¹ sn The third year of the reign of Jehoiakim would be ca. 605 BC. At this time Daniel would have been a teenager. The reference to Jehoikim’s third year poses a serious crux interpretum, since elsewhere these events are linked to his fourth year (Jer 25:1; cf. 2 Kgs 24:1; 2 Chr 36:5-8). Apparently Daniel is following an accession year chronology, whereby the first partial year of a king’s reign was reckoned as the accession year rather than as the first year of his reign. Jeremiah, on the other hand, is following a non-accession year chronology, whereby the accession year is reckoned as the first year of the king’s reign. In that case, the conflict is only superficial. Most modern scholars, however, have concluded that Daniel is historically inaccurate here.
²sn Nebuchadnezzar ruled Babylon from ca. 605-562 BC.
³sn This attack culminated in the first of three major deportations of Jews to Babylon. The second one occurred in 597 BC and included among many other Jewish captives the prophet Ezekiel. The third deportation occurred in 586 BC, at which time the temple and the city of Jerusalem were thoroughly destroyed.
⁴tn Heb “gave.”
⁵tn Heb “house.”
⁶sn Shinar is another term for Babylonia. Cf. Gen 10:10; 11:2; 14:1, 9; Josh 7:21; Isa 11:11; Zech 5:11.
⁷tn Heb “brought.”
⁸sn It is possible that the word Ashpenaz is not a proper name at all, but a general term for “inn-keeper.” See J. J. Collins, Daniel, 127, n. 9. However, the ancient versions understand the term to be a name.
⁹sn The word court official (Hebrew saris) need not mean “eunuch” specifically, although in the case of the Book of Daniel there was in Jewish literature a common tradition to that effect.
¹⁰tn Heb “stand in the palace of the king.” Cf. vv. 5, 19.
¹¹sn The language of the Chaldeans referred to here is Akkadian, an East Semitic cuneiform language.
¹²sn The names reflect a Jewish heritage. In Hebrew Daniel means “God is my judge”; Hananiah means “the Lord is gracious”; Mishael means “who is what God is?”; Azariah means “the Lord has helped.”
¹³tc LXX and Vg lack the verb.
¹⁴sn The meanings of the Babylonian names are more conjectural than is the case with the Hebrew names. The probable etymologies are as follows: Belteshazzar means “protect his life,” although the MT vocalization may suggest “Belti, protect the king” (cf. Dan 4:8); Shadrach perhaps means “command of Aku”; Meshach is of uncertain meaning; Abednego means “servant of Nego.” The purpose of assigning pagan names to the Hebrew youths may have to do with an attempt to erase from their memory their Israelite heritage.
¹⁵tn Heb “placed in his heart.”
¹⁶sn Various reasons have been suggested as to why such food would defile Daniel. Perhaps it had to do with violations of Mosaic law with regard to unclean foods, or perhaps it had to do with such food having been offered to idols.
¹⁷tn Heb “loyal love and compassions.” The expression is a hendiadys.
¹⁸tn Heb “The one in charge of the court officials.”
¹⁹tn Heb “my head.” Presumably this is an implicit reference to capital punishment, although this is not entirely clear.
²⁰tn Heb “your servants.” Cf. v. 13.
²¹tn Heb “to bring them.”
²²tc MT lacks the conjunction, reading the first word in the phrase as a construct (“wisdom of insight”). While this reading is not impossible, it seems better to follow Theod., Syr., Vg, and the Sahidic Coptic, all of which have the conjunction.
²³tn Heb “hands.”
²⁴sn Cyrus’ first year in control of Babylon would be 539 BC. Daniel actually lived beyond the first year of Cyrus, as is clear from 10:1. The purpose of the statement in 1:21 is merely to say that Daniel’s life spanned the entire period of the neo-Babylonian empire. His life span also included the early years of the Persian control of Babylon. However, by that time his age was advanced to such a degree that he probably died sometime in the 530’s BC.
¹tn Heb “Nebuchadnezzar’s.”
²tn Heb “dreamed dreams.”
³tn Heb “his spirit.”
⁴tn Heb “his sleep left (?) him.” The use of the verb hyh here is unusual. Cf. Dan 8:27. Some scholars emend the verb to read nadedah (“fled”); cf. Dan 6:19.
⁵tn Heb “said.” So also in v. 12.
⁶sn The term Chaldeans (Hebrew kasdim) is used in the Book of Daniel both in an ethnic sense and, as here, to refer to a caste of Babylonian wisemen.
⁷tn Heb “stood before the king.”
⁸tn Heb “I have dreamed a dream.”
⁹tn Heb “my spirit.”
¹⁰sn Contrary to common belief, the point here is not that the Chaldeans replied to the king in the Aramaic language. It was this view that led in the past to Aramaic being referred to as “Chaldee.” Rather, this phrase is better understood as an editorial note marking the fact that from 2:4b through 7:28 the language of the book shifts from Hebrew to Aramaic. In 8:1, and for the remainder of the book, the language returns to Hebrew. Various views have been advanced to account for this change of language, most of which are unconvincing. Most likely the change in language is a reflection of stages in the transmission history of the Book of Daniel.
¹¹tn Heb “your servants.” Cf. v. 7.
¹²tn Heb “answered and said,” a common semitism.
¹³sn The translation “the matter is gone from me,” suggesting that the king had simply forgotten the dream, is incorrect. It seems clear from what follows that Nebuchadnezzar clearly recalls the content of the dream, although obviously he does not know what to make of it. By not divulging the dream itself to the would-be interpreters, he intends to find out whether they are simply leading him on. If they can tell him the dream’s content, which he is able to verify, he then can have confidence in their interpretation.
¹⁴tn Heb “one is your law,” i.e., only one thing is applicable to you.
¹⁵tn Heb “I will know.”
¹⁶tn Heb “flesh.”
¹⁷tn Heb “was angry and very furious.” The expression is a hendiadys.
¹⁸tn The Hebrew participle is used here to express the imminent future.
¹⁹tn The impersonal active plural of the Aramaic verb often, as here, functions like an English passive.
²⁰tn Heb “prudence and counsel.” The expression is a hendiadys.
