He: see the above comment on the pronouns referring to God.

Changes times and seasons: the verb used here expresses somewhat indirectly the idea that God has authority over time and history. This is in contrast with the Babylonian idea of history, which seemed to indicate that the gods could do nothing to modify its course.

The two nouns in Hebrew have a rather general meaning, and it is probably unnecessary to try to make a careful distinction between them. Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch translates the two by a single term in German. Bible en français courant translates “time and history,” but this is not to be understood as separate and precise renderings. Rather the two are to be taken together. Most English versions translate simply “times and seasons,” but Moffatt has “epochs and eras.” Note the similar expression in Gen 1.14.

Removes … sets up: in many languages it will be more natural to reverse the order of these two verbs. In some cases there are special words for the installation (enthronement) of a king and for his removal (dethronement). Or translators may also consider saying “he gives authority (or power) to kings, and he takes their power (or authority) away.”

Gives wisdom to the wise and knowledge to those who have understanding: in some languages these two parallel statements would be nonsense, because the wise already have wisdom and those who have understanding would also have knowledge. It will be much more logical to say “He is the one who makes a person wise, and it is he who gave understanding to those who have it” or something similar. Good News Translation does not say who receives the wisdom and understanding, but it is probably better to make this clear in many languages. Some possible models for this statement are “If people have wisdom and understanding, it comes from God,” “It is God who gives people wisdom and understanding,” or “God is the one who makes people wise and lets them understand matters.”

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 .

Here again the writer shows his fascination with lists by giving six different words for musical instruments. This list is repeated exactly in verse 7 (according to some ancient manuscripts) and again in verses 10 and 15. Once the list has been established here, it may be repeated in the same way in these other verses. But if the fourfold repetition is unnatural, a more summary statement may be used in the later verses. In many languages where such instruments are not well known, this poses serious translation problems. If it proves impossible to have the same number of instruments as in the biblical text, the number may be reduced (in some manuscripts there are only five names here); however, given the importance of lists in Daniel, it is not recommended that they be replaced by a simple summary statement as, for example, “when the band strikes up…” (Living Bible).

Translators who have access to recent issues of The Bible Translator may find considerable help in understanding the various types of musical instruments in the Bible by consulting the articles written by Ivor H. Jones (January 1986, pages 101-116 and January 1987, pages 129-143).

Horn: this is the same word as is used for the horn of an animal (as in 7.7, for example). The animal horn was actually made into a kind of trumpet-type musical instrument that was held to the mouth and blown to create a sound. While this instrument was originally made from the horn of an animal, it later came to be made of wood or metal as well.

Pipe: this was also an instrument held to the mouth and blown to produce pleasant sounds. It is usually translated “flute” (King James Version, New International Version, New American Bible, New American Standard Bible), but Good News Translation renders it “oboes.” Others refer to it as a “clarinet.”

Lyre: this stringed instrument was considered the noblest instrument of all and was used in secular merrymaking. It could have as few as three strings or as many as twelve. The term used is probably a borrowing from Greek and is probably related to our modern word “guitar.” It could be played with the fingers or with a thin piece of ivory or metal.

Trigon: based on the form of the name, scholars have suggested that this was a triangular musical instrument, probably with four strings. Perhaps the closest approximation in many cultures may be the “hand piano” or “thumb piano,” although this is not technically a stringed instrument.

Harp: this was also a stringed instrument with a large resonator. It probably had ten strings.

Bagpipe: many scholars are convinced that this is not actually the name of a particular instrument, but rather that it referred to the playing together of all the individual instruments mentioned before (so Good News Translation, “and then all the other instruments will join in”). The term probably derived from the Greek meaning “accompanying sound.” New English Bible follows this interpretation, using the general term “music” here. However, one commentator suggests that this may be the name of a sort of drum (Anchor Bible); New Revised Standard Version translates the term in this way.

And every kind of music: this is probably a summary statement corresponding to “and all the officials” in the list of officials in verse 2 above. It should be translated in such a way as to sum up the list that it follows. It should be noted, however, that New English Bible translates “singing of every kind,” since it takes the word usually translated “bagpipe” in a more general sense.

Fall down: the Aramaic verb used here has a great many applications and is found in a wide variety of contexts. But in this context it clearly involves a voluntary act of bowing low or lying face down in order to show reverence and respect. This idea should be made clear in the 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 .

At last: the exact meaning of the corresponding Aramaic expression is uncertain. The main word in the expression is derived from a root meaning “after,” “next,” or “another.” Many versions take it to mean At last (as in Revised Standard Version and New Revised Standard Version) or “Finally” (New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, Revised English Bible). Others render it “A little later” (Bible en français courant), which is similar to Good News Translation “Then….” New English Bible follows the meaning “yet another.” It is probably best to adopt a rendering that approximates the meaning “finally” or “at last.”

Before me: it will be noted that Good News Translation takes this information as included in “came in.”

He who was named Belteshazzar: see 1.7, where this new name was given. The name and its explanation are rightly taken as parenthetical information in Good News Translation and certain other versions. If parentheses are not used in the language of translation, then some other device should be found to indicate that this explanation of Daniel’s other name is aside from the main story line.

