Journal: Journal of the Evangelical Theological Society
Volume: JETS 21:4 (Dec 1978)
Article: Qumran And The Dating Of Daniel
Author: Robert I. Vasholz

JETS 21:4 (December 1978) p. 315

Qumran And The Dating Of Daniel

Robert I. Vasholz*

*Robert Vasholz is assistant professor of Old Testament language and literature at Covenant Theological Seminary, St. Louis, Missouri.

The current situation on the implications of the philological contributions of the Aramaic documents from Qumran (lQapGen and llQtgJob) needs to be stated. This is especially so regarding the dating of the canonical Daniel.

From about the turn of the century, a number of scholars have endeavored to date the book of Daniel by analyzing its Aramaic.1 S. R. Driver’s second-century date for Daniel paved the way for the majority of critical scholars as a fixed certainty: Daniel is a second-century-B.C. document.

More recently, however, the possibility of a pre-second-century dating for the Aramaic in Daniel has been offered. “The Aramaic of Daniel” by K. A. Kitchen has, in our opinion, updated this issue and should be the current focal point for modem study on the subject.2 To understand the present state of affairs we must summarize Kitchen’s conclusions.

The first point of his discussion concerns vocabulary. Kitchen notes that about ninety per cent of the Aramaic vocabulary in Daniel occurs in fifth-century texts or earlier and maintains that words appearing in the fifth century presuppose their existence in the sixth century. Akkadian loan words in Aramaic are of no significance for dating since Aramaean migration into Mesopotamia from southern Babylonia persisted from the twelfth century B.C. All Persian words in Daniel are from Old Persian and therefore certainly plausible (even suggestive)

JETS 21:4 (December 1978) p. 316

for a pre-second-century dating.3 As far as the Greek loan words are concemed, an insinuation that their appearance demands a date posterior to Alexander the Great is now absurd. An avalanche of evidence has demonstrated the presence of the Greek language in the Semitic milieu long before the sixth century B.C.4 Therefore since almost all of the vocabulary in Daniel is attested in the fifth century B.C. or earlier, and since the influence of foreign loan words may also precede the fifth century B.C., it is not reasonable to exclude a pre-second-centuryB.C. date for the Aramaic of Daniel on the basis of vocabulary.

With regard to the orthography of Daniel, especially in comparison with the Elephantine papyri, the latter demonstrate lapses into phonetic spelling and false archaisms. The Elephantine papyri, therefore, are not a relia...