DANIEL 2:4-11

Q:  The footnote on this passage in The Daily Bible says “The text from here through chapter 7 is in Aramaic.” Is Daniel believed to have originally been written in partial Aramaic? Is it possible a later scribe wrote/translated this part in Aramaic? Why would the original author or a later scribe write a portion, or specifically this portion, in Aramaic as opposed to the Hebrew in which the rest of the book was written? Very curious. 

This is an intriguing question, and one that has puzzled scholars for years. In fact, Daniel is not the only book in which this phenomenon occurs. There is the same mixture of languages in Ezra and Nehemiah (which I will deal with when we get to those books). I believe that the best explanation for the use of dual languages in all these books is a literary one. So below are some excerpts from my unpublished book The Structure of Scripture that attempt to deal with this question.

One feature of Daniel is way in which the book is divided by original languages of composition. Verses 2:4b-7:28 are in Aramaic while the rest is in Hebrew. Gammie declares, “Scholars have not yet come up with an altogether convincing explanation for the two-fold languages in the book.” Similarly, after reviewing several theories, Young concludes, “There does not appear to be any truly satisfactory explanation of the two languages.” Many scholars posit an original Aramaic document to which additional Hebrew writings were appended or which was partially translated into Hebrew. But why was the entire document not translated into the same language? Alternatively, it has been suggested that the Aramaic portions of the book are those most suited for a non-Jewish audience or that they are most appropriate for those stories that focus on international events.

Looking at the general subjects and genre that occur in Daniel, one comes up with a slightly different division for the book. Namely, the first six chapters are widely recognized as court tales (similar to the Book of Esther) involving Daniel and his friends while the rest of the book consists of various visions and revelations usually classified as apocalyptic literature. Also, chapters 1-6 refer to the heroes in the third person while chapters 7-12 are narrated by Daniel himself.

“The most perplexing anomaly lies in the fact that the division on the basis of form and date does not coincide with the division on the basis of language.” In other words, why is Chapter 1 in Hebrew instead of Aramaic as are the other court stories of Daniel, and why isn't Chapter 7 in Hebrew with the other visions of the second half of the book?

The answer to the first question is that Chapter 1 is written in Hebrew to highlight its unique function. As Collins has noted, “The position of ch.1 is ambiguous.” It is not only a court tale as are the stories in chapters 2-6, but also serves as an introduction to the entire book. This chapter links the reader, through the character of Daniel, to the exile at start of the chapter and to the return with its mention of Cyrus at end.

Similarly, the retaining of Chapter 7 in Aramaic acts as “an interlocking device” to tie together the two halves of the book. As Sims states, “Chapter 7 has been widely recognized as the structural link between the two parts, so strongly binding the two that efforts to separate them are futile.” Baldwin puts the case even more strongly: “There are good reasons for thinking that ch. 7 is the key to the whole book, even its focal point.” This pivotal role of Chapter 7 is also seen in the way its ambiguity allows the pictured four-kingdom scheme to either refer backwards to the four sovereigns who have already appeared in the first six chapters or forward to the future realms of chapters 8-12. Similarly, Stead notes that “both the stories and the visions of book of Daniel are read together as providing complementary perspectives rather than opposing viewpoints.” A final indication of the structural importance of Chapter 7 is the fact that the attribution of the words of the book jointly to God and the prophet is not given until Daniel 7:1. This is unlike the other prophetic books, whose similar attributions are given in the opening verses.

The two halves of the book are further united in a more general and basic fashion, as pointed out by several commentators:

"...the evidence of verbal and thematic interlocking between the narrative and apocalyptic parts of Daniel works against the view that the book consists of two distinct genres unequally yoked together...clear visions and confused history [are] followed by clear history and puzzling visions.”

"The first part of the book prepares for the second, and the second looks back to the first.”

"...both parts of Daniel have the same purpose: to reveal heavenly realities and events that are to come in the world. In this sense, both are apocalyptic."

"In effect, the book records both the external [chapters 1-6] and the internal [chapters 7-12] history of Daniel."

"Throughout the book the kingdom of God provides the frame for human history. In the tales this is acknowledged primarily in the doxologies."

"...the stories, like the visions, portray a God who rules in heaven who is also sovereign over the realm of death, who is active in the past and trustworthy for the future...It is a mixed form, as much a series of short stories to which visions are attached as a series of visions prefaced by some stories."