In the third year of Cyrus, king of Persia - In regard to Cyrus, see the notes at Isaiah 41:2. In Daniel 1:21, it is said that "Daniel continued even unto the first year of king Cyrus." But it is not necessarily implied in that passage that he "died" then. It may mean only that he continued in authority, and was employed, in various ways, as a public officer, until that time. See the note at that passage. For anything that appears, he may have lived several years after, though, for causes now unknown, he may have retired from the court after the accession of Cyrus. This vision may have occurred when he was no longer a public officer, though the whole narrative leads us to suppose that he had not lost his interest in the affairs of the Jewish people. He may have retired on account of age, though his declining years would be naturally devoted to the welfare of his people, and he would embrace any opportunity which he might have of doing them good.

A thing was revealed unto Daniel - A revelation was made to him. The occasion on which it was done is stated in the next verse. It was when he was earnestly engaged in prayer for his people, and when his mind was deeply anxious in regard to their condition.

Whose name was called Belteshazzar - See the notes at Daniel 1:7. The name Belteshazzar was probably that by which he was known in Babylon, and as this prophecy was perhaps published in his own time, the use of this name would serve to identify the author. The name "Daniel" would have been sufficient to give it currency and authority among his own countrymen.

And the thing was true - That is, it would be certainly accomplished. This expresses the deep conviction of the writer that what was revealed in this vision would certainly come to pass. In his own mind there was no doubt that it would be so, though the time extended through many years, and though it could not be expected that it would be complete until long after his own death. Perhaps the declaration here is designed to bring the weight of his own authority and his well-known character to pledge his own word, that what is here said would be accomplished; or, as we should say, to stake his veracity as a prophet and a man, on the fulfillment of what he had affirmed. Such an assertion might be of great use in consoling the minds of the Jews in the troubles that were to come upon their nation.

But the time appointed was long - Margin, "great." There is considerable variety in the translation and interpretation of this passage. The Latin Vulgate renders it, "fortitudo magna." The Greek, "And the power was great." The Syriac, "And the discourse was apprehended with great effort, but he understood the vision." Luther, "And it was of great matters." Lengerke, "And the misery (Elend) is great;" that is, the distress of the people. Bertholdt renders it, "Whose contents pertained to great wars." This variety of interpretation arises from the word rendered in our version "the time appointed" - צבא tsâbâ'. This word properly means an army, host, as going forth to war; then the host of angels, of the stars, and hence, God is so often called "Jehovah of hosts." Then the word means warfare, military service, a hard service, a season of affliction or calamity. See the notes at Job 7:1. It seems to me that this is the meaning here, and that Gesenius (Lexicon) has correctly expressed the idea: "And true is the edict, and "relates to long warfare;" that is, to many calamities to be endured." It was not a thing to be soon accomplished, nor did it pertain to peaceful and easy times, but it had reference to the calamities, the evils, and the hardships of wars - wars attended with the evils to which they are usually incident, and which were to be conducted on a great scale. This interpretation will accord with the details in the following chapters.

And he understood the thing ... - This seems to be said in contradistinction to what had occurred on some other occasions when the meaning of the vision which he saw was concealed from him. Of this he says he had full understanding. The prophecy was, in fact, more clearly expressed than had been usual in the revelations made to Daniel, for this is almost entirely a historical narrative, and there could be little doubt as to its meaning.

In the third year of Cyrus - Which answers to the first year of Darius the Mede.

The time appointed was long - וצבא גדול vetsaba gadol, but the warfare long; there will be many contentions and wars before these things can be accomplished.

In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia,.... Not of his being king of Persia only, but of the Medopersian empire, after he had subdued the Babylonian empire, and annexed it to his dominions; and this is not to be reckoned from the time of his taking Babylon, and putting the government of it into the hands of his uncle Darius, with whom he jointly reigned; but from the time of his uncle's death, when he was sole monarch of the whole empire: he reigned thirty years, as Cicero (t), from a Persian writer, relates; which is to be reckoned from the time of his being appointed by his uncle commander-in-chief of the Persian and Median armies; for from his taking of Babylon to his death were but nine years; and so many years the canon of Ptolemy assigns to his reign, taking in the two years he reigned with his uncle; for from his being sole monarch, after the death of Cyaxares, or Darius the Mede his uncle, were but seven years; which, according to Xenophon (u), is the whole of his reign, who reckons it from thence; and it was in the third of these that Daniel had the visions contained in this and the two following chapters; which, according to Bishop Usher (w), and Dean Prideaux (x), was in the year of the world 3470 A.M. and 534 B.C. Mr. Bedford (y) places it in the year 533 B.C.: how long Daniel 54ed after this is not certain; very probably he died quickly after, since he must be in a very advanced age; for the third year of Cyrus being the seventy third of his captivity, as Dean Prideaux (z) observes; and if he was eighteen years of age, as that learned man thinks is the least that can be supposed at the time of his carrying into Babylon, he must have been in the ninety first year of his age at this time; or if he was but fifteen years of age at that time, which is the opinion of Aben Ezra on Daniel 1:4, he must be in the third year of Cyrus eighty eight years of age. The Dutch annotators observe, that Daniel 54ed in the court of Babylon above seventy seven years, which will carry his age to a greater length still. Jarchi on Daniel 1:21 asserts Daniel to be the same with Hatach in Esther 4:5 and so the Targum on that place, who lived in the times of Ahasuerus, supposed to be Xerxes: now between the third of Cyrus, and the beginning of Xerxes's reign, is mentioned a space of seventy one years, which, added to the least number eighty eight before given, will make Daniel now to be one hundred and fifty nine years old, when Ahasuerus or Xerxes began his reign; which is not only an age unfit for such business Hatach was employed in; but agrees not with the period in which Daniel 54ed, when it was not usual for men to live so long, and must be exploded as fabulous:

a thing was revealed unto Daniel; a secret, which he otherwise could never have known; and which was a singular favour to him, and showed him to be a friend of God, a favourite of his; and this respected the Persian and Grecian monarchies; the various kings of Egypt and Syria, and what should befall them; and the times of Antiochus, and the troubles the Jews would have through him:

(whose name was called Belteshazzar); a name given him by the prince of the eunuchs; see Daniel 1:7,

and the thing was true; was not a false vision, a mere fancy of the brain, an empty conjecture, a delusion of the mind, like the divination and soothsaying of the Gentiles, but a real thing, that was sure and certain, and would be fulfilled, and might be depended upon: but the time appointed was long; ere the whole would be accomplished; for it reached to the times of Antiochus, three hundred years after this, yea, to the resurrection of the dead, and the end of all things: or, "a great host", or "army" (a); a vast appearance of things were represented to him; not a host of angels, as Saadiah; but a vast number of facts, like an army of them, and which respected armies and battles; or it may denote the force, power, and efficacy of the word that was true, which should not fail, but be certainly fulfilled:

and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision; that is, Daniel understood "the word" (b), or words of the prophecy, in which it was expressed; they were clear and plain, and not obscure, dark, and doubtful; and he had a clear view of each of the parts of it, of the whole series of things, the connection of facts, and their dependence on one another, and their certain accomplishment; he saw them in their order, as they were presented to him in vision and prophecy; and was not at any loss about the meaning of any part of them, or the words by which they were signified.

(t) De Divinatione, l. 1.((u) Cyropaedia, l. 8. c. 45. (w) Annales Vet. Test. A. M. 3470. (x) Connexion, &c. par. 1. p. 161, 162. (y) Scripture Chronology, p. 718. (z) Ut supra. (Connexion, &c. par. 1. p. 161, 162) (a) "et militia magna", Pagninus, Montanus, Gejerus; "militia seu belligeratio ingens", Michaelis. (b) "verbum", Pagninus, Montanus, Munster.

The Theophany - Daniel 10-11:2a

The Introduction to the Following Manifestation of God - Daniel 10:1-3

This verse is to be regarded as an inscription or general statement of the substance of it. Therefore Daniel speaks of himself in the third person, as in Daniel 7:1, and in the historical portions Daniel 1-6. The definition of the time, "In the first year of Cores (Cyrus) king of Persia," refers us back to Daniel 1:21, but it does not, as has been there already remarked, stand in contradiction to the first year of Cyrus named there. דּבר is the following revelation, which was communicated to the prophet not by a vision (חזון), but by a manifestation of God (מראה), and was given in the form of simple human discourse. The remark regarding Daniel, "whose name was Belteshazzar," is designed only to make it obvious that the Daniel of the third year of Cyrus was the same who was carried by Babylon in the first year of Nebuchadnezzar (seventy-two years before). To the question why Daniel did not return to his native land in the first year of Cyrus, which Hitzig has thus formulated for the purpose of framing an argument against the genuineness of this prophecy - "How could he, who was a pattern of piety (Daniel 1:8; Ezekiel 14:14), so disregard the opportunity that was offered and the summons of Isaiah (Isaiah 48:20; Isaiah 52:11.) as if he stood on the side of those who forgot the holy mountain?" (Isaiah 65:11) - the supposition of his advanced old age (Hv.) is no sufficient answer. For, on the contrary, Hitzig has rightly replied that old men also, such as had even seen the former temple, had returned home (Ezra 3:12), and Daniel was not so infirm as to be unable for the journey. The correct answer is rather this, that Daniel, because divine revelations had been communicated to him, had obtained a position at the court of the world-rulers in which he was able to do much for the good of his people, and might not, without a special divine injunction, leave this place; that he thus, not from indifference toward the holy mountain or from neglect of the injunctions to flee from Babylon (Isaiah 48:20; Isaiah 52:11.), but from obedience to God, and for the furtherance of the cause of His kingdom, remained at his post till the Lord His God should call him away from it.

