Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of Daniel 1:4
Children in whom [was] no blemish, but well favored, and skillful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as [had] ability in them to stand in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.
4. children ] youths (R.V.).
blemish ] here of physical imperfection, as Lev 21:17-18, &c.
well favoured ] An archaistic English expression for good-looking: so Gen 29:17; Gen 39:6; Gen 41:2 al. As Mr Wright ( Bible Word-Book, s. v. Favour) shews, ‘favour’ in old English meant face [179] , so that ‘well favoured’ means having a handsome face. The Heb. (lit. good in looks) is the same as in Gen 24:16; Gen 26:7. An Oriental monarch would attach importance to the personal appearance of his attendants.
[179] Bacon, Essays, xxvii. p. 113, ‘As S. James saith, they are as men, that looke sometimes into a glass, and presently forget their own shape, and favour ’; Cymbeline, dan 1:5, 93, ‘His favour is familiar to me.’
intelligent in all wisdom, and knowing knowledge, and understanding science ] i.e. men of sagacity and intelligence, the combination of synonyms merely serving to emphasize the idea. ‘Cunning’ (i.e. kenning) in A.V., R.V., is simply an archaism for knowing, skilful, though the word is used generally where the reference is to some kind of technical knowledge (Gen 25:27; Exo 38:23 [where, for ‘cunning workman,’ read ‘designer’]; 1Sa 16:16; 1Ch 25:7 [not R.V.]; 2Ch 2:7; 2Ch 2:13-14; Jer 9:17; Jer 10:9 al.). The modern associations of the word prevent it, however, from being now a good rendering of the Hebrew.
science ] In the Heb. a (late) synonym of ‘knowledge’ (as it is rendered Dan 1:17; 2Ch 1:10-12), and derived from the same root: the word is not to be understood here in a technical sense, but simply as a Latinism for ‘knowledge,’ used in default of any more colourless synonym.
ability ] Properly, power; i.e. capacity, both physical and mental.
to stand ] to take their place with a suggestion of the idea of serving, which, with ‘before’ (see on Dan 1:5), the word regularly denotes.
learning ] literature: lit. book ( s), writing ( s), cf. Isa 29:11-12.
and the tongue of the Chaldeans ] ‘Chaldeans’ is used here, not in the ethnic sense, which the word has in other books of the O. T., but to denote the learned class among the Babylonians, i.e. the priests, a large part of whose functions consisted in the study and practice of magic, divination, and astrology, and in whose hands there was an extensive traditional lore relating to these subjects (see more fully below, p. 12 ff.). The word has the same sense elsewhere in the Book of Daniel (Dan 2:2; Dan 2:4-5; Dan 2:10, Dan 3:8 (prob.), Dan 4:7, Dan 5:7; Dan 5:11). The literature on the subjects named is what is referred to in the present verse. The ‘tongue of the Chaldeans’ would be Babylonian, a Semitic language, but very different from Hebrew, so that it would have to be specially studied by a Jew. Many of the magical texts preserved in the cuneiform script are also written in the non-Semitic Sumerian (or ‘Accadian’); but it is hardly likely that the distinction between these two languages was present to the author.
Fuente: The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges
Children in whom was no blemish – The word rendered children in this place ( yeladym) is different from that which is rendered children in Job 1:3 – bannym). That word denotes merely that they were sons, or descendants, of Israel, without implying anything in regard to their age; the word here used would be appropriate only to those who were at an early period of life, and makes it certain that the king meant that those who were selected should be youths. Compare Gen 4:23, where the word is rendered a young man. It is sometimes, indeed, used to denote a son, without reference to age, and is then synonymous with ben, a son. But it properly means one born; that is, recently born; a child, Gen 21:8; Exo 1:17; Exo 2:3; and then one in early life. There can be no doubt that the monarch meant to designate youths. So the Vulgate, pueros, and the Greek, neaniskous, and so the Syriac. All these words would be applicable to those who were in early life, or to young men. Compare Introduction to Daniel, Section I. The word blemish refers to bodily defect or imperfection. The object was to select those who were most perfect in form, perhaps partly because it was supposed that beautiful youths would most grace the court, and partly because it was supposed that such would be likely to have the brightest intellectual endowments. It was regarded as essential to personal beauty to be without blemish, 2Sa 14:25 : But in all Israel there was none to be so much praised as Absalom for beauty; from the sole of Iris foot even to the crown of his head there was no blemish in him. Son 4:7 : thou art all fair, my love; there is no spot in thee. The word is sometimes used in a moral sense, to denote corruption of heart or life Deu 32:5; Job 11:15; Job 31:7, but that is not the meaning here.
But well-favored – Hebrew, good of appearance; that is, beautiful.
And skillful in all wisdom – Intelligent, wise – that is, in all that was esteemed wise in their own country. The object was to bring forward the most talented and intelligent, as well as the most beautiful, among the Hebrew captives.
And cunning in knowledge – In all that could be known. The distinction between the word here rendered knowledge ( daath) and the word rendered science ( madda) is not apparent. Both come from the word yada to know, and would be applicable to any kind of knowledge. The word rendered cunning is also derived from the same root, and means knowing, or skilled in. We more commonly apply the word to a particular kind of knowledge, meaning artful, shrewd, astute, sly, crafty, designing. But this was not the meaning of the word when the translation of the Bible was made, and it is not employed in that sense in the Scriptures. It is always used in a good sense, meaning intelligent, skillful, experienced, well-instructed. Compare Gen 25:27; Exo 26:1; Exo 28:15; Exo 38:23; 1Sa 16:16; 1Ch 25:7; Psa 137:5; Isa 3:3.
And understanding science – That is, the sciences which prevailed among the Hebrews. They were not a nation distinguished for science, in the sense in which that term is now commonly understood – embracing astronomy, chemistry, geology, mathematics, electricity, etc.; but their science extended chiefly to music, architecture, natural history, agriculture, morals, theology, war, and the knowledge of future events; in all which they occupied an honorable distinction among the nations. In many of these respects they were, doubtless, far in advance of the Chaldeans; and it was probably the purpose of the Chaldean monarch to avail himself of what they knew.
