¹sn The first year of Belshazzar’s reign would have been ca. 553 b.c. Daniel would have been approximately 67 years old at the time of this vision.
²tn The Aramaic is difficult here. Some scholars add a verb thought to be missing (e.g., “the visions of his head [were alarming him]”), but there is no external evidence to support such a decision and the awkwardness of the text at this point may be original.
³tn Aram “head of words.” The phrase is absent in Theodotion.
⁴tn Aram “answered and said.”
⁵tn Or “the heavens.” The same Hebrew term, <y]m^v* (v*m^y]<), may be translated “heavens” or “sky” depending on the context.
⁶sn The referent of the great sea is unclear. The common view that the expression refers to the Mediterranean Sea is conjectural.
⁷tn Aram “the heart of a man.”
⁸sn The identity of the first animal, derived from v. 17 and the parallels in chap. 2, is Babylon. The reference to the plucking of its wings is probably a reference to the time of Nebuchadnezzar’s insanity (cf. chap. 4). The latter part of v. 4 then describes the restoration of Nebuchadnezzar. The other animals have traditionally been understood to represent respectively Media-Persia, Greece, and Rome, although most of modern scholarship identifies them as Media, Persia, and Greece. For a biblical parallel to the mention of lion, bear, and leopard together, see Hos 13:7-8.
⁹sn The three ribs held securely in the mouth of the bear, representing Media-Persia, apparently symbolizes military conquest, but the exact identity of the “ribs” is not clear. Possibly it is a reference to the Persian conquest of Lydia, Egypt, and Babylonia.
¹⁰tc The LXX lacks the phrase “between its teeth.”
¹¹tn Or, “sides.”
¹²sn If the third animal is Greece, the likely identification of these four heads is the four-fold division of the empire of Alexander the Great following his death. See note on Dan 8:8.
¹³sn The fourth animal differs from the others in that it is nondescript. Apparently it was so fearsome that Daniel could find nothing with which to compare it. Attempts to identify this animal as an elephant or other known creature are needlessly speculative.
¹⁴tn The Aramaic word for “teeth” is dual rather than plural, suggesting two rows of teeth.
¹⁵tn Aram “were uprooted from before it.”
¹⁶tn Or “the Ancient One,” although the traditional expression has been retained in the translation because it is quite familiar to many readers.
¹⁷tn Traditionally the Aramaic word neqe’ has been rendered “pure,” but here it more likely means “of a lamb.” Cf. the Syriac, neqya’, “a sheep, ewe.”
¹⁸tc The LXX and Theodotion lack the words “I was watching” here. It is possible that these words in the MT are a dittography from the first part of the verse.
¹⁹tn Aram “a prolonging of life was granted to them.”
²⁰tc The LXX has epi (“upon”) here (cf. Matt 24:30; 26:64). Theodotion has meta (“with”) here (cf. Mark 14:62; Rev 1:7).
²¹tn Or “the heavens.” The same Hebrew term, <y]m^v* (v*m^y]<), may be translated “heavens” or “sky” depending on the context.
²²sn This text is probably the main OT background for Jesus’ use of the term “son of man.” In both Jewish and Christian circles the reference in the Book of Daniel has traditionally been understood to refer to an individual, usually in a messianic sense. Many modern scholars, however, understand the reference to have a corporate identity. In this view, the “son of man” is to be equated with the “holy ones” (vv. 18, 21, 22, 25) or the “people of the holy ones” (v. 27) and understood as a reference to the Jewish people. Others understand Daniel’s reference to be to the angel Michael.
²³tn Some take “serving” here in the sense of “worshiping.”
²⁴tn The Aramaic text includes the phrase “in its sheath,” apparently viewing the body as a container or receptacle for the spirit somewhat like a sheath or scabbard is for a knife or a sword. For this phrase the LXX and Vg have “in these things.”
²⁵tn Aram “matter,” but the matter at hand is of course the vision.
²⁶sn The expression holy ones is either a reference to angels or to the saints.
²⁷tc The conjunction in the MT before “eyes” is odd. The ancient versions do not seem to presuppose it.
²⁸tn Aram “than its companions.”
²⁹tc In the LXX, Syriac, and Vg the verb is active, understanding “judgment” to be the object rather than the subject of the verb (i.e., “the Ancient of Days rendered judgment”). This presupposes a different vocalization of the verb (yehab rather than the MT yehib).
³⁰tn Or “subjugate.”
³¹tn Aram “wear out.” The word is a hapax legomenon in biblical Aramaic, but in biblical Hebrew it especially refers to wearing out such things as garments.
³²tn Aram “times and law.” The present translation is based on the understanding that the expression is a hendiadys.
³³sn Although the form times is vocalized in the MT as a plural, it probably should be regarded as a dual. The Masoretes may have been influenced here by the fact that in late Aramaic (and Syriac) the dual forms fall out of use. The meaning would thus be three and a half “times.”
³⁴tn Aram “brightness was changing on me.”