PERES: this is the singular form of the plural parsin found in verse 25. The word comes from a root meaning “divide,” “dissect,” or “cut in two.” But there is a play on words in this verse, so that it is also related to the Persians mentioned at the end of the verse. While New Jerusalem Bible and Revised English Bible have the plural form, this is not recommended. In fact, with all three terms, it will be better to translate the meaning rather than retain the transliterated form of the Aramaic.

Your kingdom is divided: once again the passive may have to be transformed into an active form with God as the agent: “God has divided…,” or in some languages “God is about to divide…” or “God is dividing….”

And given to the Medes and Persians: if God is made the subject of the verb “divide” in the previous phrase, this one may continue “so that he might give it to…” or “in order to hand it over to….” The two names are actually singular in form in the Aramaic, “the Mede and the Persian,” but they have a collective meaning and should be translated as plurals in most cases. The Aramaic word for “Persian” constitutes a play on words with parsin in verse 25 and peres here. But it is inevitable that the wordplay will be lost if the meaning is translated in verses 25 and 28 instead of being transliterated. If judged indispensable for the reader, this information can be provided in a footnote.

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 .

In the first year of Belshazzar: a literal reading of this phrase may give the impression that Belshazzar was only a year old at the time. But the sense of the expression is that the vision took place during the first year of the reign of Belshazzar as king. Translators should be sure at this point that the proper name of this king is sufficiently distinguished from the one given to Daniel in 1.7 (see also 5.1 and comments).

King of Babylon: Belshazzar was ruler over all Babylonia and not just the capital city of Babylon. So it is better to translate as in Good News Translation, “king of Babylonia.”

Daniel … his … he: note that the account is transposed from the third person to the first person in Good News Translation. In the original the third person pronouns are used in this verse, but in the following verse there is a shift to a direct quote from Daniel. In some languages it may be advisable to put the entire story in the first person as in Good News Translation, but naturalness in the translation should be the determining factor. If the Good News Translation model is not followed, translators must be careful to see that the pronoun references are clear, since both Daniel and the king are mentioned earlier in this verse.

A dream and visions: the rendering of this phrase should not give the impression that two different things are being talked about here. These are simply two terms used to describe a single event. In some languages the idea of a vision has to be expressed by a phrase like “something happened inside my head” or “I saw something happening in my mind.” Compare New International Version “visions passed through his mind.” For comments on the term “vision,” see 2.19.

As he lay in his bed: or “as he lay on his bed.” Other languages may express this idea in very different ways, depending on cultural practices. Some may say “as he lay down to go to rest,” or “when he stretched himself out for sleeping,” or “when he was on his sleeping mat.”

Then: it may be better to omit this transition word altogether in some languages. But in others it will be necessary to indicate the sequence of events: first Daniel had the dream, then he wrote it down.

Wrote down the dream, and told the sum of the matter: according to some interpreters these two verbal expressions should not be taken as referring to two different actions. The second would be rather an extension of the first. The two are combined in the New International Version rendering: “wrote down the substance of his dream.” Many versions, however, take the second verb phrase as introducing the actual wording that begins after Daniel said in the following verse. New Jerusalem Bible, for example, has “he wrote the dream down, and this is how the narrative began:….” And Moffatt translates “he wrote down the dream, describing all that he had seen.” But the oral character of the message (in addition to the fact that it was written) seems to be emphasized by the writer. The verb meaning “tell” or “say” occurs both here and again at the beginning of the following verse.

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 .

As I was considering: compare 7.8. The Good News Translation rendering gives the impression that Daniel was thinking about what he had already seen, when the goat appeared. But New Jerusalem Bible translates “This is what I observed:…,” making the verb relate to what follows. Most versions, however, adopt the same solution as Good News Translation and indicate that he was reflecting on what he had already seen. This is the recommended interpretation.

Behold: see verse 3.

He-goat: this is not normal English usage, so Good News Translation drops the he-, and the gender is made clear by the use of masculine pronouns. Some languages have a separate word for a male goat. If there is no special term, the fact that the goat was male must be conveyed in the most natural way possible.

From the west: again, the point of reference is that of the writer, writing from Judea. In many languages it may be necessary to say “from the side where the sun sets.”

Across the face of the whole earth: this clause contains two potential translation problems. In many languages the earth is not depicted as having a face. The obvious meaning is the “surface” of the earth. Also this expression constitutes an exaggeration for dramatic effect. If there is a danger that it will be understood literally in the translator’s language, it may have to be reduced. But in the context of an apocalyptic vision, the overstatement may be easily understood. The reference to the face of the whole earth implies conquering all nations, but this should not be made explicit in the translation of the vision itself.

Without touching the ground: this is not a reference to the use of airplanes! Good News Translation makes it clear that the animal is “moving so fast” that it appears not to touch the ground as it moves. Most translators should probably adopt a similar solution, to avoid misunderstanding on the part of the readers.

A conspicuous horn: that is, a single horn that was very prominent. The rendering of the word conspicuous should make it clear that this was really something quite spectacular that could be seen without any effort. It may be indicated in a footnote that this single horn represents Alexander the Great, the founder and first ruler of the Greek Empire (see verse 21).

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 .

Have not obeyed: while the verb used here is literally “listened,” in this context it has to do with obedience or actually following the instructions that one hears. In many languages the equivalent for “listen” naturally carries the sense of obedience; but in other languages where this is not the case, Revised Standard Version provides a better model than Good News Translation.

