How does Daniel 9:1 fit into the historical timeline of the Babylonian and Persian empires? Canonical Setting Daniel 9 opens during the first regnal year of a new monarch over Babylon. The narrative links back to chapters 5–6, which record the fall of the Neo-Babylonian Empire (605–539 BC) and Daniel’s immediate service under the succeeding regime. Because Daniel’s prophetic prayer hinges on Jeremiah’s seventy-year exile prophecy (Jeremiah 25:11; 29:10), the verse places the reader at the hinge point between Babylonian dominance and Medo-Persian ascendancy. Historical Context: Fall of Babylon (October 12/13, 539 BC) Cuneiform records, notably the Nabonidus Chronicle (British Museum BM 35382), affirm that “the army of Cyrus entered Babylon without battle” in the month of Tishri, year 17 of Nabonidus. Herodotus (Histories 1.190-191) and Xenophon (Cyropaedia 7.5) corroborate a sudden capture. Daniel 5 narrates the same transition. Daniel 9:1 thus opens in the administrative reorganization that followed this conquest. Who Is Darius the Mede? 1. Gobryas/Gubaru Theory – Babylon’s conqueror, the governor appointed by Cyrus, is called Ugbaru/Gubaru in the Chronicle. He “installed governors in Babylon” (line 18). As a vassal-king he fits Daniel’s description: “made ruler over the kingdom of the Chaldeans.” 2. Cyaxares II Theory – Xenophon reports that Cyrus inherited Media through his uncle/brother-in-law Cyaxares II, providing a Median “Darius” who ruled briefly. 3. Regnal Name for Cyrus Theory – Some conservative scholars note that Old Persian kings often bore multiple throne names; Cyrus could be styled “Darius” (“holder of the scepter”) when acting specifically over Babylon (cf. Daniel 6:28 footnote). Any of the first two harmonize seamlessly with Daniel’s statement that this Darius was “about sixty-two years old” at the fall of Babylon (Daniel 5:31). The crucial point: Daniel 9:1 situates itself after Babylon’s fall yet before Cyrus’ edict of return (Ezra 1:1-4). Synchronization with Recorded Kings Nebuchadnezzar II 605-562 BC Evil-Merodach 562-560 BC Neriglissar 560-556 BC Labashi-Marduk 556 BC Nabonidus/Belshazzar 556-539 BC Darius “the Mede” 539-538 BC (first regnal year) Cyrus II 538-530 BC Daniel 9:1 therefore belongs to 539/538 BC (Ussher’s date 538 BC). Chronological Reckoning: Accession and Regnal Year Babylonian-Persian practice counted a partial inauguration year as “year 0.” Daniel adopts this calendar (cf. Daniel 1:1, 2:1 & royal annals). The “first year” (Daniel 9:1) is thus the civil year beginning Nisan 538 BC, roughly six months after the October 539 BC conquest. Implications for Jeremiah’s Seventy Years Jerusalem’s first deportation occurred in 605 BC (Daniel 1:1-3; 2 Kings 24:1). Counting inclusively, Jeremiah’s seventy years close in 536/535 BC, the very window when Cyrus’ decree (Ezra 1) enabled the first return. Daniel’s prayer in 538 BC shows the prophet recognizing that only two to three years remained. The historical setting therefore intensifies his plea for covenant mercy. Archaeological Corroboration • Nabonidus Chronicle – Independent confirmation of Babylon’s swift fall. • Cyrus Cylinder (British Museum BM 90920) – Records Cyrus’ policy of repatriating displaced peoples: “I gathered all their inhabitants and returned […] to their places.” This matches Ezra 1. • Hillah Stele (Gubaru inscription, fragment VAT 13849) – Lists a Median commander installed over Babylon. • The Persepolis Fortification Tablets – Show dual Persian-Median administration, validating Daniel’s “Medo-Persian” syntax (Daniel 5:28; 8:20). Harmonization with Conservative Chronology Archbishop Ussher dates the fall of Babylon to October 13, 539 BC (Anno Mundi 3468). He assigns Daniel 9 to Amos 3469. The short one-year interval agrees with both the Nabonidus Chronicle and the scriptural order (Daniel 6:28). Answering Critical Objections Critics allege anachronism because secular lists do not mention a “Darius the Mede.” Yet: • Royal double names are common (e.g., Pharaoh Hophra = Apries). • Daniel explicitly restricts Darius’ jurisdiction to “the kingdom of the Chaldeans,” not the entire empire, fitting a sub-king or governor. • The book’s accurate use of late-Babylonian loanwords (Akkadian, Sumerian) discovered on tablets only in the 20th century (e.g., karkadān, pesār) argues for eyewitness authenticity. Theological Significance Placing Daniel 9:1 immediately after Babylon’s collapse underscores God’s sovereignty over empires (Daniel 2:21). The precise dating also anchors the famous Seventy-Weeks prophecy to an objective starting point, allowing the countdown that culminates in Messiah the Prince (Daniel 9:24-27), fulfilled in the crucifixion and resurrection of Jesus Christ “in the fullness of time” (Galatians 4:4). Conclusion Daniel 9:1 fits squarely into the well-documented transition from Babylonian to Medo-Persian supremacy in 539–538 BC. Extrabiblical chronicles, archaeological finds, and coherent regnal calculations converge with the biblical record, reinforcing Scripture’s historical reliability and showcasing the providential hand of Yahweh who “removes kings and establishes them” (Daniel 2:21). |
    |