N = Gutt. in the root, and not a mere Quiescent.-, emph. of The reader must not suppose, that all the four monarchies are symbolized here as coxisting and contemporaneous, when the final blow is given. The explanation in the sequel shows plainly, that they are successive. But inasmuch as one dynasty went over into another, in regular succession, the last became the tout ensemble and representative of the whole; and when it was smitten, in a certain sense all perished together. One thing should be specially noted here, viz. that an end of all is made, when the fifth kingdom begins to be set up. So the text: "They were crushed at once or altogether, the iron, clay," etc. Their utter destruction is most graphically described, by the subsequent image of chaff blown away by the wind. No place, therefore, is found for them. (36) This is the dream; and the interpretation thereof will we now declare before the king. 8, § 21. Daniel again includes his companions with himself; for this seems to be the meaning of the 1st plur. here. The pluralis majestaticus he surely would not apply to himself, on such an occasion; and it would therefore seem that he speaks communicativé, comp. vs. 17, 18, 23, above. (37) Thou, O king, art king of kings, on whom the God of heaven hath bestowed dominion, strength, and power and glory. , see v. 31.-..., lit. to whom of the 2d pers., which we cannot so express in English, but the sense of which I have given above. The of course belongs to the, and gives to it a relative sense, although separated far from it., Nom. before the verb for the sake of emphasis. The four nouns that follow are all of the emph. form, and from their specific meaning here, would claim an article in the Hebrew; § 32. 1.—, with o, comes from, a Hebraizing Segholate. The two first nouns are asyndic, but the last two have each a (1). The writer probably designed to couple them as one compound-splendid power. The firmness of Daniel is conspicuous here. He does not merely ascribe splendor and power to the king, (which he might well do), but solemnly reminds him, that all this is due to the God of heaven, who is not only King of kings, but King of him who is every day saluted with this high title. (38) And wherever dwell the sons of men, the beast of the field, or the fowl of the air, into thy hand hath he given [them], and made thee ruler over them all; thou art that head of gold. — in its local sense, wherever. The is an intensive here, as in, v. 8 above. Our English word wherever expresses the idea with sufficient exactness.-, Peal Part. of an, but the vowels belong to the Qeri, 777, with a movable Yodh. The Kethibh would be appropriately pointed, and thus written, it is simply a Hebraizing form (like ); and inasmuch as it stands here so written, and also in 4: 32. 6: 26, it appears that the Masorites have been too solicitous to conform the text to the proper Chaldee. I prefer the Kethibh, as being Hebraeo-Chaldaic. - Sons of men, common in Hebrew for men, mankind, but more frequent still in Chaldee and Syriac. -, const. of (he-va), from s to live, final & here being put for of the root (§ 20. 1), the Vav is resumed where the fem. formative - היֹּא . is added.-7, emph. form of, field; but the probable root ( inanis fuit) seems to indicate either desert, or (like ¿ožμos) an uncultivated place, i. e. destitute of houses, hedges, etc. Fowl of the air, generic like. That often designates the air, there can be no more doubt, than that the corresponding Heb. word does. Ine 30, the before the noun conveys the appropriate sense, into. The hand grasps and wields. To put anything into it, is to commit it to the disposal of the person to whom the hand belongs. —, Aph. with suff, hath made thee to rule. The root of this word points out the meaning of Sultan, i. e. b with - formative.. In in, be is a noun (root) with a suff.; hence the Dagh. forte in, lit. over the totality of them. the verb art, § 40. 1. Still it carries a kind of demonstrative force with it, like that of the Greek ouzos, and is equivalent to thou art the very or that same. emph. of x for 7. The description given in this verse of the extensive dominion of Nebuchadnezzar, is of course not to be literally urged; for in a court-compliment or address, (which must be such as not to give offence), who can exact literal exegesis? Is Paul to be taxed with uttering a fulsome compliment, when he addresses Festus with his usual title zoάriore? Acts 26: 25. That this method of describing extensive dominion was common in the Semitic dialects, is evident from Gen. 1: 26. Ps. 8: 6-8, comp. Heb. 2: 7, 8, and Jer. 27: 6. 