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.
Parallel Translations
-
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.
-
Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names: for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abed-nego.
-
And the chief of the officers gave names unto them: unto Daniel he gave the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abed-nego.
Cross-references (10)
Passages linked to Daniel 1:7 in the Treasury of Scripture Knowledge, ordered by reader-vote popularity; verse text shown in World English Bible.
- Daniel 5:12 because an excellent spirit, knowledge, understanding, interpreting of dreams, showing of dark sentences, and dissolving of doubts were found in the same Daniel, whom the king named Belteshazzar. Now let Daniel be called, and he will show the interpretation.”
- Daniel 4:8 But at the last Daniel came in before me, whose name was Belteshazzar, according to the name of my god, and in whom is the spirit of the holy gods. I told the dream before him, saying,
- Daniel 2:49 Daniel requested of the king, and he appointed Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego over the affairs of the province of Babylon; but Daniel was in the king’s gate.
- 2 Kings 23:34 Pharaoh Necoh made Eliakim the son of Josiah king in the place of Josiah his father, and changed his name to Jehoiakim; but he took Jehoahaz away, and he came to Egypt and died there.
- 2 Kings 24:17 The king of Babylon made Mattaniah, Jehoiachin’s father’s brother, king in his place, and changed his name to Zedekiah.
- Daniel 1:3 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;
- Genesis 41:45 Pharaoh called Joseph’s name Zaphenath-Paneah. He gave him Asenath, the daughter of Potiphera priest of On as a wife. Joseph went out over the land of Egypt.
- Daniel 1:10-11 The prince of the eunuchs said to Daniel, “I fear my lord the king, who has appointed your food and your drink. For why should he see your faces worse looking than the youths who are of your own age? Then you would endanger my head with the king.” Then Daniel said to the steward whom the prince of the eunuchs had appointed over Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah:
- Daniel 2:26 The king answered Daniel, whose name was Belteshazzar, “Are you able to make known to me the dream which I have seen, and its interpretation?”
- Daniel 3:12-30 There are certain Jews whom you have appointed over the affairs of the province of Babylon: Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. These men, O king, have not respected you. They don’t serve your gods, and don’t worship the golden image which you have set up.” Then Nebuchadnezzar in rage and fury commanded that Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego be brought. Then these men were brought before the king. Nebuchadnezzar answered them, “Is it on purpose, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, that you don’t serve my god, nor worship the golden image which I have set up? Now if you are ready whenever you hear the sound of the horn, flute, zither, lyre, harp, pipe, and all kinds of music to fall down and worship the image which I have made, good; but if you don’t worship, you shall be cast the same hour into the middle of a burning fiery furnace. Who is that god that will deliver you out of my hands?” Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego answered the king, “Nebuchadnezzar, we have no need to answer you in this matter. If it happens, our God whom we serve is able to deliver us from the burning fiery furnace; and he will deliver us out of your hand, O king. But if not, let it be known to you, O king, that we will not serve your gods or worship the golden image which you have set up.” Then Nebuchadnezzar was full of fury, and the form of his appearance was changed against Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. He spoke, and commanded that they should heat the furnace seven times more than it was usually heated. He commanded certain mighty men who were in his army to bind Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, and to cast them into the burning fiery furnace. Then these men were bound in their pants, their tunics, and their mantles, and their other clothes, and were cast into the middle of the burning fiery furnace. Therefore because the king’s commandment was urgent, and the furnace exceedingly hot, the flame of the fire killed those men who took up Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego. These three men, Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, fell down bound into the middle of the burning fiery furnace. Then Nebuchadnezzar the king was astonished, and rose up in haste. He spoke and said to his counselors, “Didn’t we cast three men bound into the middle of the fire?” They answered the king, “True, O king.” He answered, “Look, I see four men loose, walking in the middle of the fire, and they are unharmed. The appearance of the fourth is like a son of the gods.” Then Nebuchadnezzar came near to the mouth of the burning fiery furnace. He spoke and said, “Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, you servants of the Most High God, come out, and come here!” Then Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego came out of the middle of the fire. The local governors, the deputies, and the governors, and the king’s counselors, being gathered together, saw these men, that the fire had no power on their bodies. The hair of their head wasn’t singed. Their pants weren’t changed, the smell of fire wasn’t even on them. Nebuchadnezzar spoke and said, “Blessed be the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, who has sent his angel, and delivered his servants who trusted in him, and have changed the king’s word, and have yielded their bodies, that they might not serve nor worship any god, except their own God. Therefore I make a decree, that every people, nation, and language, which speak anything evil against the God of Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, shall be cut in pieces, and their houses shall be made a dunghill; because there is no other god who is able to deliver like this.” Then the king promoted Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego in the province of Babylon.
