The four young Hebrews (Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, Azariah) receive new Babylonian names (Belteshazzar, Shadrach, Meshach, Abednego). The change aims to erase their Hebrew religious identity (centered on the God of Israel) and to integrate them into Babylonian culture by associating them with the local deities.
The Hebrew names and their meaning
Daniel: “God is my judge”
Hananiah: “Yahweh has shown grace”
Mishael: “Who is like God?”
Azariah: “Yahweh has helped”
All these names contain a direct reference to God (El or Yah), affirming their religious identity and their bond with the God of Israel.
Details on the Babylonian names
-
Belteshazzar (Daniel)
Origin: linked to the god Bel/Marduk, the principal deity of Babylon.
Probable meaning: “Protected by Bel” or “May Bel protect his life.”
Context: Marduk was regarded as the supreme god, patron of Babylon. To associate Daniel with him was to integrate him into the official religion.
Contrast: Daniel means “God is my judge.” The new name shifts authority from the God of Israel to Bel, the god of Babylon.
-
Shadrach (Hananiah)
Origin: probably linked to Aku, the moon god, or to Marduk.
Possible meaning: “Command of Aku” or “Servant of Marduk.”
Context: Aku was a secondary deity, but one associated with the celestial cycles and with destiny.
Contrast: Hananiah means “Yahweh has shown grace.” The new name erases divine grace and replaces it with the authority of an astral god.
-
Meshach (Mishael)
Origin: derived from the root of the Hebrew name, but transformed.
Probable meaning: “Who is like Aku?”
Context: It is a parody of the original name “Who is like God?” The interrogative structure is kept, but God is replaced by Aku.
Contrast: This change is particularly ironic: it diverts a name that proclaimed the uniqueness of God and applies it to a pagan deity.
-
Abednego (Azariah)
Origin: linked to the god Nabu, god of wisdom, writing and scribes.
Probable meaning: “Servant of Nabu.”
Context: Nabu was greatly revered in Mesopotamia and, through his role as divine scribe, was considered the keeper of destinies.
Contrast: Azariah means “Yahweh has helped.” The new name turns the identity into that of a servant of a foreign god, instead of recalling the help of the God of Israel.
Overall meaning of the change
Religious erasure: the Hebrew names directly recalled Yahweh; the Babylonian names tie them to the local deities.
Cultural assimilation: it is a way of saying: “You now belong to Babylon, not to Judah.”
Inner resistance: despite these imposed names, the account shows that Daniel and his companions remain faithful to the God of Israel. Their deepest identity cannot be erased by an outward change.
Conclusion
The change of names in Daniel 1 is an illustration of the tension between identity and assimilation. The Babylonians seek to reshape these young men by integrating them into their culture and religion. But the account stresses that true identity does not depend on an imposed name, but on inner faithfulness.
The new names erase the reference to the God of Israel and associate them with the Babylonian deities, marking an attempt at cultural and religious assimilation.
This contrast between Hebrew names (God at the center) and Babylonian names (pagan deities) can show how identity may be challenged outwardly yet preserved inwardly.