The Pulpit Commentary — Daniel — Section 318

foreign lnnd, why is be thus reprosented as ,1ie~,h e.s ohry,olithm-n intorprctl\tion very not part.e,king of the P&l!obl\l feast? It is true genore.lly followed now. In the Mn.ssorctio thal., with the temple in ruins, the Pusobal text, the use of the nmnore.l "one," almost lamb oould not be sl&iu iu the way enjoined e.s our indefinite article, he.a to be noted. in the Law; but the modern Jew keeps the Bad deem is tho plural of n word need mainly PaMo"e.r '\\·ithout the le.mh. I was by the for the material of which the garments of •ilk of the great rii-er, ttl1frh u Hidde/eel, the priests were mado; it occ•irs also in tho '.rbe ne.mo is e. trnnsferenoo of the vision of Ezekiel. The singularity is tlmt Assyrinn name lddiklat, It would seem in Ezekiel, as in D0-niel, tbc word is aJwnys tllllt De.niel we.s then on the ba.nke of plural, whoreas in the rest of Scripture it the Tigris, not in vision, but in e.otue.l 1s always singular. Uphaz occurs, ns aborn person, as here there is no reference, a.e in mentioned, only in Jer. x. 9; it is by eomo oh. riii. 2, to hia being there in nsion; the supposed to be a varintion on Ophir, As mention of e.ttenda.nts also renders it un- here, it is connected in Joreruie.h with likely that it was only in vision that Daniel Tarshish. Fiirst suggests paz, "fino gold " was on the be.nks of the Tigris. His pur- = (Job :uviii. 17), and It-: •i;t, "coast or island," pose in being there was probably govern- thus making it equivalent to" Gold Coe.et." mental, a.e he had nttende.nts with him. K6them, " fine gold," is nssocinted in Isn. Vors. 5, 6.-Th~n I liftad up mine eyes, xiii.12 with "Ophir," ae here with"Uphaz;" and looked, and behold a certain man olothecl this might hint at the identity of tho two in linen, whos3 loin& were girded with :fine places. That, however, is nn uncertain b:i.sis. gold of Upha.z : his body also wae like the The fact that Tarshish and Uphaz ere baryl, and his faoe a■ the appeara.noe of brought together, would indice.te that, liko lightning, and his eyes a.a lamps of 11.re, Tarshish, it wae in Spain. Kneucker, in and hia arms and hia feet like in oolonr to Schenkel's ' Bibellexikon,' decides for Hy- polished bre.u, and the voioe of hia words phasis, South Are.hie., on the uncertain like the voioe of e. multitude. The version ground of the sound of the no.me. Bochart given by the Septuagint exhibits traces of would place it in Ceylon, because Ptolemy confluence, "And it we.s [apparently read- mentions e. harbour e.nd river of tho name ing •;:;:) (va!,'Y"hee)] on the four and twen- of Phasis. Tarshish is the Tartessue of the tieth day of the first month, I was upon the Greeks e.nd the modem The.reis ; here tho ba.nk of the grent river Tigris, e.nd I lifted chrysolite or topaz, e.e brought from thence. up mine eyes, and saw, and behold a me.n Marg"lothayo, " his feet,'' is the most com- clothed in tine linen (Suaawo.), and girt about mon rendering; but von Lengerke would the loins with fine linen (Suaa,,,q, ), and from render, "the ple.ce where his feet rested" his middle there wo.s light, and his mouth -e. rendering which, while it suits the form we.s ae the sea., and his face ae the appear- of the word, does not suit the context. It ance of lightning, and his eyes ae le.mps of occurs four times in Ruth in one conneotion, fire, his arms e.nd feet as gleaming brass, and not elsewhere, save here. "Like in e.nd the voice ( 'P"'"11) of his speech ae the colour to polished braes " is e. phra.ee which voice of a mnltitnde." It wonld seem that OCOW'B in Ezek. i. 7. Professor Beve.n ea.ye, the tra.nsle.tor he.d c•:i~ twice; that might •• What meaning th1t author e.tte.ched to '~P. be dne to blunder, or may be a e&ee of (qal.al), 'polished,' it is imposeible to eay." doublet-& phenomenon so frequent. The All the versioD.B render" gleaming," in both difficnlt word Uph<u, which only occurs else- passages; there seems no need to suggest a. where in Jer. L 9, is omitted; "from his corruption of the text, The vision here he.a middle there we.e light" is probably an effort a great resemblance, though with many to render this clause, which the translator points of contraet,'to Ezek. i. 4-25; viii. 2; seems to he.ve ree.d mithoq 'or. Poesibly the ix. 2; x. 1-22. Mo.ny passages in the mysterioue clause, "e.nd his mouth wae like .Apocalypse show traces of its influence: the sc&.," may be another attempt to render thus i. 14, 15, the sppee.re.nce of our Lord; these unaccnstomed words. Theodotion also x. 1-3. The vision in Ezek. i. is a. merely transliterates c-,:i into S«lili{,,, and theophany; this, however, is not the appear- ti•Jt-:,r, into 6«pais, and regards Upha, as a ance of a direct symbol of God, but the garment, which, in the case before ue, was e.ppee.re.nce of one of his nngels. The whole golden (XPua{q, ). ID the Syriac of the aspect is one of terror nnd splendour. It Peshitte., the tre.nsla.tor escapes the diffi- has been noted that the yellow gleam of culty of baddeem by rendering it "glory." the topaz suits well the tiut of the Oriental The next cle.uee is also pe.raphraetic, " the complexion. When we compare this with girdle of his loins (be.ck) wae of splendid Ezekiel's vision, wo find e. reticence in llllignificence : " this last is his rendering of Ezekiel'e description; he does not affirm Dpl,az. The next verso does not ce.11 for re- (i. 27) the.t it is a man he sees, but only one mark. Jerome, in the Vulgate, renders tar- in human likeness. Whereas Dnniel dis- 011, x. 1-21.J nm BOOK OF D.\NU,:I,. 2!Jl