Danger (Hastings' Dictionary)

In Apocr. (Ad. Est 14, Sir 3'^ 29" 34" 43", 2 Mac 15') and in Ac 19"- •^ 'danger' has its modern meaning ; and so the adj. 'dangerous,' Sir 9", Ac 27'. But in the other passages in which 'danger' occurs (Mt S-'-^^, Mk 3^) it is used in the obsol. sense of ' power,' ' control ' ; Gr. ^oxos, fr. irlxi^, held in the power of some person or thing, hence (1) 'guilty of,' as Ja 2>°, 1 Co 11" ; (2) ' liable to,' as here.

Rv retains ' in danger of,' except Mk 3' 'guilty of an eternal sin,' for AV ' in danger of eternal damnation,' reading i/iapr^iuiTo! for Kpljeus. Tho LAt. dominiu lord,' was coDCract«d in old French in ▼ariouB ways, of which one waa dans, and was thence adopted lato £ng. in the form dan. Spenser, F. Q, iv, ii, 32, has — * Dan Chaucer, well of English undefyld.' Chaucer himself uses 'dan' freely as a title of respect = sir. from this word was formed dawjer (first in late Lat. or Fr.

, and then adopted into Eng.) by adding the t«rm. get, seen in pftasenger, messenger. This 'danger' became a great legal word In medisval Eng., signifying a lord's rights or sway, the extent of his Jurisdiction. Hence ^poi . — PnL 863 (Oxf. ed. "power,' • control,' ae Chaucer, * In daunger hadde he at his owne gyse The yonge girles of the diocyse.' Cf. More, Utopia, p. 116, 1. 6 (Lumby), 'so disdaining to be in her daunger, that he renouncetb and refuseth all her benefltes ' ; and Shalu. Uer.

o/ Fm. it. i. ISO— ' Tou stand within his danger, do you notT ' Thus ' to be in one's danger ' passed easily into the meaning of be liable to ' punishment or the like, anil then ' be exposed to ' any harm, the mod. meaning. J. HASTINGS. DANIEL, Sk-j^i (in Ezk 14>- » 28' Sun, ker^ Sx-n), meaning 'God is my judge,' occurs in OT as the name of three (or four) persons. 1. David's second son, ' bom unto him in Heb- ron' 'of Abigail the Carmelitess ' (1 Ch 3').

In the parallel passage, 2 S 3^, the name is Chileab (^K^j) J and since this is the evident source of the chronicler's list, the name D. probably arose from a corruption of the text. This apparently can be traced through the LXX, which in each pa.ssage has AoXowd (B Aa/iviTiX in 1 Ch 3') (ax'js, .ikSi, Sn-n) (Kittel on 1 Ch 3' in Haupt's OT). 2.

A priest of the lino of Itliamar who returned in the time of Artaxerxes with Ezra to Judaea (Ezr 8'), and sealed the covenant drawn up by Nehemiah (Neh 10°), unless two distinct persons are mentioned. 3. The hero and traditional author of the Bk. of Daniel. According to this took, D. was a youth of noble descent and high physical and intellectual endowments, carried by Nebuchadnezzar in the third year of Jehoiakim from .Jems, to Babylon, and with other Jewish youths, esp.

three companions, Hananiah, Mi.shac'l, and Azariah, a-ssigned for education at the king's court (Un I'"'). D. and his companions refused to dctilo themselves with the royal food, and for their fidelity were rewarded by being fairer in appearance ' than all the youths which ciid eat of the king's meat,' and in their final examination before the king by licing superior in understanding and wisdom to all tho magicians and enchanters of the realm (Dn l**). In the second year of Nebuchadnezzar, D.

revealed and in- terpreted, on the failure of all the other wise men, the king's dream of the composite image, and was made ruler over the whole pro^Tnce of Babylon and chief ruler over all the wise men (Dn 2). He also interpreted the king's dream of the tree (Dn 4). After the death of Nebucli. he seems to have lost his higli office and gone into retirement ; but when the handwriting appeared on tlie wall of the palace during Belshazzar's feast (Dn 5'-°), again D.

was, on the failure of the other magicians, sum- moned at the instigation of the queen (vv.'""'-). He interpreted the writing, and was then clothed with purple, decked with a chain, and proclaimed the third ruler in the kingdom (v.^). Under Darius tlie Mede, D. was appointed one of three presidents over 120 satraps, and was distinguished above all the others ; ' and the king thought to set him over the whole realm ' (Dn 6').

Through this favour he incurred the enmity of his fellow-officers, who, find- ing no occasion of accusing him, persuaded Darius to pass a decree that for 30 days no one should present a petition unto any god or man except himself on pain of being cast into a den of lions. As they expected, D. faithfully continued his custom of praying unto his God three times a day. Thus an accusation was brought against D. ; and although the king tried to rescue him, yet he was cast into the den of lions (w.'

^"'°), but was miracu- lously saved (v.'''") D.'s accusers were then cast into the den and quickly devoured, and the king decreed that all men should fear and tremble before the God of D. (w.^'"). ' So this D. prospered in the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian' (v.'*). This is the story of D. in Dn 1-6. In chs. 7-12 he appears as the recipient of a series of divine apocalyptic revelations respecting the future of Israel, for whose welfare he is extremely concerned.

Two additional stories, that of Bel and the Dragon and that of Susanna, are also related concerning him in the Apocrypha. This narrative of D. is evidently an example of Jewish Ilaggadoth (see next art.) Whether I), represents in any way a real hist, character cannot be absolutely determined. In Ezk 14"- * a D. is mentioned with Noah and Job as a pre-eminently righteous character, and in Ezk 28' as an example of the highest wisdom. This association and allusion imply that the D.

in the mind of the prophet was an ancient worthy in the traditions of Israel. (We can with difficulty conceive of Ezekiel speaking thus of a younger contemporary. See Cheyne in Ei-po.iilor, July 1897, p. 25.) Of tliis D. of Jewish tradition we are entirely ignorant ; yet probably lie was the prototype of the D. of the Exile, and many features of this ancient character probably reappear in the later one. Ewald supposed that the D.

of Ezk was a Jewish exile of the ten tribes who lived at the court of Nineveh and had acquired there a reputation for wisdom and right- eousness, and whom later Jewisli tradition trans- ferred to Babylon. Or it is possible that there was such a aistinguished Jew at Babylon, who enjoyed the favour first of Nebuch. and then of the Persian conquerors, who was actually named D.

