¹sn As is clear from the extra-biblical records, it was actually Nabonidus (ca. 556-539 b.c.) who was king of Babylon at this time. However, Nabonidus spent long periods of time at Teima, and during those times Belshazzar his son was de facto king of Babylon. This arrangement may help to explain why later in this chapter Belsahzzar promises that the successful interpreter of the handwriting on the wall will be made third ruler in the kingdom. If Belshazzar was in effect second ruler in the kingdom, this would be the highest honor he could afford.

²sn Persian kings were renown in the ancient world for their lavish banquets. This scene calls to mind a similar grandiose event recorded in Esth 1:3-8.

³sn The king probably sat at an elevated head table.

⁴tn Aram “the thousand.”

⁵tn Or perhaps, “when he had tasted,” in the sense of officially initiating the commencement of the banquet. The translation above seems preferable, however, given the clear evidence in the context of inebriation.

⁶tn Or “ancestor”; or “predecessor” (also in vv. 11, 13, 18). The Aramaic word translated “father” can on occasion denote these other relationships.

⁷sn Making use of sacred temple vessels for an occasion of reveling and drunkenness such as this would have been a religious affront of shocking proportions to the Jewish captives.

⁸tc Theodotion has the passive enechthesan (“were brought”).

⁹tc The present translation reads wekaspa’ (“and the silver”) with Theodotion and the Vg. Cf. v. 2.

¹⁰tn Aram “the temple of the house of God.” The phrase seems rather awkward. The Vg lacks “of the house of God,” while Theodotion and the Syriac lack “the house.”

¹¹tn While Aramaic pas can mean the palm of the hand, here it seems to be the back of the hand that is intended.

¹²sn The mention of the lampstand in this context is of interest because it suggests that the writing was in clear view.

¹³tn Aram “[the king’s] brightness changed for him.”

¹⁴tn Aram “his loins went slack.”

¹⁵sn Purple was a color associated with royalty in the ancient world.

¹⁶sn The reference to a golden collar here is probably to something more substantial than merely a gold chain or necklace.

¹⁷tc Read pisreh with the Qere rather than pisra’ of the Kethib.

¹⁸tn Aram “his visage altered upon him.” So also in v. 10.

¹⁹tn Aram “the queen.” In the following discourse this woman is able to recall things about Daniel that go back to the days of Nebuchadnezzar, things that Belshazzar does not seem to have the same recollection of. It is likely that she was the wife not of Belshazzar but of Nabonidus or perhaps even Nebuchadnezzar. In that case, “queen” here means “queen mother.”

²⁰tn Aram “The queen.” The translation has used the pronoun “she” instead because repetition of the noun here would be redundant in terms of English style.

²¹tn Aram “[there were] discovered to be in him.”

²²tn Aram “wisdom like the wisdom.” This would be redundant in terms of English style.

²³tc Theodotion lacks the phrase “and wisdom like the wisdom of the gods.”

²⁴tc The MT includes a redundant reference to “your father the king” at the end of v. 11. None of the attempts to explain this phrase as original are very convincing. The present translation deletes the phrase, following Theodotion and the Syriac.

²⁵tc Read mipsar rather than the MT mepassar; later in the verse read misra’ rather than the MT mesare’. The Masoretes have understood these Aramaic forms to be participles, but they are more likely to be vocalized as infinitives. As such, they have an epexegetical function in the syntax of their clause.

²⁶tn Aram “let [Daniel] be summoned.”

²⁷tn Or perhaps “one of three,” in the sense of becoming part of a triumvir. So also v. 29.

²⁸tn Or “royal greatness and majestic honor,” if the four terms are understood as a double hendiadys.

²⁹tn Aram “were trembling and fearing.” This can be treated as a hendiadys, “were trembling with fear.”

³⁰tn This Aramaic form is the aphel participle of hyh (“to live”). Theodotion and the Vg mistakenly take the form to be from mh’ (“to smite”).

³¹sn The point of describing Nebuchadnezzar as arrogant is that he had usurped divine prerogatives, and because of his immense arrogance God had dealt decisively with him.

³²tn Aram “heart.”

³³tn Or “descendant”; or “successor.”

³⁴tn Aram “your heart.”

³⁵tn Aram “in whose hand [are].”

³⁶tc The Greek version of Theodotion lacks the repetition of mene’ (cf. NAB).

³⁷tc Theodotion has the singular, phares (cf. NAB “peres”).

³⁸tn The Aramaic term mene’ is a noun referring to a measure of weight. The linkage here to the verb for “to number” (Aram., menah) is a case of paronomasia rather than strict etymology. So also with teqel and parsin. In the latter case there is an obvious wordplay with the name “Persian.”

³⁹sn Peres is the singular form of pharsin in v. 25.

⁴⁰tn Aram “king of the Chaldeans.”

⁴¹sn The year was 539 b.c. At this time Daniel would have been approximately eighty-one years old. The relevant extra-biblical records describing the fall of Babylon include portions of Herodotus, Xenophon, Berossus (cited in Josephus), the Cyrus Cylinder, and the Babylonian Chronicle.

⁴²sn Beginning with 5:31, the verse numbers through 6:28 in the English Bible differ from the verse numbers in the Aramaic text (BHS), with 5:31 ET = 6:1 AT, 6:1 ET = 6:2 AT, 6:2 ET = 6:3 AT, 6:3 ET = 6:4 AT, etc., through 6:28 ET = 6:29 AT. Beginning with 7:1 the verse numbers in the English Bible and the Aramaic text are again the same.