242 Charles C. Torrey, 



Sibylline Oracles, iii, 97 ff. There is an essential difference between 

 apocalypse and mere vaticination.' But in chaps. 7—12 we have a 

 continuous series of " apocalypses " in the true technical sense. The 

 interpreting angels are present in every chapter ; the strange beasts, 

 which belong only to the supernatural world, are brought in 'to make 

 their impression of terror, as usual ; there is in each case the deep sleep, 

 or trance, in which the seer is given the revelation. Everything is wrapped 

 in portentous obscurity. The Daniel of these chapters is a character 

 conceived in a manner very different from that of the first half of the 

 book. There, he is a man who through his virtue has achieved wisdom. 

 He is an impressive figure, self-possessed and commanding. He has 

 " understanding in all visions and dreams." In one case (2 : 19) it is 

 through a dream that he is enabled to solve the riddle proposed to him, 

 but in the other cases he sees the answer directly. His interpretation 

 is straightforward and perfectly definite. Even in 2 : 37—44 there was 

 nothing that could have caused any of his contemporary readers a 

 moment's hesitation — though there was here just enough of mystery in 

 the manner of expression, characterizing the successive kingdoms instead 

 of naming them outright, to suggest to the later writer how he might 

 carry this method still further. But in chaps. 7 ff., the Daniel of the 

 visions is not a person for whom the narrator feels any enthusiasm. 

 He is merely a passive instrument in the hands of angels, like all the 

 other heroes of Jewish apocalypses. He sees through nothing ; it must 

 all be explained to him. He gives no interpretation, but merely records j 

 what he is told ; and when he awakes from the vision, he is ill from | 

 the effect of it. 



There are other indications which point quite as unmistakably in the ! 

 same direction, showing that we have before us the work of two different 

 authors. The literary style of 7-12 differs widely from that of 1-6, 

 and the fact that the greater part of one of these sections is written in 

 Aramaic does not suffice to account for the difference. The style of 

 chaps. 1 ff. has no striking peculiarities. It is somewhat repetitious, . 

 and has a few favorite mannerisms, but on the whole stands near to thei 

 average style of Jewish narrators. The writer of chaps. 7 ff., on the' 

 contrary, has a style which is highly original. While both picturesque] 

 and full of vigor, it is also marvellously disjointed and obscure, and! 

 filled with unusual phraseolog}-, so that every paragraph has its pitfalls I 



' In my article ,, Apocalyptic Literature" in the Jewish Eneyclopadla, I' 

 attempted to define tlie '' apocalypse " as a literary product, and to indicate , 

 the principal characteristics of the writings which belong to this peculiar 

 class. My attempt was, so far as I am aware, the first one of the kind, 

 and I do not know that any other has been made since that time. 