²¹tn Aram., mehahsepah. The word may refer to the severity of the king’s decree (i.e., “harsh”), although it would seem that in a delicate situation such as this Daniel would avoid this kind of criticism of the king’s actions. The translation above understands the word to refer to the immediacy, not harshness, of the decree.
²²tc Theod. and Syr. lack “went in and.”
²³sn As is often the case in the Bible, here the name represents the person.
²⁴sn In Hebrew, we. Various explanations have been offered for the plural, but it is probably the editorial plural. So also with me later in this verse.
²⁵tc MT has `al `al (“he entered upon”). Several medieval Hebrew manuscripts lack the verb, although this may be due to haplography.
²⁶tc LXX and Vg, along with one medieval Hebrew manuscript, lack this verb.
²⁷tn Heb “the king.”
²⁸sn Arioch’s claim is self-serving and exaggerated. It is Daniel who came to him, and not the other way around.
²⁹tn Heb “days.”
³⁰tn Heb “heart.”
³¹tn Heb “an image.”
³²sn Clay refers to baked clay, which though hard was also fragile. Cf. the reference in v. 41 to tin’, “wet clay.”
³³tc LXX, Theod., and Vg have “from a mountain,” though this is probably a harmonization with v. 45.
³⁴tn Various suggestions have been made concerning the plural “we.” It is probably the editorial plural and could be translated here as “I.”
³⁵tn Heb “the sons of man.”
³⁶sn The identity of the first kingdom is clearly Babylon. The identification of the following three kingdoms is disputed. The common view is that they represent Media, Persia, and Greece. Most conservative scholars identify them as Media-Persia, Greece, and Rome.
³⁷tc Theod. and Vg lack “and as iron breaks in pieces.”
³⁸tc LXX lacks “and toes.”
³⁹tn Heb “potter’s clay.”
⁴⁰tn Heb “clay of clay.” So also in v. 43.
⁴¹tc Read the conjunction, with most medieval Hebrew manuscripts, LXX, Vg, and the qere. The kethib lacks the conjunction.
⁴²sn The reference to people being mixed is usually understood to refer to intermarriage.
⁴³tn Heb “with the seed of men.”
⁴⁴tc Read hek di rather than MT he’ kedi. It is a case of wrong word division.
⁴⁵tn Heb “after this.”
⁴⁶tn Heb “on his face.”
⁴⁷tn Heb “was at the gate of the king.”
¹sn The Greek OT (LXX) introduces this chapter with the following chronological note: “in the eighteenth year of.” Such a date would place these events at about the time of the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC (cf. 2 Kgs 25:8). However, there seems to be no real basis for associating the events of Dan 3 with this date.
²sn There is, of course, no need to think of Nebuchadnezzar’s image as being solid gold. No doubt the sense is that it was overlaid with gold (cf. Isa 40:19; Jer 10:3-4), with the result that it presented a dazzling self-compliment to the greatness of Nebuchadnezar’s achievements.
³sn According to a number of patristic authors, the image represented a deification of Nebuchadnezzar himself. This is not clear from the chapter, however.
⁴sn The dimensions of the image (ninety feet in height and nine feet in width) imply that it did not possess normal human proportions, unless a base for the image is included in the height dimension. The ancient world knew of other tall statues. The Colossus of Rhodes, for example, was said to be seventy cubits in height, which would make it even taller than this image of Nebuchadnezzar.
⁵sn The specific duties of the seven types of officials listed here (cf. vv. 3, 27) are unclear. The Aramaic words that are used are transliterations of Akkadian or Persian technical terms whose exact meanings are uncertain. The translations given above follow suggestions set forth in BDB.
⁶tc LXX and Theod. lack the words “that Nebuchadnezzar had established.”
⁷tn According to BDB the Aramaic word used here is a Greek loanword, but other scholars have argued for a Persian derivation. See BDB, 1097b; contra KB, 1087a.
⁸tn Heb “in strength.”
⁹sn The word zither (Aramaic qayteros), and the words for harp (Aramaic pesanterin) and pipes (Aramaic sumponyah), are of Greek derivation. Though much has been made of this in terms of suggesting a date in the hellenistic period for the writing of the book, it is not surprising that a few Greek cultural terms, all of them the names of musical instruments, should appear in this book. As a number of scholars have pointed out, the bigger surprise (if, in fact, the book is to be dated to the hellenistic period) may be that there are so few Greek loanwords in Daniel.
¹⁰tn The imperfect Aramaic verbs have here an injunctive nuance.
¹¹tc Though not in BHS, this word appears in many medieval Hebrew manuscripts, some LXX manuscripts, and Vg. Cf. vv. 5, 10, 15.
¹²tc This expression is absent in Theod.
¹³tn Heb “ate the pieces of.”
¹⁴tn Heb “answered and said,” a common Aramaic idiom that occurs repeatedly in this chapter.
¹⁵sn O king, live forever! is a comment of typical court courtesy that is not necessarily indicative of the real sentiments of the speaker. Ancient oriental court protocol could require a certain amount of hypocrisy.
¹⁶sn Daniel’s absence from this scene has sparked the imagination of commentators, some of whom have suggested that perhaps he was unable to attend the dedication due to sickness or due to being away on business. Hippolytus supposed that Daniel may have been watching from a distance.
¹⁷tn Heb “in anger and wrath.”
¹⁸tn The Aramaic infinitive is active.
¹⁹tn Heb “hand.” So also in v. 17.
²⁰tc In MT this word is understood to begin the following address. However, it seems unlikely that Nebuchadnezzar’s subordinates would address the king in such a familiar way, particularly in light of the danger that they now found themselves in. The translation implies moving the athnach from “king” to “Nebuchadnezzar.”
²¹tn Heb “to return a word to you.”
²²tc The ancient versions typically avoid the conditional element of v. 17.
²³tn The Aramaic expression is very difficult to interpret. It may be an implicit reference back to Nebuchadnezzar’s comment in v. 15, which denies the existence of a god capable of delivering from the king’s power. Attempts to take ‘itay with the participle later in the verse (yakil, “able”), must explain why such a periphrastic construction would be broken apart in this way.
