Printer Friendly Version

Particulars of Christianity:
314 End Times Prophecy (Eschatology)


Addendum 2 (Timeline of Biblical World History)
(Additional Information and Calculations on the Period between the Desolation of Jerusalem to the Decree to Rebuild the City and Its Walls)

The Sabbath Millennium
Timeline of Biblical World History
Timeline Addendum 1
Timeline Addendum 2



Introduction

In our study of biblical world history we used the conventional chronology of this period in order to provide the number of years from the Babylonian desolation of Jerusalem to the decree mentioned in Daniel 9:25. This was done in order to provide a simple and brief account of the duration of this period.

In this addendum, we will take a closer look at the biblical and historical data involved in calculating the length of time between these two important biblical events. Our investigation will be organized into the following sections:

1. The Historical and Biblical Context of Daniel 9, Desolations, and Weeks of Years
2. Potential Relevance of Jubilee Cycles to Our Chronology
3. Corresponding Jubilee Years with the Historical Record
4. Artaxerxes I Issues the Decree Mentioned in Daniel 9
5. Reconsiderations of the Conventional Chronology
6. Constructing Historical Chronologies
7. Conclusions and Possible Adjustments to the Duration of this Period
Our first step will be to get familiar with the historical and biblical context of this period. This will include a closer look at the beginning and end points we are using to define this segment of biblical world history.



The Historical and Biblical Context of Daniel 9, Desolations, and Weeks of Years

This period of biblical world history begins where the previous period ended, with the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Babylonians. It ends with the issuing of a particular decree as prophesied by Daniel the Prophet in chapter 9 of his book.

We have chosen to end this period of time with this prophetic decree because Daniel’s prophecy presents a timetable that we will use as we continue our timeline of biblical world history.

Not only does Daniel 9 present the event that we will use to mark the end of this period, but studying the nature of this prophecy provides an excellent opportunity to become more familiar with the beginning of this historical segment – the events and dates surrounding the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple. With that in mind, let us take a look at Daniel 9 and the desolations of Jerusalem.

In Daniel 9:24-26, the prophet Daniel is given a timetable that ends with the death of the Messiah. (Verse 27 also details a segment of this timetable that will occur after the death of the Messiah.) As we can see from verse 24, this prophetic timetable involves a total of seventy weeks of years.

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. 25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. 26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. 27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

The fact that these “weeks” are comprised of seven years each is made clear by two biblical facts. The first fact comes by way of information provided in the Book of Daniel itself. In chapter 12, Daniel is given further insight and some added details about the events of the final week. According to Daniel 9:27 a desolation occurs in the middle (midst) of the final or seventieth week. In order to comprehend the connection between chapter 9 and chapter 12 and what a “week” is, we first need to understand what Daniel means by the term “desolation.”

The opening verses of chapter 9 give us some context for understanding the prophetic timetable that concludes the chapter. In those opening verses Daniel discusses the fulfillment of a prophecy made by Jeremiah the prophet concerning a seventy year period wherein Jerusalem would be desolated.

Daniel 9:2 In the first year of his reign I Daniel understood by books the number of the years, whereof the word of the LORD came to Jeremiah the prophet, that he would accomplish seventy years in the desolations of Jerusalem.

Here Daniel is referring to a prophecy recorded in Jeremiah 25:11-12 and Jeremiah 29:10.

Jeremiah 25:11 And this whole land shall be a desolation, and an astonishment; and these nations shall serve the king of Babylon seventy years. 12 And it shall come to pass, when seventy years are accomplished, that I will punish the king of Babylon, and that nation, saith the LORD, for their iniquity, and the land of the Chaldeans, and will make it perpetual desolations.

Jeremiah 29:10 For thus saith the LORD, That after seventy years be accomplished at Babylon I will visit you, and perform my good word toward you, in causing you to return to this place.

So, both Jeremiah and Daniel are discussing the same thing, the desolation of Jerusalem. (In an earlier section of our study we saw that the prophet Ezekiel also wrote about these events – see Ezekiel 4:1-7.)

The Hebrew word for “desolation” used in Jeremiah 25:11 and Daniel 9:2 means “a place laid waste, ruin, waste, desolation” (Strong’s number 02723.) According to Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary, the English word “desolate” means “devoid of inhabitants” and “showing the effects of abandonment and neglect.”

By understanding the desolations that Jeremiah spoke about we can understand what Daniel is discussing. Jeremiah is discussing an impending 70-year period wherein Jerusalem would become largely devoid of inhabitants at the hands of the Babylonians. Daniel the prophet lived through the 70-year fulfillment of Jeremiah’s prophecy.

Let’s take a look at the historical account of the events that led to the desolation of Jerusalem at the end of the period of the kings of Judah.

As we saw earlier in our study, 2 Kings 23-25 and 2 Chronicles 36 both record the desolation of Jerusalem that was brought about by King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon. According to 2 Kings 23:36-37, these events began during the reign of Jehoiakim, the third to last king of Judah.

2 Kings 23:36 Jehoiakim was twenty and five years old when he began to reign; and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Zebudah, the daughter of Pedaiah of Rumah. 37 And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his fathers had done.

The next verse in the Book of 2 Kings is the beginning of the next chapter, chapter 24. This verse reports that Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, came up to Jerusalem and made Jehoiakim his servant. After that time, however, Jehoiakim rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar’s authority.

2 Kings 24:1 In his days Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years: then he turned and rebelled against him. 2 And the LORD sent against him bands of the Chaldees, and bands of the Syrians, and bands of the Moabites, and bands of the children of Ammon, and sent them against Judah to destroy it, according to the word of the LORD, which he spake by his servants the prophets. 3 Surely at the commandment of the LORD came this upon Judah, to remove them out of his sight, for the sins of Manasseh, according to all that he did;

Verses 2-3 inform us that the difficulties suffered by the kingdom of Judah at this time were by God’s command and a fulfillment of prophecies made by earlier prophets. Just as important, we should note that the purpose of this was “to remove the people of Judah out of God’s sight” (verse 3.) This fits exactly with Jeremiah’s prophecy that Jerusalem would be made desolate.

Daniel 1 and Jeremiah 25 both indicate that Nebuchadnezzar’s conquest of Judah occurred in the third year of Jehoiakim’s reign. According to Daniel, an early deportation of Jews took place at this time including some of the children related to King Jehoiakim and also Daniel in particular.

Daniel 1:1 In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it. 2 And the Lord gave Jehoiakim king of Judah into his hand, with part of the vessels of the house of God: which he carried into the land of Shinar to the house of his god; and he brought the vessels into the treasure house of his god. 3 And the king spake unto Ashpenaz the master of his eunuchs, that he should bring certain of the children of Israel, and of the king's seed, and of the princes; 4 Children in whom was no blemish, but well favoured, and skilful in all wisdom, and cunning in knowledge, and understanding science, and such as had ability in them to stand in the king's palace, and whom they might teach the learning and the tongue of the Chaldeans. 6 Now among these were of the children of Judah, Daniel, Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah…

Jeremiah 25:1 The word that came to Jeremiah concerning all the people of Judah in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah king of Judah, that was the first year of Nebuchadrezzar king of Babylon.

As we continue with the record provided in 2 Kings 24, we can see that Jehoiakim dies and his son, Jehoiachin (elsewhere known as Jeconiah – see Jeremiah 24:1, 27:20, 28:4, 29:2) becomes king in his place. Like his father, Jehoiachin was an evil king.

2 Kings 24:5 Now the rest of the acts of Jehoiakim, and all that he did, are they not written in the book of the chronicles of the kings of Judah? 6 So Jehoiakim slept with his fathers: and Jehoiachin his son reigned in his stead. 7 And the king of Egypt came not again any more out of his land: for the king of Babylon had taken from the river of Egypt unto the river Euphrates all that pertained to the king of Egypt. 8 Jehoiachin was eighteen years old when he began to reign, and he reigned in Jerusalem three months. And his mother’s name was Nehushta, the daughter of Elnathan of Jerusalem. 9 And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that his father had done.

Because of Jehoiachin’s evil ways, Nebuchadnezzar returned to Jerusalem and laid siege to the city. Nebuchadnezzar’s siege is successful and Jehoiachin (Jeconiah) and the nobles and leaders of Judah are taken away in captivity to Babylon.

2 Kings 24:10 At that time the servants of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up against Jerusalem, and the city was besieged. 11 And Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came against the city, and his servants did besiege it. 12 And Jehoiachin the king of Judah went out to the king of Babylon, he, and his mother, and his servants, and his princes, and his officers: and the king of Babylon took him in the eighth year of his reign…14 And he carried away all Jerusalem, and all the princes, and all the mighty men of valour, even ten thousand captives, and all the craftsmen and smiths: none remained, save the poorest sort of the people of the land. 15 And he carried away Jehoiachin to Babylon, and the king’s mother, and the king’s wives, and his officers, and the mighty of the land, those carried he into captivity from Jerusalem to Babylon. 16 And all the men of might, even seven thousand, and craftsmen and smiths a thousand, all that were strong and apt for war, even them the king of Babylon brought captive to Babylon.

So, we can see that Nebuchadnezzar did indeed bring desolation to Jerusalem. He took captive all of its leadership and people except the poorest of the land. Jerusalem was indeed being desolated.

Because it will be important later in our study we should take note of the timing of these important events.

First, we should note that Jehoiakim (Jehoichin’s father) was king for 11 years (2 Kings 23:26. 2 Kings 24:1 reports that Jehoiakim became Nebuchadnezzar’s servant after three years as king, but Jehoiakim rebelled. For the remainder of Jehoiakim’s life and 11-year reign, Judah remained in rebellion against Nebuchadnezzar. Upon Jehoiakim’s death, his son Jehoiachin became king. But, Jehoiachin only reigned for 3 months because Nebuchadnezzar came and besieged Jerusalem and took captive most of its population. According to 2 Kings 24:12, this captivity of Jehoiachin took place in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. (It could not be the eighth year of Jehoiachin’s reign because he had only reigned for 3 months – see verse 8.)

From these verses we can see that Nebuchadnezzar’s reign is being counted from the third year of Jehoiakim, when he apparently first subjugated Jerusalem. We know this because 8 years after this rebellion, in the eighth year of his reign, Nebuchadnezzar returned to Jerusalem and took the city captive (2 Kings 24:12.)

This captivity which took place in the time of Jehoiachin involved the deportation of important biblical figures such as Mordecai (Esther 2:5-6).

As we continue with the account of 2 Kings 24, we can see that after the deportation of Jehoiachin (Jeconiah), his uncle Zedekiah was appointed (by Nebuchadnezzar) to be king of Judah. Zedekiah’s reign lasted 11 years. And he did evil in the sight of the Lord. Because of their iniquity, God intended to cast the people of Judah and Jerusalem from His presence just as He had foretold through Jeremiah the prophet.

2 Kings 24:17 And the king of Babylon made Mattaniah his father’s brother king in his stead, and changed his name to Zedekiah. 18 Zedekiah was twenty and one years old when he began to reign, and he reigned eleven years in Jerusalem. And his mother’s name was Hamutal, the daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah. 19 And he did that which was evil in the sight of the LORD, according to all that Jehoiakim had done. 20 For through the anger of the LORD it came to pass in Jerusalem and Judah, until he had cast them out from his presence, that Zedekiah rebelled against the king of Babylon.

According to verse 20 of 2 Kings 24, Zedekiah rebelled against Nebuchadnezzar. So, in the ninth year of Zedekiah’s reign, Nebuchadnezzer returned to Jerusalem with all his armies and laid siege to the city for nearly 2 years. After this, in the eleventh and final year of Zedekiah, the city fell into the hands of the Babylonians.

This was apparently the third time Jerusalem had been subdued by the Nebuchadnezzar’s forces. The first time was during the third year of Jehoiakim. The second time was after Jehoiakim’s death in the first few months of the reign of his son Jehoiachin. And the third time was after 11 years of Zedekiah’s reign as king of Judah.

2 Kings 25:1 And it came to pass in the ninth year of his reign, in the tenth month, in the tenth day of the month, that Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came, he, and all his host, against Jerusalem, and pitched against it; and they built forts against it round about. 2 And the city was besieged unto the eleventh year of king Zedekiah. 3 And on the ninth day of the fourth month the famine prevailed in the city, and there was no bread for the people of the land. 4 And the city was broken up, and all the men of war fled by night by the way of the gate between two walls, which is by the king’s garden: (now the Chaldees were against the city round about:) and the king went the way toward the plain. 5 And the army of the Chaldees pursued after the king, and overtook him in the plains of Jericho: and all his army were scattered from him. 6 So they took the king, and brought him up to the king of Babylon to Riblah; and they gave judgment upon him. 7 And they slew the sons of Zedekiah before his eyes, and put out the eyes of Zedekiah, and bound him with fetters of brass, and carried him to Babylon.

After conquering the city and subduing Zedekiah and his men of war, Nebuchadnezzar burnt the Temple, the king’s house, and all the houses of Jerusalem with fire. After the burning of the city, the Babylonian forces broke down the city walls and took captive all who remained in the city. Only the poor were left in the land of Judah. And all the valuable works of the Temple were taken away to Babylon.