, or owing to his wisilom and righteousness was so called by his countrymen after the ancient worthy alluded to by Ezk, and thus a real historical character may have been the basisof theheroof the Bk. of Daniel." The story of D. appears to have been written in imitation of that of Joseiih — history, however, often repeats itself ; yet, if the story is liistorical, it is strange that no reference is made to D. in the Cheyne miggeflt a connexion between D.

and Zoroaster, the name having been coined out of the Zend ddnu, ' wise ' oi 'wisdom' {Bamp. Lfct. on Psalter, 106 IT.) 552 DAXIEL, THE BOOK OF DANIEL, THE BOOK OF OT narrative of the restoration ; that no post-exilic writer liefore the Maccabiean age knows anything about him ; tliat no one else shared his expectations ; and that he, with all his patriotism, did not avail himself of the opportunity of returning to Pal. ; and that Ben-Sirach, writing about B.C.

170, should entirely omit him from tlie worthies of Israel, and also write (Sir 49"), ' Neither was there a man bom like unto Joseph, a governor of his brethren, a stay of the people.-^ E. L. CURTIS. DANIEL, THE BOOK OF, in the Heb. Canon, is placed among the Hagiographa, between Est and Ezr, but in the LXX, Vulg., and En^. Bible ass one of the four great prophets, immediately after Ezekiel. It falls into two divisions : chs. 1-6, the history of Daniel ; chs.

7-12, visions and revela- tions given to Daniel. In the original, 2"'-i^ la wTitten in Aramaic instead of Hebrew. In literary character the Bk. of Dn is mainly an apocalypse, representing in visions under symbolical forrns various historical epochs. The beginning of this kind of writing appears in Ezk and Zee; but Dn is far more complete and elaborate, and exercised a great influence upon subsequent Jewish and Christian literature. . i. Authorship and Date.— The visions (chs.

7-12) are represented as ^ven in the words of Dn (7" 8' 9' 10^), hence the inference that he wrote the entire book. This was the ancient Jeivish opinion,* and the prevailing Christian one, until within recent years.t Now, however, it has gene- rally been abandoned, and in its place are quite a variety of views all agreeing in this, that the book in its present form, must be assigned to the age of AntiochuB Epiphanes (B.C.

175-163) ; and there is a "TO«ing consensus of opinion that the book as a whole belongs to that period, for the foUowang reasons: — „ . , ou n 1. Acquaintance vnth Ant. Epiphanes.— i^h. 11 shows a clear acquaintance with minor events in his rei"!! and in those of his predecessors. In the veiTed form of a revelation of the future it gives veuea lorm oi a, ic»cia,i.iuu vr. v..v- .„»„.-.- „-, an outline of history from the tune of tyrus to near the death of Antiochus.

J There are sketched the Persian period (v.'), the rise and conquest of Alexander the Great (v.'), the dismemberment of his empire (v.*), and then principally the varying relations of the Ptolemaic and Seleucid dynasties to each other and of the latter to the Jews (vv.»»»). Attention is called in succession to Ptolemy I. and Seleucus Nikator (v.»), Ptolemy Philadelplius and Antiochus II. (v.«), Ptolemy Euergetes (vv.'-"), Antiochus the Great (w.'"-"), Seleucus Philopator (v.

*), and Antiochus Epiphanes (w."'") While, from the obscurity of the history and the difficulty of determining the meaning of tiie Heb. text, some references are not perfectly plain, yet it is easy to point out definitely the accessions of these sovereigns, their alliances, intrigues, campaigns, victories, defeats, bestowment of gifts, treacheries, acts of violence, and frequently untimely deaths.

The older commentators regarded these details as signal examples of divine prediction ; but since •TheTalm. «tat«inent (Baba bathra 16), that the men of the Great Synagogue ' wrote ' Dn, does not necessarily impl^v the contrary or express the idea of a later editing : it may simply mean a ' recording ' of the hook. t Porphvrv, the .ScoPlatonist (t SOS), wrote a treatise denvnng the genuine'ness of Daniel's prophecy. His views arc known from the Commentary of Jerome, who refuted them.

Por]ihyry had no followers in Oie Christian Church. The Brst systematic modem rejection of Daniel's authorship was by Corrodi m 1783 and 1792. He was followed by Bertholdt, Eichhom, (lesenms, Bleek, De Wette, Ewald, et at. ; while the genumencss was stoutly defended by Hengstenberg, Havemick. ^uherlcn, keil, Pusey etal. Ct. for histor\- of the criticism. Hleek's /•.'in/cifunj; Zockler"* Comm. In the Lange Scries, and Hengslenberg on GenuinetvM of Danu'l. .^ I Vv.

tou are perhaps an ideal deicription of eranta which the writer expected. snch a revelation of the future is without analog? elsewhere in Scripture, and without any apparent moral or spiritual import, this chapter or insertions in it are now allowed, even by those who regard Daniel as the author of his visions or the rest of the book, to belong to the period of Antiochus Epi- phanes.

Similar references elsewhere, however, seem to require these to be taken with their natural force, indicating the true date of the entire book, and not as later additions. In ch. 8 is a clear descrip- tion of the conquests of Alexander (w.o-s-'M and the division of his empire (vv.s- '■'■'), and of Antiochus Epiphanes (w.'-'^- ^-a). These appear again, ace. to the most probable interpretation (see below), m ch.

7, the fourth beast representing Alexanders kingdom and its succession m the Seleucid dynasty (with which alone the writer here is concerned), culminating in Antiochus Epiphanes (v^-.-^ ). The descriptions are very exact. While the numbers of the kings, ten and three (v."), might be taken relatively or symbolically, yet the corre- spondence to the Seleucidas is so precise that these kings seem evidently meant.f The eleventh corresponds exactly to Antiochus Epiphanes.

Another clear reference to this sovereign seems also to appear in 9^'-.t Thus throughout all these • Zockler in Lange's Bibelwerk, 1869 ; C. H. H.Wright, Introd. to OT, 1890; Kohler, Lehrbuch der Biblischen Gesch. voL li. p. 645, 1893. , »,. , J t We do not know, of course, just how the author reckoned these kings. Two main schemes have been suggested : (a) (Hitag, Kuenen, Comill, Bevan, «t al.) (1) Alexander. (2) Seleucus I. Nikator, (3) Antiochus l. Soter, (4) Antiochus ll.

Theos, (6) Seleucus ll. Callinicus, (6) Seleucus UL Ceraunus, (7) Antiochua the Great, (8) Seleucus IV. Philopator, (9) Heliodorus, (10) De- metrius I. Soter, or an unknown elder brother ; (b) (Bertholdt Von Lengerke, DeliUsch, Meinhold, «( al.) (1) Seleucus L Nikator, (■2)-(9)=(3H10) of (o) (10) Ptolemaus vi. Philometor. (8) (9) (10) of either (o) or (6) fulfil the conditions of the three kings put down (v.W). Seleucus rv.

