confirmation of the truth of this exposition: for God is the only being to whom the same name in the singular and in the plural may be indiscriminately applied: and this change from the one number to another, without any thing in the principles of the language to account for it, is frequent in speaking of God in the Hebrew tongue, but unexampled in the case of any other being. The assertion, therefore, is, that God had decreed to execute a signal judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar for his pride and impiety, in order to prove, by the example of that mighty monarch, that ‘the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.’ To make the declaration the more solemn and striking, the terms in which it is conceived distinctly express that consent and concurrence of all the persons in the Trinity, in the design and execution of this judgment, which must be understood indeed in every act of the Godhead.”

2d, The command given by these watchers and holy ones may be considered as addressed to any of those creatures, animate or inanimate, that are to fulfil the Creator’s will; or the expression may be understood as being merely a prediction that the tree should be cut down, and its leaves shaken off, &c.: and the hewing down of the tree signified only the removal of it for a time, not its entire destruction, because while the root remained in the ground new shoots might break forth, and so the tree grow up again. When it is added, let the beasts get away from under it, the meaning evidently is, let not his subjects rely upon him for protection, for he shall not be in a condition to afford them any, or to be the author of any good to them. Nevertheless (it is further commanded) leave the stump of his roots in the earth — By which is signified, that Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom should be preserved to him, and that no one should seize upon it during his exile, or affliction. The words, with a band of iron and brass, were meant to give still further assurance that his kingdom should remain unshaken and sure to him, like things held firm and immoveable by iron or brass. The next expression, in the tender grass of the field, either alludes to the circumstance of the stump of a tree lying buried and neglected in the field, till it is overgrown with grass and herbs, and so is not noticed; or it is a transition from the sign to the thing signified, from the tree to Nebuchadnezzar, represented by it, the tree with its stump being lost sight of, and a person coming in its stead, to whom only what follows is applicable. Let his heart be changed from man’s — “It is hard to say what the real nature of this transformation was. The Syriac seems to incline to a change of the mind, and probably it means no more than that his heart, or the nature of his constitution, was made savage and brutish, either by a real madness, or by such a slovenly neglect of himself, or deprivation of the proper use of his speech and limbs, as might reduce him to a state like the beasts. There is a kind of madness called lycanthropy, wherein men have the fury of wolves.” — Wintle. See Univ. Hist., p. 964. Scaliger thinks this madness of Nebuchadnezzar is obscurely hinted at in a document of Abydenus, produced by Eusebius; wherein, having represented the king, from the Chaldean writers, to have fallen into an ecstasy, and to have foretold the destruction of that empire by the Medes and Persians, the author adds, that immediately after uttering this prophecy he disappeared; which Scaliger expounds of the king’s being driven from his kingly state, and the society of men: see Scaliger’s notes upon the Ancient Fragments in the appendix to his work de Emendatione Temporum. See also Houbigant and Calmet on the metamorphosis of Nebuchadnezzar. And let seven times pass over him — Literally, Till seven times be changed upon him, that is, seven years, for so the expression evidently signifies in several parts of this book, as we shall see hereafter.

Ver. 13. A watcher and a holy one came down from heaven. The high and holy Angel, who had, at the head of the heavenly hosts, a celestial charge of the Chaldaic empire. He is called the holy one, indicating that God does not allow Satan to rule the world.

13, 14. A holy one from heaven (compare Zechariah 4:10, where “seven eyes” should probably read “seven watchers”) — the “guardian angel” of Babylon (compare Daniel 10:13, 14) — pronounces the death doom of this empire, declaring that what has been the protection of the nations will now be their destruction if they do not flee away from it. Perhaps this watcher took the form in Nebuchadnezzar’s eyes of one of the colossal cherubim who were called the “guardians” or “watchers” in front of the palaces. (See notes Ezekiel 10.)

Verse 14. Hew down the tree] As the tree was to be cut down, the beasts are commanded to flee away from under his branches. His courtiers, officers, &c., all abandoned him as soon as his insanity appeared; but he soon fled from the society of men.

Verses 10-16. I saw, &c. — The substance of what the king relates is, that he saw in a dream “a tree, strong and flourishing; [in the midst of the earth, or of his empire;] its summit pierced the clouds, and its branches overshadowed the whole extent of his vast dominions: it was laden with fruit, and luxuriant in its foliage: the cattle reposed in its shade, and the fowls of the air lodged in its branches, and multitudes partook of its delicious fruit. But the king saw a celestial being, a watcher, and a holy one, come down from heaven; and heard him give orders, with a loud voice, that the tree should be hewn down, its branches lopped off, and its fruit scattered, and nothing left of it but the stump of its roots in the earth, which was to be secured, however, with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field. Words of menace follow, which are applicable only to a man, and plainly show, that the whole vision was typical of some dreadful calamity, to fall for a time, but for a time only, on some one of the sons of men.” — Bishop Horsley. The whole of this allegorical dream is explained in the subsequent part of the chapter; and therefore it will only be necessary to notice here two or three of the singular expressions and particulars found in it.

1st, By the terms watcher and holy one, or, as the expression is, verse 17, watchers and holy ones, has generally been understood some principal angel, or angels, the angelical orders being described as always attending upon God’s throne to receive and execute his commands: see Psalm 103:20; Matthew 18:10; and notes on Ezekiel 1:11, 24. For which reason they are called the eyes of the Lord, Zechariah 4:10. But Bishop Horsley, in his sermon on the 17th verse, strongly combats, and seems to have fully confuted this opinion. His train of reasoning is too long to be inserted here, and indeed it is not necessary to insert it, the following short extract being quite sufficient to clear up the point. “Those who understand the titles of watchers and holy ones of angelic beings, agree, that they must be principal angels — angels of the highest orders; which, if they are angels at all, must certainly be supposed: for it is to be observed, that it is not the mere execution of the judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar, but the decree itself, which is ascribed to them. The whole matter originated in their decree; and at their command the decree was executed. The holy ones are not said to hew down the tree, but to give command for the hewing of it down. Of how high order, indeed, must these watchers and holy ones have been, on whose decrees the judgments of God himself are founded, and by whom the warrant for the execution is finally issued? It is surprising, that such men as Calvin among the Protestants of the continent — such as Wells and the elder Lowth in our own church — and such as Calmet in the Church of Rome, should not have their eyes open to the error, and impiety indeed, of such an exposition as this which makes them angels, especially when the learned Grotius, in the extraordinary manner in which he recommends it, had set forth its merits, as it should seem, in a true light, when he says, that it represents God as acting like a great monarch ‘upon a decree of his senate:’ and when another of the most learned of its advocates imagines something might pass in the celestial senate, bearing some analogy to the forms of legislation used in the assemblies of the people at Rome, in the times of the republic. It might have been expected that the exposition would have needed no other confutation, in the judgment of men of piety and sober minds, than this fair statement of its principles by its ablest advocates.

“The plain truth is, that these appellations, Watchers and Holy Ones, denote the persons in the Godhead; the first describing them by the vigilance of their universal providence, the second by the transcendent sanctity of their nature. The word rendered Holy Ones is so applied in other texts of Scripture, which make the sense of the other word, coupled with it here, indisputable. In perfect consistency with this exposition, and with no other, we find, in the 24th verse, that this decree of the Watchers and the Holy Ones is the decree of the Most High God; and in verse 13, God, who in regard to the plurality of the persons, is afterward described by these two plural nouns, Watchers and Holy Ones, is, in regard to the unity of the essence, described by the same nouns in the singular number, Watcher and Holy One. And this is a fuller confirmation of the truth of this exposition: for God is the only being to whom the same name in the singular and in the plural may be indiscriminately applied: and this change from the one number to another, without any thing in the principles of the language to account for it, is frequent in speaking of God in the Hebrew tongue, but unexampled in the case of any other being. The assertion, therefore, is, that God had decreed to execute a signal judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar for his pride and impiety, in order to prove, by the example of that mighty monarch, that ‘the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.’ To make the declaration the more solemn and striking, the terms in which it is conceived distinctly express that consent and concurrence of all the persons in the Trinity, in the design and execution of this judgment, which must be understood indeed in every act of the Godhead.”

2d, The command given by these watchers and holy ones may be considered as addressed to any of those creatures, animate or inanimate, that are to fulfil the Creator’s will; or the expression may be understood as being merely a prediction that the tree should be cut down, and its leaves shaken off, &c.: and the hewing down of the tree signified only the removal of it for a time, not its entire destruction, because while the root remained in the ground new shoots might break forth, and so the tree grow up again. When it is added, let the beasts get away from under it, the meaning evidently is, let not his subjects rely upon him for protection, for he shall not be in a condition to afford them any, or to be the author of any good to them. Nevertheless (it is further commanded) leave the stump of his roots in the earth — By which is signified, that Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom should be preserved to him, and that no one should seize upon it during his exile, or affliction. The words, with a band of iron and brass, were meant to give still further assurance that his kingdom should remain unshaken and sure to him, like things held firm and immoveable by iron or brass. The next expression, in the tender grass of the field, either alludes to the circumstance of the stump of a tree lying buried and neglected in the field, till it is overgrown with grass and herbs, and so is not noticed; or it is a transition from the sign to the thing signified, from the tree to Nebuchadnezzar, represented by it, the tree with its stump being lost sight of, and a person coming in its stead, to whom only what follows is applicable. Let his heart be changed from man’s — “It is hard to say what the real nature of this transformation was. The Syriac seems to incline to a change of the mind, and probably it means no more than that his heart, or the nature of his constitution, was made savage and brutish, either by a real madness, or by such a slovenly neglect of himself, or deprivation of the proper use of his speech and limbs, as might reduce him to a state like the beasts. There is a kind of madness called lycanthropy, wherein men have the fury of wolves.” — Wintle. See Univ. Hist., p. 964. Scaliger thinks this madness of Nebuchadnezzar is obscurely hinted at in a document of Abydenus, produced by Eusebius; wherein, having represented the king, from the Chaldean writers, to have fallen into an ecstasy, and to have foretold the destruction of that empire by the Medes and Persians, the author adds, that immediately after uttering this prophecy he disappeared; which Scaliger expounds of the king’s being driven from his kingly state, and the society of men: see Scaliger’s notes upon the Ancient Fragments in the appendix to his work de Emendatione Temporum. See also Houbigant and Calmet on the metamorphosis of Nebuchadnezzar. And let seven times pass over him — Literally, Till seven times be changed upon him, that is, seven years, for so the expression evidently signifies in several parts of this book, as we shall see hereafter.

Ver. 14. Hew down the tree. This shows that the fall of the Chaldaic empire, as well as the fall of Zedekiah’s kingdom, had its sentence first pronounced in heaven. Ezekiel 17:22. This Angel led the Persian armies against Babylon to destroy her empire.

13, 14. A holy one from heaven (compare Zechariah 4:10, where “seven eyes” should probably read “seven watchers”) — the “guardian angel” of Babylon (compare Daniel 10:13, 14) — pronounces the death doom of this empire, declaring that what has been the protection of the nations will now be their destruction if they do not flee away from it. Perhaps this watcher took the form in Nebuchadnezzar’s eyes of one of the colossal cherubim who were called the “guardians” or “watchers” in front of the palaces. (See notes Ezekiel 10.)

Verse 15. Leave the stump] Let him not be destroyed, nor his kingdom alienated.

Verses 10-16. I saw, &c. — The substance of what the king relates is, that he saw in a dream “a tree, strong and flourishing; [in the midst of the earth, or of his empire;] its summit pierced the clouds, and its branches overshadowed the whole extent of his vast dominions: it was laden with fruit, and luxuriant in its foliage: the cattle reposed in its shade, and the fowls of the air lodged in its branches, and multitudes partook of its delicious fruit. But the king saw a celestial being, a watcher, and a holy one, come down from heaven; and heard him give orders, with a loud voice, that the tree should be hewn down, its branches lopped off, and its fruit scattered, and nothing left of it but the stump of its roots in the earth, which was to be secured, however, with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field. Words of menace follow, which are applicable only to a man, and plainly show, that the whole vision was typical of some dreadful calamity, to fall for a time, but for a time only, on some one of the sons of men.” — Bishop Horsley. The whole of this allegorical dream is explained in the subsequent part of the chapter; and therefore it will only be necessary to notice here two or three of the singular expressions and particulars found in it.

1st, By the terms watcher and holy one, or, as the expression is, verse 17, watchers and holy ones, has generally been understood some principal angel, or angels, the angelical orders being described as always attending upon God’s throne to receive and execute his commands: see Psalm 103:20; Matthew 18:10; and notes on Ezekiel 1:11, 24. For which reason they are called the eyes of the Lord, Zechariah 4:10. But Bishop Horsley, in his sermon on the 17th verse, strongly combats, and seems to have fully confuted this opinion. His train of reasoning is too long to be inserted here, and indeed it is not necessary to insert it, the following short extract being quite sufficient to clear up the point. “Those who understand the titles of watchers and holy ones of angelic beings, agree, that they must be principal angels — angels of the highest orders; which, if they are angels at all, must certainly be supposed: for it is to be observed, that it is not the mere execution of the judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar, but the decree itself, which is ascribed to them. The whole matter originated in their decree; and at their command the decree was executed. The holy ones are not said to hew down the tree, but to give command for the hewing of it down. Of how high order, indeed, must these watchers and holy ones have been, on whose decrees the judgments of God himself are founded, and by whom the warrant for the execution is finally issued? It is surprising, that such men as Calvin among the Protestants of the continent — such as Wells and the elder Lowth in our own church — and such as Calmet in the Church of Rome, should not have their eyes open to the error, and impiety indeed, of such an exposition as this which makes them angels, especially when the learned Grotius, in the extraordinary manner in which he recommends it, had set forth its merits, as it should seem, in a true light, when he says, that it represents God as acting like a great monarch ‘upon a decree of his senate:’ and when another of the most learned of its advocates imagines something might pass in the celestial senate, bearing some analogy to the forms of legislation used in the assemblies of the people at Rome, in the times of the republic. It might have been expected that the exposition would have needed no other confutation, in the judgment of men of piety and sober minds, than this fair statement of its principles by its ablest advocates.

“The plain truth is, that these appellations, Watchers and Holy Ones, denote the persons in the Godhead; the first describing them by the vigilance of their universal providence, the second by the transcendent sanctity of their nature. The word rendered Holy Ones is so applied in other texts of Scripture, which make the sense of the other word, coupled with it here, indisputable. In perfect consistency with this exposition, and with no other, we find, in the 24th verse, that this decree of the Watchers and the Holy Ones is the decree of the Most High God; and in verse 13, God, who in regard to the plurality of the persons, is afterward described by these two plural nouns, Watchers and Holy Ones, is, in regard to the unity of the essence, described by the same nouns in the singular number, Watcher and Holy One. And this is a fuller confirmation of the truth of this exposition: for God is the only being to whom the same name in the singular and in the plural may be indiscriminately applied: and this change from the one number to another, without any thing in the principles of the language to account for it, is frequent in speaking of God in the Hebrew tongue, but unexampled in the case of any other being. The assertion, therefore, is, that God had decreed to execute a signal judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar for his pride and impiety, in order to prove, by the example of that mighty monarch, that ‘the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.’ To make the declaration the more solemn and striking, the terms in which it is conceived distinctly express that consent and concurrence of all the persons in the Trinity, in the design and execution of this judgment, which must be understood indeed in every act of the Godhead.”

2d, The command given by these watchers and holy ones may be considered as addressed to any of those creatures, animate or inanimate, that are to fulfil the Creator’s will; or the expression may be understood as being merely a prediction that the tree should be cut down, and its leaves shaken off, &c.: and the hewing down of the tree signified only the removal of it for a time, not its entire destruction, because while the root remained in the ground new shoots might break forth, and so the tree grow up again. When it is added, let the beasts get away from under it, the meaning evidently is, let not his subjects rely upon him for protection, for he shall not be in a condition to afford them any, or to be the author of any good to them. Nevertheless (it is further commanded) leave the stump of his roots in the earth — By which is signified, that Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom should be preserved to him, and that no one should seize upon it during his exile, or affliction. The words, with a band of iron and brass, were meant to give still further assurance that his kingdom should remain unshaken and sure to him, like things held firm and immoveable by iron or brass. The next expression, in the tender grass of the field, either alludes to the circumstance of the stump of a tree lying buried and neglected in the field, till it is overgrown with grass and herbs, and so is not noticed; or it is a transition from the sign to the thing signified, from the tree to Nebuchadnezzar, represented by it, the tree with its stump being lost sight of, and a person coming in its stead, to whom only what follows is applicable. Let his heart be changed from man’s — “It is hard to say what the real nature of this transformation was. The Syriac seems to incline to a change of the mind, and probably it means no more than that his heart, or the nature of his constitution, was made savage and brutish, either by a real madness, or by such a slovenly neglect of himself, or deprivation of the proper use of his speech and limbs, as might reduce him to a state like the beasts. There is a kind of madness called lycanthropy, wherein men have the fury of wolves.” — Wintle. See Univ. Hist., p. 964. Scaliger thinks this madness of Nebuchadnezzar is obscurely hinted at in a document of Abydenus, produced by Eusebius; wherein, having represented the king, from the Chaldean writers, to have fallen into an ecstasy, and to have foretold the destruction of that empire by the Medes and Persians, the author adds, that immediately after uttering this prophecy he disappeared; which Scaliger expounds of the king’s being driven from his kingly state, and the society of men: see Scaliger’s notes upon the Ancient Fragments in the appendix to his work de Emendatione Temporum. See also Houbigant and Calmet on the metamorphosis of Nebuchadnezzar. And let seven times pass over him — Literally, Till seven times be changed upon him, that is, seven years, for so the expression evidently signifies in several parts of this book, as we shall see hereafter.

15, 16. The destruction of the tree is nearly absolute, since only a “stump” remains, not rooted solidly in its former place of life, but under a most strange and unnatural form of restraint. This stump represents Nebuchadnezzar (compare Isaiah 11:1), and the dreamer now sees the king rather than the tree, constrained and restrained by some unnatural compulsion, unprotected from the night dews, eating grass like the beasts of the field, and having the inner consciousness of an animal rather than of a man, until “seven times pass over him.” These times (literally, periods) may be “years” (Greek) or “months” (Lenormant), or, more in accordance with the literal meaning of the word, “seasons.” Thomson refers to J. Rendel Harris for the statement that “summer and winter are the only seasons counted in Babylonia,” which would make this expression parallel to the “times and time and half a time” of Daniel 7:25. “Seven” was, however, a round number with all the orientals. Gunkel sees in this figure a reference to the Babylonian world-tree, whose height reached to heaven, but whose roots were bound to the earth.

Verse 16. Let his heart be changed] Let him conceive himself to be a beast, and act as such, herding among the beasts of the field. Let seven times pass over him.] Let him continue in this state for seven years. I knew a man who was thus changed in his heart—in his imagination. He believed himself to be a bear, and would imitate the ursal growl, &c.; and the case did not appear to be hypochondriacal. Whether he ever came to sound mind, I know not.