2 Kings 25:8 And in the fifth month, on the seventh day of the month, which is the nineteenth year of king Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, came Nebuzaradan, captain of the guard, a servant of the king of Babylon, unto Jerusalem: 9 And he burnt the house of the LORD, and the king’s house, and all the houses of Jerusalem, and every great man’s house burnt he with fire. 10 And all the army of the Chaldees, that were with the captain of the guard, brake down the walls of Jerusalem round about. 11 Now the rest of the people that were left in the city, and the fugitives that fell away to the king of Babylon, with the remnant of the multitude, did Nebuzaradan the captain of the guard carry away. 12 But the captain of the guard left of the poor of the land to be vinedressers and husbandmen. 13 And the pillars of brass that were in the house of the LORD, and the bases, and the brasen sea that was in the house of the LORD, did the Chaldees break in pieces, and carried the brass of them to Babylon…18 And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the door: 19 And out of the city he took an officer that was set over the men of war, and five men of them that were in the king’s presence, which were found in the city, and the principal scribe of the host, which mustered the people of the land, and threescore men of the people of the land that were found in the city: 20 And Nebuzaradan captain of the guard took these, and brought them to the king of Babylon to Riblah: 21 And the king of Babylon smote them, and slew them at Riblah in the land of Hamath. So Judah was carried away out of their land.

According to 2 Kings 25, this final Babylonian siege of Jerusalem left the city, its houses, its walls, and its Temple totally demolished. Its people, except the poorest of them, were either put to death or taken to captivity in Babylon. (See also 2 Chronicles 36, especially v. 18-20.) It is important to note that this all occurred in the eleventh year of Zedekiah, which was the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar (2 Kings 25:8.) The final result of all this was that Jerusalem lay desolate and destroyed along with its walls and Temple. This is just as was foretold by the prophets Jeremiah and Ezekiel.

A timeline of these events can be constructed from the biblical record. We will take note of the important events and their timing in relation to one another.

First, we saw that Nebuchadnezzar’s reign was counted as beginning at the end of the third year of Jehoiakim.

Second, just 8 years later, after Jehoiakim’s death, Nebuchadnezzar came to Jerusalem and deported Jehoiakim’s son Jehoiachin (Jeconiah.) At this time Jehoiachin and all the leaders of Judah were deported to Babylon. This deportation of Jehoiachin took place in the eighth year of Nebuchadnezzar.

Third and finally, after another 11 years, Nebuchadnezzar returned to Jerusalem and subdued the rebellion of Zedekiah. At this point Jerusalem, its houses, its walls, and its Temple were all destroyed and all of its people (except the very poorest) were taken to Babylon in captivity. This occurred in the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar.

Now that we have spent some time studying the prophecy of Jeremiah, we can understand what is involved in the desolations mentioned in Daniel 9:2 and 27. Within the biblical and historical context “desolation” refers to the depopulation of the city of Jerusalem and the disruption of Temple activities through the destruction of the Temple itself.

These facts help us understand what is meant by Daniel 9’s prophecy of 70 weeks. According to verses 24-25, Jerusalem would be rebuilt and restored after the Babylonian captivity had ended and the prophecy of Jeremiah was fulfilled (see also Daniel 9:2.) According to verse 26, at some point after the first 69 weeks, the city and the Temple would be destroyed for a second time. Likewise, according to verse 27, a third period of desolation would begin half way through the final “week.” We should note that all of the desolations of Jerusalem including the desolation of the seventieth and final “week” involve the disruption or cessation of Temple activities. And we should note that this final desolation and cessation of Temple activities involves an abomination.

Daniel 9:24 Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. 25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. 26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. 27 And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate.

The desolation of the final (seventieth) week is discussed further in Daniel 12. In chapter 12, Daniel is informed that final week’s desolation, abomination, cessation of Temple activities, and scattering of the people of Israel will occupy a duration identified as “a time, times, and a half.” So, we can see from Daniel 9:27 and 12:7 that the period of desolation is equivalent to “the midst of a week” and “a time, times, and a half.” But Daniel 12:11 is even more clear about the duration of time occupied by these events. The text specifically states that these descriptions refer to a period of 1290 days.

Daniel 12:6 And one said to the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, How long shall it be to the end of these wonders?7 And I heard the man clothed in linen, which was upon the waters of the river, when he held up his right hand and his left hand unto heaven, and sware by him that liveth for ever that it shall be for a time, times, and an half; and when he shall have accomplished to scatter the power of the holy people, all these things shall be finished. 8 And I heard, but I understood not: then said I, O my Lord, what shall be the end of these things? 9 And he said, Go thy way, Daniel: for the words are closed up and sealed till the time of the end. 10 Many shall be purified, and made white, and tried; but the wicked shall do wickedly: and none of the wicked shall understand; but the wise shall understand. 11 And from the time that the daily sacrifice shall be taken away, and the abomination that maketh desolate set up, there shall be a thousand two hundred and ninety days. 12 Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh to the thousand three hundred and five and thirty days. 13 But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot at the end of the days.

The specification of 1290 days by Daniel 12:11 in conjunction with the term “weeks” plainly shows that the “weeks” of Daniel 9:24-27 are groups of 7 years. The middle of a “week” would be equal to 3 1/2 years. This is what is meant by the phrase “a time, times, and half,” which is equivalent to “a year, 2 years, and a half a year.”

In the ancient Jewish calendar, a 3 1/2 year period would contain either 1260 or 1290 days. This is because the ancient Jewish year was, in part, based a lunar cycle involving twelve months containing 29-30 days each. However, it was necessary to add an additional month every few years in order to keep the year synchronized with the seasons created by the earth’s tilt as it revolves around the sun – a cycle which takes approximately 365-days.

The Jewish calendar – The Jewish calendar is lunisolar—i.e., regulated by the positions of both the moon and the sun. It consists usually of 12 alternating lunar months of 29 and 30 days each (except for Heshvan and Kislev, which sometimes have either 29 or 30 days), and totals 353, 354, or 355 days per year. – Encyclopedia Britannica

The Jewish calendar – The average lunar year (354 days) is adjusted to the solar year (365 1/4 days) by the periodic introduction of leap years in order to assure that the major festivals fall in their proper season. The leap year consists of an additional 30-day month called First Adar, which always precedes the month of (Second) Adar. A leap year consists of either 383, 384, or 385 days and occurs seven times during every 19-year period the so-called Metonic cycle ). – Encyclopedia Britannica As we continue we should note that the context of Daniel makes it is clear that the 70 weeks are, in fact, weeks of years (groups of years containing 7 years each.)

A second biblical fact showing that Daniel 9’s “weeks” are groups of seven years comes from the Book of Leviticus.

The concept of a week of years was well-known to Jews of the biblical period. In the Book of Leviticus, God gave commands to the Israelites regarding periods of seven years. Every seventh year, the Israelites were to allow the land to remain fallow. That is, they were not to sow or reap crops during the seventh year. According to Leviticus 25, this resting of the land every seventh year was a type of Sabbath.

Leviticus 25:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses in mount Sinai, saying,2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath unto the LORD. 3 Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof; 4 But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the LORD: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard. 5 That which groweth of its own accord of thy harvest thou shalt not reap, neither gather the grapes of thy vine undressed: for it is a year of rest unto the land.

So, the nation of Israel had a Sabbath each week on the seventh day of the week (see Exodus 20:11, Exodus 31:16-17, and Deuteronomy 5:14) and they had a Sabbath year every seventh year (Leviticus 25:1-7.) This Sabbath of years was a rest for the land.

Just one chapter after introducing the Sabbath of years, Leviticus 26 explains what would happen if the Israelites did not keep God’s commandments and Sabbaths (verses 1-3, 14-15.) According to this chapter, if the Israelites were unfaithful, God would make their land and cities desolate, scatter them among the heathen, and not accept their sacrificial offerings (v. 22, 31-33, 36) And while they were exiled among the heathen, the land would enjoy its Sabbaths (v. 34-35.) (See also verses 43-44.) 2 Chronicles 36:21 reports a corollary to the prophecy of Jeremiah regarding the seventy years of desolation that would occur under the Babylonians. It reports that during these years of desolation, the land would keep its Sabbaths just as Leviticus 26 stated.

2 Chronicles 36:18 And all the vessels of the house of God, great and small, and the treasures of the house of the LORD, and the treasures of the king, and of his princes; all these he brought to Babylon. 19 And they burnt the house of God, and brake down the wall of Jerusalem, and burnt all the palaces thereof with fire, and destroyed all the goodly vessels thereof. 20 And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon; where they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia: 21 To fulfil the word of the LORD by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had enjoyed her sabbaths: for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years.

From these texts we can see that Jews like Daniel were very well acquainted with the connection of the weeks of years, Sabbath years, and the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple. Indeed, the Babylonian captivity was a period of 70 years (10 weeks of years) in which Jerusalem was desolate and Temple activities had ceased. Biblically speaking, there can be little doubt that the weeks of Daniel 9 are weeks of years. Seventy weeks of years are equivalent to a total of 490 years (70 weeks multiplied by 7 years in a week equals 490 years: 70 x 7 = 490.)

Daniel’s prophecy segments the events contained within this 70 week (490 year) timetable into at least two sections. The first section (Daniel 9:24-26) concerns what would happen after the first 69 weeks (483 years.) The second section involves the events of the seventieth or final week of years (Daniel 9:27.)



Potential Relevance of Jubilee Cycles

Daniel’s prophecy of 70 weeks of years is important because it details the final period of our Old Testament timeline as discussed in biblical texts. Again, the period we are currently examining is the time between the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple to the decree to restore and rebuild the city and its walls (Daniel 9:25.)

From our examination of Daniel, Jeremiah, Leviticus, 2 Kings, and 2 Chronicles, we have become familiar with the beginning of this period of biblical history. The desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple began 11 years after the captivity of Jehoiachin (2 Kings 24:8-18, 25:1-2, 8-11, 21.) At this time there was a final deportation of the population of Judah and Jerusalem to Babylon and the city, its houses, its walls, and its Temple were destroyed.

We have also learned about the end of this period of biblical history. This period would end with a decree to restore and rebuild Jerusalem, its walls, and its streets (Daniel 9:25.)

By comparing Daniel 9 with Ezekiel 40, author and pastor, Tim Warner identifies a biblical clue for calculating the amount of time between the desolation of Jerusalem and this decree to restore the city and its walls.

As we have seen the prophecy of Daniel 9 presents a period of 70 weeks of years. And this period of years begins with a particular decree. It is important to note that Daniel 9:25 discusses what will happen after this decree occurs. In doing so, this verse discusses the first 69 weeks of the prophetic timetable as a period of 7 weeks and 62 weeks. (This is equivalent to 483 years.)

Daniel 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times.

As Tim Warner insightfully observes, a grouping of 7 weeks of years was a well-known facet of the Old Testament sabbatical year cycle that we discussed in our previous section. (See “The Coming Millennial Sabbath – Part II,” Tim Warner, Copyright © July, 2009, answersinrevelation.org)

Earlier in our study we looked at Leviticus 25:1-7. In this passage we saw that God had commanded the Israelites to keep a Sabbath rest of the land every seven years. Now we will return to pick up with the highly relevant content of the remaining verses of Leviticus 25.

After establishing the seventh year Sabbath of the land, Leviticus 25 immediately presents a grouping of 7 sabbatical year cycles (or 7 weeks of years.) As verse 8 explains, the Israelites were commanded by God to count and group together 7 sabbatical year cycles (7 weeks of years.) Seven weeks of years totals 49 years. According to Leviticus 25, the fiftieth year after every 49 years (7 weeks of years,) was a special, holy year for the Israelites.

Leviticus 25:1 And the LORD spake unto Moses in mount Sinai, saying,2 Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye come into the land which I give you, then shall the land keep a sabbath unto the LORD. 3 Six years thou shalt sow thy field, and six years thou shalt prune thy vineyard, and gather in the fruit thereof; 4 But in the seventh year shall be a sabbath of rest unto the land, a sabbath for the LORD: thou shalt neither sow thy field, nor prune thy vineyard. 5 That which groweth of its own accord of thy harvest thou shalt not reap, neither gather the grapes of thy vine undressed: for it is a year of rest unto the land…8 And thou shalt number seven sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years; and the space of the seven sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years. 9 Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of the jubile to sound on the tenth day of the seventh month, in the day of atonement shall ye make the trumpet sound throughout all your land. 10 And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year, and proclaim liberty throughout all the land unto all the inhabitants thereof: it shall be a jubile unto you; and ye shall return every man unto his possession, and ye shall return every man unto his family.

Like the sabbatical (seventh) year, the Israelites were not allowed to sow or reap the land in this fiftieth (Jubilee) year.

Leviticus 25:11 A jubile shall that fiftieth year be unto you: ye shall not sow, neither reap that which groweth of itself in it, nor gather the grapes in it of thy vine undressed.

This would result in a situation in which every 48 years the Israelites were forbidden from sowing and reaping for 2 years in a row. For, they were not allowed to sow or reap in the forty-ninth year because it was the sabbatical (seventh) year in a 7-year week. And they also could not sow or reap in the fiftieth year. For, it was a Jubilee year. This lack of a harvest for two years in a row would seem to present an obvious problem for any ancient culture. In Leviticus 25:20-22, God recognizes that this would seem to some to be a serious problem. However, according to God’s plan, the inability to sow or reap would not pose a problem during these years of rest. Instead, God would provide an abundance in the sixth year of the previous week of years. In fact, the abundance of the sixth year would produce enough food and seed to last three years. Therefore, even the 2 year consecutive rest at the Jubilee year would not present any difficulty.

Leviticus 25:20 And if ye shall say, What shall we eat the seventh year? behold, we shall not sow, nor gather in our increase: 21 Then I will command my blessing upon you in the sixth year, and it shall bring forth fruit for three years. 22 And ye shall sow the eighth year, and eat yet of old fruit until the ninth year; until her fruits come in ye shall eat of the old store.

