Who was Darius the Mede?
Daniel 5:31 it mentions that Darius the Mede received the kingdom at age sixty-two. Some believe extrabiblical history supposedly never mentions Darius the Mede. Not a whole lot is known about the Kingdom of the Medes. The name Darius is a title that means Lord and King. Others have said Darius is actually a general by the name Gubaru who was with the Babylonians but left them to join the confederation of the Medes and Persians who defeated Belshazzar and his father Nabonidus when Babylon was conquered in 539 B.C.
It is important to determine who Darius is for our own knowledge and peace of mind. Also, it is important to be able to refute the critics who deny the historicity of the book of Daniel, and the actual existence of Daniel himself.
If one is totally captive to the truthfulness of the Word of God such as I am, then you have to believe that Darius the Mede was an actual historical figure just like Melchizedek was although he appears only once in Genesis 14:18, and is mentioned in the following verses: Psalm 110:4, and Hebrews 5:6, 10 6:20; 7:1,10,11,15,17. We cannot allow extrabiblical sources to validate the Bible. We use scripture to determine if other sources are valid when dealing with Biblical matters and characters. The Word of God tells us that all scripture is theopneustos, that is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16). Meaning that Daniel recorded the Words of God, not his own. This makes the book of Daniel perfect in its presentation because it is not the word of man, but as 2 Peter 1:21 declares Daniel was carried along by the moving and power of the Holy Spirit. The book of Daniel is an original autograph with no propaganda. So what better person to validate who Darius was than an eyewitness? This is where Daniel comes in. When the Medes and Persians conquered Babylon in 539 B.C., the Bible tells us Darius the Mede received the kingdom when he was sixty-two years old (Dan 5:31).
We also read of the famous true story of Daniel being rescued from the lion’s den in chapter 6. Darius is the king at that time who lifts Daniel out of the den and has Daniel’s accusers thrown in.
Although there are several sources that have written about this time in history, the two main historians are Herodotus (484-425 BC.) and Xenophon (430-354 BC). Herodotus’ work is entitled Histories and Xenophon’s work is the Cyropaedia which means “The education of Cyrus”.
Some the main differences between the two Greek historians are these: Herodotus claims that Cyrus defeated his maternal Grandfather Astyages/Ahasuerus in battle in 550 B.C. Herodotus also claims that Astyages had no heir to receive his throne. As a result, Cyrus’ became the sole ruler of the Medo-Persian Empire. Xenophon tells a different story. He never records that Astyages and his Grandson Cyrus battled. Rather Astyages’ son was a man by the name of Cyaxeres II as the Greeks would call him. We know him by his throne name, Darius. This view is shared by the historian Josephus (37-100 AD) although he never mentions Darius by the name Cyaxares. An ancient text called the Behistun of Darius Hystaspes (Darius I or Darius the Great, 522-486 BC)[1] also supports the existence of Darius the Mede.[2] According to Herodotus Astyages did not have a son, but a daughter named Mandane who married Cyrus’s father Cambyses I. In Xenophon’s account, Cyaxares II/Darius the Mede is Cyrus’ maternal uncle. When Darius dies in 537 B.C., Cyrus becomes the ruler of both the Medes and Persians with the Persians becoming more powerful as evidenced by the prophecy/vision Daniel receives of the Ram in Daniel 8:3b.
From what I have researched, Herodotus has received praise from it seems many and much criticism from men like Diordorus who accused Herodotus of telling false stories. Strabo (c. 64 BC-AD 21) said Herodotus provided unreliable historical accounts regarding the Medes and Persians. Another harsh critic was a man named Plutarch (c. AD 50-120). He outright said Herodotus was a liar. A man named Cicero apparently had mixed feelings regarding Herodotus. He called Herodotus “the father of history” which is definitely an overreach. In the same sentence, he said that Herodotus was a man who’s works “contain numerous fabulous tales”. What a duplicitous statement! The running theme with Herodotus is that he could spin a story. It appears he perhaps wanted to romance the life of Cyrus rather than deliver the cold hard facts. Herodotus said that out of the four stories regarding the accession and life of Cyrus, he picked the one that is most suitable to him – perhaps the one most dramatic. From the critics, it appears that Herodotus was more interested in presenting drama than historical fact. In reading Xenophon and briefly reviewing his life, I believe responsible researchers would lean toward him. Whether Xenophon knew or cared, his account supports the Biblical account of Daniel’s Darius the Mede. He personally traveled with the Persians and in particular with Cyrus the Younger’s entourage (Cyrus III) who was the Son of Darius II (423-404) who was the Son of Artaxerxes Longimanus or Artaxerxes I (465-424 BC).
It appears the biggest criticism Xenophon receives from modern critics is the person of Cyaxeres II/Darius the Mede. Postmodernists have pretty much abandoned the idea this person really existed. In doing so, they have discredited Daniel as a reliable historical eyewitness reporter guided by the Holy Spirit. Even worse, they have discredited the Bible – a most serious charge.
One more major disagreement surrounds Cyrus’ death. Herodotus claims Cyrus dies in battle in 530 B.C. Xenophon declares he dies in peace at home. So, his death has been a matter of dispute for over 2500 years.
Daniel also mentions Darius the Mede in 6:1,6,9, 25, 28; 9:1; 11:1.
[1] The years listed for the kings are the years of their reign.
[2] It is important for the reader to know that there were four kings named Darius in history: Darius the Mede (559-537 BC, Darius Hystaspes or Darius I (522-486 BC), Darius II (423-404 BC), Darius III (336-330 BC) who was defeated by Alexander the Great.
Comments