Cross-references from openbible.info (CC BY 4.0)
Explain this verse (12 sources)
Historical commentary, presented as a primary source — not an endorsement.
Private notes
Saved on this device only — never synced or sent anywhere.
Geneva Bible translators 1599 · Public Domain That they might altogether forget their religion: for the…
That they might altogether forget their religion: for the Jews gave their children names, which might ever put them in remembrance of some point of religion: therefore this was a great tentation and a sign of servitude, which they were not able to resist.
Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain.
John Trapp 1656 · Public Domain Dan 1:7 Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs…
Dan 1:7 Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names: for he gave unto Daniel [the name] of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abednego.
Ver. 7. Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names.] Not without the command of the king, {Dan 5:12} as desirous to naturalise them, and by changing their right names, which had the names of God in them, El and Jah, to make them forget their religion; but that was better rooted than to be so easily razed out, though these new names were shrewd temptations to apostasy and idolatry, as being compounded by the names of the Babylonish gods, and means to make them honourable among the Chaldeans.
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 Names; that is, other names: this was done by…
Names; that is, other names: this was done by the subtle instigation of Satan, that they might renounce their names received in circumcision, by assuming names imposed relating to the idol gods, being a profanation and a further degree of their apostacy; for Daniel had
the name of Belteshazzar, or Baltasar, from the great Babylonian idol Baal or Bel, &c. This was by the king’s command, and herein he put forth an act of his sovereignty. Thus Adam, Gen 2:19,20. Thus Pharaoh did, Gen 41:45; he gave
Read full note →
Joseph the name of Zaphnath-paaneah. And Pharaohnechoh changed the name of
Eliakim, Josiah’s son, to Jehoiakim, 2Ki 23:34. And the king of Babylon turned the name of
Mattaniah to Zedekiah, 2Ki 24:17. The Lord changed the name of
Sarai to Sarah, of
Abram to Abraham, of
Jacob to Israel. Thus the Lord changed
Simon’s name to Cephas or Peter, Mar 3:16.
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 Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names,....…
Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names,.... Other names, Chaldee names, according to the names of the gods of that country, for honour and glory, as Saadiah observes; which was done either to make them more acceptable to the court and courtiers of the king of Babylon; and to show that they were his servants, and naturalized subjects; and chiefly to cause them to forget the names their fathers gave them, and out of hatred to them, having all of them in them the names of the true God, El or Jah; and, most of all, that they might forget the God of their fathers, whose names they bore. This prince of the eunuchs seems to be the same with the master of the eunuchs, Ashpenaz, before mentioned, so Jacchiades; but some take him to be another person: what he did in changing the names of these four Hebrew youths was not his own idea and by his own authority, but by the order of the king; Dan 5:12,
for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; which signifies "Bel hath hid and treasured"; or Bel's treasurer, or the keeper of his treasures; see Dan 1:2. Bel was the chief idol of the Chaldeans, Isa 46:1, and Daniel was named according to him, as Nebuchadnezzar himself says, Dan 4:8 and differs but in one letter from the name of a successor of his, Belshazzar, Dan 5:1, hence Daniel is thought by Broughton, and others, to be the Belesis of Diolorus Siculus: or it may be he had this name given him from "beltis" or "baaltis" (u), a queen and goddess of the Babylonians, and may be compounded of that and "azer":
Read full note →
and to Hananiah of Shadrach; which some interpret a "tender pap", or "breast": others, the "king's messenger", or "the messenger the sun". The word "rach" signifies a "king" with the Chaldeans, as it did with the Egyptians, as may be observed in the word "abrec", the king's father, in Gen 41:43 and is used by them of the sun, the prince of planets, whom they worshipped: others, "the inspiration of the sun", their idol. Hillerus (w) explains it of fire, the object of their adoration:
and to Mishael of Meshach; or; "of Shach", which was a name of a god or goddess of the Chaldeans, they worshipped; at the celebration of whose feast they were when Babylon was taken by Cyrus:
and to Azariah of Abednego; or "a servant, or worshipper of Nego". The word signifies "shining brightness": which some understand of fire worshipped by them; others of the bright planet Venus; and others of Lucifer, or the morning star. Saadiah takes it to be the same with Nebo, by a change of a letter, which was a god of the Chaldeans; see Isa 46:1.