Philopator was assassmated (the Jews mav have thought by the connivance of Ant. Epi- phanes). Heliodorus, who seized the government, was over- thrown by Antiochus ; Demetrius, the rightful heir, was thrust aside, and Ptolemv, who laid claim to it, was bitterly humbled. For Demetrius, who never became king, Kuenen, after von Guuchmidt {Kleiiie Schriften, vol. ii. pp. 176-179). was incUned to place an elder brother who ace. to a (raiment of John of Antioch was put to death bv Antiochus.

t Antiochus Epiphanes, to the Jewish mind, was the incarna- tion of wickedness, arrogance, and blasiihemy (cf. 1 Mac l'"- " 262 2 Mac 9'-i^- 28). and every term mentioned in the above references in Dn is most appropriate to describe him and his career.

The eves (79») and ' understanding dark sentences (823) indicate his vigilance and cunning ; ' the look more stout than his fellows ' and ' the fierce countenance ' (7> 8^3), the terror he in- spired, and his cruelty ; ' the mouth speaking great things (78. 30 u-"). his boastful arrogance, seen in the assumption of the title Epiphanes, 'the illustrious'— changed to Epimanes ' tLe mad ' by his subjects.— and the title Theos, ' the god,' on some of his coins.

His fearful persecution of the Jews and his suppres- sion of their laws and sacred days are clearly indicated lu 7-» gu. The following outline (abridged from LOT p. 461 f.) givea the leading events of his reign and the references to them m Dn:— 176. Accession (1 Mac l"), Dn 78. ". » 89 2» 11« . ^ . 176. Jason intriguing against Onias m. procures from Antiochus .u.. u:..u ..-:.. rV..^.^^ Riac nt ll,>ll,i,ti7ino' TiArt.v in Jerua. n intnguingagainst vMiitto 111. ^mrt^uico i.vu* «..v.

v^«"- the high priesthood. Rise of Hellenizing party in Jerus. Mac 111", 2 Mac 4" 22). (1 172 [1711. Onias in. murdered (2 Mac 4»S5), Dn 92»« ll'"'.,,.^,^^ 171. Ist expedition of Antiochus against Egypt (1 Mao l'"-""), Dn 11'^ 24. 170. Snd expedition against Egypt (1 Mac 1»), Dn U*>-^. Antiochus on his return plunders the temple and massacres many Jews (1 Mac 121 2.^, 2 Mac 6n-4i, Dn 8i1b.1i), n2«). 169 8rd expedition against Egypt. Kom.

legate Popiliua LiBiia-s oliliges AntiochuB to retire, I'olyb. xxix. 1 ; Livy, xliv. 19, xlv. 12 ; Dn 112>30.. 169-8. rresh measures against Jerusalem. City surprised on Sabbath dav. Many inhabitantaslain or captured and sold as slaves. Syrian garrison placed in citadel. God-fearing Jews flee. All practices of Jewish religion prohibited. Temple worship suspended, and, on 16 Chislev. B.C. UlS. ' the abomination of desolation ' (a small heathen altar erected on the altar of bumt-oflering).

Books of the law burnt, and women who had their children circum;ised put to death (1 Mac 129 <«. 2 Mac 6-7, Dn 721. «b » gilf t3h.a4.3s iiaib. • ii30l,-32» (renegade Jews) "i>^" (the faithful) ^^^ 12'- ^- "). 167 Revolt of the Maccabees (1 Mac 2). Dn ll" (the little help) 105. AfUr victories by the Maccabees (1 Mac 42»S5), Mmple puri DANIEL, THE BOOK OF DANIEL, THE BOOK OF 553 chapters there are indications of the same kind of knowledge of Antiochus and of previous history as in ch. 11.

Antiochus and his persecution of tlie Jews and defilement of their sanctuary seem ever E resent before the writer (cf. 1 Mac 1). When, owever, he touches uj)on a subsequent period he gives nothing which need be interpreted as refer- ring to specific historical events, but only symbolizes the general Messianic hope of Israel (2"'- 7" 12'"-)- Hence the conclusion that chs. 7-12 belong to the age of Antiochus Epiphanes appears warranted, and then also chs. 1-6 if by the same author.

Unity of Authorship has been the prevailing view among scholars of all schools. That clis. 1-6 belong to one author is evident. Ch. 1 is a necessary introduction to the others. Without it 2^"- and 2" would be unintelligible, and 3"^ requires 2** ; and S'""- require chs. 2 and 4. Ch. 6 is closely connected with the preceding ones. The visions (chs. 7-12) require an account of D.'

s personality and life, and tlie unity of the two sections is seen from the fact that the substance of the dream of the composite image (ch. 2) is repeated in tlie vision of tlie four beasts (ch. 7), and that ' they shall mingle themselves with the seed of men ' (2") is eWdcntly a reference to the unhappy marriages of the Ptolemies and Seleucidie (11'- "). The homi- letical or didactic purpose of each section is also the sanie.t 2. Historical Statements.

Daniel, according to 1', began his career as a youthful student at the Bab. court in the 3rd year of Jehoiakim, and lived at least until the 3rd year of Cyrus, i.e. from 606 or 605 to 536 or 535 B.C. Within this period are men- tioned as kings of Babylon, Nebuchadnezzar (2'), Belahazzar (5'- >), Darius the Mede (5^' 6=»- ^), and Cyrus (6*).

Events are dated by the years of these kings (2' 7' 8' 9' 10'), showing that the writer mast have regarded all of them as reigning sove- reigns, and not in any way as subordinate rulers. Belshazzar is further described as the son of Nebuchadnezzar (5"' ") and king of Babylon at its capture by the Medes and Persians, when (ace. to 5*''-) he was slain and Darius received the king- dom. But history knows nothing of a Babylonian king Darius the Mede preceding Cyrus.

The reigning nionarchs within this period were Nebuch- adnezzar, Evil-Merodacli, Nenglissar, Nabunahid, and Cyrus. No Darius reigned in Babylon until a Bcore of years later. The person whom Belshazzar represents was undoubtenly Bil-sar-usur, son of Nabunahid and commander of the Babylonian army during the last years of his father's reign (COT ii. p. 130 f.) Being more active and energetic fled and public worship re-pstabliBhed Just thrte yeart »tter iU) ilesccration (1 Mac <3<>-«i), Dn S''"'-.

164 (16.S1. Antiochus dies somewhat suddenly in Persia (1 Mac 6> >«, butseealno Polyb. xxxi. 11), Dn 71'» y^i"- »»•»'> 9»b. 37b n4Bb (The explanation of ll^a-a* i§ uncertain, for we do not know whether they refer to an EjoT- campaij^n or to conduct in Aseyria. On Antiochus the student should consult J. F. Iloft- mann, Ant. Ejtiph., Leipzi^f, 187;l) • That of Uesenius, Dc Wettc, lileek, Comill, Kuenen, Driver, Konig, et ai., a« well as Havemick, HenffstenlKrrp, Keil, I'usey, Fuller, ^( 0^.