²⁴tn Heb “the appearance of his face was altered.”
²⁵sn There is a great deal of uncertainty with regard to the specific nature of these items of clothing.
²⁶tn Heb “caused to go up.”
²⁷tn The Aramaic verb is active.
²⁸sn The deuterocanonical writings known as The Prayer of Azariah and The Song of the Three present at this point a confession and petition for God’s forgiveness and a celebration of God’s grace for the three Jewish youths in the fiery furnace. Though not found in the Hebrew/Aramaic text of Daniel, these compositions do appear in the ancient Greek versions.
²⁹sn The phrase like that of a god is in Hebrew “like that of a son of the gods.” Many patristic writers understood this phrase in a christological sense (i.e., “the Son of God”). But it should be remembered that these are words spoken by a pagan who is seeking to explain things from his own polytheistic frame of reference.
³⁰tn Heb “in their bodies.”
³¹tn Heb “from me is placed an edict.”
³²tn Heb “May your peace increase!”
³³sn Dan 3:31-33 of the Aramaic text appears as Dan 4:1-3 in the English Bible. Although the translation above follows the division of the Aramaic text, a good case can be made for thinking that these verses are actually the introduction to chapter 4.
¹sn The Greek OT (LXX) has the following addition: “In the eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign he said.” This date would suggest a link to the destruction of Jerusalem in 586 BC. In general, the LXX of chapters 4-6 are very different from MT, so much so that the following notes will call attention only to selected readings. In Daniel 4 the LXX lacks sizable portions of material in MT (e.g., vv. 3-6, 31-32), includes sizable portions of material not in MT (e.g., v. 14a, parts of vv. 16, 28), has a different order of some material (e.g., v. 8 after v. 9), and in some instances is vastly different from MT (e.g., vv. 30, 34). Whether these differences are due to an excessively paraphrastic translation technique adopted for these chapters in the LXX, or are due to differences in the underlying Vorlage of the LXX, is a disputed matter. There is a growing trend in modern scholarship to take the LXX of chapters 4-6 much more seriously than was the case in most of earlier text-critical studies that considered this issue.
²tn Heb “my house.”
³tn Heb “from me there was placed a decree.”
⁴tn The Aramaic infinitive here is active.
⁵sn This explanation of the meaning of the name Belteshazzar may be more of a paronomasia than a strict etymology.
⁶tc Read hazi (“consider”) rather than MT hezwe (“visions”). MT implies that the king required Daniel to disclose both the dream and its interpretation, as in chapter 2. But in the following verses Nebuchadnezzar recounts his dream, while Daniel presents only its interpretation.
⁷tc LXX lacks the first two words (Heb “the visions of my head”) of the Aramaic text.
⁸tn Heb “its sight.” So also v. 17.
⁹sn This watcher is apparently an angel. The Greek OT (LXX) in fact has aggelos (“angel”) here. Theodotion simply transliterates the Aramaic word (`ir).
¹⁰tn Heb “in strength.”
¹¹tn Heb “and thus he said.”
¹²tn Heb “the stock of its root.” So also v. 23. The implication here is that although the tree is chopped down, it is not killed. Its life-giving root is spared. The application to Nebuchadnezzar is obvious.
¹³sn The function of the band of iron and bronze is not entirely clear, but it may have had to do with preventing the splitting or further deterioration of the portion of the tree that was left after being chopped down. By application it would then refer to the preservation of Nebuchadnezzar’s life during the time of his insanity.
¹⁴tn Heb “heart.”
¹⁵tc Read pisreh, “its interpretation,” with the qere and many medieval Hebrew manuscripts; the kethib is pisra’, “the interpretation.” So also v. 16.
¹⁶tn Heb “about one hour.”
¹⁷tn Heb “my lord.”
¹⁸sn Much of modern scholarship views this chapter as a distortion of traditions that were originally associated with Nabonidus rather than with Nebuchadnezzar. A Qumran text, the Prayer of Nabonidus, is often looked to for parallels to these events.
¹⁹tn Heb “a watcher and a holy one.” The expression is a hendiadys.
²⁰tn The Aramaic indefinite active plural is used here like the English passive. So also in v. 28, 29.
²¹sn Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity has features that are associated with the mental disorder known as boanthropy, in which the person so afflicted imagines himself to be an ox or similar animal and behaves accordingly.
²²tn Heb “until.”
²³sn The reference to heaven is a circumlocution for God. There was a tendency in Jewish contexts to avoid direct reference to God. Cf. the expression “kingdom of heaven” in the NT and such statements as “I have sinned against heaven and in your sight” (Luke 15:21).
²⁴tn Heb “house.”
²⁵tn Heb “by the might of my strength.”
²⁶tn Heb “in the mouth of the king.”
²⁷tn Heb “until.”
²⁸tn Heb “hour.”
²⁹tn Heb “was fulfilled.”
³⁰tn Heb “days.”
³¹tc Read kela’, with many medieval Hebrew manuscripts, rather than kelah of BHS.
³²tc Read haderet (“I returned”) rather than MT hadri (“my honor”). Cf. Theod.
³³tc Read hotqenet (“I was established”) rather than MT hotqenat (“it was established”). As it stands, MT makes no sense here.
³⁴tn Heb “walk.”
¹sn As is clear from the extra-biblical records, it was actually Nabonidus (ca. 556-539 BC) who was king of Babylon at this time. However, Nabonidus spent long periods of time at Teima, and during those times Belshazzar his son was de facto king of Babylon. This arrangement may help to explain why later in this chapter Belsahzzar promises that the successful interpreter of the handwriting on the wall will be made third ruler in the kingdom. If Belshazzar was in effect second ruler in the kingdom, this would be the highest honor he could afford.
²sn Persian kings were renown in the ancient world for their lavish banquets. This scene calls to mind a similar grandiose event recorded in Esth 1:3-8.
³sn The king probably sat at an elevated head table.
⁴tn Heb “the thousand.”
⁵tn Or perhaps, “when he had tasted,” in the sense of officially initiating the commencement of the banquet. The translation above seems preferable, however, given the clear evidence in the context of inebriation.
