In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia: the ancient Greek translation reads “In the first year of King Cyrus,” but modern English versions do not follow this reading. Compare 7.1 and comments.
A word was revealed: this clearly refers to more than a single word (King James Version has “a thing”). Moffatt translates “a revelation was made.” In some languages it may be wise to follow the Good News Translation model and translate “a message was revealed”; but in those cases where passive forms cause difficulties, it will be better to restructure the sentence and say “a revelation came to Daniel” (Revised English Bible), “God revealed a matter to Daniel,” or something similar. Translators should understand that the word … revealed and the vision mentioned at the end of this verse are not identical. The vision came later in order to explain the revelation.
Who was named Belteshazzar: see 1.7; 2.26; 4.8. In order to avoid the passive, it is fitting to say “whom the king had named Belteshazzar.”
The word was true: literally “the word was sealed.” In ancient times the use of a seal was a guarantee that a document was legitimate. It served to confirm the truth of what was contained in the writing. So this phrase emphasizes the fact that what God revealed to Daniel was authentic. If word is translated “message” earlier, then the same rendering should probably be used again to ensure that the reader understands that the reference is to the “word that was revealed.”
And it was a great conflict: the meaning of the two Hebrew words translated by this clause is unclear. Some have taken them as a description of the war waged by the angels in verses 12-21 at the end of the chapter. They have thus been translated “it concerned a great war” (New International Version) or “it concerned a great conflict” (New Revised Standard Version). While this meaning is certainly possible, it is more likely that the two difficult words refer to the struggle involved in understanding the message. These words may be taken, as in Good News Translation, to mean that the matter revealed to Daniel required a real mental struggle to understand; that is, it was extremely difficult to comprehend. Revised English Bible translates “yet only after much struggle (did understanding come to him in the course of the vision).” And New Jerusalem Bible renders the same expression “it was a great task (to understand the prophecy).”
He understood the word and had understanding of the vision: this literal rendering of the original is not very natural in English. The meaning is stated more clearly in the following renderings: “he paid heed to the revelation and understood the vision” (Moffatt); “understanding came to him through the vision” (New Jerusalem Bible); “He paid attention to the oracle, so that he understood the revelation” (Anchor Bible).
This verse is clearly different from what follows, since Daniel is here referred to by a third person singular pronoun. In the verses that follow, the first person singular pronoun is used. For this reason some early editions of Good News Translation placed this verse within parentheses. But this is not necessary. It will be sufficient to set it off as a separate paragraph, as in the later editions of Good News Translation and in most other versions.
Quoted with permission from Péter-Contesse, René & Ellington, John. A Handbook on Daniel. (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1994. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .