ner, said at first, evidently because he does not
know, i.e.. because, although he has heard him
speak, he has not understood his words. He
saw. therefore, two angels, who were engaged
in conversing with each other, and lieard one
of them say something which he failed to under-
stand ; the question, however, which the other
addressed to the first speaker was so clearly
apprehended by the prophet that he was able
to repeat it in the latter half of this verse.
Ewald puts it, correctly : " Thus, at the first
moment of sOence after that speech, he sud-
denly hears one angel ask another, imih whom he
is conversing,'" etc. Hitzig, Kamphausen, etc. ,
on the other hand, are arbitrary : "The second
angel addressed the speaker, by directing an in-
quiry in the interest of Daniel to him (v. 13 b),
bi/ rep/i/ing to which the other angel became for
the first time a speakers!' According to this the
greater part of v. 13 would be a logical paren-
thesis, and the words "and he said unto me " at
the beginning of v. 14 would serve simply to re-
sume the introductory words of v. 13 ; the lan-
guage of the writer, however, does not accord
with this view. His evident aim is to repeat
what he has overheard of a conversation be-
tween two angels ; otherwise the most simple
course for him would have been to address the
inquiry concerning the duration of the tribuliv-
tion to the angel in person, as in chap. vii. 10,
which is, in other respects, an analogous case.
— How long shall be the vision concetning the
dziily saorifice. " The vision," i.e., the subject
of the viision, which is here more specially indi-
cated by the two genitives that follow, viz. :
n^':?!" and -r"^ ''"â– PPl'"'.- The anxious ques-
tion as to "how long?" (cf. Lsa. vi. 11) is
caused by the fearful and alarming character of
the profanation and destruction, as seen in the
vision of the prophet.— And the transgression



of desolation; rather, " and the horrible trans-
• grcssion." ^"-, the partic. of Cl^r, "to be
astonished," and then "to be desolate or laid
waste," certainly expresses the idea of the
"horrible or monstrous" (Lat. horrendus),
whether the intransitive sense of "being as-
tounded," or, in accord with Ezek, xxxvi. 3, the
less general transitive sense of " laying waste,"
be regarded as the radical meaning ; cf. on
chap. ix. 27. In the laUer case it would pro-
bably be necessary to tiSnslate the participle as a
substantive in apposition; "and (of) the trans-
gressor, the destroyer ; " * but in the former
case also, where the adjective sense " hon'ible "
(Ewald) or "astounding" (Kranichfeld) is
chosen, the participle must be regarded as a
kind of appositional supplement to '"4-"2, to
which it is therefore added without the article
(as in Ezek. xxxix. 27). The expression Srsn
C~3, instead of which D^Sn 3>rtS might have
been expected (cf. xi. 31), produces a sol-
emu emphasis, which warrants the urgent ques-
tion that is proposed. — To give both the sanc-
tuary (rather, "the most sacred thing") and
the host to be trodden under foot, i.e.,
to give both the holy sacrifice (the central
point of worship) and the community of the
samts of the Most High (cf. vii. 18, 23, 27). the
partakers of the theocratic covenant, to be trod-
den under foot (thus Ewald, correctly). [The
grammatical construction of the latter clause of
the verse seems to be that nri and liJlp and
!<~^ are all in dependence upon Ti'n^ like l^SFl
and "â„¢S preceding. " How long shall be . . .
. (the) giving, and (the) sanctuary, and (the)
host (to be) trampled." 3?1'? thus qualifies
all the last three nouns, the latter two directly
as an adj., and the former as an equivalent for
the infin.] " The expression adds nothing that
is new to the former statements, but simply re-
peats the comprehensive estimate of the condi-
tion of the Jewish religion referred to, and the
outrage committed against it, in the light of the
idea that they are permitted by a superior Pro-
vidence ; and, in point of fact, the only object
of the question is to recapitulate what has
already been said. The asyndetic connection
accords with the abrupt conciseness of the de-
scription, and the disjunctive "] before -Ip and
H32, added to the lack of conjunctions, is suit-
ed to its poetic character (note also the omission
of articles). Consequently, everything that Hit-
zig regards as objectionable in this place, and
that he urges against the traditional pointing
for the purpose of removing "P to the preced-
ing clause, arises naturally from the subject it-
self. Moreover, the explanation of "p; by Hit-
zig, ' to permit the horrible transgression to go
on,' has no parallel, neither in v. 12, nor in lsa.



