rondere, "odours." The Medimvnl Greek then, repented hie hasty decrco, a.n,l pnyed Version tre.nele.tee, "inetmmente of mueio." for the deliverance of Dani~!. Filret epee.ks with favour of the Byrie.o Vere. 19, 20.-Then the king arose very rendering, "food-tables." Han'ayl, the early in the morning, and went in haste e.phol of '•ilal, has to be noted as e. sign unto the den of lione. And when he c,rne of antiquity. The version of the Septun.- to the den, he cried with a lamentable voice gint is very wide from the Me.eeoretic in unto Daniel : and the king spake and said to the lo.tter po.rt of the verse, "'.l'hue the Daniel, 0 Daniel, servant of the living God, king returned to his palace, e.nd wcn t to ia thy Ood, whom thou servest continually, Led fa.sting, being grieved about Daniel." 1 able to deliver thee fro!ll the lions 1 " Vcry It is evident thnt the Septuagint tro.nslntor ee.rly" is really "tbe glimmer of day" ho.d before him d'heel instead of dohvan- (ahapharparrt'). The word uaed occurs in the nun in the script of Egypti1.1n Arari:.a.ic is Targums. It may, however, be doubted very like lamed in the later mode writing, as whether the word here is not the Syriao also yodh e.nd 11av. It is possible the.t the shaphra. The writing here presents so many name "Dnniel" was rend han'eel or, vice peculiarities that snspicion is forced upon versa, ns two of the letters e.re identical. the reader. The first El is email, and the If we can accept the Septuagint reading, second ie la.rge. There ie tlie further the difficulty of this mysterious da~van difficulty that nogah is nearly equivalent to dise.ppee.re. Another clause is e.dded here shaphra. One might suspect a doublet, as in the Septuagint from ver. 22 (23) Mas- Behrmann maintains, here, did not the soretio, though with variations. "Then the versions indicate something like this as the God of Daniel, to.king thought for him meaning of this clnuse. A lamentaMe r:oice (1rpovo,uv .,,0,06µ.,vos ub-,-oii) closed the mouths ( tzeeb) seems to mean "sad" or "grieved." 0
of the lions, that they did not hurt Daniel." The version of the Septuagint shows traces This statement is not inserted in De.niel's of addition, "And King DariU3 rose early answer to the king in the Septuagint, e.s it in the morning, and took with him the is in the Me.ssoretio text. It would almost eatraps, e.nd went and stood 11.t the mouth of seem that our present text in both cases is the den of lions. Then the king called to e. condensation of a more extended docu- Daniel with a loud voice, witb. weeping, ment. This view receives support from the saying, 0 Daniel, if thou art alive, and thy rendering of Theodotion, "And the king God whom thou servest continually, bath departed to his house, e.nd went to bed he so.ved thee from tl1e lions? and have eupperless. e.nd viands were not brought they not harmed thee?" It is possible the to him, e.nd ~ sleep went from him, e.nd addition of "the so.traps" mayhe.ve been due God closed the mouths of the lions, e.nd to shapharpara being read a~ashdarpnayya. they did not hurt Daniel." It will be seen Certainly if the purpose of the double seal- that the le.at clause here agrees with the ing we.a what it is assigned to be in the concluding clause of the Septuagint. The first verse, then the satraps would ac- mysterious word da~van is rendered here company him; only the suggestion is "food" ( i5ecrµ.u-,-u )-a version that is aus- such a. nature.I one that it might readily picious from the fact that it merely repeats, slip into the text. Ver. 20 (21) in under another form, the ste.tement that the the LXX. he.a traces of expansion. The king went to bed fasting. It is supported omission of yekeel e.nd the change of sheezab by the Peshitta e.nd the Vulgate. This to the finite preterite is possible enongh, and difference cnn scarcely be doe to a various may indicate that in the original text the reading. Otherwise the Peshitte. e.nd the word rendered "able " was not found. Vulgate e.gree with the Massoretio text. Theodotion renders ver. 19 (20) in accord- The king's sorrow e.nd humiliation could o.nce with the Massoretio reading, but, in not be better pictured than it is here : even ver. 20 (21) instead of "le.men table voice,'' the feaet of the pe.le.ce had no pleasure for he.a "strong voice," e. reading that seems him, he we.a so grieved about Daniel. But somewhat confirmed by the LXX. Further, we must also bear in mind that fasting he.d he tre.nsle.tes the interrogative ha as if it among the Jews, e.nd, indeed, in the East were the Hebrew kee, "if." 1 The Peshitta, generally, a relationship to prayer (see though e.greeingin the nineteenth ,eree with Esth. iv. 16, where fasting takes the place the Massoretic, he.a some minor differences in of prayer; Si:'fl also Dan. x. 3). It means the following verse-" high voice " insteo.d also repente.nce (Jonah iii. 6-8). Darius, of "lamentnble voice,'' and "faithfully" instead of "continually." The Vulge.te singularly inserts in ver. 20 putasne? ",lost 1 Josephus, 'Ant.,' L 11, seems to have thou think?" That Do.riua should thus rend with the LXX. here, Darius "spent the whole night fasting e.nd sleepless, 11s he 1 Josephue, 'Ant.,' L 11, supports Theo- was anxious ( <irwvtwv) 11.bout Daniel." dotion by rendering iive.SJ'l.,.•• THE BOOK OF DANIEL. [oH. VI, 1-28,