Diversity of authorship has, however, been held, both by those holding the late authorship and by those reffapdinp cha. 7-12 3A genuine. Of the former, llerlholdt Ihoupht the book to have l»een written by nine authors. Strack and Meinhold regard 1*^-^ oji by an earlier writer, al>out B.C. 300. Of the latter, Sir Isaac Newton thouirht Daniel wrote only chs. 6-12. Kuhler (Lf-hrlntch dtr hihUschen Oejichickle, ii. p. 637, 1893) holds that chs.

1-6 were written some time after the rei(;n of Gyrus by the editor of chs. 7-12. t No reason is clearly perceptible why the book Is partly written in lleb. and partly in Aramaic. The following have been «U(f ifesU'd;(l) Diversity of orik'in (St rack, Meinhold. see fn. above); (2) jmrtinn of the o^i^rt^aI Heb. lost and rep!ace<l by the Aram, translation (I.,enomiant, lievan, Haupt) ; (3) the Aram, lan^ua^'o a secret sij^n that the Ch^ldiDans represented the Syrians, i.e.

Antiochus and his followers (mentioned by Kfinijf. A'r'nArif. p. B82) ; (4) author preferred to give the speeches of the heathen In Aram, rather than in the sacred Ileb., and heina more at home in that language continued to use it (Behmiann). than his father, he seems to have supplanted him in tradition as sovereign. In reality, however, he was never king.

This is proved by the long series of contract tablets, 'which, dated month by mouth and almost day by day from the reign of Nebueh adnezzar to that of Xer.xes,' makt. no mention of an intermediate ruler between Nabunahid and Cyrus (Sayce, UCM p. 528). Belshazzar also was not a son of Nebuchadnezzar even by descent, for his fallier, Nabunahid, belonged to a dillerent family.* In introducing Darius the Mede the writer shows t he same conftised idea of the order of events as the Greek writers.

t Cyrus, we now know from Iht cuneiform inseription.-i, obtained i)osses.sion oi Babylon peaceably. Duriu" the reign of Darius (B.C. 521-4S6) Babylon rebelled, and Darius was obliged to besiege the city, and took it by strat:i gem. In the tradition followed by Herodotus tin- siege is transferred to Cyrus (Her. i. 191). In Jin both the king and the siege seem to have been trans- ferred to the earlier period. J A further confusion about Darius appears in !

>', where he is called the son of Aliasuerus or Xer.\e.>. Darius I. was the father of Xerxes. Another apparently inaccurate statement is thai of Nebucliailnezzar's .siege and capture of Jerus. in the 3rd year of .lelioiakim, B.C. 6(J5 (Dn 1')- Tlir historical books relate no such event, and that it did not happen seems implied in .Jer25'"'', and necessary from the movements of Nebuchadnezzar.

Shortly after the battle of Carcheniisli (605) he returned lii Babylon to secure liis accession to the tlirone. The conquest of tlie West occupied four years more, .since not until 601 or 600 did Jehoiakim licgin to pay tribute (Tiele, Bab. unci Ansijr. Gcsrh. p. 425 f. ).S A class of wi.se men or magicians are called Chaldaians (O'^. 4. lo 47 57. uj .xiiis signiUcation is foreign to Assyrian and Babylonian usage, and did not arise till after the fall of tlie Babylonian empire' (COT ii. p.

125). These Chald.-eans are also represented as addressing Nebuchadnezzar in Aramaic (2''), which probably was not spoken then at the Bab. court, and, in no case, in the western Aramaic dialect which the writer gives.H In y- D. is said to iiave 'understood by the books the number of the years whereof the word of the Lord came toJeremiah the prophet.' Thisexpre.ssion • The remote possibility that B. was a gnvndson of N.

on hia mother's side has been uri^^ed as an explanation of the author's statements. This, however, is highly improbable, and an un- natural interpretAtion (cf. Bar inf-). t They have given four different accounts of the origin of Cynis and his relation to the last king of Media, no one of which is entirely correct (art. 'Cyrus,' Kncy. Brit. tth ed.) 1 Ch. fi implies no peaceable surrender of Babylon, but its capture by assault or stratagem.

That Darius should be called a Mede may have arisen from is 1317, Jer 6111- '^, where it is predicted that the Medes will coiKjuor Babylon. The Medes also were allies of Cyrus, and Gobryos, to whom the city sur- rendered, and whom Cyrtis placed in command, was governor of ' Qutiuin,' a Median province (lintrdge z. Ass]/riiUo<jie, l»elit/.sch and Haupt, vol. ii. p. 223). Tlie older commentators generally saw in Darius, Cyaxares 11. of Xenophon's Cyrrnxxdia. "This proli- ably was the view of Jos.

{Ant. x. xi. 4). But the Cyyuptt'tlia is a romance, and modern hist, investigation has failed to find a place for this king. The story of festivities at the time of the fall of Babylon is given in Herodotus, i. 1113. The cuneiform tablets mention a religious festival in connexion with the ac- count of the capture of Babylon, but earlier than the entraiii'e of Cyrus or tJobryoa into the city.

§ 'i'he writer perhaps drew his statement from a combination of 2 K 24if- and 2 Ch 30'1, misunderstanding the three years in Kings and reckoning them from the beginning of Jehoiakim's reign, or by reckoning backwani he may have reganied the 3rd year of Jeboiukim as the beginning of the 70 years of cal>ti^ ity.

^at the author of Dn, both here and elsewhere, does not si-eiu to have rightly apprehended or presented recordiil facts of tiT history, is no more surprising than the similar variations lietween the stiitcnients of Kings and Ch, and esp. the departures in NT from the Heb. text. Cf. Cn 11" 121- * (Haran) with Ac T> (Ur), Dt Wf ("0 souls) with Ac 7" (76), On •J3(i:phron in Hebron) with Ac 710 (Ilauior in Shechem), Kx r2-i" (1311 years in Kgypt) with Oal 3'" (430 years in Canaan and Egypt).

[I The word n'DlK"'ln Aramaic' (v.* KVm), may be a gloss Bo Lenormant, Bevan, Kautzsch-Marti, P. Uaupt {Bk. oj IM Crit. Heb. Text, p. Ifl). rt ill 554 DANIEL, THE BOOK OJb DAXIEL, THE BOOK OE implies that the prophecies of Jer. belonged to a well-known collection of sacred books, and sug- gests (this is the prevailing interpretation) the second division of the Heb. Canon, which was formed a century or more after the Exile. See art. Canon. Thus the Bk.

of Dn contains a series of historical statements which imply a misconception of the exilic period, and that their author lived consider- ably later, and may well have written during the reign of Antiochua Epiphanes. 3. TKe Language of Dn points likewise in the same direction.* The Heb. is distinguished from that of the exilic Ezk and the immediately following Hag and Zee, and resembles more nearly that of 1 and 2 Ch WTitten about B.C. 300, and certainly does not belong to an earlier period.

