the manners and customs of the Babylonian court are given with an exactitude, remarkably confirmed by the monuments, which no writer in Palestine of the 3rd or 2nd century B.C. could have possibly attained'." Positive and negative evidences all tend to the same conclusion. The Church recognizes the undoubted difficulties which exist in the Book of Daniel. The message is often that of "sealed

1 Lenormant, 'Les prem. Civil.' 1. p. 113. In 'La Magie, &c.' p. 14, the same writer says: "Plus on avance dans la connaissance des textes cunéiformes, plus on reconnait la nécessité de réviser la condamnation portée beaucoup trop prématurément par l'école exégétique allemande contre le livre de Daniel. Sans doute, la langue, remplie à certains endroits de mots grecs, atteste

words" (xii. 9), but in the utterance of the message a real man appears. No one can take up this inspired book without finding in it true marks of authenticity. There is historical accuracy and spiritual profit, and not that puerility of fiction or merely intellectual stimulant, which would have marked the work had it been a production of the Maccabæan period.

que la rédaction définitive, telle que nous la possédons, est postérieure à Alexandre. Mais le fond remonte bien plus haut; il est empreint d'une couleur babylonienne parfaitement caractérisée, et les traits de la vie de la cour de Nabuchadorossor et de ses successeurs y ont une vérité et une exactitude auxquelles on n'aurait pas atteint quelques siècles plus tard."

CHAP. I. 1. In the third year, &c.] "It appears from Jer. xxv. I that the fourth year of Jehoiakim was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar, and we may gather from Dan. ii. 1 that the captivity of Daniel commenced before the accession of Nebuchadnezzar, because his time of probation and preparation was three years, and yet he was called before that monarch in the second year of his reign. There is no real discrepancy in these statements, as it is clear that Nebuchadnezzar is called king by anticipation. It is also probable that he was associated with his father in the latter part of his government. Saadias Gaon, Rashi, Aben Ezra, and other Jewish interpreters, as well

as

some Christian writers, understand in the third year of Jehoiakim's rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar; but this is a forced interpretation, and inconsistent with Dan. ii. 1" [R]. The kings of Assyria and Babylonia did not in general begin to count the years of their reign until the commencement of the new year following their accession. During the remainder of the year in which they ascended the throne, documents were dated, "In the year of the accession to the kingdom of so and so," and the first year of the reign commenced with the next new year's day, the first day of the month Nisan (G. Smith, 'Assyrian Discoveries,' p. 386). (See Note at end of Chapter.)

"We may observe here the wonderful working of God's providence. Babylon was the appointed means for the punishment of Jerusalem; but Josiah-whether from a hope of conciliating the enemy, or by inevitable necessity made an alliance with the king of Babylon, and went out to meet Pharaoh-Necho, king of Egypt, who was advancing against Babylon. Josiah perished in the battle of Megiddo, and the king of Egypt was afterwards routed at the battle of Carchemish. The pursuit of the Egyptians led the Babylonian host into Palestine, and Jehoiakim, who was placed upon the throne by Pharaoh-Necho, was, of course,

Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it.

2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god;

considered as an enemy by the king of Babylon. Thus the very means by which human wisdom hoped to avert God's judgment, only aided in bringing it to pass. The motives of Josiah are not indicated in Scripture, but are a matter of conjecture" [R].

2. part of the vessels of the house of God] "The temple of Jerusalem had been several times partially spoiled. Shishak took away the golden shields dedicated by Solomon (1 K. X. 17, xiv. 26). In the reign of Amaziah, Joash, king of Israel, carried away the vessels of gold and silver (2 K. xiv. 14). Ahaz took the silver and the gold from the house of the Lord and sent it to the kings of Assyria (2 K. xvi. 8). Hezekiah gave the silver of the house of the Lord, and the gold from the doors and pillars, to the king of Assyria (2 K. xviii. 15). And now Nebuchadnezzar takes away many of the remaining treasures of the holy house. The further destiny of these vessels is related ch. v. 2. Their loss was a judgment of God on His people for their unfaithfulness in His worship. It may be well to call attention to the fact that Nebuchadnezzar brought these treasures into the house of his god. Jerome and some other commentators look upon this course as intended to do honour to them, but their reasoning is very inconclusive. It may have been in the intention of shewing the superiority of his gods by offering the spoils taken from the temple of another god. But although in the house of Dagon the idol fell down before the ark of the Lord, God would not interpose to protect these holy vessels in this degenerate time. Theodoret expresses the same sentiment, and interprets God's permitting His sacred vessels to be taken to Babylon, as a declaration that the Jews were little better than the Babylonians" [R]. The remaining vessels were afterwards brought to Babylon, Jer. xxvii. 18-22, lii. 17-24; 2 K. xxiv. 13, &c. Their restoration is told in Ezra i. 7-11. into the land of Shinar] “Shinar is enume

and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god.

rated with Babel, Calneh, &c. as a portion of the kingdom of Nimrod, Gen. x. 10 (cp. note in loco): and the tower of Babel was in the land of Shinar.' Hence the name is synonymous with the kingdom of Babylon" [R].

