Conflicting Traditions: The Interpretation of Daniel’s Four Kingdoms in the Ethiopic Commentary (Tergwāmē) Tradition

Abstract

In Daniel we encounter the scripturalization of the four kingdoms motif. The work itself presents the division of history into four temporal kingdoms (and one eternal one) as a sacred reality, embedding the motif within inspired dreams and visions. The acceptance of Daniel as canonical by the church and synagogue has ensured that two millennia of biblical interpreters have used the motif in their framing of world history and their understanding of the future. In this contribution I examine the reception of Daniel’s four kingdoms in one area typically overlooked in the study of biblical reception history: medieval Africa. The tergwāmē, or Geʿez (classical Ethiopic) commentaries to Daniel, continue the hermeneutical work already begun within Daniel itself by deciphering the symbols left untouched by the dream-interpreter Daniel and the interpreting angel. These commentaries do this in different ways, inheriting and developing various interpretive traditions that sometimes offer conflicting understandings of the identities of the body parts of the statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream and the four animals in Daniel’s. Within one of the commentaries these different traditions are identified, explained, allowed to coexist, and ultimately reconciled with each other. In bringing disparate traditions together the tergwāmē provide a good window into some of the issues in the broader reception history of Daniel’s four kingdoms and offer a glimpse into the Ethiopian commentary tradition.