⁶sn Making use of sacred temple vessels for an occasion of reveling and drunkenness such as this would have been a religious affront of shocking proportions to the Jewish captives.
⁷tc Theod. has the passive enechthesan (“were brought”).
⁸tc Read wekaspa’ (“and the silver”) with Theod. and Vg. Cf. v. 2.
⁹tn Heb “the temple of the house of God.” The phrase seems rather awkward. Vg lacks “of the house of God,” while Theod. and Syr. lack “the house.”
¹⁰tn While Aramaic pas can mean the palm of the hand, here it seems to be the back of the hand that is intended.
¹¹sn The mention of the lampstand in this context is of interest because it suggests that the writing was in clear view.
¹²sn Purple was a color associated with royalty in the ancient world.
¹³sn The reference to a golden collar here is probably to something more substantial than merely a gold chain or necklace.
¹⁴tc Read pisreh with the qere rather than pisra’ of the kethib.
¹⁵tn Heb “his visage altered upon him.” So also in v. 10.
¹⁶tn Heb “the queen.” In the following discourse this woman is able to recall things about Daniel that go back to the days of Nebuchadnezzar, things that Belshazzar does not seem to have the same recollection of. It is likely that she was the wife not of Belshazzar but of Nabonidus or perhaps even Nebuchadnezzar. In that case, “queen” here means “queen mother.”
¹⁷tn Heb “the queen.”
¹⁸tn Heb “the wisdom.”
¹⁹tc Theod. lacks “and wisdom like the wisdom of the gods.”
²⁰tc MT includes a redundant reference to “your father the king” at the end of v. 11. None of the attempts to explain this phrase as original is very convincing. Delete the phrase, with Theod. and Syr.
²¹tc Read mipsar rather than MT mepassar; later in the verse read misra’ rather than MT mesare’. The Masoretes have understood these Aramaic forms to be participles, but they are more like to be vocalized as infinitives. As such, they have an epexegetical function in the syntax of their clause.
²²tn Or perhaps “one of three,” in the sense of becoming part of a triumvir. So also v. 29.
²³tn Or “royal greatness and majestic honor,” if the four terms are understood as a double hendiadys.
²⁴tn This Aramaic form is the aphel participle of hyh (“to live”). Theod. and Vg mistakenly take the form to be from mh’ (“to smite”).
²⁵sn The point here is that Nebuchadnezzar had usurped divine prerogatives, and because of his immense arrogance God had dealt decisively with him.
²⁶tn Heb “heart.”
²⁷tn Heb “your heart.”
²⁸tn Heb “hand.”
²⁹tc Theod. lacks the repetition of mene’.
³⁰tc Theod. has the singular, phares.
³¹tn Aram. mene’ is a noun referring to a measure of weight. The linkage here to the verb for “to number” (Aram., menah) is a case of paronomasia rather than strict etymology. So also with teqel and parsin. In the latter case there is an obvious word-play with the name Persian.
¹sn The year was 539 BC. At this time Daniel would have been approximately eighty-one years of age. The relevant extra-biblical records describing the fall of Babylon include portions of Herodotus, Xenophon, Berossus (cited in Josephus), the Cyrus Cylinder, and the Babylonian Chronicle.
²tn Heb “to find.”
³tn Heb “from the side of the kingdom.”
⁴tc Theod. lacks “and no negligence or corruption was to be found in his case.”
⁵tn Heb “were saying.”
⁶tn The Aramaic verb rgs occurs three times in this chapter (vv. 7, 12, 16). Its meaning is widely disputed by commentators and versions. BDB’s suggestion that it means “to come thronging” seems inappropriate, since it is unlikely that subordinates would enter a royal court in such a reckless fashion. The ancient versions struggled with the word and are not in agreement in their understandings of its meaning. In this chapter the word apparently means to act in agreement with other parties in the pursuit of a duplicitous goal, namely the entrapment of Daniel.
⁷tn Heb “thus they were saying.”
⁸tn Heb “prays a prayer.”
⁹tn Heb “establish a written interdict and inscribe a written decree.”
¹⁰tn Heb “knew.”
¹¹sn In later rabbinic thought this verse was sometimes cited as a proof-text for the notion that one should pray only in a house with windows. See Berakoth 34b.
¹²sn According to some scholars, the Muslim practice of praying toward Mecca is derived from this text.
¹³sn This is apparently the only specific mention in the OT of prayer being regularly offered three times a day. The practice was probably not unique to Daniel.
¹⁴tc Read with several medieval Hebrew manuscripts and printed editions hawah rather than MT hu’.
¹⁵tn Heb “kneeling on his knees.”
sn No specific posture for offering prayers is prescribed in the OT. Kneeling, as here, and standing were both practiced.
¹⁶tc MT also has “about the edict of the king,” but this phrase is absent in LXX and Syr. The translation deletes the expression.
tn Heb “before the king.”
¹⁷tn Heb “the word is true.”
¹⁸tn Heb “from the sons of.”
¹⁹tn Heb “placed his mind on.”
²⁰tn Heb “the entrances of the sun.”
²¹tc Theod. lacks the words “came by collusion to the king and.”
²²tn Heb “the king.”
²³tn Heb “know.”
²⁴tn Heb “said.” So also in vv. 24, 25.
²⁵sn The den was perhaps a pit below ground level which could be safely observed from above.
²⁶tn Heb “answered and said.”
²⁷tn Heb “mouth.”
²⁸sn The purpose of the den being sealed was to prevent unauthorized tampering with the opening of the den. Any disturbance of the seal would immediately alert the officials to improper activity of this sort.
²⁹tn Heb “the signet rings.”
³⁰tn The meaning of Aramaic dahawah is a crux interpretum. Suggestions include music, dancing girls, concubines, table, food—all of which are uncertain. The translation offered here, suggested by earlier scholars, is deliberately vague.
³¹tn Heb “his sleep fled from him.”
³²tn Heb “to Daniel.”
³³tn Heb “ate the pieces of.”
³⁴tn The Aramaic active impersonal verb is often used as a substitute for the passive.
³⁵tc LXX specifies only the two overseers, together with their families, as those who were cast into the lions’ den.