The name has not yet been certainly found in the Assyrian cuneiform inscriptions; its identification with the Su-ner and Sa-ner, read there (G. Smith, Notes on the Early History of Assyria and Babylonia,' p. 23) being still an open question: cp., however, Loftus, 'Chaldæa and Susiana,' ch. xv. But reference to it in the Egyptian monuments of the 18th dynasty, which record invasions of Mesopotamia by Thotmes III. (cp. add. notes to Exod. i. p. 457), is frequent. Sayce, Lenormant, and Haigh, identify it with the vast alluvial plain between the Tigris and Euphrates, i.e. Sumir or Northern Chaldæa, the whole country having been called from an early period "the land of Sumir and Accad" (cp. the Inscriptions of Khammurabi of Babylon and Rimmon-Nirari of Assyria in 'Records of the Past,' I. pp. 4, 8; and Sayce in 'Trans. of Soc. of Bibl. Arch.' II. p. 248). The name is ingeniously explained to describe the land famous for "two rivers," the equivalent to the Greek Mesopotamia, and the Semitic Naharaim (Egyptian, Naharina), or the land famous for its two cities, Schrader ('Die Keilinschriften u. d. A. T.' p. 34) and Sayce ('Assyr. Gr.' p. 179). The name occurs in the prophetic books (e.g. Isai. xi. 11; Zech. v. 11), and also as defining an article of merchandise (Josh. vii. 21).

the house of his god] i.e. "his temple" (2 Chro. xxxvi. 7). Bel-Merodach was the patron god of Babylon; to this god Nebuchadnezzar's inscriptions are addressed. The Greeks knew this temple by the name of the temple of Belus (see note to ref. in Chro.). It was in the form of a pyramid in stages, and stood up in proud independence and replete with costly ornamentation, as the building of Babylon in Nebuchadnezzar's time. "This," says the king in the Standard Inscription, "is the great temple of heaven and earth, the dwelling of Merodach, the master of the gods. I have restored its sanctuary, the place of repose of the deity, plating it with pure gold. I stored up inside silver and gold and precious stones... and placed there the treasure house of my kingdom." At the base of the pyramid was the sanctuary of Nebo-the god whose name enters into the composition of that of the king; halfway up was the sepulchral chamber of Merodach, where they consulted his oracle; and at the top was another sanctuary called "the mystic sanctuary of Merodach" (Lenormant, Man. of the Anc. Hist. of the East,' 1.

3 ¶ And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs,

480). The greatness of Merodach as the tutelary god of the city seems to have grown with the increase of the political and religious importance of the capital. It was not till the time of Nabopolassar, the father of Nebuchadnezzar, that the god became the second personage in the supreme Babylonian triad (do. 'Les prem. Civilisations,' II. 171). Allusions to him are found in Baruch (vi. 14, 15) as bearing the instruments with which he is represented on the cylinders.

It is an open question whether or not which in which he carried includes the captives and king Jehoiakim. The intention to carry the king into captivity is expressed in 2 Chro. xxxvi. 6, and the LXX. affirm that this was actually done; but there are many difficulties connected with such transportation. Jehoiakim's death took place in Palestine (Jer. xxii. 18). The Bellino cylinder and the cylinder of Esar-haddon describe at length the custom of the conquerors and the fate of the conquered.

These verses (1 and 2) form an introduction to Daniel's proper career. It was necessary to explain the after celebrity of Daniel and his three friends at the courts of the heathen monarchs whom they served: and this is effected naturally by the few words which account for their presence in the land of captivity.