• [Stuart, on the other band, strongly contends for the
pasw'pe sense of S^O'tT here, '^equivalent to which oughl

to he laid wa^le or dett'-oj/ed," as being sustained not only
by the intransitive force of the root, but bv the distinctivt
use of the transitive D?2ID?3 in cli. ix. 27. KeiJ :.<ike8 3i.'\>
Btaatially the same view.]



ITS



THE PROPHET DA>"IEL.



X. 6, where, like the synonymous litlv ' to make
into' something,' it is joined to a double accusa-
tive ; and when Hitzig takes ^~'â–  at first in the
sense of ' to permit,' and immediately afterward
makes it signify â–  to make into something,' the
artificial zeugma certainly does not diminish the
imaginary difficulty which, in view of the disjunc-
tive vav, he discovers in the vav that is not pre-
fixed to ^^," (Kranichfeld.)— Verse 14. And he
said unto me. Thus all the MSS. , which read
"is, while the ancient translators, and among
modem expositors, Bertholdt. Dereser, Hitzig,
Ewald, etc. , prefer T'is. The latter form certain-
ly seems to accord better with the contents of v.
13, since it is supposed that the "i^l^n ^'.yzbs (cf.
Ruth iv. 1) who says what follows, would address
it to the other angel, who inquires of him : but it
is conceivable, on both logical and psychological

â–  grounds, that the witness to the conversation of
the angels would represent the information con-
veyed in the reply to the angel's question as im-
parted to himself, because he was still more inter-
ested in that information than was the inquirer.

â–  Accordingly, he substitutes himself for the an-
gel, because the interest felt by him in equal
measure justifies him in identifying himself to
some extent with the questioner. — Unto two-
thousand and three-hundred days (" evening-
mornings ") ; then shall the sanctuary be
cleansed (rather, '-justified"). The " justify-
ing of the sanctuary " is the re-consecrcttion of
the desecrated sanctuarj- and its services (which
were permitted to be trodden under foot), which
is accomplished by the renewal of the daily
sacrifices. P'^?-'! consequently denotes a being
justified by that work, and, in its position at the
-head of the apodosis to the antecedent clause
beginning with the connective 1?, expresses to
some extent the sense of the fut. exactum. The
material justification or renewal of the perfec-
tion of the hast, according to v. 18, the second
of the objects exposed to being " trodden under
foot," is conceived of as essentially coincident
with that of the sanctuary, or as immediately
involved in it, and for that reason is not expressly
mentioned. The neglect to mention the host
does not warrant the conclusion reached by Hit-
nig, under i-eference to 1 Mace, v. 2 et seq. , that
lihe author intended to point out that its state
'it being trodden under foot was to be more pro-
tracted, while that of the sanctuary was to cease
kt an earlier date. —The duration of the period
jvhich is to precede the re-dedication of the
Banctuary, is again indicated by a mystically in-
definite and equivocal limitation of time, as in
chap. vii. 25. The 2,300 evening-mornings
(ipS 2~.5) cannot be intended to signify so
many (ktys (as Bertholdt, Hiivemick, v. Len-
gerke, etc., assume), for although the several
days are, in Gen. i. 5 et seq. , divided into the two
parts which represent them, 3'!}'; and "ip.3, they
sd:e not numbered accordingly ; and the Gr.
vvx^il!'n""\ which is often adduced in compari-
Bon, is the less adapted to serve as an analogy
or ground of proliability for the signification of
evening-morning as synonymous with " day," as
"j-a Z'XS_ can hardly be regarded as a compound



