¹ sn The expression have nothing is difficult. Presumably it refers to an absence of support or assistance for the anointed one at the time of his “cutting off.” The KJV rendering “but not for himself,” apparently suggesting a vicarious death, cannot be defended.

¹ tc The present translation reads וּצְבָאָהּ נִתַּן (uts^evaʾah nittan, “and its army was given”) for the MT וְצָבָא תִּנָּתֵן (v^etsavaʾ tinnaten, “and an army was being given/will be given”). The context suggests a perfect rather than an imperfect verb.

¹ sn The specific duties of the seven types of officials listed here (cf. vv. 3, 27) are unclear. The Aramaic words that are used are transliterations of Akkadian or Persian technical terms whose exact meanings are uncertain. The translations given here follow suggestions set forth in BDB.

¹ sn Daniel’s absence from this scene has sparked the imagination of commentators, some of whom have suggested that perhaps he was unable to attend the dedication due to sickness or absence prompted by business. Hippolytus supposed that Daniel may have been watching from a distance.

¹ tn Various suggestions have been made concerning the plural “we.” It could be an editorial plural translatable as “I.” However, Daniel has portrayed himself as an agent of God, who revealed the matter (vv. 28, 30), so we can express that reality.

² sn Various reasons have been suggested as to why such food would defile Daniel. Perhaps it had to do with violations of Mosaic law with regard to unclean foods, or perhaps it was food that had been offered to idols. Daniel’s practice in this regard is strikingly different from that of Esther, who was able successfully to conceal her Jewish identity.

³ sn The reference to “all the ships of the sea…within you” suggests that the metaphor is changing; previously Tyre had been described as a magnificent ship, but now the description shifts back to an actual city. The “ships of the sea” were within Tyre’s harbor. Verse 11 refers to “walls” and “towers” of the city.

¹ tc Date formulae typically include the month. According to D. I. Block (Ezekiel [NICOT], 2:34, n. 27) some emend to “in the twelfth year in the eleventh month,” relying partially on the copy of the LXX from Alexandrinus, where Albright suggested that “eleventh month” may have dropped out due to haplography.

³ tn In the Hebrew text there is no conjunction before “their sons and daughters.” For this reason one might assume that the preceding descriptive phrases refer to the sons and daughters, but verse 21 suggests otherwise. The descriptive phrases appear to refer to the “stronghold,” which parallels “my sanctuary” in verse 21. The children constitute a separate category.

² tn Heb “(one who is) unclean due to the impurity they humble within you.” The use of the verb “to humble” suggests that these men forced themselves upon women during menstruation. Having sexual relations with a woman during her period was forbidden by the Law (Lev 18:19; 20:18).

² tn Heb “and after, if you will not listen to me.” The translation leaves out “and after” for smoothness. The text is difficult. M. Greenberg (Ezekiel [AB], 1:374) suggests that it may mean “but afterwards, if you will not listen to me…” with an unspoken threat.

³ tc The MT reads: “what appeared to be his waist and downwards was fire.” The LXX omits “what appeared to be,” reading: “from his waist to below was fire.” Suggesting that “like what appeared to be” belongs before “fire,” D. I. Block (Ezekiel [NICOT], 1:277) points out the resulting poetic symmetry of form with the next line, as followed in the translation here.

² tc This translation accepts the emendation suggested in BHS of בְּרוּם (b^erum, “in the lifting”) for בָּרוּךְ (barukh). The letters mem (מ) and kaf (כ) were easily confused in the old script, while בָּרוּךְ (“blessed be”) implies a quotation, which is out of place here. The word also does not fit the later phrase “from its place,” which requires a verb of motion.

¹ tc The MT reads: “and the form of the creatures” (וּדְמוּת הַחַיּוֹת, ud^emut hakhayyot). The LXX reads: “and in the midst of the creatures,” suggesting an underlying Hebrew text of וּמִתּוֹךְ הַחַיּוֹת (umittokh hakhayyot). The subsequent description of something moving among the creatures supports the LXX.

⁶ tc The BHS editors and many commentators suggest that the fourth bicolon in 2:19 is a late addition and should be deleted. Apart from the four sets of bicola in 1:7 and 2:19, every stanza in chapters 1-4 consists of three sets of bicola.

⁶ tn Heb “He brought down to the ground in disgrace the kingdom and its princes.” The verbs חִלֵּל…הִגִּיע (higgiʿ…khillel, “he has brought down…he has profaned”) function as a verbal hendiadys, as the absence of the conjunction ו (vav) suggests. The first verb retains its full verbal force, while the second functions adverbially: “he has brought down [direct object] in disgrace.”

² tn Heb “bulls.” Metaphorically, bulls may refer to mighty ones, leaders, or warriors. F. W. Dobbs-Allsopp (Lamentations [IBC], 69) insightfully suggests that the Samek stanza presents an overarching dissonance by using terms associated with a celebratory feast (bulls, assembly, and a winepress) in sentences where God is abusing the normally expected celebrants, i.e., the “leaders” are the sacrifice.

³ tc The MT reads בֵּינֵיהֶם (b^enehem, “in them” = “in their midst”). The BHS editors suggest that this is a textual variation from an original text of בְּעֵינֵיהֶם (b^eʿenehem, “in their eyes” = “in their view”). The ע (ʿayin) might have dropped out due to orthographic confusion.

⁵ tc The MT reads שְׁעָרֶיהָ (sh^eʿareha, “her gates”). The BHS editors suggest revocalizing the text to the participle שֹׁעֲרֶיהָ (shoʿareha, “her gatekeepers”) from שֹׁעֵר (shoʿer, “porter”; BDB 1045 s.v. שֹׁעֵר). The revocalization creates tight parallelism: “her gatekeepers”//“her priests,” but ruins the chiasm: (A) her gatekeepers, (B) her priests, (B’) her virgins, (A’) the city itself.

⁷ tn Heb “groan” or “sigh.” The verb אָנַח (ʾanakh) is an expression of grief (Prov 29:2; Isa 24:7; Lam 1:4, 8; Ezek 9:4; 21:11). BDB 58 s.v. 1 suggests that it means “sigh,” but HALOT 70-71 s.v. prefers “groan” here.