Calendar Question, Altered Figure and Daniel 8

Nicolas

Hi forum,

In recent discussion, I came upon the following problems in connection with my research on the book of Daniel.

A. Time Aspect.

Some are publishing online document with the startling theory that the time period of 2300 days in Daniel 8:14 should be 2200 or 2400 days. They affirmed that the LXX used by Jesus Christ during his incarnate-state on earth has 2400 days. Another most startling affirmation is that Jerome affirms that there are a third series of manuscripts with 2200 days.

Current research done those past weeks have confirmed the figure 2300. However I will like to hear from anyone of you who may have more documentation on the historical aspect of the 2200 and 2400 alternatives.

It should be noted that:

1. All English Versions (Old Bibles, Bibles that heavily rely on the LXX and Vulgate, Most Reent Bibles, Protestant Bibles, Ecumenical Bibles, Catholic Bibles, Jewish Bibles) have the figure '2300'. An exception is to this is the GNB with the figure '1500,' which heavily depends on the '2300' figure.

2. There are no footnotes in any English Versions that I have inspected with deal with the alternate figures 2200 or 2400.

3. There are no references to the alternative figure in such commmentaries as Keil, Barnes, Clark, Henry, JFB, Stedman

4. The Vulgate has 2300 Days as in the MT.

5. The BHS and BHM have the figure 2300.

6. It is alledged that the LXX has the figure 2400 but the historical evidences point to a misprint in only one of the 6 available manuscripts. Please read the following quotation from the book Daniel and the Revelation by Uriah Smith: (a Seventh-day Adventist HIstoricist Interpreter)

“The question may be raised, Why does the Vatican edition of the Septuagint (LXX) render this number "twenty-four hundred days"? On this point S. P. Tregelles writes:.

"Some writers on prophecy have, in their explanations or interpretations of this vision, adopted the reading 'two thousand and four hundred days;' and in vindication of it, they have referred to the common printed copies of the LXX version. In this book, however, the translation of Theodotion has been long substituted for the real LXX: and further, although 'two thousand four hundred' is found in the common printed Greek copies, that is merely an erratum made in printing the Vatican edition of 1586, which has been habitually perpetuated. I looked (in 1845) at the passage in the Vatican MS., which the Roman editions professedly followed, and it read exactly the same as the Hebrew text ["twenty-three hundred days"]; so also does the real LXX of Daniel. (So too Cardinal Mai's edition from the Vatican MS. which appeared in 1857)." [8]

“Further substantiating the veracity of the twenty-three-hundred-day period, we quote the
following:

"The edition of the Greek Bible which is commonly used, is printed, as you will find it stated in Prideaux and Horne, not after that of the 70, but after that of Theodotion, made about the end of the second century. There are three principal standard editions of the Septuagint bible, all containing the version of Daniel by Theodotion; viz., the Complutensian, published in 1514; the Aldine, 1518; and the Vatican, 1587, from which the last English editions of the 70 have been chiefly taken; to these three we may add a fourth, being that of the Alexandrian text, published between 1707 and 1720. Besides these, there is one called the Chisian, 1772, which contains the Greek text both of Theodotion and of the 70. Of all these six copies the Vatican alone reads 2400, all the rest agreeing with the Hebrew and our English Bibles. Moreover, the manuscript itself, in the Vatican, from which the edition was printed, has 2300, and not 2400, and therefore it is indisputable that the number 2400 is nothing but a misprint." [9]

“These quotations show clearly that no confidence whatever can be placed in this rendering of the Vatican edition of the Septuagint.

The footnotes refer to the following works:

[8] S. P. Tregelles, Remarks on the Prophetic Visions in the Book of Daniel, p. 89, footnote.
[9] Dialogues on Prophecy, Vol. I, pp. 326, 327.

7. Concerning the 2200 days, the Late G. F. Hasel wrote the following statement:

“He [Jerome] also referred to “some authorities” who worked with the figure of 2200 rather than 2300. We do not know what Porphyry thought about this time period, but he might have been one of those persons to whom Jerome referred in this way.” Daniel and Revelation Committee 2:328.

Any further information will be greatly appreciated.

B. Chronological Aspect

I am looking for in-depth information regarding the type of calendars used by Jewish Scribe during:

the Immediate Pre-exilic,
exilic and
Post-exilic period.

Please give me the references as well.

God Bless U.

Nicolas T. MARIE