The king spoke to Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring in some of the children of Israel, even of the royal offspring and of the nobles; youths in whom was no defect, but well-favored, and skillful in all wisdom, and endowed with knowledge, and understanding science, and who had the ability to stand in the king’s palace; and that he should teach them the learning and the language of the Chaldeans. The king appointed for them a daily portion of the king’s dainties, and of the wine which he drank, and that they should be nourished three years; that at its end they should stand before the king.
Now among these were of the children of Judah: Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah. The prince of the eunuchs gave names to them: to Daniel he gave the name Belteshazzar; to Hananiah, Shadrach; to Mishael, Meshach; and to Azariah, Abednego.
John Calvin 1540 · Public Domain On vv3–6 Here Daniel pursues his narrative, and shows the manner…
Here Daniel pursues his narrative, and shows the manner in which he was led away together with his companions. The king had demanded young men to be brought, not from the ordinary multitude, but from the principal nobility, who stood before him, that is, ministered to him. Hence, we ascertain why Daniel and his companions were chosen, because they were noble young men and of the royal seed, or at least of parents who surpassed others in rank. The king did this purposely to show himself a conqueror; he may also have taken this plan designedly, to retain hostages in his power; for he hoped, as we shall see, that those who were nourished in his palace would be degenerate and hostile to the Jews, and he thought their assistance would prove useful to himself. He also hoped, since they were born of a noble stock, that the Jews would be the more peaceable, and thus avoid all danger to those wretched exiles who were relations of the kings and the nobles. With regard to the words, he calls this Aspenaz the prince of eunuchs, under which name he means the boys who were nourished in the king’s palace to become a seminary of nobles; for it is scarcely possible that this Aspenaz was set over other leaders. But we gather from this place, that the boys whom the king held in honor and regard were under his custody. The Hebrews calls eunuchs סריסים, serisim, a name which belongs to certain prefects; for Potiphar is called by this name though he had a wife. So this name is everywhere used in Scripture for the satraps of a king; (Genesis 37:36; Genesis 40:2, 7;) but since satraps also were chosen from noble boys, they were probably called eunuchs, though they were not made so, yet Josephus ignorantly declares these Jewish children to have been made eunuchs. But when eunuchs existed among the luxuries of Oriental kings, as I have already said, those youths were commonly called by this name whom the king brought up as a kind of school of nobles, whom he might afterwards place over various province.
The king, therefore, commanded some of the children of Israel of the royal seed and of the nobles to be brought to him. So the sentence ought to be resolved; he did not command any of the common people to be brought to him, but some of the royal race, the more plainly to show himself their conqueror by doing all things according to his will. He means those “elders” who yet were in chief authority under the king of Judah. And Daniel also was of that tribe, as we shall afterwards see. The word פרתמים, pharthmim, “princes,” is thought to be derived from Perah, which is the Euphrates, and the interpreters understand prefects, to whom the provinces on the banks of the Euphrates were committed; but this does not suit the present passage where Jews are treated of. We now see the general signification of this name, and that all the elders ought to be comprehended under it. — The rest tomorrow.
John Calvin's Commentaries (1540-1563) — public domain. Text from the Calvin Translation Society English edition (1840s-50s) via the Christian Classics Ethereal Library (ccel.org). Calvin's coverage is partial (roughly two-thirds of the Bible); uncommented books and verses are honest gaps, never fabricated. The 19th-century editor's footnotes and remarks are omitted so the notes are faithfully Calvin's own voice.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain On vv3, 4, 5, 7 He calleth them Eunuchs whom the King nourished and…
He calleth them Eunuchs whom the King nourished and brought up to be rulers of other countries afterward.
Who was as master of the wards.
Read full note →
His purpose was to keep them as hostages, and that he might show himself victorious, and also by their good entreaty and learning of his religion, they might favor rather him than the Jews, and so to be able to serve him as governors in their land: moreover by this means the Jews might be better kept in subjection, fearing otherwise to procure hurt to these noble men.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain On vv3–7 Dan 1:3 And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the…
Dan 1:3 And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring [certain] of the children of Israel, and of the king’s seed, and of the princes;
Ver. 3. And the king spake unto Ashpenaz.] Which signifieth in the Chaldee tongue the chief chider, or controller of the king’s house, as Ctesias useth Ashpamithres for chief priests. To this great officer the king commendeth the care of his school.
Read full note →
And of the king’s seed, and of the princes.] As having been better bred, and so more hopeful. Here Nebuchadnezzar, minding nothing but the glory of his court by these noble waiters, unwittingly maketh way for the Church’s comfort.
John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Matthew Poole 1685 · Public Domain On vv3–7 These here called eunuchs were chief among the king’s…
These here called eunuchs were chief among the king’s servants, and they are called
eunuchs because many of them were such of old among all the princes of the East, and at this day, but they were not all such, Jer 52:25. The word translated
Read full note →
eunuch signifies also
chamberlain; such was
Hatach, Est 4:5; such were
Bigthana and
Teresh, Est 6:2, and
Harbonah, Est 7:9, and
Ashpenaz in the text, the master of the king’s eunuchs, who had set
Melzar over Daniel and his companions, Dan 1:11.
Here was fulfilled what the prophet Isaiah had foretold king Hezekiah, Isa 39:7. Some think Daniel and his companions were made eunuchs in a strict sense, which doth not appear to be probable; but rather to be bred up in the court for officers, and thereby to alienate their minds from the religion of their country, and from seeking the welfare and return of their people; but God had otherwise appointed by this education of them, as appears in many signal testimonies of the presence and power of God with them, for the conviction of idolaters that God was above all gods.
Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
John Gill 1763 · Public Domain On vv3–7 And the king spake unto Ashpenaz, the master of…
And the king spake unto Ashpenaz, the master of his eunuchs,.... That is, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon spake to this officer of his, whose name was Ashpenaz; which, according to Saadiah, signifies a man of an angry countenance; but Hillerus (e) derives it from the Arabic word "schaphan", as designing one that excels in wit and understanding; for which reason he might have the command of the eunuchs, many of which the eastern princes had about them, particularly to wait upon their women, or to educate youth, as the Turks have now; though, as R. Jeshuah in Aben Ezra observes, the word signifies ministers, and may intend the king's nobles and courtiers, his ministers of state; and so this Ashpenaz may be considered as his prime minister, to whom he gave orders,
that he should bring certain of the children of Israel; whom he had taken and brought captive to Babylon, and were disposed of in some part or another of the city and country; and out of these it was his will that some should be selected and brought to his court:
Read full note →
and of the king's seed, and of the princes: or, "even (f) of the king's seed, and of the princes"; not any of the children of Israel, but such as were of the blood royal, or of the king of Judah's family, or some way related to it; or, however, that were of princely birth, the children of persons of the first rank, as the word (g) may signify; or of nobles and dukes, as Jarchi interprets it.
(e) Onomast. Sacr. p. 752, 753. (f) , so is sometimes rendered; see Noldius. p. 276. (g) "ex Graeca voce" Grotius, Junius.
John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
John Wesley 1765 · Public Domain On vv3–7 Of the eunuchs - These were chief among the…
Of the eunuchs - These were chief among the king's servants; and they are called eunuchs, because many of them were such. And of the princes - Here was fulfilled what the prophet Isaiah had foretold, Isaiah xxxix, 7.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain On vv3–7 Verse 3. Master of his eunuchs] This word eunuchs…
Verse 3. Master of his eunuchs] This word eunuchs signifies officers about or in the palace, whether literally eunuchs or not.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Joseph Benson 1811 · Public Domain On vv3, 5, 6 Dan 1:3-4. And the king spake unto Ashpenaz, master…
Dan 1:3-4. And the king spake unto Ashpenaz, master of the eunuchs — One of the chief officers of his palace; the officers that attended about the persons of the eastern kings being commonly eunuchs, (a custom still practised in the Ottoman court,) such being employed as guardians over the women which the kings kept for their pleasure. That he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and, or rather, even, of the king’s seed — The conjunction copulative being often used by way of explication. And thus Isaiah’s prophecy was punctually fulfilled, Isa 39:7. Children in whom was no blemish — He was directed to make choice of such as were comely, and had no defect or deformity of body, to which the Hebrew word מאום, here used, is chiefly applied, answerable to the Greek μωμος. But by the subsequent characters in the verse, it should seem that the young men were to be as complete in every respect as was possible, perfect in their mental as well as corporal powers. The greatest care seems to have been required as to the accomplishments of their minds, and on this account three several expressions are made use of, the particular force of each of which it may not be easy to ascertain. “Perhaps,” says Mr. Wintle, “the first relates to the best and most excellent natural abilities; the second, to the acquisition of the greatest improvements from cultivation; and the third, to the communication of their perceptions in the happiest manner to others.” He translates the clause as follows: Ready of understanding in all wisdom, and of skill in science, and expert in prudence. Or, more generally, the expressions may only signify that they were to be such as had been instructed, and had made proficiency, in every thing that was taught in the land of Judea. And such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace — Not only being of a strong constitution to endure the fatigue of long waitings, in or near the royal presence, during which they were not permitted to sit down; “but qualified for every business in which they might be employed, and to do credit to the situation in which they were to stand.” And whom they might teach the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans — As Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, so we are not to wonder that Daniel was taught the learning of the Chaldeans; and that he so far excelled in it, as to be placed at the head of the magi: see Dan 4:9. It must be observed that the word ילדים, rendered children in the beginning of this verse, does not signify persons in a state of childhood, but refers to those of more advanced years. The expression is applied to Rehoboam’s counsellors, 1Ki 12:8, who cannot be thought to have been mere children. Nor can we suppose Daniel and his companions to have been less than eighteen or twenty years of age at this time, as may be concluded from Daniel’s being put into considerable posts in the government soon after.
Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain On vv3–7 And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of…
And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs - On the general reasons which may have influenced the king to make the selection of the youths here mentioned, see the analysis of the chapter. Of Ashpenaz, nothing more is known than is stated here. Eunuchs were then, as they are now, in constant employ in the harems of the East, and they often rose to great influence and power. A large portion of the slaves employed at the courts in the East, and in the houses of the wealthy, are eunuchs. Compare Burckhardt’s “Travels in Nubia,” pp. 294, 295. They are regarded as the guardians of the female virtue of the harem, but their situation gives them great influence, and they often rise high in the favor of their employers, and often become the principal officers of the court. “The chief of the black eunuchs is yet, at the court of the Sultan, which is arranged much in accordance with the ancient court of Persia, an officer of the highest dignity. He is called Kislar-Aga, the overseer of the women, and is the chief of the black eunuchs, who guard the harem, or the apartments of the females. The Kislar-Aga enjoys, through his situation, a vast influence, especially in regard to the offices of the court, the principal Agas deriving their situations through him.” See Jos. von Hammers “des Osmanischen Reichs Staatsverwalt,” Thes i. s. 71, as quoted in Rosenmuller’s “Alte und neue Morgenland,” ii. 357, 358.
That it is common in the East to desire that those employed in public service should have vigorous bodies, and beauty of form, and to train them for this, will be apparent from the following extract: “Curtius says, that in all barbarous or uncivilized countries, the stateliness of the body is held in great veneration; nor do they think him capable of great services or action to whom nature has not vouchsafed to give a beautiful form and aspect. It has always been the custom of eastern nations to choose such for their principal officers, or to wait on princes and great personages. Sir Paul Ricaut observes, ‘That the youths that are designed for the great offices of the Turkish empire must be of admirable features and looks, well shaped in their bodies, and without any defect of nature; for it is conceived that a corrupt and sordid soul can scarcely inhabit in a serene and ingenuous aspect; and I have observed, not only in the seraglio, but also in the courts of great men, their personal attendants have been of comely lusty youths, well habited, deporting themselves with singular modesty and respect in the presence of their masters; so that when a Pascha Aga Spahi travels, he is always attended with a comely equipage, followed by flourishing youths, well clothed, and mounted, in great numbers. ‘“ - Burder. This may serve to explain the reason of the arrangement made in respect to these Hebrew youths.
Read full note →
That he should bring certain of the children of Israel - Hebrew, “of the sons of Israel.” Nothing can with certainty be determined respecting their “age” by the use of this expression, for the phrase means merely the descendants of Jacob, or Israel, that is, “Jews,” and it would be applied to them at any time of life. It would seem, however, from subsequent statements, that those who were selected were young men. It is evident that young men would be better qualified for the object contemplated - to be “trained” in the language and the sciences of the Chaldeans Dan 1:4 - than those who were at a more advanced period of life.
And of the king’s seed, and of the princes - That the most illustrious, and the most promising of them were to be selected; those who would be most adapted to accomplish the object which he had in view. Compare the analysis of the chapter. It is probable that the king presumed that among the royal youths who had been made captive there would be found those of most talent, and of course those best qualified to impart dignity and honor to his government, as well as those who would be most likely to be qualified to make known future events by the interpretation of dreams, and by the prophetic intimations of the Divine will.
Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Haydock's Catholic Bible Commentary 1859 · Public Domain On vv3–7 Eunuchs, or chief officers. The Jews assert that Daniel…
Eunuchs, or chief officers. The Jews assert that Daniel was made an eunuch. (Isaias xxxix. 7.) But he might be so styled on account of his dignity. (Calmet) --- Princes. Literally, "tyrants." (Haydock) --- This name was afterwards only rendered odious by the misconduct of several kings. (Calmet) --- Hebrew parthemim, (Haydock) seems to be of Greek derivation, alluding to Greek: protimoi, or protoi, "the first or most honoured." (Drusius) --- We find here other Greek words. (Calmet)
George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).
Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset & David Brown 1871 · Public Domain On vv3–7 master of . . . eunuchs--called in Turkey the…
master of . . . eunuchs--called in Turkey the kislar aga.
of the king's seed--compare the prophecy, Kg2 20:17-18.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
Daniel D. Whedon 1874 · Public Domain On vv3–6 3. Ashpenaz — Compare Gen_10:3. This name as it…
3. Ashpenaz — Compare Gen_10:3. This name as it stands is not Babylonian, but resembles Persian. It is found in several inscriptions of the Persian period. However, one recension and various early quotations, made probably from the original LXX., give a very different name here, Abiesdri, or Abriesdri, which Lenormant partially unites to the Hebrew, making the name Assa-ibn-zir, “the goddess has molded the germ.”
Master of his eunuchs — That is, courtiers. This title even Hugo Winckler, as late as 1890, supposed to be a mere Hebrew fiction, being, as he thought, absolutely unknown at the Assyrian or Babylonian court; but Mr. Pinches, in 1889, found on a brick in the British Museum this very name as a title of one of the highest Babylonian officials, the Hebrew Rab-sarisim (or Sar-sarisim, Dan_1:7; Dan_1:10), corresponding almost exactly with the Babylonian Rabu-saresu, “chief of the chiefs.” Noldeke has also found this as an hereditary title on a recently discovered Phoenician inscription (Revue des Etudes Juives, 1895, p. 119).
Read full note →
Of the king’s seed, and of the princes — This may refer to the children of the Babylonian king and his nobles. The word for “princes” is generally regarded as Persian.
Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain On vv3–7 3. Ashpenaz] No satisfactory explanation of this name has…
3. Ashpenaz] No satisfactory explanation of this name has yet been found. Açp in old Persian means a horse (Sansk. açpa); but the name as a whole, in its present form, is not explicable from either Persian or Babylonian. LXX. has Αβιεσδρι. The word is not improbably a corrupt form (like ‘Holophernes,’ in Judith; or ‘Osnappar,’ Ezr_4:10).
the master of his eunuchs] Eunuchs were, and still are, common in Oriental Courts; they sometimes attained to great influence with the monarch, and were treated by him as confidential servants. Eunuchs are often represented on the Assyrian monuments, where they are readily recognizable by their bloated and beardless faces (cf. Smith, D. B.2 s. v.; Rawlinson, Ancient Monarchies4, i. 496–8, iii. 221–223). The ‘master,’ or superintendent, of the eunuchs would have the control of the eunuchs employed in the palace, and would naturally hold an important position at court. The principal eunuch, with other eunuchs under him, would have the care of the royal harem; and the training of youths for the service of the king was a duty which would be naturally entrusted to him[178]. Cf. the prophecy, 2Ki_20:18 (= Isa_39:7); though it is not said that Daniel and his companions were made eunuchs, and it is too much to infer this (as has been done) from the statement that they were put in charge of the ‘master of the king’s eunuchs’: in Persia eunuchs superintended the education of the young princes (Rawl. Anc. Mon.4, iii. 221); and in Turkey, Rycaut states (see the note below), a eunuch had charge of the royal pages.
Read full note →
[178] In Turkey, as described by Rycaut in 1668 (The Ottoman Empire, p. 35 ff.) the office was divided, the women being under the charge of a black eunuch, called Kuzlir Agasi, and the selected youths who were being educated in the Seraglio as pages for the royal service (together with the white eunuchs employed about the Court) being under the superintendence of a white eunuch, the Capa Aga (p. 25 ff.).
bring] bring in (R.V.), viz. into the palace (Dan_1:18).
children of Israel] The expression would include, at the time here referred to, men of Benjamin and Levi, as well as of Judah (cf. Ezr_1:5; Ezr_4:1; Ezr_10:9), perhaps also men of other tribes who had migrated into the territory of Judah.
and of the seed royal, and of the nobles] If the first ו (‘and’) is to be taken in its obvious sense, the reference must be to members of the royal family and nobility of Babylon (so Prof. Bevan). Most commentators render both (cf. Dan_8:13; Jer_32:20; Psa_76:7 [A.V. 6]), though that is hardly a sense which it would naturally convey in the present sentence. Perhaps it is best to understand it in the sense of and in particular (cf. Dan_8:10).
of the seed royal] Lit. seed of royalty, or of the kingdom: so Jer_41:1 (= 2Ki_25:25); Eze_17:13. Not necessarily the descendants of the reigning ‘king.’ LXX. ‘of the royal race.’
nobles] Heb. partĕmim, elsewhere only in Est_1:3; Est_6:9 : the Pers. fratama, Sansk. fratema, akin etymologically to πρότ-ερος, πρῶτ-ος. “The phrase martiyâ fratamâ, ‘foremost men,’ occurs several times in the Achaemenian inscriptions” (Bevan).
3–5. Nebuchadnezzar’s purpose to have certain noble and promising youths educated for the king’s service.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers 1878 · Public Domain On vv3–6 (3) Ashpenaz . . . his eunuchs—i.e., the courtiers…
(3) Ashpenaz . . . his eunuchs—i.e., the courtiers or attendants upon the king. (See marginal translation of Gen_37:36; and compare Jer_39:3, where a Rab-saris, or chief of the courtiers, is mentioned. See also Isa_39:7.)
The king’s seed.—According to the story of Josephus (Ant. x. 10, 1), Daniel and the three holy children were all connected with Zedekiah. The context makes this opinion perfectly admissible.