28: 14. The reader would err, as I apprehend the matter, if he should attempt to prove from this golden head, that the Babylonish empire under Nebuchadnezzar was actually larger and more powerful than any of the three that followed. Nebuchadnezzar is placed at the head, because the symbolic vision begins with him; and the natural mode of describing the image was to begin with its most striking part- the head. The assumption, that the whole is a mere artifice of the writer, by which he makes Daniel flatter the king, by giving him such a preference (for in this light some view it) over others, seems to be but ill-matched with the bold and faithful and fearless character of the man as elsewhere represented. Diversity of parts and of metals, in the present case, is requisite in order to designate variety of dynasties. No comparison of their respective extent or importance is to be made out of this; for, plainly, the writer has himself made the comparison in the sequel by express language-inferior to thee. rule over all the earth — mighty as iron which crusheth everything. (39) And after thee shall arise another dominion, inferior to thine; and another third dominion of brass, which shall rule over all the earth. , suff. form of the prep., from ., § 31. 1. , adj. for x, ib.-, the points belong to the Qeri, . The Masorites rejected the emph. form, because they regarded the word as adverbial; but the word may be fem., and the objection then virtually ceases. The Kethibh should be read .-, the of comparison. The silver portion of the image, to which this second dominion corresponds, is not here named; but in respect to the third dominion, brass is specified as the corresponding symbol, which of course shows that the writer couples, in his own mind, the second dominion with the silver, see in v. 32. -, fem. of, formed like the stat. emph. in Dec. VIII. p. 91. In this case, it distinguishes the here from the same word above, and is in apposition with the latter. Reign over all the earth, an expression not to be taken in a literal geographical sense, but as a popular phrase, indicating wide and uncontrolled domination; comp. Gen. 41: 54. Jer. 34: 1. 50: 23. Ezek. 22: 4. 2 Chron. 36: 23, where Cyrus, in his proclamation, says: "All the kingdoms of the earth hath the Lord God of heaven given unto me." To this third dynasty is ascribed a wider domain than to one. The second is described as inferior to the first, the third is represented as a domain of the widest extent. is represented by the respective portions of the compound Colossus, will be a subject of inquiry in the sequel. So Luke 2: 1. the preceding 8; while What dynasty (40) And a fourth dominion shall be strong as iron; altogether as iron crushes and grinds to pieces everything - even as iron which dashes in pieces - all these will it crush and dash in pieces. apoc. of, § 31. 1.-, the vowels belong to the Qerin, which is the usual normal form of the fem. in nouns with the ending", e. g. 7. Instead of the normal form, (which changes the last into when accession is made), the biblical Chaldee retains the Yodh final, and makes it movable. Our text, therefore, should be written ; see p. 96, under No. VIII. applicable to physical hardness, compactness, strength, like that of iron, as is an epithet primarily תַקִיפָה the text intimates. It does not designate, in respect to the fourth dynasty, its potency by reason of numbers, but its resistless energy in destroying. bap is not causal here, but simply just as, altogether as, quite like, etc.; see on v. 8 above, for the form of expression. P, Aph. Part. with retained; the idea of crushing as grain is crushed in a mill, which is the appropriate meaning of this word, is very graphic. — , Part., comminuit to reduce to small pieces, or contudit to bruise to pieces, answer well to the Chaldee word. Our vulgar smash comes very exactly to it. It serves to increase the intensity of the description. The corresponding word is and , both of which (from ) are nearly synonymous with b. Even as iron that dashes in pieces, resumes or repeats the comparison already intimated, for the sake of impressing on the mind of the reader the iron-like power of the dynasty. -, according to the accents, belongs to. But this mars the sense and the grammar. To what can relate, if such a construction be adopted? As the apodosis must begin, therefore, with, we