Prophecy in the Book of Daniel
The Conqueror of Babylon
and Darius the Mede took the kingdom . . . (Dan. 5:30-31).
The author of the Book of Daniel does not know the correct name or nationality of the liberator of the Jews from the Babylonian Captivity. Babylon actually fell to the Persian king Cyrus and the secular records make no mention of or reference to a "Darius the Mede."
Some argue that Cyrus did not deal with Babylon directly but may have had a Median general named Darius do the job for him. This would reflect immediate contact with the conquerors under "Darius the Mede" and not with the highest level of imperial government (Cyrus). But the writer of Daniel portrays "Darius the Mede" in complete control: Then king Darius wrote unto all people . . . I make a decree . . . (Dan. 6:25-26). It is clear that a sequence of kings is intended, not a hierarchy of rulers: So this ...Daniel prospered during the reigns of Darius and Cyrus the Persian (Dan. 6:28).
Both Isaiah (13:17) and Jeremiah (51:11) had predicted that Babylon would fall to the Medes (more failed Bible prophecies), but Persia conquered the Median empire eleven years before Babylon fell. Daniel does not know that the Babylonian empire outlasted the Median empire, even though he was supposedly living in Babylon at the time.
The real Book of Daniel author (writing centuries later) must have been a pious Jew who believed the Old Testament predictions of the fall of Babylon to the Medes, so he describes a sequence of four great empires: Chaldean (Babylon), Median, Persian, and Greek. He wrote that an eternal Jewish state would be the fifth empire (Dan 2:31-44). For believers in biblical prophecy in Daniel, it should be embarrassing that Daniel could not foresee that Rome would be the fifth great empire (the largest of them all).
The author of Daniel thought, taking the prophesy as true, the Medes had succeeded the Babylonians, so he created a semi-fictitious "Darius the Mede." He may have confused a later historical Persian monarch named Darius Hystaspis with Cyrus. Darius Hystaspis had to reconquer Babylon in 521 B. C. and again in 515 B.C. after the city rebelled against Persian rule. The author's garbled knowledge of history is also revealed by his mistaken notion (Dan.9:1) that "Darius the Mede" was the son of Ahasuerus (Xerxes). The Persian king Ahasuerus didn't live until almost half a century later, so even if "Darius the Mede" were a real person it would be impossible for him to be the son of a man not yet even born.
The archeological evidence leaves no room at all for a ruler of Babylon between Nabonidus, the last Babylonian king, and Cyrus, the Persian conqueror. Clay tablets from the period in question contain contracts dated according to the year of the king's reign in which they were signed. The tablets pass directly from one dated "10 Marchesvan (October) in the 17th year of King Nabonidus," to one dated "24 Marchesvan in the accession year of King Cyrus" the Persian.
