Frederic Farrar - The Expositor's Bible - The Book of Daniel

Berachôth , f. 31.

Sanhedrin , f. 93. Midrash Rabba on Ruth, 7, etc., quoted by Hamburger, Real-Encyclopädie , i. 225.

Kiddushin , f. 72, 6; Hershon, Genesis acc. to the Talmud , p. 471.

Bel and the Dragon, 33-39. It seems to be an old Midrashic legend. It is quoted by Dorotheus and Pseudo-Epiphanius, and referred to by some of the Fathers. Eusebius supposes another Habakkuk and another Daniel; but "anachronisms, literary extravagances, or legendary character are obvious on the face of such narratives. Such faults as these, though valid against any pretensions to the rank of authentic history, do not render the stories less effective as pieces of Haggadic satire, or less interesting as preserving vestiges of a cycle of popular legends relating to Daniel" (Rev. C. J. Ball, Speaker's Commentary , on Apocrypha, ii. 350).

Höttinger, Hist. Orientalis , p. 92.

Ezra viii. 2; Neh. x. 6. In 1 Chron. iii. 1 Daniel is an alternative name for David's son Chileab – perhaps a clerical error. If so, the names Daniel, Mishael, Azariah, and Hananiah are only found in the two post-exilic books, whence Kamphausen supposes them to have been borrowed by the writer.

No valid arguments can be adduced in favour of Winckler's suggestion that Ezek. xxviii. 1-10, xiv. 14-20, are late interpolations. In these passages the name is spelt דָּנִּאֵל; not, as in our Book, דָנִיֵאל.

Isa. xxxix. 7.

See Rosenmüller, Scholia , ad loc.

Ezek. , p. 207.

Herzog, R. E. , s. v.

Ewald, Proph. d. Alt. Bund. , ii. 560; De Wette, Einleit. , § 253.

So Von Lengerke, Dan. , xciii. ff.; Hitzig, Dan. , viii.

He is followed by Bunsen, Gott in der Gesch. , i. 514.

Reuss, Heil. Schrift. , p. 570.

Ignat., Ad Magnes , 3 (Long Revision: see Lightfoot, ii., § ii., p. 749). So too in Ps. Mar. ad Ignat. , 3. Lightfoot thinks that this is a transference from Solomon ( l. c. , p. 727).

See Ezek. xxix. 17.

See Zech. ii. 6-10; Ezek. xxxvii. 9, etc.

See Hag. ii. 6-9, 20-23; Zech. ii. 5-17, iii. 8-10; Mal. iii. 1.

Ezra (i. 1) does not mention the striking prophecies of the later Isaiah (xliv. 28, xlv. 1), but refers to Jeremiah only (xxv. 12, xxix. 10).

Dan. x. 1-18, vi. 10.

Ezra i. 5.

D'Herbelot, l. c.

Matt. xxiv. 15; Mark xiii. 14. There can be of course no certainty that the "spoken of by Daniel the prophet" is not the comment of the Evangelist.

See Elliott, Horæ Apocalypticæ , passim .

Kranichfeld, Das Buch Daniel , p. 4.

See Ezra iv. 7, vi. 18, vii. 12-26.

"The term 'Chaldee' for the Aramaic of either the Bible or the Targums is a misnomer, the use of which is only a source of confusion" (Driver, p. 471). A single verse of Jeremiah (x. 11) is in Aramaic: "Thus shall ye say unto them, The gods who made not heaven and earth shall perish from the earth and from under heaven." Perhaps Jeremiah gave the verse "to the Jews as an answer to the heathen among whom they were" (Pusey, p. 11).

אֲרָמִית; LXX., Συριστι — i. e. , in Aramaic. The word may be a gloss, as it is in Ezra iv. 7 (Lenormant). See, however, Kamphausen, p. 14. We cannot here enter into minor points, such as that in ii. – vi. we have אֲלוּ for "see," and in vii. 2, 3, אֲרוּ; which Meinhold takes to prove that the historic section is earlier than the prophetic.

Driver, p. 471; Nöldeke, Enc. Brit. , xxi. 647; Wright, Grammar , p. 16. Ad. Merx has a treatise on Cur in lib. Dan. juxta Hebr. Aramaica sit adhibita dialectus , 1865; but his solution, "Scriptorem omnia quæ rudioribus vulgi ingeniis apta viderentur Aramaice præposuisse" is wholly untenable.

Auberlen, Dan. , pp. 28, 29 (E. Tr.).

Einleit. , § 383.

Cheyne, Enc. Brit. , s. v. "Daniel."

כתבו. See 2 Esdras xiv. 22-48: "In forty days they wrote two hundred and four books."

Baba-Bathra , f. 15, 6: comp. Sanhedrin , f. 83, 6.

Yaddayim , iv.; Mish. , 5.

See Rau, De Synag. Magna. , ii. 66 ff.; Kuenen, Over de Mannen der Groote Synagoge , 1876; Ewald, Hist. of Israel , v. 168-170 (E. Tr.); Westcott, s. v. "Canon" (Smith's Dict. , i. 500).

Yaddayim , iii.; Mish. , 5; Hershon, Treasures of the Talmud , pp. 41-43.

Hershon ( l. c. ) refers to Shabbath , f. 14, 1.

Herzog, l. c. ; so too König, Einleit. , § 387: "Das Hebr. der B. Dan. ist nicht blos nachexilisch sondern auch nachchronistisch." He instances ribbo (Dan. xi. 12) for rebaba , "myriads" (Ezek. xvi. 7); and tamîd , "the daily burnt offering" (Dan. viii. 11), as post-Biblical Hebrew for 'olath hatamîd (Neh. x. 34), etc. Margoliouth ( Expositor , April 1890) thinks that the Hebrew proves a date before b. c. 168: on which view see Driver, p, 483.

Lit. of Old Test. , pp. 473-476.

Das Buch Dan. , iii.

See Glassius, Philol. Sacr. , p. 931; Ewald, Die Proph. d. A. Bundes , i. 48; De Wette, Einleit. , § 347.

Ezekiel always uses the correct form (xxvi. 7, xxix. 18, xxx. 10). Jeremiah uses the correct form except in passages which properly belong to the Book of Kings.

Nöldeke, Semit. Spr. , p. 30; Driver, p. 472; König, p. 387.

Driver, p. 472, and the authorities there quoted; as against McGill and Pusey ( Daniel , pp. 45 ff., 602 ff.). Dr. Pusey's is the fullest repertory of arguments in favour of the authenticity of Daniel, many of which have become more and more obviously untenable as criticism advances. But he and Keil add little or nothing to what had been ingeniously elaborated by Hengstenberg and Hävernick. For a sketch of the peculiarities in the Aramaic see Behrmann, Daniel , v. – x. Renan ( Hist. Gén. des Langues Sém. , p. 219) exaggerates when he says, "La langue des parties chaldénnes est beaucoup plus basse que celle des fragments chaldéens du Livre d'Esdras, et s'incline beaucoup vers la langue du Talmud."