And such as had ability in them to stand in the kings palace – Hebrew, had strength – koach. Properly meaning, who had strength of body for the service which would be required of them in attending on the court. A firm constitution of body is required for those protracted services of standing in the hall of the royal presence. – Grotius. The word palace here ( heykal) is commonly used to denote the temple (2Ki 24:13; 2Ch 3:17; Jer 50:28; Hag 2:15. Its proper and primitive signification, however, is a large and magnificent building – a palace – and it was given to the temple as the palace of Jehovah, the abode where he dwelt as king of his people.
And whom they might teach – That they might be better qualified for the duties to which they might be called. The purpose was, doubtless (see analysis), to bring forward their talent, that it might contribute to the splendor of the Chaldean court; but as they were, doubtless, ignorant to a great extent of the language of the Chaldeans, and as there were sciences in which the Chaldeans were supposed to excel, it seemed desirable that they should have all the advantage which could be delayed from a careful training under the best masters.
The learning – – sepher. literally, writing Isa 29:11-12. Gesenius supposes that this means the writing of the Chaldeans; or that they might be able to read the language of the Chaldeans. But it, doubtless, included the knowledge of what was written, as well as the ability to read what was written; that is, the purpose was to instruct them in the sciences which were understood among the Chaldeans. They were distinguished chiefly for such sciences as these:
(1) Astronomy. This science is commonly supposed to have had its orion on the plains of Babylon, and it was early carried there to as high a degree of perfection as it attained in any of the ancient nations. Their mild climate, and their employment as shepherds, leading them to pass much of their time at night under the open heavens, gave them the opportunity of observing the stars, and they amused themselves in marking their positions and their changes, and in mapping out the heavens in a variety of fanciful figures, now called constellations.
(2) Astrology. This was at first a branch of astronomy, or was almost identical with it, for the stars were studied principally to endeavor to ascertain what influence they exerted over the fates of men, and especially what might be predicted from their position, on the birth of an individual, as to his future life. Astrology was then deemed a science whose laws were to be ascertained in the same way as the laws of any other science; and the world has been slow to disabuse itself of the notion that the stars exert an influence over the fates of men. Even Lord Bacon held that it was a science to be reformed, not wholly rejected.
(3) Magic; soothsaying; divination; or whatever would contribute to lay open the future, or disclose the secrets of the invisible world. Hence, they applied themselves to the interpretation of dreams; they made use of magical arts, probably employing, as magicians do, some of the ascertained results of science in producing optical illusions, impressing the common with the belief that they were familiar with the secrets of the invisible world; and hence, the name Chaldean and magician became almost synonymous terms Dan 2:2; Dan 4:7; Dan 5:7.
(4) It is not improbable that they had made advances in other sciences, but of this we have little knowledge. They knew little of the true laws of astronomy, geology, cheministry, electricity, mathematics; and in these, and in kindred departments of science, they may be supposed to have been almost wholly ignorant.
And the tongue of the Chaldeans – In regard to the Chaldeans, see the notes at Job 1:17; and the notes at Isa 23:13. The kingdom of Babylon was composed mainly of Chaldeans, and that kingdom was called the realm of the Chaldeans Dan 9:1. Of that realm, or kingdom, Babylon was the capital. The origin of the Chaldeans has been a subject of great perplexity, on which there is still a considerable variety of opinions. According to Heeren, they came from the North; by Gesenius they are supposed to have come from the mountains of Kurdistan; and by Michaelis, from the steppes of Scythia. They seem to have been an extended race, and probably occupied the whole of the region adjacent to what became Babylonia. Heeren expresses his opinion as to their origin in the following language: It cannot be doubted that, at some remote period, antecedent to the commencement of historical records. one mighty race possessed these vast plains, varying in character according to the country which they inhabited; in the deserts of Arabia, pursuing a nomad life; in Syria, applying themselves to agriculture, and taking up settled abodes; in Babylonia, erecting the most magnificent cities of ancient times; and in Phoenicia, opening the earliest ports, and constructing fleets, which secured to them the commerce of the known world.
There exists at the present time, in the vicinity of the Bahrein Islands, and along the Persian Gulf, in the neighborhood of the Astan River, an Arab tribe, of the name of the Beni Khaled, who are probably the same people as the Gens Chaldei of Pliny, and doubtless the descendants of the ancient race of the Chaldeans. On the question when they became a kingdom, or realm, making Babylon their capital, see the notes at Isa 23:13. Compare, for an interesting discussion of the subject, Forsters Historical Geography of Arabia, vol. i. pp. 49-56. The language of the Chaldeans, in which a considerable part of the book of Daniel is written (see the Introduction Section IV., III.), differed from the Hebrew, though it was a branch of the same Aramean family of languages. It was, indeed, very closely allied to the Hebrew, but was so different that those who were acquainted with only one of the two languages could not understand the other. Compare Neh 8:8. Both were the offspring of the original Shemitish language. This original language may be properly reduced to three great branches:
(1) The Aramean, which prevailed in Syria, Babylonia, and Mesopotamia; and which may, therefore, be divided into the Syriac or West-Aramean, and the Chaldee or East-Aramean, called after the Babylonian Aramean.
(2) The Hebrew, with which the fragments of the Phoenician coincide.
(3) The Arabic, under which belongs the Ethiopic as a dialect. The Aramean, which, after the return from the Babylonian captivity, was introduced into Palestine, and which prevailed in the time of the Saviour, is commonly called the Syro-Chaldaic, because it was a mixture of the Eastern and Western dialects. The Chaldee, or East Aramean, and the Hebrew, had in general the same stock of original words, but they differed in several respects, such as the following:
(a) Many words of the old primitive language which had remained in one dialect had been lost in the other.
(b) The same word was current in both dialects, but in different significations, because in the one it retained the primitive signification, while in the other it had acquired different meaning.
(c) The Babylonian dialect had borrowed expressions from the Northern Chaldeans, who had made various irruptions into the country. These expressions were foreign to the Shemitish dialects, and belonged to the Japhetian language, which prevailed among the Armenians, the Medes, the Persians, and the Chaldeans, who were probaby related to these. Traces of these foreign words are found in the names of the officers of state, and in expressions having reference to the government.
