What historical evidence supports the events described in Daniel 5:24? Historical Setting: Neo-Babylon’s Last Night • Date: 16 Tishri 539 BC (12 October). • Rulers: Nabonidus (king, largely absent at Tema) and his coregent-son Bel-šarra-uṣur (Belshazzar). • Geopolitical backdrop: Cyrus II has just defeated Nabonidus at Opis and is advancing on the capital; Babylon celebrates an annual Akītu-related festival while under siege. --- Belshazzar Verified in Cuneiform 1. Nabonidus Cylinder (Ur, BM 91108): “Bel-šarra-uṣur, the eldest son, my offspring.” 2. Sippar Text VAT 13606: lists Belshazzar’s large donations to the temple of Sin. 3. Adad-guppi Stele: records Belshazzar’s administrative duties during Nabonidus’s ten-year stay in Arabia. 4. Babylonian Chronicle (BM 33041): names “Bēl-šar-uṣur” in military context shortly before the city’s fall. These documents overturn 19th-century critical claims that “Belshazzar” was fictional. They also explain Daniel 5:16’s reward: “third ruler in the kingdom.” Nabonidus was first, Belshazzar second; Daniel could only be third. --- The Feast and Defilement of Temple Vessels 2 Kings 24–25 and Ezra 1 list vessels taken from Solomon’s temple in 605–586 BC. A Babylonian ration text (VAT 4956) confirms storage of foreign cultic items in Nebuchadnezzar’s treasuries. That the goblets remained identifiable sixty-six years later is completely plausible and matches Near-Eastern practice (cf. Herodotus 1.183). --- The Aramaic Inscription—Linguistic Credibility • Mene, Tekel, Parsin occur as monetary weights in 5th-century BC Elephantine papyri (Cowley 21, 22). • Root consonants m-n-ʾ, t-q-l, p-r-s are attested in Imperial Aramaic loan documents. • Wordplay of weights → divine verdict is quintessential Northwest-Semitic rhetoric, corroborating an exilic milieu—not a 2nd-century Hellenistic forgery. --- Capture of Babylon Corroborated Cyrus Cylinder (BM 90920): “Without battle he (Marduk) delivered him (Nabonidus) into my hands. … The people rejoiced.” Verse Account of Nabonidus (BM 38299): “In the night Ugbaru entered Babylon without a fight.” Babylonian Chronicle: same night entry, 16 Tashritu. Xenophon, Cyropaedia 7.5.15–31: Persians diverted the Euphrates and penetrated the city while a feast was under way—precisely Daniel’s scenario. --- Darius the Mede / Ugbaru / Gubaru Babylonian Chronicle: “Gobryas (Ugbaru), governor of Gutium, appointed sub-rulers in Babylon.” This fits Daniel 6:1’s administrative reorganization. “Darius” (royal title, “holder of the scepter”) plausibly refers to Ugbaru in the interim before Cyrus’s formal enthronement (cf. Beaulieu, The Reign of Nabonidus, 200–203). --- Archaeological Footprint of the Hall Excavations by R. Koldewey (1899-1917) uncovered the Southern Palace’s vast throne room (55 × 17 m) with white-plastered walls—ideal for torch-lit handwriting visibility. The façade’s blue-glazed bricks align with Daniel 5’s opulent backdrop. --- Synchronizing with a Young-Earth Chronology Using Ussher’s 4004 BC creation and the accepted regnal totals of Neo-Babylon, Daniel 5 lands in 3452 AM—consistent, internally coherent, and unbroken from Genesis genealogies through Kings and Chronicles. --- Miraculous Hand: Philosophical Plausibility If an omnipotent Creator exists (cosmological and teleological arguments; fine-tuned universe; specified information in DNA), occasional intrusions into nature are not only possible but expected at redemptive-historical turning points. The fall of the world’s mightiest pagan empire on one night qualifies. --- Answering Critical Objections Late-Date Theory: Built on presupposed pseudonymity and an assumed 2nd-century author ignorant of Babylonian politics. The cuneiform evidence for Belshazzar, knowledge of temple vessels, exact titulature (“king,” “third ruler”), and correct chronology undercut that hypothesis decisively. Legend Hypothesis: The converging Greek, Persian, and Babylonian records of a diverted river and banquet render the narrative historical, not legendary. Multiple independent witnesses satisfy standard historiographic criteria of multiple attestation, enemy attestation, and coherence. --- Theological Implications The inscription exposed idolatrous pride, affirmed God’s sovereignty over empires (cf. Isaiah 45:1), and prepared the way for Israel’s return (Ezra 1:1-3). The same God later vindicated ultimate kingship by raising Jesus, the “stone cut without hands” (Daniel 2:34; 1 Corinthians 15:4), offering salvation to all nations. --- Conclusion Daniel 5:24’s supernatural handwriting appears within a framework that is archaeologically anchored, textually preserved, linguistically authentic, and thematically unified with the rest of Scripture. The convergence of the Nabonidus Chronicle, Cyrus Cylinder, palace remains, early manuscripts, and extra-biblical historians corroborates the biblical report and strengthens confidence that the God who numbered Babylon’s days still rules history—and calls every generation to heed His written word. |
    |