(u) Vid Euseb. Praepar. Evangel. l. 1. p 38. &. l. 9. c. 41. p. 456. (w) Onomast. Sacr. p. 924.
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 Gave names - That is, other names, relating to…
Gave names - That is, other names, relating to the idol-gods. Belteshazzar - So Daniel had the name of Belteshazzar, from the great Babylonian idol Baal or Bell. This was by the king's command, and herein he put forth an act: of his sovereignty.
John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.
Adam Clarke 1810 · Public Domain Verse 7. Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs…
Verse 7. Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names] This change of names, Calmet properly remarks, was a mark of dominion and authority. It was customary for masters to impose new names upon their slaves; and rulers often, on their ascending the throne, assumed a name different from that which they had before.
דניאל DANIEL signifies "God is my Judge." This name they changed into בלטשאצר BELTESHATSTSAR; in Chaldee, "The treasure of Bel," or "The despository of the secrets (or treasure) of Bel."
Read full note →
הנניה HANANIAH signifies, "The Lord has been gracious to me," or "He to whom the Lord is gracious." This name was changed into שדרך SHADRACH, Chaldee, which has been variously translated: "The inspiration of the sun;" "God the author of evil, be propitious to us;" "Let God preserve us from evil."
מישאל MISHAEL signifies "He who comes from God." Him they called מישך MESHACH, which in Chaldee signifies, "He who belongs to the goddess Sheshach," a celebrated deity of the Babylonians, mentioned by Jeremiah, Jer 25:26.
עזריה AZARIAH, which signifies "The Lord is my Helper," they changed into אבד נגו ABED-NEGO, which in Chaldee is "the servant of Nego," who was one of their divinities; by which they meant either the sun, or the morning star; whether Jupiter or Venus.
The vicious pronunciation of this name should be carefully avoided; I mean that which lays the accent on the first syllable, and hurries to the end, without attending to the natural division of the word Abed-Nego.
Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.
Albert Barnes 1834 · Public Domain Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names…
Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names - This practice is common in Oriental courts. “The captive youths referred to in the notes on Dan 1:5, in the Turkish court also receive new names, that is, Mahometan names, their former names being Christian.” - “Pict. Bible.” It is “possible” that this changing of their names may have been designed to make them forget their country, and their religion, and to lead them more entirely to identify themselves with the people in whose service they were now to be employed, though nothing of this is intimated in the history. Such a change, it is easy to conceive, might do much to make them feel that they were identified with the people among whom they were adopted, and to make them forget the customs and opinions of their own country. It is a circumstance which may give some additional probability to this supposition, that it is quite a common thing now at missionary stations to give new names to the children who are taken into the boarding-schools, and especially the names of the Christian benefactors at whose expense they are supported. Compare the same general character, for this change of names may have been, that the name of the true God constituted a part of their own names, and that thus they were constantly reminded of him and his worship. In the new names given them, the appellation of some of the idols worshipped in Babylon was incorporated, and this might serve as remembrancers of the divinities to whose service it was doubtless the intention to win them.
