reigners, the people under them may have gladly seized the occasion to complain of them to the king. But so little is known of the circumstances, that it is not possible to determine the matter with certainty. All that needs to be said is, that the fact that Daniel was not implicated in the affair, is no proof that the three persons referred to were not; that it is no evidence that what is said of them is not true because nothing is said of Daniel.

22. ANALYSIS OF THE CHAPTER.

THIS chapter, which is coraplete in itself, or which embraces the entire narrative relating to an important transaction, contains the account of a magnificent brazen image erected by Nebuchadnezzar, and the result of attempting to constrain the conscientious Hebrews to worship it. The narrative comprises the following points:

I. The erection of the great image in the plain of Dura, ver. 1.

II. The dedication of the image in the presence of the great princes and governors of the provinces, the high officers of state, and an immense multitude of the people, accompanied with solemn music, vs. 2-7.

III. The complaint of certain Chaldeans respecting the Jews, that they refused to render homage to the image, reminding the king that he had solemnly enjoined this on all persons, on penalty of being cast into a burning furnace in case of disobedience, vs. 8-12. This charge was brought particularly against Shadrach, Meshach, and Abed-nego. Daniel escaped the accusation, for reasons which will be stated in the Notes on ver. 12. The common people of the Jews also escaped, as the command extended particularly to the rulers.

IV. The manner in which Nebuchadnezzar received this accusation, vs. 13-15. He was filled with rage: he summoned the accused into his presence; he commanded them to prostrate themselves before the image on penalty of being cast at once into the fiery furnace.

V. The noble answer of the accused, vs. 16-18. They stated to the king that his threat did not alarm them, and that they felt no solicitude to answer him in regard to the matter (v. 16); that they were assured that the God whom they served was able to deliver them from the furnace, and from the wrath of the king (ver. 17); but that even if he did not, whatever might be the issue, they could not serve the gods of the Chaldeans, nor worship the image which the king had set up.

VI. The infliction of the threatened punishment, vs. 19-23. The furnace was commanded to be heated seven times hotter than usual; they were bound and thrown in with their usual apparel on; and the hot blast of the furnace destroyed the men who were employed to perform this service.

VII. Their protection and preservation, vs. 24-27. The astonished monarch who had commanded three men to be cast in bound, saw four men walking in the midst of the flames loose; and satisfied now they had a divine protector; awed by the miracle; and doubtless dreading the wrath of the divine being that had become their protector, he commanded them suddenly to come out. The princes, and governors, and captains were gathered together, and these men, thus remarkably preserved, appeared before them uninjured.

VIII. The effect on the king, vs. 26-30. As in the case when Daniel had interpreted his dream (chap. ii.), he acknowledged that this was the act of the true God, ver. 26. He issued a solemn command that the God who had done this should be honoured, for that no other God could deliver in this manner, ver. 27. He again restored them to their honourable command over the provinces, ver. 30.

1 Nebuchadnezzar the king amade an image of gold, whose height was

2 Ki. 19. 17, 18. Ps. 115. 4, &c. Is. 40. 19, &c. Je. 16. 20. Ac. 19. 26.

1. Nebuchadnezzar the king made an image of gold. The time when he did this is not mentioned; nor is it stated in whose honour, or for what design, this colossal image was erected. In the Greek and Arabic translations, this is said to have occurred in the eighteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar. This is not, however, in the original text, nor is it known on what authority it is asserted. Dean Prideaux (Connex. I. 222,) supposes that it was at first some marginal comment on the Greek version that at last crept into

threescore cubits, and the breadth thereof six cubits: he set it up in the plain of Dura, in the province of Babylon.

the text, and that there was probably some good authority for it. If this is the correct account of the time, the event here recorded occurred B. C. 587, or, according to the chronology of Prideaux, about nineteen years after the transaction recorded in the previous chapter. Hales makes th chronology somewhat different, though no essentially. According to him, Daniel was carried to Babylon B. C. 586, and the image was set up B. C. 569, making an interval from the time that he was carried to Babylon of seventeen years; and

that it was in honour of Nebuchadnezzar himself, and that he purposed by it to be worshipped as a god. But this opinion has little probability in its favour. The opinion that it was in honour of Bel, the principal deity of the place, is every way the most probable, and this derives some confirmation from the well-known fact that a magnificent image of this kind was, at some period of his reign, erected by Nebuchadnezzar in honour of this god, in a style to correspond with the magnificence of the city. The account of this given by Herodotus is the following:

