"The generally received opinion is that Cambyses and Pseudo-Smerdis are not mentioned in Scripture, that Xerxes is the Ahasuerus of Esther, and that Artaxerxes Longimanus is Artaxerxes of Ezra 7:1 and Nehemiah 2:1, 5:14, and 13:6."

We shall turn to the Hebrew text of the books of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther and scrutinize them microscopically to ascertain the facts in the case.

The present state of the received chronology is in such great confusion that it is utterly impossible for one to arrive at the historical facts unless he is willing to investigate all the factors involved. A strained interpretation has been forced upon the records of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther in the interest of a preconceived theory; therefore, we shall in this investigation discard all conventionalities, presuppositions, and hypotheses and look at the text, accepting it at its face value. Furthermore, we must be very careful in our study of the different monarchs mentioned in this section of the Word of God. By patience and close attention to details we can arrive at the facts. The task is hard, but the results accruing from solving the problem will well repay all our labor.

Mr. Anstey lays down three very important rules that must be observed in our investigation of this section of the Word. They are as follows:
(a) Never adopt any rule which is inconsistent with other data.
(b) Never frame any hypothesis, or entertain any conjecture, which
cannot be verified or supported by positive evidence. And
(c) Never identify different persons bearing the same name, and
never fail to identify the same person bearing different names.

These principles which are axiomatic are absolutely essential in our investigation of these books.

2. Sources Of Our Information

As stated before, we are compelled to rely entirely upon the books of Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. The book of Daniel throws some light upon the situation.

The books of Chronicles were originally one and are so reckoned in the listing of the Divine Oracles by Josephus in his polemic "Against Apion." Scholars, I think, are agreed that the diction, style, and general features prove the original unity of these two books. They begin with the creation of Adam and trace the history in the form of genealogical tables to the time of David. At this point the record is enlarged, giving the details of his reign. Chapters 11-29 are devoted to his life and labors as King of Israel. The first nine chapters of the second book of Chronicles are devoted to Solomon's administration. From chapter 10 to the close appears the record of the Chosen People from the disruption of the kingdom at the death of Solomon to the Babylonian captivity. Thus the history is carried forward in a majestic manner.

A casual reading of the Chronicles account and a comparison of it with that given in Kings impress one with the fact that the writer of the former record had, as his direct objective, the presentation of the history from the divine standpoint. In other words, he has given us the divine philosophy of history--the interpretation of God's providential dealings with both individuals and nations.

Ezra is a continuation of Chronicles, as is seen by comparing the first paragraph of the former with the last of the latter. The same style, diction, and interpretation of history continue through the books of Ezra and Nehemiah. That these constituted a single work originally is shown by the Masoretic note at the end of Nehemiah, which makes Nehemiah 3:31 the middle of these books. The number of verses listed and other data presented by the Masoretes prove conclusively that these two books were anciently considered as a single work. They were never divided into two volumes until Origen arbitrarily separated them into two distinct books.

We must recognize the fact that Chronicles, Ezra, and Nehemiah constitute one sweeping survey of history, and that the book of Esther is a separate work, in which is reflected, a crisis in the history of Israel. It does not, therefore, continue the account which comes to a close with the ending of Nehemiah, but is a sidelight on the times of Darius Hystaspes. This point will be proved later.
 

Three periods of 70 years are mentioned in the prophetic word. It, therefore, behooves us to notice each passage and its context microscopically in order to differentiate one from the other.

As stated before, Jeremiah 25 is one of the most important passages in the Scriptures from a chronological standpoint. Its significance is heightened by the fact that it blends the Babylonian captivity of the children of Israel with world-affairs which, as we know from other passages, will develop in the end time. Jeremiah began his prophetic ministry in the thirteenth year of Josiah king of Judah, which was 3499 A.H. (626 B.C.E.). That was a crucial year for Judah. Speaking in familiar terms, I would say that the die had all but been cast, the Rubicon crossed when Jeremiah began his ministry. The oracle presented in this chapter was uttered in the fourth year of Jehoiakim, 23 years after the prophet had begun his public ministry. As we have seen, Nebuchadnezzar had already come against Jerusalem, had removed some of the vessels from the temple of Jehovah, and had taken certain of the seed royal to Babylon in the previous year (Dan. 1:1f). In this fourth year of Jehoiakim, Jeremiah was given the vision concerning the servitude of the nations in western Asia to Babylon. The guarantee of this political bondage was in evidence already by Nebuchadnezzar's conquest the year previous.