The Aram, also, as far as can be determined, is of the same late date. Persian words appear in both sections, some in connexion with the description of Bab. institutions before the conquest of Cyrus (see list, LOT p. 469). This indicates a period long enough after that conq uest for Persian words to have become a part of the Jewish language. Three Gr. words, the names of musical instruments (Din-p, KlBapit, flute ; I'VDCB, yj/aKHipiov, psaltery ; and .tjBOio, avij.

tpu>vLa, dulcimer or bagpipe, 3'- '• '"• "), also occur. One of these, avuipuvla, as the name of a musical instrument, is peciiliar to late Gr., and according to Polybius was a favourite instrument with Antiochus Epiphanes (Bevan, p. 41). This evidence brings the composition of Dn to a date at least later than the conquest of Alexander, unless the supposition be made that the Gr.

musical instruments had at an earlier period through channels of trade found their way into the East, and their names become domesticated in the Aram, language. This, how- ever, is unlikely, t 4. The. Doctrines of Dn with respect to angels and the resurrection are the most developed in the OT. Angels have special personal names (8" 9'-' 10"- -' 12'), special ranks (lO''-*' 12'), and the guardian- ship of diflerent countries (10"- ^- '").

These repre- sentations go far beyond those of Ezk and Zee, and are relatively identical with those of Tobit and other Jewish writings of the 1st cent. B.C. Dn plainly teaches a personal resurrection both of the righteous and the wicked (12-). This also is a decided advance upon the doctrine elsewhere in OT, and is mentioned by later Jewish tradition in con- nexion with the Maccabees (cf. 2 Mac 12^'''-).

Thus, while the determination of the date of an OT writing from its religious doctrines is always a delicate procedure, yet, as far as a doctrinal de- velopment can be found in OT, the Bk. of Dn comes after all the other OT writings, and approxi- mates most closely to the Jewish literature of the 1st cent. B.C. 5. The Homiletical Purpose of the Bk. of Dn is most agreeable to the Antiochian period. The narratives in chs. 1. 3.

6 are exhortations to keep the Jewish law and to remain faithful to the worship of J". While such teaching might be appropriate at all times, it was esp. so then in its peculiar form. The question of eating meat was at that time a test of faith. Then iiious Jews 'chose to die that they might not be defiled with food, and that they might not profane the covenant' (1 Mac jiBf.) ■fijg lessons of the ' fiery furnace ' and the 'lions' den,' chs.

3and6, never could have been more fitly presented than when ' came there forth out • Delitzsch, art. • Daniel." PliBnS^S), Driver, LOT pp. 469-476 (1891); Konig, Einleit. { 80 (1S93) ; Bevan, Cam. pp. 26-42 (1892); Rehmiann, Komm. pp. i-x(lS94). t Additional evidence in language appears alao in the proper names Nebvichadnezzar 1', Belteahazzar 17, and Abed-Nepo 17, lince their spelling and formation show a laclE of acquaintance vith the language and goda of Babylon during the Exile {coT a.

I2t. ; Sayoe, HCM p. 532) of Isr. transgressors of the law, and persuaded many, saying. Let us go and make a covenant with the nations that are round about us' (1 Mac 1"), and when Antiochus commanded the worship of foreign deities on pain of death (1 Mac 1''*'). The stories of the humbling of Nehuch. (ch- 4) and the fall of Belshazzar (ch. 5) would also be fraught «ith par- ticular consolation when Israel was oppressed by the heathen. The visions (chs.

7-12), whatever view is taken of their date, are universally acknowledged to have been primarily designed for consolation during the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. 6. The External History of the Bk. of Dn likewise favours its composition at the time of Antiochus. There is no evidence in any OT or Apocr. writing of its earlier existence. The testimony of Josephus, written near the close of the 1st cent. A.D., that the book was sho^vn to Alexander the Great {Ant. XI. viii. 5), prob.

represents only a Jewish legend, and historically is of no decisive value. The earliest possible reference is in the Sibylline Verses, iii. 388 tj'. (about B.C. 140), where there may be an allusion to Antiochus Epiphanes and the ten horna (Dn 7'- "• " ; Schurer, HJP div. u. vol. iii. p. 280). The next reference is 1 Mac 2"'- where Matthias is reported in his dying exhortation to have said • that Hananiah, Azariah, and Mishael believed and were saved out of the flame.

Daniel for hia innocency was delivered from the mouth of lions.' While this might simply indicate a knowledge of these stories, it is probable that the author of 1 Mac (about B.C. 100), who evidently composed the speech of Matthias, was acquainted with our book. From this period on there are abundant evidences of its bein" well known. Its influence is very appreciable in NT, esp. in Rev, but it is only once directly mentioned (Mt 24").* The place of the Bk.

of Dn among the Hagio- grapha favours also its late composition. If it had been written during the ExUe, notwithstanding its apocalyptic character, it naturally would have been placed among the Prophets. The Conclusion , then, in favour of the Maccabaean date, in view of this accumulation of concurrent facts, seems abundantly warranted. The exact date of composition is usually placed within the year B.C. 165.

The ' aliomination of desolation,' 168, is clearly before the writer, and also the Maccaba?an uprising in 167, but not the n- iledica- tion of the temple in Dec. 165, and the ucath of Antiochus in 163. The great difficulty, of course, in assigning the Bk. of Dn to the late date is the fact that chs. 7-12 are represented as revelations of the future given to Daniel during the Exile.

But this ditticulty vanishes the moment one considers how prevailing in OT and among Jewish writers was the custom of representing present messages as given in the past through ancient worthies. Thus the law of Deut. is given as though spoken by Moses in the land of Moab, and the legislation of P as though revealed to Moses in the wilderness. The Bk. of Eccles. is written as the experience of Solomon. While in 2 Es, Bar, the Bk.

of Enoch, and the Jewish Apocalypses generally, this method of com- position is abundantly illustrated, and was evi- dently a favourite one with the devout and pious of the centuries immediately preceding and fol- lowing Christ. Assigning the entire book to the Maccabopan period,destroys, it is true, the hist, reliability of chs. 1-6. These chapters must be regarded as a species • This passage, lilte other similar NT ones, reflect* the Jewish opinion of the Ist cent. A.D.

, but has no further weight in deciding the question of authorship. Christ or the writer of the Gospel naturally expressed hinieelf according to this opinion, for we have no reason to believe that the Divine Spirit ever led either of them to instruct or correct their contemporariea ol questions of literary and historical criticism. DANIEL, THE BOOK OF DANIEL, THE BOOK OF 555 of the later Jewish Hajjgada, or method of incul- cating moral and spiritual lessons by tales of the imagination.