We already know that Daniel 9’s weeks of prophecy contained a direct and intentional reference to Leviticus 25 and its 7-year sabbatical cycle. This connection would have been obvious to any Jew of the Old Testament period who read the book of Daniel. What Warner insightfully points out is that, by grouping the first 7 weeks of the prophetic timetable together, Daniel 9 seems to also contain an equally obvious reference to the Jubilee cycle also mentioned in Leviticus 25.

On its own this detail cannot inform us of the amount of time between the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple and the decree to rebuild the city and its walls. However, as Warner shows, we should note that Daniel 9:25 seems to make it plain that this decree will coincide with the beginning of a new Jubilee cycle. Daniel 9:25 marks this coincidence by grouping the first 7 weeks together just as the Israelites were instructed to do in the Jubilee cycles commanded in Leviticus 25:8.

Next Warner correlates this important detail of Daniel 9:25 with Ezekiel 40:1. In this passage, Ezekiel records a vision that he had 25 years after the captivity of Jehoiachin and 14 years after Jerusalem was desolated.

Ezekiel 40:1 In the five and twentieth year of our captivity, in the beginning of the year, in the tenth day of the month, in the fourteenth year after that the city was smitten, in the selfsame day the hand of the LORD was upon me, and brought me thither.

Warner astutely notes that, according to Ezekiel this was the beginning of the year. In the Hebrew text, the phrase translated “beginning of the year” in English is “rosh ha shaneh.” This is a Hebrew reference to Rosh Hashanah – New Year’s day.

Rosh Hashanah – In the earliest times the Hebrew year began in autumn with the opening of the economic year… The earliest reference to such a custom is, probably, in the account of the vision of Ezekiel (Ezek 40:1)…This first day of the seventh month was appointed by the Law to be "a day of blowing of trumpets". There was to be a holy convocation; no servile work was to be done; and special sacrifices were to be offered (Lev 23:23-25; Num 29:1-6). – wikipedia.org

Rosh ha-Shanah [Heb.,= head of the year], the Jewish New Year, also known as the Feast of the Trumpets. It is observed on the first day of the seventh month, Tishri, occurring usually in September…A distinguishing feature of the New Year is the blowing of the shofar (a ram's horn), which summons Jews to penitential observance. – Columbia Encyclopedia

Leviticus 23:23-24 instructs the Israelites that the first day of the seventh month was a day of rest. They were required to blow the trumpets on this day every year and rest from their work.

Leviticus 23:23 And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying, 24 Speak unto the children of Israel, saying, In the seventh month, in the first day of the month, shall ye have a sabbath, a memorial of blowing of trumpets, an holy convocation. 25 Ye shall do no servile work therein: but ye shall offer an offering made by fire unto the LORD.

However, as Leviticus 25 points out, after every 49 years (7 weeks of years/sabbatical-year cycles) the Israelites were to proclaim the fiftieth year a year of Jubilee. According to Leviticus 23:23, every year on the first day of the seventh month the Israelites were to sound the trumpets. However, Leviticus 25:8-10 informs us that in the year of Jubilee the Jews were to sound the trumpets on the tenth day of the seventh month.

Leviticus 25:8 And thou shalt number seven sabbaths of years unto thee, seven times seven years; and the space of the seven sabbaths of years shall be unto thee forty and nine years. 9 Then shalt thou cause the trumpet of the jubile to sound on the tenth day of the seventh month, in the day of atonement shall ye make the trumpet sound throughout all your land. 10 And ye shall hallow the fiftieth year,

As Tim Warner and others have recognized, Ezekiel’s reference to the tenth day of the month in connection with the beginning of the year (Rosh Hashanah) seems to specifically denote that this year was, in fact, a Jubilee year.

Rosh Hashanah – In the earliest times the Hebrew year began in autumn with the opening of the economic year…It is likely that the new year was celebrated from ancient times in some special way. The earliest reference to such a custom is, probably, in the account of the vision of Ezekiel (Ezek 40:1). This took place at the beginning of the year, on the tenth day of the month (Tishri). On the same day the beginning of the year of jubilee was to be proclaimed by the blowing of trumpets (Lev 25:9)… – wikipedia.org

Sabbatical Year And Jubilee: Talmudic and Samaritan Calculation of Jubilees – The first cycle commenced after the conquest of the land and its distribution among the tribes, which, occupied fourteen years, and the last jubilee occurred on the "tenth day of the month [Tishri], in the fourteenth year after that the city was smitten" (Ezek. xl. 1), which was the New-Year's Day of the jubilee ('Ab. Zarah 9b; 'Ar. 11b-12b). - www.jewishencyclopedia.com

Based on these observations, it seems reasonable to conclude that Ezekiel 40:1 is reporting that the fourteenth year after the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple was, in fact, a Jubilee year (a fiftieth year after 7 sabbatical year cycles.)

If he has indeed given us the location of a Jubilee year in relation to the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple, Ezekiel has helped provide a key factor in determining the amount of years between the Babylonian desolation and the decree mentioned in Daniel 9:25. Since Daniel 9:25 seems to place this decree in the first year of a Jubilee cycle, we should be able to place that decree within a multiple of 50-year cycles after Ezekiel’s vision. Perhaps more importantly, Ezekiel provides the date of his vision in relation to the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple. We may be able to use this information to help find the date of the decree of Daniel 9:25 in relation to the Babylonian desolation.

We must also consider that Ezekiel’s identification of the first ten days of the year as the “head of the year,” or Rosh Hashanah, may not indicate a Jubilee year specifically. Rather than specifying that this was a special year, Ezekiel may only be noting that the ancient Jews considered the first 10 days of the year to be the “beginning of the year.” (We will include calculations with the Jubilee cycles and without the Jubilee cycles in our study.)

Rosh Hashanah – In the earliest times the Hebrew year began in autumn with the opening of the economic year…It is likely that the new year was celebrated from ancient times in some special way. The earliest reference to such a custom is, probably, in the account of the vision of Ezekiel (Ezek 40:1). This took place at the beginning of the year, on the tenth day of the month (Tishri). – wikipedia.org We should note that, in his articles, Tim Warner points out these facts. He also uses 49 years (rather than 50 years) as the amount of time in a Jubilee cycle. However, we believe that it is equally probable that the Jubilee cycle contained a total of 50 years rather than 49.

For the Jubilee cycle to contain only 49 years, it must be the case that the fiftieth year is also the first year in a new sabbatical cycle. It would also therefore, necessarily be the first year in a new Jubilee cycle. (In this way, the Jubilee would be both a fiftieth year after a 49-year cycle and it would also be the first year in a new 49-year cycle. This would mean there is only 48 years, years 2-49, separating the end of the first year, which is itself a Jubilee year, and the next Jubilee year. Yet Leviticus 25:11 clearly calls the Jubilee year the 50th year.)

However, the text of Leviticus 25 specifically states that the Israelites were allowed to sow and reap in the first 6 years of each week of years (Leviticus 25:3.) This necessarily means that the Jews were allowed to sow and reap in the first year of each sabbatical year cycle. These details could reasonably be taken to indicate that the Jubilee year was a fiftieth year, distinguished from the weeks of years which came before it and from the weeks of years that followed it. With this in mind, we believe it is at least possible, if not likely, that the Jubilee cycle should be counted as a 50-year cycle rather than as a 49-year cycle. (In this scenario, the Jubilee would be a fiftieth year after a 49-year cycle. But it would also be distinct from and followed by the first year in a new 49-year cycle.)

In either case, we will need to determine how many Jubilee cycles may have occurred during the interval between Ezekiel’s vision and the decree described in Daniel 9:25. Once we have determined the number of Jubilee cycles, then we can multiply that number by either 49 years or 50 years to arrive at the total interval for this period of biblical world history.



Corresponding Jubilee Years with the Historical Record

As we have seen Ezekiel 40 and Leviticus 25 provide some potentially strong indications that the decree of Daniel 9:25 would occur in the first year of a Jubilee cycle. The question then is how do we determine the number of Jubilee cycles between Ezekiel’s vision and the decree prophesied in Daniel 9:25?

As we said at the beginning of this section of our study, the bible does not specifically provide us with the exact number of years. However, historians are able to understand the timeframe of these biblical events by piecing them together with the compiled extra-biblical chronology of this period of ancient history.

Using this historical chronology we can plot these biblical events on a timeline of world history. The results are as follows.

1. By the end of the third year of his reign, King Jehoiakim is a subject of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. Biblically speaking, this is referred to as the first year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. It is commonly dated to approximately 605 BC.

Jehoiakim – However, when the Egyptians were defeated by the Babylonians at Carchemish in 605 BC, Jehoiakim changed allegiances, paying tribute to Nebuchadrezzar II of Babylon. – wikipedia.org

Jehoiakim – From 605 BC, after the Babylonians defeated Egypt, Jehoiakim became a vassal of Nebuchadnezzar…He died in 598 just as Nebuchadnezzar was besieging Jerusalem. – Columbia Encyclopedia



2. The deportation of the nobles and a large portion of the population of Jerusalem during the reign of Jehoiakim’s son, Jehoiachin (or Jeconiah) occurred 8 years later. The bible reckons this as Nebuchadnezzar’s eighth year of reign. This is conventionally placed in the year 597 BC.

Judaism - King Jehoiakim's attempt to be free of Babylonia ended with the exile of his successor, Jehoiachin, along with Judah's elite (597); - Encyclopedia Britannica

Jehoiakim – According to the Babylonian Chronicles[9], Jerusalem eventually fell on 2 Adar (March 16) 597 BC. – wikipedia.org



3. The ultimate deportation of the population of Jerusalem and Judah and the destruction of the city, its walls, its houses, and its Temple took place 11 years later. This is counted as the nineteenth year of Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon. These events are dated to 586 BC.

Judaism - In 587/586 BCE the doom prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel came true. Rebellious Jerusalem was reduced by Nebuchadrezzar, the Temple was burnt, and much of Judah's population dispersed or deported to Babylonia. - Encyclopedia Britannica

Diaspora - The first significant Jewish Diaspora was the result of the Babylonian Exile (q.v.) of 586 BC. After the Babylonians conquered the Kingdom of Judah, part of the Jewish population was deported into slavery. - Encyclopedia Britannica Jerusalem - Jerusalem became the spiritual and political capital of the Hebrews. In 586 B.C. it fell to the Babylonians, and the Temple was destroyed. - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.



4. Ezekiel 40:1 reports a vision he had in the twenty fifth year after the deportation of Jehoiachin, which was the fourteenth year after the city was destroyed. We know that the deportation of Jehoiachin took place 11 years before destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. So, the twenty fifth year after the captivity of Jehoiachin and the fourteenth year after the destruction of Jerusalem refer to the same year. The deportation of Jehoiachin is placed in 597 BC and the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple is place in 586 BC. Ezekiel’s vision took place in the first month of the Hebrew year. This month occurs in fall. Therefore the beginning of the fourteenth year after the destruction of Jerusalem would begin in the year 573 BC. This means that Ezekiel’s vision took place in 573 BC. According to indications provided in the text of Ezekiel 40:1, this may very well have been a Jubilee year, the fiftieth year after a cycle of 7 weeks of years (49 years.)



5. According to biblical texts including Jeremiah 25:11, Jeremiah 29:10, Daniel 9:2, and Zechariah 7:5, Jerusalem would be desolate and the Jews would live in Babylon for a period of 70 years. This 70 year period could refer to several possible durations during this timeframe.

The first possible manner of reckoning the timeframe of these 70 years begins with the subjugation of Jehoiakim. According to the biblical descriptions, Nebuchadnezzar’s rule of Judah is said to begin at this time and Nebuchadnezzar’s reign is always counted in numbers beginning with this event. As we have seen this is conventionally set in the year 605 BC.

Jeremiah 25:11 refers to 70 years serving the king of Babylon. So, the 70 years may be understood to begin at this time (605 BC.) And as we have seen, the deportation of Jehoiachin is typically dated to 597 BC. Many important Jewish men and their families were taken to captivity in Babylon at this time and the desolation of Jerusalem began. In 538 BC, Cyrus became the ruler of the kingdom of Babylon. In the first year of Cyrus’ reign over Babylon he released the Jewish exiles to return to Judah and Jerusalem (2 Chronicles 36:22-23, Ezra 1:1-8.)

Cyrus the Great - The Chaldaean empire of Babylonia fell to Cyrus in 538 BC. - Columbia Encyclopedia

Babylonian Captivity - 538 -"Decree of Cyrus" allows Judahites to return to Jerusalem. - wikipedia.org

Biblical Literature - In any event, it was from this community that the leadership and the cadres for the resurrection of the Judahite nation and faith were to come when Cyrus the Great (labelled "the Lord's anointed" in Deutero-Isaiah) conquered Babylon and made it possible for them to return (538). A contingent of about 50,000 persons, including about 4,000 priests and 7,000 slaves, returned under Sheshbazzar, a prince of Judah. - Encyclopedia Britannica

Babylonian Captivity - also called Babylonian Captivity, the forced detention of Jews in Babylonia following the latter's conquest of the kingdom of Judah in 598/7 and 587/6 BC. The exile formally ended in 538 BC, when the Persian conqueror of Babylonia, Cyrus the Great, gave the Jews permission to return to Palestine. - Encyclopedia Britannica

Belshazzar - According to the accounts in the Bible and Xenophon, Belshazzar held a last great feast... Belshazzar died after Babylon fell to the Persian general Gobyras without resistance on Oct. 12, 539, and probably before the Persian king Cyrus II entered the city 17 days later. - Britannica.com

We should note that 538 BC is 67 years after Nebuchadnezzar is credited with subjugating the kingdom of Judah (in 605 BC.)

