Daniel 5:31 - Who is Darius the Mede Historically and How To Address Skeptics of Him?

[Gxg (G²)]

Daniel 5:12
“And this is the inscription that was written:

MENE,[d] MENE, TEKEL,[e] UPHARSIN.[f]
26 This is the interpretation of each word. MENE: God has numbered your kingdom, and finished it; 27 TEKEL: You have been weighed in the balances, and found wanting; 28 PERES: Your kingdom has been divided, and given to the Medes and Persians.”[g]
​

29 Then Belshazzar gave the command, and they clothed Daniel with purple and put a chain of gold around his neck, and made a proclamation concerning him that he should be the third ruler in the kingdom.

Belshazzar’s Fall

30 That very night Belshazzar, king of the Chaldeans, was slain. 31 And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.

​

Shalom

Concerning why I was writing, I was studying the Book of Daniel recently and came across others who noted that the Book itself may not be historical due to the fact that Darius the Mede has been consistently noted to not have existed. Many have debated on the actual identity of who Darius the Mede is - with others saying that Darius I cannot be who Darius the Mede is since he was the successor to Cyrus King of Persia (who came later on afterward). And others have noted that it's possible that perhaps Darius the Mede is a historical figure that has not been recorded fully in scripture.

For reference on the debates/discussions that have been done by historians on the issue, one can go here /here or to the following:

• Darius the Mede
• Tyndale Bible Dictionary - Page 356
• Ugbaru is Darius the Mede (539/538 BCE)
• A Layman's Journey: 1/10/10 Darius The Mede
• Who was Cyrus? Who was Darius, king of the Medes?
• IDENTIFICATION OF DARIUS THE MEDE - Ready Scribe Press
• The Enigma of Darius the Mede - BiblicalStudies.org.uk
• Darius the Mede: His Identity Revealed | Presenttruth.com
• Nabonidus Chronicle: New Readings and the Identity of Darius
• Handwriting on the Wall: A Commentary on the Book of Daniel - Page 303

The view that Darius the Mede is possible King Cyrus of Persia is the most intriguing to me at the moment - as it'd add an entirely differing view of how things are when seeing the ways that Cyrus - who set the Jews back to their homeland (2 Chronicles 36 /2 Chronicles 36:21-23/Ezra 1 ) and was called the anointed Shepherd of God ( Isaiah 44:27-28/Isaiah 45:1-3 ) - may've been at one point the Darius who wanted to spare Daniel ...and in seeing Daniel saved from the Lion's den, came to make it law that all in the kingdom had to revere Daniel's God....thus setting a precedent for the eventual call for the Jews to return home.


Regardless of the views, I was curious as to whether or not anyone had any information on the issue that could help address the matter. Who do you feel Darius the Mede is historically and how do things line up for you historically when it comes to addressing Daniel 5?

 

[visionary]

Darius the Mede by John C Whitcomb Jr - Reviews, Discussion, Bookclubs, Lists

Is a good read on the subject.

 

[visionary]

Even Josephus wrote about Darius.. http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-10.htm ... you will like Antiquities of the Jews X 11:4.

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Darius the Mede by John C Whitcomb Jr - Reviews, Discussion, Bookclubs, Lists

Is a good read on the subject.

Thanks for the resource, as I checked it out and it seemed promising Have you read it yourself?

 

[Gxg (G²)]

Even Josephus wrote about Darius.. http://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-10.htm ... you will like Antiquities of the Jews X 11:4.

Interesting...

 

[daq]

If there was indeed a ruler by the name of ''Darius the Mede'' then why would it be of any importance for the reader to know his exact age when he received the kingdom? Moreover, what if the text implies that Darius the Mede received the kingdom without a battle which might have decimated the city? Perhaps the passage might be suggesting that Darius ''acquired the kingdom'' just as if he were a ''son of the kingdom''? This is exactly what happened the night Belshazzar was slain. There was a channel of the Euphrates which flowed under the wall of the city and the armies of Cyrus/Darius cut off the flow from upstream, drying up the channel; then they entered the city under the cover of darkness, undetected, by way of the dried up channel and thereby took Babylon without a battle.

Daniel 5:31 TUA Transliterated
31. (6:1 in Aramaic) W-Daryawesh Mada'ah{*} qabel malkuwta' kbar shniyn [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]iyn wtarteyn.

What if the text rather states the following?

''And Daryavesh the Maday acquired the dominion like a son; years sixty and two.''

What if it is the Chaldean kingdom that was ''years sixty and two''?
Also, is there another important ''sixty and two'' anywhere else in Daniel?