Here, again, we meet with striking parallels in the OT Ilk. of Jonah and in the Apocr. stories of Tobit and J udith. A quasi defence oi chs. 1-6 is frenuently made on the ground that the writer useu authentic written material of the Exile which he revised. This, of course, is possible, but it is a mere hypothesis, and it is more probable that his material was only traditions or tales.* Tlie view which has been presented of the 15k.

of Dn doubtless will appear to some to destroy its religious value and render it unworthy of a place within the sacred Canon. No one, however, under the modem view can read the book witliout being taught lessons of sublime faith, and having a firmer assurance of the ultimate triumph of the kingdom of God.

The book has in the ^jast been blessed as an instrument of the Holy Spirit for the strengthening of the Church, and, interpreted in the light of its real origin, this will contmue and be enhanced. Great difficulties in receiving its lessons will be removed, and the Church will be spared endless profitless discussion and exegesis necessi- tated by the old view.f ii. The Interpretation. — The Bk.

of Dn con- tains three representations of the world's history more or less closely related to each other, which, with their interpretations, may be outlined as follows : — Oh. 2 Ch. 7 A.Oolden»The liou he&d S i I V e r "The bear breast B r azen=The leopard belly and Ihiphs Iron leff9 = The fourth and iron beast and clay feet Oh. 8 = Babylonian Empire.

= The ram =Medo-Peraian ,, = The he-goat = Grecian „ * An argument often repeated rest« on the assertion that the whole colourinjf and character of the book are Oriental and esp. Babylonian, imposHibte to on a^e so tinfaniiliur with them as the Maccabiean, and reference is made to the colossal image, the flery furnace, the martyr-like hnldnesa of the three ctni- feasors, the decree of Darius, the lions' den, the dreams of Nebuch., and his demands of the Clmldaana, etc. (Fuller, art.

' Daniel, Smith, DB"^. Such a view hatl the countenance and authority of Lenommnt (La Dimnation, pp. 109-'J07). The tnith is, however, that the Bk, of Dn contains no allusions to Bab. customs which might not have been known to a Jewinh writer of the 2nd cent. B.C.

(who even might have vibited Babylon), or have been preserved in the tales from which he drew his material ; while, on the other hand, there are the statements olready piven which seem to prove the author's real lack of acquaintance with Babylon during the Exile. In a<ldition to these may be mentioned the statement of Daniel's appoint- ment as * chief governor over all the wise men of Babylon {'1^). This, owing to the exclusiveness of Bab. sacred caste, even Lenormant regarded as impos.

si))le, and hence held the words ' all tlie wise men ' to be an mt<-Ti»(tlation. Indeed, Lenormant's or any sinnlar theory of the compnsitioii of the book {i.e. an early work thoroughly revised in the (Jreek periofi) is worthless for a defence either of the truth of its narrative or of its genuineness, because the line of separation between the early and late contents cannot be determined. The account of Nebuchadnezzar's in- sanity (ch.

4) has been thought to receive connnnalJon by a story given in a fragment of tne historian Abydenus (i>reHerved In EusebiuH, Prcep. Kvanff. ix. 41). The "story relates that Nebuch. on the roof of his palace was in^ipired by some god or other, and announced the future calainities of Babylon and then suddenly vanished.

In this announcement there is a wish that the author of these calamities might t>e driven into the desert wticre the wild beasts seek their foofl, and wander among the mountains and rocks alone. The similarity between this and tlie hihlical narrative is not very great, and yet enough perhaps to show that the same story originally was the basis of each (Bevan, p. 87 ft. ; Schroder, JPT, 1»S1, pp. 618-029).

t The following from Farrar Is worthy of iiuolalion in this connexion : ' Though I am compelled to regard the IJk. of Dn as a work which In its present form first saw the light in the days of Antiochus Kpiphanes, and though I believe that its six mag- nificent opening chapters were never meant to be regarded in any other light than that of moral and religious Uaggadoth, yet no words of mine can exaggerate the value which I atlarh to this part of our Canonical 8rrli>ture8.

The book, as we »liall Me. has exercised a iwwerful inllurnco over Christian conduct and Christian thougot. Its right to a place in the Canuu is Ch. 8 e= Babylon Ian Empire :The ram =Medo-Per8i&o „ ' The he-goat = MocedoDian „ « Syrian „ = Babylonian Empire. ■> Persian Ch. 2 Ch. 7 B. O o I d e n = The lion head Silver =The bear ■ breast B r a z e n = The leopard > l^elly and thighs Iron Icgs-The fourth and iron beast an<i clay feet 0.

GoIden=TheliOD head Silver =The bear ■ ^The ram ^Median breast Braze n = The leopard = belly and thighs Iron lega=The fourth and iron beast =Thehe-goat=Qrecian „ and clay feet The parallelism between the composite image (ch. 2) and the four beasts (ch. 7) shows that they were desired to represent the same world-powers. In this mterpreters are generally agreed. The historic fact that after the fall of the Bab.

kingdom there was no distinct Median kingdom, but Media was united to Persia, naturally gave the interpretation of Medo-Persian to the silver breast and the bear, and such a united kingdom appeared in the two- homed ram of ch. 8. Tlie brazen belly and thi^dis and tiie leopard then well symbolized the Grecian kingdom of Alexander and his successors, who ace. to ch. 8 were represented by the he-goat.

While tlie legs of iron and feet of iron and clay and the fourth beast with the ten horns, in connexion with wiiich appeared the final everlasting kin'^dom (2** 7^), would represent the Roman Empire in whose days the Christ appeared. Elsewhere, both in OT and NT, there were indication.s of great wars and dis- tress, and even an Antichrist to precede the tinal consummation of the kingdom oi J".

Hence the interpretation A was most plausible, and became almost universal in the early Jewish and the Christian Church.* The prevailing modem interpretation is C (B has had few advocates). The reasons for the adoption of C are as follows : Whatever may have been the facts of history, the author does distinguish between the Median and Persian kingdoms.

After tlie iJabylonian he places the Median represented in the reign of Darius (o" 6' 9^), who has the position of an independent and absolute sovereign, and then follows the reign of Cyrus tlie Persian (G*^ 10'). A Medo-Persian Kingdom could scarcely have been designated by the writer as ir^fcrlor to Nebucliail- nezzar or the Babylonian (2^"), wliile this would aptly describe the short-lived Median of his scheme. This kingdom seems also well represented in the bear (7^).

The kingdom of brass which shall rule over all the earth {2^"), or the leopard to which douiinion was given (7*), with its four wings undisputed and indisputable, and there is scarcely a single book of the OT which can l)e more richly pr<»fltahle for tcarbing, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, completely furnished to every good work. Such religious lessons .

are not In the slightest degree impaired by those results of archtoological discovery uml criticism which are almost universally accepted by the scliolars of the Continent and maii^* of our chief English critics. Kiiially unfavourable to authenticity, they are yet in no way derogatory to the preciousness of this OT Apocalypse ' {Uk. of i)an. jt. 3 f.)'