word (on the analogy of "5^?), but is, on the
contrary, an asyndeton, arising from the poetic
brevity of expression in this section (similar to
D?:0 yrDH in V. 13 1, which, so far from being
a " current phrase " or " stereotyped formula."
occurs only in this place as a designation ol
time. The limitation of the expression in this
sense to this passage indicates, with an almost
absolute certainty, that - >â–  and - ; do not
signify the con-esponding periods of the day,
but rather the sacrifices required to be offered
in them. The whole prophecy relates princi-
pally to the T^^P, to which the passage under
consideration assigns an especially prominent
position ; but as, according to Ex. xxix. 41 (cf.
infra, chap. ix. 21), this consists of a -"l'_~"n:^
anda -|: - V, the terms " evening" and "morn-
ing" in' this" place clearly denote the evening
and morning sacrifices, or, if it be preferred, the
times at which they were offered. " Morning '"
and " evening " are therefore to be counted
separately ; * and thus the period indicated by
the author covers 1,150 days instead of 2,300.
This period is nearly equivalent to the three
and a half years in chap. vii. 25, while, on
the other hand, the later numbers of 1.290
and 1,335 days (chap. xii. 11 et seq.) exceed
the medium of three and a half years but
little. How this discrepancy in the limits
assigned to the duration of the time of anti-
Christian persecution and oppression is to be ex-
plained, and, in particular, how the number in
this place is to be interpreted, is of course very
uncertain, and must always remain undecided.
In generd, those expositors of the truth who
always come nearest to the sense of the pro-
phetic author, wUl regard the present number
1,150 as a designed narroiriny, and the numbers
1,290 and 1.335 as a designed extension or wer-
stepping of the limit of three and a halt years, and
seek to establish a conformity to law both in the
narrowing and the extension of that period. If it
is assumed that this book limits the year to 360
days (or to twelve months of thirty days each)
besides five intercalated days, amounting in all



* [This conclusion, however, if by no means certain, as
the following considerations w-ill serve to show ; " n^B 2"15
have no cupnla or conjunction between them : it would
therefore seem to be a popular mode of compound expression,
like that of the Greek wxHl^tlx"' C-i Cor. xi. 25), in order to
designate tlie whole of H day. Compare Oen. i., where the
evening and morning constitute respectively day the .first,
day Iht aeiond, etc. ; for it seems plain that the phraseolipgy
before us is derived from this source. In other words, ^"5

"l~a, as here employed, may be admitted to contain an
allusion to the morning end evening sacrifices, and thns the
phrase virtually becomes a kind of substitution for T"l?pr)i
which is generic, and includes both the morning and the
evening sacriflce."— 5<"ar«. "That in ver. 26 an^rt

"IpS"'^ ((Ae evening and the mornina) stands for the
phrase in question, does not prove that the evening and
morning are reckoned separately, but only that cveninr;-
morning is a period of time consisting of evening and morn-
ing. When the Hebrews wish to e.>:i>rC8s separately day and
night, the component parts of a day of n week, then the
numlicr of both is expressed, Thns they say, e.g., firty dayi
and forty nights (Gen, vii, -1. 12; Ex..d, xxiv, IS; 1 Knigs
xix. 8), or three davs and three nights ( Junah ii. 1 ; Matt,
xii, 4U). but not e.ghty or six days and nights when they
wish to speak of forty or three full days.' —Ktit. ]



CHAP. VIIL 1-27.



