Chapter Six

1–3. The accession of Darius the Mede and the elevation of Daniel under him. 4–9. The attempt of the prophet’s enemies to destroy him. 10–17. The carrying out of their scheme. 18–24. Daniel’s salvation and the death of his enemies. 25–28. The decree of Darius the Mede.

Daniel 6:1. It pleased Darius to set over the kingdom one hundred and twenty satraps, that they should be throughout the kingdom, From the connection of this verse with verse 30 of the preceding chapter, and from verses 28 and onward of the present chapter, it clearly follows that Darius, son of Ahasuerus, of the lineage of the Medes (Dan 9:1), was the successor of Belshazzar and the predecessor of Cyrus in the governance of the Babylonian monarchy. Yet, according to the testimony of the Greek historians Herodotus and Xenophon, the power over Babylon passed after Belshazzar’s death not to Darius, whom they do not know, but to Cyrus, who took possession of the Babylonian empire. Similarly, Alexander Polyhistor and the Canon of Ptolemy, after recounting the conquest of Babylon, immediately speak of Cyrus’s reign in it. Neither does the testimony of the Book of Daniel accord with that of the Babylonian inscriptions. According to the so-called Cyrus Cylinder, the viceroy of Babylon after its conquest was Cyrus’s general Ugbaru. The discrepancy between biblical and non-biblical testimony is further intensified by the fact that the non-biblical sources do not know the name of Darius the Mede at all. In view of all this, the opponents of the authenticity of the Book of Daniel suspect the very existence of this king and reject the historical reliability of the account in chapter 6. But as for the succession of Babylonian kings after Belshazzar, the reliability of the Book of Daniel’s account is confirmed by the testimony of the Babylonian inscriptions. In them, Cyrus is not called a Babylonian king earlier than the third year after Babylon’s fall, but during the first two years is simply called ‘king of the peoples.’ Clearly, he did not occupy the Babylonian throne immediately after its conquest; someone else was king before him for two years. This is exactly what the Book of Daniel affirms, naming Darius the Mede as the predecessor of Cyrus in the Babylonian kingdom. And since, according to Josephus Flavius, he bore a different name among the Greeks, defenders of the authenticity of the Book of Daniel do not consider him a mythical figure, but attempt to identify him with one of the contemporaries of Cyrus who assisted him in the conquest of Babylon. Such a person, according to the Greek historian Xenophon, was Cyaxares II, the son of the Median king Astyages. In favor of identifying him with Darius, the identity of the meanings of the names Cyaxares and Darius speaks first. Cyaxares is a Median name, Uwakshatr, and means “autocrat.” The meaning of the Greek name Doreiios (Darius), the Persian Darjawusch, is, as Herodotus himself defines it, by the word “herxeies” – “holder,” “ruler,” “lord.” Further, Astyages (Cyaxares, son of Astyages) – corresponding to the Median “Ajisdahaku” – “biting serpent” – is a name common to kings of the Median dynasty. The Hebrew name Achaschwerosch, rendered by Theodotion as Ασσουηρος (see Darius, son of Assuerus) and by the LXX as Ξερξης, is the name of Xerxes, derived from the Persian Kschaja – kingdom – and likewise constitutes a common name of Persian kings, as does the Median name Astyages. Thus, the Persian name Darius and the Median name Cyaxares have the same meaning, and the names of the father: Assuerus and Astyages turn out to be common dynastic titles. The only difference between the prophet Daniel and Xenophon is that in the former, the successor of Belshazzar is called by Persian names (Darius, son of Assuerus), whereas in the latter he is called by Median names. Defenders of the Darius–Cyaxares hypothesis further point to the similarity in the circumstances of Cyaxares’s and Darius’s accession. According to Xenophon’s account, Cyrus, having conquered Babylon by Cyaxares’s authority, went to Media and told him that if he came to Babylon, houses and a palace would be prepared for his residence there. Cyaxares agreed and, upon arriving in Babylon, appointed satraps over the conquered regions and peoples. In short, Cyaxares became king in Babylon by Cyrus’s wish and insistence. In full accord with this, the prophet Daniel remarks of Darius that he was “appointed king over the kingdom of the Chaldeans” (Dan 9:1), “received the kingdom” (Dan 5:31). The last argument in favor of identifying Darius with Cyaxares is a reference to the similarity of their character and their identical age at accession. Judging from Xenophon’s accounts, the character of Cyaxares presented a mingling of opposites. He could appreciate and select worthy men and at the same time displayed great lack of perception; he was lazy and given to sensual pleasures; so weak-willed that he sometimes wept, he was capable of strong outbursts of anger. Such is also Darius the Mede. Having appreciated the merits of Daniel and brought him close, he at the same time agreed with the proposal of his officials to issue the known decree (Dan 6:9), not suspecting its hidden purpose. Having yielded after a whole day’s argument to the demands of the officials (Dan 6:14-16), he subsequently fell into deep sorrow (Dan 6:18). Not wishing to burden himself with the affairs of government, he appointed 120 satraps to govern the state. Darius ascended the throne at the age of 62 (Dan 5:31). Likewise, according to Xenophon, Cyaxares was of such an age that he no longer hoped to have male heirs. He was older than Cyrus, who was over 60 when he conquered Babylon. All these facts make the supposition of the identity of Darius the Mede with Cyaxares II fairly plausible.

