Daniel in the Lions Den

Who can tell me which is a more accurate picture? .... and why?

Good points Savannah.
I found this picture... but it is not accurate

This one is better but still not very accurate...



You brought good points Savannah but it is not what I was looking for.

Give up?

Do you have to be familiar with the details of the story to notice the inaccuracy?

Rob wrote:

Do you have to be familiar with the details of the story to notice the inaccuracy?

Nope

Savannah wrote:

Are you referring to the hair? As in . . . there shouldn't BE any?

You are VERY VERY close!!!! But WHOSE hair?

Okay....You lost me there if you're talking about the lions.

Are you looking for something about the lions, i.e. something about the male/female ratio of the lions? Or that these are African lions? Would they even be this kind of lion?

amyk wrote:

Or that these are African lions?

YOU GOT IT!!!!!

I'll explain in a bit...

Most people... when they think of lions... they all think about this guy:



But not many people remember the Asiatic lion.



Compared to the African lion, the male Asiatic lion has a relatively short, darker, sparse mane.

It was the Asiatic lion which spawned the stories of Hercules and the Nemean lion, Daniel in the lions den, Samson choking the lion and king Davids training years against lions threatening his flock. These are the lions of the bible.

So.. in looking at the pictures I was looking for the lions the mostly resembled the lions of Asia

Wow, that IS a good catch, amyk!! I would never have gotten that in a million years!

Very interesting, Carol!

I just presumed that the king was a showoff and didn't want "common" lions in HIS den.

Savannah wrote:

Ha - technically, it should be a mixture of both. Daniel was a high-ranking official, and so would have likely been wearing rather elaborate clothing...So in that aspect, the second picture is probably more accurate. However, the Bible says that a stone was rolled onto the mouth of the lions den, and it was sealed. The next morning, the king had the stone rolled away and he called down into the den, asking Daniel if his God had been able to deliver him from the lions - The king couldn't see into the den. So in that way, the first picture is more accurate.

Yes, I think that is Savannah who is right.

In general, artistic works representing some event of world history are not too much accurate. We must have a mixing of two or more of them about the same event to see et accurately portrayed. My branch of history is French Revolution and I've read about the execution of Robespierre and his friends and one of them was depicted as being guillotined all injured, covered by blood and dressed only with a long, white shirt...Well; in some paintings you could see him without a drop of blood over him and dressed like a dandy...Oh, well. Art is art, and reality is reality...

Vanesa.

Everyone's idea was better than mine I reckon. I was thinking in military reasoning; It's a tie. Stand perfectly still and you won't get attacked. No movement, they can smell you, but can't sense another living creature.

Yeah, that's a boring answer.

flatbroke wrote:

Everyone's idea was better than mine I reckon. I was thinking in military reasoning; It's a tie. Stand perfectly still and you won't get attacked. No movement, they can smell you, but can't sense another living creature.

Yeah, that's a boring answer.

Vanesa