I saw, &c. The substance of what the king relates is, that he saw in a dream “a tree, strong and flourishing; [ in the midst of the earth, or of his empire;] its summit pierced the clouds, and its branches overshadowed the whole extent of his vast dominions: it was laden with fruit, and luxuriant in its foliage: the cattle reposed in its shade, and the fowls of the air lodged in its branches, and multitudes partook of its delicious fruit. But the king saw a celestial being, a watcher, and a holy one, come down from heaven; and heard him give orders, with a loud voice, that the tree should be hewn down, its branches lopped off, and its fruit scattered, and nothing left of it but the stump of its roots in the earth, which was to be secured, however, with a band of iron and brass, in the tender grass of the field. Words of menace follow, which are applicable only to a man, and plainly show, that the whole vision was typical of some dreadful calamity, to fall for a time, but for a time only, on some one of the sons of men.” Bishop Horsley. The whole of this allegorical dream is explained in the subsequent part of the chapter; and therefore it will only be necessary to notice here two or three of the singular expressions and particulars found in it.
1st, By the terms watcher and holy one, or, as the expression is, Daniel 4:17, watchers and holy ones, has generally been understood some principal angel, or angels, the angelical orders being described as always attending upon God's throne to receive and execute his commands: see Psalms 103:20; Matthew 18:10; and notes on Ezekiel 1:11; Ezekiel 1:24. For which reason they are called the eyes of the Lord, Zechariah 4:10. But Bishop Horsley, in his sermon on the 17th verse, strongly combats, and seems to have fully confuted this opinion. His train of reasoning is too long to be inserted here, and indeed it is not necessary to insert it, the following short extract being quite sufficient to clear up the point. “Those who understand the titles of watchers and holy ones of angelic beings, agree, that they must be principal angels angels of the highest orders; which, if they are angels at all, must certainly be supposed: for it is to be observed, that it is not the mere execution of the judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar, but the decree itself, which is ascribed to them. The whole matter originated in their decree; and at their command the decree was executed. The holy ones are not said to hew down the tree, but to give command for the hewing of it down. Of how high order, indeed, must these watchers and holy ones have been, on whose decrees the judgments of God himself are founded, and by whom the warrant for the execution is finally issued? It is surprising, that such men as Calvin among the Protestants of the continent such as Wells and the elder Lowth in our own church and such as Calmet in the Church of Rome, should not have their eyes open to the error, and impiety indeed, of such an exposition as this which makes them angels, especially when the learned Grotius, in the extraordinary manner in which he recommends it, had set forth its merits, as it should seem, in a true light, when he says, that it represents God as acting like a great monarch ‘upon a decree of his senate:' and when another of the most learned of its advocates imagines something might pass in the celestial senate, bearing some analogy to the forms of legislation used in the assemblies of the people at Rome, in the times of the republic. It might have been expected that the exposition would have needed no other confutation, in the judgment of men of piety and sober minds, than this fair statement of its principles by its ablest advocates. “The plain truth is, that these appellations, Watchers and Holy Ones, denote the persons in the Godhead; the first describing them by the vigilance of their universal providence, the second by the transcendent sanctity of their nature. The word rendered Holy Ones is so applied in other texts of Scripture, which make the sense of the other word, coupled with it here, indisputable. In perfect consistency with this exposition, and with no other, we find, in the 24th verse, that this decree of the Watchers and the Holy Ones is the decree of the Most High God; and in Daniel 4:13, God, who in regard to the plurality of the persons, is afterward described by these two plural nouns, Watchers and Holy Ones, is, in regard to the unity of the essence, described by the same nouns in the singular number, Watcher and Holy One. And this is a fuller confirmation of the truth of this exposition: for God is the only being to whom the same name in the singular and in the plural may be indiscriminately applied: and this change from the one number to another, without any thing in the principles of the language to account for it, is frequent in speaking of God in the Hebrew tongue, but unexampled in the case of any other being. The assertion, therefore, is, that God had decreed to execute a signal judgment upon Nebuchadnezzar for his pride and impiety, in order to prove, by the example of that mighty monarch, that ‘the Most High ruleth in the kingdom of men, and giveth it to whomsoever he will, and setteth up over it the basest of men.' To make the declaration the more solemn and striking, the terms in which it is conceived distinctly express that consent and concurrence of all the persons in the Trinity, in the design and execution of this judgment, which must be understood indeed in every act of the Godhead.”
2d, The command given by these watchers and holy ones may be considered as addressed to any of those creatures, animate or inanimate, that are to fulfil the Creator's will; or the expression may be understood as being merely a prediction that the tree should be cut down, and its leaves shaken off, &c: and the hewing down of the tree signified only the removal of it for a time, not its entire destruction, because while the root remained in the ground new shoots might break forth, and so the tree grow up again. When it is added, let the beasts get away from under it, the meaning evidently is, let not his subjects rely upon him for protection, for he shall not be in a condition to afford them any, or to be the author of any good to them. Nevertheless (it is further commanded) leave the stump of his roots in the earth By which is signified, that Nebuchadnezzar's kingdom should be preserved to him, and that no one should seize upon it during his exile, or affliction. The words, with a band of iron and brass, were meant to give still further assurance that his kingdom should remain unshaken and sure to him, like things held firm and immoveable by iron or brass. The next expression, in the tender grass of the field, either alludes to the circumstance of the stump of a tree lying buried and neglected in the field, till it is overgrown with grass and herbs, and so is not noticed; or it is a transition from the sign to the thing signified, from the tree to Nebuchadnezzar, represented by it, the tree with its stump being lost sight of, and a person coming in its stead, to whom only what follows is applicable. Let his heart be changed from man's “It is hard to say what the real nature of this transformation was. The Syriac seems to incline to a change of the mind, and probably it means no more than that his heart, or the nature of his constitution, was made savage and brutish, either by a real madness, or by such a slovenly neglect of himself, or deprivation of the proper use of his speech and limbs, as might reduce him to a state like the beasts. There is a kind of madness called lycanthropy, wherein men have the fury of wolves.” Wintle. See Univ. Hist., p. 964. Scaliger thinks this madness of Nebuchadnezzar is obscurely hinted at in a document of Abydenus, produced by Eusebius; wherein, having represented the king, from the Chaldean writers, to have fallen into an ecstasy, and to have foretold the destruction of that empire by the Medes and Persians, the author adds, that immediately after uttering this prophecy he disappeared; which Scaliger expounds of the king's being driven from his kingly state, and the society of men: see Scaliger's notes upon the Ancient Fragments in the appendix to his work de Emendatione Temporum. See also Houbigant and Calmet on the metamorphosis of Nebuchadnezzar. And let seven times pass over him Literally, Till seven times be changed upon him, that is, seven years, for so the expression evidently signifies in several parts of this book, as we shall see hereafter.