When the seven "times"--whether years or brief periods--were concluded, Nebuchadrezzar "lifted up his eyes to heaven," and his understanding returned to him. No further light is thrown on his recovery, which (as is not infrequently the case in madness) was as sudden as his aberration. Perhaps the calm of the infinite azure over his head flowed into his troubled soul, and reminded him that (as the inscriptions say) "the Heavens" are "the father of the gods."[410] At any rate, with that upward glance came the restoration of his reason. He instantly blessed the Most High, "and praised and honoured Him who liveth for ever, whose dominion is an everlasting dominion, and His kingdom is from generation to generation.[411] And all the inhabitants of the earth are reputed as nothing; and He doeth according to His will[412] in the army of heaven, and among the inhabitants of the earth;[413] and none can stay His hand, or say unto Him, What doest Thou?"[414] Then his lords and counsellors reinstated him in his former majesty; his honour and brightness returned to him; he was once more "that head of gold" in his kingdom.[415] He concludes the story with the words: "Now I Nebuchadnezzar praise and extol and honour the King of heaven, all whose works are truth and His ways judgment;[416] and those that walk in pride He is able to abase."[417] He died B.C. 561, and was deified, leaving behind him an invincible name. FOOTNOTES: [371] Comp. 1 Macc. i. 41, 42: "And the king [Antiochus Epiphanes] wrote to his whole kingdom, that all should be one people, and every one should leave his laws." [372] Isa. xxvi. 9. [373] Professor Fuller follows them in supposing that the decree is really a letter written by Daniel, as is shown by the analogy of similar documents, and the attestation (!) of the LXX. (ἀρχὴ τῆς ἐπιστολῆς). He adds, "The undertone of genuineness which makes itself so inobtrusively felt to the Assyrian scholar when reading it, is _quite sufficient to decide the question of authenticity_"! Such remarks are meant only for a certain circle of readers already convinced. If they were true, it would be singular that scarcely one living Assyriologist accepts the authenticity of Daniel; and Mr. Bevan calls this "a narrative which contains _scarcely anything specifically Babylonian_." [374] See _Jos. c. Ap._, I. 20, ἐμπεσὼν εἰς ἀῤῥωστίαν, μετηλλάξατο τὸν βίον (of Nebuchadrezzar); and I. 19 of Nabopolassar. [375] _Præp. Ev._, lx. 41. [376] I follow the better readings which Mr. Bevan adopts from Von Gutschmid and Toup. [377] Comp. Ezra iv. 7, vii. 12. [378] If Nebuchadrezzar wrote this edict, he must have been very familiar with the language of Scripture. See Deut. vi. 22; Isa. viii. 18; Psalm lxxviii. 12-16, cvi. 2; Mic. iv. 7, etc. [379] _Heykal_, "palace"; Bab., _ikallu_. Comp. Amos viii. 3. See the palace described in Layard, _Nineveh and Babylon_. [380] A mistake of the writer. See _supra_, p. 129. [381] _Rab-chartummaya._