There is but one period of 70 years of captivity referred to by Jeremiah.

"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 Jehovah, for their iniquity, and the land of the Chaldeans; and I will make it desolate forever. 13 And I will bring upon that land all my words which I have pronounced against it, even all that is written in this book, which Jeremiah hath prophesied against all the nations" (Jer. 25:11-13).

Let us note the fact that the prophecy foretells the desolation of the land of Israel and Judah's captivity in Babylon for 70 years. According to this prediction God said that at the expiration of this 70-year period He would punish the king of Babylon. This is the terminal date of the epoch. This fact must be kept clearly in mind as we continue our studies.

The same epoch is again referred to in a letter which Jeremiah wrote to the exiles in Babylon after the deportation of Jeconiah and the nobility who were taken into bondage with him in 3528 A.H. (597 B.C.E.). There had arisen in Babylon false prophets who were telling the captives that they would remain there only a short time, and that they then would be brought back to their native soil. In this communication the Lord reiterated the fact that, after 70 years were accomplished for Babylon, He would visit Israel and perform His good word toward her in causing her to return to the land of the fathers. This letter constitutes chapter 29 of Jeremiah's book and clearly refers to the 70 years of desolation mentioned in chapter 25. About this position there can be no doubt.

This same time is mentioned again in Daniel 9:1,2:
"In the first year of Darius the son of Ahasuerus, of the seed of the Medes, who was made king over the realm of the Chaldeans, 2 in the first year of his reign I, Daniel, understood by the books the number of the years whereof the word of Jehovah came to Jeremiah the prophet for the accomplishment of the desolations of Jerusalem, even seventy years."

If one studies Daniel 1:1-7 in connection with Jeremiah 25:1-14, he immediately sees that this prediction began in the third year of Jehoiakim, when Nebuchadnezzar invaded the country. That it ended with the accession to power of Cyrus king of the Medo-Persian empire is clear from a reading of II Chronicles 36:20-23:

"20 And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon; and they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia: 21 to fulfil the word of Jehovah by the mouth of Jeremiah until the land had enjoyed its sabbaths: for as long as it lay desolate it kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years. 22 Now in the first year of Cyrus king of Persia, that the word of Jehovah by the mouth of Jeremiah might be accomplished, Jehovah stirred up the spirit of Cyrus, king of Persia, so that he made a proclamation throughout all his kingdom, and put it also in writing saying, 23 Thus saith Cyrus, king of Persia, All the kingdoms of the earth hath Jehovah, the God of heaven, given me; and he hath charged me to build him a house in Jerusalem, which is in Judah. Whosoever there is among you of all his people, Jehovah his God be with him, and let him go up."

From this quotation it is very clear that the decree which Cyrus issued brought to a close the period of desolation of Jerusalem foretold by Jeremiah.

In the first year of Darius the Mede (3587 A.H. or 538 B.C.E.), which, was the 68th of the 70 years of desolation, Daniel was reading the prophecy of Jeremiah. He states that he understood from the books the significance of Jeremiah's prediction. This prophet wrote only one book, but Daniel understood from the books. What books would throw light upon Jeremiah's statement? Since Chronicles and Kings give us the account of the reigns of various rulers of Israel and Judah, it is highly probable that Daniel was referring to them. It is also quite likely that the book of Isaiah was included in this collection. Daniel was a student of prophecy. Isaiah, whose ministry fell something like a century and a half before that of Daniel, foretold that God would use Cyrus to restore His people to the land of their fathers.¹

At the time when Daniel read Jeremiah's prophecy, Cyrus was associated with Darius in the government of the Medo-Persian empire. Since the prophet was a high official at the Persian court, he doubtless knew the trend of things and could see naturally that sooner or later Cyrus, if he lived, would grasp the power of the empire. He could, therefore, in the light of Isaiah's prediction and the trend of affairs, recognize Cyrus as the one of whom Isaiah by inspiration had spoken as the deliverer of Israel.

