Hebrew Bible (Praf in .i>an.)i and, instead of any commentary of his own, adds shortly Origen's remarks ** on the &blee of Bel and Susanna** (Comm, in Dan, xiii, 1). In a similar manner, he notices shortly the Song of the three Children, ** lest he should seem to have overlooked it" (Comm, in Dan, iii, 23).
III. Their Derivation, — Various conjectures have been made as to the origin of the additions. It has been supposed that they were derived from Aramaic originals (De Wette, End, ii, 2, Kap. 8, gives the ar- gumente at length), but the intricate evidence is whol- ly insufficient to establish the point The character of the additions themselves indicates rather the hand of an Alexandrine writer; and it is not unlikely that the translator of Daniel wrought up traditions which were already current, and appended them to his work (comp. Fritzsche, Exeg, Hcmdb, zu den Apok, i, 121). The abruptness of the narrative in Daniel famished an occasion for the introduction of the prayer and hymn ; an^ the story of the Dragon seems like a strange exaggeration of the record of the deliverance of Daniel (Dan. vi), which may naturally have formed the basis of different legends. Nor is it difficult to see in the history of Susanna a pointed allosion to the name of the prophet, though the nairatiYe may not be wholly fictitious.
The Sept. appears to be the original sonrce from which all the existing recensions of the ftragments were derived (comp. Hody, De Bibl, text, p. 688). The- odotion seems to have done little more than transcribe the Sept. text, with improvements in style and lan- guage, which are considerably greater in the appended narratives than in the Song incorporated into the ca- nonical text. Thus, while the history of Susanna and Bel and the Dragon contain large additions which complete and embellish the story (e. g. Hist. Sus. IS- IS; 20,21; 24-27; 46,47,49, 60; Bel and Dr. 1, 9-13 ; Eichhorn, p. 431 sq.), the text of the Song is little more than a repetition of that ef the Sept (comp. De Ma- gistris, Daniel, ete. p. 264 sq. ; Eichhorn, EinUit. in der Apokryph, Schrift, p. 422 sq.). The Polyglot-Syriac, Arabic, and Latin versions are derived fh>m Theodo- tion, and the Hexaplar-Syriac from the Sept (Eich- horn, p. 480, ete.).
The stories of Bel and Susanna received various em- bellishmento in later times, which thn}w some light upon the manner in which they were originally com- posed (comp. Origen, Ep, ad Afric. § 7, 8 ; Bochart, Hieroz, iii, 3 ; Eichhorn, p. 446, ete.), just as the change which Theodotion introduced into the narrative of Bel,, to give some consistency to the foots, illustrates the rationalizing process through which the legends passed (comp. Delitzsch, De Habacuci vitd et ataU, 1844). It \b thus useless to institute any inquiry into the historic foundation which lies below the popular traditions; for, though the stories cannot b^ regarded as mere fa- bles, it b evident that a moral purpose determined the shape which they assumed. A later age found in them traces of a deeper wisdom, and to Christian com- mentators Susanna appeared as a type of the true Church tempted to infidelity by Jewish and pagan adversaries, and lifting up her voice to God in the midst of persecution (Hippo^. In Susaxm, p. 689 sq., ed. Migne). — Smith, s. v.
V. Their Spuriousness, — ^These addenda are regard- ed as canonical by the Roman Church, but the only evidence that can be adduced for this authority being atteched to them is the fact of tiieir existence in the Sept, Vulg., and other versions, and their quotation by the early Church fathers. On the other hand, these arguments are more than counterbalanced by the fiict of their non-existence in the Heb. text and the earliest Syriac, the weak authority of the Sept. (especially in the book of Daniel), and consequently of the Vulg., which is based upon it, and the general manner in which these fathers refer to them. Je- rome, indeed, ft^quently and openly ridicules their ab-
DANIEL THE STYLTTE
672
DANTE
surd legends ; and their own contradictions are suffi- cient to stamp them as spurious upon their very face.
See Josippon ben Gorion (ed. Breithaupt, Goth, et Lips. 1710), p. 34; Whltaker, DuputaHon oh Scripture (ParlLer Society od.), p. 76 sq. ; Du Pin, History of the Canon (London, 1699), p. 14 sq., 117 sq. ; Arnold, Com- mentary on Apocrypha; Zunz, Gottesdient$lichen Vor^ trage^ p. 122; Herzfeld, Geschichte der /sraely p. 817; Gr&tz, Gesch, der Juden, iii, 808 ? Ewald, Ge$ch, Igrad, iv, 657 sq. ; Fritzsche, Exeg, Handb.% 111 ; Davidson, Text oftheO.T. p. 976. See SoNO of the thbbe noLT Children ; Susanna, Uistobt of ; Destruc- tion OF Bel and the Dragon, Uistort of.
3. (Sept. Aavu/A.) A priest of the fiunily of Itha- mar, who returned from the exile in the time of *' Ar- taxerxes" (Ezra viii, 2), B.C. 459. He is probably the same with the priest Daniel who joined in the cov- enant drawn up by Neheniiah (Neh. x, 6), B.C. 410. He has been confounded with the prophet ia the apoc- ryphal addenda to the Sept. (Dan. xiv, 1, Sept., not Theodotion), where he is called ** a priest by the name of Daniel, the son of Abda'* (Jerome, PrafaJL, in Dan- id,),