of the image stood for the Roman Empire, so that they did not expect the Messianic reign at the close of the Greek Empire, which, in the prediction, it immediately succeeds.[210] How late was the date before the Jewish Canon was finally settled we see from the Talmudic stories that but for Hananiah ben-Hizkiah, with the help of his three hundred bottles of oil burnt in nightly studies, even the Book of Ezekiel would have been suppressed, as being contrary to the Law (_Shabbath_, f. 13, 2); and that but for the mystic line of interpretation adopted by Rabbi Aqiba (A.D. 120) a similar fate might have befallen the Song of Songs (_Yaddayim_, c. iii.; _Mish._, 5). There is, then, the strongest reason to adopt the conclusion that the Book of Daniel was the production of one of the _Chasidîm_ towards the beginning of the Maccabean struggle, and that its immediate object was to warn the Jews against the apostasies of commencing Hellenism. It was meant to encourage the faithful, who were waging a fierce battle against Greek influences and against the mighty and persecuting heathen forces by which they were supported.[211] Although the writer's knowledge of history up to the time of Alexander the Great is vague and erroneous, and his knowledge of the period which followed Antiochus entirely nebulous, on the other hand his acquaintance with the period of Antiochus Epiphanes is so extraordinarily precise as to furnish our chief information on some points of that king's reign. Guided by these indications, it is perhaps possible to fix the exact year and month in which the Book saw the light--namely, about January B.C. 164.[212] From Dan. viii. 14 it seems that the author had lived till the cleansing of the Temple after its pollution by the Seleucid King (1 Macc. iv. 42-58). For though the Maccabean uprising is only called "a little help" (xi. 34), this is in comparison with the splendid future triumph and epiphany to which he looked forward. It is sufficiently clear from 1 Macc. v. 15, 16, that the Jews, even after the early victories of Judas, were in evil case, and that the nominal adhesion of many Hellenising Jews to the national cause was merely hypocritical (Dan. xi. 34). Now the Temple was dedicated on December 25th, B.C. 165; and the Book appeared before the death of Antiochus, which the writer expected to happen at the end of the seventy weeks, or, as he calculated them, in June 164. The king did not actually die till the close of 164 or the beginning of 163 (1 Macc. vi. 1-16).[213] FOOTNOTES: [194] Jacob Perez of Valentia accounted for this by the hatred of the Jews for Christianity! (Diestel, _Gesch. d. A.T._, p. 211). [195] Comp. Luke xxiv. 44; Acts xxviii. 23; Philo, _De Vit. Cont._, 3. See Oehler in Herzog, _s.v._ "Kanon." [196] _Jos. c. Ap._, I. 8.