³⁶tn Heb “until the end.”
³⁷tn Heb “hand.”
³⁸sn Or perhaps, in the reign of Darius, even in the reign of Cyrus. The identity of this Darius is disputed. Some take the name to be referring to Cyrus, understanding the following waw (“and”) in an epexegetical sense (“even”). Others identify Darius with a governor of Babylon known from extra-biblical records as Gubaru, or as Cambyses, son of Cyrus. Many scholars maintain that the reference is historically mistaken.
¹sn The first year of Belshazzar’s reign would have been ca. 553 BC. Daniel would have been approximately 67 years of age at the time of this vision.
²tn The Aramaic is difficult here. Some scholars add a verb thought to be missing (e.g., “the visions of his head were alarming him”), but there is no external evidence to support such a decision and the awkwardness of the text at this point may be original.
³tn Heb “head of words.” The phrase is absent in Theod.
⁴tn Heb “answered and said.”
⁵sn The identity of the great sea is unclear. The common view that it is the Mediterranean Sea is conjectural.
⁶sn The identity of the first animal, derived from v. 17 and the parallels in chap. 2, is Babylon. The reference to the plucking of its wings is probably a reference to the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity (cf. chap. 4). The latter part of v. 4 then describes the restoration of Nebuchadnezzar. The other animals have traditionally been understood to represent respectively Media-Persia, Greece, and Rome, although most of modern scholarship identifies them as Media, Persia, and Greece. For a biblical parallel to the mention of lion, bear, and leopard together, see Hos 13:7-8.
⁷sn The three ribs held securely in the mouth of the bear, representing Media-Persia, apparently symbolizes military conquest, but the exact identity of the “ribs” is not clear. Possibly it is a reference to the Persian conquest of Lydia, Egypt, and Babylonia.
⁸tc LXX lacks the phrase “between its teeth.”
⁹tn Or, “sides.”
¹⁰sn If the third animal is Greece, the likely identification of these four heads is the four-fold division of the empire of Alexander the Great following his death. See note on Dan 8:8.
¹¹sn The fourth animal differs from the others in that it is nondescript. Apparently it was so fearsome that Daniel could find nothing with which to compare it. Attempts to identify this animal as an elephant or other known creature are needlessly speculative.
¹²tn Aram., neqe’. Traditionally this word has been rendered “pure,” but here it more likely means “of a lamb.” Cf. Syr., neqya’, “ a sheep, ewe.”
¹³tc LXX and Theod. lack the words “I was watching” here. It is possible that these words in MT are a dittography from the first part of the verse.
¹⁴tc LXX has epi (“upon”) here (cf. Matt 24:30; 26:64). Theod. has meta (“with”) here (cf. Mark 14:62; Rev 1:7).
¹⁵sn This text is probably the main OT background for Jesus’ use of the term “son of man.” In both Jewish and Christian circles the danielic reference has traditionally been understood to refer to an individual, usually in a messianic sense. Many modern scholars, however, understand the reference to have a corporate identity. In this view, the “son of man” is to be equated with the “holy ones” (vv. 18, 21, 22, 25) or the “people of the holy ones” (v. 27) and understood as a reference to the Jewish people. Others understand Daniel’s reference to be to the angel Michael.
¹⁶tn The Aramaic text includes the phrase “in its sheath,” apparently viewing the body as a container or receptacle for the spirit somewhat like a sheath or scabbard is for a knife or a sword. For this phrase LXX and Vg have “in these things.”
¹⁷tn Heb “matter,” but the matter at hand is of course the vision.
¹⁸sn The holy ones is either a reference to angels, or to the saints.
¹⁹tc The conjunction in MT before “eyes” is odd. The ancient versions do not seem to presuppose it.
²⁰tc In LXX, Syr., and Vg the verb is active, understanding “judgment” to be the object rather than the subject of the verb (i.e., “the Ancient of Days rendered judgment”). This presupposes a different vocalization of the verb (yehab rather than MT yehib).
²¹tn Heb “wear out.” The word is a hapax legomenon in BA, but in BH it especially refers to wearing out such things as garments.
²²tn Heb “times and law.” The translation suggested above is based on the understanding that the expression is a hendiadys.
²³sn Although the form times is vocalized in MT as a plural, it probably should be regarded as a dual. The Masoretes may have been influenced here by the fact that in late Aramaic (and Syriac) the dual forms fall out of use. The meaning would thus be three and a half “times.”
¹sn Dan 8:1 marks the switch from Aramaic (= 2:4b—7:28) to Hebrew as the language in which the book is written in its present form. The remainder of the book from this point on (8:1—12:13) is in Hebrew. The bilingual nature of the book has been variously explained, but it most likely has to do with the transmission history of the book.
²sn The third year of King Belshazzar’s reign would have been ca. 551 BC. Daniel would have been approximately 69 years of age at the time of this vision.
³tn Heb “in the beginning.”
⁴sn Susa (Hebrew Shushan), located some 230 miles east of Babylon, was a winter residence for Persian kings during the Achaemenid period. The language of v. 2 seems to suggest that Daniel may not have been physically present at Susa, but only saw himself there in the vision. However, the Hebrew is difficult, and some have concluded that the first four words of v. 2 in MT are a later addition (cf. Theod.).
⁵sn The word citadel (Hebrew bira = “castle, palace”) usually refers to a fortified structure within a city, but here it is in apposition to the city-name Susa and therefore has a broader reference to the entire city (pace BDB).
⁶sn The word canal (Hebrew ‘ubal = “stream, river”) is a relatively rare word in BH, found only here and in vv. 3 and 6. The Ulai was apparently a sizable artificial canal in Susa, and not a river in the ordinary sense of that word.
⁷tn Heb “one.” The Hebrew numerical adjective occasionally functions like an English indefinite article. See GKC §125b.
⁸tn In the hiph. Heb. gdl (make great, magnify) can have either a positive or a negative sense. For the former, used especially of God, see Ps 126:2, 3; Joel 2:21. In this chapter (8:4, 8, 11, 25) the word has a pejorative sense, describing the self-glorification of this king. The sense seems to be that of vainly assuming one’s own superiority through deliberate hubris.