We must take into account that it may have taken some time for significant numbers of the Jewish exiles to return to Jerusalem. With this in mind, it is certainly conceivable that the subjugation to the Babylonians did, in fact, last 70 years just as the bible reports. Under this conception the 70 years would have begun sometime near the year 606-605 BC and ended somewhere near the year 537-536 BC. This duration of time would also fit with Daniel 5:24-31 which records the end of the Babylonian superiority and the subjugation of the realm of Babylon by the Medes and Persians. In this passage the fall of Babylon is announced by words written on a wall stating that the Babylonian kingdom’s days had been numbered and finished (v.26.) This may, in fact, refer to the conclusion of the 70 years of Babylonian sovereignty over the kingdom of Judah, when the Medes and Persians took the kingdom under Cyrus the Great.

A second possible identification of the 70 years of Jeremiah’s prophecy can also be produced using the date of the final deportation of the people of Jerusalem and the destruction and burning of the city, its walls, its houses, and the Temple. As we have seen, this event is commonly dated to 586 BC.

If the 70 years of desolation is understood to begin with this event, then it would conclude in the year 516-515 BC. This year, 516-515 BC, is conventionally identified as the date when returned Jewish exiles had finished rebuilding the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem.

Second Temple – The Second Temple stood between 516 BCE and 70 CE, - wikipedia.org

Babylonian Captivity - 520-515 - Return under Zerubbabel and Joshua the High Priest; rebuilding of the Temple (Second Temple) - wikipedia.org

Both considerations provide working fulfillments of the 70 years prophesied by Jeremiah. The strength of the first interpretation is that it emphasizes a 70-year period that was exclusively under the rule of the Babylonians kings before Babylon itself became subjugated by the Medes and Persians. This may be what Jeremiah 25:11 intended to convey.

However, biblical texts identify the Medo-Persian kings as the kings of Babylon after they had conquered the city (Erza 5:13, Nehemiah 13:6.) Therefore, Jeremiah 25:11 may not require a 70-year period ruled exclusively by ethnically Babylonian kings. With this in mind, the Jewish return that began under Cyrus and ended with the completion of the rebuilt Temple may be what Jeremiah prophesied. So, while we are not dogmatic about it, we will use the 70-year period spanning from 586-516 BC.



6. In conventional chronologies, the completion of the rebuilt Temple in 516-515 BC falls within the first 6 years of the reign of Darius the Great, a successor of Cyrus.

Darius I – Darius I (Darius the Great) d. 486 BC, king of ancient Persia (521-486 BC), called also Dariavaush and Darius Hystaspis (after his father, Hystaspes or Vishtaspa)… Darius consolidated Persian power in the East, including NW India. He continued Cyrus' policy of restoring the Jewish state, and under his auspices the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem was completed in 515 BC For this reason he is mentioned warmly in Ezra, Haggai, and Zechariah. - Columbia Encyclopedia

Jerusalem - The city was restored to Hebrew rule later in the 6th cent. B.C. by Cyrus the Great, king of Persia. The Temple was rebuilt (538-515 B.C.; known as the Second Temple) by Zerubbabel, a governor of Jerusalem under the Persians. In the mid-5th cent. B.C., Ezra reinvigorated the Jewish community in Jerusalem. The city was the capital of the Maccabees in the 2d and 1st cent. B.C. - The Columbia Encyclopedia

This is exactly what the biblical details report. The books of Ezra, Haggai, and Zechariah mention the events of this period of time. Each discusses the work of Haggai, Zechariah, Joshua, Zerubbabel and other returned exiles as they worked to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem during the first few years of Darius’ reign. Ezra 6:15-16 specifically records that the rebuilt Temple was completed, dedicated, and in use in the sixth year of Darius. (This would have been the year 516-515 BC.)

Ezra 6:15 And this house was finished on the third day of the month Adar, which was in the sixth year of the reign of Darius the king. 16 And the children of Israel, the priests, and the Levites, and the rest of the children of the captivity, kept the dedication of this house of God with joy, 17 And offered at the dedication of this house of God an hundred bullocks, two hundred rams, four hundred lambs; and for a sin offering for all Israel, twelve he goats, according to the number of the tribes of Israel.



7. The Books of Ezra and Nehemiah in particular chronicle: a) the end of Jewish captivity in Babylon and the return of the Jewish exiles and their descendants to Jerusalem, b) the construction and completion of the second Temple, and c) the rebuilding of the walls, gates, houses, and streets of the city of Jerusalem. The accomplishment of these three historic tasks fulfilled biblical prophecy and restored Jerusalem from the desolate condition imposed on it by Nebuchadnezzar.

More specifically, we can see that these two books (Ezra and Nehemiah) discuss the restoring of the city of Jerusalem and its walls as a result of the decrees made during the reigns of Persian kings including: Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes. As we have seen above, these three kings are commonly identified with Cyrus II (the Great), Darius I (the Great), and Artaxerxes I.

Babylonian Captivity - also called Babylonian Captivity, the forced detention of Jews in Babylonia following the latter's conquest of the kingdom of Judah in 598/7 and 587/6 BC. The exile formally ended in 538 BC, when the Persian conqueror of Babylonia, Cyrus the Great, gave the Jews permission to return to Palestine. - Encyclopedia Britannica

Darius I – Darius I (Darius the Great) d. 486 BC, king of ancient Persia (521-486 BC), called also Dariavaush and Darius Hystaspis (after his father, Hystaspes or Vishtaspa)… Darius consolidated Persian power in the East, including NW India. He continued Cyrus' policy of restoring the Jewish state, and under his auspices the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem was completed in 515 BC For this reason he is mentioned warmly in Ezra, Haggai, and Zechariah. - Columbia Encyclopedia

Nehemiah - a charter granted by the Persian king Artaxerxes I to Ezra scholar and priest of the Babylonian Exile empowered him to enforce the Torah as the imperial law for the Jews of the province Avar-nahra (Beyond the River), in which the district of Judah (now reduced to a small area) was located. - Encyclopedia Britannica

This endeavor, the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its walls, indicates that the all-important decree mentioned by Daniel 9:25 occurred at some point during the reigns of these Persian kings.

Daniel 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. 26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.



Artaxerxes I Issues the Decree Mentioned in Daniel 9

There are two royal documents issued by Artaxerxes I that are typically cited in regard to the decree of Daniel 9:25. One of these documents is dated to 444 BC. And the other is dated to 458-457 BC.

In the twentieth year of Artaxerxes, Nehemiah is informed that the walls and gates of Jerusalem remained broken down and burned with fire.

Nehemiah 1:1 The words of Nehemiah the son of Hachaliah. And it came to pass in the month Chisleu, in the twentieth year, as I was in Shushan the palace, 2 That Hanani, one of my brethren, came, he and certain men of Judah; and I asked them concerning the Jews that had escaped, which were left of the captivity, and concerning Jerusalem. 3 And they said unto me, The remnant that are left of the captivity there in the province are in great affliction and reproach: the wall of Jerusalem also is broken down, and the gates thereof are burned with fire.

After hearing the condition of Jerusalem and its walls, Nehemiah petitions Artaxerxes I for permission to return to Jerusalem and to rebuild the city and its gates. Artaxerxes I grants Nehemiah’s request and gives him letters to this effect. After receiving permission from the king, Nehemiah returns to Jerusalem and tells those living in the city that they should rebuild the wall and gates of the city (v.17.)

Nehemiah 2:1 And it came to pass in the month Nisan, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes the king, that wine was before him: and I took up the wine, and gave it unto the king. Now I had not been beforetime sad in his presence. 2 Wherefore the king said unto me, Why is thy countenance sad, seeing thou art not sick? this is nothing else but sorrow of heart. Then I was very sore afraid, 3 And said unto the king, Let the king live for ever: why should not my countenance be sad, when the city, the place of my fathers’ sepulchres, lieth waste, and the gates thereof are consumed with fire? 4 Then the king said unto me, For what dost thou make request? So I prayed to the God of heaven. 5 And I said unto the king, If it please the king, and if thy servant have found favour in thy sight, that thou wouldest send me unto Judah, unto the city of my fathers’ sepulchres, that I may build it. 6 And the king said unto me, (the queen also sitting by him,) For how long shall thy journey be? and when wilt thou return? So it pleased the king to send me; and I set him a time. 7 Moreover I said unto the king, If it please the king, let letters be given me to the governors beyond the river, that they may convey me over till I come into Judah;.. 9 Then I came to the governors beyond the river, and gave them the king’s letters. Now the king had sent captains of the army and horsemen with me…11 So I came to Jerusalem, and was there three days…17 Then said I unto them, Ye see the distress that we are in, how Jerusalem lieth waste, and the gates thereof are burned with fire: come, and let us build up the wall of Jerusalem, that we be no more a reproach.

Conventional dating places the letter given to Nehemiah in 444 BC. This was the twentieth year of Artaxerxes I’s reign. (Artaxerxes I reigned from 464-425 BC.)

Artaxerxes I - Artaxerxes I , d. 425 BC, king of ancient Persia (464-425 BC), of the dynasty of the Achaemenis. – Columbia Encycopedia Biblical Literature - The first great aim was the rebuilding of the Temple as the centre of worship and thus also of national existence; this was completed in 515 under the administration of Zerubbabel and became the place of uninterrupted sacrificial worship for the next 350 years. The next task was to rebuild the walls of Jerusalem, which was undertaken by Nehemiah, a Babylonian Jew and court butler who was appointed governor of Judah and arrived in 444. - Encyclopedia Britannica

Nehemiah - The book narrates the return to Jerusalem of Nehemiah, the cup-bearer of Persian King Artaxerxes I, as governor of the city-state. In the first period of Nehemiah's governorship (445-433 B.C.) as related in the book, Jerusalem's walls were rebuilt. - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

Nehemiah - So about 444 BC Nehemiah journeyed to Jerusalem and aroused the people there to the necessity of repopulating the city and rebuilding its walls. - Encyclopedia Britannica

Jerusalem - The Temple was restored (515 BC) despite Samaritan opposition, and the city became the centre of the new statehood and its position strengthened when Nehemiah (c. 444) restored its fortifications. - Encyclopedia Britannica

We should note that Nehemiah elsewhere informs us that he was appointed by Artaxerxes I to be governor over the province of Judah (Nehemiah 5:14, 12:26.) We should also note that the exact authorizations and statements given by Artaxerxes I to Nehemiah are not provided in the biblical texts. Likewise, the document that Artaxerxes I gives to Nehemiah is referred to as a letter. No decree or command of Artaxerxes I is mentioned in the Book of Nehemiah.

The second document that is cited in reference to Daniel 9:25 is the letter given to Ezra by Artaxerxes I in his seventh year as king.

Ezra 7:1 Now after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Ezra the son of Seraiah, the son of Azariah, the son of Hilkiah, 6 This Ezra went up from Babylon; and he was a ready scribe in the law of Moses, which the LORD God of Israel had given: and the king granted him all his request, according to the hand of the LORD his God upon him. 7 And there went up some of the children of Israel, and of the priests, and the Levites, and the singers, and the porters, and the Nethinims, unto Jerusalem, in the seventh year of Artaxerxes the king. 8 And he came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king. 9 For upon the first day of the first month began he to go up from Babylon, and on the first day of the fifth month came he to Jerusalem, according to the good hand of his God upon him.

Conventional chronologies of this period place these events in the year 458-457 BC. Judaism - Nonetheless, intermarriage occurred and precipitated a new crisis when, in 458, the priest Ezra arrived from Babylon, intent on enforcing the regimen of the Torah. - Encyclopedia Britannica

Nehemiah - originally combined with Ezra to form a single book in the Hebrew canon. In the Septuagint, Ezra and Nehemiah are combined as Second Esdras. The book narrates the return to Jerusalem of Nehemiah, the cup-bearer of Persian King Artaxerxes I, as governor of the city-state. In the first period of Nehemiah's governorship (445-433 B.C.) as related in the book, Jerusalem's walls were rebuilt. There follows an account of the census taking during the earlier era of Zerubbabel in c.520 B.C. The work continues with the return of Ezra in 458 B.C.; the reading of the Jewish law; the national confession of sin; a return to Nehemiah's first governorship; and a brief account of his second term, which began sometime after 433 B.C." - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

Nehemiah - a charter granted by the Persian king Artaxerxes I to Ezra scholar and priest of the Babylonian Exile empowered him to enforce the Torah as the imperial law for the Jews of the province Avar-nahra (Beyond the River), in which the district of Judah (now reduced to a small area) was located." - Encyclopedia Britannica

Verses 11-21 of Ezra 7 provide the contents of Artaxerxes I’s letter to Ezra. Most of the content articulates Artaxerxes I’s intention to beautify the rebuilt Temple. But, the text of the document also stipulates that Artaxerxes I authorized Ezra to do whatsoever he felt was required. Also important is the fact that in verses 13 and 21 Artaxerxes I himself specifically refers to his authorization to Ezra as a decree.

Ezra 7:12 Artaxerxes, king of kings, unto Ezra the priest, a scribe of the law of the God of heaven, perfect peace, and at such a time. 13 I make a decree (02942), that all they of the people of Israel, and of his priests and Levites, in my realm, which are minded of their own freewill to go up to Jerusalem, go with thee…18 And whatsoever shall seem good to thee, and to thy brethren, to do with the rest of the silver and the gold, that do after the will of your God…21 And I, even I Artaxerxes the king, do make a decree (02942), to all the treasurers which are beyond the river, that whatsoever Ezra the priest, the scribe of the law of the God of heaven, shall require of you, it be done speedily…

The following chapter of Ezra recounts those who returned with Ezra from Babylon and their travels to Jerusalem (Ezra 8:1-32.) Ezra 8:36 refers to the authorization given to Ezra by Artaxerxes as “commissions.” This word means “law, edict, decree” (Strong’s 01881.)

