The Pulpit Commentary — Daniel — Section 101

giving yet more definitely. Ood he.d me.de who had solemnly se.crificcd before ee.ch )mown to him wh0,t the king h0,tl re<Juirecl. campaign, 0,nd taken the o.ug1Jries, pro- Vor. 21.-Therofore De.niel went 1n unto tested a.go.inst this sur!clen 0,nrl whr,lcaal<1 Ariooh, whom the king he.d ordained to massacre. He has determined to fritLcr destroy the wise men of Babylon: he went nway time, in order to give his mastor and said thus unto him ; Destroy not the opportunity to bethink himself. The mere wise men of Babylon: bring me in before political ill will that would be roasetl by the king, and I will show unto the king the such an attempt was formidable. We know interpretation. The differences in the that the Babylonian monarch Nabunahid versions fro111 this are slight. The LXX. has really rather fell before the intrigues of l,caO'-ra instead of 0'6-y1<p10'111, e,s if reading ',!, the priests e.nd augurs than before the instead of 1r;i'~!), e.n emendation due to the arms of Cyrus. To him, thus waiting anrl fact the.t the king had demanded from the procrastinating, comes Dani~!. Although wise men, not merely the interpretation, there is nothing said of it in the narra- which, given the dree.m, they were willing tive, Daniel may have given him to under- enough to give, hut the dree.m itself; only stand that be hoped to be able to satisfy themorene.ture.l emendation would have been the demands of the king. The power Daniel had of gaining the favour and con- to have interpolated Nl;)?Q (~el'ma), "dream," fidence of those with whom he came in before "interpretation." Both the Septuagint contact, led to bis being buoyed up by a e.nd Theodotion omit the word representing certain hope in bis procrastination, which the second" went." It is to he observed the.t would be strengthened by the fact that the "went in " e.nd" went" a.re different words in fiery young king made no inquiry whether the original, aa in the Peshitte. Version. The his order was being fulfilled. Still, it must verbs ',~l!. ("'la!) and '1N ('".ea!) have different have been withjoy he saw Daniel appearing, idea.a connected with them. The :first means and heard him say, "Destroy not the wise "to enter," of a ple.oe with a preposition; the men of Babylon," especially when followed latter he.a the notion of simple going. If we by the request to he brought into the co.n imagine the body-guard of the king presence of the king; thus he knew that quartered in some part of the huge pa.lace, Daniel could answer the king's question then Daniel " went in " first to the quarters and tell him hie dream, e.s well as the pro- of the guard, and then, having got ad- mised interpretation. If we take the Septua- mission, "went" up to Arioch, who we.a gint rendering as representing the original probably endeavouring to occupy as muoh text, Daniel promised to tell the king time as possible to delay the horrible exe• "everything." cution, or perhaps esce.pe the necessity Ver. 25.-Then .l..riooh brought in Daniel altogether. It would seem as if Arioch before the king in haste, and said thus unto bad beard nothing of the petition which him, I have found a man of the captives of Daniel had presented to the king, and only .Judah, that will make known unto the king knew that his dele.y he.d not been found the interpretation. Save that the Septuagint fault with. It might seem by the intro- has again l,ce&O'-re& instead of O'{ry,cp10'iv or ductory word "therefore" (kol-q•biil-d•nah) ,r{ry,cp,µti., and Paulus Tellensis adds the that the hymn he.a been an interpolation. adjective "wise" as a description of the It is quite true that it would most naturally mo.n who bad thus professed t.o satisfy immediately follow var. 19. Yet we mast the king, the versions agree with the bear in mind that the conseoution of one po.rt Maeeoretic text. In regard to the Aramaio to another, which we have in our Western here, the use of the Eaetem form of the languages, is not so ce.refully observed in haphel is to be noted-han'ii! instead of Eastern tongues. It may be doubted, more- ha'el. These are to be looked upon as over, whether nri-',;~r,-',~ (kol-q•biil-d•11ah) archaisms or Orien talism.s. that have sur- he.a so much e. logical ns e. local or temporal vived modernizing efforts of the pre-Mas- significe.nce. "Thereupon" would, perhaps, soretio scribes. We have already remarked more correctly render this connective here. on this e.s an Ee.stem peculiarity which After he had finished offering up his praise survives in the Me.nde.itio and in the and thanks to God, Daniel went to Arioch. Babylonian Talmud. The careful way in As we have already so.id, it would seem that which the Septuagint renders the particular Ariooh had a reluctance to set about the •:r, 8Ta,omitted in the otherold versions save fulfilment of this horrible order, not that the Peshitta, ought to be noted e.s a sign of mere slaughter we.a a thing specially re- the extreme carefulness of the Septuagint pugnant to him-he had to.ken part in too translator, and a reason why we should many co.mp11igns for thut to impress him regard divergences from the Massoretic as much; but this was a m0,sso.cre of the priests. generally evidences of a different text. It All the roverence of bis nature that during ho.a been remarked by Archdeacon Rose his lifetimo bad associo.ted itself with those that .Arioch claims too much when he  62 THE BOOK OF DANIEL, [OH, II, 1-49,