Verses 10-16. I saw, &c. — The substance of what the king relates is, that he saw in a dream “a tree, strong and flourishing; [in the midst of the earth, or of his empire;] its summit pierced the clouds, and its branches overshadowed the whole extent of his vast dominions: it was laden with fruit, and luxuriant in its foliage: the cattle reposed in its shade, and the fowls of the air lodged in its branches, and multitudes partook of its delicious fruit. But the king saw a celestial being, a watcher, and a holy one, come down from heaven; and heard him give orders, with a loud voice, that the tree should be hewn down, its branches lopped off, and its fruit scattered, and nothing left of it but the stump of its roots in the earth, which was to be secured, however, with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field. Words of menace follow, which are applicable only to a man, and plainly show, that the whole vision was typical of some dreadful calamity, to fall for a time, but for a time only, on some one of the sons of men.” — Bishop Horsley. The whole of this allegorical dream is explained in the subsequent part of the chapter; and therefore it will only be necessary to notice here two or three of the singular expressions and particulars found in it.

1st, By the terms watcher and holy one, or, as the expression is, verse 17, watchers and holy ones, has generally been understood some principal angel, or angels, the angelical orders being described as always attending upon God’s throne to receive and execute his commands: see Psalm 103:20; Matthew 18:10; and notes on Ezekiel 1:11, 24. For which reason they are called the eyes of the Lord, Zechariah 4:10. But Bishop Horsley, in his sermon on the 17th verse, strongly combats, and seems to have fully confuted this opinion. His train of reasoning is too long to be inserted here, and indeed it is not necessary to insert it, the following short extract being quite sufficient to clear up the point. “Those who understand the titles of watchers and holy ones of angelic beings, agree, that they must be principal angels — angels of the highest orders; which, if they are angels at all, must certainly be supposed: for it is to be observed, that it is not the mere execution of the judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar, but the decree itself, which is ascribed to them. The whole matter originated in their decree; and at their command the decree was executed. The holy ones are not said to hew down the tree, but to give command for the hewing of it down. Of how high order, indeed, must these watchers and holy ones have been, on whose decrees the judgments of God himself are founded, and by whom the warrant for the execution is finally issued? It is surprising, that such men as Calvin among the Protestants of the continent — such as Wells and the elder Lowth in our own church — and such as Calmet in the Church of Rome, should not have their eyes open to the error, and impiety indeed, of such an exposition as this which makes them angels, especially when the learned Grotius, in the extraordinary manner in which he recommends it, had set forth its merits, as it should seem, in a true light, when he says, that it represents God as acting like a great monarch ‘upon a decree of his senate:’ and when another of the most learned of its advocates imagines something might pass in the celestial senate, bearing some analogy to the forms of legislation used in the assemblies of the people at Rome, in the times of the republic. It might have been expected that the exposition would have needed no other confutation, in the judgment of men of piety and sober minds, than this fair statement of its principles by its ablest advocates.

“The plain truth is, that these appellations, Watchers and Holy Ones, denote the persons in the Godhead; the first describing them by the vigilance of their universal providence, the second by the transcendent sanctity of their nature. The word rendered Holy Ones is so applied in other texts of Scripture, which make the sense of the other word, coupled with it here, indisputable. In perfect consistency with this exposition, and with no other, we find, in the 24th verse, that this decree of the Watchers and the Holy Ones is the decree of the Most High God; and in verse 13, God, who in regard to the plurality of the persons, is afterward described by these two plural nouns, Watchers and Holy Ones, is, in regard to the unity of the essence, described by the same nouns in the singular number, Watcher and Holy One. And this is a fuller confirmation of the truth of this exposition: for God is the only being to whom the same name in the singular and in the plural may be indiscriminately applied: and this change from the one number to another, without any thing in the principles of the language to account for it, is frequent in speaking of God in the Hebrew tongue, but unexampled in the case of any other being. The assertion, therefore, is, that God had decreed to execute a signal judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar for his pride and impiety, in order to prove, by the example of that mighty monarch, that ‘the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.’ To make the declaration the more solemn and striking, the terms in which it is conceived distinctly express that consent and concurrence of all the persons in the Trinity, in the design and execution of this judgment, which must be understood indeed in every act of the Godhead.”

2d, The command given by these watchers and holy ones may be considered as addressed to any of those creatures, animate or inanimate, that are to fulfil the Creator’s will; or the expression may be understood as being merely a prediction that the tree should be cut down, and its leaves shaken off, &c.: and the hewing down of the tree signified only the removal of it for a time, not its entire destruction, because while the root remained in the ground new shoots might break forth, and so the tree grow up again. When it is added, let the beasts get away from under it, the meaning evidently is, let not his subjects rely upon him for protection, for he shall not be in a condition to afford them any, or to be the author of any good to them. Nevertheless (it is further commanded) leave the stump of his roots in the earth — By which is signified, that Nebuchadnezzar’s kingdom should be preserved to him, and that no one should seize upon it during his exile, or affliction. The words, with a band of iron and brass, were meant to give still further assurance that his kingdom should remain unshaken and sure to him, like things held firm and immoveable by iron or brass. The next expression, in the tender grass of the field, either alludes to the circumstance of the stump of a tree lying buried and neglected in the field, till it is overgrown with grass and herbs, and so is not noticed; or it is a transition from the sign to the thing signified, from the tree to Nebuchadnezzar, represented by it, the tree with its stump being lost sight of, and a person coming in its stead, to whom only what follows is applicable. Let his heart be changed from man’s — “It is hard to say what the real nature of this transformation was. The Syriac seems to incline to a change of the mind, and probably it means no more than that his heart, or the nature of his constitution, was made savage and brutish, either by a real madness, or by such a slovenly neglect of himself, or deprivation of the proper use of his speech and limbs, as might reduce him to a state like the beasts. There is a kind of madness called lycanthropy, wherein men have the fury of wolves.” — Wintle. See Univ. Hist., p. 964. Scaliger thinks this madness of Nebuchadnezzar is obscurely hinted at in a document of Abydenus, produced by Eusebius; wherein, having represented the king, from the Chaldean writers, to have fallen into an ecstasy, and to have foretold the destruction of that empire by the Medes and Persians, the author adds, that immediately after uttering this prophecy he disappeared; which Scaliger expounds of the king’s being driven from his kingly state, and the society of men: see Scaliger’s notes upon the Ancient Fragments in the appendix to his work de Emendatione Temporum. See also Houbigant and Calmet on the metamorphosis of Nebuchadnezzar. And let seven times pass over him — Literally, Till seven times be changed upon him, that is, seven years, for so the expression evidently signifies in several parts of this book, as we shall see hereafter.

15, 16. The destruction of the tree is nearly absolute, since only a “stump” remains, not rooted solidly in its former place of life, but under a most strange and unnatural form of restraint. This stump represents Nebuchadnezzar (compare Isaiah 11:1), and the dreamer now sees the king rather than the tree, constrained and restrained by some unnatural compulsion, unprotected from the night dews, eating grass like the beasts of the field, and having the inner consciousness of an animal rather than of a man, until “seven times pass over him.” These times (literally, periods) may be “years” (Greek) or “months” (Lenormant), or, more in accordance with the literal meaning of the word, “seasons.” Thomson refers to J. Rendel Harris for the statement that “summer and winter are the only seasons counted in Babylonia,” which would make this expression parallel to the “times and time and half a time” of Daniel 7:25. “Seven” was, however, a round number with all the orientals. Gunkel sees in this figure a reference to the Babylonian world-tree, whose height reached to heaven, but whose roots were bound to the earth.

V. 17. Of the holy ones-The decree was God’s, and the demand was of the holy angels; if God enact it, the angels had the dispensation of it put into their hands, and they all consent to it as a just judgment of God to be executed by them according to the will of God. The most high ruleth-Nebuchadnezzar and his flatterers conceded he was a god in earth unaccountable to any. But the great God will make all men know he rules all in earth too, and sets up at his pleasure whom he will, and plucks them down again.

Verse 17. This matter is by the decree of the watchers] See on Daniel 4:13.

The Most High ruleth] He never leaves the government of the world to man, to second causes, or to fortuitous occurrences. What are thus called are his agents; they are no moving causes.

And setteth up—the basest of men.]

“Tyrants and kings from Jove proceed

Those are permitted, these decreed.”

The throne ennobles no man: to be properly filled, the man must be noble. Some of the greatest and some of the meanest of men have sat on the throne. Kings differ in education, seldom in intellect, from the common mass of men; the power and authority are from God. The king himself may be given either in mercy or in wrath. When James II. ruled this kingdom, it might well be said, God hath set up over it the basest of men. His successor was one of the best. The former nearly ruined it both in a civil and religious point of view; the latter was the means of restoring it in both these respects.

Verses 17, 18. This matter is by the decree of the watchers, &c., to the intent that the living may know, &c. — The intent of the matter was to give mankind a proof, in the fall and restoration of this mighty monarch, that the fortunes of kings and empires are in the hand of God; that his providence perpetually interposes in the affairs of men, and that he distributes crowns and sceptres according to his will, but always for the good of the faithful primarily, and ultimately of his whole creation. And setteth over it the basest of men — If this be applied to Nebuchadnezzar, it must be understood, either with respect to his present condition, whose pride and cruelty rendered him as despicable in the sight of God as his high estate made him appear honourable in the eyes of men; and, therefore, was justly doomed to so low a degree of abasement: or else it may be interpreted of his wonderful restoration and advancement after he had been degraded from his dignity.