3. Ashpenaz] A name akin to the Ashkenaz of Gen. x. 3 (see note), and by some connected with the Sanskrit acpa, "horse." Aspaćană occurs in Persian cuneiform as the name of an official; and at the end of the inscription at Nakhsh-i-Rustám is placed in juxtaposition with one Gobryas. A similar juxtaposition in the pages of Herodotus (III. 70) gives 'Aσrabívns as the Greek equivalent of the same name. The LXX. call Ashpenaz (vv. 3 and 11) 'Aẞieodpì, which may well be a corrupt form of Aba-(i)-Istar or the astronomer of the goddess-planet Istar. Ashpenaz was the "Rab-Saris" (comp. the similar compounds Rab-Mag, Rab-Shakeh) of the court, or the "prince" (vv. 7 and 9) "of the eunuchs," and held a position similar to that of the Kislar-Aga of the Turkish sultans. The word "Saris" had a wide application, and as in the case of Joseph's master, was borne by married men (Gen. xxxvii. 36). Here the office of the "Rab-Saris" was that of a "lord chamberlain" ("C "oberster Kämmerer,” Luther). He was commissioned to "bring certain of the children of Israel," &c., to Babylon; a term used in a general sense, and not as excluding such tribes as Levi, Benjamin, and Simeon; it is defined in the next clause as particularly referring to the "king's seed and the princes."

that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king's seed, and of the princes;

4 Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and

of the king's seed, and of the princes] "When Hezekiah was left by God to try what was in his heart, he had shewn in his pride all his treasures to the ambassadors from Babylon, and immediately the prophet Isaiah foretold that some of the seed royal should be deported to Babylon and serve in the king's palace. Here is the fulfilment of the word of God.

"The exact relationship of Daniel to the royal family is unknown. Josephus (Ant.' X. 10. 1) tells us that Daniel was of the family of Zedekiah.

"The word parthemim, here translated 'princes,' is a word of doubtful etymology. Max Müller (ap. Pusey) considers it the plural of a Persian word. Delitzsch derives it from pardom in the Pehlevi. We may safely assert that it is not Semitic, except as an adopted word. But there still remains an uncertainty as to its true origin" [R]. (See Excursus on Persian words at end of ch. i.)

4. "The beauty and comeliness of their attendants were the pride of Eastern monarchs: but in the case of these youths, care appears to have been taken of their intellectual culture also, more especially in those sciences which were supposed to be connected with a knowledge of future events" [R]. They were to be "skilful," "intelligent in all wisdom"-the scientific wisdom to be gathered from the "Chaldæan" writings (v. 17),-"cunning in" (rather, "knowing") "the knowledge" which comes by perception, and "understanding science," or rather, possessing the faculty of distinguishing between thoughts, and able (Aben Ezra) to impart that knowledge to others. Thus they would have strength (A. V. "ability"), physical and intellectual, to "stand in the king's palace." It is impossible to deny, says Ewald, that in this statement is exhibited a true knowledge of the mode of training and education current amongst the most intellectual

heathen.

It is hardly possible to determine from the word "children" what was the age of those selected. But the analogy of Egyptian and Persian habits, together with the mention of three years' probation (v. 5), tends to confirm the view (e.g. of Aben Ezra) that they were about fourteen when they first came to Babylon. The education of an Egyptian child has been already described (see add. notes to Exod. ii. 10); that of a Persian began at five and continued for fifteen years, but was

marked by a training calculated to make a boy a good athlete rather than intellectually great. At seventeen he entered the king's service, but without giving up his physical training. Provided he could endure the extremes of heat and cold, and turn his hand to any employment connected with the soldier's profession or out-door work, it was of little importance whether he could read or not, whether he understood or not the religious creed he was taught to repeat by heart (cp. authorities in Rawl. A. M.' III. 238). The training of the young Babylonian was far more like that of the Egyptian. From Herodotus and Strabo it is evident that there existed in Babylon, as in Egypt and (later on) in Persia, an hereditary order of "priests" named Chaldæans, masters of all the science and literature as well as of the religious ceremonies current among the people, and devoted from very early times to that habit of astronomical observation which their brilliant sky so much favoured (Grote, 'Hist. of Greece,' III. ch. xix. p. 291; Rawlinson, A. M.' II. 571). This priest

It

class was not, strictly speaking, a caste. was rather a sacerdotal and a learned society into which foreigners and natives, as well as the sons of the priest-members, were admitted. In the hands of these men the education of the young was deposited; and instruction in their "learning and tongue"-their written documents and scientific language-was a final and necessary part of the education of those whose physical beauty had already secured them commendation. (See Note at end of Chapter.)

Of Daniel and his three friends in their

youth, suggests Ewald, the history gives us a living picture.

It should not fail to be a royal courts. The temptations to which they striking example for all young men trained in will there be especially exposed should be met education, the advantages, the good which in the spirit in which Daniel met them: the hailed as readily as Daniel hailed them. If, will also be there especially found should be as Ewald thinks, Nebuchadnezzar's purpose in the education and training he gave these young captives was to alienate them from their own people, then the result proved how com

pletely such a purpose was ordered by God

for a wiser and nobler end.

