As for me, Daniel: the very same expression, consisting of an emphatic first person pronoun followed by the proper name, is used in verse 28 at the end of this chapter. It serves to remind the reader of the source of the information and perhaps here marks the point in the vision when the prophet comes to himself. The pronoun plus proper noun combination may also be found frequently in the next chapters (8.1, 15, 27; 9.2; 10.2, 7; 12.5). This may be a literary device to mark important transition points in the discourse structure of the last half of Daniel.

Within me: literally “in the midst of the sheath.” The last word in Aramaic is normally used of the leather container into which a sword or knife is placed when not in use. Compare New American Bible “within its sheath of flesh.” According to some scholars it is here used as a metaphor for the human body, in which the spirit resides. If this assumption is accepted, naturalness in the translation will determine whether translators use the noun “body” or the pronoun “me” (Moffatt, New English Bible, New Jerusalem Bible). However, some versions, following the ancient Greek, omit the two words altogether (New Jerusalem Bible as well as Good News Translation). It may also be possible to omit these words for translation reasons.

And: the conjunction here is not intended to indicate two totally different reactions to the vision. The structure is rather parallel, and the two phrases describe a single emotion. This 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 .

Behold: see verse 15.

What shall be at the latter end of the indignation: the word for indignation refers to God’s outrage against sin, the latter end is literally “in the afterward” and indicates the time when people will be able to see that outrage take effect. In the perspective of the vision, the end of the world is the time when God, in his anger, will punish human beings for their sins. This will be followed by the restoration of the people of God, who will be reconciled with their creator and master after having received their own chastisement. New Revised Standard Version translates “what shall take place later in the period of wrath.”

Appointed: this element seems to be missing from Good News Translation but it is important. Appointed time is one word in the Hebrew, often used for fixed dates on a calendar, as for regular feast days, for example. Thus the time of the end of the persecutions is already fixed and definite. Knox reads “be sure the end for them is fixed.”

Pertains to: this Revised Standard Version rendering carries the same meaning as the preposition “for” in verse 17. The whole clause may then be rendered “the vision refers to the time of the end, which God has already established.”

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 .

Verses 24-27 are written in a kind of rhythmic prose and are set off as poetry by New Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible. But this is not recommended to translators unless poetry is the normal form for this kind of discourse.

Seventy weeks of years: literally “seventy sevens” or “seventy weeks.” Verse 2, quoting Jeremiah, speaks of “seventy years.” When Gabriel speaks of Seventy weeks, he is clearly not suggesting periods of seven days, but seven years per week, or 490 years. This must somehow be expressed in the translation, since the modern reader will certainly not understand a literal rendering. Some see in the wording of Good News Translation a change in the focus of the original and suggest that it would be better to say “a period of seventy times seven years” as in Bible en français courant. This would show more clearly the relationship to the prophecy of Jeremiah.

Are decreed: the verb used here does not occur elsewhere in the Old Testament, but it does appear in other Jewish literature, and the meaning is clearly “to decide” or “resolve.” The passive form may be rendered actively with God as subject. It is God who has decreed or decided the time period in question. Note Good News Translation “the length of time God has set.”

Your people and your holy city: the possessive pronoun your appears to refer to Daniel in this context. While it seems proper to say your people, it seems odd to say your holy city, although some commentators indicate that this shows the extent to which Daniel, as representative of the people of Israel, was revered by the supposed author or editors. Some have suggested the following model translation: “the people to whom you belong and the holy city where you live.” But this would be a contradiction, since Daniel was living in Babylon, and holy city refers to Jerusalem. It may be best to omit the possessive pronoun in the second case and translate simply “the holy city” as in Bible en français courant and Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch.

Finish the transgression: the traditional written text has “to seal the transgressions” (New Jerusalem Bible “placing a seal on sin”). But another tradition indicated in the margin of the manuscripts by ancient Jewish scholars proposes a different reading. This tradition is what Revised Standard Version and most other English versions follow. It appears that at some point a scribe may have introduced an error. However, it is possible that the verb “seal” was used in the sense of “putting an end to” sin. Since the two Jewish textual traditions can have virtually the same meaning, the translator should not be unduly concerned about the problem. What is important is to avoid a literal rendering of the verb “to seal” that will very likely mislead the reader. But it may also be important in some language to avoid the impression that the people are being given permission to keep on sinning until they have finished the action. The idea is to put a stop to sin immediately.

