SkipCaptcha
108
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 41:
Line 41: − + − + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + +
Supplied content for section "Arguments for Other Identities"
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.
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.
==Arguments for Other Identites==
==Arguments for Other Identities==
''Please help Conservapedia by adding to this section''
===Darius the Mede as Astyages===
At first glance, the identification of Daniel’s Darius as Astyages has some strong points in its favor. He was a Mede; further, a Median king. Xenophon, Herodotus, and Ctesias agree that he was the maternal grandfather of Cyrus the Great, which could explain the authority over Cyrus that is implicit in Darius the Mede’s command in Daniel 6:6–9 that could only have been exercised by the highest authority in the empire. This view was taken by some early Christian writers, and seems to have been last maintained by Bernard Alfrink in 1928.<ref>Bernard Alfrink, “Darius Medus,” ''Biblica'' 9 (1928): 316–40.</ref>
This view runs into several difficulties. Xenophon stated that Astyages died several years before Cyrus began his multi-year campaign against the Babylonians. Neither Herodotus, who portrays Astyages as an enemy of Cyrus, nor the cuneiform inscriptions given any indication that Astyages was reinstalled as king after Cyrus (allegedly) deposed him. According to Herodotus, Astyages began his reign 64 years before the death of Cyrus in 530 BC.<ref>''Histories'' 1.130.1, 1.214.3).</ref> If he was about 62 years old when Babylon was captured in 539 BC (Daniel 5:31), this would make him about seven years old when he became king in 594 according to Herodotus’s figures; becoming king at such an early age is unlikely. For these and other reasons such as its lack of attestation in any ancient source, identifying Darius the Mede as Astyages has few if any supporters at present.
===Darius as Gobryas/Gubaru, governor of the Gutians===
Gubaru (Greek ''Gobryas'', as in Xenophon) was governor of the Gutians, whom some scholars suggest may be the ancestors of the modern Kurds.<ref>Jamie Stokes, ed., ''Encyclopedia of the Peoples of Africa and the Middle East'' (New York: Infobase, 2009), 380; Egon von Eickstedt, ''Türken, Kurden und Iraner seit dem Altertum'' (Stuttgart: Gustav Fischer, 1961) as reviewed by D. P. Erdbrink in ''Central Asiatic Journal'' 12:1 (1968): 64–65; Alexander Prokhorov, article “Guti” in ''Great Soviet Encyclopedia'' (31 vols.; New York: McMillan, 1973), 7:498.</ref> According to Xenophon, Gobryas/Gubaru, along with Gadatas, was leader of the forces that captured Babylon,<ref>''Cyropaedia'' 7.5.23–32.</ref> a statement that finds verification in the [[Nabonidus Chronicle]].<ref>''ANET'', 306b.</ref> The Chronicle also states that Cyrus appointed Gobryas as governor of the city, and then Gobryas installed sub-governors in Babylon. “This could explain why Daniel states that Darius “received the kingdom (6:1 [English Translations 5:31]) and “was made king” (9:1), according to this view, by Cyrus.”<ref>Andrew E. Steinmann, ''Daniel'' in the ''Concordia Commentary Series'' (St. Louis: Concordia, 2008), 291–92.</ref>
This view was rather popular among conservative Bible commentators in the first three-quarters of the twentieth century. Its fall from popularity is explained by several points which mitigate against it. 1) Gobryas was not a Mede, whereas Daniel 9:1 says Darius was “of the seed of the Medes.” He was a Gutian, also called an Assyrian (=Babylonian) by Xenophon<ref>(''Cyropaedia'' 4.6.2)</ref> because, until they joined Cyrus, Gutia was a Babylonian province. 2) According to the Nabonidus Chronicle, Gobryas died 25 days after the capture of Babylon,<ref>''ANET'', 306b.</ref> which does not allow enough time to accommodate the various activities ascribed to him in Daniel chapter 6. 3) As governor (not king) under Cyrus, Gobryas would not have had the authority to issue a decree that no prayers were to be made to any other king or to any god except to him for 30 days.
===Darius as Ugbaru, Persian-appointed governor of Babylon===
John Whitcomb advocated that Daniel’s Darius was not Gobryas (Gubaru), governor of the Gutians, but a certain Ugbaru, a governor of Babylon whose name is found in several cuneiform texts.<ref>John C. Whitcomb Jr., ''Darius the Mede'' (Philadelphia: Presbyterian and Reformed, 1963).</ref> However, this identification was abandoned after Lester Grabbe pointed out that Ugbaru did not become governor of Babylon until the fourth year of Cyrus, which does not fit the statements in Daniel that make Darius the king immediately after the capture of the city in 539 BC.<ref>Lester L. Grabbe, “Another Look at the ''Gestalt'' of Darius the Mede,” ''Catholic Bible Quarterly'' 50:2 (1988): 206–7.</ref> Whitcomb’s identification is therefore now generally discredited.