(d) The Babylonian pronunciation was more easy and more sonorous than the Hebrew. It exchanged the frequent sibilants of the Hebrew, and the other consonants which were hard to pronounce, for others which were less difficult: it dropped the long vowels which were not essential to the forms of words; it preferred the more sonorous a to the long o, and assumed at the end of nouns, in order to lighten the pronunciation, a prolonged auxiliary vowel (the so-called emphatic (‘); it admitted contractions in pronouncing many words) and must have been, as the language of common life, far better adapted to the sluggish Orientals than the harsher Hebrew. See an article On the Prevalence of the Aramean Language in Palestine in the age of Christ and the Apostles, by Henry F. Pfannkuche, in the Biblical Repository, vol. i. pp. 318, 319. On this verse also, compare the notes at Isa 39:7.
Fuente: Albert Barnes’ Notes on the Bible
Dan 1:4
The Learning and Tongue of the Chaldeans.
Facility in acquiring languages
It is amazing what pains some saintly people have taken in order to win souls for Christ! When John Wesley was crossing the seas on his way to Georgia, he found on board a number of German emigrants who were also crossing to the Western lands. He was seized by a passionate desire to speak to them about the love of the Saviour, but he was hampered by the hindrance of an unknown tongue. He did not know German, and so an intimate communion was impossible. There and then he set himself to learn the language. For many hours every day he laboriously pursued the study, until, long before the journey ended, he was able to tell his German brothers the uplifting story of the Christ of God. Keith Falconer was once in great need of information which would enormously help him in his sacred work. He found, however, that the information was buried in the Dutch language, which was altogether unknown to him. There and then he set himself to learn Dutch, and mastered it in order that he might gain the hidden treasure. (Hartley Aspen)
The Study of Science
From one point of view religion and science are altogether separate spheres, with different methods. Physical science consists in the observation, description, and classification of the phenomena of the material universe. But the physicist mistakes when he applies the same principle of investigation to the phenomena of the human mind, and especially to theological and cosmological questions. On the other hand, you cannot learn the laws of matter from the necessary conditions of the operations of mind. You cannot teach science by the exposition of the Bible. In scientific studies you may be profoundly religious. A certain enthusiasm of heart and a deep moral purpose are as needful for true advance in science as the clear light of the understanding itself. May the study of science afford illustrations, enforcements, helps to a religious life? Yes. Religion and science both rest upon truth. It is truth that religion recognises. It is truth that science seeks. They cannot be irreconcilable, and finally they must be one. It must be remembered, that no finality has been reached in either sphere. Dogmatism is as impertinent as it is unphilosophical. The very principles of some of our sciences have been reversed within a few years. And in religion, mens conceptions are ever changing, growing in their sweetness, in their scope. Is the study of science to be pursued without any religious thoughts being associated with it? Certainly not. Both religion and morality aid scientific investigation. The man of science will not gain his highest purpose unless he seek in the subject of his learning, to find the supreme God. Two points. The first relates to the care which the scientific student must; observe when he transfers his attention from the objects of his proper pursuit to other occupations. And be careful that you do not forget in science that you have human duties. All knowledge is but the means to that nobility of living which we gather up in the word service. (Llewellyn D. Bevan, L.L.B.)
The Chaldeans
They were to be taught the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans. The name Chaldeans is used by the Old Testament writers in a double sense. Sometimes it is used instead of Babylonian, and applies to the whole nation of which indeed it was the ancient name. Sometimes it refers to a certain order or sect within the nation, the wise men of Babylon, as they are called throughout the Book of Daniel. To speak of the Chaldean order as a priestly caste would be misleading. They were not a caste, since foreigners might be numbered among them, as Daniel afterwards was. Neither were they priestly, in the sense of their functions being confined solely to religion, and their studies to mythology. (Niebuhr compares them to the Brahmins). The Chaldeans were the most influential class in the nation, and derived their power from a remote antiquity. They had a monopoly of the national learning, secular and sacred, and members of their order took a leading part in the affairs of state. Their president stood next to the king; in the event of an interregnum, the government devolved on him; as, for example, after the death of Nabopolassar, when the throne was kept vacant for his son. The wise men of Babylon formed a class which is without precise analogy in the history of any other nation. Religion, politics, science, education–all were in their hands. It would be hard to over-estimate the importance of such an order in an empire like the Babylonian, founded on military conquest, and made up of a congeries of different races. They were the civilisers of the empire; they gave continually to the national life, and conserved the national traditions; to them it was owing that mental progress in any measure kept pace with the material. (P. H. Hunter.)
Enlarged Mental Outlook
Among those chosen for the royal service were some whose hearts God had specially touched. Young as they were, the troubles through which they had passed had wrought upon them both for moral and spiritual good. But how strange are the workings of Gods providence! Up to this time they had been trained in that noble learning, which, from the time of Samuel, had been the glory of the prophetic schools. Now they were to be trained in that strange heathen learning, so wonderfully disentombed in our days. Magic, and the interpretation of dreams and omens, formed an important part of this knowledge; and there were besides, liturgies, hymns, and histories. Up to this time the documents discovered at Babylon have been mostly of a religious character, while among those found at Nineveh and other Assyrian cities have been historical documents of priceless value. To Jewish youths much of this heathen literature must have been repulsive; it must have offended their religious ideas, and often shocked their moral sense. It had nevertheless a good side. It taught them how large the world is, and that Gods empire extendeth over all, and that all are objects of his care. Possibly coming before them with the charm of novelty, it may have made them pursue their studies with the same eagerness and zeal and curiosity which have spurred on scholars to recover the interpretation of the Sanscrit language, and to decipher these very cuneiform inscriptions in which Daniel and his friends were to have their training. And in thus enlarging their mental vision, God was preparing them to do service for His Church at a time when it was no longer hidden away among the mountains of Judah, but in danger of being trampled under foot in the highway of the nations. (Dean Payne Smith, D.D.)
