Every week, one Greek or Hebrew word changes how you read a familiar passage. Subscribe free →
BibleWord.ai iconBibleWord.ai

Attributed commentary excerpt

John Gill's Exposition on Daniel 8:2

A historical reference excerpt for this verse. Read it alongside the biblical text and other available sources.

Exposition of the Old and New Testament
John Gill (1697–1771) · 18th-century historical commentary
Source: BibleWord.ai's local reference edition of this named work.
And I saw in a vision, etc.] The following things: and it came to pass, when I saw, that I was at Shushan in the palace, which is in the province of Elam; not in reality, but so it seemed to him in the vision; as Ezekiel, when in Babylon, seemed in the visions of God to be at Jerusalem, (<260803>Ezekiel 8:3). This city Shushan, or Susa, as it is called by other writers, and signifies a “lily”, was so called from the plenty of lilies that grew about it, or because of the pleasantness of it; it was the metropolis of the country Susiana, which had its name from it, and was afterwards the royal seat of the kings of Persia. This was first made so by Cyrus; for Strabof313 says, that he and the Persians having overcome the Medes, observing that their own country was situated in the extreme parts, and Susa more inward, and nearer to other nations, being, as he says, between Persia and Babylon, set his royal palace in it; approving both the nearness of the country, and the dignity of the city. Here the kings of Persia laid up their treasures, even prodigious large ones; hence Aristagoras told Cleomenes, that if he could take that city, he would vie, and might contend, with Jupiter for richesf314; for hither Cyrus carried whatever money he had in Persia, even forty thousand talents, some say fiftyf315. Alexanderf316, when he took this city, found a vast quantity of riches in it. It is called here a palace; and so it is spoken of by Herodotusf317, Diodorus Siculusf318, Pausaniusf319, Plinyf320, and others, as a royal city, where were the residence and palace of the kings of Persia; but the royal palace was not in it at this time; the kings of Babylon had their palace and kept their court at Babylon, where Daniel was; but in vision it seemed to him that he was in Shushan, and which was represented to him as a palace, as it would be, and as the metropolis of the kingdom of Persia, which he had a view of in its future flourishing condition, and as destroyed by Alexander; for, as before observed, it was Cyrus that first made it a royal city; whereas this vision was in the third year of Belshazzar, king of Babylon. Some versions render it, a “tower” or “castle”; and so several writers, as Strabof321 Plutarchf322 and Plinyf323, speak of the tower or castle in it. Diodorus Siculusf324 says, when Antigonus took the tower of Susa, he found in it a golden vine, and a great quantity of other works, to the value of fifteen thousand talents; and out of crowns, and other gifts and spoils, he made up five thousand more. And Polybiusf325 relates, that though Molon took the city, yet could not take the fortress, and was obliged to raise the siege, so strong it was. It must be a mistake of Plinyf326 that this city was built by Darius Hystaspes; he could only mean it was rebuilt, or rather enlarged, by him, since it was in being long before his time, and even a royal city in the times of Cyrus. Strabof327 says it was built by Tithon the father of Merenon, was in compass a fifteen miles, of an oblong figure, and the tower was called after his father’s name Mernnonia; and Shushan itself is called, by Herodotusf328, Susa Memnonia. At this day, with the common people, it goes by the name of Tusterf329. The east gate of the mountain of the house, which led to the temple at Jerusalem, was called Shushan. Some sayf330 there was a building over this gate, on which the palace of Shushan was portrayed, from whence it had its name. The reason of this portrait is differently…

This public page shows a contextual excerpt from the locally available source text.

How to use this source
This excerpt is attributed to its named commentary. It is included as a historical study resource and should be evaluated in light of Scripture and other relevant evidence.