Daniel 6:1-2
Overview of Daniel Chapter 6
When approaching Daniel chapter six, we must be aware that the verse numbers
for the chapter in the English Bible do not correspond with the Aramaic text of this
book. Daniel 5:31 actually begins chapter 6 since the verse numbers beginning
with 5:31 through 6:28 in the English Bible differ from the verse numbers in the
Aramaic text of Daniel (BHS). Thus, Daniel 5:31 in the English translations should
be Daniel 6:1 since this is the case in the Aramaic text of Daniel. Correspondingly,
Daniel 6:1 is Daniel 6:2 in the Aramaic text, Daniel 6:2 is Daniel 6:3 and so on
throughout the rest of Daniel chapter 6. However, the verse numbers in the English
Bible beginning with Daniel 7:1, correspond to the Aramaic text of Daniel once
again.
Daniel chapter six records the God of Israel delivering Daniel from death at the
hands of the Medo-Persian empire as a result of a conspiracy in the government
against him. Daniel 6:1-3 (Aramaic 6:2-4) records that Daniel maintained a
prominent status in the Medo-Persian kingdom while living in Babylon. Daniel
6:4-9 (Aramaic 6:5-10) records that a conspiracy against Daniel by the other
commissioners and satraps in the Medo-Persian kingdom. Daniel 6:10-11
(Aramaic 6:11-12) records Daniel’s prayer to God while in the midst of
persecution and underserved suffering. Daniel 6:12-18 (Aramaic 6:13-19) records
Daniel being unwillingly executed by the Darius the Mede. Daniel 6:19-24
(Aramaic 6:20-25) records the God of Israel delivering Daniel from death by
shutting the mouths of the lions. Daniel 6:25-28 (Aramaic 6:26-29) records King
Darius issuing a proclamation throughout the Medo-Persian empire which praises
the God of Israel.
This chapter has been the subject of much controversy and the object of attacks
by the liberal critics of the Bible. At the heart of this controversy is the identity of
Darius since there is no historical evidence for him outside of the Bible.
Pentecost writes “Critics have long questioned the historicity of Daniel. They
challenge Daniel’s reference to the accession of Darius (vv. 1, 28; 9:1; called
Darius the Mede in 5:31) because there is no historical evidence outside the Bible
for his reign. However, several explanations are possible: (1) Darius may have
been another name for Cyrus. Daniel 6:28 may be translated, ‘So Daniel prospered
during the reign of Darius, even the reign of Cyrus the Persian.’ It was common for
ancient rulers to use different names in various parts of their realms. Thus Darius
may have been a localized name for Cyrus. (This is the view of D. J. Wiseman,
“Some Historical Problems in the Book of Daniel,” in Notes on Some Problems in
the Book of Daniel, pp. 12-14.) (2) A second explanation is that Darius was
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
1
appointed by Cyrus to rule over Babylon, a comparatively small portion of the vast
Medo-Persian Empire. According to Daniel 9:1 Darius ‘was made ruler over the
Babylonian Kingdom.’ This suggests that he ruled by appointment, rather than by
conquest and thus would have been subordinate to Cyrus, who appointed him. The
historical situation leading to this appointment, based on the Nabonidus Chronicle,
was that Babylon was conquered by Ugbaru, governor of Gutium, who entered the
city of Babylon the night of Belshazzar’s feast. After Ugbaru conquered Babylon
on October 12, 539 B.C., Cyrus entered the conquered city on October 29 of that
same year. Ugbaru was then appointed by Cyrus to rule on his behalf in Babylon.
Eight days after Cyrus’ arrival (Nov. 6) Ugbaru died. If Darius the Mede is another
name for Ugbaru, as is entirely possible, the problem is solved. Since Darius was
62 years old when he took over Babylon (5:31), his death a few weeks later would
not be unusual. According to this view (presented by William H. Shea, ‘Darius the
Mede: An Update,’ Andrews University Seminary Studies 20. Autumn 1982, pp.
229-47), Gubaru is another spelling for Ugbaru, with the name Gobryas being a
Greek form of the same name and appearing in Xenophon’s Cyropaedia 4. 6. 1-9;
7. 5. 7-34. (3) A third explanation is that Ugbaru, governor of Gutium, conquered
Babylon, and that Gubaru, alias Darius, was the man Cyrus appointed to rule over
Babylon. (This is the view of John C. Whitcomb, Jr., Darius the Mede. Nutley,
N.J.: Presbyterian & Reformed Publishing Co., 1974.) (4) Still others suggest
Darius the Mede should be identified with Cambyses, Cyrus’ son, who ruled Persia
530-522 B.C. (This view is held by Charles Boutflower, In and Around the Book of
Daniel. Reprint. Grand Rapids: Kregel Publishing Co., 1977, pp. 142-55.) Any of
these four views may be correct, but perhaps the second one is preferable.1
D. J. Wiseman writes “1. Darius the Mede, the son of Ahasuerus (Xerxes; Dn.
9:1), received the government on the death of Belshazzar (5:30–31), being made
king of the Chaldeans (9:1) at the age of 62 (5:31). He bore the title of ‘king’ (6:6,
9, 25) and the years were marked by his reign (11:1). He appointed 120
subordinate governors under three presidents, of whom one was Daniel (6:2), who
prospered in his reign (6:28). According to Jos. (Ant. 10.249), Daniel was removed
by Darius to Media. Since Darius the Mede is not mentioned by name outside the
book of Daniel, and the contemporary cuneiform inscriptions reckon no king of
Babylon between Nabonidus (and Belshazzar) and the accession of Cyrus, his
historicity has been denied and the OT account of this reign considered a
conflation of confused traditions (H. H. Rowley, Darius the Mede, 1935). On the
other hand, the narrative has all the appearance of genuine historical writing, and in
the absence of many historical records of this period there is no reason why the
1
Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1985). The Bible Knowledge Commentary: An Exposition of the Scriptures (Da
6:1). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
Jos Josephus
Ant Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
2
history should not be accepted. There have been many attempts to identify Darius
with persons mentioned in the Babylonian texts. The two most reasonable
hypotheses identify Darius with (a) Gubaru, (b) *CYRUS. Gubaru was governor of
Babylon and of the region beyond the river (Euphrates). There is, however, no
specific evidence that he was a Mede, called king, named Darius, a son of
Ahasuerus, or aged about 60. Cyrus, who was related to the Medes, was called
‘king of the Medes’ and is known to have been about 62 years old on becoming
king of Babylon. According to the inscriptions, he appointed many subordinate
officials, and documents were dated by his regnal years. This theory requires that
Dn. 6:28 be translated ‘… in the reign of Darius, even in the reign of Cyrus the
Persian’ as an explanation by the writer of the use of sources using two names for
the one person. The weakness of this theory lies in the fact that Cyrus is nowhere
named son of Ahasuerus (but this might be a term used only of royal persons) or as
‘of the seed of a Mede’. 2. Darius I, son of Hystaspes, who was king of Persia and
of Babylon, where he succeeded Cambyses (after two usurpers had been
displaced), and ruled 521–486 BC. He enabled the returned Jews to rebuild the
Temple at Jerusalem with Jeshua and Zerubbabel (Ezr. 4:5; Hg. 1:1; Zc. 1:1). 3.
Darius II (Nothus), who ruled Persia and Babylon (423–408 BC), called ‘Darius
the Persian’ in Ne. 12:22, perhaps to distinguish him from Darius the Mede’. Since
the father of Jaddua the high priest is mentioned in an Elephantine papyrus c. 400
BC, there is no need to assume that this Jaddua was the high priest who met
Alexander in 332 BC and that the Darius here meant is Darius III (Codomanus),
who reigned c. 336–331 BC.”2
Constable writes “Critics, including Rowley, claim that history allows no room
for a person by this name. However, Archer suggested that ‘Darius’ may have been
a title of honor in the Persian Empire as ‘Caesar’ was in the Roman Empire or, I
might add, ‘Pharaoh’ was in Egypt.3 If this was so, ‘Darius’ could refer to another
man known in history by another name or names. The most likely possibility
seems to me to have been Cyrus.4 This would account most naturally for the fact
that Daniel referred to Darius as ‘king’ in chapter 6. Furthermore it would have
been very unusual for a subordinate of Cyrus to divide the whole empire into 120
satrapies (v. 1). Darius was probably called ‘the Mede’ because he was of Median
descent (9:1). Another possibility is that Darius is another name for Gubaru
(Gobryas), a ruler of Babylon under Cyrus.5 ‘In his dealings with his Babylonian
2
Wiseman, D. J. (1996). Darius. In D. R. W. Wood, I. H. Marshall, A. R. Millard, J. I. Packer & D. J. Wiseman (Eds.), New Bible dictionary (D.
R. W. Wood, I. H. Marshall, A. R. Millard, J. I. Packer & D. J. Wiseman, Ed.) (3rd ed.) (257). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, IL:
InterVarsity Press.
3
Archer, "Daniel," pp. 18-19, 76
4
D. J. Wiseman, "Some Historical Problems in the Book of Daniel," in Notes on Some Problems in the
Book of Daniel, pp. 12-14.
5
Archer, "Daniel," pp. 76-77; Whitcomb, Darius the . . ., p. 35; Robert Dick Wilson, Studies in the Book
of Daniel, pp. 128-29.