Revelation from a new stand point
The new revelation which the people of God required for the period beginning with the Babylonian captivity, was to teach them how to regard the powers of the world which they were to obey, to teach them their nature and purpose, and to show them the relation in which the work of salvation which was to begin in Israel, stood to them. A new subject was thus given to prophecy, which, in the nature of things, could not have been given before the captivity, but which now forced itself, as it were, by an internal necessity. But if, according to Gods intention, a revelation was to be given concerning the powers of the world and their development, the prophet must needs take a different standpoint from his predecessors; for the Divine word has always a historical starting point, and thus its organ is made fit to receive the Divine revelation. Revelation does not fall from heaven like a written book, which one has but to take into his hands and read; but a man must first receive it into his living spirit, and afterwards write it down, so that it may be adapted to the necessities of the horizon of men. And to qualify him for this work, his historical position must be such that the word from above is not altogether strange to him, such that his whole situation may be, so to say, the human question to which revelation proclaims the divine answer. As the subject of revelation now was no longer as it had been in the time of the earlier prophets, Israel in its relation to the Powers of the world, but the powers of the world m their relation to Israel, so the man of God who was chosen to prophecy of this, could not have lived among his own people, but necessarily, at the very centre of the heathen world-power. For only there could he gain such a clear insight into its nature and development as would fit him for receiving the revelation from on high. (Carl August Auberlen.)
Fuente: Biblical Illustrator Edited by Joseph S. Exell
Verse 4. Children] yeladim, youths, young men; and so the word should be rendered throughout this book.
Skilled in all wisdom] Rather, persons capable of every kind of literary accomplishment, that they might be put under proper instruction. And as children of the blood and of the nobles mere most likely, from the care usually taken of their initiatory education, to profit most by the elaborate instruction here designed, the master of the eunuchs, the king’s chamberlain, was commanded to choose the youths in question out of such.
Fuente: Adam Clarke’s Commentary and Critical Notes on the Bible
If the princes are so curious in their choice, no marvel that God was cautious in his, Lev 21:17-21; 22:20-25. The reason why they were so delicately trained up was, that they being in the flower of their age should be allured with the delights of the court, and should: thereby be brought to forget their fathers house and their religion; this hath been the artifice of the Turk in taking Christians children, and making them Mamelukes and Janizaries, that thereby they may become, as renegades, the greatest champions for Mahomet, and enemies to the Christians.
To stand in the kings palace: this notes men fit by their parts to give advice in arduous matters, 2Ch 10:6; which shows that men only of promising abilities, and not incompetent, should be admitted to the presence of kings.
The learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans: for this cause Moses was learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians, Act 7:22; yet it must be supposed that neither Moses nor Daniel learned any thing that was ungodly, but only to search nature, and that which was only moral; wherein both the Chaldeans and Egyptians were skilled above any other nations of the heathens. And although their magi or wise men did at last degenerate into curious and vain arts, yet Daniel had no further design to know their wisdom than to choose the good of it, and to shun and reject that which was unlawful. The Chaldean tongue differed from the Hebrew in dialect and in pronunciation, which they learned in the right tone and accent, that they might be the more acceptable to the king and court, by their conformity in garb, language, and manners; for which they had the space of three years allotted them.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
4. no blemishA handsome formwas connected, in Oriental ideas, with mental power. “Children”means youths of twelve or fourteen years old.
teach . . . tongue of . . .Chaldeanstheir language and literature, theAramaic-Babylonian. That the heathen lore was not altogethervalueless appears from the Egyptian magicians who opposed Moses; theEastern Magi who sought Jesus, and who may have drawn the traditionas to the “King of the Jews” from Da9:24, c., written in the East. As Moses was trained in thelearning of the Egyptian sages, so Daniel in that of the Chaldeans,to familiarize his mind with mysterious lore, and so develop hisheaven-bestowed gift of understanding in visions (Dan 1:4Dan 1:5; Dan 1:17).
Fuente: Jamieson, Fausset and Brown’s Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible
Children in whom was no blemish,…. Not mere children, but young men of fifteen or twenty years of age; about which age Daniel is by Aben Ezra supposed to be when he was carried captive; and less than this be cannot well be thought to be, since, in a few years after, he was put into posts of the greatest eminence and importance: such were ordered to be selected that had no deformity or defect in any parts of their body, or wanted any, as an eye, or a hand, c. or, “in whom was not anything” h; vicious or immoral, or scandalous in their character:
but well favoured; of a good complexion, a ruddy countenance, and a healthful look. So Curtius i says, that, in all barbarous or uncivilized countries, the stateliness and size of the body is had in great veneration; nor do they think any capable of great services or actions, to whom nature has not vouchsafed to give a beautiful form and aspect. And Aristotle k says it was reported, that, in Ethiopia, civil offices of government or magistracy were distributed according to the bulk or beauty of men, the largeness and tallness of their bodies, or the comeliness of them; and not only among them, but this has always been the custom of the eastern nations, to choose such for their principal officers, or to wait on princes and great personages, and continues to this day. Sir Paul Ricaut l observes,
“that the youths that are designed for the great offices of the Turkish empire must be of admirable features and pleasing looks, well shaped in their bodies, and without any defects of nature; for it is conceived that a corrupt and sordid soul can scarce inhabit in a serene and ingenious aspect; and (says he) I have observed not only in the seraglio, but also in the courts of great men, their personal attendants have been of comely lusty youths well habited, deporting themselves with singular modesty and respect in the presence of their masters: so that when a pascha, aga, spahee, travels, he is always attended with a comely equipage, followed by flourishing youths, well clothed, and mounted in great numbers; that one may guess at the greatness of this empire by the retinue, pomp, and number of servants, which accompany persons of quality in their journeys.”
And no doubt Nebuchadnezzar had some of these ends in view, in ordering such persons to be selected and brought up at his expense; that they might be both for service and usefulness, and for his grandeur and glory.
