Daniel 2:27

Daniel answered in the presence of the king, and said, The secret which the king hath demanded cannot the wise men, the astrologers, the magicians, the soothsayers, show unto the king. The differences between this and the Septuagint are but slight and unimportant. To render it literally, the LXX . is, "Daniel, having spoken out in the presence of the king, said, The mystery which the king saw is nut the showing of the wise men, the astrologers, the sorcerers, the magicians." There seems to have been a confusion between עֲנָה ( ‛anah ), "to answer," and צְנָה ( tzenah ), "to cry out;" the latter word is unsuitable in the present connection. The change from שׁאל to חזה is unlikely to have been the result of any mistake in the writing of the original. It may have been the Greek scribe who misread ἠρώτησεν into ἑώρακεν . Theodotion and the Peshitta present no peculiarities worthy of notice. Jerome translates asbshaphim by magi , as usual, following the Peshitta. It is to be observed that here again we have a list of the different classes of soothsayers , and the class of Chaldeans is omitted, as also those marked as mecashphim in verse 2; instead, occupying the same place in the catalogue, is gazr ı ̄n. This may have been the original word, as evidently the real meaning was not known either in Egypt or Asia Minor, as both the LXX . and Theodotion transfer the word. The Peshitta translates this word by asuphe , in reality the corresponding one to the second word in the Chaldee. This would seem to show that the word had disappeared from Eastern as well as Western Aramaic. It is derived from gezar , "to eat." Behrmann ('Das Buch Daniel') derives it thus, and says that it refers to the fact that those who studied nativities divided the heavens into sectiones or segmenta. This was precisely what the "Chaldeans" of classic times did; hence it is quite a possible thing that Chaldeans was inserted in some Greek translations, and got into the Aramaic from the Greek. The word does not seem to be used for , astrologers" in the Talmud. The occasion of Daniel's narrating the impotence of the other wise men in presence of the task set them by the king is that probably he recognized the accent of surprise in the king's tone. As if he said, "Yes, it is perfectly true, what none of these wise men could do, I, a mere youth, undertake to do." There is nothing of contempt for them in this, as is seen in the following verse. There may be a shade of rebuke implied to the king, who had demanded from men what they could not do. They had declared that only the gods could reveal this to the king. And what Daniel says is not in opposition to this, but confirmatory of it.