A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain On vv3, 5, 6, 7 Vers. 3, 4. And the king spoke unto Ash-penaz…
Vers. 3, 4. And the king spoke unto Ash-penaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king"s seed, and of the princes; children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king"s palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans. The version of the LXX here becomes important: "And the king spoke to Abiesdri, his own chief eunuch (tw eJautou ajrcieunoucw), to lead to him from the sons of the nobles of Israel, and from the seed royal, and from the choice ones, four young men, without blemish, of goodly appearance, and understanding in all wisdom, and educated, and prudent, and wise, and strong, so that they may be in the house of the king, and may be taught the letters and tongue of the Chaldees." The version of Theodotion is in closer accordance with the Massoretic text, only it inserts "captivity" where the LXX had "nobles," and reads, "from the sons of the captivity of Israel." In this version the name of the chief of the eunuchs is the same as the Massoretic; the word rendered "princes" in the Authorized Version is transliterated forqommin. The rendering, "the seed of the kingdom," is more literal than that of the Authorized, "the king"s seed" The Peshitta is in close agreement with the Massoretic text, save that, instead of "Ashpenaz," the name of the chief of the eunuchs is written "Aspaz," and the word translated "princes" (parte mira) is transliterated Parthouia, which means literally "Parthians." Symmachus reads Parqwn. The king spake unto Ashpenaz. There is assumed here that there were a large number of Israelitish hostages who would be reckoned captives whenever the conquered state gave cause of suspicion to the regnant power in whose hands the hostages were, and they were possibly eunuchized. It is possible that Nebuchadnezzar wished to use these hostages about the court, in order that, having tasted the pleasure and dignities of the magnificent court of Babylon, their influence would be exercised on their relatives to maintain them in fidelity. The phrase, "spake unto," has. in later Hebrew, the force of "command," especially when followed by an infinitive, as Est_1:17. As translated in the Authorized Version. the impression conveyed is that of consultation. The name "Ash-penaz" has caused much discussion. As it stands, it is not Assyrian or Babylonian. The form it has suggests a Persian etymology, and on this fact, along with other similar alleged facts, an argument against the authenticity of Daniel has been based. One derivation would make it ashpa, "a horse;" nasa, "a nose," "horse nose by no means an impossible personal name for a Persian or Median. In one or two cuneiform inscriptions of the Persian period the name occurs. Nothing can be built on this, as in the Septuagint the name is given as jAbiesdri: in the Peshitta it becomes Ash-paz," as we have mentioned above. It would be easily possible to derive" Ashpaz" from "Ashpenaz," or vice versa; but there seems no relation between Abiesdri and either. By some, as Hitzig, the name has been identified with "Ashkenaz", (Gen_10:3) and that again derived from dv,a, "the cord of the testicle," and has, a Sanskrit root, "to destroy," and therefore the name would simply be "eunuch." Over and above the general improbability that is always present in regard to etymologies which imply the word in question to be a hybrid word, there is the improbability that one eunuch would receive a name applicable to the whole class of which he was a member. The name, as it appears in the Septuagint, is, as we have said, totally unconnected with that in the Massoretic text, but both may have sprung from some common source. Thus the French word eveque has not a single letter in common with "bishop," yet both words are derived from ejpiskopov. The changes that a name might undergo in passing from any language, even a cognate one, into Hebrew wine very great; thus Assur-bani-pal became "Asnapper." Lenormant has endeavoured to recover the name in the present case. The process he has followed is the somewhat mechanical one of combining the two names, as if we were to strive to reach Asshur-bani-pal item a combination of "Asnapper" and "Sar-danapalus." He arrives at the name Ash-ben-azur, which is a possible Babylonian name. Professor Fuller has suggested Aba-(i)-istar, "the astronomer of the goddess Ishtar." The main objection to this is that it is drawn solely from the Septuagint Version. If we look at the tendency exhibited by the Hebrew equivalents of Babylonian names, we find that shortening was one that was nearly invariably present, as Asshur-akhi-iddin na became Esarhaddon, and Sin-akhi-irba became Sanherib. The only exception to this shortening process which occurs to us is Brodach for Marduk, and even it is scarcely an exception. Next there is a tendency, which Hebrew shares with other languages, of suiting a foreign word to the genius of the language. Hence we find "Ashpenaz" has such a close resemblance to "Ashkenaz" of Gen_10:3, and that "Abiesdri" is identical with the form "Abiezer the name of the father of Gideon assumes in the Septuagint. Judging from "Asnapper," the name might even begin with Asshur, only that, as Asshur was the national god of the Ninevites, names which contained the name of that divinity are rare in Babylon. The first element in the word might not impossibly be ablu, "son." The final element seems certainly to have been ezer or utzur. As to the office he tided in the court of Nebuchadnezzar, "the master of eunuchs," the name of the office in the text is Rab-Sarisim, which occurs in a slightly different form in 2Ki_18:17, along with Rab-Shakeh, as if it were a proper name. From the fact that persons thus mutilated were employed in Eastern courts, the word became equivalent to "officer;" hence we find Petiphar is called saris, or "eunuch;" yet he had a wife. It therefore may be doubted whether Daniel and his companions are to be understood as placed in that condition. The title here givenRab-Sarisim becomes Sar-Sarisim in vers. 7 and 10, Sat being the Hebrew equivalent of the more Babylonian Rab. It is also Aramaic. That he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the kings seed, and of the princes. It may be doubted at first sight whether these may not be separate classes a view that seems to have been taken by most of the old translators, orwhether the first class, "the children of Israel," does not include the two classes that follow. The rendering partmim, as "Parthians," adopted by Symmachus and the Peshitta, would make a contrast between "the children of Israel" and "the Parthians." That, however, is utterly unlikely. Were that translation the true one, a strong argument could be advanced for the late origin of Daniel. The fact that the text before Symmachus and the Peshitta translator admitted of that translation shows how far the tendency to modify the text into suitability with the knowledge of the scribe had gone, and therefore how little weight ought to be given to lateness of individual words. According to the LXX and Theodotion, there is a word awanting in the first clause; the Septuagint translator would supply "nobles" (megistanwn) "from the nobles of Israel." Theodotion renders, "from the sons of the Captivity of Israel." If the sentence ran lar yr ynb, one might understand how it could be read lar yb ynb; the natural phrase for this is lar ytwlg ynb, but that would not explain the LXX rendering. The name "Israel" is the covenant name of the whole nation, equally applicable to the southern and to the northern kingdoms. All the more so that the captivity of Judah contained members of three other tribes besides that of Judah, namely, those of Benjamin and Simeon and Levi. Further, Josiah seems to have extended the bounds of the Davidic kingdom to embrace the remnant of the ten tribes, (2Ch_34:6, 2Ch_34:9) therefore his sons would claim the same boundaries, and therefore hostages might be taken by Nebuchadnezzar from them to Babylon. And of the king"s seed and of the princes. The two "ands" might be rendered "both and," or "alike ... and." The king"s seed means, literally, "the seed of the kingdom," as it is translated by Theodotion. The phrase, "children of the kingdom," is applied by our Lord (Mat_8:12) to all the Jews, and Mat_13:38 to the members of the true Israel perhaps with a latent reference to the children of the true King thus in captivity to the beggarly elements of this world, compelled to stand as servants in the court of Mammon, of which Nebuchadnezzar may well be the type. The word partemim is one which has caused difficulty; it only occurs here, and twice in Esther. (Est_1:3 Est_6:9) In these passages it is rendered by the Peshitta as here, Parthouia, "Parthians." It would seem that the Septuagint translator had before him, not partemin, but bahureem, connecting it with yeladeem," children" (youths), the opening word of the succeeding vers,., In Esther the word part is applied to a special class of nobles among the Persians, and certainly was not applied to the princes of Judah. Theodotion does not understand what it means, and so transliterates it forqommin. Symmachus and the Peshitta make it "Parthians;" the Targum on Esther makes the same blunder. The LXX Version of Esther renders it endoxoi, as if it were connected with raep and It certainly has Zend (frathema) and Pehlevi (pardun) congeners, so it may have come over from Aryan sources into the Babylonian. Equally certainly it has disappeared from Aramaic Eastern and Western. If partemim is to be held as part of the original text, it must belong to a period before the Greek domination, as the meaning of the word had disappeared by that time. It might, on the other hand, have been a word in the Babylonian court, or, again, a copyist might have inserted it as a more known word than that originally in the text. This latter, we think, is the probable solution. If the division of the verses had in the Massoretic become deranged, then bahureem would be unintelligible, standing, as it would, at the end of the verse. In Egypt this derangement did not take place, and hence bahureem was retained. Children in whom was no blemish. There is no limit to the age implied in yeled, the word the plural of which is translated "children;" thus to young counsellors who had been brought up with Rehoboam are called yeladeem. As they had been brought up with Rehoboam, they were of the same age with him, yet he was forty-one years old when he ascended the throne. Joseph is called yeled when he was at least seventeen, and Ishmael when he was probably sixteen. Benjamin is called yeled when he was nearly, if not quite, thirty years old; it is said of him immediately before he went down to Egypt, and then he was the father of ten sons. It is used also of new-born infants. (Exo_1:17) When we look at the various qualifications they were to possess skilful in all wisdom, cunning in knowledge, understanding science sixteen to eighteen seems the lowest limit we can set. Aben Ezra comes to the conclusion that they were fourteen when they came to Babylon; that, however, even when all allowance is made for the precocity of warm climates, seems too low. On the whole, we may say that Daniel, when he was taken to Babylon, was the same age as Joseph when he went down into Egypt. The Septuagint rendering (neaniskouv) supports our view. We may note that this command to Ashpenaz was in all likelihood given at Jerusalem. In whom was no blemish, but well-secured. If we may judge of the taste of the Babylonians and Assyrians from the sculptures that have come down to us, they had a high standard of personal appearance especially fine in appearance are the eunuchs that stand before the king. The word moom, "blemish," is used of the priesthood; presence of a "blemish" excluded from the priesthood. (Lev_21:17) It is used of Absalom; (2Sa_14:25) it is equivalent in meaning to mwmov, which not impossibly was derived from stone early form of this word; tovay mareh," goodly in appearance," almost identical with our colloquial "good-looking." Skilful in all wisdom. The word "wisdom" has, in general, a somewhat technical meaning in Hebrew, "skill in interpreting riddles and framing proverbs." It became widened in meaning in certain cases, as we see in the description of wisdom in the beginning of Proverbs and Job 28. Yet wider is the sphere given to it in Ecclesiasticus and the Book of Wisdom. The word translated "skilful," maskileem, means, in the first instance, "attending to;" then, the result of this attention, especially when followed by the preposition b, "in.