After the name of my god: one of the principal Babylonian deities was called “Bel” (see Isa 46.1), which is another name for Marduk. The relationship between the name of the deity and Daniel’s other name is not strictly one of derivation from the actual words, but of resemblance in spelling. The name actually comes from Balatsu-usur, meaning “may he protect his life.”

And in whom is the spirit of the holy gods: the punctuation of Revised Standard Version indicates that this is a part of the parenthetical thought of the king. Similar punctuation is used in New International Version. But in other versions where parentheses are used (Good News Translation, Moffatt), this phrase is not so marked. In most languages it will probably be better to make this a new sentence outside any parentheses. Some possible ways of wording it are “The spirit of the holy gods is in him,” “He is moved by the spirit of the holy gods,” or “This man is endowed with the spirit of the holy gods.” The plural noun gods may legitimately be translated as a singular as in one ancient version of this book, but in the mouth of the non-Jewish monarch, the plural is probably better.

In some languages it will be considered redundant and unnecessary to use the adjective holy with the word for gods, since it would be unimaginable to think of an unholy god. But unless the use of the adjective is unnatural, it should be retained for emphasis.

The word holy itself presents serious problems for translators. Even if it is omitted for contextual reasons here and in the following verse, it cannot be avoided in other passages. The adjective often refers to something belonging to God or completely separated from the ordinary things of life, and only rarely focuses on moral purity. In this context one possible translation is “the gods who are (or God who is) completely separate from human beings” or “… who are entirely different from us.”

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: the connection between the order (in verse 2) and its being obeyed is indicated by this transition word. Some versions take the relationship to be a logical one (“So” in New English Bible/Revised English Bible as well as New Revised Standard Version), while others make it a time relationship (Then in Revised Standard Version and others, or “At once” in Good News Translation). What is important is that the relationship be clear and natural in the translation.

They: it is not clear who this pronoun refers to, but probably something like “the king’s servants” should be in the mind of the reader.

Golden and silver vessels: while both gold and silver are mentioned in the order given in the previous verse, it is questionable whether both types of containers were actually brought in to the banquet. Although Revised Standard Version and a number of other English versions indicate that there were containers made of both gold and silver, the Aramaic text here has only “golden vessels.” The addition of silver vessels comes from the Greek translation of Theodotion. However, a number of modern versions (including Good News Translation, New International Version, and New Jerusalem Bible in English) prefer to retain the reading of the Aramaic text and omit the mention of “silver.” This is also the reading recommended by Hebrew Old Testament Text Project and Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament. Revised English Bible and certain other versions leave out any reference to gold or silver, saying only “those vessels.”

Temple: see verse 2 and comments.

Lords … wives … concubines: see comments on verse 2 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 .

Sought to find a ground for complaint: the translation should make clear the fact that there was some kind of inquiry or accusation against Daniel. The expression ground for complaint occurs twice in this verse, but this may be awkward in translation. One translation puts it this way: “began to look round for some pretext to attack Daniel’s administration” (New English Bible).

No error or fault was found in him: the Aramaic uses the verb “to find” three times in this verse, but it is unnecessary to reflect this in the translation. The parallel construction no error or fault may need to be reduced to a single statement in some languages. Also, the passive construction will have to be made active in many cases: “no one could find any error or fault in him” or “they could discover neither negligence nor malpractice” (Revised English Bible). The point of this statement does not seem to be that Daniel was absolutely perfect or sinless, but that he was law-abiding and trustworthy.

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 .

Considered: the main component of this verb is the idea of looking intently at an object. It may be better translated “looked at,” “was gazing upon” (New Jerusalem Bible), “examined” (Bible en français courant), “watched” (An American Translation, New Jerusalem Bible, and Moffatt). New International Version translates “thinking about,” but this is less desirable.

Behold: the particle is used twice in this verse but may be omitted in many languages. See verses 2 and 5-7, as well as 2.31 and 4.10, 13.

Before which … were plucked up: the structure of Revised Standard Version is complex and should probably be transformed in most languages. As in Good News Translation, a new sentence will be required in many cases. The idea is that the small horn that had not been apparent previously now dislodges three of the others. The agent of the passive expression were plucked up is not certain. In those languages without passive forms, translators may have to say “someone pulled out” or “they (indefinite) removed by force.” But it will be noted that Good News Translation makes the “little horn” the agent here. This does seem to fit the historical description provided in verse 24b.

Speaking great things: the Aramaic term used here has a clearly negative meaning probably indicating pride or arrogance. This meaning should definitely be conveyed in the translation. In addition to the Good News Translation model, compare the following renderings: “spoke boastfully” (New International Version), “spoke arrogantly” (New American Bible; similarly New Revised Standard Version), “uttered bombast” (Revised English Bible), “a mouth full of proud words” (Moffatt).

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 the Good News Translation note indicates, the first part of this verse is unclear in Hebrew. In fact the whole of verses 12 and 13 are difficult, and there are numerous possible interpretations. One or more notes will probably be required.

The word translated host has been variously understood as referring to “the host of the saints” (New International Version) or “the army of heaven” (Living Bible). But Good News Translation takes it here as referring to “people (in the Temple).” It is the same word as in the previous verse, in the expression “the Prince of the host,” but the meaning is not necessarily identical. In this case the meaning is probably less broad than in verse 11, here referring to the pious worshipers in the Temple.

The host was given over to it: the least unsatisfactory solution to the understanding of these words seems to be that of New Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible, which (contrary to Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation) takes them as the continuation of the sentence begun in verse 11b. The meaning is then “and the host (or army, or people) of God was (or were) also delivered to the power of the horn.” This seems to indicate the temporary success of the persecutor. Revised English Bible renders it “the heavenly host were delivered up.” The use of the past tense is legitimate, since in an apocalyptic vision the events are at the same time past (in the vision) and future (in reality). Considerations of the translator’s own language, however, will have to determine which tense is natural in such a context. In those cases where the passive form has to be rendered actively, it may be best to say something like “God allowed the horn to have power over his people,” or possibly “the people of God began to turn away from him and gave themselves to (the power of) the horn.”

Together with the continual burnt offering: the preposition translated together with may be understood to mean “at the same time” (Bible en français courant), “while” (New American Bible), “in addition,” or simply “and” (New English Bible). The expression that follows is extremely difficult and may possibly be understood to mean (a) that the transgression, referring to the “Awful Horror,” is substituted for the normal Temple sacrifice, or (b) that the regular offering of sacrifice was pronounced a crime by the persecutor. The latter solution is followed by New English Bible/Revised English Bible, “it raised itself impiously against the regular offering.” But the first solution is more likely and more commonly adopted. It is worded as follows in some English versions: “sin replaced the daily sacrifice” (New American Bible), or “thus was the daily sacrifice profanely treated” (Moffatt). Translators may even say “in the place of the daily sacrifice it established something outrageously evil.” The words through transgression have been translated in a variety of ways including “because of rebellion (or wickedness)” (New International Version, New Revised Standard Version), “iniquity” (New Jerusalem Bible), and the adverb “impiously” (Revised English Bible). Experts do not agree on whose “wickedness” is meant here. It may be that of the horn or of the “host.” Or possibly Anchor Bible is correct in slightly correcting the text so that the term actually refers to the offense or abomination that is set up in place of the regular sacrifice. This conforms to the statement in the following verse.

Truth was cast down: this refers not to abstract truth but to religious truth as contained in the Torah (Law). The passive formulation may be made active with the horn as the agent, “the horn threw true religion down,” or in those languages where the word for religion is especially difficult, “it slandered the truth about the things of God.”

Acted and prospered: these two verbs simply indicate that the horn was successful in all that it attempted to do.

While Anchor Bible has no less than nine textual notes on verses 11 and 12, the actual Anchor Bible translation of this passage may be worth noting:

• Even over the Prince of the host it exalted itself; it removed the daily sacrifice from its stand and defiled the sanctuary and the pious ones; and on the stand of the daily sacrifice it set up an offense. It cast truth to the ground and was successful in its undertaking.

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 .

This verse contains two vocative expressions that are widely separated in Revised Standard Version. In many languages it may be advisable to combine O our God at the beginning of the verse with O Lord, which is found toward the end. It may be more natural to say “O Lord our God” toward the beginning of the verse.

Now therefore: literally “and now” as in New Jerusalem Bible. This is the same transition word used at the beginning of verse 15. But here it seems to make a less prominent transition from the condition of the people, verse 16b, to the appeal in verse 17.

The prayer of thy servant … his supplications: here Daniel refers to himself in the third person in order to show his submission to God (compare 2.4, where the wise men speak of themselves in this way before the king). But in most languages such a third person reference in this context would only confuse the reader. It will be better to say “hear my prayer, for I am your servant” or something similar.

For thy own sake, O Lord: the traditional Hebrew text has “for the Lord’s sake” at this point, making the statement indirect rather than direct discourse. But several ancient versions read as Revised Standard Version, “for your own sake, Lord,” and this is followed by many other modern translations. This may be done because of translation principles if not for textual reasons. If the traditional reading is followed, the meaning will be something like “so that people may know that you are the Lord” or “for your benefit, Lord.” This is the interpretation followed by Good News Translation, but for some unknown reason “God” is substituted for Lord. This change, however, is not recommended.

Cause thy face to shine upon: this unusual idiomatic expression is familiar because of the well-known benediction in Num 6.25. The idea is to “look with favor on” (New International Version) or “deal kindly with” (Anchor Bible). New Jerusalem Bible attempts to retain something of the form of the original with the expression “let your face smile again on,” and a very similar turn of phrase is used by Moffatt, but somehow these sound a bit unnatural.

Thy sanctuary: as in 8.11, 13, 14, this refers to the Temple, and in most languages it is probably advisable to say this clearly.

Which is desolate: that is, “which has been devastated” or “which is in ruins.”

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 .