• In'teed it is ditllcull to see how a different inter^iretation ooutd have been (jiven according to the prevailing exegesis which ignurrd tile original historicjil situation and meaning of OT prnphecies, and sought some fulfihiient agreeable t<> the actual iiistory or exi»eclcd future of the Church, (vhrist had applied to His second coming the words of Dn 78 (Mk 13' 14<W), hence Ilis parousia waw reganlcd as prece<i«l by the little horn of v.n, which IhuH l)e<'aiiie the Antichrist.

Many commentators sought liist. kingdoms to represent the 10 liorns, and since the Refor- mation the pai>al power has very often been regarde<i as the Antichrist. Tlu- numbers three, four, and ten iiave alwo l>eeD freq. Interpreted symbolically (so Briggs, Me4». Prvph. g 106).

556 DANIEL, THE BOOK OF DANIEL, THE BOOK OF representing rapid and successive couq nests, and with its four heads (corresponding to tlie four kings of 11'), symbolizes particularly well the Persian kingdom which advanced so widely and rajiidly under Cyrus and Cambyses, and whose dominion was so great under Darius I. and his successors.

It must also be noted that the two horns of 8', one of wliich comes up last, which are interpreted as tlie kings of Media and Persia (8*), can as well represent two successive kingdoms, the power of one of which entered into the other, as one consoli- dated empire.

The fourth kingdom of the image, which shall be strong as iron and break in pieces and crush (2'"'), and the beast terrible and powerful with great iron teeth, that devoured and brake in pieces and stamped the residue with his feet ("'), seem identical with the he-goat of furious power (8'"') interpreted as Alexander {8^').

The feet, part of clay and part of iron (2^-), represent well the successors of Alexander, often ' externally allied but inwardly disunited ' ; and the ten toes (2^-) seem to be reproduced in the ten horns, which fitly represent the Seleucidas (see footnote, p. 552). The mmgling of the seed seems to refer to the futUe endeavours of the Ptolemies and Seleucida; to form stable alliances by marriages (cf. II*-'").

But the clear description of Antiuchus Epiphxines in the little horn (T"' •"■) is decisive for the modem inter-. pretation. The introduction of the Messianic kingdom immediately in connexion with or follow- ing events of the author's o\vn time, is fully in accord with other OT representations. Isaiah places the advent of the Messianic king in Immediate con- nexion with a deliverance from Assyr.

oppression (Is 8i»-9' 10^-1 1'"-), likewise Micah (S-"*) ; and Deutero-Isaiah blends in one picture the release and restoration from Bab. captivity, and the final consummation of the divine purposes for Israel. The same principle is illustrated in Christ's eschato- logical discourse in Mt 24. Corresponding with the interpretations of the four beasts are those of ' one luce unto a son of man ' (7™"). The prevailing Christian and Jewish interpretation has referred these words to the Messiah.

In favour of this view is their application by Christ to Himself (Mt 26", Mk W, Lk 22«», cf. Mk I3«, Lk 21", Mt W^, Lk l^"" 18«, Rev 14" et al.), and the repeated desiOTation of Christ in NT by the term ' the Son of Alan.' The Bk. of Enoch applies the same expression to the Messiah (46'" 48'"' 62'''' 69^"^), and this is the general exposition of our passage by the Jewish Rabbins, also in the Talm. {Sanh. p. 98, col. 1).

A growing modern view, however, finds in 7" a symbolization of the kingdom of Israel, and this probably was the in- tention of the writer. The expression ' son of man ' (Aram. djK i3 = Heb. n-ix-ja) ace. to a common Heb. idiom is synonymous for man or one of mankind (cf. Ps 8, Ezk 2' 3'- • '"• " et al.), and stands here evidently for one in human form representing Israel, in contrast with the beasts symbolizing the heathen powers. A striking parallel occurs in Ps 80, where in v."

'boo of man symbolizes Israel, and 'the boar' v." the heathen. The interpretation in v." seems also decisive for this view. The kingdom is given to ' the people of the saints of the Most High ; nis(the people s) kingdom is an everlastingkingdoni, and all dominions shall serve and obey him (the people).' Again, no other possible similar Messi- anic allusion appears elsewhere in Daniel.

The ' coming with tne clouds of the heaven ' is in evident contrast to the heathen kingdoms ' rising out of the8ea'(7'). The latter appearance is fig., iudioating earthly origin ; the former indicates then, by parallelism, a source in the special power of • The references (riven from the Hk. of Knoch are by some reeanleil as helonpn^ to a Christian addition to the original Jewinb work (see art. £kocu, Book ok).

God, just as the stone cut out of the mountain without hands ('2*^- ■") stands in conliaaC to the image, an evidently human or earthly product. That later writers, esp. those of the NT, siiould find in this passage a direct allusion to the Messiah, ia in exact accord with their interpretation of other or figures which primarily denote mankind or Israel (cf. Ps S-""- and He 2«-», Hos U' and Mt 2", Gn 12' and Gal 3'^ et al.) iii.

The ' Times ' of Daniel (7" 8" 9"" 12"- ") are difficult of interpretation. They are mainly an endeavour under tlie Antiochian persecution ti answer the anxious thought and piercing cry, 'Lord, how long? When wilt Thou restore the kingdom to Israel? When wUl the Messianic hope be realized ? ' They e.xpress the thouglit that the time of the fuldlment of the divine promise is very near at hand. The glorious assurances of U 40-66 had never been realized.

The Jews, in their pitiful poverty and national smalluess, and above all in this hour of persecution, seemed still in their captivity, still within the period of the seventy years mentioned by Jeremiah (Jer 29'°), and an expl.anation of their duration and the announce- ment of their end is the evident endeavour of our author in 9^-^. Of the weeks subdivided into 7 -I- 62 -t- 1 (9''-*'), as in the case of the image (ch. 2), and the four beasts (ch.

7), there are two main interpretations diflering generally according to the view taken of the Bk. of Dn as a whole, or esp. according to the historical and prophetic references in (a) ' the anointed one, the prince' (^), (b) 'the anointed one cut otl' (^), (c) the destruction («"■), (rf) the maker of the covenant ("*), (e) the desolation ('"'•). The pre- vailing Wew in the past in the Christian Church has seen in (a) (6) and [d) the Messiah, and in (c) and (c) the destruction of Jerus.

by Titus, 70 A.D. •The view received at present, agreeably to the Maccabaean date of I)n, refers (a) to Cyrus (cf. Is 45'), (6) to Onias III. (2 Mac 4"), (rf) to Antiochus Epiphanes, (c) and (e) to the havoc and desolation wrought by Antiochus at Jerusalem.