And skilful in all wisdom: in the wisdom of the Jews, or had a liberal education according to the custom of their country; or were young men of good capacities, capable of being instructed, and of improving themselves in all kind of wisdom:
and cunning in knowledge; or “knowing knowledge” m; having a large share of the knowledge of their own country, customs, and laws, civil and religious: and understanding science; the liberal arts and sciences; or however were persons of a good genius, and of retentive memories; young men of capacity, diligence, industry, and application, and of great docility, and so very promising to make great and useful men:
and such as had ability in them to stand in the king’s palace; not only strength of body, which was requisite to a long waiting there, as sometimes they were obliged to do; but strength of mind, courage, and undauntedness, to stand before the king and his nobles, without showing a rustic fear, and timidity of mind:
and whom they might teach the learning and tongue of the Chaldeans; or, “the book and language of the Chaldeans” n; book for books; such as contained their literature, history, and philosophy, mathematics, the knowledge of the stars, in which they excelled, as well as architecture and military skill; and it was necessary they should learn the Chaldean language, which differed from the Hebrew chiefly in dialect and pronunciation, that they might be able to read those books of science, and to speak with a good accent, and readily, before the king and his nobles; or rather the sense is, that they might understand the Chaldean language, the manner of reading, writing, and pronouncing it
, translated “learning”, may signify the letters of the language, the Scripture or manner of writing, as Saadiah and Aben Ezra interpret it; which must be first learned in any language, in order to attain the knowledge of it; so it seems to be used in Isa 19:12. “I am not learned, or know not a book or letters” see Joh 7:15 and , translated “tongue”, may signify the rules, idioms, and properties of the language; the nature, genius, and dialect of it, and signification of the words and phrases used in it to be learned, so as to be thorough masters of it, understand it, speak it, and pronounce it well. But here a difficulty arises, since the form and character of the letters of the Chaldee and Hebrew languages now in use are the same; it may seem unnecessary that Hebrew youths should be put to school to learn the Chaldean letters and language, though the dialect and idioms of the two languages might in some things differ; but let it be observed, that it might be, and it is not improbable, that the letters of the Chaldean language were not the same then as they are now; and Hottinger o expressly says, that the ancient Chaldee character is not known; not to say anything of the difference of the Hebrew letters then from what they are now, which some have surmised: besides, it is a clear case that the Chaldee and Syriac languages are the same, as appears from Da 2:4, where the Chaldeans are said to speak to the king in Syriac; and yet, what follows is no other than Chaldee, their mother tongue, in which it was most proper and agreeable to speak to the king: and as it is the opinion of many learned men now that these languages are the same, so it was the sense of the ancient Jews. Says R. Samuel Bar Nachman p, let not the Syriac language be mean in thine eyes, or lightly esteemed by thee; for in the law, in the prophets, and in the Hagiographa, the holy blessed God has imparted honour to it; in the law, Ge 31:47, in the prophets, Jer 10:11, in the Hagiographa, Da 2:4 in all which places it is the Chaldee language that is used; and that which was spoken in Babylon, the head of the Chaldean empire, is called the Syriac; for Cyrus, when he took that city, ordered a proclamation to be made, by men skilled, , in the Syriac language, that the inhabitants should keep within doors, and that those that were found without should be slain q; which orders were published in that language, that they might be universally understood, being the language of the common people. So Herodotus, speaking of the Assyrians, says r, these by the Greeks are called Syrians, and by the barbarians Assyrians, among whom were the Chaldeans: and, as Strabo observes s, the same language or dialect was used by those without Euphrates, and by those within; that is, by the Syrians, strictly so called, and by the Babylonians or Chaldeans: and elsewhere t, the name of Syrians reached from Babylon to Sinus Issicus; and, formerly, from thence to the Euxine sea. Now it is certain that the form and character of the letters in the Syriac language are very different from the Hebrew, and difficult to be learned, and might be those which these Hebrew youths were to be taught at school, as well as the rudiments of it; and it is as evident that the language of the Jews, and that of the Syrians, Chaldeans, and Babylonians, were so different, that the common people of the former did not understand the language of the latter when spoke, as appears from
2Ki 18:26 so that there was an apparent necessity for the one to be taught the language of the other, in order to understand it.
h “quidquam quod obstet”, Gussetius. i Histor. l. 6. c. 5. k Politic. l. 4. c. 4. tom. 2. p. 224. l Present State of the Ottoman Empire, B. 1. c. 5. p. 13. m “et scientes scientiam, Pagninus, Montanus, intelligentes scientiam”, Calvin. n “librum et linguam”, Jo. Henr. Michaelis. o Smegma Oriental. l. 1. c. 3. p. 35. p Bereshit Rabba, sect. 74. fol. 65. 4. q Xenophon. Cyropaedia, l. 7. c. 23. r Polymnia, sive l. 7. c. 63. s Geograph. I. 2. p. 58. t Ibid. l. 16. p. 507.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
In yesterday’s Lecture we saw how the prefect or master of the eunuchs was commanded to bring up some noble youths, the offspring of the king and the elders; and Daniel now describes their qualities, according to Nebuchadnezzar’s order. They were youths, not so young as seven or eight years, but growing up, in whom there was no spot; that is, in whom there was no defect or unsoundness of body. They were also of beautiful aspect, meaning of ingenuous and open countenance, he adds also, skilled in all prudence, and understanding knowledge; and then, expressing their thoughts I think those interpreters right who take this participle actively, otherwise the repetition would be cold and valueless. Their eloquence seems to me pointed out here; because there are some who inwardly understand subjects presented to them, but cannot express to others what they retain in their minds; for all have not the same dexterity in expressing exactly what they think Daniel, therefore, notices both qualifications here — the acquisition of knowledge, and the power of communicating it.
And in whom was vigor for כח, cach, usually signifies fortitude, as in Isaiah. (Isa 40:9.) Those who fear God shall change their fortitude, or renew their rigor. Then in Psa 22:0, (Psa 22:15,) my strength or rigor has failed.” He adds, the fortitude or vigor of intelligence, knowledge, and eloquence; or a healthy habit of body, which is the same thing. (77) That they might stand in the king ’ s palace, and be taught literature, (I cannot translate the particle ספר, sepher, otherwise, verbally it is a “ letter, ” but it means learning or discipline,) and the language of the Chaldees We now see how the king regarded not only their rank, when he ordered the most excellent of the royal and noble children to be brought to him; but he exercised his choice that those who were to be his servants should be clever; they were of high birth, as the phrase is; so they ought to prevail in eloquence and give hopeful promise of general excellence in both body and mind. Without doubt he wished them to be held in great estimation, that he might win over other Jews also. Thus, if they afterwards obtained authority, should circumstances allow of it, they might become rulers in Judea, bearing sway over their own people, and yet remain attached to the Babylonian empire. This was the king’s design; it affords no reason why we should praise his liberality, since it is sufficiently apparent that he consulted nothing but his own advantage.