For he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar - The name Belteshazzar (בלטשׁאצר bêlṭesha'tstsar) is compounded of two words, and means according to Gesenius, “Bel’s prince;” that is, he whom Bel favors. “Bel” was the principal divinity worshipped at Babylon (notes, Isa 46:1), and this name would, therefore, be likely to impress the youthful Daniel with the idea that he was a favorite of this divinity, and to attract him to his service. It was a flattering distinction that he was one of the favorites of the principal god worshipped in Babylon, and this was not improbably designed to turn his attention from the God whose name had been incorporated in his own. The giving of this name seemed to imply, in the apprehension of Nebuchadnezzar, that the spirit of the gods was in him on whom it was conferred. See Dan 4:8-9.
Read full note →
And to Hananiah, of Shadrach - The name “Hananiah” (חנניה chănanyâh) means, “whom Jehovah has graciously given,” and is the same with Ananias (Greek, Ανανίας Ananias), and would serve to remind its possessor of the name of “Jehovah,” and of his mercy. The name Shadrach (שׁדרך shadrak), according to Lorsbach, means “young friend of the king;” according to Bohlen, it means “rejoicing in the way,” and this last signification is the one which Gesenius prefers. In either signification it would contribute to a forgetfulness of the interesting significancy of the former name, and tend to obliterate the remembrance of the early training in the service of Jehovah.
And to Mishael, of Meshach - The name “Mishael” (מישׁאל mı̂yshâ'êl) means, “who is what God is?” - from מי mı̂y “who,” שׁ sha “what,” and אל ēl “God.” It would thus be a remembrancer of the greatness of God; of his supremacy over all his creatures, and of his “incomparable” exaltation over the universe. The signification of the name “Meshach” (מישׁך mêyshak) is less known. The Persian word ovicula means a little sheep (Gesenius), but why this name was given we are not informed. Might it have been on account of his beauty, his gentleness, his lamb-like disposition? If so, nothing perhaps would be better fitted to turn away the thoughts from the great God and his service to himself.
And to Azariah, of Abednego - The name “Azaziah” (עזריה ‛ăzaryâh) means, “whom Jehovah helps,” from עזר ‛âzar “to help,” and יה yâh, the same as “Jah” (a shortened form of Jehovah, יהוה yehovâh), This name, therefore, had a striking significancy, and would be a constant remembrancer of the true God, and of the value of his favor and protection. The name Abed-nego (עבד נגו ‛ăbêd negô) means, “a servant of Nego,” or perhaps of “Nebo” - נבו nebô. This word “Nebo,” among the Chaldeans, probably denoted the planet Mercury. This planet was worshipped by them, and by the Arabs, as the celestial scribe or writer. See the notes at Isa 46:1. The Divine worship paid to this planet by the Chaldeans is attested, says Gesenius, by the many compound proper names of which this name forms a part; as Nebuchadnezzar, Nebushasban, and others mentioned in classic writers; as Nabonedus, Nabonassar, Nabonabus, etc. This change of name, therefore, was designed to denote a consecration to the service of this idol-god, and the change was eminently adapted to make him to whom it was given forget the true God, to whom, in earlier days, he had been devoted. It was only extraordinary grace which could have kept these youths in the paths of their early training, and in the faithful service of that God to whom they had been early consecrated, amidst the temptations by which they were now surrounded in a foreign land, and the influences which were employed to alienate them from the God of their fathers.
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 Baltassar, or as Chaldees ((Calmet) or Masorets. (Haydock)) pronounce,…
Baltassar, or as Chaldees ((Calmet) or Masorets. (Haydock)) pronounce, Beltesasar, "the treasurer of Baal." The names were changed to testify their subjection, (Calmet) and that they might embrace the manners of the Chaldees. (Menochius) --- The new names alluded to the sun. (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 gave names--designed to mark their new relation, that so…
gave names--designed to mark their new relation, that so they might forget their former religion and country (Gen 41:45). But as in Joseph's case (whom Pharaoh called Zaphnath-paaneah), so in Daniel's, the name indicative of his relation to a heathen court ("Belteshazzar," that is, "Bel's prince"), however flattering to him, is not the one retained by Scripture, but the name marking his relation to God ("Daniel," God my Judge, the theme of his prophecies being God's judgment on the heathen world powers).