The LXX suits this, "skilled in all wisdom." Theodotion renders, "understanding (sunientav) in all wisdom." Professor Bevan would render maskil, "intelligent;" Hitzig adopts Luther"s einsichtig in allerlei Wissenschaft , "intelligent in every kind of science," adding, "that is, they would be were they placed in suitable circumstances." He objects to De Wette rendering "experienced," as unsuitable to boys. Cunning in knowledge; literally, knowing knowledge. The distinction is here between the faculty of intelligence and the actual acquirements. It might be rendered "intelligent and well-educated a view that is supported by the Septuagint rendering (grammatikouv). Understanding science; "discriminating knowledge," as it is rendered in Theodotion. The Septuagint translator had another text before him; instead of reading mebine madda", he had before him mebinim yodeem, that is to say, he divided the letters differently, so that he read it along with mebine, and had a yod inserted after it, not as connected, but as separate. The word maddais late, found in Chronicles and Ecclesiastes, and as Aramaic well known; the change in the Septuagint must have been due to a different reading. The fact that maddais late, and was not in the Septuagint text, throws a suspicion on all the late words in Daniel, as all of them may be due to the same modernizing tendency. The phrase, according to the Septuagint reading, may be rendered, "having good powers of discrimination and acquisition." And such as had ability in them to stand in the kings palace. The word used for "ability" (koh) usually means "physical strength," as of Samson, (Jud_1:16:6) applied to animals as of the unicorn (wild ox). (Job_39:11) Here, however, it refers rather to mental capacity. The idea is that those should be chosen who showed signs of future ability, and therefore afforded a probability that they would be of use in the royal council-chamber. The translator of the Septuagint Version puts a point after ijscuontav, and unites the two following clauses under it. And whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans. The LXX renders, "to teach them letters and the Chaldean dialect." There were three tongues used in Babylon. There was the Aramaic of ordinary business and diplomacy, called in 2Ki_18:26 "the Syrian language," and in this (Dan_2:4) "Syriack." This was commonly understood, as is shown by the fact that tablets have been found inscribed in Assyrian, but having a docquet behind in Aramaic, telling the contents. Next there was the Assyrian, a Shemitic tongue, cognate with Hebrew, though further removed from it than Aramaic is. This is the language of historic and legal documents, much as Norman French was for long the language of our Acts of Parliament, while the people spoke a tongue not far removed from our modern English. The system of writing used was cumbrous in the highest degree, the same sign standing for several different words, and the same word represented by several different signs. As a spoken language if it ever were a spoken tongue it was cumbrous also. It was eminently a monumental tongue. Lastly, there was Accadian, the sacred tongue, a language belonging to a different class from the Aramaic and Assyrian. In it the great bulk of the magical formulae and ritual directions of Babylon and Nineveh were written. In the huge library of Asshur-bani-pal, now in the British Museum, a large portion is composed of translations of those Accadian texts. A number of syllabaries have also been found, which enable scholars to investigate this antique tongue. It seems not impossible that Accadian was meant by the learning (rps sepher, "book") and tongue of the Chaldeans. Their learning involved some astronomy, a great deal of astrology, and not a little magic, incantations, interpretations of dreams and omens. We ourselves, though so far removed both geographically and chronologically from them, feel the effects of their ideas, and enjoy some of the results of their knowledge. We cannot tell whether the Babylonians were the earliest to fix the course of the sun, moon, and planets. At all events, they made observations on the basis of these discoveries; and our week, with its Sunday and Monday, conveys to us still the fact that the Babylonians believed the planets to be seven; the planets strictly so called were associated with deities similar in attributes to those associated with them by the Latin and Teutonic peoples, and the same days were sacred to them in Babylonia and Germany. The Chaldeans, Kasdeem, of the Bible, do not seem to have been originally inhabitants of Babylon. They formed a cluster of clans to the south-west of Babylon, who invaded Babylonia, and occasionally secured the supremacy in the city. The Assyrians had frequent encounters with them, and carried on against them many prolonged wars. The name in the Assyrian monuments is most frequently Kaldu, from which the Greek Caldaioi comes. It is doubtful whether there is a form Kassatu to explain the Hebrew term. In the days of Nabo-polassar, the Chaldeans being supreme in Babylonia, all the inhabitants of that province may have been called Chaldeans. Latterly there was a restricted use of the term, due to the great attention paid in Babylonia to astrology. It is doubtful whether this restricted use of the word occurred in the genuine Daniel, from which our canonical Daniel has sprung. Certainly Daniel, and those hostages selected with him, were to be educated so as to become member"s of this sacred college of augurs and astrologers.
Read full note →
Vers. 3-21.
Training for imperial office and work.
The name and the nature of a king are not always yoked together. Jehoiakim had been professedly a king, but was, in truth, a slave. Daniel and his companions, though led into exile as captives, had within them kingly qualities, which could not be degraded by strangers. As living water from the flinty rock will rise through every kind of strata, and find its way to the surface, so, through all adversities, innate nobleness will assert its imperial power. If a counterfeit king has become a captive, one from among the Jewish captives shall become a real king a true man, whom all ages shall admire and follow. There is set before us in this passage
I A POLICY REALLY ROYAL. This King of Babylon, unlike the majority of Eastern monarchs, did not abandon himself to voluptuous ease. It must have required some force of character to withstand the customs, precedents, and temptations of the luxurious palace. Yet, however stupendous the difficulty, Nebuchadnezzar rose above it. We can easily imagine the formidable array of prejudices which the Chaldean nobles would present to this new policy of the king. Was not such a plan unheard of in the entire history of the empire? Was it not a departure from the path of cautious prudence to introduce foreigners, and foreign captives, into the councils of the court?
1. It was a policy characterized by far-seeing wisdom. Already the Chaldeans had risen out of a state of barbarism, and had begun to appreciate knowledge and intellectual skill. They had learnt to observe with accuracy the motions of the stars. They had attained to considerable skill in architecture and sculpture. They knew something of the science of government. The king was a foremost man in the march of intellect. He knew that, in many respects, the Hebrews excelled his own countrymen. In agriculture, in instrumental music, in historical composition, especially in possessing the gift of prophecy, the Hebrews held the palm. Conscious that the triumphs of peaceful science were nobler and more enduring than martial victories, Nebuchadnezzar sought to strengthen and embellish his reign with all the learning and talent which he could secure, it was the Elizabethan period in Chaldean history. Although the idea had not yet been embodied in aphoristic words, the monarch had a vague feeling that knowledge was power.
2. It was a policy inspired by public spirit. In an age when Oriental sovereigns sought to use the machinery of government for their own personal advantage, Nebuchadnezzar seems to have been primarily concerned for the well-being of his people. When jealous mainly for their high prerogatives, kings have judged it safer to keep their subjects in a condition of ignorance, to the end they might render mechanical and servile obedience. This Chaldean king was a man of broader mind. He identified himself with the nation. His interest and its interest were one. He found his joy, not in personal indulgence and obsequious flattery, but in the advancement of the common weal. While he forgot himself, in his desire to elevate the nation, he was unconsciously sowing the seed of future fame.
3. It was a policy marked by catholic generosity. It was a part of his plan to obliterate the distinctions of nationality among his subjects to merge all into one. This badge of servitude it was his wish to obliterate. Were net these Hebrews as richly endowed with intellectual capacity as the Chaldeans? Had they not special aptitude for some of the sciences? Would not their gilts and services benefit the state-politic? And would not the entire body of exiles be more content in their lot if their own nobles were honoured with a place at court? This generous policy of Nebuchadnezzar may yet serve as a pattern to our modern rulers. It is paltry meanness and contemptible pride which seek to repress the intellectual energies of men who happen to have been born under other skies.
II AN IMPERFECT METHOD. The method which the king adopted was partly wise and partly unwise. There was wisdom in the arrangement that a maintenance should be supplied for these young nobles. The sustenance of life must always be the first care of men; and, until the necessities of hunger are met, no time nor energy can be spared for the researches of science or the acquisition of learning. But it was very unwise that the appetites of these young men should be pampered with royal dainties. It was perilous to the morals of these young men that their passions should be excited with royal wine. Very likely this king was a materialist in philosophy, and imagined that artificial excitements of the brain provoked the mind to loftier efforts. This was a perilous error. Frugal fare, simple habits of life, abstemiousness at the table, are most conducive to vigour of intellect and tranquillity of feeling. Long before the stage of intoxication is reached, imperceptible injury is done by stimulants to brain and nerve. More mischief is wrought by want of thought than want of will. Further, these young men were designated by new names. We might have supposed that this was done to obliterate national distinctions, or to allay the prejudice of the Chaldean nobles. But, inasmuch as the former names (at least of those mentioned) had incorporated in them the name of Israel"s God, and inasmuch as the new names bore some allusion to Chaldea"s idols, it is more likely that religious pride had prescribed these appellations. By conferring on these young men names which honoured their own deities, the Chaldeans supposed that their deities would reciprocate the honour by conferring on the bearers of their names some portion of their spirit, Yet to be labelled "saint" has never served to secure a saintly nature.
III THE KING"S METHOD SECRETLY MODIFIED. The sum-total of earthly wisdom never resides in one man not even in a king. No mortal has a monopoly of goodness. Daniel and his companions, though young, had already learnt that self-restraint is the surest path to health and usefulness and joy. One part of our nature is to be cultivated; one part of our nature is to be crucified. Every inclination and tendency which has its terminus in self in self-pleasing or self-elevation is to be repressed and curbed. Every disposition and energy which has its terminus in others especially in God should be fostered. Besides, it is very likely thatthe food furnished by the king had, in some way, been associated with idol-worship. On this account, it may be, the royal viands were supposed to possess some special virtue. These loyal servants Of,jehovah would not consent to sanction this idolatrous belief. They declined to be partakers in other men"s sins. Moreover. God had taken the pains to give to Israel minute directions what animals they might eat, and what flesh they might not eat. The use of blood in food was prohibited. They were not to eat such animals as had been strangled. Hence Daniel and the others were bound by an earlier and a higher allegiance, which they had resolved not to violate. They had not the power of choice left. In religions duty they were bound to the King of heaven. "They were willing to render unto Caesar those things which were Caesar"s, but they were determined also to render unto God the things which were God"s." We may often obtain by a conciliatory request what we cannot obtain by an imperious demand. Modesty of deportment is a grace peculiarly befitting the young. It is a false estimate of dignity when men suppose they must be self-assertive, arrogant, and unyielding. Persuasive kindness wields the mightiest sceptre. "The meek shall inherit the earth." Sweet amiability in Daniel was blended with firm principle, as luscious dates adorn the stately palm. Very likely Daniel had tacitly resolved not to violate his conscience, whatever the prince of the eunuchs might urge. But he would try gentler measures at first. He would not defeat his own ends by precipitate speech. Words, once uttered, are not easily recalled. The excellences of Daniel had already gained for him a place in the heart of this chamberlain, and the influence over this officer which Daniel had virtuously gained was used for his companions as much as for himself. The fruits of our goodness, others share in. We cannot live wholly for ourselves. The human race is an organic body, the several parts of which are united by ligaments of mutual service and reciprocal interest.
IV THE OPERATION OF SELFISH FEAR. This palace official seems to us a man mild and placable, but a slave of formal routine. The maxim of his life was this That which has been from time immemorial must continue world without end. To presume to offer a suggestion to his royal master was an offence bordering on treason. It had never occurred to him to question the wisdom of previous kings and chamberlains. Of course viands coming from the royal larder, and consecrated to the gods, must feed and vitalize human brains. It would be rank impiety to doubt it. So men hand down beliefs and customs from age to age, without bringing them to the test of practical utility. Their business runs daily in some narrow groove, and they become so completely the creatures of habit that all the energies of mind are lulled into inglorious sleep. "Let well alone" is one of their easy-going adages; forgetting that there is a "better" and a "best." This subordinate prince does not attempt to reason on the merits of the case. He is not willing to tolerate in these Hebrew youths the exercise of intelligence, judgment, or conscience. At once, he thinks exclusively of the injurious effect upon himself: "I fear my lord the king." Had he argued that he had a duty to the king, which obligation required him to fulfil, there would have been an element of nobleness in his attitude. Or had he showed anxiety for the risk of loss these young men ran, it would have been commendable. But this fear for himself is mean and despicable. Indeed, the service he had engaged to perform was one beyond his power to carry into effect without the consent of these youths themselves. This chamberlain could have spread the students" table with the prescribed food and wine, but no human power could have compelled these youths to partake. With the spreading of the periodic repast, the chamberlain"s duty would properly have terminated; but he was confronted with a difficulty be had not expected, and showed the weakness of his character by giving way at once to selfish fear. If he found that his royal master required of him unreasonable or impossible service, he could surely have requested his sovereign to relieve him from that post, and place him in some other position. A loss of official station is not necessarily a disgrace: it is often an honour. A good man need fear no one save God.
