He ordered: as in the previous verse, this is literally “he said,” but the context seems to require a stronger term.

Certain mighty men of his army: the idea here is simply that of “his best troops” or “his most capable fighters,” who would have also been the strongest. Moffatt has “some powerful soldiers.”

Bind: that is, “tie up.” In some languages it may be necessary to use a fuller expression and say something like “tie the hands and feet of….”

Into the burning fiery furnace: see comments at verse 6. There may be languages in which the repetition of the adjectives at this point will be awkward and should be omitted.

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 .

It is you: the Aramaic text does not mention the tree here, but it is clearly in mind. And this is brought out in a number of modern versions. In some languages it will be possible to heighten the suspense by using a structure similar to that of Bible en français courant: “This tree, your Majesty, it is you!” Compare also Revised English Bible, “that tree, your majesty, is you.”

O king: this is not the same word as rendered “my lord” in verse 19, but in some languages it may have to be translated in the same way.

The remainder of this verse draws on verse 11 for its terminology, but the reference is now clearly to the king rather than to the tree.

The words greatness and dominion refer to the power and authority of the king, which are described as reaching proportions that are difficult to describe. Some possible models for the last part of this verse are “You have become so great that you have power over the heavens; your authority reaches to the end of the earth” or “You are now so great that there is no limit to your power; your authority reaches over the whole world.” It will be important in many languages not to translate the conjunction and that joins these two statements in such a way as to lead readers to believe that two complete separate matters are being talked about. They are really two ways of talking about the same thing. New Century Version attempts to tie these statements more closely to the image of the tree, and that version may provide a helpful model to other translators: “You have become great and powerful. You are like the tall tree that touched the sky. And your power reaches to the far parts of the earth.”

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 .

Let your gifts be for yourself: Daniel’s answer may sound impudent in some languages if translated using the imperative form, as in Good News Translation and several other versions. Probably no such arrogance is intended, and the answer may have to be softened in some languages. Many English versions make the discourse sound less harsh by beginning with “You may keep…” instead of the imperative (New Jerusalem Bible and New American Bible). In some cases it may be possible to say “It is good for you to keep….” However, it should be noted that some scholars think that the author intentionally uses strong language here to show that Daniel is a messenger of divine judgment. This is in keeping with the tone of judgment that is found in the rest of the speech.

And give your rewards to another: the use of the conjunction and makes it appear that the gifts and rewards refer to two different sets of objects, one of which Belshazzar would keep and the other which would be given to someone else. This, however, is not the intention of the writer. So the conjunction should be “or.” Daniel is saying that the three rewards (the royal clothing, the royal collar, and royal power mentioned at the end of verse 16) may either be kept by the king or given away to other people. In addition to Good News Translation, those versions using the conjunction “or” are New English Bible, New American Bible, New Revised Standard Version, and Anchor Bible. Revised English Bible restructures the two phrases and joins them with a semicolon: “I do not look for gifts from you; give your rewards to another.” Another possible model is “I don’t want to receive your gifts. If you want to, give them to someone else.”

Nevertheless: this adverb stresses the fact that, even without any reward, Daniel intends to clear up the mystery of the writing on the wall.

To the king … to him: since Daniel is speaking directly to the king, it will be very unnatural in most languages to use this third person reference. It will be much more natural to say something like “I will read the writing to you, your Majesty, and tell you what it means.” On the use of the third person in place of the second, see 2.10 and comments.

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 .

Went to his palace: that is, “returned” or “went back to his palace,” since this was certainly not the first time that he had been there.

Spent the night fasting: or “had nothing to eat all night,” or “he refused to eat anything throughout the night.” The Aramaic actually has an adverb that depends on the verb “spend the night.”

No diversions were brought to him: in addition to the difficulty of the passive form, this clause also contains a word that has long troubled commentators. The word here rendered as diversions is found nowhere else in Aramaic literature known to the present. It has been understood to refer to “concubines” (New Jerusalem Bible), women (New English Bible and Revised English Bible), “dancing girls” (Moffatt), “entertainers” (New American Bible), and “musical instruments” (New Jerusalem Bible note). New Revised Standard Version takes this clause as an amplification of what comes before it and translates “no food was brought to him.” It is, however, probably best to use a more general word for “diversion” or “entertainment.”

Sleep fled from him: there are many ways of saying that a person is unable to go to sleep: “He spent a white night,” “his eyes would not stay closed,” or “sleep would not come to him.”

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 .

It will be important in many languages to begin a new sentence here as Good News Translation has done. And in some cases it may be more natural to begin the sentence with the conjunction “but” (Bible en français courant). Still another possibility is to repeat the earlier verb phrase, “I kept on watching until.”

The Ancient of Days: see verse 9. In some languages it will be necessary to avoid giving the impression that the Ancient of Days and the Most High (later in this verse) refer to two different beings.

Judgment was given for: although most versions take this to mean that the Judge “judged in favor of,” there is another possible interpretation. According to some experts the meaning should be “gave the right to judge to.” This interpretation finds support in New Testament passages such as Matt 19.28; 1 Cor 6.2; and Rev 20.4. But it seems unlikely in this context.

The saints of the Most High: see verse 18.

Received the kingdom: in this context this means “received the power to rule” or “secured the right to govern.” Revised English Bible has “gained possession of kingly power.”

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 .