¹ tc The MT has עַל עַל (’al ’al, “he entered upon”). Several medieval Hebrew MSS lack the verb, although this may be due to haplography.

² tc The LXX and Vulgate, along with one medieval Hebrew MS, lack this verb.

³ tn Aram “cause me to enter.” So also in v. 25.

⁴ tn Aram “the king.”

⁵ tn Aram “as one.” For the meaning “without distinction” see the following: F. Rosenthal, Grammar, 36, §64, and p. 93; E. Vogt, Lexicon linguae aramaicae, 60.

⁶ tn Aram “about one hour.” The expression refers idiomatically to a brief period of time of undetermined length.

⁷ tn Aram “my lord.”

⁸ tn Aram “to make certain.”

⁹ tn If the “holy ones” are angels, then this probably refers to the angels as protectors of God’s people. If the “holy ones” are God’s people, then this is an appositional construction, “the people who are the holy ones.” See 8:24 for the corresponding Hebrew phrase and the note there.

¹⁰ sn The holy one referred to here is presumably an angel. Cf. 4:13[10], 23 [20].

¹¹ tn Heb “gave your heart.”

¹² tn Heb “Behold.”

¹³ tc So most Hebrew MSS; one Hebrew MS along with the Dead Sea Scrolls and LXX read “something that looked like a man’s hand.”

¹⁴ tn Heb “my lord,” here a title of polite address. Cf. v. 19.

¹⁵ sn Perhaps these three more kings are Cambyses (ca. 530-522 B.C.), Pseudo-Smerdis (ca. 522 B.C.), and Darius I Hystaspes (ca. 522-486 B.C.).

¹⁶ sn This fourth king is Xerxes I (ca. 486-465 B.C.). The following reference to one of his chiefs apparently has in view Seleucus Nicator.

¹⁷ tn Heb “rich with great riches.”

¹⁸ tn The text is difficult. The Hebrew has here אֶת (’et), the marker of a definite direct object. As it stands, this would suggest the meaning that “he will arouse everyone, that is, the kingdom of Greece.” The context, however, seems to suggest the idea that this Persian king will arouse in hostility against Greece the constituent elements of his own empire. This requires supplying the word “against,” which is not actually present in the Hebrew text.

¹⁹ sn The identity of this king is problematic. If vv. 36-45 continue the description of Antiochus Epiphanes, the account must be viewed as erroneous, since the details do not match what is known of Antiochus’ latter days. Most modern scholars take this view, concluding that this section was written just shortly before the death of Antiochus and that the writer erred on several key points as he tried to predict what would follow the events of his own day. Conservative scholars, however, usually understand the reference to shift at this point to an eschatological figure, viz., the Antichrist. The chronological gap that this would presuppose to be in the narrative is not necessarily a problem, since by all accounts there are many chronological gaps throughout the chapter, as the historical figures intended by such expressions as “king of the north” and “king of the south” repeatedly shift.

²⁰ tn The words “the time of” are added in the translation for clarification.

²¹ tn Heb “has been done.” The Hebrew verb used here is the perfect of certitude, emphasizing the certainty of fulfillment.

²² tn Heb “engage in thrusting.”

²³ tn The referent of the pronoun is most likely the king of the south, in which case the text describes the king of the north countering the attack of the king of the south.

²⁴ tn Heb “many ships.”

²⁵ tn This most likely refers to the king of the north who, in response to the aggression of the king of the south, launches an invasion of the southern regions.

²⁶ tn Heb “and will overflow and pass over.”