Fear him, ye saints, and you will then Have nothing else to fear.
V THE EXPERIMENT PROPOSED. Daniel readily proposed a plan which might quiet the chamberlain"s fears. He suggests that an experiment be made for ten days only, during which time he and his comrades should diet on vegetable food and water.
1. It was a reasonable suggestion. The question at issue was one that couldbe brought to the test of practical demonstration, and controversy would be saved by such an appeal. An hour of experiment is more fruitful than years of speculative reasoning. The eye is not always a safe arbitrator. No organ is so easily deceived. But in this case the eye was a competent judge. A competition was instituted between self-indulgence and self-restraint. The virtue of abstemiousness was placed upon its trial, and we do well to note the result.
2. Nor can we close our eyes to the fact that Daniel regarded this self-abstinence as a branch of religious duty. No department of our daily life is beyond the reach of conscience. As each ray of sunshine, and each flake of snow, contributes its quota to the autumnal harvest; so each act in a man"s life, even the most trivial, produces its effect upon his interior nature contributes either to his nobleness or to his degradation. There are occasions when men use this plea of conscience dishonestly. They make conscience a mask wherewith to hide inclination and self-will. But Daniel was a true man. Transparency of motive was a jewel that glittered on his brow.
3. Daniel proposed this ordeal in the exercise of full confidence in God. Hehad, without doubt, already proved in himself the benefit, bodily and mentally, of simple diet. Never, until now, had he been brought rote the circle of such fascinating temptation; and now it was to be seen whether his faith in God would bear the trial. Yes! his faith was not only food-proof, but even fire-proof. Full sure was he that "man did not live by bread alone, but by every word of God." One wiser than himself, and kinder than any human friend, had, with blended authority and love, decreed what might and what might not be eaten, and Daniel knew that devout obedience would secure a certain blessing. "He that doubteth is condemned if he eat.
VI OBSERVE THE SUCCESSFUL RESULT. The experiment terminated favourably on their health. They were both "fairer and fatter in flesh" than their competitors. Physical beauty, as well as physical strength, is to be adequately valued. Both are gifts of God; their possession ought to awaken thankfulness. Both may lead to sin. We must distinguish between natural appetites and acquired depraved tastes. To satisfy natural appetite is to do the will of God; to pander to needless cravings is to violate Divine authority. There is a large amount of pleasure arising from robust health, although the quality of this pleasure is none of the highest. To make the development of the body the attainment of physical perfection a study, during the growing years of youth, is a religious duty. The possession of perfect health, and the enjoyment arising therefrom, are within the reach of the poorest born. The dainties and effeminacies prevalent in marble palaces hinder, rather than help, the perfection of physical beauty. Daniel"s simple pulse had more worth than the king"s delicacies. Real hunger furnishes the best condiments.
1. The prizes of virtue are manifold and cumulative. Daniel"s frugal diet brought its own inward satisfaction. Ten days" trial showed a perceptible advantage over the self-indulgent. That advantage increased during every succeeding day, until, at the end of three years, the results in health and strength and comeliness were incalculable. Meanwhile, the power of self-control over other inclinations and passions had largely increased, and this brought new delight. The consciousness that their God was right and kind in requiring this discipline of the appetites, increased their reverence and love, made them more resolute in their heavenly allegiance. They felt they were on the ascent to true nobleness and final honour, whatever temporary obscurity might arise. Their knowledge grew. Their wisdom ripened. Even foreigners and rivals rendered them real respect. Conquests over the difficulties of Chaldean learning were daily acquired, and they hailed, with glad anticipation, the approach of a royal test. They held their heads aloft, with a sense of manly greatness, when summoned into the presence of their king. "Better is he that ruleth his own spirit than he who taketh a city.
2. Then over and above this natural success and joy there was a special reward conferred by the hand of God himself. He who constructed the human mind knows well the avenues by which to gain access to all its chambers, and is able to enrich, illumine, and beautify any part. To doubt this would be infidelity, To these four young men God gave "skill in all learning and wisdom;" to Daniel in particular he gave special inspiration, a royal imagination, power to unravel dreams. We are prone to think that in the shadowy, weird territory of dreamland the reign of law is not known. Yet we err. Every wild phantom of the human mind is a link in the chain of cause and effect. Only a poet can fully appreciate true poetry. Only a man o! imaginative genius can resolve the problems of dreams. This is a God-given power a species of inspiration.
3. The day of public manifestation at length arrived. As there is many a starting-point in human affairs, so there is many a goal. The first presupposes and determines the second. "The king came in to see his Hebrew guests." It was only fitting that he should. Every pert of human life is probation trial, which has respect to honour or to disgrace. Though the end may seem far distant, yet this is only seeming. The end is really near. Righteous judgment is ever proceeding. This Chaldean monarch was, in this matter, a model prince. In many aspects of this event we have a striking forecast of the final judgment. With marked condescension, the king "communed" with these captive Hebrews, and was so far impartial in his just estimate as to confess publicly their diligent industry and their superior attainments. "He found them ten times better than all the magicians in his realm." Such knowledge as they professed was real. They made no pretensions to what was beyond their power. They did not boast of access to arcana of nature or of Divine providence really closed against them. They admitted the confines of real knowledge; they confessed the limitations of the human mind. Pretended skill is only contemptible. The truly great man is as ready to acknowledge his ignorance as his knowledge. Only a fool is unwilling to give this reply to many inquiries, "I do not know.
4. The eminence which Daniel justly attained was permanent. Real greatness, like the granite rock, is enduring. Suns rose End set, years came and went; kings flourished and fell; changes swept over all the empires of Asia; but Daniel, throughout the allotted period of his life, maintained his power and pre-eminence. Nor did his regal influence disappear with his dying breath; "twas not interred in his tomb. It lived on: it lives still. The noble qualities of Daniel have reappeared in others, age after age. The tyranny of monarchs, in the East and in the West, have been held in check by him. "Being dead, he yet speaks," yet rules! His name stands on Heaven"s beadroll among, the most saintly of his race with Samuel and with Job. In his own identical person he has lived a continuous and a progressive life in a higher sphere than this. There he occupies a throne; his hand holds a sceptre; his head is surmounted with a diadem. The voice of the Highest has said to him, "Be thou ruler over ten cities." In his own glad consciousness, his prophetic words have been fulfilled, "They that be wise shall shine as the brightness of the firmament; and they that turn many to righteousness as the stars for ever and ever." Evanescence is a quality of what is worthless, Faith is the seed of which the full development is "life everlasting. D.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Biblical Illustrator 1887 · Public Domain On vv3–6 Children in whom was no blemish.
Dan_1:3-4
Children in whom was no blemish.
Read full note →
Piety at Court
I. THE HISTORY OF DANIELS FIRST APPEARANCE.
1. It is evident that this lad had come in with the others when Nebuchadnezzar led home his captives from the smoking ruins of Jerusalem.
2. Suddenly comes a summons for this young Hebrew to take a position at court (Dan_1:3-5). Nebuchadnezzar appears to have determined to bring forward into his service some of this captive race. Quite likely his reasons were these:
(1) He desired to gain the advantage of outside talent; the long siege had taught him the stubbornness, gifts, and availability of the Jewish character.
(2) He planned to propitiate the whole race by choosing some of their number for high office; while so strong an element of his population was in a sort of sullen opposition to his government, there was always danger around the throne.
(3) He wished to add the strange power of their divine inspiration to such forces of magic as he held under his control now (Dan_1:20).
3. The group of companions thus strangely thrown together has enough of picturesqueness in it, if nothing else, to attract attention. Only three besides Daniel are mentioned by name, but there were others associated in the transaction. It is always a serious moment when any young man is summoned to come to the front. Good men are often found in the unlikeliest places, even in our day.
II. THE DESCRIPTION OF DANIELS PERSONAL ENDOWMENTS (verse 4).
1. For one thing, he was finely fashioned in figure and stature. This makes us think how the Israelites once admired Saul, the son of Kish, when he came to the throne; and how the same wayward people afterwards went into rebellion with Absalom, won by his height and his hair.
2. He was nobly born. These all were to be of the kings seed, and of the princes, when the selection was made. Some say that Daniel was a descendant of Hezekiah, concerning whose Sons it was once predicted that they should reign in Babylon. We need not reason much concerning birth or rank, for Gods choice of us is all we can wish.
3. He was liberally educated. That counts grandly in the career of each young man; for knowledge is power. The Israelites were not an intellectual race, as a whole; most of the people were farmers, and had flocks and fields; it was an agricultural nation, rather than a scientific. But Daniel had been taught to study, and had learned to think.
4. He was religiously trained. Those old Jews made thorough and honest work of this part of their duty. Here our golden text comes in with all its power: Wherewithal shall a young man cleanse his way? by taking heed thereto according to Thy word.
5. He was studious in taste. There is an expression in the narrative which is very significant (verse 20). We are told that when in consultation with these Hebrew advisers, the king found them ten times better than his magicians and astrologers; the original word is hands; they were ten hands above them in wisdom and understanding; they were, hand over hand, superior to them in common-sense and, intelligence.
6. He was eminent in the Divine favour (verse 17.) The Lord even then was giving help from heaven to this young man for his calling.
III. THE TEMPTATION TO WHICH DANIEL WAS SUBJECTED (verses 5-7).
1. The kings plan was this: he designed to swerve these men out from the straight lines of traditional fidelity and belief, and commit them to the orthodox religion of his own country.
(1) He adroitly caused their Hebrew names to be changed; from suggesting Jehovahs worship and service, they suggested the following of false gods and profane policies.
(2) He proposed a distinct political aggrandizement; these captive slaves were to be admitted at court as the peers of the realm.
(3) He offered them free education; they were to be instructed in the Chaldean language and lore.