17. “The sentence is by the decree of the watchers” (R.V.). These are the angels referred to in verse 13, who are messengers of Jehovah, and are empowered to announce his decree (verse 24). The reference to these “watchers” (compare verse 23) is omitted from the LXX., and sounds very much like the late Talmudic distinctions between various classes in the angelic hierarchy. Thomson, therefore, considers this verse an interpolation. He thinks the statement that the kingdom is to be taken after Nebuchadnezzar by the “lowest of men” is a reference to Antiochus Epiphanes, the “vile person” of Daniel 11:21. This entire section, however, insists upon the superiority of Nebuchadnezzar and the comparative and increasing degradation of all his successors (Daniel 2:38, 39; 5:25-27). Ewald has an interesting practical remark on this verse, saying that any man who resists the divine will is, after all, ultimately but an animal (Psalm 32:9, 10), having fallen from his original glory to the beastly level.

Verses 17, 18. This matter is by the decree of the watchers, &c., to the intent that the living may know, &c. — The intent of the matter was to give mankind a proof, in the fall and restoration of this mighty monarch, that the fortunes of kings and empires are in the hand of God; that his providence perpetually interposes in the affairs of men, and that he distributes crowns and sceptres according to his will, but always for the good of the faithful primarily, and ultimately of his whole creation. And setteth over it the basest of men — If this be applied to Nebuchadnezzar, it must be understood, either with respect to his present condition, whose pride and cruelty rendered him as despicable in the sight of God as his high estate made him appear honourable in the eyes of men; and, therefore, was justly doomed to so low a degree of abasement: or else it may be interpreted of his wonderful restoration and advancement after he had been degraded from his dignity.

18, 19. Compare verse 8 and Daniel 2:17-26. Daniel is at first greatly troubled and “astonished as it were for a moment” (Bevan), but when Nebuchadnezzar encourages him he replies that he is troubled not so much because of his inability to interpret the dream as because the interpretation will trouble the king. The words of Daniel here are in the highest degree diplomatic and courteous, and in agreement with current usage at the Babylonian and other courts, while at the same time no jot or tittle of the truth is omitted or glossed over for fear or favor.

V. 19. Troubled him-Because he fore-saw such troubles coming upon the king for whom he had a high reverence. Let not the dream trouble thee-Speak out, let the event be what it will. Belteshazzar said-What address and how excellent a spirit is shewn in this short preface.

Verse 19. Daniel—was astonied for one hour] He saw the design of the dream, and he felt the great delicacy of interpreting it. He was not puzzled by the difficulties of it. He felt for the king, and for the nation; and with what force and delicacy does he express the general portent; “The dream to them that hate thee, and the interpretation thereof to thine enemies!”

Verse 19. Then Daniel was astonied for one hour — “Stood in silent astonishment for nearly an hour,” both at the surprising circumstances of the judgment denounced against the king, and likewise out of a tender regard and respect for his person, who had bestowed so many favours upon him. The Vulgate renders it, cæpit intra seipsum tacitus cogitare, he began to consider in silence within himself, or silently reflected on the particulars of the dream just related. But the LXX. read aphnewqh, obstupefactus fuit, he was amazed, or confounded. The king said, Let not the dream trouble thee — Whatsoever it be that thou understandest from the dream, tell it freely without fear. Daniel answered, The dream be to them that hate thee — May the ill it portends happen to thy enemies. The words are spoken by the figure called euphemismus, according to which any displeasing or ungrateful thing is signified by a more soft and agreeable mode of expression: see a like instance, 1 Samuel 25:22. “Such rhetorical embellishments are pointed at no individuals, have nothing in them of malice or ill-will, and may be presumed to be free from any imputation of a want of charity.” — Wintle. Daniel thus expresses his dutiful concern for the safety of the king’s person and government. For though Nebuchadnezzar was an idolater, a persecutor, and oppressor of the people of God, yet he was Daniel’s prince, and therefore, though he foresees, and is now going to foretel, ill concerning him, he dares not wish ill to him. Thus Jeremiah had before exhorted the Jewish captives at Babylon to wish and pray for the prosperity of the government under which they lived.

18, 19. Compare verse 8 and Daniel 2:17-26. Daniel is at first greatly troubled and “astonished as it were for a moment” (Bevan), but when Nebuchadnezzar encourages him he replies that he is troubled not so much because of his inability to interpret the dream as because the interpretation will trouble the king. The words of Daniel here are in the highest degree diplomatic and courteous, and in agreement with current usage at the Babylonian and other courts, while at the same time no jot or tittle of the truth is omitted or glossed over for fear or favor.

Verse 20. The tree that thou sawest] The dream is so fully interpreted in the following verses that it needs no comment.

Verses 20-22. The tree that thou sawest is thou, O king, that art grown and become strong — Princes and great men are frequently represented in Scripture by fair and flourishing trees. So the king of Assyria is described, Ezekiel 31:3-8: compare Isaiah 10:34; Zechariah 11:2. Thy greatness is grown and reacheth unto heaven — As near as human greatness can do. He shows the king his present prosperous state in the glass of his own dream: see verse 11. And thy dominion to the end of the earth — To the Caspian sea, to the Euxine sea, and to the Atlantic ocean. — Grotius. See note on chap. 2:38.

20-22. See verses 10-12, and for the greatness of Nebuchadnezzar’s empire, Introduction, III, 3, 4. One ancient Greek version gives as a reason for Nebuchadnezzar’s fall, “because thou hast laid waste the house of the living God.” This seems like a stroke at Antiochus Epiphanes.

Verses 20-22. The tree that thou sawest is thou, O king, that art grown and become strong — Princes and great men are frequently represented in Scripture by fair and flourishing trees. So the king of Assyria is described, Ezekiel 31:3-8: compare Isaiah 10:34; Zechariah 11:2. Thy greatness is grown and reacheth unto heaven — As near as human greatness can do. He shows the king his present prosperous state in the glass of his own dream: see verse 11. And thy dominion to the end of the earth — To the Caspian sea, to the Euxine sea, and to the Atlantic ocean. — Grotius. See note on chap. 2:38.

20-22. See verses 10-12, and for the greatness of Nebuchadnezzar’s empire, Introduction, III, 3, 4. One ancient Greek version gives as a reason for Nebuchadnezzar’s fall, “because thou hast laid waste the house of the living God.” This seems like a stroke at Antiochus Epiphanes.

V. 22. Reacheth unto heaven-Thou art high and mighty in the in majesty which God hath given thee. To the end of the earth-To the Caspian sea north, to the Euxine and Aegean sea west, to the Mediterranean south.

Verses 20-22. The tree that thou sawest is thou, O king, that art grown and become strong — Princes and great men are frequently represented in Scripture by fair and flourishing trees. So the king of Assyria is described, Ezekiel 31:3-8: compare Isaiah 10:34; Zechariah 11:2. Thy greatness is grown and reacheth unto heaven — As near as human greatness can do. He shows the king his present prosperous state in the glass of his own dream: see verse 11. And thy dominion to the end of the earth — To the Caspian sea, to the Euxine sea, and to the Atlantic ocean. — Grotius. See note on chap. 2:38.

20-22. See verses 10-12, and for the greatness of Nebuchadnezzar’s empire, Introduction, III, 3, 4. One ancient Greek version gives as a reason for Nebuchadnezzar’s fall, “because thou hast laid waste the house of the living God.” This seems like a stroke at Antiochus Epiphanes.

Verses 24-26. This is the interpretation, O king, &c. — We may observe that Daniel informs the king with the greatest tenderness, and most respectful terms, of the sad reverse of condition that was to happen to him. They shall drive thee from men — In the Chaldee and Hebrew the plural active, they shall do, signifies no more than, thus it shall be, be the cause what it may. The meaning seems to be, that Nebuchadnezzar should be punished with insanity, which should so deprave his imagination, while he yet retained his memory, and, perhaps, his reason in some intervals, as that he should fancy himself to be a beast, and should live as such, till his heart, that is, his apprehension, appetite, or likings, should be changed from those of a man to those of a beast. To eat grass as oxen signifies to live upon the herbs of the field; for the original word signifies any kind of field-herb as well as grass. Till thou know that the most high God ruleth, &c. — It appears from what is here said, that this judgment was inflicted on Nebuchadnezzar on account of his pride or haughtiness, and his making no acknowledgment of a Divine Providence ordering and governing the affairs of the world; but attributing the acquisition of all his great power and vast dominion to his own prudence and valour, instead of acknowledging it as the gift of the most high God. And whereas they commanded to leave the stump, &c., thy kingdom shall be sure unto thee — There shall be no other king chosen during thy affliction, but thou shalt again receive thy kingly power, and reign as before. After that thou shalt have known that the heavens do rule — The heavens are here put for the God of the heavens.

V. 25. They shall drive thee-This was such a thundering peal, that it was wonderful the king could endure to hear it without fury boiling in his heart, yet the Lord with-held him. Seven times-Seven years. ‘Till thou know-How hard is it for lofty princes to learn this lesson.

