Skip to Content.
Sympa Menu

b-hebrew - Re: [b-hebrew] First temple destroyed 586 or 587 BCE?

b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org

Subject: Biblical Hebrew Forum

List archive

Chronological Thread  
  • From: "Harold R. Holmyard III" <hholmyard AT ont.com>
  • To: b-hebrew AT lists.ibiblio.org
  • Subject: Re: [b-hebrew] First temple destroyed 586 or 587 BCE?
  • Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2004 07:30:40 -0500

Dear Yigal,

Where did all this come from? Cyrus II (The Great) became king of the
Persians in 559, and conquered Babylon in 539. His proclamation was issued
in that year or the next. He died in 530 and was succeeded by his son
Cambyses. Cambyses stabbed himself to death under strange circumstances in
522, which is when Darius took over. "Darius the Mede" is an invention of
Daniel - there was no such king.

HH: There are other ways of handling the problem than declaring Darius the Mede a fiction.

John Whitcomb identified Darius the Mede of Daniel 6 with "Gubaru, the Governor of Babylon," a person known from inscriptions as Cyrus' governor over Babylon, who appointed sub-governors.
http://xxx.infidels.org/~ltaylor/bible-notes/Whitcomb-darius.html

HH: Here is this same idea presented by the International Standard Bible Encyclopedia:
http://www.studylight.org/enc/isb/view.cgi?number=T2531

In the original Persian it is spelled "Darayavaush"; in Babylonian, usually "Dariamush"; in Susian(?), "Tariyamaush"; in Egyptian "Antaryuash"; on Aramaic inscriptions, d-r-y-h-w-sh or d-r-y-w-h-w-sh; in Hebrew, dareyawesh; in Greek, Dareios; in Latin, "Darius." In meaning it is probably connected with the new Persian word Dara, "king." Herodotus says it means in Greek, Erxeies, coercitor, "restrainer," "compeller," "commander."

(1) Darius the Mede (Daniel 6:1; 11:1) was the son of Ahasuerus (Xerxes) of the seed of the Medes (Daniel 9:1). He received the government of Belshazzar the Chaldean upon the death of that prince (Daniel 5:30,31; 6:1), and was made king over the kingdom of the Chaldeans.

From Daniel 6:28 we may infer that Darius was king contemporaneously with Cyrus. Outside of the Book of Daniel there is no mention of Darius the Mede by name, though there are good reasons for identifying him with Gubaru, or Ugbaru, the governor of Gutium, who is said in the Nabunaid-Cyrus Chronicle to have been appointed by Cyrus as his governor of Babylon after its capture from the Chaldeans. Some reasons for this identification are as follows:

(a) Gubaru is possibly a translation of Darius. The same radical letters in Arabic mean "king," "compeller," "restrainer." In Hebrew, derivations of the root mean "lord," "mistress," "queen"; in Aramaic, "mighty," "almighty."

(b) Gutium was the designation of the country North of Babylon and was in all possibility in the time of Cyrus a part of the province of Media.

(c) But even if Gutium were not a part of Media at that time, it was the custom of Persian kings to appoint Medes as well as Persians to satrapies and to the command of armies. Hence, Darius-Gubaru may have been a Mede, even if Gutium were not a part of Media proper.

(d) Since Daniel never calls Darius the Mede king of Media, or king of Persia, it is immaterial what his title or position may have been before he was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans. Since the realm of the Chaldeans never included either Media or Persia, there is absolutely no evidence in the Book of Daniel that its author ever meant to imply that Darius the Mede ever ruled over either Media or Persia.

(e) That Gubaru is called governor (pihatu), and Darius the Mede, king, is no objection to this identification; for in ancient as well as modern oriental empires the governors of provinces and cities were often called kings.

Moreover, in the Aramaic language, no more appropriate word than "king" can be found to designate the ruler of a sub-kingdom, or province of the empire.

(f) That Darius is said to have had 120 satraps under him does not conflict with this; for the Persian word "satrap" is indefinite as to the extent of his rule, just like the English word "governor." Besides, Gubaru is said to have appointed pihatus under himself. If the kingdom of the Chaldeans which he received was as large as that of Sargon he may easily have appointed 120 of these sub-rulers; for Sargon names 117 subject cities and countries over which he appointed his prefects and governors.

(g) The peoples, nations and tongues of chapter 6 are no objection to this identification; for Babylonia itself at this time was inhabited by Babylonians, Chaldeans, Arabians, Arameans and Jews, and the kingdom of the Chaldeans embraced also Assyrians, Elamites, Phoenicians and others within its limits.

(h) This identification is supported further by the fact that there is no other person known to history that can well be meant. Some, indeed, have thought that Darius the Mede was a reflection into the past of Darius Hystaspis; but this is rendered impossible inasmuch as the character, deeds and empire of Darius Hystaspis, which are well known to us from his own monuments and from the Greek historians, do not resemble what Daniel says of Darius the Mede.

HH: Another suggestion I have heard is that Darius the Mede was a dynastic name for Cyrus himself. This theory was put forward by Donald Wiseman, and also by J. M. Bulman:

D. J. Wiseman, Notes on Some Problems in the Book of Daniel (1965), pp. 9-16
J. M. Bulman, Westminster Theological Journal 35 (1973) 247-67

HH: Here are a couple more suggestions:
http://www.nisbett.com/people/bp-darius.htm

Various modern attempts to identify this Darius have resulted in several theories, none of them free from difficulties. One theory equates him with Cambyses, Cyrus' son and successor, who ruled jointly with his father for a time; another equates him with Gobryas, the officer of Cyrus who actually took the city of Babylon, and may have ruled the conquered Babylonian kingdom under Cyrus for a year or so. Another explanation, plausible enough, is that Darius is another name for Cyaxares II, the son of Astyages, who according to the Greek writer Xenophon was Cyrus' uncle and father-in-law, and whom Cyrus might have retained temporarily as a figurehead king to please the Medes. The fact that the Persian account of the fall of Babylon to Cyrus begins Cyrus' reign in Babylon immediately, without any intervening reign of Darius the Mede, does not contradict the Biblical narrative. Darius was evidently recognised as a ruler in Babylon by courtesy of Cyrus, while it was Cyrus who actually held the power (see Is 45:1). It was natural that Daniel, in direct contact with Darius, should speak of him as the "king" and mention his "first year" (Dan 9:1). It seems evident that we are to consider the accession year and 1st year of Darius the Mede as coinciding with the same years of Cyrus. The lack of conclusive evidence as to the identity of Darius the Mede must not lead one to question the Bible statements concerning this ruler, for future finds may clarify the problem, as archaeology has already done for Belshazzar, who puzzled earlier historians.

Yours,
Harold Holmyard




Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.

Top of Page