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
3
subjects, Cyrus was “king of Babylon, king of lands.” . . . But it was Gobryas the
satrap who represented the royal authority after the king's [i.e., Cyrus'] departure
[from Babylon].’6 This view distinguishes Gubaru from Ugbaru, the governor of
Gutium and Persian commander who led the assault against Babylon. A third view
is that Ugbaru and Gubaru are different spellings of the same man's name.7 ‘But
the syllable GU is written quite differently from UG in Akkadian cuneiform.’8 A
fourth view equates Darius the Mede with Cambyses, Cyrus' son, who ruled Persia
from about 530 to 522 B.C.9 Darius the Mede was definitely not the same person
as Darius the Great (Darius I) who was much younger and ruled Persia later, from
521-486 B.C. ‘It must be emphasized that there is no established fact which
contradicts a person by the name of Darius the Mede reigning over Babylon if
Darius is an alternate name for a known ruler.’10”11
Walvoord writes “From the standpoint of biblical scholarship, however, more
attention has been directed to Darius the Mede, the king of Babylon at this time,
than to the events of the chapter itself. The reason for this is that much of the
critical unbelief in relation to the book of Daniel is based on what is claimed to be
a palpable historical error, for it is claimed that history allows no room for such a
person by this name. The alleged error is another important argument used to prove
a second-century date for Daniel at which the true facts of four hundred years
before would be obscure. The problem has attracted scholars who continue to write
entire books discussing the questions involved. H. H. Rowley, who has written one
of the most important scholarly studies on this question, begins his work by saying,
‘The references to Darius the Mede in the book of Daniel have long been
recognized as providing the most serious historical problem in the book.’12 The
problem to which he refers is that the book of Daniel states that Darius the Mede,
at the age of 62, received the kingdom after the death of Belshazzar (Dan 5:31) and
was ‘the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over
the realm of the Chaldeans’ (Dan 9:1). In chapter 6 we learn that Darius organized
‘the whole kingdom,’ setting up one hundred and twenty princes and three
presidents of which Daniel was the first. The Septuagint translates Daniel 6:28 to
read that after the death of Darius, Cyrus the Persian king took control, implying a
Median kingdom under Darius which was followed by a Persian kingdom under
Cyrus. Sources outside the Bible, however, clearly indicate that this is not the case.
6
A. T. Olmstead, The History of the Persian Empire, p. 71.
William H. Shea, "Darius the Mede: An Update," Andrews University Seminary Studies 20 (Autumn
1982):229-47, is a recent advocate of this old view. See also idem, "The Search for Darius the Mede
(Concluded), or, The Time of the Answer to Daniel's Prayer and the Date of the Death of Darius the Mede,"
Journal of the Adventist Theological Society 12:1 (Spring 2001):97-105.
8
Archer, "Daniel," p. 76.
9
Charles Boutflower, In and Around the Book of Daniel, pp. 142-55.
10
Walvoord, p. 134.
11
Constable, Thomas L., Notes on Daniel-2007 Edition, pages 63-64; copyright 2007; Published by Sonic Light: http://www.soniclight.com/
12
H. H. Rowley, Darius the Mede and the Four World Empires in the Book of Daniel, p. 8.
7
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
4
As D. J. Wiseman has itemized, basing his findings on the Nabonidus Chronicle,
the actual events went something like this.13 Babylon was conquered by Ugbaru,
the governor of Gutium, who led the army of Cyrus and entered the city of
Babylon on the night of Belshazzar’s feast. Nabonidus, who was Belshazzar’s
father, had fled Babylon the day before only to be captured and later die in exile.
When Babylon fell to Ugbaru on October 11, 539 B.C., Cyrus himself had
remained with other troops at Opis, and not until eighteen days later, October 29,
539 B.C., did he actually arrive in Babylon. A man by the name of Gubaru was
appointed by Cyrus to rule in Babylon. Eight days after the arrival of Cyrus,
Ugbaru died. If this precise history of the events following the fall of Babylon is
correct, it is obvious that there is no room for Darius the Mede to reign over
Babylon. Although there are several explanations, three predominate. First, the
book of Daniel is here historically in error, and the writer has confused Darius the
Mede with some other important personage. One of the most important advocates
of this explanation is H. H. Rowley, who successively discards identification of
Darius the Mede with Astyages, the last of the Median kings;14 Cyaxares, the son
of Astyages;15 Gobryas, another form of the name Gubaru, or Ugbaru, who led the
forces conquering Babylon;16 and Cambyses, a son of Cyrus.17 Rowley offers
rather thorough proof that none of these suggestions are valid and supports the
conclusion that there is no reliable evidence that a person named Darius the Mede
ever lived, as only Daniel mentions him. Rowley suggests that this ruler was so
designated by the author of Daniel because of confusion with Darius the son of
Hystaspes, who is associated with a later fall of Babylon in 520 B.C. In a word,
Rowley believes that Daniel’s book is not reliable historically in its reference to
Darius the Mede. This would also support the theory that Daniel the prophet of the
sixth century B.C. could not have written the book as he would have had accurate
information. Two explanations have been offered by conservative scholars. Both
recognize Darius the Mede as an actual historical character who fulfilled the role
assigned him in Daniel 6. One of these explanations, which is quite popular, is that
Darius the Mede is the same as Gubaru, the governor appointed over Babylon by
Cyrus. This view is strongly supported by Robert Dick Wilson18 and a host of
others such as Friedrich Delitzsch, C. H. H. Wright, Joseph D. Wilson, and W. F.
Albright.19 John C. Whitcomb, Jr. has attempted to revive this view and answer
Rowley.20 Whitcomb distinguishes Gubaru from Ugbaru, both of whom are called
13
D. J. Wiseman, “Some Historical Problems in the Book of Daniel,” in Notes on Some Problems in the Book of Daniel, pp. 9-18
Rowley, pp. 30-36.
15
Ibid., pp. 37-43.
16
Ibid., pp. 19-29.
17
Ibid., pp. 12-18.
18
R. D. Wilson, Studies in the Book of Daniel, pp. 128 ff.
19
Rowley, p. 19.
20
J. Q. Whitcomb, Jr., Darius the Mede.
14
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
5
Gobryas in some translations of the Nabonidus Chronical. Whitcomb holds that
Ugbaru, identified previously as the governor of Gutium in the Nabonidus
Chronical, led the army of Cyrus into Babylon and died less than a month later.
Gubaru, however, is identified by Whitcomb as Darius the Mede, a king of
Babylon under the authority of Cyrus. Although sources outside the Bible do not
call Gubaru a Median or king of Babylon, nor do they give his age, there is no real
contradiction between the secular records and that which Daniel states of Darius
the Mede. The third view, held by the conservative scholar, D. J. Wiseman, has
simplicity in its favor. It claims that Darius the Mede is another name of Cyrus the
Persian. This is based upon a translation of Daniel 6:28 which the Aramaic permits
to read ‘Daniel prospered in the reign of Darius, even the reign of Cyrus the
Persian.’21 The fact that monarchs had more than one name is common in ancient
literature, and Wiseman’s view offers another conservative explanation of this
problem in Daniel. All who discuss the question of Darius the Mede must
necessarily found their arguments on a relative scarcity of factual material. Critics
frequently appeal to silence as an argument in their favor, as if the absence of a fact
from our fragmentary records is a conclusive point. Most Bible-believing
Christians feel that, until there is overwhelming evidence to the contrary, the
Scripture record itself should be given more consideration than the fragmentary
records outside the Bible or, specifically, than the lack of record. K. A. Kitchen has
summarized the inconclusive nature of this negative evidence, demonstrating that it
does not support the sweeping conclusion that Daniel is in error.22 It must be
emphasized that there is no established fact which contradicts a person by the name
of Darius the Mede reigning over Babylon if Darius is an alternate name for a
known ruler.23
Wiersbe weighs in, he writes “Who was Darius the Mede? Isaiah had said that
Cyrus would capture Babylon and set the Jews free (Isa. 44:28–45:13); see also
Dan. 1:21 and 10:1. Darius is mentioned as ‘king’ in Dan. 6:1, 6, 9, 25, 28; 9:1;
11:1. The solution is found in the word ‘took’ in 5:31; it should be translated
‘received.’ Darius (Cyrus’ military leader) received the kingdom from Cyrus, king
of Persia, and ruled Babylon for him. In 6:28 we see that it was a dual kingship;
Cyrus was the king of the empire, while Darius ruled Babylon and the area
connected with it. Cyrus entered Babylon a mighty conqueror and proceeded to
deal wisely with the people, including the exiled Jews. It was Cyrus who issued the
decrees that permitted the Jews to return to their land and rebuild their temple
21
22
23
Wiseman, p. 14.
K. A. Kitchen, Ancient Orient and the Old Testament, pp. 30 ff.
Walvoord, John F. Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation; pages 132-134; Moody Press; Chicago; 1971
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
6
(Ezra 1:1–4; see Isa. 44:28). So, even the rise and fall of empires is all a part of
God’s plan for His people.”24
The problem with Wiseman’s view is that Darius is clearly identified as a Mede
and not a Persian. It appears the best solution to the problem is accept the view
held by Robert Dick Wilson, Wiersbe, Pentecost and others, which is that Darius
the Mede is the same as Gubaru, who was the governor appointed over Babylon by
Cyrus. This interpretation is strongly supported by the biblical text because Daniel
5:31 (6:1) and Daniel 9:1 make clear that Darius the Mede was appointed king
over Babylon.
Darius the Mede must not be confused with Darius I who began to rule in 522
B.C. since the latter was a about twenty-eight by 522 B.C. having been born in
approximately 550 B.C. whereas the former was sixty-two when he began to rule
according to Daniel 5:31 (6:1). Furthermore, Darius I was of a Persian royal line
because his father, Hystaspes, was of the Achaemenid dynasty whereas the father
Darius the Mede was Ahasuerus who was of Median descent according to Daniel
9:1. Darius I took the throne by a coup d’état whereas Cyrus appointed Darius the
Mede to be king over Babylon according to Daniel 9:1.
Darius I is mentioned in Ezra 4:5, 24; 5:5-7; 6:1, 12, 15 as well as Haggai 1:1;
2:10; Zechariah 1:1, 7; 7:1 whereas Darius the Mede is only mentioned in the book
of Daniel (6:1, 6, 9, 25, 28; 9:1; 11:1). The royal houses of the kingdoms of Media
and Persia were closely related by marriage, which the Median king, Astyages, had
arranged. He wed his daughter, Mandane to Cambyses, King of Anshan. This
union produced Cyrus the Great who later became king of Persia. Astyages had a
son as well, namely Darius Cyaxares (pronounced sigh AKS uh reez) II who is none
other than Darius the Mede and uncle of Cyrus the Great. The latter spent little
time in Babylon after its capture. Thus, he left Babylon in Darius’ hands, his uncle.
Cyrus eventually married the daughter of Darius. Then approximately two years
later, upon the death of Darius, Cyrus united the kingdoms of Media and Persia
and assumed the title King of Persia.