Hananiah--that is, "whom Jehovah hath favored."
Read full note →
Shadrach--from Rak, in Babylonian, "the King," that is, "the Sun"; the same root as in Abrech (Gen 41:43, Margin), inspired or illumined by the Sun-god."
Mishael--that is, "who is what God is?" Who is comparable to God?
Meshach--The Babylonians retained the first syllable of Mishael, the Hebrew name; but for El, that is, GOD, substituted Shak, the Babylonian goddess, called Sheshach (Jer 25:26; Jer 51:41), answering to the Earth, or else Venus, the goddess of love and mirth; it was during her feast that Cyrus took Babylon.
Azariah--that is, "whom Jehovah helps."
Abed-nego--that is, "servant of the shining fire." Thus, instead of to Jehovah, these His servants were dedicated by the heathen to their four leading gods [HERODOTUS, Clio]; Bel, the Chief-god, the Sun-god, Earth-god, and Fire-god. To the last the three youths were consigned when refusing to worship the golden image (Dan 3:12). The Chaldee version translates "Lucifer," in Isa 14:12, Nogea, the same as Nego. The names thus at the outset are significant of the seeming triumph, but sure downfall, of the heathen powers before Jehovah and His people.
Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.
The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges 1878 · Public Domain 7. And the prince of the eunuchs gave names…
7. And the prince of the eunuchs gave names unto them: unto Daniel he gave, &c.] as R.V. ‘Prince’ (Heb. sar, i.e. here, governor, superintendent, 1Ki_9:22 [‘rulers’], 1Ki_22:26) is a synonym of the rab of Dan_1:3 (cf. Gen_37:36 with Jer_39:9). The practice of giving a person a new name, when admitted into the public service of a foreign country, is well attested in the case of Egypt (see not only Gen_41:45, but also Erman, Life in Ancient Egypt, p. 517 f.), and was probably usual elsewhere. There is an example, though it is not quite parallel, quoted from the reign of the Assyrian king, Esarhaddon, when Neco’s son was made viceroy of Athribis under the Assyrian name of Nabu-uǎêzib-anni (‘Nebo saves me’). In the present instance the change has the effect in each case of obliterating the name of God: Daniel, ‘God is my judge’; Ḥananiah, ‘Yah is gracious’; Mishael, ‘Who is what God is?’; Azariah, ‘Yah hath holpen.’
Belteshazzar] i.e. balâṭsu-uṣur, ‘protect his life!’; probably elliptical for Bêl-balâṭsu-uṣur, ‘Bel, protect his life!’ The name (which recurs Dan_2:26, Dan_4:8-9; Dan_4:18-19, Dan_5:12) is quite distinct from Belshazzar (see on Dan_5:1).
Read full note →
Shadrach] Of uncertain meaning, but explained plausibly by Friedr. Delitzsch as Shudur-Aku, ‘the command of Aku’ (Aku being the Sumerian equivalent of Sin, the Semitic name of the Moon-god); cf. the proper name Kibît-Ishtar, ‘the word, or command, of Ishtar.’
Meshach] Explained by Delitzsch, somewhat less satisfactorily, as a hybrid word, partly Hebrew and partly Babylonian, properly Mîsha-Aku, ‘Who is what Aku is?’, cf. Mishael above, and the Babylonian names Mannu-ki-Rammân, ‘Who is like Rammân (Rimmon)?’, and Mannu-ki-ilu, ‘Who is like God?’
Abed-nego] generally recognized as a corruption of ‘Abed-nebo, ‘servant of Nebo’ (Isa_46:1). Proper names, compounded with ‘Abd (or ‘Ebed), ‘servant,’ are common in most Semitic languages; and, though it is not the usual word for servant in Babylonian, Babylonian names compounded with it occur. Indeed, the name Abed-nebo itself has been found in a bilingual (Assyr. and Aram.) inscription (Schrader, KAT[183][184] ad loc.); it is also, as Prof. Bevan remarks, met with as that of a heathen Syrian long after the Christian era (Cureton’s Ancient Syriac Documents, p. 14).
[183] AT. Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O.T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the original, which is given on the margin of the English translation.