Daniel 6:2. and over them three chief officials, of whom Daniel was one, to whom these satraps should give account, so that the king might suffer no loss. Daniel 6:3. Then this Daniel was distinguished above all the other officials and satraps, because an excellent spirit was in him. And the king thought to set him over the whole realm. The division of power among 120 satraps and its concentration in the hands of three chief officials made it easier for Darius, who was not particularly inclined toward labor, to govern the vast monarchy. One of the supreme officials was Daniel. He owed his elevation to this office both to his outstanding wisdom, which news of might have reached Darius, and also to the events of Babylon’s last night – to his prediction about its conquest by the Medes and Persians. Darius elevates the man who prophesied success to him, that is, a person, as he understood it, who was favorable to him. In his new position, Daniel not only justified the king’s trust but, by his wisdom, appeared in the king’s eyes worthy of appointment to the post of supreme and absolute ruler of the state.

Daniel 6:4. Then the other officials and the satraps sought to find a ground for complaint against Daniel with regard to the kingdom; but they could find no ground for complaint or any fault, because he was faithful and no error or fault was found in him. Daniel 6:5. Then these men said: We shall not find any ground for complaint against this Daniel unless we find it in connection with the law of his God. Darius clearly did not hide from his associates his intention (Dan 6:3). And this circumstance provoked envy in Daniel’s ill-wishers, and envy gave rise to a desire to destroy him, to get rid of a fortunate rival. But the state activities of the prophet provided no material for accusations: he was too honest and disinterested. In view of this, the enemies decided to exploit his religious convictions for their purposes, and indeed they did.

Daniel 6:6. Then these officials and satraps came by agreement to the king and said to him: “King Darius, live forever! Daniel 6:7. All the officials of the kingdom, the prefects and the satraps, the counselors and the governors, are agreed that the king should establish an ordinance and enforce an edict, that whoever makes petition to any god or man for thirty days, except to you, O king, shall be cast into the den of lions. Acquainted with the prophet’s life, the officials were convinced that he would not abandon his religion and its demands under any circumstances. The law they were proposing, however, demanded the renunciation of that religion. Daniel, the conspirators reasoned, would not obey the law and therefore must perish. The edict devised by the satraps exalted the king to the status of divinity – it required all subjects to pray to him as to God. Strange at first glance, it is in reality historically accurate – it fully corresponds to the religious conceptions of the Medes, who allowed the deification of the royal person. Like the Persians, they considered their kings to be gods – incarnations of Ahura Mazda – and thus rendered them divine honors. So it is known that when Darius Hystaspes went out of the palace, court attendants burned fragrant incense before him. Similarly, kings, having adopted such a view, sought to present themselves as inaccessible, invisible to ordinary mortals as celestial beings. According to Herodotus, for example, the Median king Deioces forbade his subjects to appear before him, hid himself from the people’s eyes, so that the subjects, not seeing him, would recognize him as a higher divine being. The right to see the king’s face belonged only to seven high officials. The edict is also historically accurate in its second part – in the condemnation of the disobedient to be devoured by lions. As is evident from Assyro-Babylonian inscriptions, this was one of the customary methods of execution in Assyria and Babylon.

Daniel 6:8. Now, O king, establish the edict and sign the document, so that it cannot be changed, according to the law of the Medes and Persians, which cannot be revoked. Daniel 6:9. Therefore King Darius signed the document and edict. With royal approval and ratification, the edict received the force of an obligatory law, a character that distinguished all Medo-Persian edicts (Dan 6:12), despite the injustice and monstrosity of some of them (Esth 1:19; Esth 8:8). In view of the complete acceptability of the proposed law, Darius agreed with the proposal of his officials.

Daniel 6:10. When Daniel learned that the document had been signed, he went to his house where the windows of his upper chamber opened toward Jerusalem. He got down on his knees three times a day and prayed and gave thanks before his God, as he had done previously. The conspirators’ calculations proved correct. Upon learning the content of the edict, Daniel did not abandon his custom of praying three times a day, perhaps in the morning, at noon, and in the evening (Ps 54:18), or at 3, 6, and 9 o’clock, the hours of worship services in the temple in Jerusalem (Ps 140:2; Dan 9:21), toward Jerusalem. (On this custom, see the Introduction in the section on the authenticity of the book).