Nehemiah 12:22 mentions a Darius the Persian, who is not the same Darius
mentioned in Daniel chapter six since the latter of course was a Mede according to
Daniel 6:1. This Darius was known as Darius Codomannus or Darius III. He was
the last king of Persia. His empire was destroyed by Alexander the Great.
The Medo-Persian Empire was represented by the silver arms and chest of the
statue in Nebuchadnezzar’s dream recorded in Daniel chapter 2. This kingdom
lasted over 200 years (539-330 B.C.), longer than the Neo-Babylonian Empire of 87
years (626-539). However, as we noted in Daniel chapter two this empire was
inferior in quality to the Babylonian empire just as silver compared with gold.
24
Wiersbe, W. W. (1993). Wiersbe’s Expository Outlines on the Old Testament (Da 5:30–31). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
7
Daniel 2:39 contains two statements. The first records Daniel telling
Nebuchadnezzar that after his kingdom there will arise another kingdom which
will be inferior to his kingdom. Since Daniel told the king at the end of Daniel 2:38
that he was the head of gold of the statue in his dream, this second kingdom is
represented by the silver arms and chest of the statue. History records that this part
of the statue represented the Medo-Persian Empire. It was inferior since it lacked
the inner unity of Babylon because the Medes and the Persians, though united,
never fused into one people.
Since the metals of the statue decrease in value but increase in strength, the
silver arms and chest of the statue indicate that the character of authority in
rulership of the Media-Persian Empire was superior to the third and fourth
kingdoms, which history records were Greece and Rome respectively and inferior
to only Babylon. However, its power or strength was superior to Babylon but
inferior to Greece and Rome.
The Medo-Persian empire was founded by Cyrus, who started out as the king of
Anshan in Persia. He fused the Iranian tribes into a great military machine. He
married the daughter of the king of Media and added Media to his empire. Then,
the Medo-Persian army conquered the Babylonians in 539 B.C. Under Cryus, they
defeated the Babylonian army outside the city of Babylon. According to
Babylonian and Persian records, the people of Babylon threw open the gates of the
city, welcoming the Persian army as deliverers from the despotic reigns of
Nabonidus and Belshazzar. They gave Cyrus a triumphal entry complete with palm
branches. The Persian kings were good-natured but weak. Most imitated the
corruption of Babylon.
In Nebuchadnezzar’s dream, the arms of silver represented two distinct nations,
namely, Media and Persia that together defeated Babylon. Although the MedoPersia Empire lasted over 200 years (539-330 B.C.) longer than the NeoBabylonian Empire of 87 years (626-539), the Medo-Persian Empire was inferior
to it, as silver is compared with gold. History confirms that the Medo-Persian
Empire, and the empire of Alexander which followed, lacked the central authority
and fine organization which characterized the Babylonian Empire, thus the
Babylonian Empire was greater.
Thomas Constable writes “The Medo-Persian Empire led by Cyrus the Great
would have been inferior in quality to Babylon from Nebuchadnezzar's viewpoint
(cf. 5:28, 31). The Medo-Persian monarchs could not annul a law once it went into
effect (cf. 6:8, 12). This restricted the absolute authority of the king. However in
some respects this kingdom was superior to Babylonia. For example, it covered a
larger geographical area, and it lasted longer (539-331 B.C., 208 years). The arms
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
8
of the image evidently represented the two nations of Media and Persia that united
to defeat Babylon.”25
Dwight Pentecost commenting on Daniel 2:39, writes, “The second portion of
the statue, the chest and arms of silver, represented the rise of the Medes and
Persians (cf. 5:28; 6:8; also cf. 5:31). The Medo-Persians conquered the
Babylonians in 539 B.C. The arms of silver evidently represent the two nations of
Media and Persia that together defeated Babylon. Though that kingdom lasted over
200 years (539-330 B.C.), longer than the Neo-Babylonian Empire of 87 years
(626-539), the Medo-Persian Empire was inferior to it, as silver compared with
gold.”26
Media
Commenting on Media, D.J. Wiseman writes “Media was the name for NW
Iran, SW of the Caspian Sea and N of the Zagros Mountains, covering the modern
province of Azerbaijan and part of Persian Kurdistan. The inhabitants were called
Medes or Medians and were Japhethites (Gn. 10:2), whose Aryan lineage is
confirmed by Herodotus (7. 62), Strabo (15. 2. 8) and by the surviving traces of
their language. The Medes were steppe-dwellers whose name is first mentioned by
Shalmaneser III who raided their plains in 836 BC to obtain their famous, finely
bred horses. Later Assyr. kings followed him and sought to keep the E passes open
to the traders. Adad-nirari III (810–781 BC) claims to have conquered ‘the land of
the Medes and Parsua (Persia)’, as did Tiglath-pileser III (743 BC) and Sargon II
(716 BC). The latter transported Israelites to Media (2 Ki. 17:6; 18:11) after he had
overrun the part of the land ruled by Dayaukku (Deioces), whom he exiled for a
time to Hamath. Esarhaddon bound his Median vassals by treaty (Iraq 20, 1958,
pp. 1–91), but they soon rebelled and joined the Scythians (Ashguza) and
Cimmerians against the declining power of Assyria after 631 BC. Under Phraortes
there began the open attacks which culminated in the fall of Nineveh (612 BC) and
Harran (610 BC) to Kyaxares of Media and his Bab. allies. The Medes controlled
all lands to the N of Assyria and clashed with Lydia until peace was ratified in 585
BC. In 550 BC *CYRUS of Anshan (*ELAM) defeated Astyages and brought Media
under control, capturing the capital Ecbatana and adding ‘King of the Medes’ to
his titles. Many Medes were given positions of responsibility and their customs and
laws were combined with those of the Persians (Dn. 6:8, 15). Media was
sometimes used to denote Persia but more usually combined with it as a major part
of the new confederation (Dn. 8:20; Est. 1:19). The Medes, as seen by the prophets
25
Constable, Thomas L., Notes on Daniel-2007 Edition, page 30; copyright 2007; Published by Sonic Light: http://www.soniclight.com
Walvoord, J. F., Zuck, R. B., & Dallas Theological Seminary. (1983-). The Bible knowledge commentary : An exposition of the scriptures (Da
2:39). Wheaton, IL: Victor Books.
26
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
9
Isaiah (13:17) and Jeremiah (51:11, 28), took part in the capture of Babylon (Dn.
5:28). The new ruler of Babylon, *DARIUS, was called ‘the Mede’ (Dn. 11:1),
being the son of Ahasuerus of Median origin (Dn. 9:1). The Medes later rebelled
under Darius I and II (409 BC). The history of the Jews in Media is recounted in
Esther (1:3, 14, 18–19) and the Medians under Syrians (Seleucids) and Parthians
are referred to in 1 Macc. 14:1–3; Josephus, Ant. 10.232. Media was organized as
the 11th and 18th Satrapies. The Medes are mentioned, with the Parthians and
Elamites, in Acts 2:9. After the Sassanids Media was used only as a geographical
term.”27
Albert Bean writes “The region south and southwest of the Caspian Sea in the
Zagros Mountains inhabited by the Medes, an Aryan people from north and west
of the Caspian Sea. It is north of Elam and west of Assyria. The traditional capital
of the region was Ecbatana. Before 1500 B.C. the region was part of the Mitanni
kingdom. Later the Elamites controlled the region and its nomadic inhabitants. The
people known as the Medes entered the area over a long period between 1400 and
1000 B.C. The Medes were first reported in history by the Assyrian Shalmaneser III
about 850 B.C. They were a group of nomadic tribes rather than a state or kingdom.
The Assyrians controlled them or sought to for more than 200 years, though the
Medes enjoyed some periods of freedom before the Scythians conquered them in
653 B.C. Sometime before this, Deioces were united and organized the Medes.
Despite the Scythians’ invasion, the Medes continued to develop as a kingdom.
The greatest Median king was Cyaxares (625–585 B.C.). He was the third ruler of
the united Medes and was able to defeat the Scythians. Afterwards Cyaxares turned
his attention to the Assyrians, attacking Nineveh, the Assyrian capital. Before
Nineveh fell in 612 B.C., Cyaxares conquered Asshur, the ancient center of the
Assyrian Empire. Then, with the aid of the Scythians and Babylonians and others,
Nineveh was taken. The end of the Assyrian Empire was near. Babylon and Media
divided the Assyrian Empire with Media taking the land east and north of the
Tigris River. Nebuchadnezzar II and Cyaxares’ granddaughter wed to seal the pact.
The Medes turned their attention to the north and toward Asia Minor. After a fiveyear war with Lydia, Cyaxares concluded a peace in 584 B.C., again sealing it with
a marriage. His son Astyages married the daughter of the Lydian king. Astyages
became king of the Medes when Cyaxares died. The end of the Median kingdom
came with the rise of Cyrus II, founder of the Persian Empire. Cyrus was king of
Anshan and a vassal to Astyages. Indeed, Cyrus’ mother was Astyages’ daughter.
About 550 B.C., encouraged by Babylon, Cyrus rebelled against the Medes. His
rebellion led to the defeat of Astyages. The kingdom of the Medes was replaced by
the kingdom of the Persians. Though conquered by the Persians, the Medes
27
Wood, D. R. W., & Marshall, I. H. (1996). New Bible dictionary (3rd ed.) (745). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity Press.
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
10
continued to hold a place of honor in the Persian Empire. Media was the secondmost important portion of the Empire after Persia itself. Biblical references
frequently combine “the Medes and the Persians” (Dan. 5:28; cp. Esther 1:19;
10:2). The kings of the Persian Empire are called “the kings of Media and Persia”
(Dan. 8:20). The most famous Mede in Scripture is Darius the Mede (Dan. 5:31;
9:1). Media is sometimes referred to as the instrument of God, especially against
Babylon (Isa. 13:17; 21:2; Jer. 51:11, 28), but the Medes also had to drink the cup
of God’s judgment (Jer. 25:25). Their final appearance in Scripture is the presence
of Jews or Jewish converts from there at Pentecost (Acts. 2:9).”28
Eerdman’s Dictionary has the following article on Media, “An Indoaryan
people living in the mountains of Iran east of Armenia, northeast of Mesopotamia,
and south of the Caspian Sea. The early history of the Medes remains obscure.
