2. Bearing on Biblical Statements Regarding Belshazzar.
Similar chronicles are given by the tablet for other years. It is stated each time what Nabuna’id was doing; where the king’s son (Belshazzar) was, and what Cyrus was doing. Cyrus, who overthrew the Median king in 553 B. C., was occupied for several years in subjugating other lands before he attacked Babylon. He overthrew Crœsus, King of Lydia, in 546. It would seem that it was well known in Babylonia what he was doing each year. Those scholars who believe that Isaiah 40-55 is the work of a prophet who lived during the Babylonian Exile, claim that this chronicle explains how that prophet could refer in Isa. 44:28; 45:1 to Cyrus as a well-known figure. They see the exercise of the prophetic gift of the prophet in the faith which he had that Cyrus would release Israel from captivity. Those who believe that the whole of the book of Isaiah is the work of the son of Amoz, see in these verses pure prediction of the rise of Cyrus as well as of the release of the Jews.
3. Account of the Capture of Babylon.
From the chronicle just quoted we have the following statement for the 17th year of the reign of Nabuna’id:
...... Nebo to go forth from Borsippa .......... the king entered the temple of Edurkalama. In the month .......... in the lower sea a revolt ........ Bel came out; the feast of Akiti (Sept.-Oct.), according to the custom .......... the gods of Marad, Zagaga, and the gods of Kish, Bêltis, and the gods of Harsagkalama entered Babylon. Unto the end of Elul (Aug.-Sept.) the gods of Borsippa, Cutha, and Sippar did not enter. In the month Tammuz (June-July) Cyrus, when he made battle in Opis, on the banks of the river Zalzallat, with the soldiers of Akkad, conquered the inhabitants of Akkad. When they assembled the people were killed. On the 14th Sippar was taken without a battle. Nabuna’id fled. On the 16th Gobryas, governor of the land of Gutium, and the soldiers of Cyrus entered Babylon without a battle. Later Nabuna’id was captured because he remained in Babylon. To the end of the month the shield-bearers of the land of Gutium assembled at the gates of Esagila. No weapon of any kind was taken into Esagila or the temples; nor was the standard raised. On the third day of Marcheswan (Oct.-Nov.) Cyrus entered Babylon. The walls (?) were broken down before him. Cyrus proclaimed peace to all of Babylon. He appointed Gobryas his satrap, and also prefects in Babylon. From Kisleu (Nov.-Dec.) unto Adar (Feb.-March), the gods of Akkad, whom Nabuna’id had brought to Babylon, returned to their cities. In the month Marcheswan, on the night of the 11th, Gobryas unto .......... the son of the king was killed. From the 27th of Adar to the 3rd of Nisan there was lamentation in Akkad. All the people bowed their heads. On the 4th day Cambyses, the son of Cyrus, went to Eshapakalama.[549]
4. Bearing of This Account on the Book of Daniel.
This interesting text here becomes too broken for connected translation. It is clear that the document means to state that Nabuna’id was king of Babylon when it was captured, and not Belshazzar, as stated in Daniel 5:30. It states, also, that Cyrus captured Babylon and not Darius the Mede, as in Dan. 5:31. It is true that Gobryas took Babylon first, and occupied it about two weeks before Cyrus arrived. He was, however, Cyrus’s officer and was acting in his name. Critical scholars, who believe that Daniel was written 168-165 B. C., find in these statements a confirmation of their views. They think its author lived so far from the events that he confused their exact order. Those who defend the traditional date of Daniel think that Gobryas is meant by Darius the Mede, and see in the exalted position which Belshazzar held, as crown prince and commander of the army, sufficient ground for the Biblical statement that he was king. By such interpretations they harmonize this chronicle with the Bible.
Dr. Theophilus G. Pinches has recently published[550] some extracts from two tablets from Erech which are in the possession of an Englishman, Mr. Harding Smith, which throw some additional light on these points. It was customary for Babylonians in confirming a contract to swear by the name of the reigning king, and one of these tablets contains a contract, dated in the 12th year of Nabuna’id, in which a man bound himself by the oath of Nabuna’id, King of Babylon, and of Belshazzar, the king’s son. As Belshazzar is here associated with the king, he must have been but slightly lower in rank and power than the king himself.
This is confirmed by a tablet at Yale, recently published by Prof. Clay.[551] The text contains the interpretation of a dream for the King Nabuna’id and for his son Belshazzar. It is dated in the seventh year of the reign of Nabuna’id.
The other tablet quoted by Pinches shows that in the fourth year of Cambyses (i. e., 524 B. C.), Gobryas was still governor of Babylon. If he is the man who in Daniel is called Darius the Mede, he exercised the powers of governor in Babylon for a considerable number of years.