if the dream (ch. ii.) was explained with-rents. Prideaux, Hales, the Editor of the in three or four years after Daniel was Pict. Bible, and most others, suppose that taken to Babylon, the interval between it was in honour of Bel, the principal that and this occurrence would be some deity worshipped in Babylon. See Notes thirteen or fourteen years. Calmet makes on Isa. xlvi. 1. Some have supposed the captivity of Daniel 602 years before Christ; the interpretation of the dream 598; and the setting up of the image 556 -thus making an interval of more than forty years. It is impossible to determine the time with certainty; but allowing the shortest mentioned period as the interval between the interpretation of the dream (ch. ii.) and the erection of this statue, the time would be sufficient to account for the fact that the impression made by that event on the mind of Nebuchadnezzar, in favour of the claims of the true God, (ch. ii. 46, 47,) seems to have been entirely effaced. The two chapters, The temple of Jupiter Belus, whose in order that the right impression may be huge gates of brass may still be seen, is a received on this point, should be read square building, each side of which is two with the recollection that such an inter- furlongs. In the midst rises a tower, of val had elapsed. At the time when the the solid depth and height of one furevent here recorded is supposed by Pri- long; upon which, resting as upon a deaux to have occurred, Nebuchadnezzar base, some other lesser towers are built had just returned from finishing the in regular succession. The ascent is on Jewish war. From the spoils which he the outside; which, winding from the had taken in that expedition in Syria and ground, is continued to the highest Palestine, he had the means in abundance tower; and in the middle of the whole of rearing such a colossal statue; and at structure there is a convenient restingthe close of these conquests, nothing place. In the last tower is a large chapel, would be more natural than that he should in which is placed a couch, magnificently wish to rear in his capital some splendid adorned, and near it a table of solid gold; work of art that would signalize his reign, but there is no statue in the place. In record the memory of his conquests, and this temple there is also a small chapel, add to the magnificence of the capital. lower in the building, which contains a The word which is here rendered image figure of Jupiter, in a sitting posture, Chald. -Greek sixóva, in the usual with a large table before him; these, with form in the Hebrew, means a shade, the base of the table and the seat of the shadow; then that which shadows forth throne, are all of the purest gold, and are anything; then an image of anything, estimated by the Chaldeans to be worth and then an idol, as representing the eight hundred talents. On the outside deity worshipped. It is not necessary of this chapel there are two altars; one to suppose that it was of solid gold, for is gold, the other is of immense size, and the amount required for such a structure appropriated to the sacrifice of full grown would have been immense, and probably animals: those only which have not yet beyond the means even of Nebuchad- left their dams may be offered on the nezzar. The presumption is, that it was golden altar. On the larger altar, at the merely covered over with plates of gold, anniversary festival in honour of their for this was the usual manner in which God, the Chaldeans regularly consume instatues erected in honour of the gods cense to the amount of a thousand talents. were made. See Isa. xl. 19. It is not There was formerly in this temple a staknown in honour of whom this statue tue of solid gold twelve cubits high; was erected. Grotius supposed that it this, however, I mention from the inforwas reared to the memory of Nabopo- mation of the Chaldeans, and not from aassar, the father of Nebuchadnezzar, and my own knowledge." Clio, 183. Diodoobserves that it was customary to erect rus Siculus, a much later writer, speaks tatues in this manner in honour of pa- to this effect: "Of the tower of Jupiter