===Darius as Cyrus===
The view that “Darius” was just another name of Cyrus was advocated by D.J. Wiseman.<ref>Donald J. Wiseman, “The Last Days of Babylon,” ''Christianity Today'' 2/4 (November 25, 1957): 7–10.</ref> To support this identification, Wiseman and those who have followed him have argued that Daniel 5:31 should be translated as “So this Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, ''that is'', in the reign of Cyrus the Persian.” This contrasts with the usual translations which give “. . . in the reign of Darius, ''and'' in the reign of Cyrus the Persian.” The difference centers on one word, the Aramaic (and Hebrew) conjunction ''waw'', (pronounced ''vav'' in modern Hebrew), which is usually translated “and.” Andrew Steinmann, who accepts Wiseman’s interpretation, points out the following Scriptures where the meaning “that is” must be taken for this conjunction: 1 Chronicles 5:26, Daniel 2:28, and Daniel 3:2.<ref>Steinmann, ''Daniel'', 293.</ref> One advantage of Wiseman’s interpretation is that it is in harmony with the authority that Darius must have had in order to issue a decree that no one could pray to any other king or god except to him for 30 days (Daniel 6:6–9), necessarily implying that he was the highest authority in the empire at that time. Another advantage is that, with this interpretation, Darius the Mede has not “disappeared from history” outside of the book of Daniel and works depending on it; his personage is remembered in all the ancient literature referring to Cyrus the Great.
The problems with this identification may be listed as follows.
# Darius was of “the seed of the Medes” (Daniel 9:1), and he is also called a Median in 5:31 and 11:1. In contrast, Cyrus is called a Persian or king of the Persians in 6:28 and 10:1 and also 2 Chronicles 36:22, Ezra 1:1, and 4:5. Although Cyrus’s mother was Mandane, daughter of Astyages the king of the Medes, ethnicity in the ancient Near East was reckoned through the father’s line, not the mother’s.
# The equation Cyrus=Darius makes it difficult to understand why the author of Daniel would repeatedly make distinctions between “Darius the Mede” and “Cyrus the Persian.”
# In Cyrus’s inscriptions, and in other ancient references, Cyrus is never referred to as a Mede or as a king of the Medes; he is always “Cyrus the Persian,” “Cyrus King of Persia,” or “Cyrus King of Anshan” (a capital of Persia).
# According to Xenophon,<ref>''Cyropaedia'' 1.2.8, 9; 1.5.4.</ref> Cyrus was about 27 years of age when he assumed the generalship of the combined Median and Persian armies in preparation for war with the Babylonians under their chosen general, Croesus of Lydia. This was apparently a year or two before the eventual defeat of Croesus and his forces in 547 BC, which would make Cyrus about 29 in 547 and about 37 when his forces captured Babylon in 539 BC. This is consistent with the “Dream Text” of Nabonidus that calls Cyrus a “young servant” of Marduk when he became leader of the Medes and Persians.<ref>Paul-Alain Beaulieu, ''The Reign of Nabonidus, King of Babylon 556–539 B.C.'' (New Haven CT: Yale University Press, 1989), 108.</ref> Darius “the Mede”, however, was about 62 years of age in 539 BC (Daniel 5:31).
===Darius as Cambyses II, son and successor of Cyrus===
This identification was proposed by the Anglican clergyman Charles Boutflower.<ref>Charles Boutflower, ''In and around the Book of Daniel'' (London: Society for Promoting Christian Knowledge, 1923; reprint; Grand Rapids: Kregel, 1977), 142–45.</ref> It was based in part on some cuneiform texts suggesting that Cambyses II may have been appointed coregent by his father soon after the capture of Babylon. He could therefore properly be called “king,” and might fill the role of the Darius who “received the kingdom” (Daniel 5:31).
There are many problems with Boutflower’s view. 1) Although Cambyses’s grandmother and great-grandfather were Medes, Cambyses and Cyrus were always called Persians, not Medes. 2) Cambyses could not have issued the decree of Daniel 6:6–9 while his father Cyrus was still the supreme ruler. 3) Daniel’s Darius was about 62 years of age when Babylon fell to the combined forces under the Medes and Persians (Daniel 5:31). In the section above, it was shown that Cyrus himself was only about 37 years of age at this time, and his son would naturally be several years younger. These objections show why Boutflower’s view has never found acceptance among other scholars.
==How Did Darius the Mede Disappear from History? Or Did He?==
==How Did Darius the Mede Disappear from History? Or Did He?==