5. the king's meat] According to oriental custom the "daily provision" was supplied at the king's cost to all connected with his court.

so nourishing them three years, that at the end thereof they might stand before the king.

6 Now among these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah :

7 Unto whom the prince of the

"Day by day" was king Jehoiachin, when in captivity, fed with food from the table of Evil-Merodach (Jer. lii. 34). The diet of the richer Babylonians consisted of wheaten bread, meats of various kinds, fruits, fish and game; imported wine was the usual beverage (Rawlinson, A. M.' III. 19). “The spirit of obedience, thus shewn by these captives in the days of their youth, an obedience which was the effect of God's grace, and the source of further grace from Him,-shed a divine light over their future days. Like Joseph and Samuel, Daniel and his companions shine forth conspicuously among those who devoted their early years to God. See Gen. xxxix. 21; Prov. xvi. 7; Ps. cvi. 46" [R].

6. Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah] "All these are Semitic names, Daniel signifying God is my Judge, and the others respectively God is gracious, Who is as God? and God is a helper. These names were changed into others derived, probably, from the language of the Chaldeans or Casdim. We have many instances in Scripture of similar changes of name. A new name-Zaphnath-paaneahwas given to Joseph (Gen. xli. 45). It is hardly necessary to call attention to names changed by divine authority, as those of Abraham, Sarah, Jacob, Solomon, St Peter, &c." [R].

That this practice was usual when foreigners were admitted into the king's service, has received interesting confirmation from the Assyrian inscriptions. Psammetik II. was the son of Pharaoh-Necho, king of Egypt. The Assyrians at that time were masters of Egypt, and they made him ruler or subordinate king of the city Athribis. At the same time they changed his name into Nebo-sezib-ani (Nebo save me!). Later on he ascended the throne of Egypt by his native name (cp. Fox Talbot, 'Illustrations of the prophet Daniel,' &c., in 'Trans. of the Soc, of Bibl. Arch.' II. x. 364). In 2 K. xxiii. 34 the Pharaoh of the day changed the name of Eliakim into Jehoiakim (see note there). In the Himyaritic inscriptions instances occur of the same person being known by two names (Osiander in 'Zeitsch. d. D. M. G.' xx. 265). (See note to 'Bible Com.' I. p. 446, col. 1.)

The new names given to Daniel and his companions contain, so far as they can be determined, a religious element. Like the Hebrew names which they replaced they are full

eunuchs gave names: for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach ; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abed-nego.

8 ¶ But Daniel purposed in his heart that he would not defile him

of a sacred, if heathen, poetry. Nebo and Beltis-the goddess-wife of Bel, were objects of Babylonian worship; the former the patron deity of Borsippa, the latter of Nipur, and their names enter in the composition of AbedNebo and Belteshazzar. (See Note at end of Chapter.)

8.

king's meat" and the consecrated barley-cake But Daniel purposed, &c.] If the of the sacrificial offering were at any time the and if it was sent to the members of the royal same (see Exc. on Pers. words at end of ch. i.), household, to partake of it would be nothing companions "purposed" (lit. "set the heart," less than idolatry. To that Daniel and his and so "determined") not to submit. In this he was like Ezekiel (iv. 9, 12-14) and unlike Jehoiachin (2 K. xxv. 27–30) and many others (Hos. ix. 3).

"The purpose of these youths, among whom Daniel was already pre-eminent, arose from their holy devotion to God, and won His most especial favour. 'A little that the righteous hath is better than the riches of many wicked.' Ps. xxxvii. 16 (comp. Prov. xv. 16, xvi. 8). Such is the declaration of God's word, and His blessing was plainly manifested in the health and comeliness of Daniel and his companions. It is of far more consequence to have God's blessing than large means. No passage in Scripture is more encouraging than this to all who strive to serve God with very slender opportunities. God's blessing makes a vegetable diet more nourishing than royal dainties, and stamps a widow's mite with a value above the choicest gifts of the rich. The hearty obedience of Daniel and the generous love of the poor widow bring that blessing. The motives of Daniel have been already alluded to. The courtesy and docility of Daniel also appear very prominently here" [R], as do the "favour and tender love" (v. 9) whichlike Joseph and his gaoler, like Jeremiah and Artaxerxes he had won from the Sar-sarisim. The hesitation felt and expressed by the "prince of the eunuchs" (v. 10) was perfectly natural. He was servant to a king who could execute children before the eyes of their father (2 K. XXV. 7; Jer. xxxix. 6), and in a moment of passion threaten with death the "wise men" of his country (ii. 5, 12). "Ye shall make me endanger my head” was a simple fact familiar to everyone who offended the capricious mood of an oriental despot, and knew that the