and research, than in any other English work of the kind, we should anticipate for it a very high, if not the highest place, among English commentaries on Daniel. We doubt not a brief outline or analysis of the exposition will be acceptable to our readers. We shall, therefore, present it here, noting, when it may seem necessary, the points where our author diverges from the usual course of exposition, or differs from those who have been regarded as authorities. We say nothing of the historical part,