Daniel 6:13. Then they answered and said before the king: Daniel, who is one of the exiles from Judah, pays no regard to you, O king, nor to the edict you have signed, but he makes his petition three times a day. Daniel 6:14. When the king heard this, he was much distressed and set his mind to deliver Daniel. He spent the whole day trying to rescue him. Daniel 6:15. Then these men came by agreement to the king and said to the king: “Know, O king, that it is a law of the Medes and Persians that any edict or ordinance that the king establishes cannot be changed. Daniel 6:16. Then the king commanded, and Daniel was brought and cast into the den of lions. The king said to Daniel: “Your God, whom you serve continually, He will deliver you. In the mind of Darius, who understood the conspirators’ schemes against Daniel, a struggle ensued between the feeling of duty, which required him to enforce the law, and the desire to save the prophet. The latter was so strong that it initially prevailed: the king devised various means to circumvent the edict he himself had approved (Dan 6:14). But in the end, the awareness of the necessity of being faithful to the law overcame his disposition toward Daniel. Unable to save him, unable to offer him any help, he lived only with the hope that Daniel’s protector would be God, whom he served.

Daniel 6:17. And a stone was brought and laid on the opening of the den, and the king sealed it with his own signet and with the signet of his lords, that nothing might be changed concerning Daniel. The stone that had been placed over the opening of the den was sealed with the seal of Darius and his officials with the purpose that “nothing might be changed concerning Daniel.” The seals of the officials prevented Darius from taking any measures to free the prophet; the king’s seal deprived the officials of the ability to kill Daniel if the lions did not touch him.

Daniel 6:18. Then the king went to his palace and spent the night fasting; no diversions were brought before him, and sleep fled from him. Daniel 6:19. Then, at break of day, the king rose and went in haste to the den of lions. Daniel 6:20. When he came near the den to Daniel, he cried out with a lamentable voice. The king said to Daniel: “Daniel, servant of the living God! Has your God, whom you serve continually, been able to deliver you from the lions? The deep sorrow for his beloved official did not extinguish in Darius the hope of his miraculous salvation (Dan 6:16). Urged on by it, the king set out early in the morning to discover whether his expectations had been fulfilled.

Daniel 6:21. Then Daniel said to the king: “O king, live forever! Daniel 6:22. My God sent His angel and shut the mouths of the lions, and they have not hurt me, because I was found blameless before Him; and also before you, O king, I have done no wrong. Daniel 6:23. Then the king was exceedingly glad, and commanded that Daniel be taken up out of the den. And Daniel was taken up out of the den, and no kind of harm was found upon him, because he had trusted in his God. Daniel’s salvation was a work of God’s omnipotence and the consequence of an angel’s appearance to the prophet. Just as the angel miraculously altered the action of nature’s elements, commanding the fire not to burn but to cool the righteous (Dan 3:49-50), so in this case he forbade the lions to touch the prophet. It is baseless to think that Daniel himself possessed a magnetic power of his gaze by which he tamed the wild beasts. It is also impossible to suppose that the lions were satiated, or that the angel miraculously satisfied their hunger (Cornelius, Knabenbauer): these very same animals tore to pieces the enemies of the prophet, before they reached the bottom of the den (Dan 6:24).

Daniel 6:24. And the king commanded, and those men who had accused Daniel were brought and cast into the den of lions, they, their children, and their wives. And before they reached the bottom of the den, the lions overpowered them and broke all their bones in pieces. Against Daniel’s enemies was applied the law of the ancient Persians concerning slanderers. According to it, they were subjected to the same punishment to which they had condemned their victim. Into the lion’s den were thrown not only the officials but also their families, which fully accords with Herodotus’s testimony about the Persian custom of executing with the guilty their wives, children, and even close relatives.

Daniel 6:25. Then King Darius wrote to all peoples, nations, and languages that dwell in all the earth: “Peace be multiplied to you. Daniel 6:26. I make a decree, that in all the realm of my kingdom, men should tremble and fear before the God of Daniel, for He is the living God, enduring forever; His kingdom shall not be destroyed, and His dominion shall be without end. Daniel 6:27. He delivers and rescues; He performs signs and wonders in heaven and on earth; He has delivered Daniel from the power of the lions.’ In recognizing the God of Daniel as the living God, eternally abiding, working miracles and wonders in heaven and on earth, Darius does not, however, require his subjects to renounce their own gods and believe only in the one God of Daniel, but only forbids them to blaspheme Him. Consequently, like Nebuchadnezzar, he falls short of faith in the Lord as the sole true God (cf. Dan 3:96).