Verses 24-26. This is the interpretation, O king, &c. — We may observe that Daniel informs the king with the greatest tenderness, and most respectful terms, of the sad reverse of condition that was to happen to him. They shall drive thee from men — In the Chaldee and Hebrew the plural active, they shall do, signifies no more than, thus it shall be, be the cause what it may. The meaning seems to be, that Nebuchadnezzar should be punished with insanity, which should so deprave his imagination, while he yet retained his memory, and, perhaps, his reason in some intervals, as that he should fancy himself to be a beast, and should live as such, till his heart, that is, his apprehension, appetite, or likings, should be changed from those of a man to those of a beast. To eat grass as oxen signifies to live upon the herbs of the field; for the original word signifies any kind of field-herb as well as grass. Till thou know that the most high God ruleth, &c. — It appears from what is here said, that this judgment was inflicted on Nebuchadnezzar on account of his pride or haughtiness, and his making no acknowledgment of a Divine Providence ordering and governing the affairs of the world; but attributing the acquisition of all his great power and vast dominion to his own prudence and valour, instead of acknowledging it as the gift of the most high God. And whereas they commanded to leave the stump, &c., thy kingdom shall be sure unto thee — There shall be no other king chosen during thy affliction, but thou shalt again receive thy kingly power, and reign as before. After that thou shalt have known that the heavens do rule — The heavens are here put for the God of the heavens.

Ver. 25. Seven times shall pass over thee. Seven years of melancholy, the punishment for his boundless pride, in aspiring at divine honours: ver. 30,

31. This fever lurking in the blood, has a strange effect in exciting the passions of pride, fury, or despair.

25. Kuenen (Onderzoek, 2:487, note 5) discredits entirely this story of Nebuchadnezzar’s temporary insanity, but most modern scholars, including some of the leading Assyriologists, believe, notwithstanding the silence of cuneiform documents, that some tragedy such as is described here clouded the end of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar. Josephus, quoting from the Babylonian historian, Berosus, refers thus to the illness of Nebuchadnezzar: “Nebuchadnezzar falling into a state of weakness, altered his (manner of) life when he had reigned forty-three years, whereupon his son, Evil-merodach, obtained the kingdom.” Eusebius also, quoting an earlier author, says: “On a certain occasion the king went up to the roof of his palace and after prophesying the coming of the Persian, Cyrus, and his conquest of Babylon, suddenly disappeared.” Professor Prince, a reliable Assyriologist, after quoting these statements, points out that they all agree that Nebuchadnezzar was at one time seriously afflicted, either bodily or mentally, while the two non-biblical records agree in the statement that this disturbance was directly followed by his “disappearance,” that is, his retirement from public life. “Nothing is known regarding the death of Nebuchadnezzar, nor indeed is there any record in the cuneiform literature of his son, Amel-Marduk (Evil-merodach), except three contracts which are dated in the first year of the reign of this king” (Prince, Daniel, 1899). This disease, which is generally acknowledged to have been “insania zoanthropica,” is well known to physicians. Sir Resdon Bennett, in his small but valuable book on the Diseases of the Bible, affirms the accuracy with which the symptoms of the disease — commonly known as lycanthropy — are here described; the demented person always imagining himself to be some animal the voices and actions of which he will attempt to imitate. David Yellowlees, M.D., lecturer on insanity in the University of Glasgow, believes, however, that this illness was not lycanthropy, but an attack of acute mania, which in its extreme forms “exhibits all kinds of degraded habits — such as stripping off and tearing of the clothes, eating filth and garbage of all sorts, wild and violent gesticulations, dangerous assaults, howling noises, and utter disregard of personal decency. The patient often is liker a wild animal than a human being. These symptoms merely show the completeness of the aberration, and do not at all indicate a hopeless condition. On the contrary, they are seen most frequently in the cases which recover” (Pulpit Commentary, 1897). Dr. Yellowlees states that, when uncomplicated, recovery usually takes place “in seven months” — which is a remarkable parallel to the “seven times” of verse 32. (See note verses 15, 16). Another specialist on insanity has pointed out that the best possible treatment for such melancholia is the one indicated here, namely, to let the patient live out-of-doors, without employing any restraint whatever, mechanical, chemical, or manual. He states that the few hints given here concerning Nebuchadnezzar’s recovery and expression of excessive thankfulness afterward are all true to life, this narrative containing “one of the most beautiful and concise descriptions of the premonition, the onset, the course and the termination of a case of insanity that is recorded in any language” (Popular Science Monthly, 1895, pp. 416-429). The cuneiform records contain no statement concerning Nebuchadnezzar’s madness. However literal this account may be, such mention ought not to be expected. There is not an insane or wicked king mentioned in all the royal records of Egypt or Babylon. Certain old Jewish commentators suggested that Daniel, as chief of the Magi, probably reigned during the king’s madness, and they sometimes indulge in strange stories of Nebuchadnezzar falling from the palace roof after hearing God’s voice and being miraculously guided to the wilderness, where he remained until Daniel, seven years after, sent the army and his nobles to hunt for him. Such stories are purely imaginary.

V. 26. The heavens do rule-That God, who sits in heaven rules over all.

Verse 26. Thy kingdom shall he sure unto thee] No new king was set up; Evil-merodach his son was regent during his father’s insanity.

Verses 24-26. This is the interpretation, O king, &c. — We may observe that Daniel informs the king with the greatest tenderness, and most respectful terms, of the sad reverse of condition that was to happen to him. They shall drive thee from men — In the Chaldee and Hebrew the plural active, they shall do, signifies no more than, thus it shall be, be the cause what it may. The meaning seems to be, that Nebuchadnezzar should be punished with insanity, which should so deprave his imagination, while he yet retained his memory, and, perhaps, his reason in some intervals, as that he should fancy himself to be a beast, and should live as such, till his heart, that is, his apprehension, appetite, or likings, should be changed from those of a man to those of a beast. To eat grass as oxen signifies to live upon the herbs of the field; for the original word signifies any kind of field-herb as well as grass. Till thou know that the most high God ruleth, &c. — It appears from what is here said, that this judgment was inflicted on Nebuchadnezzar on account of his pride or haughtiness, and his making no acknowledgment of a Divine Providence ordering and governing the affairs of the world; but attributing the acquisition of all his great power and vast dominion to his own prudence and valour, instead of acknowledging it as the gift of the most high God. And whereas they commanded to leave the stump, &c., thy kingdom shall be sure unto thee — There shall be no other king chosen during thy affliction, but thou shalt again receive thy kingly power, and reign as before. After that thou shalt have known that the heavens do rule — The heavens are here put for the God of the heavens.

26. Rather, so soon as thou shalt recognize that the heavens do rule. This is the first time in Jewish literature that “the heavens” is used for the “God of heaven.” (Compare Daniel 3:1.) In the Mishna this is a common form, as also in the Apocrypha (for example, 1 Macc. iv). It might be added, however, that Bel is addressed in the inscriptions as the “great heavens.”

V. 27. If it may be-Daniel was not certain of pardon for him, nor did he altogether despair of it. With what wisdom and tenderness does he speak: and yet with what plainness?

Verse 27. Break off thy sins by righteousness] Do justice. Thou hast been an oppressive man; show mercy to the poor, many of whom have been made such by thyself: witness the whole nation of the Jews. He was to cease from his sins—repent and bring forth fruits meet for repentance, in order that he might find mercy at the hand of God.

Verse 27. Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee — These words Daniel adds out of love to the king, if perhaps his complying with the advice given might turn away this dreadful stroke from him, or at least might give the king some hopes of a mitigation of the calamity. And break off thy sins by righteousness — Cease to do evil, and learn to do well. Change thy principles and practices; do justly and love mercy; and instead of oppressing the poor, have compassion upon them, and be kind and bountiful to them. Give this evidence of thy true repentance and reformation. Though the word qrp, here used, properly signifies to break off, as it is here translated, yet many of the versions render it, to redeem, and read the clause, Redeem thy sins by righteousness, that is, as they explain it, by almsgiving; and thus the passage is alleged as favouring the doctrine of expiatory merit, and purchase of absolutions and pardons; but, it must be observed, sins are not said to be redeemed in Scripture, but persons; and the plain sense of the words is as it is given in our translation. If it may be a lengthening of thy tranquillity — Daniel was not certain of pardon for him, nor did he altogether despair of it. With what wisdom and tenderness does he speak, and yet with what plainness!

Ver. 27. Break off thy sins by righteousness, and thine iniquities by showing mercy to the poor. By the exercise of all those virtues which are the reverse of his former conduct; for what is repentance worth without its fruits. Who but Daniel durst have said these words to king Nebuchadnezzar?

27. Break off — Or, R.V., margin, “redeem.” The LXX. translates righteousness by almsdoing and in Ecclesiasticus (second century B.C.) the word is used constantly in this sense. Prince, however, justly remarks that the injunction to give alms to the needy would not be appropriate in this connection, and translates “break off (that is, cast away) thy sins by kind acts, and thy iniquities by showing mercies to the wretched ones (of Jehovah).” Kautzsch’s rendering is very similar. If it may be a lengthening of thy tranquility — Better, as Bevan, If haply there may be a lengthening of thy prosperity. (Compare Acts 8:22.) Like almost all prophecies of woe (compare Jonah) its fulfillment might be averted by repentance. The chief sin of Nebuchadnezzar mentioned in this connection is his pride, because of which he exalted himself above the God of kings, from whom he had received the kingdom (verses 25, 26), and which also caused him to be imperious and harsh to his Jewish subjects. (Compare Daniel 2:15.) For remarkable examples of pride punished when at its height see Farrar’s Book of Daniel, pp. 198, 199; and for modern instances of mad kings, ibid., pp. 201, 225.

V. 28. King Nebuchadnezzar-With how admirable propriety is the person changed here! These six verses speaking in the third person. But in the thirty fourth, Nebuchadnezzar having recovered his reason, speaks in the first person again.

