at, 'in the second year of his reign'
(v. 1), waking thoughts of the future of his monarchy should trouble the
warrior-king, scarcely yet firm on his throne, and should repeat
themselves in nightly visions? God spoke through the dream, and He is
not wont to answer questions before they are asked, nor to give
revelations to men on points which they have not sought to solve. We may
be sure that Nebuchadnezzar's dream met his need.

The unreasonable demand that the 'Chaldeans' should show the dream as
well as interpret it, fits the character of the king, as an imperious
despot, intolerant of obstacles to his will, and holding human life very
cheap. Daniel's knowledge of the dream and of its meaning is given to
him in a vision by night, which is the method of divine illumination
throughout the book, and may be regarded as a lower stage thereof than
the communications to prophets of 'the word of the Lord.'

The passage falls into two parts: the image and the stone.

I. The Image.

It was a human form of strangely mingled materials, of giant size no
doubt, and of majestic aspect. Barbarous enough it would have looked
beside the marble lovelinesses of Greece, but it was quite like the
coarser art which sought for impressiveness through size and costliness.
Other people than Babylonian sculptors think that bigness is greatness,
and dearness preciousness.

This image embodied what is now called a philosophy of history. It set
forth the fruitful idea of a succession and unity in the rise and fall
of conquerors and kingdoms. The four empires represented by it are
diverse, and yet parts of a whole, and each following on the other. So
the truth is taught that history is an organic whole, however unrelated
its events may appear to a superficial eye. The writer of this book had
learned lessons far in advance of his age, and not yet fully grasped by
many so-called historians.

But, further, the human figure of the image sets forth all these
kingdoms as being purely the work of men. Not that the overruling divine
providence is ignored, but that the play of human passions, the lust of
conquest and the like, and the use of human means, such as armies, are
emphasised.

Again, the kingdoms are seen in their brilliancy, as they would
naturally appear to the thoughts of a conqueror, whose highest notion of
glory was earthly dominion, and who was indifferent to the suffering and
blood through which he waded to a throne. When the same k