In the second hemistich the contents of this new divine revelation are characterized. הדּבר with the article points back to דּבר in the first half of the verse. Of this "word" Daniel says that it contains אמת and גּדול צבא. In the statement that "the thing was true," Hitzig finds an intimation that thereby the author betrays his standpoint, namely, the time when "the thing" was realized, for Daniel could not say this before it happened. But this objection supposes that the author was a lying prophet, who spoke from his own heart (Jeremiah 29:8, Jeremiah 29:15). But if Daniel had actually received a "word" from God, he could before its fulfilment testify its truth. The testimony to the truth of the word here indicates, as it does in Daniel 8:26 in the mouth of the angel, that the word of God now communicated to the prophet contained things which it would be difficult for the human heart to believe. The second predicate גּדול צבא shows in what respect this is so. For that these words do not, with the lxx and Aquil., refer to what follows is obvious, as is acknowledged by all modern interpreters. צבא, warfare, military service, then the difficulty of this service, and figuratively difficulty, afflictions of life, Job 7:1; Job 10:17, and also here. "The word is, i.e., concerns, has as its contents, great afflictions" [E.V. "the time appointed was long"].

In the last clause of this verse בּין and בינה are not the imperative (v. Lengerke), because a summons to give heed, or understand, would not be here in place. בינה is a substantive, and the throwing of the accent on the penultima is occasioned by the accented לו which follows. בּין is the 3rd pers. perf., not the infinitive (Hv.). Understanding was to him בּמּראה, by that which was seen, i.e., by the appearance described in Daniel 10:5. בּמּראה cannot at all be referred (Klief.) to the earlier prophecies of Daniel 8:7, Daniel 8:9. The statement in these two passages serves for the confirmation of that which was said regarding the contents of the word from God, and stands in relation to Daniel 8:27, where Daniel was troubled because no one understood the vision. He was helped out of this state of non-understanding by the following revelation, cf. Daniel 10:14. But the objection that it cannot be here said that Daniel understood the word, because he himself, Daniel 12:8, says that he did not understand it, has been disposed of by Kliefoth, who justly remarks that the non-understanding in Daniel 12:8 regards a single point, namely, the duration of the affliction, regarding which, however, disclosures are given to the prophet in Daniel 12:10. The translation: "he heard the word, and understood the vision" (Kran.), is set aside by this circumstance, that it takes בּין in a different sense from בינה, contrary to the parallelism of the passages.

In the {a} third year of Cyrus king of Persia a thing was revealed unto Daniel, whose name was called Belteshazzar; and the thing was true, but the time appointed was {b} long: and he understood the thing, and had understanding of the vision.

(a) He notes this third year, because at this time the building of the temple began to be hindered by Cambyses, Cyrus's son, when the father made war in Asia minor against the Scythians, which was discouraging to the godly, and fearful to Daniel.

(b) Which is to declare that the godly should not hasten too much, but patiently abide the fulfilment of God's promise.

long: Heb. great

CHAPTER 10

Da 10:1-21. Daniel Comforted by an Angelic Vision.

The tenth through twelfth chapters more fully describe the vision in the eighth chapter by a second vision on the same subject, just as the vision in the seventh chapter explains more fully that in the second. The tenth chapter is the prologue; the eleventh, the prophecy itself; and the twelfth, the epilogue. The tenth chapter unfolds the spiritual worlds as the background of the historical world (Job 1:7; 2:1, &c.; Zec 3:1, 2; Re 12:7), and angels as the ministers of God's government of men. As in the world of nature (Joh 5:4; Re 7:1-3), so in that of history here; Michael, the champion of Israel, and with him another angel, whose aim is to realize God's will in the heathen world, resist the God-opposed spirit of the world. These struggles are not merely symbolical, but real (1Sa 16:13-15; 1Ki 22:22; Eph 6:12).

1. third year of Cyrus-two years after Cyrus' decree for the restoration of the Jews had gone forth, in accordance with Daniel's prayer in Da 9:3-19. This vision gives not merely general outlines, or symbols, but minute details of the future, in short, anticipative history. It is the expansion of the vision in Da 8:1-14. That which then "none understood," he says here, "he understood"; the messenger being sent to him for this (Da 10:11, 14), to make him understand it. Probably Daniel was no longer in office at court; for in Da 1:21, it is said, "Daniel continued even unto the first year of King Cyrus"; not that he died then. See on [1099]Da 1:21.

but the time appointed was long-rather, "it (that is, the prophecy) referred to great calamity" [Maurer]; or, "long and calamitous warfare" [Gesenius]. Literally, "host going to war"; hence, warfare, calamity.

10:1-9. This chapter relates the beginning of Daniel's last vision, which is continued to the end of the book. The time would be long before all would be accomplished; and much of it is not yet fulfilled. Christ appeared to Daniel in a glorious form, and it should engage us to think highly and honourably of him. Let us admire his condescension for us and our salvation. There remained no strength in Daniel. The greatest and best of men cannot bear the full discoveries of the Divine glory; for no man can see it, and live; but glorified saints see Christ as he is, and can bear the sight. How dreadful soever Christ may appear to those under convictions of sin, there is enough in his word to quiet their spirits.