(4) He furnished them full support gratis; he actually descended into details; he appointed the portion of provisions, and of the wine he himself was accustomed to drink.
2. But the implied condition was this: the whole thing was an adroit ruse and a snare. It made at least four distinct pledges for an alienation of all that these young Hebrews cherished.
(1) They should surrender their religion;
(2) They should drift away from their national speech, history, and hope;
(3) They should take part with the traditional oppressors of their fathers;
(4) Worst, and fatallest, of all, they should enter upon the service of a religion of idolatry.
IV. THE EXPEDIENT OF ESCAPE WHICH DANIEL PROPOSED, (verses 8-14).
1. Observe carefully what Daniel did not do. He did not decline the chance given him for conspicuous service. He only avoided the embarrassing conditions attached to it. He was willing to be useful, if so splendid an opportunity was offered him; but he would not peril his convictions, nor sacrifice his principles. No young man has any right to refuse an opening in life that is advantageous; he must just accept the gift which in the providence of God comes to him, and then consecrate it to the service of God and his fellow-men.
2. Observe the devoutness and trust of the piety these young Hebrews exhibited.
3. Finally, observe the superb success these young men achieved. The ten days passed; they were fairer and fatter. But there were now three years more before they should come before the king; and still they trusted God.. It is good for a man that he bear the yoke in his youth. (C. S. Robinson, D.D.)
Bible Biography
1. The narrative of striking facts and the delineation of celebrated characters, is perhaps, of all methods of instruction, the most effective. No one is ignorant of the power of example both for good and evil. Such is mans nature, that he is more guided by the practice of others than by his own reason. A child writes more easily after a copy than by rule. Men are prone to imitate whatever they see done, be it good or bad, emulating the one and aping the other.
2. Examples inform and impress the mind in a manner more compendious, easy, and pleasant than precepts or any other instrument or way of discipline. Precepts are abstract, naked, powerless--without a hold on either the fancy, sense, or memory; like the shadows of a passing cloud, too subtle to make any great impression, or leave any remarkable footsteps. But example comes home with irresistible power and strikes out its likeness. Precept is the man chiselled out, standing mute in the awful majesty of a statue of Praxiteles; example is the man with the life-speaking eye, the grace of living motion, and the lips parted with instructive lessons. The most successful professors of arts and sciences explain, illustrate, and confirm their general rules and precepts by particular examples. Mathematicians demonstrate their theorems by schemes and diagrams; orators back their enthymemes with inductions; philosophers urge the reason and nature of things, and then throw themselves aback on the practice of Socrates, Zeno, and such like personages. Politics are more easily and clearly drawn out of veritable history than out of books De Republica. Artificers describe models, and set patterns before their learners with greater success than if they merely delivered accurate rules and precepts to them. Nor is the ease at all different when these principles are applied to morals. Seneca says that the crowd of philosophers which followed Socrates derived more of their ethics from his manners than his words. It is said of Origen, the most learned man of his age, the author of a Hexapla--a man that employed seven amanuenses at once--that he recommended religion more by his example than by all he wrote. One good example may represent more fully and clearly the nature of virtue than a thousand eloquent descriptions of it. Is it faith we have to acquire? Then we have but to look at Abraham. Is it wisdom, constancy, humility, and resolution? Behold Moses. Is it zeal, patience, perseverance, and piety? Then look at Peter, Paul, and John.
3. Good examples are powerful, because they persuade and incline us to follow them by plausible authority. In a word, examples incite our passions and impel us to duty. It is by reading and studying the lives of those who have distinguished themselves above the rest of mankind, that we may both amuse and instruct ourselves. History has, therefore, done well in immortalizing those men who have, by their talents or genius, or by their enterprise and benevolence, done much for the well-being of their fellowmen. Two important particulars are worthy of being mentioned here and remembered; namely, that the field is open to all, and that special Divine energy is promised to all that will trust in God, and walk in the way of his commandments. Circumstances aid great men, but do not make them. On the contrary, great men make circumstances. (W. A. Scott, D.D.)
True Nobility
I. WHAT DO WE KNOW OF THE PERSONALITIES OF THESE YOUNG-MEN?
1. They appear to have been nobly born. At all events, if the instructions which Ashpenaz received were literally carried out, that must have been the case. Birth, however, is nothing if it be a mans sole claim upon the esteem of his fellows.
2. But Daniel and his friends were both noble and good, not only of the kings, seed but children of the living God. When one thinks of the temptations to which those of high rank are exposed, it would almost appear that a pious prince is one of the most admirable of men. Of old, man, for his sin, was doomed to labour for his bread in the sweat of his brow. But the curse has proved, in the good providence of God, the greatest boon which fallen man could have bestowed upon him. Let us think with prayerful sympathy of those perils of a life of leisure and temptation to which some by their birth are exposed, while we thank God for our own humbler, and, it may be, safer lot.
3. Then, further, we may gather from the text that the personal appearance of these four young nobles was attractive. They were children in whom was no blemish, but well-favoured (Josephus, Ant.10; 10, 1). The body, it is true, is only the house which the spirit inhabits. But while the tenant is of infinitely more importance than his dwelling, we have no right to despise either a goodly home or a comely body. If the whole man belongs to God, physical beauty is a gift which the fortunate possessor of it may use for the glory of Him who bestowed it.
4. But the beauty of these young Hebrews was not that of those who have only their faces and forms to recommend them. The powers of their minds were of no mean order (verse 17). Observe here that their knowledge and skill, their learning and wisdom, are directly traced to the hand of the Giver of all good. How apt we are, if we excel our fellows in the matter of intellectual ability, to become proud of our superiority! Ours! It is not ours; it is Gods. Did you ever reflect that the mental ability with which a sceptic argues out his conclusions, with which even an atheist seeks to disprove the existence of God, is the glorious gift of God Himself, prostituted to ignoble uses, and turned in defiance against its Maker and Giver? How sure and immovable the truth must be, and how certain, if I may use the expression, must God be of its ultimate triumph, when he allows men to go on year after year using the precious endowments which He has given, and could in a moment take away, for the purpose of endeavouring to overthrow His dominion ever the minds and hearts of their fellows!
5. Once more, here, the story of these comely and accomplished youths touches our deepest sympathies when we read that they were involuntary exiles from their native land. We cannot but think that they loved their country. Who shall, say what sorrows pierced the heart of this young prince, thus, with his companions, doomed to mourn, in the land and at the court of a heathen conqueror, not only his own sad fate, but still more grievously the appalling desolation which had befallen the land of his birth?
II. OF COURSE IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE BUT THAT THESE YOUNG EXILES SHOULD HAVE THEIR FAITH SORELY TRIED. The king, with that lavish and somewhat indelicate kindness so often associated with despotic power, doubtless meant them well. He had not, it is true, consulted their feelings in tearing them away from the land of their birth, but in his rough way he desired to treat them kindly. Yet to partake of the food and drink thus provided was just what they could not do. It was not wine as wine, any more than it was meat as meat, that they refused. Times are changed with us now, and our difficulties are not of the precise nature either of these captive Hebrews, or of the early Christians (1Co_8:1-13). But though customs change and ceremonial observances vanish away, principles abide unchanged for evermore. One of the favourite texts in the unwritten and unholy Bible of the world is, When you are in Rome you must do as Rome does. Few of us dare to be singular. And yet to be right we must often be singular, not in phraseology, or tone, or look, or garb, but in character and conduct. What would some of us have said if we had been placed in the circumstances described in the text? On the one hand, there was food of the daintiest, wine of the richest; on the other, danger of displeasing the king, and perhaps being cast into an Oriental dungeon. Would it have been a thing to be wondered at if Daniel had reasoned thus; What does it matter? The notions of our father are antiquated. Moses was well enough in his day, but that day is a long time since. Other times, other manners. Its our policy now to please the king. He would have had his meat and drink, but he would have lost his God, turned his back upon his early faith, forgotten his country, become a Babylonian idolater, and his life, unwritten and unsung, would have sunk into the oblivion which his time-serving cowardice deserved. (J. R. Bailey.)
Excellence in Youth
Children in whom was no blemish. Such as were Joseph, David, Artaxerxes Longimanus, Germanicus, and others, in whom beauty proved to be the flower of virtue as Chrysippus called it. Of Galba the Emperor once said, that his good wit dwelt in an ill house, like an excellent instrument in a bad case; whereas Vatinius the Roman was not more misshapen in body than in mind. The heathens also advise us to beware of those whom nature hath set a mark upon. (J. Trapp.)
The Four Hebrew Children
I. THE BODY.
As they were princes they were chosen to be pages of the king of Babylon. They were to be fed for three years with all the royal dainties. Most boys would have blest their good fortune, and taken their fill of all that was going in the palace. But these Jewish boys refused the kings meat and wine, lest they should eat anything forbidden by their religion. And they grew fairer and fatter than all the children in the palace. Like them, you should religiously think about what you eat and drink. The children who are content with plain food become the healthiest and fairest men and women. You will smile with suspicion when I tell you what is the healthiest place in all Scotland, and perhaps in the world. Sir Robert Christion proves that it is Perth Prison. For every man who dies inside it, about ten men of the same age die outside. Many of the prisoners have uneasy minds, and their lives have been wild, but no matter: they have by necessity what our four boys had by choice,--water, and the plainest food, and splendid health. Their food costs fourpence a day. I was in Richmond, Virginia, shortly after the great war. Nearly the whole city was a mass of blackened ruins. Two things, they said, astonished them during the siege; first, that they could live on so very little; and secondly, that fewer people died in days of starvation, than in days of abundance. They made the same discovery during the cotton famine in Lancashire. Plenty, it seems, harms more by its excesses than poverty by its privations. Your eating and drinking help greatly to form your character; for your diet influences the soul as well as the body. That Turk was much mistaken, who, when about to drink wine, warned his soul to quit the body for a little, lest it should be harmed. How many evils have sprung from luxurious living? It destroyed Rome, after Rome had conquered the whole world. How safe and noble is the spirit of these boys! They did not despise the body, as monks do: in the spirit of the Bible they honoured it as the handmaid of the soul. They were not as those who live to eat, but who eat to live. By keeping under their bodies they escaped being castaways.
