Changes

</TABLE>

</TABLE>

'''Darius the Mede''' is a character appearing thrice in the biblical [[Book of Daniel]].  The exact identity of "Darius the Mede" remains the subject of heated debate representing "the last great hurdle to the contextually historical authenticity of book" with skeptics claiming him to be fictional and "historical harmonizers" suggesting that this is simply another name for a real historical individual.

'''Darius the Mede''' is a character appearing thrice in the biblical [[Book of Daniel]].  Meanwhile the exact identity of ''Darius the Mede'' remains the subject of heated debate representing''the last great hurdle to the contextually historical authenticity of book'': leading skeptics to claim that "Darius the Mead" to be nothing more than an easily dismissed fictional character, while reversely the class of "historical harmonizers" suggesting that ''Darius the Mede'' is simply another name for an existing historical figure.

This subject is further complicated by [[Josephus]] simply stating that Darius the Mede was the son of [[Astyages]] king of the Medes and that he was known to the Greeks by another name, without qualifying what that was. Meanwhile the broadly used "[[Herodotus|Father of History]]" also oft called "the Father of Lies" in his  dramatic recount, records that [[Astyages]] had no son, but rather tells how the kingdom passed directly to [[Cyrus the Great|Cyrus]] by force of arms (''Histories'' 1.109.3, 1.129.4). Yet [[Herodotus|Herodotus']] account stands in direct opposition to [[Xenophon|Xenophon's]] far more extensive and detailed book on the subject, which was written about 60 years later and was constantly studied by [[Alexander the Great]]. The [[Cyropaedia]] provides a natural solution to the question of the existence and identity of Darius the Mede. But with the only extant clay tablets and Ptolemy's Canon ''seeming'' to support the direct passage of power to [[Cyrus the Great|Cyrus II]] and the [[Behistun (inscription)|Behistun Inscription]] references to Cyaxares being questionable as to whether the Cyaxares in the Inscription is Cyaxares I, father of [[Astyages]] or Cyaxares II his son, the academic community remains divided.

This subject is further complicated by [[Josephus]] simply stating that Darius the Mede was the son of [[Astyages]] king of the Medes and that he was known to the Greeks by another name, without qualifying what that name was.

 

Meanwhile the broadly used "[[Herodotus|Father of History]]" also oft called "the Father of Lies" in his  dramatic recount, records that [[Astyages]] had no son, but rather tells how the kingdom passed directly to [[Cyrus the Great|Cyrus]] by force of arms <ref>[[Herodotus]], ''Histories'' 1.109.3, 1.129.4</ref>.

 

Thus [[Herodotus|Herodotus']] account stands in direct opposition to [[Josephus|Josephus']] statement and [[Xenophon|Xenophon's]] far more extensive and detailed book on the subject which when combined do provide a natural solution on the subject.

 

But with the only extant clay tablets and Ptolemy's Canon ''seeming'' to support the direct passage of power to [[Cyrus the Great|Cyrus II]] and the [[Behistun (inscription)|Behistun Inscription]] references to Cyaxares being questionable as to whether the Cyaxares in the Inscription is Cyaxares I, father of [[Astyages]] or Cyaxares II his son, the academic community remains divided.

Below in separate sections we shall examine each of the three instances with the finer details.  But immediately we shall examine the cases for each suggested individual.

Below in separate sections we shall examine each of the three instances with the finer details.  But immediately we shall examine the cases for each suggested individual.