After arriving in Jerusalem, Ezra assembles with the leadership and people of the city (Ezra 9:1-4.) In Ezra 9:9, Ezra explains that the kings of Persia had given the Jews permission to rebuild the Temple and repair the desolation of the city of Jerusalem and its walls. These words clearly show that Ezra understood that Artaxerxes I’s decree had authorized the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its walls.

Ezra 9:9 For we were bondmen; yet our God hath not forsaken us in our bondage, but hath extended mercy unto us in the sight of the kings of Persia, to give us a reviving, to set up the house of our God, and to repair the desolations thereof, and to give us a wall in Judah and in Jerusalem.

These events of the Book of Ezra are continued in the Book of Nehemiah where the process of repairing the walls of Jerusalem are recorded in great detail in times of adversity from local enemies who repeatedly sought to disrupt their efforts. All of this fits perfectly with Daniel 9:25, which refers to a commandment to restore and rebuild Jerusalem and its walls and streets in troublous times.

Daniel 9:25 Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. 26 And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined.

There are several reasons that we believe that the decree of Artaxerxes I to Ezra should be identified as the decree or command of Daniel 9:25. First, it is clear that this decree was understood to authorize Ezra to do whatever he felt was required by God. And we know from Ezra 9:9 that Ezra himself understood this to include the restoration of the city and its walls.

Second, this authorization given to Ezra is specifically and repeatedly referred to as a decree or command of the king. While Nehemiah was clearly concerned with the ruinous state of the city and its walls and was given authority as governor of Judah, his appointment is not identified as a decree or command.

Third, even if Ezra and Nehemiah were both given decrees to rebuild and restore Jerusalem and its walls, Ezra’s decree came first. Therefore, it is reasonable to give preference to this earlier authorization.

Fourth, and perhaps most importantly, Daniel 9:25-26 specifies that there would be a period of 69 weeks of years (483 years) between the decree authorizing the rebuilding of the city and its walls to the death of the Messiah. Daniel 9:25 states that the coming of the Messiah will occur 69 weeks of years after the issuing of the command to rebuild the city. Daniel 9:26 states that after this 483 year period the Messiah will be cut off (killed.)

On the other hand, identifying the authorization of Nehemiah as the command mentioned in Daniel 9:25 presents a mathematical difficulty with historical chronologies. Nehemiah’s authorization was given in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes I (Nehemiah 2:1-9.) This is typically identified as the twentieth year of King Artaxerxes I of Persia, which was the year 444 BC.

When we add the 483 years (69 weeks of years) prescribed by Daniel’s prophecy to the year 444 BC we arrive at the year 38 AD. If 444 BC is the year of the command mentioned in Daniel 9:25, then the Messiah should have come no sooner than 38 AD. And he would have been killed after this date. (For the sake of calculations, we must keep in mind that there was no year zero between 1 BC and 1 AD.)

Standard historical timelines date Christ’s birth anywhere between 6 BC and 1 AD. Biblical information indicates that Jesus was nearly (or exactly) 30 years of age when he began his ministry (Luke 3:23.) Biblical chronologies of Christ’s ministry span 3 1/2 years of time (at the most.) If we assume that Christ was born at the latest possible date (1 AD) and add 33 years of his life, ministry, and death, then Christ would have died in 33 AD at the latest. This is at least 5 years too early to fulfill the timeline specified by Daniel’s prophecy.

On the other hand, the decree given to Ezra in Artaxerxes I’s seventh year works perfectly with Daniel’s prophecy and historical chronologies. The seventh year of Artaxerxes I was 458-457 BC. Adding 483 years (69 weeks of years) from 458-457 BC would arrive at the year 25 AD. If we subtract 33 years as the maximum amount of time for Christ’s life, ministry, and death then we arrive at the year 7 BC. But the text of Daniel merely requires that the Messiah would have to come at the end of the 483 years. It does not specify that he had to come exactly at that point. Theoretically, Christ could have been born at any point after 7 BC, died 33 years later, and fulfilled the timeline provided in Daniel 9.

In our first addendum we presented historical data showing that Christ’s death is likely to have occurred in the year 29-30 AD and his baptism by John probably occurred near 26 AD. These dates fit very well with the identification of Artaxerxes I’s decree to Ezra in 458-457 BC, which would have ended in 25 AD.

It is also possible that our standard chronology of history from the Babylonian desolation of Jerusalem to Christ’s death may be off by a decade or so. If that is the case then either the decree given to Ezra or the authorization received by Nehemiah would work with Daniel’s prophecy. However, for the sake of simplicity we will assume that the conventional chronology of these periods is accurate enough and that it does not require alteration. For these reasons we will identify the decree given to Ezra in Artaxerxes I’s seventh year (458-457 BC) as the command mentioned in Daniel 9’s prophecy.

(We have been using the year 458-457 instead of simply 458 because the Hebrew civic year begins in fall, while the years of our historical calendar begin in January. The timetable of Daniel 9 uses the Hebrew year, which overlaps two Gregorian solar years and runs from fall of our Gregorian year to fall the following year. Therefore, we have marked the time of Artaxerxes I’s decree to Ezra as falling in the Hebrew year that corresponds to 458-457 BC on our modern calendar.)



Reconsiderations of the Conventional Chronology

Identifying the prophesied decree of Daniel 9:25 has allowed us to identify the year when the final period of Old Testament biblical world history began. For our purposes, using the standard chronology of this period, we have identified the year 458-457 AD as the year of the prophetic decree.

Earlier we used the same historical chronology to identify the year of the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple by the Babylonians. We saw that this event is conventionally placed in the year 586 BC.

This means that, according to conventional historical chronologies, there was a total of 128 years between the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple (in 586 BC) and the decree given to Ezra to restore and rebuild Jerusalem and its walls (in 458-457 BC.) We have used this number (128 years) as one of the possible options in our count of the years of biblical world history.

However, earlier in our study we also learned that the prophet Ezekiel noted the occurrence of a Jubilee year 14 years after the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple (Ezekiel 40:1 and Leviticus 25.) Likewise, we learned that Daniel 9:25 indicates that the 69 weeks of years before the coming of the Messiah began with a grouping of 7 weeks of years. As author Tim Warner has noted, this grouping of 7 weeks of years may, in fact, refer to the Jubilee cycle described in Leviticus 25. The text of Leviticus 25 describes both the grouping of 7-year sabbatical cycles (or weeks of years) and the grouping of seven 7-year cycles in a Jubilee cycle. Daniel’s prophecy seems to enlist both types of Jewish calendar cycles in its prophetic timetable.

From this biblical data we might supposed that the beginning of the 483 years (69 weeks of years) before the Messiah’s coming and death would start in the first year of a new Jubilee cycle (containing 49 years or 7 weeks of years.) However, we did not know how many Jubilee cycles would occur between Ezekiel’s vision and the decree mentioned in Daniel 9:25.

A conventional chronology of this period of history has indicated that there were 128 years between the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple and the decree to rebuild and restore the city and its walls mentioned in Daniel 9:25. We know that Ezekiel had a vision in the beginning of the fourteenth year of this period and that this year may have been a Jubilee year. This means that Ezekiel’s vision occurred in the Hebrew year that began in the fall of 573 BC (586 – 573 = 13 years; Ezekiel’s vision occurred in the beginning of the fourteenth year after 13 years had been completed.) Consequently, according to conventional history, 573 BC was the Jubilee year indicated by Ezekiel 40. This would mean that the decree of Daniel 9:25 should occur within a number of Jubilee cycles from this year.

If the Jubilee year is itself the first year in a new sabbatical year cycle, then a Jubilee cycle consists of 49 years. However, it is also possible that the Jubilee year is distinct from the sabbatical cycles and that the next sabbatical cycle began after the Jubilee year ended. In this case, a Jubilee cycle would contain 50 years (7 weeks of years or 49 years plus the Jubilee year. The Jubilee would be counted as a fiftieth year, but not as the first year of the next Sabbatical and Jubilee cycles.)

With these two alternatives in mind, two Jubilee cycles may contain either 98 years or 100 years. Adding either 98 or 100 years to the conventional date of Ezekiel’s vision (573 BC) would result in either the year 475 or 473 BC. This is, in fact, 15-17 years before the conventional date for the decree of Artaxerxes I given to Ezra (458-457 BC.) (For reference it is 28-30 years ahead of the conventional date for the authorization of Nehemiah in 444 BC.)

These references to the Jubilee cycles in Ezekiel 40 and Daniel 9 may indicate that the conventional date of Artaxerxes I’s decree may be in error by 15-17 years. In other words, the conventional duration of the period from Jerusalem’s destruction to the decree (of Artaxerxes I to Ezra) would contain an extra 15-17 years. There would be 15-17 years too many. Since this adjustment would be biblically based, we will include this possibility in our count of biblical world history. As we consider this reduction there are a few related items that should be mentioned.

First, biblical data on the genealogies of individuals who lived during this period may be helpful in determining how many years transpired between the destruction of Jerusalem and Artaxerxes I’s decree to Ezra.

In this respect, Ezra may be of particular use. His genealogy is provided in the biblical texts where it is noted that he was a son of Seraiah, the chief priest.

Ezra 7:1 Now after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Ezra the son (01121) of Seraiah, the son of Azariah, the son of Hilkiah,

However, as Tim Warner has observed, Seraiah was killed by Nebuchadnezzar shortly after the city and the Temple were burned.

2 Kings 25:18 And the captain of the guard took Seraiah the chief priest, and Zephaniah the second priest, and the three keepers of the door: 19 And out of the city he took an officer that was set over the men of war, and five men of them that were in the king’s presence, which were found in the city, and the principal scribe of the host, which mustered the people of the land, and threescore men of the people of the land that were found in the city: 20 And Nebuzaradan captain of the guard took these, and brought them to the king of Babylon to Riblah: 21 And the king of Babylon smote them, and slew them at Riblah in the land of Hamath. So Judah was carried away out of their land.

If Ezra was the son of Seraiah, he would have had to have been born prior to the destruction of the Temple and the subsequent death of his father. This would have been at some point near 586 BC, the conventional date of the Babylonian destruction of Jerusalem.

Judaism - In 587/586 BCE the doom prophecies of Jeremiah and Ezekiel came true. Rebellious Jerusalem was reduced by Nebuchadrezzar, the Temple was burnt, and much of Judah's population dispersed or deported to Babylonia. - Encyclopedia Britannica

Diaspora - The first significant Jewish Diaspora was the result of the Babylonian Exile (q.v.) of 586 BC. After the Babylonians conquered the Kingdom of Judah, part of the Jewish population was deported into slavery. - Encyclopedia Britannica

Jerusalem - Jerusalem became the spiritual and political capital of the Hebrews. In 586 B.C. it fell to the Babylonians, and the Temple was destroyed. - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

Standard chronologies place Ezra’s return to Jerusalem in 458-457 BC, the seventh year of Artaxerxes I’s reign. But according to the Book of Nehemiah, Ezra was still alive at the dedication of the rebuilt walls of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 12:26.) This event took place after the twentieth year of Artaxerxes I when Nehemiah was authorized to serve as the governor of Jerusalem (Nehemiah 2:1-8.) As we have seen, Nehemiah’s arrival in Jerusalem is conventionally dated to 444 BC.

If Ezra was born before the year 586 BC, he would have been around 129 years old when he traveled back to Jerusalem (in 458-457 BC.) And he would have been 142 years old at the time Nehemiah arrived in Jerusalem in 444. As Tim Warner points out, notions that Ezra was over 140 years old seem more than a little unlikely. Clearly, Ezra was not over 140 years old.

This leaves us with two options. Option one would require that the conventional history of this period is too long and must be reduced in order to accommodate the historical details of the life and times of Ezra. Option two would be that Ezra was not actually born before the Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem and the Temple and killed Seraiah.

If Ezra was Seraiah’s son, this second option must be discarded as impossible. However, we believe that it is entirely possible and reasonable that Ezra was not Seraiah’s son, but rather his grandson. Several biblical facts may support this option.

First, the biblical term “ben” (Strong’s number 01121) is used to describe Ezra’s relationship to Seraiah.

Ezra 7:1 Now after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Ezra the son (01121) of Seraiah, the son (01121) of Azariah, the son (01121) of Hilkiah,

This Hebrew word does not always refer to a son, but is often used to refer to a male descendent of more than one generation such as a grandson.

1121 ben
TWOT - 254 from 01129
Part of Speech
n m
Outline of Biblical Usage
1) son, grandson, child, member of a group
a) son, male child
b) grandson

The Aramaic equivalent (“bar,” Strong’s number 01247) corresponds to the Hebrew word “ben.” “Bar” is used in this way in regards to Belshazzar, king of Babylon in Daniel 5:22.

Daniel 5:22 And thou his son (1247), O Belshazzar, hast not humbled thine heart, though thou knewest all this;

Belshazzar was, in fact, a descendant of Nebuchadnezzar, but he was not his son. Instead, Belshazzar is commonly thought to be Nebuchadnezzar’s grandson through his daughter Nitocris.