II. THE MIND.--They were young thinkers, quickwitted, and eager to learn. Well-favoured and without blemish, they had minds to match their bodies. Your mind is nobler far than your body, and nobler than all the things your eyes behold. The powers of mind are more valued than powers of body by all but savages and stupid people. Often the body is the grave of the spirit; and many value the mind as the minister of the body: they would use it as a sort of chief cook or confectioner for the body. Yet he hardly lives at all, whose mind is not thoughtful. When the mind is not trained or used, man sinks toward the level of the sheep feeding in the pastures, and of the oxen fattening in the stall. His history is made up of nothings. For life without thought is death to all but the body. With many boys and girls the powers of the mind are roused at first as by a kind of sudden conversion. A book, or a conversation, or a lesson, or even a problem in arithmetic--I have known such cases--deeply stirs the mind and makes the youth conscious of new powers. From that day he tastes the sweets of thinking, and burns with the love of knowledge. William Arnot tells that the first time he read a book of his own accord, he was half-intoxicated with the new-found pleasure. Many a writer has used with real affection the words, my master, as remembering how much he owes to his teacher. Thus also students long ago called their university, Alma Mater, that is, Bountiful Mother. Their university cherished them into mental health and joy, even as a kind mother cherishes her dear children. Because the powers of the mind are so great you should be careful to read only healthy books. If the books of your boyhood are bad, you will regret the reading of them as long as you live.
III. THE SOUL.--As the mind is nobler than the body, so the soul is nobler than the mind. The soul is the man, the mind is the souls servant, and the body is the servants servant. As thought is the life of the mind, so true Christian life is the grandeur of the soul. Their state of body and mind was most helpful to their soul. Their minds were not dulled by overfeeding, nor were their souls clogged with stupid minds. We wonder at their holy lives in such a wicked palace, and at their perfect boldness. The poets speak of a river that preserves the sweetness of its waters amid the bitterness of the sea, and of an animal that lives in the midst of the fire; and such-like were their lives. There is a little insect that gathers around itself a viewless coat of air, and goes down clad in it to the bottom of the sea. The little diver moves about at its ease, unhurt amid the stagnant waters. The grace of God wove such a garment of Heavens air around these children, that they passed unhurt through the poisoned atmosphere of Babylon. It made them the children of Heaven, and gave them a nobility of nature more than nature can give. (J. Wells, M.A.)
Education and training of youth
Those raw country lads with the hulking, slouching gait which gives such a look of clumsiness and stupidity just need training. They are the rough material of which a vast deal may be made. You have in them the water-worn pebble which will yet take on a beautiful polish. Take him and send him to a college for four years; let him then become a tutor in a good family, and before long you find him with the quiet, self-possessed air and easy address of the gentleman who has seen the world. Remember this and look with respect on the diamond that only needs to be polished, the people of whom more might have been made. (H. O. Mackey)
Daniels Education
From the beginning of next chapter, it appears, that astrology was a principal branch of learning among the Chaldeans. As Daniel was afterwards appointed master of the magicians, we see no reason to doubt that he was taught this, and the other occult sciences of Babylon. We are warranted, from Daniels tenderness of conscience, to conclude that he neither believed in astrology, nor practised it; but we see no sin in his becoming acquainted with it, just as we see no sin in a Christian being taught the mythology of Greece and Rome, or in a missionary studying the superstitious of the Hindoos. (J. White.)
A wise royal policy
The instructions, which Nebuchadnezzar gave respecting the education of these young men, show that he had the talents of a statesman, as well as of a general, and that he had an enlargement of view worthy of him who was to be the golden-head in the image of empire. It would have been well for the world if he, and all kings and emperors had always showed as much wisdom in the selection, and care about the education, of those who were to rule under them. (J. White.)
The College Student
1. Young men may be carried into captivity by their enemies. There is a captivity more galling than the one into which Daniel was transported, it is the captivity of evil habit. Men do not go into that wittingly. Slyly and imperceptibly are the chains forged upon them, and one day they wake up to find themselves away down in Babylon. Men talk of evil habits as though they were light and trivial; but they are scorpion whips that tear the flesh; they make a road of spikes more bloody than the path of a Brahmin; they are the poisonous robe of Nessus; they are the sepulchre in which millions are buried alive. The young are in more peril because they are unsuspecting.
2. Early impressions are almost ineffaceable. Daniel had a religious bringing up. From the good meaning of his name I know he had a pious parentage. When I find what Daniel is in Jerusalem I am not surprised to find what he is in Babylon. The father plans the character of the child, and its destiny for time and eternity; then the son completes the structure.
3. The beauty of Christian sobriety. The meat and the wine that were to come to Daniels table were to come from the Kings table. Daniel had no right to take that food. He chose pulse. It was a miracle that he did not dwindle away. When God for his self-denial puts upon him this benediction he puts a benediction upon all Christian sobriety.
4. The beauty of youthful character remaining incorrupt away from home. If Daniel had plunged into every wickedness of the city of Babylon, the old folks at home would never have heard of it. But Daniel knew that Gods eye was on him. That was enough. There are young men not so good away from home as at home. God forbid that any of us, through our misconduct, should bring disgrace upon a fathers name, or prove recreant to the love of a mother. (T. De Witt Talmage, D.D.)
Mens qualifications for public service
It was like the proud spirit of the King to surround himself with all spendour of talent that should throw additional glory on himself and on his throne. Accordingly directions to select candidates for the public service were given to Aspenaz, the chief of the eunuchs. Of him we know nothing more than is stated in the first chapter of the Book of Daniel. He belonged to a class always existing in Oriental courts, often high in royal favour, of large influence, authority and power. This individual appears to have been marked by much wisdom, considerate care, a gracious bearing, and courtly courtesy. That he regarded Daniel with favour and tender love, should be his passport to our esteem. The King prescribed the qualifications of the candidates.
1. Some of these were physical. Vigour and beauty were required. Probably Daniel was tall, strong, well-built, handsome.
2. The King required knowledge. Skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science. They were to be generally intelligent, and in particular, acquainted with the science of their country, namely--music, architecture, natural history, agriculture, morals, theology, and prophecy. There is reason to believe that in many of these departments the Hebrews were in advance of the Babylonians. The King proposed to turn their superiority to account. He was evidently a broad-minded and sagacious man.
3. The next requirement was what we understand by capacity. Such as had ability in them to stand in the Kings palace. Ability is here the Hebrew word for strength, power, resource of almost any kind. The King required general capacity, not overlooking moral qualifications.
4. They were to be teachable. Without that spirit, these tall, handsome men would be but as ornamental logs of wood in the palace of the King. Present attainment in knowledge and in moral culture is as nothing compared with the capacity of receiving more, and power to do more in the future. (H. T. Robjohns, B.A.)
The Biblical Illustrator, edited by Joseph S. Exell (c. 1880s–1900s) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary 1892 · Public Domain On v3 SECT. II.—THE FOUR CAPTIVE YOUTHS (Chap. Dan_1:3-7)
HOMILETICS
SECT. II.—THE FOUR CAPTIVE YOUTHS (Chap. Dan_1:3-7)
Read full note →
Among the youths of noble or princely birth taken from Jerusalem to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar as trophies of his conquest [7], and perhaps as hostages for the good behaviour of those who were left behind, were Daniel and his three companions, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah. These, according to a custom prevalent in Babylon, similar to that of the Ottoman court which in more modern times originated the institution of the Janissaries [8], were, at the king’s command, immediately placed under the charge of an officer called Ashpenaz [9], the chief of the eunuchs [10]. To this often influential class these captive youths were henceforth to belong, having been selected for their handsome appearance, intelligence, and good address [11]. In token of their entire subjection to their Babylonian master, their names, according to a common usage, were changed for others intended apparently to obliterate all traces of their race and nation, and still more of their religion, and to mark them, if it could not also make them, worshippers of the gods of their new sovereign [12], as well as his property and slaves. Designed for high stations at court and about the king’s person, they were for three years to be dieted in a way judged most fitted to promote their health and more especially their good appearance; while they were carefully instructed in the learning [13] and language of the Chaldæans [14]. These captive youths, and Daniel more especially, were to be God’s chosen instruments in effecting, by their influence at court, the predicted restoration of their exiled countrymen at the appointed period. Observe from the passage—
[7] “Certain of the children of Israel and of the king’s seed, and of the princes.” When Darius Hystaspes succeeded Cyrus, he obtained from Babylonia and the rest of Assyria a thousand talents of silver and five hundred boy-eunuchs. Keil observes that פַּרְתְּסִים (partemim) is the Zend “prathema” (Sansc. “prathama”), denoting persons of distinction—magnates, princes.
[8] The Janissaries were originally Christian youths who had been taken captive by the Turks and brought to the Ottoman court, after which they were placed under the care of the chief of the white eunuchs, under whom they were trained and educated, taught some trade, and brought up in the religion of their masters. Those most gifted were employed about the ruler’s person, and in due time advanced to high and suitable offices in the state, to military commands, and to the government of provinces. Their Christian names were changed for such as their Moslem masters delighted in.—Kitto; also Ranke’s “Ottoman Empire.”
[9] “Ashpenaz.” Keil observes that the name has not yet received any satisfactory or generally adopted explanation. He thinks the person so named was the chief marshal of Nebuchadnezzar’s court. Dr. Rule thinks he might be called master of the household. Junius observes that the word in the Chaldaic denotes the master of the chiders (objurgantium), or, as Willet translates it, the master of the comptrollers, i.e., the chief comptroller and governor of the king’s house.
[10] “Eunuchs.” Dr. Rule remarks that the name סריסים (sarisim) may simply indicate members of the king’s household; the name being applied to officers in or about the palace, whether literally and physically eunuchs or not.
[11] “Well-favoured.” The Assyrian and Babylonian kings, wishing to add to the lustre and magnificence of their court, admitted into their palace none but young persons of high birth, distinguished for the gracefulness of their person and the beauty of their countenance.—Gaussen.
[12] “Gave names.” Daniel, which in Hebrew denotes, “God is my Judge,” was changed, according to the name of Nebuchadnezzar’s god (Dan_4:8), into Belteshazzar, or “Bel’s treasurer,” or the “Depositary of Bel’s secret things;” but according to Gesenius and Nork, the “Prince of Bel.” Azariah, or “The Help of the Lord,” was changed into Abednego, the “servant of Nego,” or the Brightness, i.e., of the Sun or Fire, or perhaps one of the planets—also objects of Babylonian worship. The other two names given for Mishael and Hananiah believed to have also an idolatrous meaning, although not so obvious. Shadrach, according to some, is “The Inspiration of Rach” or the Sun; and Meshach, a “devotee of Shach “or Venus, the festival goddess. Kitto observes that the practice of changing the names of slaves is as ancient as the time of Joseph, whose name was changed by his Egyptian master to Zaphnath-Paaneah, or the Revealer of Secrets. In modern times the practice prevailed in the case of Negro slaves.
