Changes

As discussed at the start, while the character of [[Cyaxares II]] is not generally accepted amidst the classical histories such as [[Herodotus]], the reconstructed fragments of [[Ctesias]], the [[Uruk King Lit]], the [[Ptolemy's Canon|Cannon of Ptolemy]]<ref>Ptolemy's ''Canon''[https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/ptolemys-canon/]</ref> or even on a currently available clay tablet (other than two possible references in the [[Behistun (inscription)|Behistun Inscription]]), [[Cyaxares II]] presents the most natural solution to the problem and is the summary position of several Bible commentaries such as: ''Benson Commentary''<ref>Benson Commentary, Daniel 9:1 [https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/9.htm]</ref><ref>Benson Commentary, Daniel 6:1[https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/6.htm]</ref><ref>Benson Commentary, Daniel 5:30-31 [https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/5.htm]</ref> ''Barnes Notes''<ref>Barnes Notes, Daniel 9:1[https://biblehub.com/commentaries/barnes/daniel/9.htm]</ref> & the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentaries.

As discussed at the start, while the character of [[Cyaxares II]] is not generally accepted amidst the classical histories such as [[Herodotus]], the reconstructed fragments of [[Ctesias]], the [[Uruk King Lit]], the [[Ptolemy's Canon|Cannon of Ptolemy]]<ref>Ptolemy's ''Canon''[https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/ptolemys-canon/]</ref> or even on a currently available clay tablet (other than two possible references in the [[Behistun (inscription)|Behistun Inscription]]), [[Cyaxares II]] presents the most natural solution to the problem and is the summary position of several Bible commentaries such as: ''Benson Commentary''<ref>Benson Commentary, Daniel 9:1 [https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/9.htm]</ref><ref>Benson Commentary, Daniel 6:1[https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/6.htm]</ref><ref>Benson Commentary, Daniel 5:30-31 [https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/5.htm]</ref> ''Barnes Notes''<ref>Barnes Notes, Daniel 9:1[https://biblehub.com/commentaries/barnes/daniel/9.htm]</ref> & the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentaries.

Finally even [[Saint Jerome]] asserts that ''Darius the Mede'' is [[Cyaxares II]], son of [[Astyages]],<ref>Jerome, ''Commentariorum in Danielem libri III<IV>'', 820-21.</ref> leaving Benson to conclude "so that it appears to have been the generally received opinion in [[Saint Jerome|Jerome's]] time, as it probably was also in the time of Josephus, which was not more than five or six hundred years after [[Cyrus the Great|Cyrus]]."<ref>Benson's Commentaries, Daniel 6:1 [https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/6.htm]</ref>  Furthermore [[Alexander the Great|Alexander's]] known love and constant study of the [[Cyropaedia]] (and thereby [[Aristotle|Aristotle's]] recommendation) show peer acceptance of the identity of [[Cyaxares II]] by both academia and heads of state not 100-200 years from the events they record.

In conclusion, when [[Jerome]] asserts that ''Darius the Mede'' is [[Cyaxares II]], son of [[Astyages]],<ref>Jerome, ''Saint Jerome, ''Commentary on Daniel'', Chapter 5, Verse 1<br>"...Darius, King of the Medes, who was the maternal uncle of Cyrus, King of the Persians, the empire of the Chaldeans was destroyed by Cyrus the Persian."</ref> by claiming that ''Darius the Mede'' is the maternal uncle of [[Cyrus II the Great|Cyrus]]: in this he cites that this was the the commonly understood position of his time.  In this Benson was left to conclude "it appears to have been the generally received opinion in [[Jerome|Jerome's]] time, as it probably was also in the time of Josephus, which was not more than five or six hundred years after [[Cyrus the Great|Cyrus]]."<ref>Benson's Commentaries, Daniel 6:1 [https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/6.htm]</ref>  Yet of [[Xenophon|Xenophon's]] [[Cyropedia]], it was considered so authoritive not yet two hundred years after the events that [[Aristotle]] provided it to [[Alexander the Great]] as a core textbook, which [[Alexander the Great|Alexander]] loved so much that he kept it under his pillow showing peer acceptance of the narrative that ''Darius the Mede'' is [[Cyaxares II]] by both academia and heads of state not 100-200 years from the events they record.  Furthermore [[Darius the Great]]'s billboard sized inscription twice shows that the claimants to the Median throne claim to be "of the household of Cyaxares" and not Astages proving that they saw [[Cyaxares II]] as the last legitimate Median king before the same gave the rulership of the Median kingdom to [[Cyrus II the Great|Cyrus the Great]].

 

While [[Cyaxares II]] does not show on any of the known 'king lists' which are all known to be flawed, it must be noted that the biased position which desires to prove the historical inaccuracy of the Prophecies of Daniel is not without motive.  While the reverse is also true, the works of Darius the Great and Xenophon stand as the last remaining near first hand sources available creating a solid case for the existence of [[Cyaxares II]].

==Arguments for Other Identities==

==Arguments for Other Identities==