Verses 28-33. All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar — With what admirable propriety is the person changed here! the six following verses being delivered in the third person. But in the 34th, Nebuchadnezzar, having recovered his reason, speaks in the first person again. At the end of twelve months — God deferred the execution of his threats against this impious prince for a whole year, giving him that time wherein to repent and return to him; but seeing that he persevered in his crimes, the measure of his iniquities being full, he put his menaces in execution. — Calmet. “Strange as it may seem,” says Bishop Horsley, “notwithstanding Daniel’s weight and credit with the king, — notwithstanding the consternation of mind into which the dream had thrown him, the warning had no permanent effect. He was not cured of his overweening pride and vanity till he was overtaken by the threatened judgment. At the end of twelve months, he was walking in the palace of the kingdom of Babylon — Probably on the flat roof of the building, or perhaps on one of the highest terraces of the hanging gardens, where the whole city would be in prospect before him; and he said, in the exultation of his heart, Is not this great Babylon, which I have built for the seat of empire, by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty? — The words had scarcely passed his lips, when the might of his power and the honour of his majesty departed from him. The same voice, which in the dream had predicted the judgment, now denounced the impending execution; and the voice had no sooner ceased to speak than it was done.”

Of the extent, glory, and splendour of Babylon, see note on Isaiah 13:19. Although Babylon was one of the oldest cities in the world, being built by Nimrod a little after the erection of the famous tower of Babel, and considerably augmented by Semiramis, yet Nebuchadnezzar had very much improved it, and made it one of the wonders of the world, on account of the largeness and height of the walls which he built round it, the temple of Belus, his own palace, and the famous hanging gardens belonging to it, all of which were the works of this king. Bochart thinks that Babylon was as much indebted to Nebuchadnezzar as Rome was to Augustus Cesar, who used to boast, that he received the city of brick, and left it of marble. But Herodotus says, it was built gradually by several other Assyrian kings; and he relates, that the wealth of the Babylonian state was so great, that it was equal to one third part of all Asia; and that, besides the tribute, if the other supplies for the great king were divided into twelve parts, according to the twelve months of the year, Babylon would supply four, and all Asia the other eight.

Verses 28-33. All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar — With what admirable propriety is the person changed here! the six following verses being delivered in the third person. But in the 34th, Nebuchadnezzar, having recovered his reason, speaks in the first person again. At the end of twelve months — God deferred the execution of his threats against this impious prince for a whole year, giving him that time wherein to repent and return to him; but seeing that he persevered in his crimes, the measure of his iniquities being full, he put his menaces in execution. — Calmet. “Strange as it may seem,” says Bishop Horsley, “notwithstanding Daniel’s weight and credit with the king, — notwithstanding the consternation of mind into which the dream had thrown him, the warning had no permanent effect. He was not cured of his overweening pride and vanity till he was overtaken by the threatened judgment. At the end of twelve months, he was walking in the palace of the kingdom of Babylon — Probably on the flat roof of the building, or perhaps on one of the highest terraces of the hanging gardens, where the whole city would be in prospect before him; and he said, in the exultation of his heart, Is not this great Babylon, which I have built for the seat of empire, by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty? — The words had scarcely passed his lips, when the might of his power and the honour of his majesty departed from him. The same voice, which in the dream had predicted the judgment, now denounced the impending execution; and the voice had no sooner ceased to speak than it was done.”

Of the extent, glory, and splendour of Babylon, see note on Isaiah 13:19. Although Babylon was one of the oldest cities in the world, being built by Nimrod a little after the erection of the famous tower of Babel, and considerably augmented by Semiramis, yet Nebuchadnezzar had very much improved it, and made it one of the wonders of the world, on account of the largeness and height of the walls which he built round it, the temple of Belus, his own palace, and the famous hanging gardens belonging to it, all of which were the works of this king. Bochart thinks that Babylon was as much indebted to Nebuchadnezzar as Rome was to Augustus Cesar, who used to boast, that he received the city of brick, and left it of marble. But Herodotus says, it was built gradually by several other Assyrian kings; and he relates, that the wealth of the Babylonian state was so great, that it was equal to one third part of all Asia; and that, besides the tribute, if the other supplies for the great king were divided into twelve parts, according to the twelve months of the year, Babylon would supply four, and all Asia the other eight.

29, 30. This picture of the king walking on the roof garden of the royal palace in Babylon and praising himself for his magnificent building enterprises finds an echo in almost every one of his inscriptions which have been preserved. [See Introduction, III, 3, (1); 4.] He was the greatest builder of all the Babylonian kings, rebuilding the capital city almost from its foundations. Again and again he records how “silver, gold, precious stones, copper, precious woods, all kinds of valuable things, the produce of the mountains, the fullness of the seas, rich presents, splendid gifts, to my city of Babylon into his [Bel-Marduk’s] presence I brought.”

Verse 30. Is not this great Babylon] Here his heart was inflated with pride; he attributed every thing to himself, and acknowledged God in nothing. The walls, hanging gardens, temple of Bel, and the royal palace, all built by Nebuchadnezzar, made it the greatest city in the world.

Verses 28-33. All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar — With what admirable propriety is the person changed here! the six following verses being delivered in the third person. But in the 34th, Nebuchadnezzar, having recovered his reason, speaks in the first person again. At the end of twelve months — God deferred the execution of his threats against this impious prince for a whole year, giving him that time wherein to repent and return to him; but seeing that he persevered in his crimes, the measure of his iniquities being full, he put his menaces in execution. — Calmet. “Strange as it may seem,” says Bishop Horsley, “notwithstanding Daniel’s weight and credit with the king, — notwithstanding the consternation of mind into which the dream had thrown him, the warning had no permanent effect. He was not cured of his overweening pride and vanity till he was overtaken by the threatened judgment. At the end of twelve months, he was walking in the palace of the kingdom of Babylon — Probably on the flat roof of the building, or perhaps on one of the highest terraces of the hanging gardens, where the whole city would be in prospect before him; and he said, in the exultation of his heart, Is not this great Babylon, which I have built for the seat of empire, by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty? — The words had scarcely passed his lips, when the might of his power and the honour of his majesty departed from him. The same voice, which in the dream had predicted the judgment, now denounced the impending execution; and the voice had no sooner ceased to speak than it was done.”

Of the extent, glory, and splendour of Babylon, see note on Isaiah 13:19. Although Babylon was one of the oldest cities in the world, being built by Nimrod a little after the erection of the famous tower of Babel, and considerably augmented by Semiramis, yet Nebuchadnezzar had very much improved it, and made it one of the wonders of the world, on account of the largeness and height of the walls which he built round it, the temple of Belus, his own palace, and the famous hanging gardens belonging to it, all of which were the works of this king. Bochart thinks that Babylon was as much indebted to Nebuchadnezzar as Rome was to Augustus Cesar, who used to boast, that he received the city of brick, and left it of marble. But Herodotus says, it was built gradually by several other Assyrian kings; and he relates, that the wealth of the Babylonian state was so great, that it was equal to one third part of all Asia; and that, besides the tribute, if the other supplies for the great king were divided into twelve parts, according to the twelve months of the year, Babylon would supply four, and all Asia the other eight.

29, 30. This picture of the king walking on the roof garden of the royal palace in Babylon and praising himself for his magnificent building enterprises finds an echo in almost every one of his inscriptions which have been preserved. [See Introduction, III, 3, (1); 4.] He was the greatest builder of all the Babylonian kings, rebuilding the capital city almost from its foundations. Again and again he records how “silver, gold, precious stones, copper, precious woods, all kinds of valuable things, the produce of the mountains, the fullness of the seas, rich presents, splendid gifts, to my city of Babylon into his [Bel-Marduk’s] presence I brought.”

Verse 31. While the word was in the king’s mouth] How awful to a victorious and proud king: “Thy kingdom is departed from thee!” All thy goods and gods are gone in a moment!

Verses 28-33. All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar — With what admirable propriety is the person changed here! the six following verses being delivered in the third person. But in the 34th, Nebuchadnezzar, having recovered his reason, speaks in the first person again. At the end of twelve months — God deferred the execution of his threats against this impious prince for a whole year, giving him that time wherein to repent and return to him; but seeing that he persevered in his crimes, the measure of his iniquities being full, he put his menaces in execution. — Calmet. “Strange as it may seem,” says Bishop Horsley, “notwithstanding Daniel’s weight and credit with the king, — notwithstanding the consternation of mind into which the dream had thrown him, the warning had no permanent effect. He was not cured of his overweening pride and vanity till he was overtaken by the threatened judgment. At the end of twelve months, he was walking in the palace of the kingdom of Babylon — Probably on the flat roof of the building, or perhaps on one of the highest terraces of the hanging gardens, where the whole city would be in prospect before him; and he said, in the exultation of his heart, Is not this great Babylon, which I have built for the seat of empire, by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty? — The words had scarcely passed his lips, when the might of his power and the honour of his majesty departed from him. The same voice, which in the dream had predicted the judgment, now denounced the impending execution; and the voice had no sooner ceased to speak than it was done.”

Of the extent, glory, and splendour of Babylon, see note on Isaiah 13:19. Although Babylon was one of the oldest cities in the world, being built by Nimrod a little after the erection of the famous tower of Babel, and considerably augmented by Semiramis, yet Nebuchadnezzar had very much improved it, and made it one of the wonders of the world, on account of the largeness and height of the walls which he built round it, the temple of Belus, his own palace, and the famous hanging gardens belonging to it, all of which were the works of this king. Bochart thinks that Babylon was as much indebted to Nebuchadnezzar as Rome was to Augustus Cesar, who used to boast, that he received the city of brick, and left it of marble. But Herodotus says, it was built gradually by several other Assyrian kings; and he relates, that the wealth of the Babylonian state was so great, that it was equal to one third part of all Asia; and that, besides the tribute, if the other supplies for the great king were divided into twelve parts, according to the twelve months of the year, Babylon would supply four, and all Asia the other eight.