[13] “Might teach the learning of the Chaldeans.” According to Pliny and Strabo, the priest-caste among the Babylonians had educational establishments in certain cities; for instance, in Babylon itself, Borsippa in Babylonia, and Hipparene in Mesopotamia.—Hengstenberg. According to Plato and Xenophon, the education of royal officers in Persia did not begin until they had passed fourteen years of age, and youths did not enter into the king’s service until they had completed their sixteenth or seventeenth year.—Rule. An objection has been made to the genuineness of the Book of Daniel on the ground that it is improbable that Daniel, with his strict principles, should be willing to be taught the principles of the magi. But Moses also was “learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians” (Act_7:22). As Moses acquired the secular knowledge of the Egyptians without their debasing superstitions, so might Daniel that of the Babylonians. Nor was that learning all superstitious. Their philosophers were chiefly engaged about astronomy; and the Greeks thought that the birthplace of philosophy in general was among the magi of Persia and the Chaldees of Babylonia or Assyria. But the futility of the objection is at once obvious; at Babylon the king’s will was law, and especially with his slaves. The passage is rather a confirmation of the genuineness of the book, as affording an example of agreement with the customs and usages of the time and country.
[14] “The language of the Chaldeans.” Michaelis, Winer, and others have supposed that by the “language of the Chaldeans” we are to understand that of the Chaldeans proper, and not the Eastern Aramæan branch, which is usually called the Chaldaic, and which in chap. Dan_2:4, as in Ezr_4:7 and Isaiah 38, is called the Aramaic or Syriac. Hengstenberg thinks it to be the court language, spoken by the monarch himself and his attendants, which appears from chap. Dan_2:4 not to be the Aramaic, as that is said to be the language in which the Babylonian sages answered the king. The exact knowledge of the languages prevalent in Babylon in the time of Daniel, as shown by the book, no contemptible proof of its genuineness. Keil thinks the “language of the Chaldeans” in the text to be that of the Babylonish priests and learned men or magi, called also Chaldeans in a more restricted sense, the same being afterwards applied to the whole body of the wise men of Babylon (Dan_2:2). He adds: “If for the present no certain answer can be given to the question as to the origin of the Chaldeans and the nature of their language and writing, yet this much may be accepted as certain, that the language and writing of the Chaldees (כַּשְׂדִּים, casdim) was not Semitic or Aramaic, but that the Chaldeans had in remote times migrated into Babylonia, and there had obtained dominion over the Semitic inhabitants of the land; and that from among this dominant race the Chaldees, the priestly and the learned class of the Chaldees, arose. This class in Babylon is much older than the Chaldean monarchy founded by Nebuchadnezzar.” This instruction in the wisdom of the Chaldeans, Auberlen thinks, “tended, at all events, to develop the high prophetical gifts which Daniel possessed by nature;” and that “a similar school was thus provided for Daniel to that which his Egyptian education was to Moses, or which study of philosophy is for the theologian of our own day.” Dr. Rule observes that “seven or eight centuries later than Daniel, the learning of the Chaldeans or Babylonians was described as comprising astronomy, astrology, divination, augury, incantations, and the science of dreams and prodigies. Although idol-worshippers, Justin Martyr, in his Exhortation to the Greeks, affirms that the Babylonians differed widely from the Greeks and from all other idolaters of the world, inasmuch as they acknowledged a supreme and self-existent God.”
1. The literal fulfilment of God’s word. The good King Hezekiah’s foolish vanity entailed a chastisement which, according to the word of the prophet, was to fall upon his descendants. Some of them were to become eunuchs in Babylon (Isa_39:7; 2Ki_20:18). Probably Daniel and his three companions were thus made examples, that no word of God, whether in promise or threatening, falls to the ground. “Heaven and earth may pass away, but my word shall not pass away.”
2. The inscrutable providence of God. It is one of the mysteries of that providence that the innocent suffer with and through the guilty. Both rulers and people in Israel had deeply revolted from Jehovah. But it might be asked of those four godly youths, “What had they done?” “When the scourge slayeth suddenly, it mocketh at the trial of the innocent.” Yet God is still infinitely wise and just and good. A gracious end in view, though hidden at the time. Children often made to feel the effects of a parent’s sin, while these effects may be graciously overruled for their eternal good. The captivity of these youths made to turn to their own benefit and that of others. Apparent evil often a real good. “Ye thought evil against me, but God meant it unto good, to bring to pass, as it is this day, to save much people alive” (Gen_1:20).
3. The sovereignty of divine grace. Nothing is said of the parents of these youths. The royal seed had become a reprobate one. Both the sons of Josiah who succeeded him on the throne were wicked. The princes of Jerusalem imitated them in their sin. Grace makes exceptions. Perhaps these youths were judiciously taken away from the evil example of the rest. Safer perhaps at the time to live in Babylon than in Jerusalem. One might hope from the character of these four youths that they had been taught the fear of God at home. But graceless parents may have gracious children. Grace steps in and makes men to differ. The wind bloweth where it listeth. Saints found in Cæsar’s household, and a godly Obadiah in Ahab’s court.
4. Mercy remembered in the midst of judgment. Preparations for the purposed and promised deliverance of Israel made from the very commencement of their captivity. One of the very first captives to be made God’s chosen instrument in bringing it about. The edict of Cyrus, at the end of the predicted seventy years, the result of Daniel’s influence at the Babylonian and Persian courts. The same influence doubtless effectual in mitigating the sufferings of his fellow-exiles [15]. A silver lining often in the darkest cloud. God’s bow of mercy set in the cloud of man’s deepest misery. Mercy and judgment the alto and bass in the believer’s song.
[15] “The Lord in His great mercy had prepared for His people an influence in Babylon that must have mitigated the severity of bondage when the ten thousand captives [with Jehoiachin] were added to all that went before. The king and the princes indeed were prisoners of war; but young men of royal blood are at the head of the government, naturalised, and in rank next the imperial throne, but known as worshippers of the God of heaven, and as confessors of that God in opposition to the gods of the country, in full enjoyment of religious liberty and protected in the exercise of their sacred right by a decree in honour of Daniel’s God.”—Rule.
5. God’s instruments prepared for their work. Daniel and his three companions prepared beforehand for the part they were to perform in the relief and deliverance of their countrymen. Gifted by nature and endowed by grace, they received an education at the Babylonian court that fitted them for the post they were to occupy about the king’s person and in the government of the country. Capacity for learning, united with conscientious application and the divine blessing given in answer to prayer, made the youthful exiles ten times more able to answer the king’s questions than all the wise men in the realm, and so prepared the way for their future elevation. The influence of that education in reference to the exercise of Daniel’s prophetical gift also not to be entirely overlooked.
6. Grace superior to circumstances. Captivity in a heathen land, residence in an idolatrous and luxurious court, a three years’ course of study pervaded with idolatry and superstition, the constant presence of the followers of a false religion and a low morality, all combined are unable to crush out the piety of these young men. Circumstances changed their names but not their nature. With names imposed upon them that seemed to designate them the worshippers of idols, they were enabled by grace to remain the faithful servants of the true God. The religion produced by the Holy Spirit in the soul is fast colours—not painted, but engrained.
7. The value of gracious principles in early life. Only the presence of divine grace in the soul able to withstand the temptations of the world and to conquer in the battle of life. “Evil communications corrupt good manners” only when those manners are not the fruit of a divine principle implanted in the soul. “This is the victory that overcometh the world, even your faith.” Only an apparently renewed Demas will forsake the truth, “having loved this present world.” Renewed by the Spirit and grafted into Christ, we are “kept by the power of God through faith unto salvation,” and made “more than conquerors through Him that loved us.” Probably these youths taught like Timothy to know the Holy Scriptures from early childhood. Daniel may have had a Eunice for his mother, though her name is not recorded. His early youth spent in the reign of good Josiah, who apparently died only four years before he was taken captive to Babylon. Few men have become at once great and good who have not been able to connect their religion with a mother’s prayers and the instruction received at a mother’s knee. One thing concerning these four youths is certain, that in early life they had been taught to say in truth, “Thy word have I hid in my heart, that I might not sin against Thee.”
The Preacher's Complete Homiletical Commentary (gen. ed. Joseph S. Exell; Funk & Wagnalls, c. 1892) — public domain (pre-1929). A full-Bible homiletical/sermon-outline anthology covering 65 of 66 books (2 John is absent from the source module). Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain On vv6–7 deported 8 years before Ezekiel. 2Ki 24:1; 2Ki 24:2;…
Daniel
deported 8 years before Ezekiel. 2Ki 24:1; 2Ki 24:2; 2Ch 36:5-7; Jer 25:1; Jer 52:12-30.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
unfoldingWord translationNotes 2017 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv3, 6 The king spoke
The king spoke
This refers to Nebuchadnezzar.
Read full note →
Ashpenaz
This is the chief official. (See: How to Translate Names)
nobility
the highest social class.
without blemish
These two negative words together emphasize a positive idea. AT: "with perfect appearance" (See: Litotes)
filled with knowledge and understanding
This is an idiom. This means they knew much and could organize and use that information. (See: Idiom)
king's palace
This is the large house or building where the king lives.
He was to teach them
"Ashpenaz was to teach them"
The king counted out for them
The king's officials did this task for him. AT: "The king's officials counted out for them" (See: Metonymy)
his delicacies
the special, rare, good foods that the king ate
These young men were to be trained
This can be stated in active form. AT: "Ashpenaz was to train these young men" (See: Active or Passive)
trained
"taught skills"
translationWords
king
Israel
royal
wise
know
qualify
servant
Babylon
wine
unfoldingWord translationNotes — © Distant Shores Media and the Door43 World Missions Community, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Source: git.door43.org/Door43/en_tn.
Tyndale Open Study Notes 2022 · CC BY-SA 4.0 On vv3–6 1:3-7 The Lord fulfilled his threat to make sons…
1:3-7 The Lord fulfilled his threat to make sons of the royal family serve in Babylon (Isa 39:7) despite their being heirs to the promises of Davidic kingship. Nebuchadnezzar made a powerful attempt to proselytize them by education, social and religious pressure, and name changes. Instead, their impact upon their pagan surroundings became the outstanding feature of their stay at the king’s palace and court.
1:3 staff: Though often translated “eunuchs” (cp. Isa 39:7), in this case the Hebrew term (saris) likely means that Ashpenaz and those under his authority were high government officials (see 2 Kgs 8:6).
Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.