Archaeological evidence suggests that they entered Iran as nomads or
transhumants at the beginning of the tenth century B.C. Frequent references in
Assyrian cuneiform texts from the mid-ninth century on suggest a loose
confederation of autonomous tribes. Tiglath-pileser III captured some of the
Median territory ca. 740, and Sargon II subdued Median factions and their allies.
After Assyria defeated Israel in 722, some of the populace was resettled in “the
cities of the Medes” (2Kgs. 17:6; 18:11). Threatened by neighboring peoples ca.
676, various Median tribes sought Assyrian aid and soon thereafter were
subjugated through vassal treaties. In the seventh century, however, a number of
the tribes were unified by the chieftain Deioces, who ruled from Ecbatana, and the
Medes became increasingly powerful. Deioces’ son Phraortes conquered the
Persians as well as much of Anatolia. Joining with Babylon, the Medes under
Cyaxares II destroyed the Assyrian capital Nineveh in 612. Subsequently Cyaxares
extended Median control over Parthia and Anatolia as far as Lydia. Cyaxares’ son
Astyages was overthrown by the vassal king of Persia, Cyrus II the Great, son of
Cambyses I and Astyages’ daughter Mandane. Cyrus made Media the first satrapy
of his (Medo-)Persian Empire, which he ruled from Ecbatana. The territory, along
with the entire Persian Empire, fell to Alexander the Great in 331 (Dan. 8:1–8, 20–
21) and subsequently came under Seleucid (1 Macc. 6:56) and Parthian (14:1–3)
rule. Although Cyrus had permitted the return of Judahites deported by Babylon
and the rebuilding of Jerusalem, Media remained home to some Diaspora Jews in
the first century A.D. (Acts 2:9). In the Old Testament “the Medes (and Persians)”
are cited primarily for their conquest of the NeoBabylonian Empire in 539 (Isa.
13:17; 21:2; Jer. 51:11, 28; Dan. 5:28). The immutability of their law is proverbial
(Dan. 6:8, 12, 15; cf. Esth. 1:19).”29
28
Brand, C., Draper, C., England, A., Bond, S., Clendenen, E. R., Butler, T. C., & Latta, B. (2003). Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (1095–
1096). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.
29
Myers, A. C. (1987). The Eerdmans Bible dictionary (704). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans.
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
11
Persia
A.R. Millard writes “The Indo-European Persians, nomadic pastoralists from S
Russia, probably entered the Iranian plateau late in the 2nd millennium BC. In 836
BC Shalmaneser III of Assyria received tribute from rulers of a Parsua near Lake
Urmia. His successor found the land of Parsuash in the S where several tribes
finally settled. This area, E of the Persian Gulf, is still called Farsistan. Persepolis
and Parsagarda were the chief towns. Heb. pāras, ‘Persia’, refers to this land. The
early traditions of the Persian people are recorded in the sacred book, the ZendAvesta. The earliest recorded kings ruled from Anshan, NW of Susa. The
Achaemenes who was claimed as founder of the dynasty by later kings probably
reigned c. 680 BC. His grandson, Cyrus I, opposed Ashurbanipal of Assyria, but
later submitted. Cyrus II, grandson of Cyrus I, rebelled against his Median
suzerain, Astyages, killing him and taking over his capital, *ECBATANA, in 550 BC.
Thereafter Median language and customs had strong influence on the Persians.
This success was followed by the subjugation of Anatolia and the conquest of
Croesus of Lydia (547 BC). Cyrus then turned E to extend his realm into NW India.
By 540 BC he was sufficiently strong to attack Babylonia. After several battles he
entered Babylon in triumph on 29 October 539 BC, 17 days after the city had fallen
to his army (Dn. 5:30f.; *CYRUS). The king soon returned to Susa, but his son
Cambyses remained in Babylon to represent him in religious ceremonies. The
whole empire was divided into large regions ruled by *SATRAPS, chosen from
Persian or Median nobles but with native officers under them (cf. Dn. 6). Various
statues of gods which had been collected into Babylon by the last native king,
Nabonidus (perhaps reflected in Is. 46:1f.), were returned to their own shrines. As
there was no image of Yahweh to return to Jerusalem, Cyrus gave to back the Jews
the precious vessels looted from the Temple by Nebuchadrezzar (Ezr. 1:7ff.; cf.
DOTT, pp. 92–94). More important, he gave royal authorization for the rebuilding
of the Temple to any Jew who wished to return to Judah (Ezr. 1:1–4). One
Sheshbazzar was appointed governor (Ezr. 5:14). He was evidently a special
officer responsible to the king. The governor of the province of ‘Across the River’
(the country W of the Euphrates) was clearly unaware of Cyrus’ edict when in 520
BC he attempted to delay the work. His letter went to his superior, the satrap who
had charge of Babylon and the W. No record was found among the archives kept at
Babylon, but a memorandum was found at Ecbatana, where Cyrus had resided
during his first regnal year. Darius I (522–486 BC) confirmed the decree and
ordered his officials to help the Jews. Darius and his successor Xerxes I (486–465
BC) expended considerable energy in an attempt to conquer the Greeks of the
Peloponnese, almost the only area remaining outside the Persian empire in the
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
12
known world, for Cambyses II (530–522 BC) had annexed Egypt in 525 BC. The
defeat at Marathon (490 BC) by a small Gk. army was the only rebuff suffered by
Darius. His reorganization of the satrapies, his system of military commanders, and
his introduction of coinage, legal and postal systems lasted as long as the empire.
These facilities coupled with the considerable degree of autonomy allowed to
subject peoples contributed greatly to the stability of the empire and allowed such a
small community as Judah to survive, Jewish officers acting as governors (pḥh)
there. Under Artaxerxes I (465–424 BC) Jewish affairs had official representation at
court. *EZRA, it seems, was ‘Secretary of State for Jewish Affairs’ (Ezr. 7:12). He
was accredited as special envoy to reorganize the Temple services at Jerusalem
(458 BC). The eager Jews were led on by the encouragement they received to
exceed the terms of Ezra’s commission and rebuild the city wall. This was reported
to the king by the governor of Samaria, who evidently had some responsibility for
Judah. The royal reply (Ezr. 4:17–23) ordered the cessation of the work, for search
of the records had shown that the city had revolted against earlier kings.
Artaxerxes was faced with rebellion in Egypt (c. 460–454 BC), so he could not
allow the construction of a fortress so near to that country. However, the royal
cupbearer was a Jew, *NEHEMIAH, who was able to reverse the effects of this
decree by having himself appointed *GOVERNOR of Judah (Heb. tiršāṯā’, a Persian
word, Ne. 8:9) with permission to rebuild the walls (445 BC). No record remains of
relations between the Persian rulers and the Jews after this period. When the
Persian empire was in the power of Alexander (331 BC) the Jews simply
transferred their allegiance from one monarch to another. The Indo-European
Persian language was written in a cuneiform script composed of 51 simple syllabic
signs (*WRITING) but this was restricted to imperial monuments almost
exclusively. The imperial chancery used Aramaic language and characters for
official communications (e.g. the letters in Ezra, cf. DOTT, pp. 256–269).
Translations were made into local tongues (cf. Est. 3:12; 8:9). The luxury of the
Persian court as described in the book of *ESTHER is attested by objects found at
several sites. A number of stone bas-reliefs depict the king and his courtiers and
the tribute of the vanquished. Portraits of the different racial groups are especially
fine examples of Persian stone carving. The Oxus treasure (now mostly in the
British Museum) and other chance finds show the skill of goldsmiths and jewellers.
Solid gold and silver bowls and vases illustrate the wealth of the kings. Gk.
influences may be seen in some Persian works and Gk. craftsmen appear among
lists of palace dependants. The early Persians revered gods of nature, fertility and
the heavens. The tribe of the Magi were nearly exclusively the priests. Some time
after 1000 BC Zoroaster proclaimed a religion of lofty moral ideals based on the
principle ‘Do good, hate evil’. For him there was one god, Ahura-mazda, the
Good, represented by purifying fire and water. Opposed to the good was a dark
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
13
power of Evil. This creed was adopted by Darius I, but soon became lost among
the more ancient cults. Zoroaster’s doctrines survived and were spread abroad.
Their influence has been traced in the writings of early Judaism (*Dead Sea
Scrolls) and, by some scholars, in the NT.”30
Albert Bean writes “As a nation Persia corresponds to the modern state of Iran.
As an empire Persia was a vast collection of states and kingdoms reaching from the
shores of Asia Minor in the west to the Indus River Valley in the east. It reached
northward to southern Russia and in the south included Egypt and the regions
bordering the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman. In history the empire defeated
the Babylonians and then fell finally to Alexander the Great. The nation was
named for the southernmost region of the area called Parsis or Persis. It was a
harsh land of deserts, mountains, plateaus, and valleys. The climate was arid and
showed extremes of cold and heat. Gold and silver and wheat and barley were
native to the area. The region was settled shortly after 3000 B.C. by people from the
north. An Elamite culture developed which, at its peak in 1200 B.C., dominated the
whole Tigris River Valley. It lasted until 1050 B.C. After its destruction other
northern groups entered the area. Among these groups were tribesmen who formed
a small kingdom in the region of Anshan around 700 B.C. It was ruled by
Achaemenes, the great, great-grandfather of Cyrus II, the Great. (Thus, the period
from Achaemenes to Alexander is called the Achaemenid Period.) This small
kingdom was the seed of the Persian Empire. When Cyrus II came to his father’s
throne in 559 B.C., his kingdom was part of a larger Median kingdom. The Medes
controlled the territory northeast and east of the Babylonians. In 550 B.C. Cyrus
rebelled against Astyages, the Median king. His rebellion led to the capture of the
king and gave Cyrus control over a kingdom stretching from Media to the Halys
River in Asia Minor. Soon Cyrus challenged the king of Lydia. Victory there gave
Cyrus the western portion of Asia Minor. Then in 539 B.C. Babylon fell to Cyrus
due to his skill and internal dissension in the Babylonian Empire. Cyrus died in
530 B.C.; however, the Persian Empire continued to grow. Cambyses II, Cyrus,
son, conquered Egypt in 525 B.C. Cambyses’ successor Darius I expanded the
empire eastward to the Indus and attempted to conquer or control the Greeks.