179



to 365 days, it will be found 1 1 ) that the whole
number of 1.277 days, which are necessary to
cover the period of three and a half years, is
decreased by 127 days, or something more than
four months, by the number 1,150 ; i2) that the
number 1,290 adds twelve days or about half a
month to 1.277 days or three and a half years ;
and (8) that the number l.SUj adds fifty-eight
days, or nearly two months, to the period of
three and a half years A certain conformity to
law is evident from these figures, inasmuch as the
two mouths by whicn the three and a half years
are extended in the last number, are added to the
shorter period of three years in the fii-st {i.e., to
1,095 days) ; or, in other words, in the one case
the prophet regards the period of three and a
half years as exltitdtd by two mouths, in the
other Un the present passage) as n/torteiiid by
four months. These piojihet ic limiUitwits of time
correspond generally to the events of the primary
historical fulfilment of this vision in the Macoa-
basan sera of oppression and revolt, wUlumt being
chronologically coi-ertd by them. It has already
been shown, on chap. vii. 25. that the interval
between the abrogation of the daily sacrifices by
Epiphanes ' 1 Mace. i. 54) and the reconsecration
of the sanctuary by Judas Jlaccabaaus (ibid. iv.
52) amounted to three years and ten days, or
1.105 days, thus covering forty-five days or one
and a half months less than 1,150 days, as here
stated. But if, on the other hand, the arrival
in Judcei of Appollonius, the commissioner
of tribute (1 JIacc. i. 20), is taken as the start-
ing-point of the calculation (as Hitzig does),
a result of three and a quarter years to the re-
dedication of the temple is obtained, with toler-
able exactness, which amounts at least to from
one to one and a half months more than 1,150
days. A comparison of the larger periods of
1.290 and 1,3^5 days with the circumstances of
the aira of the religious persecution by Antio-
chus, as recorded in the books of Maccabees,
leads to still more unsatisfactory results (cf.
infra, on chap. xii. 1 1 et seq, ). Hence, nothing
more definite than a general or approximate cor-
respondence between the predicted periods and
their historical counterparts can be looked for ;
or, what amounts to the same thing, the pro-
jiheticaUy-ideal value of the numbers in question
must be recognized. Cf. the remarks in the
Eth.-fund. principles, etc.. No. 1, respecting the
nece&iity that the predictions of any prophet
which involve numbers should be only approxi-
mately fulfilled. — AH the expositors of this pas-
sage, whether upholding or denying the compo-
sition of Damel's prophecies during the captiv-
ity, are in the end obliged to assume a merely
approximate correspondence of the number
1,150 to the periods of the Maccabsean tera of
persecution. Among the former class, the view
we have presented comes nearest to that of
Delitzsch (p. 280), who holds that, "for rensuus
which vur knowledge tf hiatury doen not permit us
to recognize" the prophet's estimate of the
period of something more than three years,
from the 15th Chisleu 145 eb. Sel. to the 25th
Chisleu 148, is " somewhat inadequate ; " and
also to that of Kranichfeld (p. 300 et seq. ). who
diverges from us on the mode of estimating the
Juration of the years in question, but is wholly
agreed on the general principle. His opinion is
that here, as well as elsewhere in the book,



Daniel estimated the year at twelve mont hs ol
thirty days each, intercalating a month of thirty
days every third year. This results in exactly
1,290 days for 31 years, but leaves a discrepancy
of forty days between 1,150 days and three
years or 1,110 days. With regard to this differ
ence he then observes: "It is equally in har-
mony with the vei-y general employment of the
number forty in theocratic representations of
times of severe trial and sifting (e.g.. Gen. vii.
4, 12, 17; Xum. xiv. 33, 34; Ezek. iv. U; xxix.
11 et seq. ; 1 Kings xix. 8 ; Matt. vi. 1 et seq. ),
and with the author's general usage which em-
ploys numbers in an ideal sense (cf . on iv. 1 3 ;
vii. 25). as well as with the context more espe-
cially, that precisely this number should be
found in combination with the final half-time.
Consequently the amount 1,110 + 40 results ae
substantially identical with the more direct meas-
urement of the three and a half times in chap. xii.
11; and this discrepancy within the book itself
becomes no more strange than that, for instance,
which represents the same kingdom at one time
as divided into two parts, at another as falling
into ten, and again (see supra, on v. 8) as sepa-
rating into four, in all of which descriptions the
same fundamental idea prevails, although pre-
sented under different forms." We cannot
adopt this estimate of the 1,150 days, by which
they are made to consist of 1,110-1-40 days, be-
cause it seems too artificial upon the whole, and
because the opinion on which it rests, that
Daniel added an intercalary month of thirty
days to every third year of 300 days, seems to
be untenable, and to conflict with the 1,200
days or forty-two months of the Apocalypse,
which, beyond all question, are synonymous