⁹tn Heb “a he-goat of the goats.”
¹⁰sn The goat of Daniel’s vision represents Greece; the large horn is Alexander the Great. The ram stands for Media-Persia. Alexander’s rapid conquest of the Persians involved three battles of major significance which he won against overwhelming odds: Granicus (334 BC), Isus (333 BC), and Gaugemela (331 BC).
¹¹sn After his death, Alexander’s empire was carved up among four of his generals: Cassander, who took Macedonia and Greece; Lysimachus, who took Thrace and parts of Asia Minor; Seleucus, who took Syria and territory to its east; and Ptolemy, who took control of Egypt.
¹²sn This small horn is Antiochus IV Epiphanes, who controlled the Seleucid kingdom from ca. 175-164 BC. Antiochus was extremely hostile toward the Jews and persecuted them mercilessly.
¹³sn The expression the land of beauty (Hebrew hassebi = “the beauty”) is a cryptic reference to the land of Israel. Cf. 11:16, 41, where it is preceded by the word ‘eres (“land”).
¹⁴sn The prince of the host is an expression that apparently refers to God.
¹⁵tn Or perhaps “and by him,” referring to Antiochus rather than to God.
¹⁶tc Read useba’ah nittan for MT wesaba’ tinnaten. The context suggests a perf. rather than imperf. verb.
¹⁷sn The phrase in the course of transgression is difficult. It could mean “due to transgression,” referring to the failures of the Jews, but this is not likely since it is not a point made elsewhere in the book. The phrase more probably refers to the transgressions against the Jews epitomized by Antiochus.
¹⁸tc A couple of medieval Hebrew manuscripts and the LXX have a passive verb here: “truth was hurled to the ground.”
¹⁹sn Truth here probably refers to the Torah. According to 1 Macc 1:56, Antiochus initiated destruction of the sacred books of the Jews.
²⁰sn The holy one referred to here is presumably an angel. Cf. 4:13[10], 23 [20].
²¹sn The language of evenings and mornings is reminiscent of the creation account in Genesis 1. Since “evening and morning” is the equivalent of a day, the reference here would be to 2,300 days. However, some interpreters understand the reference to be to the evening sacrifice and the morning sacrifice, in which case the reference would be to only 1,150 days. Either way, the event that marked the commencement of this period is unclear. The event that marked the conclusion of the period is the rededication of the temple following the atrocious and sacrilegious acts that Antiochus implemented. This took place on December 25, 165 BC. The Jewish celebration of Hannukah each year commemorates this victory.
²²sn The only angels whose names are given in the OT are Gabriel (Dan 8:16; 9:21; cf. Luke 1:19, 26) and Michael (Dan 10:13, 21; 12:1; cf. Jude 9; Rev 12:7). The name Gabriel means in Hebrew “man of God,” and Michael means “who is like God?”
²³tn Heb “the he-goat, the buck.” The expression is odd, and the second word may be an explanatory gloss.
²⁴tc Read happes`im for MT happose`im. While MT is understandable (cf. NIV, “when rebels have become completely wicked”), the filling up of transgressions is a familiar OT expression (cf. Gen 15:16) and fits this context well. Cf. LXX, Theod., Vg, and Syr.
²⁵tn Heb., nihyeti. The meaning of the word is not entirely clear. Hayah normally has meanings such as “to be” or “become.” Here, however, it describes Daniel’s emotional and physical response to the enigmatic vision that he has seen. It is parallel to the following verb, which refers to illness, and seems to refer to a state of utter exhaustion due to the amazing things that Daniel has just seen. LXX lacks the word.
¹sn The identity of this Darius is a major problem in correlating the biblical material with the extra-biblical records of this period. Most modern scholars treat the reference as a mistaken allusion to Darius Hystaspes (ca. 522-446 BC). Others have maintained instead that this name is a reference to the Persian governor Gubaru. Still others understand the reference to be to the Persian king Cyrus (cf. 6:28, where the waw may be understood as waw explicativum, meaning “even”). Under either of these latter two interpretations, the first year of Darius would have been ca. 538 BC. Daniel would have been approximately eighty-two years old at this time.
²tc LXX has “Xerxes.”
³tc MT, hophal (i.e., passive). Theod., Syr., and Vg all presuppose the hiphil (i.e., active). Even though this is the only occurrence of the hophal of this verb in the Bible, there is no need to emend the vocalization to the hiphil.
⁴tc This phrase, repeated from v. 1, is absent in Theod.
⁵sn The tetragrammaton (the four Hebrew letters which constitute the divine Name, YHWH) appears seven times in this chapter, and nowhere else in the Book of Daniel.
⁶tn Heb “the covenant and the loyal love.” The expression is a hendiadys.
⁷tc LXX and Vg have the singular.
⁸tn Heb “him.”
⁹tn Heb “for the sake of my Lord.” Theod. has “for your sake.” Cf. v. 19.
¹⁰tn Heb “incline your ear.”
¹¹tn Heb “over which your name is called.” Cf. v. 19.
¹²tn Heb “praying our supplications before you.”
¹³tn Heb “speaking in prayer.”
¹⁴tn Heb., mu`ap bi`ap. The expression is very difficult. The issue is whether the verb derives from `up (“to fly”) or from y`p (“to be weary”). Many ancient versions and modern commentators take the first of these possibilities and understand the reference to be to the swift flight of the angel Gabriel in his coming to Daniel. The words more likely refer to the extreme weariness, not of the angel, but of Daniel. Cf. 7:28; 8:27; 10:8-9, 16-17.
¹⁵tn This sentence is perhaps a compound hendiadys (“give serious consideration to the revelatory vision”).
¹⁶tn Heb “sevens.” These are periods of seventy “sevens” of years, or a total of 490 years.
¹⁷tc Read the qere (from the root tmm) with many witnesses. The kethib has “to seal up” (from the root htm), a confusion with a reference later in the verse to sealing up the vision.
¹⁸tc Read the qere (singular), rather than the kethib (plural).
¹⁹tn Heb. lekalle’ is apparently a metaplastic spelling of the root klh (“to complete, finish”), rather than a form of kl’ (“to shut up, restrain”), as has sometimes been supposed.