31, 32. See note verse 25. This description is intensely dramatic, and many things unmentioned here are brought vividly before the eyes of anyone acquainted with the life of a Babylonian palace. If this, indeed, represents an attack of insanity, how the physicians and “magicians” must have tried every art known to them to deliver this greatest king of earth from his illusions. There was no disease known to the ancients which was regarded as so mysterious and so directly the result of the touch of the divine hand as this. Many of the magical texts have specific reference to the warding off of demoniacal powers and to deliverance from the “sickness of the head.” As one text states, “The disease of the forehead proceeds from the infernal regions; it is come from the dwelling of the lord of the abyss.” Think of the exorcisms against demons such as the following, accompanied with strange ceremonies, which must have been chanted over this afflicted monarch: —

They are 7! They are 7!

They are the agents of the vengeance of the gods,

Raising up difficulties, obtaining power by violence. The enemies! The enemies!

They are 7! They are 7! They are twice 7!

Spirit of the heavens, may they be conjured!

Spirit of the earth, may they be conjured! — Chaldean Magic. Or this: —

May the bad demons depart!

May they seize upon one another!

The propitious demon, the propitious giant,

May they penetrate into his body.

Professor Sayce (Hibbert Lectures) gives a specific spell against madness, which was in the great classical work on medicine used by all the physicians in Nebuchadnezzar’s time, closing with the pathetic wail: — Let the madness of his head be removed,

May the malady of the head which has descended

like the rain of the night be driven away.

He also translates this oracle from Nebuchadnezzar’s favorite god, Marduk, to some one in sickness: —

In the night he was in grief,

in the day he was troubled,

And in a dream he sent unto him a warning;

Revealing it in a vision, he did not direct him

* * * * * * * * * *

His sick neck was not quiet in the yoke.

The — — with pure means did not soothe him.

Like an ox in the — — — was he.

Like a lamb among the bricks was he confounded,

and at the mouth of the camp was he laid.

King, in his Babylonian Magic (1896), gives many of the ceremonies connected with the driving away of these demons and the cries of those in bondage to them: —

May the sickness of my body be torn away!

May the groaning of my flesh be consumed!

May the ban be torn away!

And again: —

Because of the evil magic, the demon,

Free me from my bewitchment! Loosen my sin!

Verse 32. They shall make thee, &c.] Thou shalt be made to eat grass as oxen. The madness that fell upon him induced him to forsake society, and to run to the woods and deserts, where he lived like a wild beast, his hairs growing long and thick, so as to be a substitute for clothing; and his nails strong and hooked, that he might the better climb trees and grub up the ground, in order to get roots and earth-nuts. It was the mercy of God that thus clothed and accoutred him. His case seems much like that of the maniac in the Gospel, whose dwelling was among the tombs and in the mountains, and who shunned the society of men.

Verses 28-33. All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar — With what admirable propriety is the person changed here! the six following verses being delivered in the third person. But in the 34th, Nebuchadnezzar, having recovered his reason, speaks in the first person again. At the end of twelve months — God deferred the execution of his threats against this impious prince for a whole year, giving him that time wherein to repent and return to him; but seeing that he persevered in his crimes, the measure of his iniquities being full, he put his menaces in execution. — Calmet. “Strange as it may seem,” says Bishop Horsley, “notwithstanding Daniel’s weight and credit with the king, — notwithstanding the consternation of mind into which the dream had thrown him, the warning had no permanent effect. He was not cured of his overweening pride and vanity till he was overtaken by the threatened judgment. At the end of twelve months, he was walking in the palace of the kingdom of Babylon — Probably on the flat roof of the building, or perhaps on one of the highest terraces of the hanging gardens, where the whole city would be in prospect before him; and he said, in the exultation of his heart, Is not this great Babylon, which I have built for the seat of empire, by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty? — The words had scarcely passed his lips, when the might of his power and the honour of his majesty departed from him. The same voice, which in the dream had predicted the judgment, now denounced the impending execution; and the voice had no sooner ceased to speak than it was done.”

Of the extent, glory, and splendour of Babylon, see note on Isaiah 13:19. Although Babylon was one of the oldest cities in the world, being built by Nimrod a little after the erection of the famous tower of Babel, and considerably augmented by Semiramis, yet Nebuchadnezzar had very much improved it, and made it one of the wonders of the world, on account of the largeness and height of the walls which he built round it, the temple of Belus, his own palace, and the famous hanging gardens belonging to it, all of which were the works of this king. Bochart thinks that Babylon was as much indebted to Nebuchadnezzar as Rome was to Augustus Cesar, who used to boast, that he received the city of brick, and left it of marble. But Herodotus says, it was built gradually by several other Assyrian kings; and he relates, that the wealth of the Babylonian state was so great, that it was equal to one third part of all Asia; and that, besides the tribute, if the other supplies for the great king were divided into twelve parts, according to the twelve months of the year, Babylon would supply four, and all Asia the other eight.

31, 32. See note verse 25. This description is intensely dramatic, and many things unmentioned here are brought vividly before the eyes of anyone acquainted with the life of a Babylonian palace. If this, indeed, represents an attack of insanity, how the physicians and “magicians” must have tried every art known to them to deliver this greatest king of earth from his illusions. There was no disease known to the ancients which was regarded as so mysterious and so directly the result of the touch of the divine hand as this. Many of the magical texts have specific reference to the warding off of demoniacal powers and to deliverance from the “sickness of the head.” As one text states, “The disease of the forehead proceeds from the infernal regions; it is come from the dwelling of the lord of the abyss.” Think of the exorcisms against demons such as the following, accompanied with strange ceremonies, which must have been chanted over this afflicted monarch: —

They are 7! They are 7!

They are the agents of the vengeance of the gods,

Raising up difficulties, obtaining power by violence. The enemies! The enemies!

They are 7! They are 7! They are twice 7!

Spirit of the heavens, may they be conjured!

Spirit of the earth, may they be conjured! — Chaldean Magic. Or this: —

May the bad demons depart!

May they seize upon one another!

The propitious demon, the propitious giant,

May they penetrate into his body.

Professor Sayce (Hibbert Lectures) gives a specific spell against madness, which was in the great classical work on medicine used by all the physicians in Nebuchadnezzar’s time, closing with the pathetic wail: — Let the madness of his head be removed,

May the malady of the head which has descended

like the rain of the night be driven away.

He also translates this oracle from Nebuchadnezzar’s favorite god, Marduk, to some one in sickness: —

In the night he was in grief,

in the day he was troubled,

And in a dream he sent unto him a warning;

Revealing it in a vision, he did not direct him

* * * * * * * * * *

His sick neck was not quiet in the yoke.

The — — with pure means did not soothe him.

Like an ox in the — — — was he.

Like a lamb among the bricks was he confounded,

and at the mouth of the camp was he laid.

King, in his Babylonian Magic (1896), gives many of the ceremonies connected with the driving away of these demons and the cries of those in bondage to them: —

May the sickness of my body be torn away!

May the groaning of my flesh be consumed!

May the ban be torn away!

And again: —

Because of the evil magic, the demon,

Free me from my bewitchment! Loosen my sin!

V. 33. Was driven from men-Being bereft of his understanding, as a man distracted he fled, and betook himself to the woods.

Verses 28-33. All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar — With what admirable propriety is the person changed here! the six following verses being delivered in the third person. But in the 34th, Nebuchadnezzar, having recovered his reason, speaks in the first person again. At the end of twelve months — God deferred the execution of his threats against this impious prince for a whole year, giving him that time wherein to repent and return to him; but seeing that he persevered in his crimes, the measure of his iniquities being full, he put his menaces in execution. — Calmet. “Strange as it may seem,” says Bishop Horsley, “notwithstanding Daniel’s weight and credit with the king, — notwithstanding the consternation of mind into which the dream had thrown him, the warning had no permanent effect. He was not cured of his overweening pride and vanity till he was overtaken by the threatened judgment. At the end of twelve months, he was walking in the palace of the kingdom of Babylon — Probably on the flat roof of the building, or perhaps on one of the highest terraces of the hanging gardens, where the whole city would be in prospect before him; and he said, in the exultation of his heart, Is not this great Babylon, which I have built for the seat of empire, by the might of my power, and for the honour of my majesty? — The words had scarcely passed his lips, when the might of his power and the honour of his majesty departed from him. The same voice, which in the dream had predicted the judgment, now denounced the impending execution; and the voice had no sooner ceased to speak than it was done.”

Of the extent, glory, and splendour of Babylon, see note on Isaiah 13:19. Although Babylon was one of the oldest cities in the world, being built by Nimrod a little after the erection of the famous tower of Babel, and considerably augmented by Semiramis, yet Nebuchadnezzar had very much improved it, and made it one of the wonders of the world, on account of the largeness and height of the walls which he built round it, the temple of Belus, his own palace, and the famous hanging gardens belonging to it, all of which were the works of this king. Bochart thinks that Babylon was as much indebted to Nebuchadnezzar as Rome was to Augustus Cesar, who used to boast, that he received the city of brick, and left it of marble. But Herodotus says, it was built gradually by several other Assyrian kings; and he relates, that the wealth of the Babylonian state was so great, that it was equal to one third part of all Asia; and that, besides the tribute, if the other supplies for the great king were divided into twelve parts, according to the twelve months of the year, Babylon would supply four, and all Asia the other eight.

