His sons: that is, the sons of the king of Syria (“the king of the north”). It is important to ensure that the persons referred to by the pronoun be made clear. This will mean using a noun phrase like “the king’s sons” in place of the pronoun. This is especially important at the beginning of a new paragraph.

Wage war and assemble a multitude: if the first verb is taken to mean “make war,” as the Revised Standard Version rendering so indicates, then this expression is not in logical order. But the meaning here is rather “prepare for war” as in Good News Translation and New International Version. Compare also New American Bible, which is more literal: “But his sons shall prepare and assemble a great armed host.” The most important element in preparing for war is the gathering together of a large group of warriors. The multitude of great forces consists therefore of soldiers, and it will be important to make this clear in most languages.

The second half of this verse switches the subject abruptly from a plural subject, His sons, to the third person singular masculine pronoun. It is confusing to say “he” without a singular noun that it can refer back to (as in New Jerusalem Bible and New Jerusalem Bible), and misleading to use the relative pronoun which (New International Version and New Revised Standard Version) referring to the assembled armies. Some versions attempt to reflect the singular pronoun by saying “one of them” (New English Bible/Revised English Bible and Good News Translation), referring to one of the sons of the Syrian king. This is probably the best solution to a difficult problem.

The Hebrew text that follows contains no less than five different verbs in series. The first is repeated in the infinitive form. A literal rendering of these verbs is:

(a) he will come on to come on and
(b) he will overflow and
(c) he will pass along and
(d) he will turn and
(e) he will do battle

In the following comments, discussions of these verbs are marked by letters within brackets for the sake of easier reference.

(a) The duplication of the first verb, come on, serves as a kind of emphasis. The King James Version rendering “shall certainly come” is not bad. The verb translated come on is the ordinary word “come” used several times in the verses immediately preceding. The translation come on is repeated in verse 13, but there is no reason to translate by any verb other than “come.” It is the repetition here that requires a more emphatic translation.
(b) The verb overflow gives a picture of flowing water that spills over the banks of its normal course. Since this is incompatible with a singular subject, it is possible to shift the subject once again and add “and with his soldiers, he will….” The imagery of an army as a flood is taken from Isa 8.8. The flood image is retained in most English versions.
(c) The verb translated pass through can also mean “cross over” and possibly refers to crossing over the border into the other country, but this can also be taken as a part of the flood imagery.
(d) The next verb is the subject of considerable debate. It may mean “carry on” or “turn back,” or simply again. New American Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, and King James Version take it to mean “return,” “turn back,” or “retreat.” New International Version, New English Bible, An American Translation, and Moffatt prefer the meaning “press forward” or “carry on.” And New Jerusalem Bible and New American Standard Bible, as well as Revised Standard Version/New Revised Standard Version, translate the same term “again.” The meaning “press forward” is probably to be preferred.
(e) According to the traditional written text, this verb has a plural subject, “they will attack (or do battle),” but the ancient specialists in the Jewish holy books noted in the margin of the manuscripts that it should be read as a singular, “he will attack.” This suggestion is followed by most modern versions.

His fortress: the possessive pronoun his in this case refers back to the king of Egypt. The reference here is probably to “the fortress of Gaza” (Moffatt), which was the strongest fortification in southern Judea. However, it is probably better not to be as precise as this in translation. It can be rendered “the enemy’s strongest town” or something similar. New Jerusalem Bible has “the southern stronghold,” while Revised English Bible has simply “the enemy stronghold.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Stretch out his hand against: or “use his power against,” or “extend his domination over.”

The countries: the reference here may be to Edom, Moab, and Ammon mentioned in the previous verse (Good News Translation), or possibly to “other countries” in addition to them (Bible en français courant and New English Bible/Revised English Bible). New International Version has “many countries.” This interpretation seems more likely than that of Good News Translation. But if the interpretation of Good News Translation is followed, it will probably not be necessary to repeat the proper names. It is quite likely that a more definite reference such as “those countries” will be appropriate.

The land of Egypt: this is another clearly-stated geographical reference to Egypt, confirming the translation of “king of the south” as “king of Egypt” (see the discussion under verse 5).

Shall not escape: or “will also be captured.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Answered a second time: literally “answered again and saying.” This is essentially a repetition of their request in verse 4. The text does not provide the object of the verb answered, but in those languages where one is required, it is clearly the king.

Let the king tell his servants …: again the indirect reference to the king (rather than saying “you”) and to themselves as his servants (instead of simply “us”) are ways of showing respect and were very natural in ancient times. But the use of the pronouns is recommended in most languages today.

Show its interpretation: that is, “show you what it means.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Commentators often feel that verses 41-44 are cluttered with needless repetition. In these four verses toes, which were not mentioned earlier, complicate the figure of speech. Also some kind of clay is mentioned seven times. But it is difficult to see any particular significance in the various terms used, and many languages will not have the resources to make such distinctions.

As you saw the feet and toes partly of potter’s clay and partly of iron: all this forms a single subordinate clause in Aramaic. For stylistic reasons it may be better in some languages to break it into two shorter units and make a separate sentence of it. For example, “As you have noticed, the feet and toes of the statue are made partly of ceramic and partly of iron.”

The word for clay or “baked clay” (New International Version) is qualified in the original by “of potter.” Depending on the word chosen for clay, it may be possible to leave this out. On the translation of the idea of clay, see verse 33. But a different word is used here. The Revised Standard Version miry clay at the end of the verse seems to focus on the watery character of clay that has not yet been baked or fired, and this is not at all the intent of the writer. It is probably best not to try to distinguish between what the Revised Standard Version calls potter’s clay and miry clay.

