244 Charles C. Torrey, 



the separate Median kingdom, chap. 6 ; ' and last of all, at the end 

 of this same chapter, Cyrus is mentioned, in the words : " So this Daniel 

 prospered in the reign of Darius, and in the reign of Cyrus the Persian " 

 (6 : 29). That is, the writer returns to his original statement, that Daniel 

 lived to see the day of Cyrus. The fitness of this verse to serve as 

 the close of the book is very obvious. Now m the following chapters, 

 7—12, the histoiy returns (of course) upon itself; beginning with Bel- 

 shazzar, in chaps. 7 and 8, and continuing with Darius Hystaspis, " the 

 Mede," in chap. 9. But the final vision, occupying chaps. 10—12, is 

 dated " in the third year of C rus king of Persia." Here is a flat 

 contradiction of the statement in chap. 1. The only plausible expla- 

 nation is this, that the later writer, in making his addition to the book, 

 Temembered the words of 6 : 29, but forgot — or chose to disregard — 

 those of 1 : 21." 



Again, it is customary to say that chaps. 1-6 reflect the conditions 

 of the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes. Cornill, Einlcitung, p. 242, even 

 goes so far as to say : " Ferner sind gerade in den Danielgeschichten 

 2-6 die durchgangigen Beziehungen auf Antiochus Epiphanes und seine 

 Verfolgung der jiidischen Religion ganz besonders unverkennbar." But 

 this is a mere delusion. These stories, so far as they deal with the 

 perils of devout Jews in the hands of foreign potentates, might perfectly 

 well have been written at any time after 597 B.C. The Hebrews of 

 Jerusalem certainly did not suppose that their brethren who went into 

 captivity renounced their faith, or that they were all in high favor with 

 the Babylonian monarchs. The Second Isaiah, for instance, says in 

 42 : 22, speaking of the " exiles " of Israel : " They are robbed and 

 plundered ; entrapped in holes, and hidden away in dungeons. They 

 are become a prey, with none to rescue ; a plunder, with none to say, 

 Restore it !" And again, in 47 : 6, 49 : 24 fi"., 51 : 13 f., etc., he declares 



each other very widely in point of style, would certainly have written obscure 

 Hebrew even if they had lived in the time of Amos. If they had composed 

 their writings in Aramaic, the Aramaic would have been precisely as bad 

 as the Hebrew. 



^ I have shown elsewhere that in the uniform Jewish tradition in the Greek 

 period Darius Hystaspis was transposed to the place Just before Cyrus, as the 

 representative of the Median power; cf. 9:1, 10:1, 11:1. See the Am. 

 Journal of Sent. Languages, xxiii, 178 f. ; xxiv, 29, 209 ff. The two authors 

 of the book of Daniel, like the Chronicler and his sources, certainly supposed 

 the reign of Cyrus to have been immediately followed by that of Xerxes 

 (Ezr. 4:5ff., 24). 



^ It is useless to attempt to interpret 1 : 21 as meaning " Daniel contin- 

 ued even unto the reign of king Cyrus." The express mention of " the first 

 year " is conclusive. 