And if indeed it is the Babylonian-Chaldean kingdom which is stated to be sixty and two years, (and counting) at this point in the text then you might want to remember the following in your personal chronology:

2 Kings 24:1-2 KJV
1. In his days Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years: then he turned and rebelled against him.
2. And the Lord sent against him bands of the Chaldees, and bands of the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the children of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by his servants the prophets.

606/605BC - 3 years of servitude = 603/602BC
603/602BC - The Rebellion = 599-598BC (Jeconiah-Coniah taken captive).
599-598BC - 540/539BC = ''sixty and two'' completed in the dominion (divided).

 

[visionary]

If there was indeed a ruler by the name of ''Darius the Mede'' then why would it be of any importance for the reader to know his exact age when he received the kingdom? Moreover, what if the text implies that Darius the Mede received the kingdom without a battle which might have decimated the city? Perhaps the passage might be suggesting that Darius ''acquired the kingdom'' just as if he were a ''son of the kingdom''? This is exactly what happened the night Belshazzar was slain. There was a channel of the Euphrates which flowed under the wall of the city and the armies of Cyrus/Darius cut off the flow from upstream, drying up the channel; then they entered the city under the cover of darkness, undetected, by way of the dried up channel and thereby took Babylon without a battle.

Daniel 5:31 TUA Transliterated
31. (6:1 in Aramaic) W-Daryawesh Mada'ah{*} qabel malkuwta' kbar shniyn [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]iyn wtarteyn.

What if the text rather states the following?

''And Daryavesh the Maday acquired the dominion like a son; years sixty and two.''

What if it is the Chaldean kingdom that was ''years sixty and two''?
Also, is there another important ''sixty and two'' anywhere else in Daniel?

And if indeed it is the Babylonian-Chaldean kingdom which is stated to be sixty and two years, (and counting) at this point in the text then you might want to remember the following in your personal chronology:

2 Kings 24:1-2 KJV
1. In his days Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years: then he turned and rebelled against him.
2. And the Lord sent against him bands of the Chaldees, and bands of the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the children of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the Lord, which he spake by his servants the prophets.

606/605BC - 3 years of servitude = 603/602BC
603/602BC - The Rebellion = 599-598BC (Jeconiah-Coniah taken captive).
599-598BC - 540/539BC = ''sixty and two'' completed in the dominion (divided).

Good point... good question..

Historically was it the country under Darius's reign 62 years or the age of Darius... anyone know?

 

[daq]

Good point... good question..

Historically was it the country under Darius's reign 62 years or the age of Darius... anyone know?

It seems we have an Aramaic scholar that occasionally visits this board. It would be interesting to see his rendering of Daniel 5:31 and whatever else may be related.

 

[SteveCaruso]

You rang?

/bar/ in this case is actually part of the form of how one expresses their age. For example, If I were to say: אנה בר שתין ותרתין שנין /ana bar [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]in w'tarthayn shenin/ it means "I am 62 years old" but literally means "I am a son of sixty and two years."

Likewise, asking someone their age follows a similar formula: בר כמה שנין את /bar k'mah shenin at?/ (lit. "A son of how many years (are) you?" If you're talking to a woman, it becomes בת/ברת (bat/barth = daughter).

In this part of Daniel, the declaration of years is up front (which happens in Imperial Aramaic) and the phrase כבר שנין שתין ותרתין /ki-bar sh'nin [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]in w-thartayn/ (literally "as a son of years sixty and two") would express something more similar to the English "as/when he was sixty two years old.

To take in the implications of that vis a vis this conversation, I'd have to read a bit more up on this thread first.

To take in the implications of that vis a vis this conversation, I'd have to read a bit more up on this thread first.

(And as a PS, something odd is happening with posting right now. All of my quotation marks are messing up.)

 

[daq]

You rang?

/bar/ in this case is actually part of the form of how one expresses their age. For example, If I were to say: אנה בר שתין ותרתין שנין /ana bar [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]in w'tarthayn shenin/ it means "I am 62 years old" but literally means "I am a son of sixty and two years."

Likewise, asking someone their age follows a similar formula: בר כמה שנין את /bar k'mah shenin at?/ (lit. "A son of how many years (are) you?" If you're talking to a woman, it becomes בת/ברת (bat/barth = daughter).

In this part of Daniel, the declaration of years is up front (which happens in Imperial Aramaic) and the phrase כבר שנין שתין ותרתין /ki-bar sh'nin [bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse][bless and do not curse]in w-thartayn/ (literally "as a son of years sixty and two") would express something more similar to the English "as/when he was sixty two years old.