Darius lost to the Greeks at Marathon in 490 B.C. This was the greatest extension
of the empire. Later emperors did little to expand the empire. They even had
difficulty holding such a far-flung empire together. The Persian Empire is
important to the history and development of civilization. It had major effects on
religion, law, politics, and economics. The impact came through the Jews, the
Bible, contacts with the Greeks, and through Alexander the Great’s incorporation
of ideas and architecture from the Persians. Politically the Persian Empire was the
30
Wood, D. R. W., & Marshall, I. H. (1996). New Bible dictionary (3rd ed.) (903–905). Leicester, England; Downers Grove, Ill.: InterVarsity
Press.
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
14
best organized the world had ever seen. By the time of Darius I, 522–486 B.C., the
empire was divided into 20 satrapies (political units of varying size and
population). Satrapies were subdivided into provinces. Initially Judah was a
province in the satrapy of Babylon. Later Judah was in one named ‘Beyond the
River.’ The satrapies were governed by Persians who were directly responsible to
the emperor. Good administration required good communications that called for
good roads. These roads did more than speed administration, though. They
encouraged contacts between peoples within the empire. Ideas and goods could
move hundreds of miles with little restriction. The empire became wealthy and also
gave its inhabitants a sense that they were part of a larger world. A kind of
‘universal awareness’ developed. The use of minted coins and the development of
a money economy aided this identification with a larger world. The emperor’s
coins were handy reminders of the power and privileges of being part of the
empire. Also the Persians were committed to rule by law. Instead of imposing an
imperial law from above, however, the emperor and his satraps gave their authority
and support to local law. For the Jews this meant official support for keeping
Jewish law in the land of the Jews. The Persian Empire affected the Jews and
biblical history a great deal. Babylon had conquered Jerusalem and destroyed the
temple in 586 B.C. When Cyrus conquered Babylon, he allowed the Jews to return
to Judah and encouraged the rebuilding of the temple (Ezra 1:1–4). The work was
begun but not completed. Then, under Darius I, Zerubbabel and the high priest,
Joshua, led the restored community with the support and encouragement of the
Persians. (Ezra 3–6 tells of some of the events while Haggai’s and Zechariah’s
prophecies were made during the days of the restoration.) Despite some local
opposition Darius supported the rebuilding of the temple, which was rededicated in
his sixth year (Ezra 6:15). In addition, both Ezra and Nehemiah were official
representatives of the Persian government. Ezra was to teach and to appoint judges
(Ezra 7). Nehemiah may have been the first governor of the province of Yehud
(Judah). He undoubtedly had official support for his rebuilding of the walls of
Jerusalem. The Jews had trouble under Persian rule, too. Although Daniel was
taken into exile by the Babylonians (Dan. 1), his ministry continued through the
fall of the Babylonians (Dan. 5) into the time of the Persians (Dan. 6). His visions
projected even further. Daniel 6 shows a stable government but one in which Jews
could still be at risk. His visions in a time of tranquillity remind readers that human
kingdoms come and go. Esther is a story of God’s rescue of His people during the
rule of the Persian emperor, Ahasuerus (also known as Xerxes I). The story shows
an empire where law was used and misused. Jews were already, apparently, hated
by some. Malachi, too, was probably from the Persian period. His book shows an
awareness of the world at large and is positive toward the Gentiles and the
government. Throughout the period the Jews kept looking for the kind of
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
15
restoration promised by prophets such as Isaiah (chaps. 40–66) and Ezekiel (chaps.
40–48). Prophets such as Haggai and Zechariah and Malachi helped the Jews to
hope, but these men of God also reminded their hearers of the importance of
present faithfulness and obedience to God.”31
Eerdman’s Dictionary commenting on Persia “The largest empire of the ancient
Near East, which, at the height of its power, spanned from the borders of India in
the east to Ionia in the west. The people themselves called the empire Aryana, from
a term in the Zoroastrian scriptures derived from Sanskrit arya ‘noble’ (cf. “Iran,”
“Aryan”). The area in which Persia was established is a plateau of some 777,000
sq. km. (300,000 sq. mi.), consisting of a series of high valleys and dry basins,
approximately 900–2500 m. (3000–8000 ft.) above sea level. The plateau is ringed
by a variety of mountain ranges (the Kurdistan and Zagros on the west, the Elburz
on the north, and the Hindu Kush to the east). To the south, along the Persian Gulf
and Gulf of Oman, lie inhospitable plains. Two vast, salt-caked deserts, the Dashti-Kavir and Dasht-i-Lut, occupy most of central eastern Persia. Rainfall is meager,
except in the north, averaging 20 cm. (8 in.) or less in the eastern portion of the
plateau and 38 cm. (15 in.) in the western portion. Accordingly, large-scale
farming demanded the use of irrigation technology; wheat and barley were
cultivated, and sheeps and goats were fast raised during the Neolithic period (ca.
9000 B.C.). Temperatures range from -18°C. (0°F.) to 20–32°C. (70–90°F.) in the
central plateau and as high as 50°C. (120°F.) along the Persian Gulf coast. The
climate is subtropical near the Caspian Sea to the north, where rain forests called
janqal (cf. “jungle”) grow. A. Early Period Archaeological evidence indicates that
plants and animals were domesticated at several sites in the Zagros mountain
region as early as 9000 B.C. (“the Neolithic Revolution”) and that here were
formed the earliest village civilizations relying on irrigation agriculture. The
kingdom of ELAM, which predated the formation of the Persian Empire, was
located in southwestern Iran along the northern coast of the Persian Gulf. It
supplied Sumer with such minerals as copper, tin, silver, lead, and alabaster.
Precious gems, timber, and horses were also exported from Elam. Toward the end
of the second millennium ethnic groups from south and east of the Caspian Sea
entered Elam. This wave of Aryan peoples included Cimmerians, Scythians,
Medes, and Persians. By the ninth century the latter two groups had settled in
northwest Iran, but they were hemmed in by the power of Urartu, Assyria, Elam,
and Babylonia. An inscription of the Assyrian king Shalmaneser III (859–825)
includes the first reference to Medes (Akk. Madai) and Persians (Parsua), whom
he deported in large numbers in 837. These peoples also paid tribute to
Tiglathpileser III (745–727) and Sargon II (721–705). Attacks by the Assyrians
31
Brand, C., Draper, C., England, A., Bond, S., Clendenen, E. R., Butler, T. C., & Latta, B. (2003). Holman Illustrated Bible Dictionary (1279–
1280). Nashville, TN: Holman Bible Publishers.
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
16
and Urartians in the seventh century forced the MEDES to unite, founding a capital
at Ecbatana (modern Hamadân). Their leader was one Deioces (or Dayakku), who
was taken to Assyria in 715 and thence exiled to Hamath in Syria. His successor,
Phraortes (Khshathrita), who ruled from 675–653, lost his life while conquering
the Persians in the southwest. The Medians lived under Scythian rule for twentyeight years, until Cyaxares (Uvakhshtra; 653–585) liberated them. Allied with the
Babylonians and Scythians, Cyaxares participated in the siege and destruction of
Nineveh. He then concluded a treaty with Babylon and married his granddaughter
Amytis to Nabopolassar’s son Nebuchadrezzar II (605–562); it was for Amytis that
the famous ‘Hanging Gardens’ of Babylon were built. The Persians gradually
settled east of Elam, led by a dynasty founded by Achaemenes (Hakhamanish) ca.
700. His successor Teispes added Anshan to Persian territory; his sons Ariaramnes
(Ariyaramna; 640–590) and Cyrus I (Kurash; 640–600) annexed lands in the west.
Cambyses I (Kanbujiya; 600–559) married Mandane, daughter of Astyages, who
bore him Cyrus II. As with Moses, a legend about Cyrus depicts his birth and
rescue by a shepherd after Astyages ordered the infant abandoned (Herodotus Hist
i:108–122). The Achaemenid dynasty was founded when Cyrus II successfully
revolted against Astyages in 549. B. Persian Empire 1. Cyrus II (ca. 559–530).
Babylonian preoccupation with westward expansion gave Cyrus time to add
Assyria, Cilicia, Sardis, and the Ionian Greek cities to his realm. Newly acquired
lands were organized into satrapies, initially approximately twenty administrative
units headed by royal appointees from noble families. King Nabonidus’ unpopular
decision to remove the images of most of the deities of Babylon to the capital
paved the way for Cyrus’ conquest of Babylonia, and the Persian (aided by
disgruntled Babylonians) entered the city on October 13, 539. The Persian king
was an autocrat. Edicts sealed with his ring had the force of law (Esth. 3:12; 8:8).
Six prominent families called vispati held hereditary positions in the court; the
commander of the “Immortals,” the king’s bodyguard, may have been the most
distinguished such figure. Unfortunately, relatively little is known about the
administration of the immense empire; although a large number of archival texts
have been recovered, they concern primarily local matters. In a stroke of
diplomatic genius Cyrus returned the images to their temples and decreed that all
subject peoples of the Babylonians return to their own home-lands (2 Chr. 36:23;
Ezra 1:1–4). The joy with which the deportees from Judah greeted this news (cf.
Isa. 44:28; 45:1, 13) was undoubtedly expressed by other peoples as well. Persian
rulers were careful to be crowned king of conquered lands in accordance with local
customs and traditions; the Babylonian “Cyrus cylinder” depicts Cyrus as chosen
by the god Marduk to topple Nabonidus, and praises him for not looting the
temples in Babylon (ANET, pp. 15–16). Cyrus died in battle against the
Massagetae on the northeastern frontier in 530. 2. Cambyses II (529–522).
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
17
Cambyses, Cyrus’ eldest son, was quick to continue the expansion of the empire.