²⁰sn Sealing in the OT is a sign of authentication. Cf. 1 Kgs 21:8; Jer 32:10, 11, 44.
²¹tn Heb “vision and prophecy.” The expression is a hendiadys.
²²sn The MT indicates disjunction at this point, which would make a messianic interpretation of the passage difficult, if not impossible. In light of the reference in v. 26 to the sixty-two weeks as a unit, it seems preferable to understand the disjunction as indicated above. The translation of the entire passage (vv. 24-27) presented here departs occasionally from the Masoretic understanding.
²³sn The expression have nothing is difficult. Presumably it refers to an absence of support or assistance for the anointed one at the time of his “cutting off.” The KJV rendering “but not for himself,” apparently suggesting a vicarious death, cannot be defended.
²⁴tc Some witnesses (e.g., Syr.) understand a passive verb and the preposition `im (“with) rather than the noun `am (“people”), thus reading “the city and the sanctuary will be destroyed with the coming prince.”
²⁵sn Flood here is hypocatastic for sudden destruction.
²⁶tn The meaning of Heb. kenap (“wing”) is unclear here. LXX and Theod. have “the temple.”
¹sn This chapter begins the final unit in the Book of Daniel, consisting of chapters 10-12. The traditional chapter division to some extent obscures the relationship of these chapters.
²tc The LXX has “first.”
sn Cyrus’ third year would have been ca. 536 BC. Daniel would have been approximately eighty-four years old at this time.
³tn Heb., saba’. The meaning is uncertain. The word most often refers to an army or warfare. It may also mean “hard service,” and many commentators take that to be the sense here (i.e., “the service was great”). The translation given above assumes the reference to be to the spiritual conflicts described, for example, in 10:16-11:1.
⁴tn Heb “three weeks of days.” The inclusion of “days” here and in v. 3 is perhaps intended to call attention to the fact that these weeks are very different in nature from those of chap. 9, which are “weeks of years.”
⁵tn Heb “mouth.”
⁶sn Anointing oneself with oil was a common OT practice due to the severity of the Middle Eastern sun (cf. Ps 121:6). It was also associated with rejoicing (e.g., Prov 27:9) and was therefore usually not practiced during a period of mourning.
⁷sn Twenty-four days would be about three and a half weeks, a measure of time that takes on interest in light of its similarity to the time mentioned in Dan 9:27.
⁸sn The first month would be the month of Nisan, during which Passover was observed.
⁹tn The Hebrew text has Hiddaqel. “Tigris” appears here in LXX, since it is the Greek name for this river. Elsewhere in the OT “the great river” refers to the Euphrates (e.g., Gen 15:18; Josh 1:4), leading some interpreters to think that a mistake is involved in using the expression to refer to the Tigris. But it is doubtful that the expression had such a fixed and limited usage. Syr., however, does render the word here by “Euphrates” (Syr., perat), in keeping with biblical usage elsewhere.
¹⁰tn Heb “I lifted up my eyes.”
¹¹tn Heb “one.” The Hebrew numerical adjective is used here like an English indefinite article.
¹²sn The identity of the messenger is not specifically disclosed. Presumably he is an unnamed angel. Some interpreters identify him as Gabriel, but there is no adequate reason for doing so.
¹³tn Heb. baddim is a plural of extension. See GKC §124 a,b,c, and Joüon-Muraoka, §136 c.
¹⁴tn Heb., `upaz. The location of this place and even the exact form of the name are uncertain. Apparently it was a source for pure gold. (See Jer 10:9.) The Heb. word paz (“refined or pure gold”) is more common in the OT than `upaz, and some scholars emend the text of Dan 10:5 to read this word. Cf. also “Ophir” (1 Kgs 9:28; Isa 13:12; Job 22:24; 28:16).
¹⁵sn Yellow jasper (Hebrew tarsis) was a valuable stone. Its exact identity is somewhat uncertain. It may be the yellow jasper, although this is conjectural.
¹⁶tn Heb “The sound of his words” (cf. v. 9).
¹⁷tn Heb “the vision.”
¹⁸tc The first words of v. 9 are absent in LXX and Syr.
¹⁹tn Heb “as I listened to the sound of his words.”
²⁰tc Theod. lacks “and the palms of my hands.”
²¹tn The Hebrew participle is often used, as here, to refer to the imminent future.
²²tn Heb “stand upon your standing.”
²³tn Heb “gave your heart.”
¹tn Heb “according to these words.”
²tn Heb “my lord,” here a title of polite address. Cf. v. 19.
³tn Heb “How is the servant of this my lord able to speak with this my lord?”
⁴tn Heb “He added and touched me.” The construction is verbal hendiadys.
⁵sn The question is rhetorical, intended to encourage reflection on Daniel’s part.
⁶tn Heb “a book of truth.”
⁷sn The antecedent of the pronoun I is the angel, not Daniel. The traditional chapter division at this point, and the presence of a chronological note in the verse similar to ones used elsewhere in the book to position Daniel’s activities in relation to imperial affairs, sometimes lead to confusion on this matter.
⁸sn Perhaps these three more kings are Cambyses (ca. 530-522 BC), Pseudo-Smerdis (ca. 522 BC), Darius I Hystaspes (ca. 522-486 BC).
⁹sn This fourth king is Xerxes I (ca. 486-465 BC). The following reference to one of his chiefs apparently has in view Seleucus Nicator.
¹⁰tn The text is difficult. The Hebrew has here ‘et, the marker of a definite direct object. As it stands, this would suggest the meaning that “he will arouse everyone, that is, the kingdom of Greece.” The context, however, seems to suggest the idea that this Persian king will arouse in hostility against Greece the constituent elements of his own empire. This requires supplying the word “against,” which is not actually present in the Hebrew text.
¹¹sn This mighty king is Alexander the Great (ca. 336-323 BC).