Belshazzar - Though he is referred to in the Book of Daniel as the son of Nebuchadrezzar, the Babylonian inscriptions indicate that he was in fact the eldest son of Nabonidus, who was king of Babylon from 555 to 539, and of Nitocris, who was perhaps a daughter of Nebuchadrezzar. - Britannica.com

Nitrocris of Babylon – ‘Nitocris of Babylon"' circa (550 BC), was a queen of Babylon, either married to Nebuchadnezzar II or daughter of Nebuchadnezzar II. – wikipedia.org

Belshazzar - Herodotus refers to the last king of Babylon as Labynetos and claims that this was also the name of his father. Herodotus says that the mother of the younger Labynetos was the queen Nitocris whom he portrays as the dominant ruler. She is commonly thought to have been the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar. Labynetos is generally understood to be a garbled form of the name Nabonidus and the younger Labynetos is often identified with Belshazzar. – wikipedia.org

In the same way, Zechariah is referred to in Ezra 5:1 and 6:14 as the “ben” of Iddo.

Ezra 5:1 Then the prophets, Haggai the prophet, and Zechariah the son (1247) of Iddo, prophesied unto the Jews that were in Judah and Jerusalem in the name of the God of Israel, even unto them.

Ezra 6:14 And the elders of the Jews builded, and they prospered through the prophesying of Haggai the prophet and Zechariah the son (1247) of Iddo. And they builded, and finished it, according to the commandment of the God of Israel, and according to the commandment of Cyrus, and Darius, and Artaxerxes king of Persia.

However, in his own book, Zechariah identifies himself as the “ben” of Berechiah the “ben” of Iddo. According to Zechariah then, he was the son of Berechiah and the grandson of Iddo.

Zechariah 1:1 In the eighth month, in the second year of Darius, came the word of the LORD unto Zechariah, the son (1121) of Berechiah, the son (1121) of Iddo the prophet, saying,

Zechariah 1:7 Upon the four and twentieth day of the eleventh month, which is the month Sebat, in the second year of Darius, came the word of the LORD unto Zechariah, the son (1121) of Berechiah, the son (1121) of Iddo the prophet, saying,

A comparison of Ezra and Zechariah shows that the Book of Ezra may use “ben” to refer to “grandson” as is the case with Zechariah. This conclusion is further supported by the fact that Ezra’s own genealogy uses “ben” to refer to grandson rather than son.

Nehemiah 10:2 reports that Seraiah was the son of Hilkiah.

Nehemiah 11:11 Seraiah the son (01121) of Hilkiah, the son of Meshullam, the son of Zadok, the son of Meraioth, the son of Ahitub, was the ruler of the house of God.

But, we already know from Ezra 7:1 that Azariah was Seraiah’s father and that Hilkiah was, in fact, Seraiah’s grandfather.

Ezra 7:1 Now after these things, in the reign of Artaxerxes king of Persia, Ezra the son (01121) of Seraiah, the son (01121) of Azariah, the son (01121) of Hilkiah,

With these biblical facts in mind, it is reasonable to consider that Ezra may, in fact, have been Seraiah’s grandson and not his son. If this is the case, then Ezra would not have to have been born before 586 BC and would not, therefore, have been 142 years old by the time Nehemiah arrived in Jerusalem. Instead, if Ezra was Seraiah’s grandson or great-grandson, he could have been born in exile in Babylon several decades after the destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple. Such a scenario is very reasonable and would reduce Ezra’s age by 30 years or more.

For instance, let us suppose that Ezra was Seraiah’s grandson and that he was born 30 years after the destruction of Jerusalem (and death of Seraiah.) Ezra would then have been born at about the year 556 BC. He would still have been nearly 100 years old when he traveled to Jerusalem in 457 BC and almost 113 years old when Nehemiah arrived in 444 BC. However, we would not need to think that Ezra lived much beyond this. The dedication of the rebuilt walls of Jerusalem seems to have taken place within a short period of time and Ezra may not even have lived to be 120 years old. A scenario in which Ezra dies before age 120 is certainly more reasonable than the alternate idea where Ezra lives to be over 142 years old.

(These estimates for Ezra’s age do not differ much from those provided by Warner in his paper The Coming Millennial Sabbath – Part II, Bible Chronology, from Creation to the Second Coming. See page 17 of that article for Warner’s calculations on the age of Ezra.)

In conclusion, the age of Ezra does not provide a necessary warrant to reconsider or drastically alter the conventional timeline. However, the occurrence of Jubilee cycles may provide some warrant to alter the chronology. (Reducing the duration of this period to fit with the Jubilee cycles may also reduce the age of Ezra.)

(The challenge created by Ezra’s age may at first seem multiplied by a similar fact presented in Ezra 3. Ezra 3:12 refers to the time “when the foundation of this house was laid” and seen by “many of the priests and Levites and chief of the fathers, who were ancient men, that had seen the first house.” As indicated earlier, the completion of the Temple is conventionally dated to the sixth year of Darius in the year 516-515 BC. In order to be old enough to remember seeing the Temple, these men would probably been at least 5-10 years old before it was destroyed. With the Temple’s destruction conventionally dated to 586 BC, there would have to be “many” men at least 80 years or more in age if they survived to see the rebuilt Temple’s completion in 516-515 BC. However, 80 years does not seem unreasonable, particularly when compared to the 140 years potentially ascribed to Ezra. Moreover, Ezra 3 does not require these men to live until the Temple’s completion in 516-515 BC in Darius’ sixth year, but only to the time when its foundation was laid sometime before the reign of Darius. This would subtract at least 6 years from their respective ages. Consequently, these men would not need to be much more than 70.)



Constructing Historical Chronologies

We should note that the standard rabbinical timeline for this period is well-known to be much shorter than the conventional chronology.

Wikipedia.org has an informative article on this subject entitled “Missing Years.” According to the article, there is a difference of 165 years between the conventional chronology and the traditional Hebrew chronology of the period from the destruction of the first Temple and the destruction of the second Temple. The conventional, secular account is the longer of the two chronologies.

Missing Years – The missing years in the Hebrew calendar refer to a discrepancy of some 165 years between the traditional Hebrew dating for the destruction of the First Temple and the modern secular dating for it (586 BCE)… - wikipedia.org

A look into the discussion of these differences will provide us with some useful and relevant insight into the construction of historical chronologies.

Wikipedia’s article provides explanations offered by proponents of both chronologies as to deficiencies in the other calendar. Of particular interest to our study is the chronology of the Babylonian and early Persian kings prior to the time of Ezra and Nehemiah.

The summary of criticisms for the conventional chronology notes that the Persian period (from 538-332 BC) is largely dependant upon the dates provided in the Canon of Kings (also known as Ptolemy’s Canon or the Royal Canon.) According to the criticisms cited in wikipedia’s article, potential problems with Ptolemy’s Canon of Persian kings do exist. Included among these potential inaccuracies are:

1. That information provided in ancient texts requires some interpretation due to the fragmented nature of the source material. This invites questions concerning the ordering (and identification) of Persian rulers.

2. The names and titles of Persian rulers are not clearly explained in the available Persian inscriptions inviting questions about the proper identification of the Persian rulers.

3. Potential forgeries, duplications, and false additions to the list of Persian rulers.

4. Median and Persian rulers who are conventionally counted as ruling exclusively may have actually been contemporaries with overlapping reigns.

Missing Years – The astronomical data used by the secular historians has been criticized. Physicist and science historian Robert R. Newton has found [3] Ptolemy's work to contain errors and fraudulent observations. (Bickerman questions if the Royal Canon is actually the work of Ptolemy.) Dolan notes that Babylonian records of astronomical events are subject to interpretation as they do not clearly distinguish between eclipses and weather phenomena; moreover eclipses may have been missed or their extent misrecorded as a result of observation conditions. Dolan also notes that the dates of ancient texts have also been the subject of interpretation due to broken texts and uncertainty about ordering. Aaronson points out that the Persian inscriptions consist only of names and titles with virtually no explanatory content, and that the identification of the individuals mentioned is also a matter of interpretation. (Aaronson also notes that some ancient Persian sources, such as two of the inscriptions of Arsames and Ariaramnes, have subsequently been revealed to be forgeries.) Aaronson and Heifetz note that the Greek sources contradict each other and the archaeological sources and reconciling the difference involves additional interpretation. They argue that the sources can be interpreted in a manner consistent with the traditional dating as well as with the secular dating. They consider the reigns of certain Median and Persian monarchs to have been overlapping whereas the secular dating counts them as non-overlapping. They also argue that certain kings named in Greek sources who have been counted as separate monarchs are in fact the same individual - in particular they argue that only one Alexander of Macedonia fought a king Darius of Persia, not two Alexanders as the secular dating requires. – wikipedia.org

In his article on biblical chronology, Tim Warner also draws a similar conclusion regarding the exactness of conventional, secular understanding of the chronology of the Persian kings.

The reliability of the secular data, particularly the dates and list of Persian kings in Ptolemy’s Canon, (the primary source for the Persian period), are suspect. – The Coming Millennial Sabbath – Part II, Tim Warner, Copyright © July, 2009, answersinrevelation.org

In his article, Warner provides additional sources who concur with the criticisms mentioned in wikipedia’s article. In additional, the scholars Warner quotes also note that some ancient kings are known to have exaggerated their term of rule as a matter of self-importance. Among these other issues, Warner’s sources point out that Ptolemy’s Canon does not recognize co-regencies or overlapping reigns. (See Warner, The Coming Millennial Sabbath – Part II, p. 19.)

The absence of co-regencies is a known feature of the Canon of Kings.

Canon of Kings - The Canon only deals in whole years. Thus, monarchs who reigned for less than one year are not listed, and only one monarch is listed in any year with multiple monarchs. – wikipedia.org

It should be recognized that the absence of recording co-regencies in the Canon of King’s does seem to conflict with information provided in other ancient artifacts and documents. It is a generally well-known fact that co-regencies were commonly practiced among Babylonian, Median, and Persian royalty. There are numerous known historical instances when a son or relative ruled as co-regent or vassal under or alongside another ruler over a different, but equally important and powerful city or province. To the people who lived in that province, the local ruler was often identified as king.

Below are examples of the various practices among the Babylonian, Median, and Persian rulers that may provide some difficulties for ancient historians to construct a perfectly exact chronology of their reigns.

Before the Medes and Persians became the prominent power in the region their Babylonian contemporaries practiced co-regency.

Nabonidus - After a popular rising led by the priests of Marduk, chief god of the city, Nabonidus, who favoured the moon god Sin, made his son Belshazzar coregent and spent much of his reign in Arabia. - Britannica.com

Nabonidus - He was not of Nebuchadnezzar's family, and it is possible that he usurped the throne... Cuneiform records indicate that Belshazzar was Nabonidus' son and his coregent during the last years of Babylon. - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

Belshazzar - When Nabonidus went into exile (550), he entrusted Belshazzar with the throne and the major part of his army. - Britannica.com

The practice of co-regency did not end with the Babylonians. Cambyses II, the oldest son of Cyrus the Great was regent of Babylon and co-regent with his father Cyrus, king of the Medes and Persians.

Cambyses II - flourished 6th century BC Achaemenid king of Persia (reigned 529-522 BC), who conquered Egypt in 525; he was the eldest son of King Cyrus II the Great by Cassandane, daughter of a fellow Achaemenid. During his father's lifetime Cambyses was in charge of Babylonian affairs. In 538 he performed the ritual duties of a Babylonian king at the important New Year festival, and in 530, before Cyrus set out on his last campaign, he was appointed regent in Babylon. - Britannica.com

Prior to the time of Cyrus the Great’s rule over Persia, the Persian kings had served as chief ministers and vassals under the Median kings. After this, the Medes served alongside the Persian rulers. The two were often featured together in royal documents.

Cyrus II - He not only conciliated the Medes but united them with the Persians in a kind of dual monarchy of the Medes and Persians. Cyrus had to borrow the traditions of kingship from the Medes, who had ruled an empire when the Persians were merely their vassals. A Mede was probably made an adviser to the Achaemenian king, as a sort of chief minister; on later reliefs at Persepolis, a capital of the Achaemenian kings from the time of Darius, a Mede is frequently depicted together with the great king. - Britannica.com

Prior to his becoming the chief ruler of Media and Persia, Cyrus the Great himself served as the ruler of Persia under his grandfather Astyages, king of the Medes.

Cyrus II - Astyages, the king of the Medes and overlord of the Persians, gave his daughter in marriage to his vassal in Persis, a prince called Cambyses. From this marriage Cyrus was born. – Encyclopedia Britannica

Persian Empire - 556-530 THE REIGN OF CYRUS THE GREAT. On the death of his father, Cyrus II became the king of the Persians. In 553, Cyrus led a revolt against his grandfather Astyages. - The Encyclopedia of World History, 2001

Persian Empire - In 553, Cyrus led a revolt against his grandfather Astyages. Although he suffered some early defeats, the Median army eventually went over to Cyrus, and he took Ecbatana in 549. Cyrus now ruled the entire Median Empire. - The Encyclopedia of World History. 2001.

Cyrus II - Cyrus overthrew Astyages, king of the Medes, sometime between 559 B.C. and 549 B.C. He entered Ecbatana and, taking over the Median kingdom, began to build a great empire after the Assyrian model." - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001

In addition, the bloodlines of the Median and Persian kings were heavily intertwined. Cyrus himself was a descendant of both Median and Persian royalty. He is known and identified by various sources as either a Mede, a Persian, or both.

The Book of Daniel – Furthermore, kings commonly took dual titles and Nabonidus, Cyrus' cousin, referred to Cyrus as "the king of the Medes." [12] – wikipedia.org

Cyrus the Great - Cyrus was born between 590 and 580 BC, either in Media or, more probably, in Persis… – Encyclopedia Britannica

Cyrus II - According to the legend, Astyages, the king of the Medes and overlord of the Persians, gave his daughter in marriage to his vassal in Persis, a prince called Cambyses. From this marriage Cyrus was born. – Encyclopedia Britannica

Cyrus II- d. 529 B.C., king of Persia, founder of the greatness of the Achaemenids and of the Persian Empire. According to Herodotus, he was the son of an Iranian noble, the elder Cambyses, and a Median princess, daughter of Astyages. Many historians, following other ancient writers (such as Ctesias), deny this genealogy, and the whole of Cyrus' life is encrusted with legend. – Columbia Encyclopedia

Persian Empire - 556-530 THE REIGN OF CYRUS THE GREAT. On the death of his father, Cyrus II became the king of the Persians. In 553, Cyrus led a revolt against his grandfather Astyages. - The Encyclopedia of World History, 2001

Astyages - flourished 6th century BC Akkadian Ishtumegu the last king of the Median empire (reigned 585-550 BC). According to Herodotus, the Achaemenian Cyrus the Great was Astyages' grandson through his daughter Mandane, but this relationship is probably legendary. According to Babylonian inscriptions, Cyrus, king of Anshan (in southwestern Iran), began war against Astyages in 553 BC; in 550 the Median troops rebelled, and Astyages was taken prisoner. Then Cyrus occupied and plundered Ecbatana, the Median capital. A somewhat different account of these events is given by the Greek writer Ctesias. – Encyclopedia Britannica

Astyages - fl. 6th cent. B.C., king of the Medes (584-c.550 B.C.), son and successor of Cyaxares. His rule was harsh, and he was unpopular. His daughter is alleged to have married the elder Cambyses and was said to be the mother of Cyrus the Great, who rebelled against Astyages and overthrew him (c.550 B.C.), thus creating the Persian Empire." – Columbia Encyclopedia

We should be aware that various ancient sources do not always present these chronologies or kings in the exact same manner. Several instances of this kind of variance are exhibited in the ancient historical accounts of this period.

Our first example is a man identified in the Book of Daniel as Darius the Mede.

Daniel 11:1 Also I in the first year of Darius the Mede, even I, stood to confirm and to strengthen him.

Daniel 9:1 In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, which was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans;

Darius the Mede may be understood as Daniel’s means of identifying one of several potential historical persons. Wikipedia.org provides summaries of the various theories for Darius the Mede’s identity. Below we have simply reproduced the relevant section from wikipedia’s article on the Book of Daniel.

Book of Daniel – Responses to the problem of Darius the Mede: As no ruler of this name is recorded, scholars have attempted to identify him with other figures: "Darius the Mede" as Cyrus the Great
This theory was first proposed by Donald Wiseman in 1957.[11] Unlike Gubaru or Astyages, Cyrus the Great of Persia was the king who took over the Babylonian Empire. Cyrus was also married to a Mede, and had a Median mother.[12] Indeed, his maternal grandfather Astyages, to whom he owed fealty, was the so-called "Last King of the Median Empire." An analysis of variant early texts, particularly the Septuagint, reveals that the names "Darius" and "Cyrus" are reversed in 11:1, and may have been miscopied elsewhere. The appellation "Mede" may have been used as an ethnic term to apply to Persians as well, who were of the same race.[13] In addition, Dan. 6:28, "So Daniel prospered during the reign of Darius and the reign of Cyrus the Persian", could also be translated, "So Daniel prospered during the reign of Darius, that is, the reign of Cyrus the Persian."[14] Furthermore, kings commonly took dual titles and Nabonidus, Cyrus' cousin, referred to Cyrus as "the king of the Medes."[12] – wikipedia.org

The above theory suggests that Darius the Mede was an alternative name for Cyrus the Great. It is potentially relevant to point out that one of the common dates given for Cyrus the Great’s birth is the year 600 BC.

Cyrus the Great – Cyrus the Great (c. 600 BC or 576 BC,) also known as Cyrus II or Cyrus of Persia,[7] was the founder of the Persian Empire under the Achaemenid dynasty.[8] – wikipedia.org

Cyrus the Great’s conquest of Babylon is commonly dated to 538 BC.

Cyrus the Great - The Chaldaean empire of Babylonia fell to Cyrus in 538 BC. - Columbia Encyclopedia

Babylonian Captivity - 538 -"Decree of Cyrus" allows Judahites to return to Jerusalem. - wikipedia.org

Babylonian Captivity - also called Babylonian Captivity, the forced detention of Jews in Babylonia following the latter's conquest of the kingdom of Judah in 598/7 and 587/6 BC. The exile formally ended in 538 BC, when the Persian conqueror of Babylonia, Cyrus the Great, gave the Jews permission to return to Palestine. - Encyclopedia Britannica

If Cyrus was born in 600 BC, he would have been 62 years old when he conquered Babylon. This is exactly what Daniel reports concerning Darius the Mede who he identifies as taking the kingdom of Babylon after the death of the final Babylonian king. This may confirm the theory that Darius the Mede was, in fact, Cyrus the Great.

Daniel 5:31 And Darius the Median took the kingdom, being about threescore and two years old.

A second possible identification of Darius the Mede is the figure of Gubaru (or perhaps Gobryas) a general of Cyrus the Great who conquered the city of Babylon before Cyrus arrival a few days or weeks later.

Book of Daniel – "Darius the Mede" as Gubaru/Ugbaru
Gubaru was the governor of Gutium, who actually led Cyrus's army that captured Babylon in the month of Tashritu in the 17th year (see Pierre Briant below).[15] Two weeks later Cyrus made his triumphal entry into Babylon and a week after that Gubaru died. It is possible that Cyrus may have rewarded Gubaru with a regional governorship for capturing the capital of the Babylonian Empire and ending the war. Furthermore, under the first translation of Dan. 6:28, Darius ruled during the reign of Cyrus, and Dan. 5:31 states that Darius the Mede "received the kingdom" of the Chaldeans. Complicating this view is the question of whether or not Gubaru and Ugbaru are two different people, or simply variant spellings of the same name. Verse 1 of "Bel and the Dragon" mentions Astyages the Mede, who was indeed the last king before Cyrus; but nearly the same verse is added in the Greek LXX after the end of chapter 6 of Daniel, but with "Darius" in place of "Astyages". ( LXX Dan. 14:1 and Dan 6:29) – wikipedia.org

Nabonidus – king of Babylonia from 556 until 539 bc, when Babylon fell to Cyrus, king of Persia. After a popular rising led by the priests of Marduk, chief god of the city, Nabonidus, who favoured the moon god Sin, made his son Belshazzar coregent and spent much of his reign in Arabia. Returning to Babylon in 539 bc, he was captured by Cyrus’ general Gobryas and exiled… - Encyclopedia Britannica

The identification of Darius the Mede as the general of Cyrus’ armies and regent of Babylon is noted elsewhere. (Though perhaps this person was not the same as Gobryas.)

Gobryas – Gobryas was a common name of several Persian noblemen. The English form Gobryas is derived from the Greek rendering of this name. This Gobryas is mentioned in the Cyropedia of Xenophon as a general who helped in the conquering of Babylon. The A.K. Grayson translation of the Nabonidus Chronicle based on that of T.G. Pinches, considers both the names Ugbaru and Gubaru found in the latter to be references to this Gobryas. However the names are distinct in the text and refer to two different individuals, the one called Gubaru being the ruler placed over Babylon thus corresponding to Cyaxares of the Cyropedia (and the Darius the Mede of the Bible) not Gobryas. Ugbaru remains a candidate for Gobryas being described as the ruler of the region of Gutium dying soon after the conquest of Babylon similarly to Xenophon's portrayel of Gobryas as an elderly "Assyrian" ruler – wikipedia.org

A third possibility is that Darius the Mede was a Median king, perhaps the uncle of Cyrus the Great who assisted in Cyrus’ conquest of Babylon and served as regent under Cyrus until his death. (The quotes above and below suggest that such a Median king may have existed and elsewhere may be identified as Cyaxares II.)

Book of Daniel – "Darius the Mede" as king of the Medes
Talmudic and midrashic sources describe Darius the Mede as the uncle and father-in-law of Cyrus the Great, to whom Cyrus owed fealty. After Darius's death, Cyrus took the throne. According to Josippon, the Ahasuerus in the book of Esther was the son of Darius the Mede. The Midrash Tanchuma describes the fall of Babylon as described in Daniel and adds to the narrative Darius taking Vashti, the daughter of Belshazzar, as a wife for his son Ahasuerus. – wikipedia.org

A fourth possible identification of Darius the Mede involves a Median king discussed in other historical works. Josephus says Darius the Mede was the son of Ahasuerus whom he identifies as the Median King Astyages, Cyrus the Great’s grandfather. Xenophon speaks similarly of the son of Astyages calling him by the name Cyaxares II.

Book of Daniel – "Darius the Mede" as Cyaxares II
The little we know of Cyaxares from extra-Biblical sources matches the description offered in the Book of Daniel. According to Daniel, he began ruling when he was 62 years old (chapter 5, verse 31), appointed 120 satraps to govern over their provinces or districts (chapter 6, verse 1), was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans (chapter 9, verse 1), and pre-dated Cyrus (chapter 11, verse 1). – wikipedia.org

Ahasuerus – Book of Daniel
Ahasuerus is given as the name of the father of Darius the Mede in the Book of Daniel.[11] Josephus names Astyages as the father of Darius the Mede, and the description of the latter as uncle and father-in-law of Cyrus by mediaeval Jewish commentators matches that of Cyaxares II, who is said to be the son of Astyages by Xenophon. Thus this Ahasuerus is commonly identified with Astyages…– wikipedia.org

According to Xenophon, Cyaxares II ruled the Medes after Astyages (the grandfather of Cyrus through his mother Mandane, Astyages’ daughter.) Xenophon’s account identifies Cyaxares II as the brother of Mandane. And Xenophon apparently has Cyaxares and Cyrus working together to conquer the Babylonians (in 539-538 BC.) After this, Cyaxares II became Cyrus the Great’s regent in Babylon until his death.

Astyages - flourished 6th century BC Akkadian Ishtumegu the last king of the Median empire (reigned 585-550 BC). According to Herodotus, the Achaemenian Cyrus the Great was Astyages' grandson through his daughter Mandane…A somewhat different account of these events is given by the Greek writer Ctesias." – Encyclopedia Britannica

Cyaxares II – According to Xenophon's Cyropaedia, Cyaxares II followed king Astyages to the throne of the Mede Empire, and was also brother of Mandane, Cyrus the Great's mother. He describes the Persian Cyrus as cooperating with his uncle, Cyaxares, in order to conquer Babylon in 539 BC. However Cyaxares was by then an old man, and because Cyrus was in command of the campaign, the army came to regard Cyrus as king. Cyrus thus received not only the king's daughter (his first cousin), but his kingdom, as dowry, and the aged Cyaxares became Cyrus' viceroy in Babylon for two years until his death, when Cyrus seized that kingdom as well. – wikipedia.org

In contrast to Xenophon and the Book of Daniel, other ancient historians do not mention Cyaxares II or Darius the Mede.

Cyaxares II – However, the fact that he is not mentioned at all in the history of Herodotus, nor in the very different history of Ctesias, has caused many scholars to debate whether such a king ever actually existed. – wikipedia.org

This inconsistency may be expected since ancient historical accounts of the Persians are said to be fragmented and to differ from one another in the order and identification of Persian kings. More specifically, the accounts of Herodotus, Ctesias, Xenophon, Josephus, and the bible differ from one another in various details including names.

Ctesias – Ctesias of Cnidus was a Greek physician and historian from Cnidus in Caria. Ctesias, who lived in the 5th century BC, was physician to Artaxerxes Mnemon, whom he accompanied in 401 BC on his expedition against his brother Cyrus the Younger. Ctesias was the author of…a history of Assyria and Persia in 23 books, called Persica, written in opposition to Herodotus in the Ionic dialect, and professedly founded on the Persian royal archives. – wikipedia.org

Ctesias – Ctesias returned to Greece in 398 and began writing his Persica, a history of Assyria-Babylonia in 23 books. Books I–VI included a history of Assyria and the Medes, and the last 10 books were a more detailed account from the death of Xerxes (465) to 398. Although Ctesias claimed that his history was based on Persian archives and state records and therefore was far superior to Herodotus’s history… - Encyclopedia Britannica

We should note that, besides the person of Darius the Mede or Cyaxares II, both Xenophon and the Book of Daniel corroborate the existence of the previously unknown Babylonian ruler Belshazzar. This Babylonian king is not mentioned in other sources and so his existence was disputed and he was not placed in the conventional chronologies of the rulers of Babylon. The Canon of Kings does not mention him at all. However, the discovery of Babylonian inscriptions has confirmed the accuracy of Xenophon’s history and the biblical record contained in Daniel. It is now well known that Belshazzar was the son and co-regent of Nabonidus (who is not mentioned in the biblical texts.)

(And again, we should note that various ancient sources identify Belshazzar using various names.)

Belshazzar - Belshazzar had been known only from the biblical Book of Daniel (chapters 5, 7-8) and from Xenophon's Cyropaedia until 1854, when references to him were found in Babylonian cuneiform inscriptions. - Britannica.com

Nabonidus - He was not of Nebuchadnezzar's family, and it is possible that he usurped the throne... Cuneiform records indicate that Belshazzar was Nabonidus' son and his coregent during the last years of Babylon. - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

Belshazzar - According to the accounts in the Bible and Xenophon, Belshazzar held a last great feast... Belshazzar died after Babylon fell to the Persian general Gobyras without resistance on Oct. 12, 539, and probably before the Persian king Cyrus II entered the city 17 days later. - Britannica.com

Belshazzar - Herodotus refers to the last king of Babylon as Labynetos and claims that this was also the name of his father. Herodotus says that the mother of the younger Labynetos was the queen Nitocris whom he portrays as the dominant ruler. She is commonly thought to have been the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar. Labynetos is generally understood to be a garbled form of the name Nabonidus and the younger Labynetos is often identified with Belshazzar. Opinions differ however on how best to reconcile Herodotus with the Babylonian sources and an alternative view is that the younger Labynetos is Nabonidus. Josephus gives an account of Belshazzar largely paralleling the Book of Daniel but remarks that he was known to the Babylonians by the name Naboandelus. Bible scholars have viewed this as a corruption of "Nabonidus" which if correct may be taken either as confusion on the part of Josephus or a corroboration of the interpretation of the younger "Labynetos" of Herodotus as Belshazzar. Josephus, however, knew of Nabonidus and calls him "Nabonnedus" relating an account of his capture by Cyrus taken from Berossus. Josephus refers to the queen at the time (corresponding to the Nitocris of Herodotus) as the grandmother of Belshazzar which corroborates the alternative view that the younger "Labynetos" (son of Nitocris) is Nabonidus. Daniel 5:1-4 describes "Belshazzar's Feast" in which the sacred vessels of Solomon's Temple in Jerusalem, which had been brought to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar at the time of the Captivity were profaned by the company. The narrative unfolds against the background of the impending arrival of the Persian armies...The Greek historians Herodotus and Xenophon also record that there was a festival in the city of Babylon the same night it fell to the Persians.[2] - wikipedia.org

Another example of the differing nomenclature used by various groups of people concerns a king identified in biblical texts as Ahasuerus. Ahasuerus is another form of the name Xerxes.

Ahasuerus – Ahasuerus, Hebrew form of the name Xerxes. – Columbia Encyclopedia

Ahasuerus – The name Ahasuerus is equivalent to his Greek name of Xerxes, both deriving from the Old Persian language Khashayarsha. – wikipedia.org

However, Josephus informs us that Ahasuerus is another name for Astyages, the Median grandfather of Cyrus the Great. According to Josephus, the Hebrews knew this Median king as Ahasuerus. As we have seen above, others knew this king by the name Xerxes. But the Greek version of the Old Testament (known as the Septuagint) identifies Ahasuerus with the name Artaxerxes. According to Josephus, the Greeks knew Ahasuerus by this name (Artaxerxes.) Clearly, even in English Xerxes and Artaxerxes seem derivative of one another.

Ahasuerus – Book of Daniel
Ahasuerus is given as the name of the father of Darius the Mede in the Book of Daniel.[11] Josephus names Astyages as the father of Darius the Mede, and the description of the latter as uncle and father-in-law of Cyrus by mediaeval Jewish commentators matches that of Cyaxares II, who is said to be the son of Astyages by Xenophon. Thus this Ahasuerus is commonly identified with Astyages…– wikipedia.org

Ahasuerus – Ahasuerus is given as the name of the King of Persia in the Book of Esther.[4] 19th century Bible commentaries generally identified him with Xerxes I of Persia.[5] The Greek version (Septuagint) of the Book of Esther refers to him as Artaxerxes, and the historian Josephus relates that this was the name by which he was known to the Greeks.[6] – wikipedia.org

We can see that there may be some interchangeability between the names Ahasuerus, Xerxes, Artaxerxes, and Astyages. Several kings of Media and Persia are identified with these titles over several generations, which shows that these were family names shared by various persons in the Medo-Persian royal lines. For example, there are possibly several kings known as Xerxes, several Artaxerxes, several Darius, two Cyrus, and two Cambyses among these ancient kings.

Related to this is the fact that we do not know if the names of the rulers from this period were their birth names, coronation names, family names, or titular names. For instance, we do not know if Cyrus II the Great was a name given at birth or taken at coronation.

Cyrus the Great - The meaning of his name is in dispute, for it is not known whether it was a personal name or a throne name given to him when he became a ruler. - Britannica.com

Daniel’s Darius the Mede is earlier than Darius I the Great who is counted as the first of three Persian rulers with that name. This may show that Darius was a name of important Medes and Persians rulers even before the time of Darius the Great. Likewise, Ahasuerus and/or Xerxes may have, in fact, been in use by the Persian royalty before the time of Xerxes I. Perhaps these were alternate names for Astyages, Cyrus the Great’s grandfather.

This varying usage of Persian royal names may explain why Ezra 4 seems to place the reign of a Persian king he identifies as Artaxerxes before the reign of Darius I the Great. Perhaps the Artaxerxes to whom Ezra 4 is referring is not Artaxerxes I, but to an earlier predecessor and ruler of the Persians who was known to Jews of this period by some variant of that name. Perhaps these names are family names or being used as titles in some cases. Perhaps there are co-regencies taking place here. Or perhaps various forms of the same name are being used interchangeably.

In addition, we should note that Hystaspes (father of Darius I the Great) served as the king of Persia under Cyrus II the Great. However, Hystaspes remained a Persian ruler even after his son Darius I the Great became king. How would the people of Persia have recorded the rules of Hystaspes and Darius in their accounts? We must keep in mind that at one point Darius was governor of Persia under Hystaspes and that Hystaspes ruled both before and during Darius kingship.

Hystaspes - Old Persian Vishtaspa, fl. 6th cent. B.C., ruler of ancient Persia, father of Darius I. Under him Darius was governor of Parthia. The legendary patron of Zoroaster is also called Hystaspes or Vishtaspa; he may or may not be the same as Darius' father. - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

Hystaspes - flourished 6th century BC son of Arsames, king of Parsa, and father of the Achaemenid king Darius I of Persia. According to the 5th-century-BC Greek historian Herodotus, Hystaspes was governor of Persis under Cyrus II the Great and Cambyses II and accompanied Cyrus on his last campaign against the Massagetai in 530 BC. When Darius seized the throne in 522, Hystaspes was governor of Parthia and Hyrcania, where he suppressed a revolt in 521. - Britannica.com

This same Hystaspes (father of Darius I the Great) is considered by some to be the patron of Zoroaster. This is considered possible despite the fact that Zoroaster’s patron and Darius the Great’s father have differing genealogies. The possibility of identifying two people with different genealogies as the same individual points out the types of uncertainties involved in making determinations about Persian royalty using the information and names provided in the available ancient accounts.

Hystaspes - flourished 6th century BC son of Arsames, king of Parsa, and father of the Achaemenid king Darius I of Persia. According to the 5th-century-BC Greek historian Herodotus, Hystaspes was governor of Persis under Cyrus II the Great and Cambyses II and accompanied Cyrus on his last campaign against the Massagetai in 530 BC. When Darius seized the throne in 522, Hystaspes was governor of Parthia and Hyrcania, where he suppressed a revolt in 521. Despite the differences in genealogies, some authorities identify him with Hystaspes, the protector of the prophet Zoroaster. - Britannica.com

Hystaspes - Old Persian Vishtaspa, fl. 6th cent. B.C., ruler of ancient Persia, father of Darius I. Under him Darius was governor of Parthia. The legendary patron of Zoroaster is also called Hystaspes or Vishtaspa; he may or may not be the same as Darius' father. - The Columbia Encyclopedia, Sixth Edition. 2001.

From this historical data, we can see how challenging it is for historians to construct a chronology of the Persian period. The process involves understanding how various names and versions of names may or may not relate to one another and how various historical sources and ancient peoples accounted the history of local and regional rulers. We have potentially interchangeable or repeated names like: a) Astyages, Ahasuerus, Xerxes, and Artaxerxes or b) Nabonidus, Labynetos, Naboandelus, and Belshazzar, and c) Darius the Mede, Gobryas, and Cyaxares II. And we have the interrelated nature of the royal relationships and overlapping reigns of these kings.

All of this illustrates the kinds of challenges that exist in the study and construction of historical chronology, especially during the era of the Median and Persian kings. Deciphering the exact chronology of the Babylonian, Median, and Persian kings in the period of 586-544 BC is not a simple task. It involves comparing and interpreting varying information presented by multiple historical artifacts and documents. (The bible is one of those historical documents.)

Wikipedia provides the following list of sources on these periods of history.

Missing Years –
The modern secular dating of the Babylonian and Persian periods are reconstructed using the following sources:
- Greek sources: The historians Herodotus, Ctesias, Thucydides, Xenophon, Dinon and Diodorus Siculus as well as the philosopher Aristotle, the playwright Aeschylus and the Egyptian priest Manetho.
- The Royal Canon of the astronomer Clauudius Ptolemy, which provides astronomically tabulated dates of the kings of the period.
- Persian sources, including king lists like the Saros Canon, as well as other inscriptions such as the Behistun inscription or the Cyrus Cylinder, and administrative records as the Persepolis Fortification Tablets, and the Persepolis Treasury Tablets.
- Babylonian sources such as astronomical records recording eclipses, temple inscriptions and various royal documents including the Nabonidus Chronicle, as well as business documents as the Marashu Archive. - wikipedia.org

As we have seen, the names and dates provided in these historical sources do not always match up with one another. So some interpretation, comparison, and assumption are necessary in order to understand how the names of various rulers and their times of rule correspond and should be sequenced. The process and challenges of constructing historical chronologies are described similarly by Encyclopedia Britannica.

Chronology – Scientific chronology, which seeks to place all happenings in the order in which they occurred and at correctly proportioned intervals on a fixed scale, is used in many disciplines and can be utilized to cover vast epochs. It is difficult to fix ancient historical chronologies in relation to scientific chronology. The terms of reference of ancient peoples were vague and inconsistent when judged by modern standards, and many of their inscriptions and writings have inevitably disappeared. The gaps in their records are increasingly filled in and their inconsistencies removed by the results of archaeological excavation. Guided by these findings, scholars can confirm, refute, or amend chronological reconstructions already tentatively made. Astronomical calculation and dating by radioactive-carbon content are also helpful in the work of fixing ancient chronologies. – Encyclopedia Britannica

Some of the challenges offered by Encyclopedia Britannica do not seem that different from points made by critics of the conventional chronology of the Babylonian and Persian periods.

Missing Years – The astronomical data used by the secular historians has been criticized. Physicist and science historian Robert R. Newton has found [3] Ptolemy's work to contain errors and fraudulent observations. (Bickerman questions if the Royal Canon is actually the work of Ptolemy.) Dolan notes that Babylonian records of astronomical events are subject to interpretation as they do not clearly distinguish between eclipses and weather phenomena; moreover eclipses may have been missed or their extent misrecorded as a result of observation conditions. Dolan also notes that the dates of ancient texts have also been the subject of interpretation due to broken texts and uncertainty about ordering. Aaronson points out that the Persian inscriptions consist only of names and titles with virtually no explanatory content, and that the identification of the individuals mentioned is also a matter of interpretation. (Aaronson also notes that some ancient Persian sources, such as two of the inscriptions of Arsames and Ariaramnes, have subsequently been revealed to be forgeries.) Aaronson and Heifetz note that the Greek sources contradict each other and the archaeological sources and reconciling the difference involves additional interpretation. They argue that the sources can be interpreted in a manner consistent with the traditional dating as well as with the secular dating. They consider the reigns of certain Median and Persian monarchs to have been overlapping whereas the secular dating counts them as non-overlapping. They also argue that certain kings named in Greek sources who have been counted as separate monarchs are in fact the same individual - in particular they argue that only one Alexander of Macedonia fought a king Darius of Persia, not two Alexanders as the secular dating requires. – wikipedia.org

As a result of what we have learned about the historical data of this period of world history, we should understand our historical chronology as an attempt to understand this important period. It is not set in stone or absolute. For this reason it may be reasonable to consider potentially altering the conventional chronology to better fit with material presented in some of the sources (including the Jubilee cycles that may be mentioned in biblical texts.)



Conclusions and Possible Adjustments to the Duration of this Period

To be clear, we believe that the conventional chronology of Babylonian, Median, and Persian history does offer a working understanding of the dynasties of this period. However, it is not inconceivable that this conventional ordering of the Medo-Persian kings and the durations and overlaps of their respective reigns could involve some imprecision. With these considerations in mind, it is not unreasonable to suppose that the conventional chronology of this period could perhaps be 15-17 years too long as indicated by the Jubilee references in Ezekiel 40 and Daniel 9.

(Incidentally, a reduction in years from the destruction of Jerusalem to the decree of Artaxerxes I’s seventh year would also reduce the necessary age of Ezra the priest. If this period is reduced by 15-17 years during the reigns of the Persian kings, then Ezra would himself have been perhaps an additional 15-17 years younger than otherwise thought.)

If the Jubilee cycles are used to correct the conventional chronology, we would need to add either 111 years (using a 49-year Jubilee cycle) or 113 years (using a 50-year Jubilee cycle) for the duration of time between the desolation of Jerusalem and the Temple and the commandment referred to in Daniel 9:25. This 111 or 113-year calculation would be an alternative to the 128 years occupied by this period according to conventional chronologies. Such a reduction would also reduce the number of years prior to Christ’s coming and death by 15 or 17 years as well as the total amount of biblical world history to date.

In our main study of the timeline of biblical world history we used conventional dates for this period and counted 3542 years from creation to Artaxerxes I’s decree to Ezra in his seventh year of reign. If we reduce this conventional chronology to fit with the biblical accounts of Jubilee cycles we would arrive at either 3525 years or 3527 years before the decree of Artaxerxes I to Ezra. Since the maximum year count yielded among the variations is 6010 AM, a subtraction of 15-17 years would once again push world history to date below the 6000-year mark. (The variation between 3525 AM and 3527 AM depends on whether Jubilee cycles consist of 49 or 50 years.)