Difference between revisions of "Darius the Mede"

From Conservapedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
(added reference)
(updates)
Line 19: Line 19:
 
* Cyrus at that point was simply heir of Persia and the greatly loved General of the Coalition Army.
 
* Cyrus at that point was simply heir of Persia and the greatly loved General of the Coalition Army.
  
−
As discussed at the start, while the character of [[Cyaxares II]] is not generally accepted amidst the classical histories such as [[Herodotus]], [[Ctesias]], the Cannon of Ptolemy 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]], [[Ctesias]], the 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 in Cyaxares II, son of Astyages{{citation needed}}.  Leaving Benson to conclude "so that it appears to have been the generally received opinion in [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."<ref>https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/6.htm</ref>  Alexander's love of the [[Cyropaedia]] and thereby [[Aristotle|Aristotle's]] recommendation show acceptance of the identity of [[Cyaxares II]] by heads of state not 100-200 years from the events they record.
+
Finally even Saint Jerome asserts that Darius the Mede is [[Cyaxares II]], son of [[Astyages]]{{citation needed}}.  Leaving Benson to conclude "so that it appears to have been the generally received opinion in [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>  Alexander's love of the [[Cyropaedia]] and thereby [[Aristotle|Aristotle's]] recommendation show acceptance of the identity of [[Cyaxares II]] by heads of state not 100-200 years from the events they record.
  
 
=In Daniel 5=
 
=In Daniel 5=

Revision as of 19:45, November 15, 2020

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.

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 "Father of History" also oft called "the Father of Lies" in his Histories dramatic recount, does not record Astyages having a son at all, but rather tells how the kingdom passed directly to Cyrus by force of arms. Yet Herodotus' account stands in direct opposition to Xenophon's far more extensive and detailed book on the subject (written about 150 years later and constantly studied by Alexander the Great) is known as the Cyropaedia (which does actually provide a natural solution to the subject). But with the only extant clay tablets and Ptolemy's cannon seeming to support the direct passage of power to Cyrus II and the Behistun Inscription references to Cyaxares being questionable if they are Astyages father or Xenophon's claim of a Cyaxares II, 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.

PLEASE NOTE THIS PAGE IS STILL UNDER INITIAL CONSTRUCTION!

Arguments for Fictional

It is sufficient to say on this subject that without a clear clay tablet on the subject, skeptics hold the character of Darius the Mede to be purely fictional and therefore the entire chapter as fiction. This as Barnes notes[1] is generally presented as evidence that the entire book is not considered to be of any historical value and to be disqualified entirely.

Arguments for Cyaxares II

In Xenophon's historical narrative, some time after the natural death of his grandfather Astyages, Cyrus the Great, while still a youth and not yet king of Persia, entered into the employ of his uncle Cyaxares II as general of the army in a mutual defence pact against Assyria (Babylon). In this capacity Cyrus campaigns with Cyaxares II at the first and then by himself until his eventual conquest of Babylon itself. In this narrative, it must be noted that all conquests are officiall in the name of the alliance which was ultimately at the expense and direction of the king of the Medes. After which Cyrus the Great returns to the capital city of Ecbatana in Media and presents Cyaxares II with a palace in Babylon as a token of victory and receives Cyaxares II's daughter as his wife with the kingdom of Media as her dowry. Xenophon's account then details Cyrus' trip home to Persia where he receives the title of King upon the death of his father Cambyses I.

This position when combined with Josephs' assertion that Darius the Mede was the son of Astyages but known to the Greeks by another name, it makes it only natural to conclude that:

  • Darius the Mede is Cyaxares II
  • "Darius the Mede took the kingdom" (Dan. 5:31) despite being actually conquered by Cyrus as
  • Cyrus at that point was simply heir of Persia and the greatly loved General of the Coalition Army.

As discussed at the start, while the character of Cyaxares II is not generally accepted amidst the classical histories such as Herodotus, Ctesias, the Cannon of Ptolemy[2] or even on a currently available clay tablet (other than two possible references in the 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[3][4][5] Barnes Notes[6] & the Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentaries.

Finally even Saint Jerome asserts that Darius the Mede is Cyaxares II, son of Astyages[Citation Needed]. Leaving Benson to conclude "so that it appears to have been the generally received opinion in [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."[7] Alexander's love of the Cyropaedia and thereby Aristotle's recommendation show acceptance of the identity of Cyaxares II by heads of state not 100-200 years from the events they record.

In Daniel 5

Herein Darius the Mede seizes the kingdom and rules as king at the fall of Babylon. This narrative has historically presented problems for Biblical scholars as it is an undisputed historical fact that Cyrus the Great conquered Babylon. While many positions exist on the subject, we shall examine each below in separate sections.

In Daniel 10 through 11

External Links

https://www.bitchute.com/video/r9npZoqtD4HA/

References

  1. ↑ Barnes Commentary, Daniel 6:1, Section 2 - "Considerable importance is to be attached to the question who was Darius the Mede, as it has been made a ground of objection to the Scripture narrative, that no person by that name is mentioned in the Greek writers." https://biblehub.com/commentaries/barnes/daniel/6.htm
  2. ↑ Ptolemy's Canon; https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/ptolemys-canon/
  3. ↑ Benson Commentary, Daniel 9:1; https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/9.htm
  4. ↑ Benson Commentary, Daniel 6:1;https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/6.htm
  5. ↑ Benson Commentary, Daniel 5:30-31; https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/5.htm
  6. ↑ Barnes Notes, Daniel 9:1; https://biblehub.com/commentaries/barnes/daniel/9.htm
  7. ↑ Benson's Commentaries, Daniel 6:1; https://biblehub.com/commentaries/benson/daniel/6.htm
Retrieved from "https://www.conservapedia.com/index.php?title=Darius_the_Mede&oldid=1705103"