[115] The writer of Daniel was evidently acquainted with the Book of Ezekiel. See Delitzsch in Herzog, _s.v._ "Daniel," and Driver, p. 476. [116] See iv. 16, 25-30. [117] Preserved by Jos.: comp. _Ap._, I. 20. [118] The phrase is common enough: _e.g._, in Jos., _Antt._, X. xi. 1 (comp. _c. Ap._, I. 19); and a similar phrase, ἐμπεσὼν εἰς ἀῤῥωστίαν, _is used of Antiochus Epiphanes_ in 1 Macc. vi. 8. [119] _Præp. Ev._, ix. 41. Schrader (_K. A. T._, ii. 432) thinks that Berossus and the Book of Daniel may both point to the same tradition; but the Chaldee tradition quoted by the late writer Abydenus errs likewise in only recognising _two_ Babylonish kings instead of _four_, exclusive of Belshazzar. See, too, Schrader, _Jahrb. für Prot. Theol._, 1881, p. 618. [120] Dan. v. 11. The emphasis seems to show that "son" is really meant--not grandson. This is a little strange, for Jeremiah (xxvii. 7) had said that the nations should serve Nebuchadrezzar, "and his son, _and his son's son_"; and in no case was Belshazzar Nebuchadrezzar's _son's son_, for his father Nabunaid was an usurping son of a Rab-mag. [121] Schrader, p. 434 ff.; and in Riehm, _Handwörterb._, ii. 163; Pinches, in Smith's _Bibl. Dict._, i. 388, 2nd edn. The contraction into Belshazzar from _Bel-sar-utsur_ seems to show a late date. [122] That the author of Daniel should have fallen into these errors is the more remarkable because Evil-merodach is mentioned in 2 Kings xxv. 27; and Jeremiah in his round number of seventy years includes _three_ generations (Jer. xxvii. 7). Herodotus and Abydenus made the same mistake. See Kamphausen, pp. 30, 31. [123] Herod., i. 191. See Rawlinson, _Herod._, i. 434. [124] Xen., _Cyrop._, VII. v. 3. [125] _Antt._, X. xi. 2. In _c. Ap._, I. 20, he calls him Nabonnedus. [126] This is now supposed to mean "grandson by marriage," by inventing the hypothesis that Nabunaid married a daughter of Nebuchadrezzar. But this does not accord with Dan. v. 2, 11, 22; and so in Baruch i. 11, 12. [127] 2 Kings xxv. 27. [128] Sayce, _The Higher Criticism and the Monuments_, p. 527. [129] I need not enter here upon the confusion of the Manda with the Medes, on which see Sayce, _Higher Criticism and Monuments_, p. 519 ff. [130] Winer, _Realwörterb._, _s.v._ "Darius."