[184] Eb. Schrader, Die Keilinschriften und das A. T., ed. 2, 1883 (translated under the title The Cuneiform Inscriptions and the O.T. 1885, 1888). The references are to the pagination of the original, which is given on the margin of the English translation.
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.
The Pulpit Commentary 1880 · Public Domain Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names;…
Unto whom the prince of the eunuchs gave names; for he gave unto Daniel the name of Belteshazzar; and to Hananiah, of Shadrach; and to Mishael, of Meshach; and to Azariah, of Abednego. The only thing to be noted in regard to the versions is that, with the exception of the Peshitta, all of them identify the name of Daniel with that of the last King of Babylon. Both are called Baltasar or Baltassar in the Vulgate, the LXX, and Theodotion. The difference made in the Peshitta is not the same as that in the Hebrew; the prophet is called Beletshazzar, and the king Belit-shazzar. This would indicate something wrong. The Greek versions render Abed-nego jAbdenagw, which also the Vulgate has. This habit of changing the names of those who entered their service prevailed among Eastern potentates. Joseph became Zaph-nath-paaneah. (Gen_41:45) Not only did those about the court receive new names, but, not infrequently, subject monarchs, as token of subjection, were newly named, as Jehoiakim, who had formerly been Eliakim. Professor Fuller mentions the case of the Egyptian monarch Psammetik II, whose name as subject of Asshur-bani-pal was Nabo-sezib-ani. Not only so, but monarchs of their own will changed their names with changed circumstances; thus Pal in Babylon is Tiglath-pileser in Nineveh. Still in modern times this is continued in the head of Roman Catholic Christendom, who has for the last twelve centuries always assumed another than his original name on ascending the papalthrone. With members of a monarch"s court this is easily intelligible. The desire was to have names of good omen; a foreign name might either be meaningless or suggest anything but thoughts full of good omen. In considering these names, there are certain preliminary facts we must bear in mind. In the first place, there is a great probability that all the names had a Divine element in them, that is, contained as an element the name of a Babylonian god. The great mass of the names of Baby-Ionian and Assyrian officials had this. Next, it is by no means improbable that, at the hands of the Jewish scribes, the names have sustained some considerable change, more especially as regards the Divine element. The Jewish scribe had few scruples as to altering a name when there was anything in it to hurt his sensibilities. It is horrible to him that Jonathan, the son of Gershom, the son of Moses the great lawgiver, should be the originator of the false temple at Dan, and so he inserts a nun, and changes Moshe, "Moses," into "Manasseh." The scribe that copied out 2 Samuel, coming to the name of Jerubbaal, cannot endure to chronicle the fact that a judge in Israel ever bore the name of the abomination of the Zidonians as part of his name, and altered it to Jerubesheth. So we have in the same book Ishbosheth for Ethbaal, and Mephibosheth for Meribbaal. With a foreign potentate it is different; but in the case of a Jew there always was a tendency to blink such an awkward fact as bearing a name with heathen elements, by a slight change. The name given to Daniel is, in the Massoretic text, Belteshazzar. From the fact that in the Septuagint, Theodotion, and the Vulgate, we have the king Belshazzar and Daniel, as Babylonian magician, called by the same name," Baltasar," and when in the Peshitta, the difference is very slight, and not always maintained, we, for our part, are strongly inclined to believe both names to have been the same. Professor Bevan ("The Book of Daniel," 40) is quite sure that the author did not understand the meaning of the name given to Daniel. He (Professor Bevan) derives the name from Balat-zu-utzur, "Protect thou his life." Professor Fuller, with as great plausibility, makes it Bilat-sarra-utzur, "Beltis protects the crown." If that be the true derivation, then Nebuchadnezzar could quite correctly say that he was called after the name of his god. Still more accurate would this statement be if the name were Belshazzar. But an uneasy suspicion crosses our mind.
