Book of Daniel

This article is about the Biblical book. For the novel by E. L. Doctorow, see The Book of Daniel (novel).

Dating

Traditionally, the book of Daniel was believed to have been written by its namesake during and shortly after the Babylonian exile in the sixth century BC. While most conservative Christians and Orthodox Jews still assert this as a realistic date, the scholarly consensus is that archaeology and textual analysis argue for a considerably later date.

Related Topics:
Exile - Archaeology - Textual analysis

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Scholarship on the dating of the Book of Daniel largely falls into two camps, one dating the book in its entirety to a single author during the desecration of the Jerusalem Temple (167-164 BC) under the Seleucid ruler Antiochus IV Epiphanes (ruled 175-164 BC), the other seeing it as a collection of stories dating from different times throughout the Hellenistic period (with some of the material possibly going back to the latest Persian period), with the visions in chapters 7-12 having been added during the desecration of Antiochus. John Collins finds it impossible for the "court tales" portion of Daniel to have been written in 2nd Century BC due to textual analysis. In his 1992 Anchor Bible Dictionary entry for the Book of Daniel, he states "it is clear that the court-tales in chapters 1-6 were 'not written in Maccabean times'. It is not even possible to isolate a single verse which betrays an editorial insertion from that period." Some scholars disagree.

Related Topics:
Seleucid - Antiochus IV Epiphanes - 1992

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Content

Antiochus IV Epiphanes

Most interpreters find that references in the Book of Daniel reflect the persecutions of Israel by Antiochus IV Epiphanes (175–164 BC), and consequently date its composition to that period. In particular, the vision in Chapter 11, which focuses on a series of wars between the "King of the North" and the "King of the South," is generally interpreted as a discussion of Near Eastern history from the time of Alexander the Great down the era of Antiochus IV, with the "Kings of the North" being the Seleucid kings and the "Kings of the South" being the Ptolemaic rulers of Egypt. This conclusion was first drawn by the philosopher Porphyry of Tyros, a third century pagan Neoplatonist whose fifteen-volume work Against the Christians is only known to us through Jerome's reply. Jerome accepted much (but not all) of Porphyry's interpretation of the vision, but held to the traditional view of Daniel's date and held that the similarities to actual history were due to Daniel's being a true prophet, rather than to a late date for the book. Porphyry, then, was the only known critic to doubt Daniel's early date until the 17th century. Many historians hold that the book was written to influence Jews living under Antiochus' persecution. They believe that the events described in the visions match well the events during the Maccabean era while the book errs on major points of Babylonian history.

Related Topics:
Antiochus IV Epiphanes - 164 BC - Alexander the Great - Porphyry of Tyros - Pagan - Neoplatonist - Jerome - Maccabean

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Four Kingdoms

Most biblical scholars believe that the four kingdoms mentioned in chapters 2 and 7 represent (1) Babylon, (2) Media, (3) Persia, and (4) Greece (Collins). Some conservative Christians identify them as (1) Babylon, (2) "Medo-Persia," (3) Greece, and (4) Rome (e.g. Young); others have advocated the following schema: (1) the Babylonian, (2) the Medo-Persian, (3) the empire of Alexander, and (4) the rival Diadochi, viz. Egypt and Syria (Lagrange).

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Language

The final major area of debate regarding the dating of Daniel regards the language used. The two reference points used for dating the Aramaic are the Samaria correspondence (4th century BC) and the Dead Sea Scrolls (2nd century BC-1st century AD). According to John Collins in his 1993 commentary, Daniel, Hermennia Commentary, the Aramaic in Daniel is almost universally held by scholars to be of a later form than that used in the Samaria correspondence, but is regarded by many as slightly earlier than the form used in the Dead Sea Scrolls. Consequently the Aramaic tales in chapters 2-6 are held by some to have been written earlier in the Hellenistic period than the rest of the book, with the vision in chapter 7 being the only Aramaic portion dating to the time of Antiochus. The Hebrew in the book is, for all intents and purposes, identical to that found in the Dead Sea Scrolls, suggesting a 2nd century BC date for the Hebrew portions of the book (chapters 1 and 8-12). source

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Loan Words

There are 3 Greek words used within the text which have long been considered evidence for a late dating of Daniel. All three Greek words are used for musical instruments. The existence of the Greek word 'symphonia' was cited by Rowlings as having its earliest use in second century BC, but modern scholarship now knows its use much earlier, both in the sense of a specific instrument and as a term referring to a group of instruments playing in unison. Pythagoras used the term to denote an instrument in 6th century BC, while its use to refer to a group performing together is found in the sixth century BC 'Hymni Homerica, ad Mercurium 51' Despite their early use in Greek however, there is no evidence for the use of these instruments in Mesopotamia in the Neo-Babylonian period where they are said to be used in Daniel, and their mention in the book is generally taken as an anachronism.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

There are also 19 Persian loan-words in the book, most of them having to do with governmental positions.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Use of the word 'Chaldeans'

The book of Daniel uses the term "Chaldean" to refer both to a Babylonian ethnic group and to astrologers in general. According to Montgomery and Hammer, Daniel's use of the word 'Chaldean' to refer to astrologers in general is an anachronism, as during the Neo-Babylonian and early Persian periods when Daniel is said to have lived it referred only to an ethnicity. Compare the later Chaldean Oracles.

Related Topics:
Chaldea - Chaldean Oracles

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~