Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] A third in the kingdom or a third of the kingdom?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: Peter Kirk <peter AT qaya.org>
  • To: "Bryant J. Williams III" <bjwvmw AT com-pair.net>
  • Cc: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] A third in the kingdom or a third of the kingdom?
  • Date: Mon, 02 Apr 2007 22:22:39 +0100

On 02/04/2007 19:21, Bryant J. Williams III wrote:
Dear A Becker,

Please sign your full name.

Regarding Daniel 5, it is apparent that Nabonidus is the first ruler and
that Belshazzar is the second ruler (co-regent). Thus, for Belshazzar, to
make the interpreter of the literal "handwriting on the wall" to be "third
ruler in the kingdom" (vs. 7) or to be a "ruler of third of the kingdom" is
also no problem since both end up in the same place. It did take place for
Daniel, but the that same night, Cyrus defeated the Babylonians.

But that was not the end of the story for Daniel, for he did become one of three chief ministers [ SRKYN TLT) ] under Darius, who (unless the story is totally confused) must have been some kind of client king of Babylon under Cyrus, or else another name for Cyrus himself, 6:3 (6:2 in English). I suppose this could be interpreted as "chief ministers of a third", but was this not the normal way of saying "three chief ministers"? So in the story and perhaps as a deliberately pointed out ironic twist, despite the sudden change of regime, Daniel really did become ruler of a third of the kingdom, and maybe also third in rank under Cyrus and Darius, equal with the other two chief ministers.

--
Peter Kirk
E-mail: peter AT qaya.org
Blog: http://www.qaya.org/blog/
Website: http://www.qaya.org/





Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page