To put an end to sin: this has essentially the same meaning as the statement before it (to finish the transgression) and the one that follows (to atone for iniquity). Just as words and expressions for sin were piled up in verse 5, here there is a piling up of phrases involving the elimination of sin. The cumulative effect is important.

To atone for iniquity: literally “to eliminate sin.” The verb used here is frequent in Leviticus (see, for example, Lev 4.20; 14.18-21). It evokes the idea of the ritual by which the priest atones for and “covers” sin. That is, he eliminates it by means of pardon. It is not a question of “expiation” in the sense of the guilty party being punished in order to be considered acquitted of his wrongdoing.

To bring in everlasting righteousness: or “to establish eternal justice.” It will be suitable in many languages to make the real subject explicit by saying something like “that God will set up eternal justice.”

To seal: if this means “to seal up” or “to hide away” as in 8.26, then it will be very difficult to make sense of this verse. The other two elements given here are positive and in the nature of fulfillment. There are two different textual traditions at this point, one meaning “seal” and the other meaning “fulfill” or “put an end to.” The latter is followed by Bible en français courant, but most English versions follow the meaning “seal,” which may be understood in the sense of “ratify.” This is the verb found in Revised English Bible, New American Bible, Moffatt, and New Jerusalem Bible. An American Translation and Anchor Bible use the verb “confirm,” which gives essentially the same idea.

Both vision and prophet: while the second of these nouns is literally prophet, the context seems to require that it be taken to mean “prophecy”—the prophet’s message—and it should be so translated.

A most holy place: literally “a holy of holies.” This may refer to the altar, to the Temple in general, or to the high priest (“the most holy place,” or “the most holy thing,” or “the most holy person”). Although some scholars understand 1 Chr 23.13 to refer to Aaron, the High Priest, as “the most holy one,” this is not generally accepted and should not trouble the translator here. Most versions that make the meaning of this verse clearer have “the Most Holy Place” (New English Bible) or “the holy Temple” (Good News Translation). Here Gabriel is probably referring to the ceremony of reconsecration of the Jerusalem sanctuary after the place had been profaned by Antiochus Epiphanes (see 8.14). But intentional ambiguity cannot be ruled out. The reestablishment of the priesthood would coincide with the restoration of the altar and the Temple. Perhaps the writer had all three in mind. But if the translator must choose, then it is probably better to speak of the Temple.

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 .

Come into: in most languages the context will require a less neutral verb indicating a military invasion. New Jerusalem Bible and Moffatt as well as Good News Translation use “invade.”

The glorious land: that is, the land of Israel as in verse 16. See also the comments on 8.9.

Tens of thousands: the traditional Hebrew text has “many (people)” (as in New Jerusalem Bible, New American Bible, New Jerusalem Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible). But the form of the text is unusual, and a minor change in the vowels (recommended by Hebrew Old Testament Text Project/Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament) yields the text of Revised Standard Version, which is also followed by Good News Translation, New English Bible/Revised English Bible, New Revised Standard Version, and others. See verse 12 and 7.10.

Fall: indicating death, as in verses 33-35.

These: the structure of Revised Standard Version, using this demonstrative pronoun at the beginning of the sentence and then defining it later (Edom and Moab), will be awkward in many languages and should probably be transformed with the geographical names at the beginning of the sentence.

Shall be delivered out of his hand: as in 1.2 and elsewhere, the hand stands for the “power” of the king and his army. And it should probably be so translated in many languages.

The main part of the Ammonites: in addition to the rendering of Revised Standard Version (as well as New Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible), the traditional Hebrew text may also be understood to mean “the beginnings of the Ammonites” or “the chiefs of the Ammonites” (followed by New International Version). But by proposing a correction in the Hebrew, some scholars have arrived at a text that corresponds to what is found in the Syriac, and that may be rendered “what remains of the Ammonites.” This is the basis of the Good News Translation rendering, which is also followed by Anchor Bible, New English Bible, and An American Translation. This emended reading seems to fit the context best.