Belus, the historians who have spoken Strabo. lib. 16, p. 738; Herodotus lib. 1 have given different descriptions; and Arrian de Expe. Alex. lib. 7, quoted by this temple being now entirely destroyed, Prideaux I. 240. It is not very probable we cannot speak accurately respecting it. that the image which Xerxes removed It was excessively high; constructed was the same which Nebuchadnezzar throughout with great care; built of reared in the plain of Dura (comp. the brick and bitumen. Semiramis placed Intro. to this chapter, 21, VII. a,); but on the top of it three statues of massy the fact that such a colossal statue was gold, of Jupiter, Juno, and Rhea. Jupi- found in Babylon may be adduced as one ter was erect in the attitude of a man incidental corroboration of the probawalking; he was forty feet in height; bility of the statement here. It is not and weighed a thousand Babylonian impossible that Nebuchadnezzar was led, talents; Rhea, who sat in a chariot of as the Editor of Calmet's Dictionary has gold, was of the same weight. Juno, remarked, (Taylor vol. iii. p. 194,) to the who stood upright, weighed eight hun- construction of this image by what he dred talents." B. II. The temple of Bel had seen in Egypt. He had conquered or Belus in Babylon, stood until the time and ravaged Egypt but a few years beof Xerxes; but on his return from the fore this, and had doubtless been struck Grecian expedition, he demolished the with the wonders of art which he had whole of it, and laid it in rubbish, having seen there. Colossal statues in honour first plundered it of its immense riches. of the gods abounded, and nothing would Among the spoils which he took from be more natural than that Nebuchadthe temple, are mentioned several images nezzar should wish to make his capital and statues of massive gold, and among rival everything which he had seen in them the one mentioned by Diodorus Thebes. Nor is it improbable that, while Siculus, as being forty feet high. See he sought to make his image more mag

the difficulty, Taylor himself supposes that the height referred to in the description was rather proportional than actual height; that is, if it had stood upright it would have been sixty cubits, though the actual elevation in a sitting posture may have been but little more than thirty cubits, or fifty feet. The breadth, he supposes, was rather the depth or thickness measured from the breast to the back than the breadth measured from shoulder to shoulder. His argument and illustration may be seen in Calmet, vol. iii. Frag. 156. It is not absolutely certain, however, that the image was in a sitting posture, and the natural construction of the passage is, that the statue was actually sixty cubits in height. No one can doubt that an image of that height could be erected; and when we remember the one at Rhodes, which was 105 Grecian feet in height, (see Art. Colossus, in Anthon's Class. Dic.,) and the desire of Nebuchadnezzar to adorn his capital in the most magnificent manner, it is not to be regarded as improbable that an image of this height was erected. What was the height of the pedestal, if it stood on any, as it probably did, it is impossible now to tell. The length of the cubit was not the same in every place. The length originally was the distance between the elbow and the extremity of the middle finger, about eighteen inches. The Hebrew cubit, according to Bishop Cumberland and M. Pelletier, was twenty-one inches; but others fix it at eighteen. Calmet. The Talmudists say that the Ilebrew cubit was larger by one quarter than the Roman. Herodotus says that the cubit in Babylon was three fingers longer than the usual one. Clio, 178. Still, there is not absolute certainty on that subject. The usual and probable measurement of the cubit, would make the image in Babylon about ninety feet high.

nificent and costly than even those in Egypt were, the views of sculpture would be about the same, and the figure of the statue might be borrowed from what had been seen in Egypt. It may perhaps furnish some illustration, therefore, of the subject before us, to copy here some figures from Calmet, representing some of the usual forms of statuary in Egypt. The cut on page 176 represents two "colossal figures which yet remain standing at the ancient Thebes," and is copied from Norden, who thus describes the figures. "The figure A seems to be that of a man; the figure B that of a woman. They are about fifty Danish feet in height, from the basis of the pedestals to the summit of the head; from the sole of the feet to the knees is fifteen feet; the pedestals are five feet in height, thirty-six and a half long, nineteen and a half broad." Whose height was threescore cubits. Prideaux and others have been greatly perplexed at the proportions of the image here represented. Prideaux says on the subject, (Connex. I. 240, 241,) "Nebuchadnezzar's golden image is said indeed in Scripture to have been sixty cubits, that is, ninety feet high; but this must be understood of the image and pedestal both together; for that image being said to be but six cubits broad or thick, it is impossible that the image would have been sixty cubits high; for that makes its height to be ten times its breadth or thickness, which exceeds all the proportions of a man, no man's height being above six times his thickness, measuring the slenderest man living at the waist. But where the breadth of this image was measured is not said; perchance it was from shoulder to shoulder; and then the proportion of six cubits breadth will bring down the height exactly to the measure which Diodorus has mentioned; for the usual height of a man being four and an half of his breadth And the breadth thereof six cubits. between the shoulders, if the image were About nine feet. This would, of course, six cubits broad between the shoulders, make the height ten times the breadth, it must, according to this proportion, which Prideaux says is entirely contrary have been twenty-seven cubits high, to the usual proportions of a man. It is which is forty and an half feet." The not known on what part of the image statue itself, therefore, according to Pri- this measurement was made, or whether deaux, was forty feet high; the pedestal, it was the thickness from the breast to fifty feet. But this, says Taylor, the the back, or the width from shoulder to Editor of Calmet, is a disproportion of parts shoulder. If the thickness of the image which, if not absolutely impossible, is here is referred to by the word "breadth," utterly contradictory to every principle the proportion would be well preserved. of art, even of the rudest sort. To meet "The thickness of a well-proportioned