To take in the implications of that vis a vis this conversation, I'd have to read a bit more up on this thread first.

To take in the implications of that vis a vis this conversation, I'd have to read a bit more up on this thread first.

(And as a PS, something odd is happening with posting right now. All of my quotation marks are messing up.)

Thank you SteveCaruso and yes I was speaking of you. And certainly I do appreciate individuals such as yourself who dedicate themselves to such daunting tasks. It was the phrase ''as a son'' or ''like a son'' which I was most curious about and which you have also suggested in your comments. However, I do also believe that whereas you injected ''when'' (a son) into the mix with ''like'' (a son) or ''as'' (a son) it may be possible that your footing may have slipped just a tad. Not that ''when'' is not an legitimate understanding but that the context here is the night that Belshazzar was slain and Darius the Mede thereupon acquired the kingdom, (''like, as if, he were a son'' of the same kingdom). But I also understand what you say concerning a son because ''ben'' (bar) also intends the founder or builder of a family name, etc., and thus, ''a son of sixty and two years'' meaning by the beginning/founding/birth of the man. Sort of like saying ''the son of a foundation laid sixty and two years (ago) to date''. Therefore it is probably still going to boil down to one's overall perceptions of Daniel as a whole, (and the Scripture-Writings).

 

[FreeinChrist]

MOD HAT

A small clean up was done.

 

[SteveCaruso]

Thank you SteveCaruso and yes I was speaking of you. And certainly I do appreciate individuals such as yourself who dedicate themselves to such daunting tasks. It was the phrase ''as a son'' or ''like a son'' which I was most curious about and which you have also suggested in your comments. However, I do also believe that whereas you injected ''when'' (a son) into the mix with ''like'' (a son) or ''as'' (a son) it may be possible that your footing may have slipped just a tad. Not that ''when'' is not an legitimate understanding but that the context here is the night that Belshazzar was slain and Darius the Mede thereupon acquired the kingdom, (''like, as if, he were a son'' of the same kingdom).

I'm not quite sure what you mean by my "footing may have slipped." כי /k'-/ as a prefix in Aramaic has a variety of uses without "injecting" anything. The plain reading of the verse has nothing to do with anyone being "like a son" and everything to do with expressing someone's age.

In English we say "I am ... years old."
In French we say, "J'ai ... ans." (/Zhey ... ã/ = lit. "I have ... years").
In Mandarin we say, "我 今年 ...岁." (/Wǒ jīnnián ...-suì/ = lit. "I (am) this year ... years").
In Aramaic we say אנה בר ... שנין (/Ana bar ... shenin/ = lit. "I (am) a son of ... years").


It's simply a matter of idiom.

But I also understand what you say concerning a son because ''ben'' (bar) also intends the founder or builder of a family name, etc., and thus, ''a son of sixty and two years'' meaning by the beginning/founding/birth of the man. Sort of like saying ''the son of a foundation laid sixty and two years (ago) to date''. Therefore it is probably still going to boil down to one's overall perceptions of Daniel as a whole, (and the Scripture-Writings).

I wouldn't stray too far down etymological fallacy lane. There's a phrase's absolute origins, and then there's how it is used colloquially in context, and a good number of time when it comes to regularly used idiom there is a large disconnect between the two. In such cases, the latter almost always takes precedence over the former when trying to interpret faithfully, so I'd wholeheartedly suggest not to read too much into it.

I hope I haven't misunderstood you.

 

[daq]

I'm not quite sure what you mean by my "footing may have slipped." כי /k'-/ as a prefix in Aramaic has a variety of uses without "injecting" anything. The plain reading of the verse has nothing to do with anyone being "like a son" and everything to do with expressing someone's age.

In English we say "I am ... years old."
In French we say, "J'ai ... ans." (/Zhey ... ã/ = lit. "I have ... years").
In Mandarin we say, "我 今年 ...岁." (/Wǒ jīnnián ...-suì/ = lit. "I (am) this year ... years").
In Aramaic we say אנה בר ... שנין (/Ana bar ... shenin/ = lit. "I (am) a son of ... years").


It's simply a matter of idiom.



I wouldn't stray too far down etymological fallacy lane. There's a phrase's absolute origins, and then there's how it is used colloquially in context, and a good number of time when it comes to regularly used idiom there is a large disconnect between the two. In such cases, the latter almost always takes precedence over the former when trying to interpret faithfully, so I'd wholeheartedly suggest not to read too much into it.

I hope I haven't misunderstood you.

I think I agree for the most part and surely the last part; ''fallacy lane'' is a broad road.