• with the three and a half years of this book (cf.
Auberlen. Viinitl, etc., pp. 185, ;j8(j et seq. i. —
Among those who deny the genuineness of this
book, Ewald approaches our method of reckon-
ing, upon the whole, inasmuch as he supposes
that the author constantly assigns 305 days to
the year ; and he consequently extends the 1.290
days over three and a half years + oue-half
month, and the 1,335 days over three and a half
years -t- two months ; but he»departs from our
view in arbitrarily reducing the number 2.300 to
2,230, so as to obtain only 1.115 days, or three
years + one month, instead of 1,1.50 (p. 408). In
opposition to such critical violence. Hilgenfeld,
Kamphausen, etc. . retain the reading 2,300 in the
text, reckon the 1,150 days backwards from the
dedication of the temple on the 25th Chisleu
148, and accept some unknown event as mark-
ing the beginning of the 1,150 days, since they

j exceed the period to the 15th Chisleu 145 by

I forty days. Hitzig thinks that only 1.105 days
elapsed between the 15th Chisleu 145 and the
25th Chisleu 148, instead of 1,110, and therefore
forty-five less than 2,300 evening-mornings, and
that this difference of one and a half months "be-
longs to the interval between the abrogation of the

j "'"'?^ (1 Mace. i. 45) and the introduction of the
3iU'/-i'y/iri tyj?//;aK7f<jf (ibid. V. 54)." A hasty glance
at the description of these incidents in 1 Macca-
bees will be sufficient to .show that this interval
of exactly forty five days between the interdict
of the daily sacrifices and the erection of the
statue of Zeus in the temple is wholly imagin-
ary. Moreover, the critic contradicts himself.



ISO



THE PROPHET DANIEL.



since he employs all his aouteness to prove, on
chap. Til 25, that the Antiochian persecution
began at least a quarter of a year, or more than
three months, before the 1.3th Chisleu 145, while
he finds it proper in this place to place the abro-
gation of the T'^Pl, or the beginning of the
same period of oppression, only one and a half
months earUer thim this date. — WhUe the repre-
sentatives of the opinion that the 2,300 evening-
mornings are but half as many days, fail to
establish an exact correspondence between the
prophecy and its fulfilment, those expositors
who regard the language as designating 2,300
days succeed no better. Bertholdt and Hiiver-
nick go three years beyond the time of Anti-
ochus, to the defeat of Nicanor (1 Mace. vii. 43,
4!l), and assign to that period 2,271 days; the
29 days which, accordingly, are still lacking,
are placed by Bertholdt at the close of the
period, as an interval between that victory and
the consequent celebration of the triumph,
while Hiivernick would prefer to assign them to
the beginning, prior to the 15th Chisleu 145 (in
opposition to both, see Hitzig, p. 136). On the
other hand. Dereser, Von Lengerke, Wieseler
{Die 70 Jahrirochen, etc., p. 110 et seq.), and
Von Hofmann ( Wemnrjnng unci Erfulliiiig, I.,
295 et seq.) go back to the year 142 le. Sel. in
reckoning the entire period of about six years —
Dereser and Hofmann calculating from the 25th
Chisleu 14S (the day of the dedication of the
temple I. and Von Lengerke and Wieseler from
the death of Ant. Epiphanes in the month of
Shebat 148. The former are thus carried back
:o the summer of the year 142 in fixing the date
of the begiiming of the apostasy of the Jews
who were seduced by Antiochus, Von Lengerke
to Sivan, or the third month, and Wieseler only
to the feast of tabernacles in the same year,
142. Wieseler himself afterwards recognized
the untenable character of this method of reck-
oning, and therefore acknowledged his conver-
sion to the exegetically more correct view enter-
tained by a m.ajority of moderns, which estimates
only 1,150 days, in his subsequent essay in the
GOtt. Gelchi ten- A/izeigcn, ISiti." [The author,