2 Then Nebuchadnezzar the king sent to gather together the princes, the governors, and the captains, the

man," says Scheuchzer (Knupfer Bibel, in loc.) "measured from the breast to the back is one-tenth of his height." This was understood to be the proportion by Augustine, Civi. Dei, L. xv. c. 26. The word which is here rendered breadth

judges, the treasurers, the counsellors, the sheriffs, and all the rulers of the provinces, to come to

vince of Babylon. One of the provinces, or departments, embracing the capital, into which the empire was divided. ch.

ii. 48.

The word

2. Then Nebuchadnezzar the king sent to gather together the princes. It is diffi-occurs nowhere else in the Chaldean the exact meaning of the words used here cult now, if not impossible, to determine of the Scriptures, except in Ezra vi. 3: with reference to the various officers "Let the house be builded-the height designated; and it is not material that thereof threescore cubits, and the breadth it should be done. The general sense is, thereof threescore cubits." Perhaps this that he assembled the great officers of refers rather to the depth of the temple the realm to do honour to the image. from front to rear, as Taylor has re- The object was doubtless to make the marked, than to the breadth from one occasion as magnificent as possible. Of side to another. If it does, it would cor- course, if these high officers were assemrespond with the measurement of Solo- bled, an immense multitude of the people mon's temple, and it is not probable that would congregate also. That this was Cyrus would vary from that plan in his contemplated, and that it in fact occurred, instructions to build a new temple. If is apparent from vs. 4, 7. that be the true construction, then the meaning here may be, as remarked above, rendered princes--827--occurs only that the image was of that thickness, and in Daniel, in Ezra, and in Esther. In the breadth from shoulder to shoulder Daniel iii. 2, 3, 27; vi. 1, 2, 3, 4, 6, 7, it may not be referred to. He set it up in is uniformly rendered princes; in Ezra the plain of Dura. It would seem from viii. 36, Esther. iii. 12, viii. 9, ix. 3, it this that it was set up in an open plain, is uniformly rendered lieutenants. The and not in a temple; perhaps not near a word means, according to Gesenius ( Lex.), temple. It was not unusual to erect im-"satraps, the governors or viceroys of ages in this manner, as the colossal figure the large provinces among the ancient at Rhodes shows. Where this plain was, Persians, possessing both civil and miliit is of course impossible now to deter-tary power, and being in the provinces mine. The Greek translation of the the representatives of the sovereign, word is sɛɛipa-Deeira. Jerome says that whose state and splendour they also the translation of Theodotion is Deira; rivaled." The etymology of the word is of Symmachus, Doraum, and of the lxx. not certainly known. The Persian word Epibolor-which he says may be rendered satrap seems to have been the foundation vinarium vel conclusum locum. "Inter- of this word, with some slight modificapreters commonly," says Gesenius, "com- tions adapting it to the Chaldee mode of pare Dura a city mentioned by Ammin. pronunciation. And governors.—ND Marcel. 25, 26, situated on the Tigris: This word is rendered governors in ch. and another of like name in Polyb. 5. 48, ii. 48. (See Notes on that place, and in on the Euphrates near the mouth of the ch. iii. 2, 3, 27; vi. 7.) It does not elseChaboras." It is not necessary to sup- where occur. The Hebrew word correspose that this was in the city of Babylon; ponding to this, p occurs frequently, and, indeed, it is probable that it was not,

as the "province of Babylon" doubtless and is rendered rulers in every place exembraced more than the city, and an cept Isa. xli. 25, where it is rendered extensive plain seems to have been selected, perhaps near the city, as a place where the monument would be more conspicuous, and where larger numbers could convene for the homage which was proposed to be shown to it. In the pro

princes. Ezra ix. 2; Neh. ii. 16, iv. 14, V. 7, 17, vii. 5; Jer. li. 23, 28, 57; Ezek. xxiii. 6, 12, 23, et al. The office was evidently one that was inferior to that of the satrap, or governor of a whole province. And captains. . This