In the case of both interpretations a week has usually been held to represent seven years, but a difficulty has always been experienced in fixing the termini, and the various solutions proposed for adjusting the49-(- 434 + 7 years have been almost endless. The more prevailing one, in the old view, places the advent of Christ at the end of 69 weeks (v.'" AV and RVm), and refers the commandment to the decree of the 7th year of Artaxerxes, B.C. 457 or 458 (cf. Ezr T-'^), and then 483 yrs.

later is A.D. 25 or 26, the date usually assigned for Christ's baptism, which, from His anointing with the Holy Spirit, might represent His proper Messianic advent (Pusey, Lect. IV.) This view and all other similar ones presented by those holding the genu- ineness of the Bk. of Dn contain their own refu- tation, for the termini a quo must be later than the period of the prophet, who would have died many years at the latest before the commencement of the 490 years or the 70 weeks B.C.

, and such a date could not have been taken as the basis of hia reckoning, unless the history of Israel after his death had been revealed to him in detail. Under the other view the natural interpretation would be as follows : To the decree of Cyrus seven weeks (v.^"), i.e. 586-49 = 537. From this decree the city stands rebuilt during 62 weeks of 434 years, but after this period (v.*) the anointed priest Onias III. shall be cut off in B.C. 171 (i.e. 537, 434 = 103.

This should be 171 ; see below). During the next seven years, the last week (v. "*■'•), occur the havoc and niin wrought by Antiochus. The .sacrifice cea.sed, and the heathen altar was set up in the sanctuary. The latter event was in Dec. 168 (1 Mic 1") ; but the former, with the terrible DANIEL, THE BOOK OF DAKDA 657 ruin and slaughter (1 Mac 1"""), occurred probably some months earlier. The temple was re-dedicatea in Dec. Itio (1 Mac 4").

These three years and some months represent the half week of the ceasioK of the oblation, mentioned in the time, times, and half a time (7^), in the 2300 evenings and mornings (8"), i.e. 1150 davs, and in the 1290 days (12") and the 1335 days (12"). The representations, of course, are not exact, i.e. the number of days exceed in each instance SJ years, or half a week.

Did we know all the circiunstances of the times, we might see a clear solntion, or possibly the author designed an enigmatic surplus or remainder to be inter- preted only through the future course of events, even as he had endeavoured to interpret the 70 weeks. In the above interpretation the actual period between the decree of Cyrus and the deatli of Onias is shorter than the 62 weeks, i.e. 3G6 years instead of 434. This probably has arisen from the defective chronology of the writer.

He placed the reign of Cyrus too early * (Bevan, Comill, Schiirer). Owing to the great difficulty of finding any con- sistent explanation of the 'times' of Dn, many writers have regarded the numbers as entirely symbolical. iv. Veksions.— The LXX text of Dn has been preserved only in one MS, Codex Chisianua, which cannot be older than the 9th cent., and is perhaps much later (Bevan). In place of the LXX the Greek VS of Theodotion was used (even by Irenaeus, + 202). There is no Targ. on Daniel.

The follow- Ing diagram (from Behrmanu, p. xxx) shows ten- tatively the relation of the VSS to the original text and to each other : — Original Text (IM B.C.) Text with gl< T.XT. (0. 100 1.0.) Tatnplar Text (a. 220 A.II.) Oodex Chislaniu (llth ctnt.) T. Additions. — Thereare three Apocr. additions to Dn : (1) The Song of the Three ChUdren, pre- ceded by the Prayer of Azarias, in LXX and Vulg. at 3"*' ; (2) The Story of Susanna, in Vulg. ch. 13, in LXX a separate book (?)

j (3) The Story of Bel and the Dragon, in Vulg. ch. 14, in LXX a separ- ate book (?) (See sep. artt.) LiTKRATCM. — The literature on Daniel l« excee<lint,'Iy voiuminoun. 'On no other book ' (saye C. II. II. Wright) ' liiui •o much worthless niatt4.>r been written in the Rhujie of exeifcHiH,' The most iniportant Commentaru* are tiiose of BertnuUlt, 1806-8 ; Von Lengerke, 18S6 ; Havemick, 1882 ; Hitilg (A'a?.

• Josejihus fell Into a similar error, also the Jewish UeUenist, Dnnetnus (Schiirer, HJP ii. ToL liL p. 68 1.X Hndb.) IS.'iO; Stuart, 1850; Ewald (Projih. d. AB), 1807, Eng. tr., 1881; Keil, ISiJ'J, Enc. tr., 1872; Zockler (Langcs Bibel irer*), 1870, Eng. tr. and add. by Strong, 1876 ; Fuller {Speaker's Com.), 187B ; Jleinhold {Kgf. Kom.), 18SB; Bevan, 1802; Behr- mann (lland-Emn,), 1894 ; Karrar {Expositm'g BittU), 1895. Special Treatitf^ and A rticles. — Hengstenberg, Beitrdgt, 1831, Eng. tr.

, 1848; Tregelles, Defence o.f Authenticity, 1852; Auberleu, Der Prophet Daniel und Oifeubaruiu) Johannes, 1854-67, Eng. tr., 1867 ; I'usey, Dan. the Prophet, 1884, 3rd ed. 1809; Fuller, Estay on the Authenticity of Daniel, 1884; Lenomiant, La Divination chez teg ChaUi. (pp. 101>-2;J6), 1876 ; Coniill, * Die Siebzig Jahrwocheu Daniels,' in Theol. Stiui. u. iikizzeii, 1889; Schrader, 'Die Sage vom Wahnsinn Nebuch.' JJ'T, ISSl; Kamphausen, ' Das Buch Daniel,' in Neu.

Geitehiehtg- /orxchung, 1893 ; Margoiiouth in Expos. Apr. 1890 ; l-'uller in Expos. 3rd series, vols. i. and ii. ; Sayce, UCM (pp. 495-637), 1893 ; Terry, Prriph. of Dan. Expounded, 1893 ; 0. Bruston, Etudes tur Dan. et CApoc. 1890. In add. to these works, the student will find valuable material on Dn in Kamphauscn's Daniel in Haupt's OT, in the OT Intro- dU'-dons of Cornill, Driver, Kbuig, Strack, et al., and the OT Tlicutifjiesot Dillmann, Schultz, Smend, c( al.

, and the Hessianic or OT Iropheeies of Briggs, DeliLzsch, Hofni.ann (iiei"jt.s'a/7»7if/ u. Erfulluiuj),OT^\\\, Riehm, f(a/., and in the Uiatori^is of Israel or the Jews of Ewold, Gratz, Kohler, Kittel, Stade, Schiirer, etaL See also art. AroOKTTUA. E. L. CUUTIS.