The Pulpit Commentary — Daniel — Section 69

nn,1 stntccrnrt woul<l be submiUotl to these 1orihe, finding it, ineorle<l it here to crimplet 9 c,u,di<lo.los, to see whnt they wonl<l eny. the sentence. Tho tranRlntion, hr,wover Above nil, in personal intercourse the King procoede yet further, "And constitnt,A of Ilnbylon would be able to form some esti- (l&v,3ei!ev) them wiser than a.II those of hia mnto of the reo.l worth of these youths. in affairs in all his land and in hi~ There probnbly would enter in o. lo.rge kingdom." This sentence has all the meneure of on price, or even superstition, into 11.ppearo.nce of nn attempt to reo<ler inl0 his choico, yet not unlikely his strong Greek a piece of Hebrew that the tre.nslo.tor pro.otionl sense would limit his superstition, imperfectly understood, As we find thnt The result of this examino.tion is eminently l&vaS,l1tvu/l-, represents occo.eionally vii;,, and sutisfoctory to the young Hebrews. They as the Syriac 11a11 and the old Hebrew ii were found superior to o.11 their competitors. were almost identical in eho.pe, )Ii; (yod'a) Therefore stood they before the king. Pro- might be read as nli•; evidently the trans- fessor Bovnn would render this "became lator has read c•c:in (/,acmeem) insteo.<l of his personal nttemlo.nts "-a very naturo.l C'!?l!:l'.11:1 (/1,artummeem ), and baa tre.nsferrcc l tro.nslution. We know, from the Ninevite the 'al ool from before hartummeem to before marbles, that the king is always, alike on the next word, which seems to have read, not the field of bo.ttle, the hnnting-fleld, and 'aahahapheem, but hartzo, the relative seems the council-chamber, attended by eunuchs, to have been omitted, e.nd the second col, It may, however, bo regarded as referring "o.11." This great variety of reading snggests to the specie.I subjects of their study. As smpicions of the verse altogether, which Ibey had boen admitted to the class of magi- the content of the verse rather strengthens. cians and astrologers, it would meo.n they Thcodotion is in strict agreement with the were admitted to the number of those who Massoretic text. The Peshitta also is o.t were royal mo.gioiuns and astrologers-those one with it in this, bnt these are late whom the kiog consulted. It is not to be compared with the Septuagint. It ho.a been unde1·;tood that, even though they were ad- reasoned that the Book of Daniel is a story mitted to this number, they were therefore modelled on the history of Joseph, e.nd the necesso.rily admitted before the king in this presence of /1,arlummeem here is reg:i.rded capacity on ordinary OCCll!,ions. They would as o. proof of this quasi Egyptian origin (see occupy but o. subordinate position in the huge Gen. xli. 8; Exod. vii. 11, etc.). One thing Bo.bylonian hierarchy. We must note here is clear, that the word-whatever it was- a ve1·iation in the Septuo.gint, ;\o-av, "they wo.s unknown in Alexandria, where this were." We, for our part, agree with Pro- translation was made; /1,artummeem, as occnr- fessor Bevan, in regarding this as a scribal ring in the Pentateuch, the earliest po.rt of blunder in the Greek, and that the origino.l the Old Testament translated, wo.s certain text was probably fr-r110-av. The only diffi- to be known: how did the word here ho.ppen culty is tho.t the blunder is o.lso in Paulus not to be known? We can nnderstand the Tellensis. pheoomenon if some word, probably of Ver. 20.-And in all matters of wisdom Babylonian origin, and unknown in Egypt and understanding, that the king inquired and Palestine, occupied the ple.ce and wo.s of them, he found them ten times better modified into a more intelligible sho.pe by than all the magicians and astrologers being turned into /•artummeem. As the verse that wc1·e in all his realm. The Septno.gint stands, /1,artummeem is grammatically placed rendering here bas a considerable addi · in apposition to the following word, tion, which really means, as it seems to 'ashshapheem, o.s there is no conjunction to us, the coalescence of two readings, It unite the two words. It is acknowledged reaile time : "And in all leo.rning (AO'Y'f'• by Professor Bevo.n that the latter word a liteml rnn<lering of ,~-;r, dabhar, 'a. word ' he.a an Assyrian origin; it is not incon- or 'thin~'), o.nd knowledge antl educo.tion oei vo.ble that /1,artummeem is really the (,rcu5e(q.) wbo.tsoever the king naked of them, explnno.tory word, though the arrangement he foun<l them ten times wiser tho.n all the of the words is decidedly against this view. wise nnd lcarno<l men in nil his kingdom." It is to be observed here that •a~hshapheem Thus for the verse is o. rendering, almost has been ne.turnlized in Eastern Aramo.ic, slnvishly clo,e, of the Massorctio text; while but ho.s not found a. lodgmeot in Western, the trnnsfotor has recognized thnt the save in Daniel. We cannot help feeling o sentence is incomplete as it sto.ude, and has little suspicion of the o.uthenticity of this inscrtetl o-o,pwdpous, nncl trnnslnted ~JI (al) verso. This phrase," ten times better," has by b,,-~p. But the tro.nslation proceed8, '' And all the look of tho.t exaggero.tion which the king honoured them, and o.ppointed become the prevailing vice of later Juda.ism. them l'lllers." This seems to llllve been As we hnve indicated, the varie.tions in due to a various rending. The sentence here rego.rd to the precise reading deepen this tro.nslo.ted we.a probo.bly, in fin old recension suspicion. If, however, the reference here of the text, 1111 thnt stood here, and some is really to Daniel's revelation to the king 28 THE BOOK OF DANIEL. [olt, I, 1-21,