* [These difficulties in the way of the literal exactness of
the period in question as applicable to the history of the per-
secution by Antiochus Epiphanes, are drawn out in detail
by Keil, p. 3iJ2 et seq., who does not, however, add anything
ot importance to what the author adduces. They seem to
us to be fairly met by the following explanation of Stuart in
his Commentary, p. 'J^ et seq. : "And then nhall that which
is holy be vindicated, p'^^'2\ shall lutve justice done, i.e.,

the rights of the sanctuary sh.iU be effectually restored, its
claims shall be vindicated. This was dune when Judas
Maccaba-'US, after the three and a half years in which all
temple rites had been suspended, and heathen sacrifices had
been offered there, made a thorough expurgation of every-
thing pertaining to the temple, and restored its entil'e ser-
vices. This was on the SSth of Dec, 165 B. C, just three
years from the time when swine's fle.sh was first offered
there by Antiochus. We have then the terminus ad qitem
of -the y,.'iUO days ; and it is not difficult, therefore, to find
the terrnlnUH a quo. These days, at thirty in a month
(which is clearly the prophetic mode of reckoning), make
bLx years, four months, and twenty days. Dec. 25th of 171
makes six years, and the four months and twenty days ivUl
bring the time to the latter half of July in the same year.
i.e., 171 B. C. Dur.ng this year, Menelaus, the high-priest
appointed by Antiochus on the gi-ound of a proffered bribe,
rifled the temple of many of the treasures to pay that blibe,
and in this transaction he was assisted by liis brother Lysi-
machus. The regular and lawful high-priest, Oiiias lU.,
frh't hiKl been rern-jvetl, severely reproved ihis sacrilege com-
mitted by his brethren ; and afterward, through fear of
tbem, fled for refuge to Daphne, an asylum near Antioch,



it will be perceived, ignores that class of inter
preters, quite common in this country and Great
Britain, but comparatively rare in Germany, whc
understand by the days in question so many
yearx, and generally apply the prophecy to the
continuance of the papal supremacy. There is,
however, a great discrepancy among these inter-
preters as to the point of time from which to
date the period spoken of, as well as some diver-
sity as to its length, whether 2,300 years or only
1,150 years, although the majority prefer the
latter. It would be a tedious, and, in our opin-
ion, a bootless task, to follow them into all the
details of their historical investigation. - , compu-
tations, and comparisons. Others, adopting the
same substitution of years for '" days," apply
the prophecy to the rise and sway of Mohamme-
danism, and make out the requisite dates as best
they can. It is an adequate answer to all these
interpretations to say that such a meaning of
the word (lay has no sufficient — if any — warrant
in Scripture use, and certainly is not hinted at
in this entire passage. A calm but fundamen-
tal refutation of the theory in question is given
by Tregelles, Remarks on Diiidel (Lond., 1804,
5th ed. ), p. 110 et seq. It is aJso abundantly
met by Stuart in his Vmnmeiitary mi the A-poca-
lypse, II. 459 seq. Elliott, the strongest advo-
cate of this theory, admits (Hurai Apoailyjiticee,
II. 905) that it was unknown till the close of
the fourteenth century, when it was first
broached by Walter Brute. It came into vogue
with the Reformation, and owes its prevalence,
not to any sound exegetical support, but to the