Egypt, Cyprus, and the Greek islands fell in quick succession, but the Persians
were stopped at Nubia. At this juncture the throne was seized by Gaumata
(“Pseudo-Smerdis”), a member of the magi who masqueraded as Cambyses’
younger brother Bardya (killed by Cambyses in 526). Revolts broke out in Media,
Armenia, and Babylonia. Gaumata hastened to consolidate his position by offering
exemptions from military service and tax exemptions, but his rule lasted only six
months. Cambyses died under mysterious circumstances, perhaps by suicide, as he
returned to Babylon. 3. Darius I (Daryavaush; 522–486). Darius, son of Hystaspes
(Vishtaspa), and satrap of Parthia and Hyrcania, took Gaumata prisoner and
executed him at Ecbatana in 522. Consequently, he was proclaimed king. It took
Darius two years to put down the revolts around the empire, but by 518 satrapies as
distant as Ionia and Egypt acknowledged Darius’ rule. Persian troops campaigned
as far west as the Danube river, but they were defeated by Greek forces at
Marathon in 490. A huge bas-relief on a high cliff at Behistun (modern Bisitun) on
the Ecbatana-Babylon trade route commemorates Darius’ victory. It depicts
Darius, under the protection of the god Ahura-mazda, trampling Gaumata, with
nine rebel leaders in attendance. The inscription in Old Persian, Akkadian, and
Elamite proved invaluable in deciphering these ancient languages. Subsequently
peace prevailed throughout the empire until the first Ionian revolt (500–494),
which ended with the destruction of Miletus. It was during Darius’ reign that
reconstruction of the temple in Jerusalem finally was undertaken by the exiles who
had returned to Judah. Zerubbabel ‘prince of Judah’ was in charge, and the
prophets Haggai and Zechariah encouraged the people in their work. When the
construction aroused the suspicion of satrap Tattenai and others, a letter was sent to
Darius requesting confirmation of the Jews’ assertion that Cyrus had given
permission to rebuild the temple (Ezra 5). The search turned up a copy of Cyrus’
decree, and Darius commanded that the work continue (ch. 6). Darius was an able
administrator who reorganized the empire into twenty-two satrapies, with delegates
from the central government (the ‘eyes’ and ‘ears’ of the king) checking up on the
satraps. A good road network, a royal mail service, and the use of Aramaic as the
language of government (replacing Elamite, which had long served in this
capacity) served to promote efficiency. Darius set up a uniform tax system and
introduced uniform weights and measures. In 517 he unified the monetary system
by introducing the gold daric (weighing 8.4 gm. [.3 oz.]) and silver shekel (5.6 gm.
[.2 oz.], worth 1/20th of a daric). Trade flourished, banking houses were
established, and Darius had a canal dug linking the Nile river and Red Sea. Greek
scientists, artists, and physicians were employed in the Persian court. An opulent
new palace was built at Susa in 521, and work was started on the new capital at
Persepolis (Pārsa) in 518. Darius constructed the so-called “royal” section of
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
18
Persepolis, a large artificial terrace rising 12 m. (40 ft.) above the plain. The
principal access to the platform was via a gradual stairway that could be ascended
on horseback; official buildings and residential buildings shared the terrace.
Foreign ambassadors were received at Susa and Ecbatana, but apparently never at
Persepolis. The royal court left Susa and journeyed to Persepolis to celebrate the
New Year’s festival (March 21), when the king received delegations from all parts
of the empire. When Darius died Persia was at the height of its territorial expansion
and material wealth. Its borders ranged from the Indus and Jaxartes rivers in the
east to Egypt and the Aegean in the west, and from the Persian Gulf in the south to
the Caspian and Black seas in the north. All Persian kings after Darius were
involved in maintaining the size and prestige the empire had achieved in his reign.
4. Xerxes I (485–465). Formerly viceroy of Babylon, Xerxes (called Ahasuerus in
Ezra and Esther) ruled Egypt and Babylon with a heavy hand, and vigorously took
up warring against the Greeks. In 480 a Persian army, accompanied by ships
served by Phoenicians, Egyptians, Ionians, and Cypriots, moved against Greece.
After a temporary delay at Thermopylae, the Persians took Thebes and Athens.
However, the reverses suffered by the Persians at Salamis, Miletus Plataea, and
Mycale forced Xerxes to relinquish control of all lands beyond Asia Minor. He
was assassinated in 465 and succeeded by Artaxerxes I. 5. Artaxerxes I (465–425).
During much of his early reign Artaxerxes was plagued by revolts in Egypt (460–
454), encouraged by the Greeks. Other rebellions resulted in the loss of some
eastern territories. Peace with Athens was restored by the treaty of Callias in 449.
Ca. 450 Rehum, the governor of Samaria, complained to Artaxerxes about repairs
to the walls of Jerusalem (Ezra 4). This time a search of the royal archives yielded
reports of Judean intrigue, and Artaxerxes put a halt to the restoration of
Jerusalem; work did not resume until Nehemiah arrived from Susa in 455, and the
city walls were not completed until 433. 6. Darius II (423–404). Darius ascended
the throne as Greece was rent by the Peloponnesian War. Despite interference by
his consort Parysatis, by siding with the Spartans he was able to recapture various
Greek cities in Asia Minor. In 419 the Egyptians, aided by the Persian governor
Vidranga, destroyed the Yahu temple at Elephantine; a series of letters from the
community of Jewish mercenaries to the Persian court details their efforts to
receive permission to rebuild the temple. 7. Artaxerxes II Mnemon (404–359). A
weak ruler, Artaxerxes II faced a revolt in Egypt that lasted for sixty years and
involved the Egyptians in anti-Persian activities along with Sparta, Athens, and
Cyprus. Artaxerxes made peace with the Greeks in 386, but his subsequent
invasion of Egypt was blunted by the skillful defense of Pharaoh Nectanebo I. 8.
Artaxerxes III Ochus (359–338). A brutal but ambitious ruler, Artaxerxes III
mounted another expedition against Egypt. Nectanebo II repelled his forces in 351,
and the Egyptians continued their tradition of stirring up unrest against Persia by
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
19
supporting a revolt in Phoenicia. Artaxerxes finally succeeded in defeating the
Egyptians in 343. He was murdered in 338 by Bagoas, his vizier and eunuch. 9.
Darius III Codomannus (336–330). His troops defeated by Alexander the Great at
Issus, Darius fled to Bactria, where he died, the last of the Achaemenid dynasty.
Alexander captured Persepolis in February 330, and sent its treasures to Ecbatana.
C. Post-Achaemenid Persia Alexander’s death in 323 loosened Persia from Greek
domination. The Seleucids retained control of the region but briefly. Parthians
from eastern Iran established their capital at Ctesiphon (Casiphia) and under the
Arsacid dynasty gradually took over the country. The Parthians revived trade in
Iran, and served as intermediaries in commerce between the Mediterranean and Far
East, which was centered at the mid-Euphrates city of Dura-Europus. Roman
absorption of Syria led to several unsuccessful attempts to extend Roman influence
into Persia. In 40 B.C. the Parthians, who invaded the Roman province of Syria,
were considered liberators by the Jews. They placed Antigonus, son of
Aristobulus, on Jerusalem’s throne (40–37), and gave military support to that city
during Titus’ siege. Jews and Parthians worked together against Rome during the
reigns of Trajan and Hadrian. The Parthians were succeeded by the Sassanians
(A.D. 223–651), who annexed part of northwest India, northern Mesopotamia, and
Armenia. In their battles with Rome they once captured the emperor Valerian
(260). Like the Parthians, the Sassanians were able traders, linking the Near and
Far East. Initially, India and Persia shared a number of deities, as was common
throughout the ancient Near East. At some point the god Ahura Mazdā was
elevated to a supreme position. Other deities (yazata) included Mithra (lit.
‘agreement’; Indian Mitra; god of the contract and of war), Haoma (Soma;
personification of an intoxicating drink), Anahita (goddess of rivers and fertility),
and Tishtrya (bringer of rain). In the sixth century the prophet ZARATHUSHTRA
(perhaps ‘he who drives [or manages] camels’) appeared on the scene. According
to Zoroastrian tradition, he enjoyed the patronage of his convert, the local chief
Vishtāspa. Zarathushtra’s teachings, preserved in the Gāthās (the earliest portion of
the Avesta), admonish persons to side with good against evil by exercising free
choice. Other topics, such as the merits and benefits of animal husbandry and cattle
breeding, are found in Zarathushtra’s discourses. While Zoroastrianism leans
toward monotheism in the figure of Ahura Mazdā, it contains strong elements of
dualism, as aša ‘truth’ stands in opposition to druj ‘falsehood.’ How pervasive
Zoroastrianism was in the Achaemenid dynasty is unclear, but Ahura Mazdā
appears in many reliefs and inscriptions.”32
32
Myers, A. C. (1987). The Eerdmans Bible dictionary (814–817). Grand Rapids, Mich.: Eerdmans.
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
20
Daniel 5:31 (6:1)-Darius the Mede Receives the Babylonian Kingdom at the
Age of About Sixty-Two
Daniel 5:31 So Darius the Mede received the kingdom at about the age of
sixty-two. (NASB95)
This verse is composed of the conjunction wa (‫( ) ְו‬waw), “so” which is followed
by the masculine singular proper name dār·yā·wěš (‫( )דָּ ְריָוֶשׁ‬daw-reh-yaw-vaysh´),
“Darius” which is modified by the feminine singular proper noun mā·ḏǎy (‫)מָדַ י‬
(maw-dah´ee), “the Mede” and then we have the third person masculine singular
puʿʿal (Hebrew: pual) perfect form of the verb qeḇǎl (‫( ) ְקבַל‬keb-al´), “received”
which is followed by the feminine singular construct form of the noun mǎl·ḵûṯ
(‫( ) ַמלְכוּת‬mal-kooth), “kingdom” and then we have the preposition k- (‫( )כְּ־‬kee) “at
about” and its object is the masculine singular construct form of the noun bǎr (‫)בַּר‬
(bar), “the age” which is modified by the feminine plural noun šenā(h) (‫שׁנָה‬
ְ )
(shen-aw´) and then we have the masculine plural cardinal number šit·tîn (‫)שִׁתִּ ין‬
(shit-teen´), “sixty” and then we have the conjunction wa (‫( ) ְו‬waw), which is not
translated and followed by the feminine dual noun terên (‫( )תְּ ֵרין‬ter-ane´), “two.”
wa
The conjunction wa is used in a transitional sense and means “now.” This word
is introducing a statement that marks a transition from the events recorded in
Daniel chapter five to the events recorded in Daniel chapter six. The former
records God deposing the Babylonian king Belshazzar from power whereas the
latter records the God of Israel delivering Daniel from the power of Darius the
Mede who unwillingly puts Daniel to death because of a conspiracy against him by
certain officials in the Medo-Persian kingdom. Here in Daniel 5:31 (Aramaic 6:1),
the conjunction wa is introducing a statement which records Darius the Mede
receiving the Babylonian kingdom from Cyrus when he was about sixty-two years
of age. Therefore, the transition is from a discussion regarding the God of Israel
dealing with Belshazzar to dealing with Darius the Mede. The former never
became a believer in the God of Israel whereas the latter, like Nebuchadnezzar did.