Does the author of Daniel ever attribute to Nebuchadnezzar the words on which Professor Bevan grounds his charge? The words are not in the Septuagint. Thus Professor Bevan never admitting the possibility of the name Belteshazzar having been modified from something else, although the evidence of the versions points most distinctly to that, and although he candidly admits it to have taken place in regard to Abed-nego assumes an etymology for it, as if it were the only possible one, which it is not; and on the ground of this etymology, and on the assumption that certain words were in the original text of Daniel, which are yet not in the Septuagint, he concludes that the author of Daniel did not know the meaning of the name he had given to his hero. Surely this is special pleading. If there has been any tampering with the name or modification of it, then Professor Bevan"s assumption falls to the ground, and his argument with it; but there seems every probability that there has been such modification, and the effect of such modification would be to deface the name of the heathen divinity in the name if there were such. Further, if Professor Fuller"s etymology may be maintained, again Professor Bevan"s assumption falls to the ground. These two arguments do not conflict. A Jewish scribe, ignorant of ancient Assyrian, might easily introduce a modification which, despite his intention, did not remove all heathen divinity from the name, only changed the divinity. If the original text of Daniel did not contain the phrase in the fourth chapter, "according to the name of my god," then again Professor Bevan"s assumption is proved groundless, and his argument without value. The phrase in question is not in the Septuagint, and therefore it is, to say the least, suspicious. It has no such intimate connection with the context as to show it part of the text; it is just such a phrase as would be put on the margin as a gloss, and get into the text by blunder of a copyist. It may be observed that Professor Bevan merely follows Schrader, alike in his derivation and deduction; but he, not Schrader, had before him continually the Septuagint version of Daniel, and he, not Schrader, is commentator on Daniel. And to Hananiah of Shadrach. This name is explained by Dr. Delitzsch as being a modified transliteration of Shudur-aku, "the command of Aku" (the moon-deity). With this Schrader agrees. There is always the possibility of the name having undergone a change. On the other hand, as the name of the deity, Aku, does not appear in Scripture, the Puritanic scribe might be unaware of its presence here. And to Mishael of Meshach. This name has caused great difficulty; it is consonantally identical with "Hesheeh," the name of one of the sons of Japhet. Dr. Delitzsch would render it Me-sa-aku, "Who is as Aku." Schrader"s objections to this are, that in the first place the Babylonian form would be Mamm-ki-Aku. And next, that there would not likely be a simple translation of the Hebrew name into Assyrian, but rather the giving a new name altogether. This second objection is valueless, for Pharaoh-Necho did not wholly change the name of Eliakim when he set him on the throne; since Jehovah may be regarded as the equivalent of El. The fact that "Meshach" is so like "Mcshech" points to intentional modification, and, therefore, to the presence in the name of the designation of a Babylonian god likely to be known to the Jews, such as Merodach, whose name was known to the Jews by its occurrence in the names Evil-Merodach and Merodach-Baladan, and actually as a divinity in Jer_50:2. Such is Lenormant"s hypothesis ("La Divination," p. 178) which would render it Misa-Mero-dash, "Who is as Merodach a suggestion certainly open to Schrader"s first objection. And to Azariah of Abed-nego. It has long been recognized that this name is a modification of Abed-Nebo. This identification is rendered all the more probable, that in New Hebrew and Aramaic Naga meant the planet "Venus," that is, "Nebo" The consonants are correct for this, but the vocalization is purposely wrong, in order to avoid the heathen name. If the author of Daniel was an obscure Jew, living in Palestine during the days of Epiphanes, whoa the influence of Babylon had disappeared, and its language had ceased to be studied, is it not strange that he should devise names which so accurately represent those that were in Babylon? One has only to read the Book of Judith, in all likelihood the product of the Epiphanes period (Konig, "Einlcitung," 480), to see the wild work that Palestinian Jews of that time made of Babylonian names.
The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.
C. I. Scofield 1917 · Public Domain i.e. the king’s leader, or attendant. Dan 2:26; Dan…
Belteshazzar
i.e. the king’s leader, or attendant. Dan 2:26; Dan 4:8; Dan 4:9; Dan 4:18; Dan 4:19; Dan 5:12. Identical in meaning with Belshazzar.
The Scofield Reference Bible (1917 edition), notes by C. I. Scofield — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.