234 REV. W. ST. CLAIR TISDALL, D.D., ON THE BOOK OF DANIEL : 



forger cannot have been so ignorant as not to have known the 

 fact. But, apart from this, the writer of Daniel represents all 

 the persons mentioned in the book [with the obvious exceptions 

 of Ashpenaz, Cyrus, Darius the Mede, and Xerxes (Ahashuerus)] 

 as having in Babylon not Aramaic but Babylonian names con- 

 ferred upon them. Thus the names there given to Daniel 

 himself and his companions (Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, 

 and Abed-nego) are in no case Aramaic, though their original 

 names were quite intelligible to an Aramaic-speaking people, 

 such as some critics still imagine the author of the book to 

 fancy the Babylonians to have been. It is worth while to study 

 these Babylonian names bestowed on foreign captives, in 

 accordance with what Hilprecht {ut supra, vol. ix, p. 28) 

 remarks : " That captives and slaves, without regard to their 

 former position and nationality, as a rule received a new name 

 from their Babylonian masters is illustrated by the large number 

 of slaves with pure Babylonian names in the Neo-Babylonian 

 contract-s." 



Nebuchadnezzar, in Dan. iv, 8, speaks of Daniel's Babylonian 

 name, Belteshazzar, as being " according to the name of " his 

 " God." Dr. Driver (Camb. Bible for Schools, etc., p. 48) 

 kindly explains this by saying : " Viz. Bel.* The Bel in 

 Belteshazzar is not really the name of the god but, as explained 

 on I, 7, is part of the word baldtsu, his life ; but it may be only 

 an assonance which the king is represented as expressing," etc. 



We are constantly struck with the gracious condescension 

 with which our Higher Critics correct the " blunders " of the 

 Biblical writers, as in this instance, and make allowances for 

 their ignorance of their own and other tongues, which our critics, 

 of course, know so much better ! But here (and elsewhere) 

 the ignorance is not that of the Biblical writer but that of 

 the critic. The name Belteshazzarf (Mu)-ballit-shar-usur (c/. 



* Though the LXX confound the names Belshazzar and Belteshazzar 

 with one another, and write BaXraa-ap for both, the former occurs in the 

 inscriptions as Bel-shar-usur, " May Bel protect the King." In this 

 name, though not in Belteshazzar, Bel is the first element. 



t Dr. Pinches, however, says : " The form Mu-ballit-sar-usur does not 

 sound right." He suggests that Belet-shazzar (the Massoretic pointing) may 

 " possibly be for [Nabu-] beletsh-assar, or (perhaps better) [Bel-]beletsh- 

 asar, i.e., ' Nebo (or Bel), protect thou his life.' This may have been 

 still further shortened to Balatsu or Balatu, of which there are many 

 examples in late Babylonian contracts." 



