Book of Daniel may identify Darius the Mede by chiasmus

by

Damien F. Mackey

 

“Through chiasmus, once again, it may tell us exactly who [Darius the Mede]

was by mirroring him with his alter ego monarch of a different name”.

 

 

This article has a parallel in my:

Toledôt Explains Abram’s Pharaoh

https://www.academia.edu/26239534/Toled%C3%B4t_Explains_Abrams_Pharaoh

{Toledôt and chiasmus, the keys to the structure of the Book of Genesis,

may lead us to a real name for this “Pharaoh”.}

 

In that article I was been able, with the benefit of the toledôt and chiastic structures of the Abrahamic histories, written (or owned) by Ishmael and Isaac,

 

“These are the generations of Ishmael …” (Genesis 25:12).

“These are the generations of Isaac …” (Genesis 25:19).

 

(a)    to show that the two accounts of the abduction of Sarai/Sarah actually referred to just the one single incident, not two; and that

(b)   he who is called “pharaoh” in the first account (Ishmael’s) was the same as the “Abimelech” referred to in the second account (Isaac’s).

 

Thus the Bible does apparently name Abram’s Pharaoh!

Now Ishmael, whose mother was Egyptian, writes his account from an Egyptian perspective; whereas Isaac, who dwelt in Palestine, writes from a more northerly perspective. This difference in perspective, yielding two rather different accounts of just the one incident, if not appreciated by commentators, can lead them to conclude, but wrongly, that these were two quite separate abductions (thereby increasing the pain for Sarah).

But, when the Abrahamic narratives are subjected to chiasmus, then it is found that “pharaoh” is perfectly mirrored by “Abimelech”.

The Bible, therefore, appears to be providing us with a key identification.

Although it does need to be noted that two names that intersect in a chiastic structure do not necessarily always identify each one named as being the same person.

 

Now to Darius the Mede.

Perhaps more important for commentators is the fact that the Book of Daniel provides the very same service in the case of the very enigmatic, but key, Darius the Mede. Through chiasmus, once again, it may tell us who he was by mirroring him with his alter ego monarch of a different name. See James B. Jordan’s brilliant chiastic structuring of Daniel 6 on p. 314 of

 

The Handwriting on the Wall

http://books.google.com.au/books?id=l25D1d4ub_0C&pg=PA314&lpg=PA314&dq=chiastic+structure+of+the+book+of+daniel+darius+and+cyrus

 

Hence, as many have suspected (e.g. George R. Law, Identification of Darius The Mede:

http://readyscribepress.com/home_files/DtM-Daniel_5_30-31.pdf.), Darius the Mede is the same as Cyrus the Persian.

The Bible seems to point it out for us.

 

Now, the Apocrypha provides a further confirmation of this identification with another account of Daniel in the lions’ den. Here Darius the Mede is presented as Cyrus. This again, like with the abduction of Sarai/Sarah, is a case of the same story being told by two different authors, quite differently. But it is nevertheless about the one same incident. All of the main protagonists are there in both accounts. Biblical scholars ought easily to be able to reconcile the two with sufficient care and attention to detail.

 

Just as God would assure that his beloved Sarah was never going to be abducted twice, so would he assure that his beloved Daniel had only once to endure the den of lions.

 

King Cyrus favoured as ‘Darius the Mede’

by

Damien F. Mackey

  

“The author might be using the approximate age of Darius, sixty-two (62),

to emphasize the prophecy of the seventy weeks determined

upon Israel and Jerusalem (Dan 9:24).

This prophecy of the seventy (70) weeks is divided into three segments:

seven (7) weeks + sixty-two (62) weeks + one (1) week (Dan 9:25-26)”.

 George R. Law

 

 By now I have concluded in various articles that the enigmatic biblical king, ‘Darius the Mede’ (e.g. Daniel 5:31), was likely the same as King Cyrus ‘the Great’.

One of these articles involved my connecting, as just the one incident, both the prophet Daniel in the den of lions at the time of Darius (Daniel 6), and Daniel’s ordeal in the den of lions in the time of Cyrus, as narrated in Bel and the Dragon. And so I asked:

Was Daniel Twice in the Lions’ Den?

https://www.academia.edu/24308877/Was_Daniel_Twice_in_the_Lions_Den

 

and I concluded that, no he wasn’t – and that Darius must be Cyrus.

 

George R. Law is another who has come to the conclusion that Darius the Mede was Cyrus, though using different means. In his 2010 article, “Identification of Darius the Mede” (p. 9), Law surprisingly suggests a link between the age of Darius, 62 years, and the 62 weeks of the prophecy of the Seventy Weeks:

 

God’s decree took the kingdom from Belshazzar and gave it to Darius the Mede, who actively received the kingdom.

In the introduction of Darius the Mede, there is an incidental hint, the approximate sixty-two-year-old age of Darius. The identification method employed in chapter four of this dissertation shows the value of knowing someone’s age and using it as an identifying mark.

The matching of the age of Cyrus the Great with the age of Darius the Mede was a significant qualifying characteristic which helped to identify Cyrus as Darius the Mede, but there might be another reason why the author provided this hint.

This number, which is otherwise extraneous information, is specific to three things in

the book of Daniel: 1) Darius, 2) Cyrus, and 3) the prophecy of the weeks. The author might be using the approximate age of Darius, sixty-two (62), to emphasize the prophecy of the seventy weeks determined upon Israel and Jerusalem (Dan 9:24).

This prophecy of the seventy (70) weeks is divided into three segments: seven (7) weeks + sixty-two (62) weeks + one (1) week (Dan 9:25-26). Cyrus, the 62-year-old conqueror, gave the commandment granting the Jews permission to return to the land and to rebuild their temple in Jerusalem. In Daniel 9:25, after a commandment is given to initiate the restoration of Jerusalem and its temple, and after the conclusion of the prophesied 62 weeks, that temple, which Cyrus commanded to rebuild, is to be destroyed. The link between the 62-year-old Darius the Mede and the 62-year-old Cyrus the Great reinforces this prophecy concerning the 62 weeks which is to pass before the new Temple will be destroyed. ….

[End of quote]

 

Whilst I think that George R. Law has rightly concluded that Darius the Mede is to be identified with Cyrus, his suggested connections here seem to me to be rather tenuous.

 

Good luck to anyone hoping to identify the biological age of Cyrus in the present state of knowledge of Medo-Persian history.

 

And, do 62 weeks really separate the beginning of the reign of Cyrus from the destruction of the new Temple?