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 .

But: the conjunction used should introduce the contrast between what will happen to the experts if they fail to fulfill the king’s request, as compared to what will happen if they are successful. In some languages it may be preferable to say something like “If, on the other hand…” (New Jerusalem Bible).

Show the dream and its interpretation: the original text does not state the indirect object of the verb show, but the pronoun “me” is unquestionably meant and has been supplied in a number of modern versions. It should probably be added in other languages if it is not clearly understood. It will be noted that these words are repeated at the end of this verse. Given the importance of this formula, it may be a good idea to retain the form at that point unless it would be unnatural to do so.

You shall receive from me: this is a rather awkward way of saying simply “I will give you….” Naturalness in the receptor language should determine how this is translated.

Gifts and rewards: the use of these two terms side by side is a way of expressing a superlative idea in Aramaic. For this reason, in some languages it will be possible to render the idea by using a single noun or a noun accompanied by an adjective: “wonderful gifts” or “special presents.” Or we may choose to modify the verb as in New English Bible: “you will be richly rewarded” (New English Bible).

Great honor: what is involved here is probably some honorary titles or actual political responsibilities accompanied by material gifts (compare 5.7).

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 word for iron occurs three times in this verse, making the Revised Standard Version rendering heavy. In many languages it will make for smoother reading to reduce this to one or two at the most.

The three verbs that describe the action of iron mean more or less the same (breaks, shatters, and crushes). It is not necessary for the translator to try to find an exact equivalent for each one of them, since it is the overall effect, rather than the slight differences of meaning, that is important. Furthermore, the parenthetical phrase and like iron which crushes is not found in several ancient versions. If it proves difficult to find three similar verbs in the language, it will be sufficient to use two. But if one wishes to retain the style of the ancient text, it is probably unwise to reduce the three to one (although this is done by Die Bibel im heutigen Deutsch).

All these: most probably this means “all the earlier kingdoms” (New Jerusalem Bible; compare also Good News Translation) or “all the kingdoms that went before it.” New English Bible follows a different assumption about the original text, with “the whole earth,” but this is reversed by Revised English Bible and is not recommended.

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 choice of a transition word here will depend somewhat on the way the rest of the verse is rendered. But the context seems to require something stronger than a simple time connection. The account is made more vivid in Good News Translation by the use of “Suddenly,” and this marks an abrupt change in the rhythm of the narrative.

Was astonished and rose up in haste: these two phrases joined by the conjunction and are very closely related and should perhaps be translated by a single phrase in some languages. It is because of the king’s astonishment that he got to his feet quickly. Some possible models are “was so amazed that he jumped up” or “sprang to his feet in amazement” (New Jerusalem Bible).

Counselors: the corresponding Aramaic term refers to important people in the royal court, highly placed government officials, or personal advisors to the king. It seems to carry the meaning of “companions (or friends) of the king.” It will be noted that royal advisors were sometimes referred to as “friends” of the king (see 2 Sam 16.16). Revised English Bible renders the term here as “courtiers.” The term is of Persian origin and does not correspond exactly to any of those listed in 3.2-3. It occurs only in the Book of Daniel (3.27; 4.36; and 6.7, as well as here). It is probably best to translate it “advisers” (New Jerusalem Bible and New International Version) or “companions” (New Jerusalem Bible).

Said: since this verb introduces a question, it may be better to render it “asked.”

Did we not cast three men bound into the fire?: neither the king nor his advisors personally took part in the binding and throwing of the three condemned men into the fire. In English and some other languages, the first person plural pronoun we can be used generally in a context like this; but if its use presents problems for the translator, this should be restructured in such a way as to avoid misunderstanding. If passive forms are possible, we may consider “How many men did we have tied up and thrown into the fire? Wasn’t it three?” Or it is possible to use the indefinite “they,” or something like “my servants” in the following: “How many men did my servants tie up and throw into the fire? Wasn’t it three?”

True, O king: some other ways of saying this are “That is correct, Your Majesty,” “It was indeed three men, sir,” or “Sir, what you say is absolutely right.”

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 .