And toes: these words are omitted by some modern versions (New Jerusalem Bible) because they are not in some ancient Aramaic texts. However, Hebrew Old Testament Text Project recommends that translators follow the longer text that includes these words. In some languages, however, it may be awkward and unnecessarily redundant to mention the toes, since they would be clearly understood as being included in the word feet. If this is the case, the words and toes may be left out—for translation reasons rather than for textual reasons.

It shall be …: although it is not stated in the text at this point, this is still a part of the explanation of the dream. For this reason Good News Translation adds “This means that…” (compare also New American Bible). This is probably a good model for most other languages to follow.

A divided kingdom: another way of saying this is “will not be united” or “will lack unity.” As the end of the verse demonstrates, it is not a question of a separation into several parts but of internal tension. Just as clay and iron do not mix well, so this kingdom will lack cohesion and unity.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

He answered: the verb used here does not indicate answering a question since no question was asked by the counselors. It merely indicates a continuation of the conversation. It may be better to translate “He continued” or “He went on” (New Jerusalem Bible).

But: this marks a very strong contrast, since there are now four men instead of the original three, and they are free instead of being tied up as they had been when thrown into the fire. Good News Translation renders this as another question, “Then why…?”

Loose: in contrast with “bound” in verses 21, 23, and 24.

They are not hurt: literally “there is no wound (or injury) on them.” Another way of wording this is “their bodies are not burned at all,” or translators may want to use a word for injury resulting from fire, if such exists in their language: “no burn-marks can be seen on their bodies.”

A son of the gods: on expressions containing “son of…” or “sons of…,” see comments on 2.25. In Jewish writings the expression “sons of God” (see, for example, Job 1.6) refers to members of the divine court meeting around the LORD. This, of course, makes us think immediately of angels. In the mouth of the Babylonian king, the words “a son of the gods” indicates that the fourth person in the fire resembled one of the gods of the Babylonians. However, the two Aramaic terms translated appearance and like indicate clearly that it was only a matter of resemblance. In verse 28 below it becomes clear that the person is actually an angel. This is why some versions (Good News Translation and Moffatt) actually translate “an angel” in this verse. Others have “one of the gods” (An American Translation), or “a god” (New Revised Standard Version and New English Bible/Revised English Bible), or “a divine being” (New Jerusalem Bible, Bible en français courant, and Anchor Bible). It is probably best not to translate literally the words “child of…” or “son of…,” since this merely indicates membership in the group of divine beings. Compare Gen 6.2; Job 1.6; 38.7; 1 Kgs 22.19; and Psa 148.2.

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

O king: see 2.4.

Let my counsel be acceptable to you: the translation should make it clear that the advice being talked about is found in the words that follow. In some cases this can be made clear by the use of a colon to introduce the actual advice. In others it will be better to say “please comply with this (following) advice,” “I beg you to accept what I am about to say,” or simply “take my advice” (New American Bible and Anchor Bible).

Break off your sins by practicing righteousness, and your iniquities by showing mercy to the oppressed: once again the parallel structure of the original is driving at a single point. The verb break off carries over to the second part, where your iniquities is parallel to your sins in the first part. It may be difficult to find two different words for sins and iniquities that are natural in some languages. Also, practicing righteousness and showing mercy are roughly equivalent, although the addition of to the oppressed is an important new element. Where the resources of the language permit, these items should be distinguished. It will be noted that a Good News Translation footnote indicates that this whole phrase may possibly be translated “Make up for your sins by doing what is right and by being merciful to the poor,” or as New Revised Standard Version has it, “atone for your sins with righteousness.” But this interpretation is not recommended. Also the translation of the oppressed by “the poor” in Good News Translation is not recommended, since it will very likely carry different connotations.

Perhaps: the Aramaic text is not as strongly affirmative as the Good News Translation rendering would suggest; and the element of doubt conveyed by this particle should be retained in translation. Revised English Bible begins a new sentence for the last part of this verse: “It may be that you will enjoy long contentment.”

A lengthening of your tranquility: the word translated tranquility has a somewhat broader meaning. It is perhaps more accurately rendered “prosperity” (New Revised Standard Version, New American Bible, and Moffatt, as well as Good News Translation).

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

And: the conjunction used in Revised Standard Version indicates simple coordination. But it should mark contrast as in New Jerusalem Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, New International Version, and Revised English Bible, as well as Good News Translation.

Belshazzar: note that Good News Translation does not include the proper name here but simply says “you, his son.” Making the translation sound natural will determine which model should be followed on this point.

Have not humbled your heart: the heart in this context stands for the whole person. This is why New Jerusalem Bible as well as Good News Translation say “have not humbled yourself.” In some languages it is possible to say “refused to be modest” or “failed to recognize God.”

Though you knew all this: it is quite possible that the order of the two clauses in this verse should be switched in many languages. This will probably constitute a more natural structure; for example, “You are his son, and you knew all this. But you didn’t humble yourself.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .

Exceedingly glad: in this case translators must search for an expression that describes happiness that exceeds all bounds and surpasses the imagination.

Commanded: as in similar cases earlier, it may be necessary to say “commanded his servants” or something of this kind.

Be taken up … was taken up: these passive forms will have to be made active in many languages. The agent of the action will be “the servants,” or “some men,” or simply “they.”

No kind of hurt was found upon him: compare 3.25, 27; but the expression is stronger here. Translators may consider “no one could find any trace of injury on his body,” or “he appeared to be in perfect health,” or possibly “it seemed that the lions had not injured him at all.”

His God: as in the previous verse, Good News Translation drops the possessive pronoun. But if the possessive form causes problems, it is probably better to translate it “the God he worshiped.”

Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .