Turn his face: or “turn his attention” (New International Version), or simply “turn,” as in many English versions. But since his turning or his attention inevitably means hostility, it may be better in some languages to use a more precise verb like “attack,” as in Good News Translation.

The coastlands: the corresponding Hebrew term means “regions with borders on the sea.” In Gen 10.5 the inhabitants of these areas are described as people “who live along the coast and on the islands” (Good News Translation). Here the word is translated “coasts and islands” by New English Bible/Revised English Bible and New Jerusalem Bible, and this may be a good model for other languages. In other cases it will be more natural to speak of “nations by the (big) water,” “peoples (or tribes) living by the (salt) water,” or something similar.

Shall take many of them: this refers to the capturing of many of the lands or peoples just mentioned. Some may prefer to translate “he will take control of many of these lands” or “he will capture many of those peoples.”

A commander: the Hebrew word used here is an archaic and poetic word similar in meaning to the more usual term for “judge” or military leader found in Josh 10.24; Judges 11.6; Isa 10.1. It has been variously rendered “consul” (New Jerusalem Bible), “leader” (New American Bible), “magistrate” (New Jerusalem Bible and Anchor Bible), and even “a certain Roman general” (Moffatt). New English Bible, Bible en français courant, and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch as well as Good News Translation all retain the idea of a commander but add a qualifying word meaning “foreign,” since the reference is to a Roman consul.

Insolence: the corresponding Hebrew word denotes the “contempt” with which a person may be treated, and by extension the “shame” or “dishonor” that the victim feels. It may also be used for the “insults” that are poured out on the despised person. On the other hand, in this context the term seems to qualify the attitude of the person who treats others contemptibly. It is therefore probably best translated “insolence” as in Revised Standard Version, or “arrogance” (Good News Translation), or “impudence.”

He shall turn his insolence back upon him: the meaning of the Hebrew text is uncertain at this point. Several textual changes have been proposed. New English Bible follows one of them with “by wearing him down.” But it is best to understand this expression in the way suggested by Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament: “a ruler will cause his insolence to cease. It will be only his insolence that will pay him back.” It is also possible to translate “make him suffer the consequences of his arrogance.” The expression seems to contain the idea of retribution for arrogance. Some other possible models are “put an end to his insults, nay pay him back for his insults” (New Jerusalem Bible) and “put a stop to his defiant insults and pay him back for them” (Moffatt).

This verse seems to refer to the conquests of Antiochus III along the coast of Asia Minor and Greece. The commander is probably the Roman Consul Lucius Cornelius Scipion, who defeated Antiochus between 191 and 189 B.C.

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 structure of the account requires another new paragraph at this point. This makes the previous paragraph consist of only one verse, but translators should not be worried about this.

Then I Daniel looked: on the use of I Daniel, see comments on 7.15; 8.15, 27. The verb here should not be translated in such a way as to give the impression that Daniel looked for the first time. Rather, as he kept on looking he “saw” or “noticed (two men).”

Behold: see comments on the Aramaic equivalent at 2.31, and on the Hebrew in 8.3.

Two others: if the translator’s language requires that the nature of the two others be clearly stated, then it will probably be best to say “two other angels” (see Anchor Bible), since this is the clear meaning in the context. Some translations, however, have “people” (New Jerusalem Bible) or “men” (Good News Translation). If there exists a more neutral term, like “beings,” this will also be appropriate. But if the translator is forced to say something more, the word “angels” is probably best.

The long and awkward description of the location of the other two angels at the end of this verse may be rendered much more naturally in many languages as “on opposite sides of the water” or “one on each bank” (Good News Translation).

The stream: this does not represent the same word as translated “canal” or “river” in chapter 8, and so it very likely does not refer to the Ulai. Nor is it the same word as the great river in 10.4. However, the use of the definite article makes readers think that it refers to something already mentioned. It may be, however, that it does refer back to chapter 10. But since this is a vision, the precise river referred to is unimportant. It may therefore be legitimately translated “a river,” as in 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: instead of the common conjunction found in the Aramaic here, it may be better in this context to highlight the urgency of the situation by translating “at once” as in Good News Translation, or “Immediately” (Bible en français courant) or “So…” (New English Bible and New Jerusalem Bible).

Besought the king to appoint him a time: Revised Standard Version may be understood in the sense that Daniel asked for an appointment, during which time he would talk with the king in more detail. However, the meaning is almost certainly that he asked for a postponement of the accomplishment of the king’s order. New Jerusalem Bible says that he asked “for a stay of execution.”

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 .

Daniel made request of the king: in other languages it will probably be necessary to make the relationship between the first two propositions much clearer. What Daniel requested was in fact what the king did. In some cases translators may wish to say “Daniel asked the king for something, and the king granted his request….” Revised English Bible, like Good News Translation, makes the first part of this verse a subordinate clause: “At Daniel’s request….”

He appointed: it should be made clear that the pronoun here refers to King Nebuchadnezzar and not Daniel.

Over the affairs of the province of Babylon: since Daniel himself was made ruler over this province, the translation should make it clear that his three friends were given high administrative positions under him. If care is not taken, it is possible to give the wrong impression that they replaced him. This is especially true in light of the fact that the last sentence of this chapter states that Daniel remained at the king’s court. While he remained at the king’s court, he was, in fact, still the ruler of the province of Babylon. The expression at the king’s court is literally “at the king’s door.” This emphasizes the readiness of the court counselor to advise the king at any moment.

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 words of this verse are set off as poetic in Good News Translation, and they do, in fact, constitute poetry. (See the comments at the beginning of 2.20-23.) The first two lines are clearly parallel:
great = mighty
signs = wonders

On signs and wonders see verse 2 above. Good News Translation makes it clear that God’s wonders are directed toward human beings: “shows us.” This kind of clarification may be a good idea in a number of other languages. But again the verb “show” may be too weak.

The third and fourth lines of the poem are also parallel:

kingdom = dominion
everlasting = from generation to generation

Note that Good News Translation also renders two of the pronouns by the noun “God.” This may also be desirable in a number of other languages.

Dominion: this term is used to indicate authority or power to rule over or impose one’s will on others. It occurs frequently in the book of Daniel. New International Version speaks of “authority to rule” in other contexts (7.6) although it uses the same word as Revised Standard Version in this verse.

From generation to generation: this may not always be the most natural way to express the permanence of God’s rule. Since two different expressions are called for by the parallel structure, translators may consider the use of a negation such as “his rule will never end” for the second of the pair. Revised English Bible has “through all generations.”

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 .

All the inhabitants of the earth: the word all is omitted from Good News Translation, but it should be included in the translation unless there are very strong reasons for omitting it.

Are accounted as nothing: the passive verb here should probably be rendered as an active one in order to make clear the fact that God is the agent. But some languages may prefer “all people on earth are as nothing in his eyes,” retaining a structure similar to the passive but insuring that the subject is understood. The verb accounted has the idea of evaluation, showing that God considers the population of the world as utterly insignificant, for they cannot oppose his will.

The host: in the Bible the word host sometimes stands for the armies of Israel, sometimes for the stars and other heavenly beings (Isa 40.26; Psa 33.6), and sometimes for angels (Psa 103.21; Luke 2.13). In this context, where the term is joined with of heaven, the context favors the last meaning, and it is good to make this clear in the translation in order to avoid the term being taken in a military sense.

Note that Good News Translation restructures the middle of this verse so that the phrase he does according to his will is translated by “are under his control,” and instead of making God the grammatical subject, “angels” and “people” are used.

None can stay his hand: since hand is often used to represent “power” in Scripture (1.2; 2.38; 3.17), it is often better to give this meaning directly in the translation. In some cases it may be appropriate to say simply “no one can stop him.”

Or say to him, “What doest thou?”: this direct question is better rendered as indirect speech in most languages. Some models are “question what he does” (Good News Translation, Revised English Bible) or, very similarly, “ask him what he is doing” (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 .

That very night: in some languages it will be more natural to say “During the night that followed.” This indicates that Belshazzar’s death took place after he had gone to bed and immediately following the events described in this chapter. It does not necessarily mean that the banquet itself took place or started after dark (see comments on the Good News Translation rendering of 1.1).

Chaldean: or “Babylonian.” The Aramaic word used here is to be taken in its geographical sense as in 1.4, and not in its cultural sense as in 2.2.

Was slain: the agent of this passive form is not clear. In some languages it will be better to say simply “died.” But it is also possible to say “someone killed” or “they (impersonal) killed.” What is important is not the identity of the assassin but the fact that what Daniel predicted actually did happen.

We know from ancient history that the city of Babylon was conquered in the night of October 11 in the year 539 B.C. It was probably during the course of the taking of this city that King Belshazzar died.

At the time when the Aramaic text was divided into chapters and verses, between the 13th and 16th centuries A.D., the following verse was unfortunately attached to the story of chapter 6 and became verse 1 of that chapter. But because it is a part of the account of Belshazzar’s Feast, most English versions follow another ancient tradition of chapter and verse division and include it as verse 31 of this chapter. Note, however, that New Jerusalem Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, and New American Bible follow the numbering system of the Aramaic text.

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 .

Four great beasts: in many languages it will be necessary to say something like “four very large (and frightening) animals.” It is generally believed that the four beasts represent the Babylonians (the lion of verse 4), the Medes (the bear of verse 5), the Persians (the leopard of verse 6), and the Greeks (the apocalyptic beast of verses 7 and 8). But this interpretation should not be put into the translation. The character of the vision is that it presents a challenge to the reader to discover what the symbolism stands for, and this character must be maintained. Other interpreters feel that the second beast represents Medo-Persia, so that the third would be Greece and the fourth would then be Rome.

Different from one another: or “each one different from the others” (Revised English Bible). Every translation team will have to look for the most natural way of communicating the idea that there were no two beasts alike. But in many languages it will be preferable to make this a separate sentence.

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 .