276 Charles C. Torrey, 



5 : 5 D£ • For the meaning of the word, cf. the Peshitta version 

 of Is. 60 : 14, and both the Peshitta and Syr.-Hex. of ii Sam. 14 : 25. 

 *Ti and ^Jil may include the forearm and lower leg, respectively. The 

 narrator wishes to make it plain that only the hand (not the wrist and 

 forearm) appeared. 



5 : 12 niinS- Another old form, which it has been customar}^ to 

 " emend " to ri^THX' See Ezra 4 : 22, and my Ezra Studies, pp. 165 f. 



5 : 20 D"]. It is, 1 think, best to treat this as passive ; not merely 

 because we have no other evidence of a stative pronunciation of this 

 verb, but also and especially because in the Semitic languages generally, 

 and more particularly in the popular speech, there is a strong tendency 

 toward the use of the passive voice in speaking of affections of the 

 mind. Compare, e. g., ri^Ii^I?, "minded," 6:4; 101> "mindful;" 

 3'^^i?, " sorrowful," 6:21; and so a great many others. It would be 

 easy to multiply examples. 



5 : 25 The writing on the wall. According to our massoretic tradition 

 here (which, however, be it noted at the outset, is contradicted by every 

 other witness, including the testimony of the Aramaic text itself in the 

 following verses) the words written on the wall were hpT\ XwD K3D 

 j^DnSI, MENE, MENE, TEQEL, UPARSiN. But this is not the original 

 reading of the Aramaic text of this verse. What the author of the book 

 wrote, as is attested by an overwhelming array of evidence, is simply 

 DnS bpn KDia, MENE, TEQEL, PERES. 



According to the interpretation which has been most widely current 

 in recent y^ars, among the exegetes of the more advanced school, the 

 words of the inscription on the wall are the names of Babylonian 

 weights : mina, shekel, and half-minas. Thus) Clermont -Ganneau 

 [Journal Asiatique, 1886), Noldeke, Hoffmann, Bevan, Haupt, Prince, 

 Marti, and others. The " mina " is supposed to stand for Nebu- 

 chadnezzar, and the " shekel " for Belshazzar. It was customary, it is 

 said, to speak of the inferior son of an excellent man as " a shekel, 

 the son of a mina." The " half-minas " would then naturally suggest 

 the division of the power or propert}' represented by the mina. That 

 is, according to this theory, the sole difficulty of the inscription was 

 that of the characters in which it was written. The words which were 

 inscribed on the wall were perfectly familiar to all those who were 

 present ; and, what is more, their typical significance [was obvious. No 

 one of the " soothsayers," if he had only been able to read the script, 

 could have had reason for hesitating, for he must at once have had 

 suggested to him interpretations which would have satisfied himself, his 

 companions, and (with a little ingenuity) even the king. 