might expect another (as) so before it. But this is often left unexpressed; ? which is frequent also in Hebrew. The subject of = pan is . be P is Aph. 3 fem. Fut. of P, and is Fut. Peal of, cause the excludes the Dagh. forte. In English, the three verbs are well represented by crush, smash, and dash to pieces. (41) And since thou sawest the feet and the toes, a part of them the clay of the potter and a part of them iron, the dominion shall be divided, and there shall be of the firmness of iron in it, inasmuch as thou sawest iron mingled with the whitish clay. Peal. , quod, since that, because that., paragogic, 2 sing. twice, the vowels being for the Qeri, see on v. 33; (so the Kethibh) being masc., the Punctators have changed it to the fem. form. so as to agree with the usual gender of the antecedents. But may not have been of the common gender? If so, the change is unnecessary. 8, emphatic fem. Part. of 3, used here as an abstract noun, that which is stable, firm, i. e. stability, firmness. 8, argilla, white clay, such as potters use, and so (with) it is named above clay of the potter. The idea must be, that the clay in the image was hardened by fire, otherwise the feet and legs could hardly be imagined to support the body of the Colossus. But still it was, even in that condition, far inferior to the iron in point of hardness and firmness. (42) And since the toes of the feet were partly of iron and partly of clay, in part the dominion shall be strong, and in part it shall be brittle. .as abore מִפְּהֵון 19, see on 1:2 above. fem. (for the Heb. ), brittle, friable, i. e. that which can be easily broken or separated. There is a clear intimation, in these last two verses, that the fourth dy nasty is of quite a different complexion from the other three. The brittle and the strong are commingled in it. But not merely this. In describing the second dynasty above, which includes the breast and arms, nothing is said or made of the fingers attached to the hands, because no special significancy is designed to be given to them. But here the toes are twice mentioned separately from the feet, (vs. 41, 42). Why? Let the reader turn to chap. vii, where is another vision of these four monarchies much more full and explicit than the present one, and he will there find ten horns of the fourth beast (vs. 7, 20), distinguished in the same way, which are explained by the angel-interpreter (7:24) as meaning ten kings, — ten who are to precede the little horn (vs. 8, 20, 24), which, beyond all reasonable doubt, symbolizes Anthiochus Epiphanes. The ten toes, in the passage before us, partly of iron and partly of clay, appear, therefore to designate, in a special manner, the ten kings who precede the king symbolized by the little horn, whose reign and character correspond well with the symbol of the iron and the clay. But the ten kings, although enigmatically intimated, are not here brought to special view, nor is anything here said of the little horn. Diverse in the mode of representation, but not in substantial meaning, is Dan. 8: 8-12. But we shall find some further characteristics of this dynasty in the next verse; to which we now come. (43) Since thou sawest iron mingled with the whitish clay, they shall intermingle with the seed of men, but they shall not cleave together this with that, see! even as iron cannot mingle with clay. Since thou sawest, etc. It does not seem to have been duly noticed by interpreters here, that v. 43 is coördinate with vs. 41, 42, which commence with the same expression. That the of connection is omitted, is quite usual in this book, as already remarked. The ground of such an arrangement may be easily explained. Vs. 41, 42 explain the mixture of the iron and clay, as symbolizing an empire which is both weak and strong, i. e. has some weak points and some strong ones. Evidently the mixture of iron and clay in the feet and toes, indicates that the colossal image has but a frail support. Accordingly when the stone from the mountain strikes the feet, the whole image falls and is crushed to powder. But here (v. 43) the mixture of the iron and clay is represented as symbolizing another remarkable characteristic of the dynasty in question, viz. the intermixture of the party-chiefs of the fourth dynasty by marriage, in order to promote their respective designs, and also the failure of these arrangements to accomplish the end proposed. This circumstance is so peculiar from its nature, that one at first wonders that such a matter should |