Meanwhile, we observe, that learning and the liberal arts were not then so despised as they are in this age, and in those immediately preceding it. So strongly has barbarism prevailed in the world, that it is almost disgraceful for nobles to be reckoned among the men of education and of letters! The chief boast. of the nobility was to be destitute of scholarship — nay, they gloried in the assertion, that they were “no scholars,” in the language of the day; and if any of their rank were versed in literature, they acquired their attainments for no other purpose than to be made bishops and abbots’ still, as I have said, they generally despised all literature. We perceive the age in which Daniel lived was not so barbarous, for the king wished to have these boys whom he caused to be so instructed, among his own princes, as we have said, to promote his own advantage; still we must remark upon the habit of that age. As to his requiring so much knowledge and skill, it may seem out of place, and more than their tender age admitted, that they should be so accomplished in prudence, knowledge, and experience. But we know that kings require nothing in moderation when they order anything to be prepared, they often ascend beyond the clouds. So Nebuchadnezzar speaks here; and Daniel, who relates his commands, does so in a royal manner. Since the king commanded all the most accomplished to be brought before him, if they really manifested any remarkable qualities, we need not be surprised at their knowledge, skill, and prudence. The king simply wished those boys and youths to be brought to him who were ingenious and dangerous, and adapted to learn with rapidly; and then those who were naturally eloquent and of a healthy constitution of body. For it follows directly, that they might learn, or be taught the literature and language of the Chaldees We perceive that King Nebuchadnezzar did not demand teachers, but boys of high birth, and good talents, and of promising abilities; he wished them to be liberally instructed in the doctrine of the Chaldees he was unwilling to have youths of merely polished and cultivated minds without natural abilities. His desire to have them acquainted with the language of Chaldea arose from his wish to separate them by degrees from their own nation, to introduce them to forget their Jewish birth, and to acquire the Chaldean manners, since language is a singular bond of communication. Respecting their learning, we may ask, whether Daniel and his companions were permitted to learn arts full of imposition, which we know to be the nature of the Chaldean learning. For they professed to know every one’s fate, as in these days there are many impostors in the world, who are called fortune-tellers. They abused an honorable name when they called themselves mathematicians, as if there were no scientific learning separate from those arts and diabolic illusions. And as to the use of the word, the Caesars, in their laws, unite Chaldeans and mathematicians, treating them as synonymous. But the explanation is easy, — the Chaldeans not only pursued that astrology which is called “Judicial,” but were also skilled in the true and genuine knowledge of the stars. The ancients say, that the course of the stars was observed by the Chaldeans, as there was no region of the world so full of them, and none possessed so extensive an horizon on all sides. As the Chaldeans enjoyed this advantage of having the heavens so fully exposed to the contemplation of man, this may have led to their study, and have conduced to the more earnest pursuit of astrology. But as the minds of men are inclined to vain and foolish curiosity, they were not content with legitimate science, but fell into foolish and perverse imaginations. For what fortune-tellers predict of any one’s destiny is merely foolish fanaticism. Daniel, therefore, might have learned these arts; that is, astrology and other liberal sciences, just as Moses is said to have been instructed in all the sciences of Egypt. We know how the Egyptians were infected with similar corruption’s; but it is said both of Moses and of our Prophet, that they were imbued with a knowledge of the stars and of the other liberal sciences. Although it is uncertain whether the king commanded them to proceed far in these studies, yet we must hold that Daniel abstained, as we shall see directly, from the royal food and drink, and was not drawn aside nor involved in these Satanic impostures. Whatever the king’s commandment was, I suppose Daniel to have been content with the pure and genuine knowledge of natural things. As far as the king is concerned, as we have already said, he consulted simply his own interests; wishing Daniel and his companions to pass over into a foreign tribe, and to be drawn away from their own people, as if they had been natives of Chaldea. It now follows —
(77) It can scarcely be correct to confound bodily with mental endowments. Wintle explains the three clauses very appositely, referring the first to “excellent natural abilities,” the second to “the greatest improvement from cultivation,” and the last to” the communication of our perceptions in the happiest manner to others.”
Fuente: Calvin’s Complete Commentary
(4) Children.If the Babylonian customs were similar to the Persian, it is probable that the course of education would commence at an early age. So elaborate a system of science as the Babylonian, whether theological, astronomical, or magical, would naturally require an early training. It is reasonable to suppose that these children were quite young. So much may be inferred from Nebuchadnezzars amazement at what he considered to be Daniels precocious genius (Dan. 2:26).
To stand, i.e., to act as courtiers or servants. (Comp. 2Ki. 5:25, and below, Dan. 1:19.)
Learning . . . Chaldeans.Many interesting specimens of this may be seen in the volumes of the Records of the Past, which are devoted to Assyrian and Babylonian subjects. Many more examples may be seen in the British Museum, and among them the large treatise on magic, which originally consisted of no less than two hundred tablets. It appears, from comparing this with Dan. 1:19, that some form of examination was held by the king, before he admitted the courtiers into his immediate service. The language of Chalda at this time was Semitic; but there was a sacred language in use besides, which probably belonged to the Turanian family. In both these languages was Daniel educated.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
4. These youths, who were selected to be schooled in “the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans” in the royal palace, were perfect physically, and with a pleasing presence a quality which was especially appreciated at the Babylonian court having good intellectual faculties, being quick to learn with able powers of discrimination, possessed of easy manners and the polite accomplishments essential to courtiers. Jephet Ibu Ali, the Kararite, in his comments, says that they had ability, that is, “force of patience, to stand before the king and abstain from expectorating!” The ordinary “tongue” of the Chaldeans was, of course, the Babylonian, which comes to us in the cuneiform inscriptions, although several languages, including Aramaic and Assyrian, must have been studied in the schools of this period, as is shown by the contract tables and magic formulas. The Babylonian literature was very extensive, as also the trade and political relations of the court with far distant nations. (See Introduction, III, 2.) Assurbanipal’s library, which he says was “for the instruction of my subjects,” was that of the palace school, and the students were instructed in mathematics, botany, zoology, astronomy, astrology, and the literary use of their own and various other languages, being especially drilled in the study of the ancient religious texts, which were written in a dead language (Sum-Akk.). It may be that the Sumerian, or ancient Babylonian, is meant as the particular tongue of the Chaldeans or “wise men.” These “Chaldeans” were the dominant race who in the sixth century B.C. and for centuries afterward monopolized the highest priestly and learned offices. It is not strange that the words “Chaldean” and “sorcerer” became almost synonymous terms, “for the magic art formed so large a part of the Babylonian religion that it can almost be considered its characteristic feature” (Zimmern). In later times the Chaldeans practiced necromancy of the grossest kind, and most abominable to pious Jews. The word may be used here, however, in the earlier sense, “learned men.” (See Introduction, II, 8.)
