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 .

The vision of the evenings and the mornings: this refers to the evening and morning sacrifices referred to in verse 14 above. But it really involves the time when it would be impossible to offer those sacrifices. In most languages it will be a good idea to make the idea of sacrifice clear again in this verse, as in Good News Translation. Another possibility is “the vision about the time (or about the things that will happen during the time) when people (or the priests) cannot offer the morning and evening sacrifices.”

Which has been told: this is almost certainly a reference to the explanation given in verses 15-25. New Jerusalem Bible expresses the first part of the verse as follows: “What was said in the vision about evenings and mornings is true.” To avoid the passive, translators may consider “The explanation about the morning and evening sacrifices is true” or “You have heard the interpretation of the morning and evening sacrifices. It is true.”

Is true: this is a validation of the explanation given in the previous verses. But it also implies that the fulfillment is certain. So instead of “… is true,” translators may say “… will surely happen (or take place).”

Seal up the vision: this is clearly not intended as a permanent sealing up of the truth revealed in the vision. For this reason Good News Translation adds the information “now.” Something like this may be required in many other languages. Many languages will have difficulty with the verb “to seal,” since there is nothing corresponding in their culture. A seal usually indicated ownership of objects or the authenticity of documents. Sealing was done by means of some sort of stone or other object making an impression in wax or clay. It also was placed on the outside of a closed document so that the document could not be opened and read without breaking the seal. In this context it may be better to say something like “keep the vision secret…” as in Good News Translation.

For it pertains to many days hence: this gives the reason for the command to keep the vision secret for the time being. In some languages the words many days may suggest a time period that is altogether too short. In place of days many will prefer to use “years,” although there may be other ways of expressing this idea: “the distant future” (An American Translation and New International Version), “the far future” (Moffatt), “to far-off days” (New Jerusalem 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 actual vision of Daniel begins with this verse. Verses 2 and 3 should be seen as preparation for the vision but not as a part of the vision itself.

The first month: this does not refer to the month of January, as may be understood in many languages. The first month in the Jewish calendar is Nisan, which corresponds approximately to mid-March to mid-April in our present system. According to some commentators the dating is significant because of the two great celebrations, Passover and Unleavened Bread (Exo 12.1-20), which occurred during this month. These celebrations were associated with Israel’s past deliverance, and Daniel is thinking about future deliverance of his people. This information can be given in a footnote. It is also wise to provide the reader with a complete table of Old Testament calendar systems along with other readers’ helps or as a part of the glossary. Good models for this are provided in New Jerusalem Bible or in the footnote at Exo 12.4 in the New International Version Study Bible, although permission from the copyright holder is required to simply copy such tables.

That is, the Tigris: this is taken by some commentators as a later addition to the text. But since the “great river” in the Old Testament is usually the Euphrates (see, for example, Josh 1.4), this clarification is necessary for translation reasons in any case. The Hebrew name for this river is Hiddekel (as in King James Version here and at Gen 2.14), but most versions adopt the better known Persian name “Tigris.”

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 .

He who comes against him: the pronoun references are unclear in Revised Standard Version. Translators should probably use a noun as the subject, “the king of the north” or “the king of Syria,” depending on how precise the translation is in the previous verses. Another possibility is to say “the invading king.” The object pronoun, him, refers to the king of the south represented by his besieged army. It will therefore be better in most cases to use a plural pronoun “them,” or perhaps better still, a phrase like “his enemies” or “the invader” (Revised English Bible).

Shall do according to his own will: that is, “do whatever he pleases.” See verses 3 and 36.

None shall stand before him: or “no one will be able to stand against him,” “he shall meet no resistance,” or “no one will dare to oppose him.”

He shall stand: while the two words in this verse translated stand in Revised Standard Version are the same in Hebrew, the contexts require very different renderings. Here the meaning is “he will establish himself” (New International Version and Revised English Bible) or “he will occupy” (Anchor Bible). The singular pronoun refers to the king, but he represents his entire army in this case. Some languages may require that this be translated “he and his army” or “with his army he shall stand.”

The glorious land: this, of course, refers to the land of Israel, but the expression has a very positive meaning. It is unwise to use a name like Moffatt, “the fair land of Palestine.” But translators should probably say something like “the fairest of all lands” (New English Bible) or “the Land of Splendour” (New Jerusalem Bible). This is not exactly the same expression as in 8.9, where only the noun “beauty” is found with the definite article, meaning “the beautiful one.” Here the word for “land” with the definite article is included. The basic meaning is, however, the same in both cases. Compare also verse 41.

All of it shall be in his power: literally, the Hebrew text has “and destruction shall be in his hand” (see New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible and New Jerusalem Bible). Hebrew Old Testament Text Project/Critique Textuelle de l’Ancien Testament recommends this reading rather than the one followed by Revised Standard Version and Good News Translation. Although a number of modern versions adopt the emended reading, the Hebrew text makes sense as it is, and there is no strong reason to deviate from it. Translators are therefore advised to say something like “he will have the power to destroy it (the Land).”

The taking of the fortress at Sidon by Antiochus III assured his total conquest of Judea. Thus the land passed from Egyptian to Syrian domination.

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 .