¹²sn This king of the south is Ptolemy I Soter (ca. 323-285 BC). The following reference to one of his chiefs apparently has in view Seleucus I Nicator (ca. 311-280 BC). Throughout the remainder of chapter 11 the expressions “king of the south” and “king of the north” repeatedly occur. It is clear, however, that these terms are being used generically to describe the Ptolemaic king (i.e., “of the south”) or Seleucid king (i.e., “of the north”) who happens to be in power at any particular time. The specific identity of these kings can be established more or less successfully by a comparison of this chapter with the available extra-biblical records that discuss the history of the intertestamental period. In the following notes the generally accepted identifications are briefly mentioned.
¹³sn Here they refers to Ptolemy II Philadelphus (ca. 285-246 BC) and Antiochus II Theos (ca. 262-246 BC).
¹⁴sn The daughter refers to Berenice, who was given in marriage to Antiochus II Theos.
¹⁵tn Heb “the strength of the arm.”
¹⁶tn Heb “and his arm.”
¹⁷tc Read yaldah (“her child”) rather than MT yoledah (“the one who begot her”). Cf. Theod., Syr., and Vg.
¹⁸sn Antiochus II eventually divorced Berenice and remarried his former wife Laodice, who then poisoned her husband, had Berenice put to death, and installed her own son, Seleucus II Callinicus (ca. 246-227 BC), as the Seleucid king.
¹⁹sn The reference to one from her family line (Hebrew “the stock of her roots”) is probably to Berenice’s brother, Ptolemy III Euergetes (ca. 246-221 BC).
²⁰tn The Hebrew preposition min is used here with the verb `md (“to stand”). It probably has a sense of separation (“stand away from”), although it may also be understood in an adversative sense (“stand against”).
²¹tn Heb “he.”
²²sn The sons of Seleucus II Callinicus were Seleucus III Ceraunus (ca. 227-223 BC) and Antiochus III the Great (ca. 223-187 BC).
²³sn This king of the south refers to Ptolemy IV Philopator (ca. 221-204 BC).
²⁴tn Heb “his heart will be lifted up.”
²⁵sn This was Ptolemy V Epiphanes (ca. 203-181 BC).
²⁶sn This well-fortified city is apparently Sidon. Its capture from the Ptolemies by Antiochus the Great was a strategic victory for the Seleucid kingdom.
²⁷tc Read mesarim (“alliances”) for MT yesarim (“uprightness”).
²⁸tn Heb “the daughter of the women.” The reference is to Cleopatra, the daughter of Antiochus, who was given in marriage to Ptolemy V.
²⁹sn The commander is probably the Roman commander, Lucius Cornelius Scipio.
³⁰tn The Hebrew here is difficult in that the negative bilti (“not”) is used in an unusual way. The sense is not entirely clear.
³¹sn This was Seleucus IV Philopator (ca. 187-176 BC).
³²sn Perhaps this exactor of tribute was Heliodorus (cf. 2 Maccabees 3).
³³sn This despicable person to whom the royal honor has not been rightfully conferred is Antiochus IV Epiphanes (ca. 175-164 BC).
³⁴tc Read hisatop (niphal infinitive absolute of stp, “to overflow”) for MT hassetep (“flood”).
³⁵tn Heb., min. The preposition is probably temporal here (so BDB, 583b), although it could also be understood here as indicating means (so J. Goldingay, Daniel, 279, n. 23a).
³⁶tn The Hebrew imperfect verb here is modal in nuance.
³⁷sn This king was Ptolemy Philometer (ca. 181-145 BC).
³⁸tc Read yisattep (passive) rather than MT yistop (active).
³⁹sn The name Kittim has various designations in extra-biblical literature. It can refer to a location on the island of Cyprus, or more generally to the island itself, or it can be an inclusive term to refer to parts of the Mediterranean world that lay west of the Middle East (e.g., Rome). For ships of Kittim the Greek OT (LXX) has “Romans.” A number of times in the Dead Sea Scrolls the word is used in reference to the Romans.
⁴⁰sn This is apparently a reference to the Roman forces, led by Gaius Popilius Laenas, which confronted Antiochus when he came to Egypt and demanded that he withdraw or face the wrath of Rome. He wisely withdrew from Egypt, albeit in a state of bitter frustration.
⁴¹tn Heb “arms.”
⁴²tn Heb “the sanctuary, the fortress.”
⁴³tn Heb “will give.”
⁴⁴tn This is an allusion to the Maccabean revolt, which struggled to bring about Jewish independence in the second century BC.
⁴⁵tn Heb “the many.”
⁴⁶tn Heb “stumble.”
⁴⁷tn Heb “days.”
⁴⁸sn The identity of this king is problematic. If vv. 36-45 continue the description of Antiochus Epiphanes, the account must be viewed as erroneous, since the details do not match what is known of Antiochus’ latter days. Most of modern scholarship takes this view, concluding that this section was written just shortly before the death of Antiochus and that the writer erred on several key points as he tried to predict what would follow the events of his own day. Conservative scholars, however, usually understand the reference to shift at this point to an eschatological figure, viz., the Antichrist. The chronological gap that this would presuppose to be in the narrative is not necessarily a problem, since by all accounts there are many chronological gaps throughout the chapter, as the historical figures intended by such expressions as “king of the north” and “king of the south” repeatedly shift.
⁴⁹tn Heb “has been done.” The Hebrew verb used here is the perfect of certitude, emphasizing the certainty of fulfillment.
⁵⁰tn Heb “engage in thrusting.”
⁵¹tn Heb “many ships.”
⁵²sn Presumably seas refers to the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea.
¹tn Heb “stands over the sons of your people.”
²sn This verse is the only undisputed reference to resurrection found in the Hebrew Bible.
³sn Many will dart to and fro is probably an allusion to Amos 8:12.
⁴tn Heb “one to this edge of the river and one to that edge of the river.”
⁵tc Read nopes (“one who shatters”) rather than MT nappes (“to shatter”).
⁶tn Heb “my lord,” a title of polite address.
⁷tn Heb “to give.”
⁸tc LXX lacks “until the end.”
⁹sn The deuterocanonical writings known as Bel and the Dragon and the Story of Susanna appear as part of the Book of Daniel in certain forms of the ancient versional tradition for this book. They are not part of the Hebrew/Aramaic text of Daniel.