Some interpret this conjunction as a marker of result which would indicate that
Darius the Mede assumed power over the Babylonian kingdom “as a result of”
Belshazzar’s death. However, he assumed power over the Babylonian kingdom
because of being appointed by Cyrus the Persian.
This word could also be translated “next” or “then” as a result of interpreting it
as a marker of a sequence of closely related events. This would mean that Darius
the Mede receiving the Babylonian kingdom when he was about sixty-two years of
age was the next event that took place after Belshazzar was killed by the Medo2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
21
Persian army. However, though this interpretation makes perfect sense, the
emphasis of the word appears to be more of introducing a statement which presents
a transition from the God of Israel dealing with Belshazzar to dealing with Darius
the Mede. The emphasis of the word is marking a new topic of discussion.
Darius the Mede
The proper name dār·yā·wěš means “Darius” and the proper noun mā·ḏǎy
means “Medes” who were the inhabitants of northwest Iran, southwest of the
Caspian Sea and north of the Zagros Mountains. This nation covered the modern
province of Azerbaijan and part of Persian Kurdistan. These two words identify an
individual who was a Mede and whose name was Gubaru, who was the governor
appointed over Babylon by Cyrus. This interpretation is strongly supported by the
biblical text because Daniel 5:31 (6:1) and Daniel 9:1 make clear that Darius the
Mede was appointed king over Babylon.
qeḇǎl
The verb qeḇǎl means “to receive” and its subject is Darius the Mede and its
object is the feminine singular construct form of the noun mǎl·ḵûṯ (‫( ) ַמלְכוּת‬malkooth), “kingdom” which refers to the Babylonian kingdom. Thus the word
denotes that Darius the Mede “received” the Babylonian kingdom as a result of
Cyrus the Persian appointing him the ruler of this kingdom. This interpretation of
the word is indicated by Daniel’s statement in Daniel 9:1 which records that in the
first year of Darius, the son of Ahasuerus of Median descent, Darius the Mede was
made king over the Chaldean kingdom. The Nabonidus Chronicle reveals that he
received this kingdom as a result of being appointed to this position by Cyrus the
Persian.
The puʿʿal (Hebrew: pual) stem of the verb is factitive and denotes that Darius
the Mede entered into the state of receiving the Babylonian kingdom. The passive
voice of the verb denotes Darius the Mede received the action of being made king
over Babylon. The perfect conjugation of the verb is constative describing in
summary fashion this past action.
mǎl·ḵûṯ
Once again, the noun mǎl·ḵûṯ means “kingdom” and denotes the sphere of
Babylon’s authority or control over various nations, ethnicities and language
groups. It is used to designate the territorial sphere of Babylon. The term refers to
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
22
the political boundaries of authority and control, which were determined by the
extent to which Belshazzar and his father Nabonidus exercised their authority.
k ḇǎrʹ šenînʹ šit·tînʹ w ṯǎr·tênʹ
The masculine singular construct form of the noun bǎr means “the age of” and
the feminine plural noun šenā(h) means “years” since it refers a definite unit of
time involving a complete cycle of seasons and here it is used to give a relative
time reference to Darius the Mede becoming ruler over the Babylonian kingdom.
The masculine plural cardinal number šit·tîn means “sixty.” The conjunction wa is
uniting this word with the feminine dual noun terên, which means “two.” The
masculine singular construct form of the noun bǎr is the object of the preposition
k-, which means “at” since it is a marker of a point of time with reference to
another point of time. The two points of time are the age of Darius the Mede and
his receiving the Babylonian kingdom from Cyrus. Therefore, this prepositional
phrase is a temporal marker indicating that Darius the Mede was sixty-two years of
age when he received the Babylonian kingdom from Cyrus the Persian.
This preposition is not a marker of an indeterminate unit of time indicating that
Darius the Mede received the Babylonian kingdom when he was “about” sixty-two
years of age since sixty-two is not a round number but a specific number. If the
text said sixty then we would see this use of the word to indicate that Darius the
Mede was fifty-nine and had not quite turned sixty. However, we have a specific
age given to Darius which would indicate that the preposition k- is marking Darius’
age with his receiving the Babylonian kingdom from Cyrus (See TNIV, NIV,
NCV, GW, YLT, HCSB).
Translation of Daniel 6:1
Daniel 5:31 (6:1) Now, Darius the Mede received the kingdom at sixty-two
years of age. (Author’s translation)
Exposition of Daniel 6:1
In the Aramaic text, Daniel 5:31 actually begins chapter 6 since the verse
numbers beginning with 5:31 through 6:28 in the English Bible differ from the
verse numbers in the Aramaic text of Daniel (BHS). Thus, Daniel 5:31 in the
English translations should be Daniel 6:1 since this is the case in the Aramaic text
of Daniel. Correspondingly, Daniel 6:1 is Daniel 6:2 in the Aramaic text, Daniel
6:2 is Daniel 6:3 and so on throughout the rest of Daniel chapter 6. However, the
verse numbers in the English Bible beginning with Daniel 7:1, correspond to the
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
23
Aramaic text of Daniel once again. So Daniel 5:31 is actually Daniel 6:1 in the
original Aramaic text of Daniel.
Daniel 5:31 (6:1) is a transitional statement meaning that Daniel is changing
topics. He goes from discussing the God of Israel dealing with the heathen
Babylonian king, Belshazzar to presenting events related to the God of Israel
delivering him from death at the hands of the Medo-Persian Empire as a result of a
conspiracy in the government against him. Darius was deceived by officials in his
kingdom who were envious and jealous of Daniel. Daniel 6:1-3 (Aramaic 6:2-4)
records that Daniel maintained a prominent status in the Medo-Persian kingdom
while living in Babylon. Daniel 6:4-9 (Aramaic 6:5-10) records that a conspiracy
against Daniel by the other commissioners and satraps in the Medo-Persian
kingdom. Daniel 6:10-11 (Aramaic 6:11-12) records Daniel’s prayer to God while
in the midst of persecution and underserved suffering. Daniel 6:12-18 (Aramaic
6:13-19) records Daniel being unwillingly executed by the Darius the Mede.
Daniel 6:19-24 (Aramaic 6:20-25) records the God of Israel delivering Daniel from
death by shutting the mouths of the lions. Daniel 6:25-28 (Aramaic 6:26-29)
records King Darius issuing a proclamation throughout the Medo-Persian empire
which praises the God of Israel.
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
24
Daniel 6:1 (6:2)-Darius Appoints 120 Satraps Over the Babylonian Kingdom
Darius Appoints 120 Satraps Over the Babylonian Kingdom
Daniel 6:1 It seemed good to Darius to appoint 120 satraps over the
kingdom, that they would be in charge of the whole kingdom. (NASB95)
“It seemed good to Darius to appoint 120 satraps over the kingdom” is
composed of the third person masculine singular peʿal (Hebrew: qal) active perfect
form of the verb šep̄ ǎr (‫שׁפַר‬
ְ ) (shef-ar´), “it seemed good” and then we have the
ǒ
preposition q ḏām (‫( )קֳדָ ם‬kod-awm´), “to” and its object is the masculine singular
proper name dār·yā·wěš (‫( )דָּ ְריָוֶשׁ‬daw-reh-yaw-vaysh´), “Darius” which is followed
by the conjunction wa (‫( ) ְו‬waw), “to” which is followed by the third person
masculine singular hafʿel (Hebrew: hiphil) active perfect form of the verb qûm
(‫( )קוּם‬koom), “appoint” and then we have the preposition ʿǎl (‫( )עַל‬al), “over” and
its object is the feminine singular construct form of the noun mǎl·ḵûṯ (‫( ) ַמלְכוּת‬malkooth), “kingdom” which is followed by the preposition lĕ (‫( ) ְל‬leh) which is not
translated and its object is the masculine plural noun ʾǎḥǎš·dǎr·pǎn (‫( ) ֲא ַחשְׁדַּ ְרפַּן‬akhash-dar-pan´), “satraps” which is modified by the feminine singular noun meʾā(h)
(‫( )מְאָה‬meh-aw´) and then we have the conjunction wa (‫( ) ְו‬waw), which is not
translated and followed by the masculine plural noun ʿěś·rîn (‫( ) ֶעשׂ ְִרין‬es-reen´),
which altogether mean “120.”
Asyndeton
Daniel under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit is employing the figure of
“asyndeton” because He wants the reader to be aware of the fact that there is a
topic shift. It makes the reader aware of the fact that the topic is shifting from
Darius the Mede ascending to power over the Babylonian kingdom to his first
executive decision that he made.
šep̄ ǎr
The verb šep̄ ǎr means “to consider a good idea” in the sense of an idea being
sound. Here it denotes that Darius the Mede considered the idea of appointing 120
satraps to be in charge over the Babylonian kingdom so that he might not suffer
loss as politically and financially sound. The word implies that this suggestion was
presented to him.
The peʿal (Hebrew: qal) stem of the verb šep̄ ǎr is stative expressing a condition
or state. Here it denotes Darius the Mede “existing in the state of being” possessing
the attitude that appointing 120 satraps to be in charge over the Babylonian
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
25
kingdom so that he might not suffer loss as politically and financially sound. The
perfect tense of the verb is stative expressing the same thing as the peʿal stative
stem.
qǒḏāmʹ dǒr·yāʹ·wěš
The proper name dār·yā·wěš means “Darius” and it is the object of the
preposition qǒḏām, which is used to indicate that something is being described
from the perspective of the object of the preposition. The object of the preposition
is of course Darius the Mede. Thus, this preposition is describing the attitude of
Darius toward the idea of appointing 120 satraps to be in charge over the
Babylonian kingdom so that he might not suffer loss. He considered it as
politically and financially sound.
wa
The conjunction wa is a statement, which functions as the direct object of the
verb šep̄ ǎr. Therefore, we will translate the word “to.”
qûm
The verb qûm means “to establish” in the sense of assigning someone to a
particular role or function or position. Here the word refers to Darius the Mede
considering sound politically and financially the idea to “establish” 120 satraps
over the Babylonian kingdom who would be accountable to him in order to protect
his interests politically and financially.