33. The king is here represented as driven away into the wilderness by this inward insane compulsion, and permitted to roam there unmolested (note verse 25) until he became as wild in appearance as the creature he thought himself to be; with his hair matted and his nails grown long as the claws of birds. (See note verse 27.)

V. 34. Mine understanding returned-God shined upon his soul, and gave him understanding to consider his sad state, and the causes of it. And honoured him-By prayer and praise, adoring the justice and mercy of God, giving God the glory of his sovereignty and unchangeableness.

Verses 34, 35. At the end of the days, I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes, &c. — The first indication of his recovery is noted by a reverse of the cause of his fall. At the expiration of the term, or at the end of seven years, he lifted up his eyes unto heaven, and his understanding returned; that is, he recovered the use of his reason, and became sensible of his dependance upon God; he acknowledged against whom he had transgressed by his pride; he humbled himself before him; acknowledged the greatness of his power, and the justice of his wrath; applied to him in prayer, and obtained mercy. And I blessed the Most High, &c. — I rendered praise to that supreme, infinite, and eternal God, the Maker of heaven and earth, and the upholder, preserver, and sovereign Lord of the universe, on whom all creatures are dependant, and to whom all intelligent creatures are accountable for their conduct; the highest angels not being above his command, nor the meanest of the children of men beneath his cognizance. And all the inhabitants of the world are reputed as nothing — The greatest monarchs, as well as persons of an inferior rank, are as nothing in his sight; and he disposes all things in heaven and earth by an irresistible power and authority. Observe, reader, a due consideration of God’s infinite greatness makes the creature appear as nothing; creatures are nothing to help, nothing to hurt, nothing in duration, nothing solid and substantial, nothing without dependance upon, and influence and support from God. God is I AM, and there is none else; verily, every man in his best estate is altogether vanity, Psalm 39:5; yea, less than vanity, and nothing, Psalm 62:9; Isaiah 40:17. And he doth according to his will — Being the Lord of hosts, and the only absolute and universal monarch of the world; none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou? — He is irresistible and uncontrollable.

34, 35. This is a dramatic representation of the king’s thankfulness. It is not to be regarded as literally a royal and public proclamation by Nebuchadnezzar of his own insanity and vanity. (Compare note verses 1-3). The LXX. differs in this entire passage in a marked degree from the received text. One of the few notes in Wyclif’s Bible discusses the question whether or not Nebuchadnezzar was damned. Isaiah 14:15, is thought to answer the question in the affirmative, but the confession recorded here “proves that Nebuchadnezzar repented and God reversed the judgment.”

V. 35. As nothing-A due consideration of God’s infinite greatness, makes the creature appear as nothing; creatures are nothing to help, nothing to hurt, nothing in duration, nothing solid and substantial, nothing without dependence, and influence, and support from God. His will-Being the Lord of hosts, and the only absolute and universal monarch of the world.

Verses 34, 35. At the end of the days, I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes, &c. — The first indication of his recovery is noted by a reverse of the cause of his fall. At the expiration of the term, or at the end of seven years, he lifted up his eyes unto heaven, and his understanding returned; that is, he recovered the use of his reason, and became sensible of his dependance upon God; he acknowledged against whom he had transgressed by his pride; he humbled himself before him; acknowledged the greatness of his power, and the justice of his wrath; applied to him in prayer, and obtained mercy. And I blessed the Most High, &c. — I rendered praise to that supreme, infinite, and eternal God, the Maker of heaven and earth, and the upholder, preserver, and sovereign Lord of the universe, on whom all creatures are dependant, and to whom all intelligent creatures are accountable for their conduct; the highest angels not being above his command, nor the meanest of the children of men beneath his cognizance. And all the inhabitants of the world are reputed as nothing — The greatest monarchs, as well as persons of an inferior rank, are as nothing in his sight; and he disposes all things in heaven and earth by an irresistible power and authority. Observe, reader, a due consideration of God’s infinite greatness makes the creature appear as nothing; creatures are nothing to help, nothing to hurt, nothing in duration, nothing solid and substantial, nothing without dependance upon, and influence and support from God. God is I AM, and there is none else; verily, every man in his best estate is altogether vanity, Psalm 39:5; yea, less than vanity, and nothing, Psalm 62:9; Isaiah 40:17. And he doth according to his will — Being the Lord of hosts, and the only absolute and universal monarch of the world; none can stay his hand, or say unto him, What doest thou? — He is irresistible and uncontrollable.

34, 35. This is a dramatic representation of the king’s thankfulness. It is not to be regarded as literally a royal and public proclamation by Nebuchadnezzar of his own insanity and vanity. (Compare note verses 1-3). The LXX. differs in this entire passage in a marked degree from the received text. One of the few notes in Wyclif’s Bible discusses the question whether or not Nebuchadnezzar was damned. Isaiah 14:15, is thought to answer the question in the affirmative, but the confession recorded here “proves that Nebuchadnezzar repented and God reversed the judgment.”

V. 36. Brightness-I had again the majesty of a king in my countenance. I was established-In wonted power and place, owned and obeyed, by all. Majesty was added-He was the most august and magnificient prince on earth, much more so than before.

Verse 36. My reason returned] Every thing was fulfilled that was exhibited by the dream and its interpretation. It is very likely that this unfortunate king had so concealed himself that the place of his retreat was not found out; and the providence of God had so watched over every thing, that, on his return to his palace, he found his counsellors and his lords, who received him gladly, and cleaved to and served him as they had formerly done.

Verses 36, 37. And for the glory — Or rather, And the glory of my kingdom, and mine honour and brightness — Or countenance, (as the word ywyz, here used, is translated, Daniel 5:6, and 7:28,) returned to me — I recovered my former looks, was possessed of the same outward glory and majesty, and was honoured with the same attendance and retinue, as I was before. Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise, and extol, and honour, &c. — The number and variety of the words here used are meant to express the vehemence of the king’s zeal and affectionate devotion. All whose works are truth, and his ways judgment — Who governs the world with equity and justice. And those who walk in pride he is able to abase — Of which Nebuchadnezzar himself was a remarkable instance. This doxology seems evidently to have proceeded from his heart; and it is very probable, from the confession that he makes, and the glory and praise which he gives to God, that his conversion was real, and that he was a true proselyte to the Jewish religion. This great king, it appears, lived only one year after his recovery; and it may be hoped that, during that term, he continued in the faith and worship of the true God. His death happened in the thirty-seventh year of Jehoiachin’s captivity, after he had reigned sole monarch forty-three years.

36, 37. Compare notes above.

This chapter contains a picture of royal pride brought low. This is also illustrated by the condition of Babylon to-day. Only a solitary tree now grows in the ruins of the terrace of that palace where the great king once stood and on every brick of which may yet be read his name. As Babelon says, “Nothing is now left of the palace and towers which threw a challenge in the face of heaven except a heap of dust and crumbling statues and a shroud of ashes.”

V. 37. Now I praise-Thus can the Lord make the stoutest hearts to stoop, and do him homage. This doxology proceeds from his heart. Are truth-God is truth essentially: he is the rule and standard of truth, his words are truth, his ways are truth, and they are judgment: he is wise, and hath dealt justly with me for my pride, and in very faithfulness hath afflicted me, and in very tenderness hath restored me; I do, and ever shall adore him for it. Able to abase-As he hath declared upon me, in stupendous changes, which I proclaim to all the world. He had a just controversy with me, and I have no ground to quarrel with him, but to give him glory by this confession. What authority had any one to say, That this man “was no convert?” We can no more doubt of his salvation than of Solomon’s.

Verse 37. Now I—praise and extol] It is very probable that Nebuchadnezzar was a true convert; that he relapsed no more into idolatry, and died in the faith of the God of Israel. It is supposed that he lived seventeen years after his restoration. But the authorized Version, which is followed in the margin, states the date of this decree to be B.C. 563, the year preceding Nebuchadnezzar’s death.

DANIEL

Verses 36, 37. And for the glory — Or rather, And the glory of my kingdom, and mine honour and brightness — Or countenance, (as the word ywyz, here used, is translated, Daniel 5:6, and 7:28,) returned to me — I recovered my former looks, was possessed of the same outward glory and majesty, and was honoured with the same attendance and retinue, as I was before. Now I, Nebuchadnezzar, praise, and extol, and honour, &c. — The number and variety of the words here used are meant to express the vehemence of the king’s zeal and affectionate devotion. All whose works are truth, and his ways judgment — Who governs the world with equity and justice. And those who walk in pride he is able to abase — Of which Nebuchadnezzar himself was a remarkable instance. This doxology seems evidently to have proceeded from his heart; and it is very probable, from the confession that he makes, and the glory and praise which he gives to God, that his conversion was real, and that he was a true proselyte to the Jewish religion. This great king, it appears, lived only one year after his recovery; and it may be hoped that, during that term, he continued in the faith and worship of the true God. His death happened in the thirty-seventh year of Jehoiachin’s captivity, after he had reigned sole monarch forty-three years.

36, 37. Compare notes above.

This chapter contains a picture of royal pride brought low. This is also illustrated by the condition of Babylon to-day. Only a solitary tree now grows in the ruins of the terrace of that palace where the great king once stood and on every brick of which may yet be read his name. As Babelon says, “Nothing is now left of the palace and towers which threw a challenge in the face of heaven except a heap of dust and crumbling statues and a shroud of ashes.”