The voice of the LORD our God: or, more naturally, “your voice, O LORD our God,” since the prayer is being made directly to the LORD. And in many languages it will be more natural to say “have not obeyed you” rather than “obeyed your voice.”

His … he … his: as in verse 4 and the end of the previous verse, these third person pronouns should be changed to second person in the context of the prayer to God.

Which he set before us: or “which he communicated to us,” or simply “gave us” (New American Bible and New International Version, as well as Good News Translation).

By: literally “through the hand of.” This is the Hebrew equivalent of “by means of.”

His servants the prophets: see verse 6 above.

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 .

When he had spoken to me according to these words: this is an awkward expression and can be rendered much more naturally in most languages. It may be better also to alter the verb tense: “While he was speaking these words to me” (New Revised Standard Version); “While he was saying these things to me” (New Jerusalem Bible); “While he was speaking thus to me” (New American Bible).

Turned my face toward the ground: literally “I placed my face to the ground.” But this does not mean that Daniel prostrated himself again. While he remained standing he looked down in an attitude of humility. As far as the physical movement is concerned, this is the opposite of “lifted up my eyes” (verse 5).

Was dumb: the Hebrew verb here expresses the idea of being incapable of speaking and is not a voluntary refusal to talk. The rendering “kept silent” (New American Bible and Nouvelle version Segond révisée) may therefore be misleading. In many languages the best way to say this is “was speechless” (New Revised Standard Version) or “was unable to speak” (Revised English Bible).

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 .

The first part of this verse is very difficult to follow. Literally it reads “Those two, the kings, their heart toward evil, at one table, will speak a lie.” This has given rise to considerable restructuring and filling in of detail in Good News Translation.

During the course of his military campaign, Antiochus IV took his nephew (Ptolemy VI) prisoner but apparently treated him well (receiving him at his own table) in order to scheme and seek ways of seizing political power in Egypt.

Minds: literally “hearts.” In Hebrew the “heart” is the center of feelings, emotions, and passions, but it is also the source of intellectual activity. In this context both aspects may be in focus. There was intellectual activity based on a desire to do evil. Translators should use the term in their language that most naturally refers to such mental and emotional activity.

Mischief: this English translation is probably too weak. The corresponding word indicates something more profoundly evil than “dirty tricks” or mischief. Most versions prefer the term “evil.”

Lies: as indicated in the literal rendering above, this noun is singular in Hebrew, but it is collective in meaning and may therefore legitimately be translated as a plural. In some languages it will be essential to indicate to whom they lied. The meaning is clearly “… to each other,” as in Good News Translation.

At the same table: this clearly suggests the idea of eating. Some languages speak of “having hands in the same bowl,” “eating the same food,” or something similar.

To no avail: in many languages this may be better translated as a separate sentence: “Their conspiring will be of no use,” “Their plans will come to nothing,” or “They will not succeed in their schemes.”

For the end is yet to be at the time appointed: this is a rather free quotation of Hab 2.3, and its meaning is not altogether clear. It is generally thought that it indicates that human beings are incapable of putting an end to all their problems by themselves—God alone can do so, and that at the time he has fixed. Some possible models are “for the time fixed (by God) has still not yet come” or “because the end will still come at the time (which God has) appointed.”

A possible model for translating the whole verse is:

• Those two kings will want to harm each other. They will sit down to eat together at the same table, but they will lie to each other. And no matter what they decide, it will not help either one of them, because God is the one who has set the time for their end.

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 .

Then: that is, after the trial period of ten days. If necessary this may be made explicit in the translation.

Appearance: the external appearance or physical condition was to be the basis for the comparison between the two groups: “compare our looks” (New Jerusalem Bible and New English Bible).

Let … be observed by you: the Hebrew original is more literally “let them (indefinite) compare before you our appearance.” The passive construction of Revised Standard Version should probably be made active in most languages by saying something like “you observe…” or “you watch….” Good News Translation simplifies the structure of the verse by using the verb “compare,” which suggests observing the two different groups of young men. This may be a good model for some languages to follow. In other languages it may be necessary to say something like “Examine us and examine the other young men who have been eating the king’s food, in order to see who looks better. Then you can decide what to do with us.”

Rich food: see verses 5 and 8.

According to what you see deal with your servants: this may be understood to mean “do with your servants as you see fit” (New Jerusalem Bible). But most understand it to mean “treat us on the basis of what you see….”

With your servants: as in verse 12 above, this simply means “toward us” and should undoubtedly be translated that way in most languages.

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 .

Then Arioch brought in Daniel … in haste: the words used here carry the idea of an action performed eagerly and in a hurry. Some versions use words like “immediately,” “quickly” (New American Bible), or “at once” (Good News Translation and New International Version). Anchor Bible begins this verse “Rushing excitedly….” New Jerusalem Bible translates “lost no time….” New English Bible, on the other hand, takes it to mean “in great trepidation,” but this interpretation is not recommended.

Among the exiles from Judah: literally “among the sons of the removed of Judah.” Some other ways of saying this may be “among those brought here from Judah” or “among the Jewish exiles” (Revised English Bible). Translators should also be careful of the structure of this verse. It is possible that this secondary information about Daniel will have to be made a separate sentence and placed after the main message to the king. It may be possible to say, for example, “I have found someone who can interpret your dream. He is one of those Jewish exiles.”

To the king: within the direct quotation it will be more natural in most cases to use the pronoun in place of the noun, “to you.”

The interpretation: we know, of course, that the interpretation is of the troublesome dream that is at the center of the whole story. But in some languages it may be desirable to state this clearly.

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 .