The hafʿel (Hebrew: hiphil stem) stem is causative meaning that the subject
causes its direct object to do the action described by this verb in the peʿal (Hebrew:
qal). Here the subject is of course Darius the Mede and the direct object is 120
satraps. Therefore, this stem denotes that Darius the Mede caused 120 satraps to
perform the action of being appointed as person of authority over the Babylonian
kingdom in order to protect his interests politically and financially. The perfect
tense of the verb is constative describes in summary fashion this past action.
mǎl·ḵûṯ
The noun mǎl·ḵûṯ means “kingdom” and denotes the sphere of Babylon’s
authority or control over various nations, ethnicities and language groups. It is used
to designate the territorial sphere of Babylon. The term refers to the political
boundaries of authority and control, which were determined by the extent to which
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
26
Belshazzar and his father Nabonidus exercised their authority. It is the object of the
preposition ʿǎl, which is a marker of authority indicating that Darius the Mede
established 120 satraps “over” the Babylonian kingdom to protect and promote his
interests.
lǎ meʾā(h)ʹ w ʿěś·rînʹ ʾǎḥǎš·dǎr·penǎy·yā(ʾ)ʹ ʿǎl
The preposition lĕ is marking the masculine plural noun ʾǎḥǎš·dǎr·pǎn,
“satraps” as the direct object of the verb qûm. The noun ʾǎḥǎš·dǎr·pǎn is a Persian
loan word which means “protector of the kingdom.” In the Septuagint, the word in
Daniel 6:2 is translated with the Greek noun σᾰτράπης which means “satrap.” This
group of officials would be the chief representatives of Darius the Mede. They
were governors of certain types of provinces. They were the highest officials in his
kingdom, which is supported by the statement in Daniel 6:1 (6:2), which records
that Darius appointed 120 satraps over his kingdom who would be in charge of the
entire kingdom.
The noun ʾǎḥǎš·dǎr·pǎn is modified by the feminine singular noun meʾā(h) and
the conjunction wa (‫( ) ְו‬waw), as well as the masculine plural noun ʿěś·rîn. The
noun meʾā(h) means “one hundred” and the noun ʿěś·rîn means “twenty.” The
conjunction wa is united the two words indicating addition. Thus the entire
expression means “one hundred twenty.”
The Purpose of the Appointments
Daniel 6:1 It seemed good to Darius to appoint 120 satraps over the
kingdom, that they would be in charge of the whole kingdom. (NASB95)
“That they would be in charge of the whole kingdom” is composed of the
particle dî (‫( )דִּ י‬dee), “that” which is followed by the third person masculine plural
peʿal (Hebrew: qal) active imperfect form of the verb ḥǎwā(h) (‫( ) ֲחוָה‬khav-aw´),
“he had” and then we have the preposition b- (‫( )בְּ־‬beh) “in charge of” and it is
followed by the singular construct form of the noun kōl (‫( )כּ ֹל‬kole), “all” which is
modifying the feminine singular construct form of the noun mǎl·ḵûṯ (‫( ) ַמלְכוּת‬malkooth), “the kingdom.”
dî
The particle dî is a marker of purpose meaning that it is introducing a clause
that presents the purpose of Darius the Mede establishing one hundred twenty
satraps over the Babylonian kindom. We will translate the word “in order that.”
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
27
ḥǎwā(h)
The verb hǎwā(h) means, “to be” in the sense of existing in a particular state.
The third person masculine plural form refers to the one hundred twenty satraps.
Therefore, this verb denotes the purpose of Darius establishing these one hundred
twenty satraps was so that they would exist in the state of being in authority over
the entire kingdom.
The peʿal stem (Hebrew: qal) is stative expressing a state or condition. Here it
expresses the fact that these one hundred twenty satraps were to exist in the state of
being in authority over the entire kingdom. The conjunction wa is employed with
the imperfect conjugation of the verb hǎwā(h) in order to form a purpose clause.
b ḵāl mǎl·ḵû·ṯā(ʾ)ʹ
Once again, the noun mǎl·ḵûṯ means “kingdom” referring to the Babylonian
kingdom and this time it is modified by the noun kōl which means “entire” since it
denotes totality. This noun mǎl·ḵûṯ is the object of the preposition b-, which is a
marker of authority indicating these one hundred twenty satraps would have
authority “over” the inhabitants of the Babylonian kingdom.
Translation of Daniel 6:1 (6:2)
Daniel 6:1 (6:2) It was considered a good idea by Darius to establish one
hundred twenty satraps over the kingdom in order that they would be in
authority over the entire kingdom.
Exposition of Daniel 6:1 (6:2)
So Daniel 6:1 (6:2) records that upon receiving the Babylonian kingdom from
Cyrus the Persian, Darius the Mede was approached with the sound idea to
establish one hundred twenty satraps over the kingdom. This group of officials
would be the chief representatives of Darius the Mede. They were governors of the
different provinces in the Babylonian empire. They were the highest officials in his
kingdom. So they much like state governors in America.
The satrap was virtually a king; he had his own court and absolute civil
authority, and he answered directly to the “great king.” To ensure the satrap’s
loyalty to the king, other officials who answered directly to the king were
appointed to work alongside the satrap: a secretary (who handled all official
correspondence), a chief financial officer (who collected taxes), and a commander
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
28
of the armed forces. In addition, inspectors known as ‘the eyes and ears of the
king’ might appear at any time to check on conditions in the provinces.33
Wikipedia writes “The satrap was the head of the administration of his
province, and found himself surrounded by an all-but-royal court; he collected the
taxes, controlled the local officials and the subject tribes and cities, and was the
supreme judge of the province before whose ‘chair’ (Nehemiah 3:7) every civil
and criminal case could be brought. He was responsible for the safety of the roads
(cf. Xenophon), and had to put down brigands and rebels.”34
Whitcomb writes “A ‘satrap’ was a Persian official who could rule over a large
province or over a small group of people. This would harmonize well with the
‘Nabonidus Chronicle,’ which states that Gubaru installed sub-governors in
Babylon immediately after the fall of the city to the armies of Cyrus. Thus, the
statement of Daniel 6:1 has nothing whatsoever to do with the division of the
Medo-Persian empire into satrapies or provinces that took place during the later
administrations of Darius I and Xerxes.”35
Myers writes that the term “satrap” is a “title of provincial governors in the
Persian Empire (Ezra 8:36; Esth. 3:12; 8:9; 9:3; KJV “lieutenants” Dan. 3:2–3;
6:1–7; KJV “princes”). Herodotus lists 20 satrapies in the empire (Hist iii.89–94),
while Esth. 1:1; 8:9 refers to 127 provinces and Dan. 6:1–2 of 120 satraps under
three presidents. Herodotus’ list is, however, related only to the organization of the
empire under Darius Hystapes.”36
Walvoord writes “With the successful conquest of Babylon and the surrounding
territory, it now is appropriate for the new kingdom to organize, both from the
standpoint of law and order and from the benefit of taxation which this would
allow. In such an organization, it would not be unsuitable to use qualified men who
had served previously in the Babylonian kingdom. The conquerors did what they
could to set up a friendly relationship with the people in their power; and although
Belshazzar was slain, his father, Nabonidus, lived for some years afterward. Even
some of the gods of Babylon were honored by the conquerors.37 The organization
of the new kingdom is detailed in the opening verses of chapter 6. One hundred
and twenty princes or ‘satraps’ were appointed. Some have held that this figure is
inaccurate. Montgomery, for instance, says, ‘The 120 satraps (AV ‘princes’) is an
exaggeration, or at least an inaccuracy. Her[odotus], iii, 89, records that Darius
created 20 satrapies, and that king’s inscriptions give their numbers successively as
21, 23, 29.’38 Montgomery goes on, however, to admit that there were 127
33
Bromiley, G. W.. The International Standard Bible Encyclopedia, Revised. Volume 4:345. Wm. B. Eerdmans
Satrap - Wikipedia
Daniel- Bible Commentary - Everyman's Bible Commentary
36
Myers, A. C. (1987). The Eerdmans Bible dictionary (914). Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans.
37
Wiseman states that the temple ritual was restored when agreement for the surrender of Babylon was reached (Ancient Orient and O.T., p. 10).
38
J. A. Montgomery, A Critical and Exegetical Commentary on the Book of Daniel, p. 269.
34
35
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
29
provinces according to Esther 1:1 but still insists that Daniel is inaccurate.
Montgomery also objects to the ‘three presidents’ as being without parallel.39 The
fact is that the appointment of 120 officials to rule such a vast territory and of three
presidents to rule over them was not at all unreasonable. Whether or not there were
precisely 120 subdivisions of his territory is not indicated, but the need for this
number of officials is obvious. The point of introducing these facts in Daniel’s
narrative is to give the setting for Daniel’s place of honor. Daniel himself was
named one of the three presidents who would coordinate the work of the 120
princes. Of them, it was required to give financial accounts and protect the king’s
interest. In such a function, an honest and capable administrator familiar with the
territory and problems of taxation would undoubtedly be of immeasurable benefit
to Darius. For this reason, Daniel, according to verse 3, was preferred above the
others and had such “an excellent spirit” that the king thought to put all of the
princes under him. All of this makes a great deal of sense and actually sets the
stage for the supreme test of Daniel which followed.”40
Daniel 6:2 (6:3) tells the reader that this was in order to protect the king’s
interests. Also, it says that three commissioners would be in authority over these
one hundred twenty and hold them accountable. Daniel the verse says was one of
these three individuals. We see that later on in the chapter, these one hundred
twenty satraps and the other two commissioners conspired against Daniel, which
leads to his execution.
39
40
Ibid.
Walvoord, John F. Daniel: The Key to Prophetic Revelation; pages 134-135; Moody Press; Chicago; 1971)
2013 William E. Wenstrom, Jr. Bible Ministries
30