Fuente: Whedon’s Commentary on the Old and New Testaments
Dan 1:4 Children in whom [was] no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as [had] ability in them to stand in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.
Ver. 4. Children in whom was no blemish. ] Such as were Joseph, David, Artaxerxes Longimus, Germanicus, and others, in whom beauty proved to be the “flower of virtue,” as Chrysippus called it. Of Galba the emperor one said, that his good wit dwelt in an ill house, like an excellent instrument in a bad case; whereas Vatinius the Roman was not more misshapen in body than in mind. a The heathens also advise us to beware of those whom nature hath set a mark upon.
And skilful in all wisdom,
And such as had ability in them.
To stand in the king’s palace,] i.e., To do him service. This is that which learned men should aim at in these studies, viz., to lay forth themselves for the public good. Paulum sepultae distat inertiae Celata virtus, c
And whom they might teach the learning.
And the tongue of the Chaldee.
a Ingenium Galbae male habitat. Deformitas corporia cum turpitudine certavit ingenii. – Paterc.
b In Vit. Jul. Agrico.
c Horat.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
Children = Youths.
cunning = skilful.
in the king’s palace. The Inscriptions show that there was a palace school with elaborate arrangements for special education. See below on “Chaldeans”, and notes on Dan 2:2.
learning = character, or books. See Prof. Sayce’s Babylonian Literature: which shows the existence of a huge literature and famous libraries, in which were arrangements for procuring books from the librarian as in our own day. These books related to all subjects, and were classified according to their subjects (pp. 12-14).
tongue. This was a special and important department.
Chaldeans. A name not peculiar to Daniel. From Genesis onward it is met with, especially in Jeremiah. They were distinct from the Babylonians (Jer 22:25. Eze 23:23), and belonged to South Babylonia. Used here of a special class, well known as such at that time (Compare Dan 2:2, Dan 2:4, Dan 2:5, Dan 2:10), and distinct also from other learned classes (Dan 2:4). The word (Hebrew. Chasdim) is used also in the wider sense of a nationality (Dan 5:30). See Dr. Pinches on The Old Testament, p. 371; Rawlinson’s History of Herodotus, vol. i; pp 255, 256; and Lenormant’s The Ancient History of the East, i. pp. 493-5.
Fuente: Companion Bible Notes, Appendices and Graphics
Dan 1:4-21
The Brainwashing Begins
Dan 1:4-21
Mark Dunagan
Dan 1:4 These are the kings own specifications. They must come from neither the royal family (a descendant of David) or from the nobility (Dan 1:3). They must have no physical blemish or infirmity. They must be physically handsome and be mentally sharp. In ancient times (and even today), the outward appearance was thought to manifest an inner quality. Showing intelligence in every branch of wisdom: The ability to apply themselves to Chaldean and not merely Jewish subjects of wisdom. To teach them the literature and language of the Chaldeans: They must now learn the language and culture of the people among whom they now dwelt. They are to undergo an intensive three-year course of training. That educational program probably included a study of agriculture, architecture, astrology, astronomy, law, mathematics, and the difficult Akkadian language. The Babylonians had inherited the sexagesimal system from the ancient Sumerians. This system of numbering by sixties is still in use, i.e., sixty seconds in a minute, sixty minutes in an hour, and 360 degrees in a circle. Clay tablets have been found showing a common familiarity with measurement of the area of rectangles and right and isosceles triangles. An amazing knowledge of algebra is also shown in Babylonian literature, tablets of squares, square roots, cubes and cube roots. We need to be impressed that all this learning does not corrupt Daniel or go to his head (1:8). He is attending the most prestigious university of his time and yet he does not lose his faith and neither does he begin to look down upon the Scriptures.
Dan 1:5 A daily ration: It was customary for royalty to support its advisors and officers from the royal income (1Ki 4:22-23). Such meals were impressive and included the finest that the empire could offer. The term choice food or dainties probably refers to foods in which the king could afford to indulge, luxurious, costly, and rare delicacies.
Dan 1:6-7 How many were selected for this very special course of training we cannot say, four are mentioned as coming from the children of Judah. The name Daniel means, my judge is God. Hananiah meant, gracious is Yahweh. Mishael meant who is He that is God? Azariah meant, God hath helped. All the names are of a kind that might in evil days be given to children of godly parents. New names are now given to these young men, Belteshazzar means protect his life, Shadrach means command of Aku (Aku being the moon-god), Meshach means who is what Aku is? And Abed-nego means servant of Nebo, another Babylonian god. The change of name involved the idea that the god of those whom bestowed the new name was to be honored rather than the god of the vanquished. No doubt the purpose was to so completely assimilate these young men into the Babylonian culture that they would become, for all practical purposes, Babylonians and disassociate themselves completely from the Hebrew ways, even from their God.
Dan 1:8 But Daniel made up his mind that he would not defile himself with the kings choice food: Daniel could accept the new teaching, because he could filter it (Heb 5:12-14; 1Th 5:21-22; 1Ti 6:20), and the new languages because truth is truth in any language. He could accept the name change, because you cannot control what people from call you and he still knew that he was Daniel. The matter of eating from the kings table was another problem, seeing that many of these foods probably were violations of the Jewish food laws.
1) Instead of trying to divide up Gods laws into important and not-so-important laws, or moral verses ceremonial laws, Daniel knew that every command that God had given is important.
2) Daniel also knew that obeying the commands of God is not legalism.
3) Daniel knew that the way to resist temptation is to make up his mind; he knew the difference between obedience and disobedience, and that success or failure is the decision that is made in the heart.
4) Daniel understood that disobedience defiled himself, that the person truly affected or hurt by disobedience is ourselves.
Dan 1:8 So he sought permission: A devotion to Gods truth can be presented in away that is humble and respectful. Daniel was both courteous and courageous.
Dan 1:9 Now God granted Daniel favor and compassion in the sight of the commander: God is behind the scenes working. In addition, Daniels courteous attitude and good example also contributed to this favor. God not only works on the national and international level, He also works in the life of the individual.
Dan 1:10 I am afraid: Give the commander of the officials this much credit; he was a very conscientious about his job. Note the difference, this man feared Nebuchadnezzar, while Daniel feared Nebuchadnezzars Lord.
Dan 1:11-14 I am impressed that Daniel had a plan. Often we fail because we do not have a plan. If we are going to teach people, then we need to anticipate their objections (1Pe 3:15). Such planning will come naturally when we, like Daniel, take our service to God seriously. Since the law of Moses did not name any unclean vegetables, Daniel could safely eat all the Babylonian vegetables he wanted. Note that Gods children do not mind being tested. When we know our ground, we are not only willing to be tested we are eager for the trial (McGuiggian, p. 32). The word for vegetables here involves more than such things as peas and beans and would include wheat and other grains so that bread would also be part of their diet.
Dan 1:15-16 We need to note that Daniel is not trying to live on bread and water, but rather, the Babylonian kitchen certainly had access to many vegetables and vegetable dishes.
Dan 1:17 God gave them knowledge and intelligence in every branch of literature and wisdom: The first part of this verse may mean that God gave such knowledge to these men because they applied themselves, and they were providentially given the best teachers. The second part of the verse, Daniel even understood all kinds of visions and dreams, clearly refers to a miraculous giving by God.
Dan 1:18-20 Ten times better: Daniel and his friends, when questioned or critiqued by the king, give far better answers than the kings own personal advisors. Some complain, If the king thought them better than his wise men, why did not he call on them when he had the disturbing dream of chapter 2? Yet, a student or apprentice may show superior knowledge in some area over a teacher or craftsman and yet still be the second choice when it comes to obtaining advice and aid. The terms magicians and conjurers refers to those who practiced the arts of divination, which includes astrologers, palm-readers, and so on. Be impressed that learning that is applied with Gods truth is 10 times better in knowledge, discernment, and wisdom than the practices and theories of unbelievers. Daniel and his friends had the same basic learning as the magicians and conjurers. What made the difference was that Daniel and his friends had monitored their learning with the Scriptures, that is, what did not conflict with the Scriptures was embraced, what did, was rejected. Gods truth gave them the ability to rightly apply what they were learning.
Dan 1:21 Daniels service in the Babylonian royal court continued until the Babylonian Empire came to an end in 539 B.C.. Dan 10:1 tells us that Daniel received a vision in the third year of Cyrus. This passage informs us that Daniel survived on into the new empire. When the kingdom changed hands the man who had prophesized such a change was there!
Fuente: Old and New Testaments Restoration Commentary
Children: The word yeladim rendered children, is frequently used for lads, or young men (see Gen 21:8, Gen 21:14-16), , as the LXX render; and Daniel must have been at this time at least seventeen or eighteen years of age.
in whom: Lev 21:18-21, Lev 24:19, Lev 24:20, Jdg 8:18, 2Sa 14:25, Act 7:20, Eph 5:27
and skillful: Rather, as Houbigant renders, “apt to understand wisdom, to acquire knowledge, and to attain science;” for it was not a knowledge of the sciences, but merely a capacity to learn them, that was required. Dan 2:20, Dan 2:21, Dan 5:11, Ecc 7:19, Act 7:22
ability: Dan 1:17-20, Pro 22:29
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
Dan 1:4. The terms Chaldeans and Babylonians may be used interchangeably for all practical purposes, although the latter is nowhere used In the book of Daniel. For the information of the readers I shall quote from three works of reference: “The Chaldeans were a Semitic [descended from Shem] people who passed into Babylonia from the south, and occupied the whole seaeoast region of South Babylonia.- Funk and Wagnalls, New Standard Bible Dictionary, article Chaldea. “In the Old Testament, from the time Of Jeremiah and the establishment of the new Babylonian Empire under Nabopolassar and Nebuchadnezzar, the terms Chaldeans and Chaldees denote the inhabitants of Babylonia, or the subjects of the Babylonian Empire.-SchaffHerzog Encyclopaedia, article Chaldeans. “It appears that the Chaldeans were in the earliest times merely one out of the many Cushite tribes inhabiting the great alluvial plain known afterwards as Chaldea or Babylonia. Their special seat was probably that southern portion of the country which is found to have so late retained the name of Chaldea. In process of time, as the Kaldi grew in power, their name gradually prevailed over those of other tribes inhabiting the country; and by the era of the Jewish captivity it had begun to be used generally for all the inhabitants of Babylonia.
It appears that while, both in Assyria and In later Babylonia, the Shemitlc type of speech prevailed for civil purposes, the ancient Cushite dialect was retained, as a learned language for scientific and religious literature. This is no doubt the learning and the tongue to which reference is made in the book of Dan 1:4, The Chaldeans were really the learned class; they were priests, magicians or astronomers, and in the last of the three capacities they probably effected [accomplished] discoveries of great importance. In later times they seem to have degenerated into mere fortunetellers.” – Smiths Bible Dictionary, article, Chaldeans. When considering the subject from a political or national standpoint the two terms are used interchangeably and I trust the reader will keep that truth in mind. When some special personal characteristics are under consideration, the Chaldeans will be spoken of as a distinct group of people. Hence in this verse we see the reference to these special subjects which Nebuchadnezzar wished to develop in the lives of the Jews who had been selected out from the general population in Jerusalem. The mental qualifications were not the only points the king wished these Jews to have. Their bodies were to be without blemish and they were to be well favored. The last word is from MAKEH which Strong defines, “A view {the act of seeing); also an appearance (the thing seen), whether (real) a shape (especially if handsome, comeliness; often plural the looks), or (mental) a vision, The Babylonian king instructed his chief servant to select some Jews who already possessed these traits of mind and body, then he purposed to develop them further by a schedule of special diet.
Fuente: Combined Bible Commentary
1:4 Children in whom [was] no blemish, but well {f} favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as [had] ability in them to stand in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the {g} learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans.
(f) The King required three things: that they should be of noble birth, that they should be intelligent and learned, and that they should be of a strong and handsome nature, so that they might do him better service. This he did for his own benefit, therefore it is not to praise his liberality: yet in this he is worthy of praise, that he esteemed learning, and knew that it was a necessary means to govern by.
(g) That they might forget their own religion and country fashions to serve him the better to his purpose: yet it is not to be thought that Daniel learned any knowledge that was not godly. In all points he refused the abuse of things and superstition, insomuch that he would not eat the meat which the King appointed him, but was content to learn the knowledge of natural things.