It did not take special inspiration by the Spirit for him to come to this conclusion, because he had studied the books (Kings, Chronicles, Jeremiah, and Isaiah) and knew that within 2 years the 70 years of Jerusalem's desolations would expire. Being acquainted with the trend of events and being associated with Cyrus personally, he would recognize in him the fulfilment of Isaiah's prediction. Anyone who will take God's Word at its face value, as Daniel did, and not attempt to force an unnatural meaning upon it, and who will pray for spiritual insight into the present situation, can recognize the fulfilment of certain predictions even today.

Isaiah foretold that Cyrus was the one who would issue the decree for the building of Jerusalem and the laying of the foundation of the temple. Did Cyrus do this thing? The decree which he actually issued is recorded in II Chronicles 36:22,23; Ezra 1:1-4; 6:1-5. Though in these different accounts of the decree nothing is said of the building of the city, we may be certain that Cyrus did give permission, because Zerubbabel and the leaders of the Jews armed with authority from him went back to Jerusalem and actually built the city and finished the walls. This fact is seen from a statement in a letter which the enemies of the Jews wrote to Artaxerxes (Pseudo-Smerdis) in 522 B.C.E.

"Be it known unto the king, that the Jews that came up from thee are come to us unto Jerusalem; they are building the rebellious and the bad city and have finished the walls, and repaired the foundations" (Ez. 4:12). But later we shall investigate this phase of the question more fully.

"Then the angel of Jehovah answered and said, O Jehovah of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?" (Zech. 1:12)

Here reference is made to 70 years of indignation against Jerusalem and the cities of Judah. In answer to the question asked, the Lord said,

"I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies; my house shall be built in it, saith Jehovah of hosts) and a line shall be stretched forth over Jerusalem" (Zech. 1:16).

This query was raised and the answer given in the second year of Darius Hystaspes, in 3605 A.H. (520 B.C.E.). When we count backward 70 years from this date we reach the ninth year of the captivity of Jehoiachin and the eighth of Zedekiah's reign. In Ezekiel 24:1-14 we find the prediction of the seething caldron which symbolized God's wrath at boiling temperature against His people. Evidently, therefore, this 70-year period began in 3536 A.H. (589 B.C.E.) The first year of this epoch of indignation was the seventeenth of the 70 years of Jerusalem's desolations.

A third period of 70 years, mentioned in the Scriptures, is characterized by the fasts of the fifth and seventh months. The people of Bethel sent a delegation to Jerusalem in the fourth year of Darius (518 B.C.E.) to inquire whether or not they should continue to fast as they had done for so many years. Evidently the reason for their making this inquiry was the fact that the foundation of the temple had already been laid 2 years prior to this time. See such passages as Haggai 2:10,15,18,20. The fast of the fifth month was to commemorate the fall and destruction of Jerusalem in 3539 A.H. or 586 B.C. This question was asked in the fourth year of Darius Hystaspes, which, as we shall see, was the 69th year from the destruction of the city. An immediate answer was given by Zechariah saying,

"Speak unto all the people of the land, and to the priests, saying, When ye fasted and mourned in the fifth and in the seventh month, even these seventy years, did ye at all fast unto me, even to me?" (Zech. 7:5).

As stated above, this event occurred in the 69th year of this period, during which the people of Israel had fasted because of the destruction of the city, but the prophet said that they had been fasting 70 years. To the casual observer there seems to be a discrepancy of one year, but the facts will show that there is no contradiction. We shall shortly see that the Persian method of reckoning time was not that of the Assyrians and the Hebrews. Instead of numbering the years of the reign of a king from the first New Year's day after his coronation, the Persians dated a man's reign from his actual accession to the throne. We shall see that the ninth month was the time when Darius received the crown. This delegation made these inquiries in the ninth month and on the 24th day. They were, therefore, at the very end of the 69th year of this period. Thus a day or two would put them into the next year. A careful reading of Zechariah 7 and 8 will disclose the facts that the prophet remonstrated with the people for doing their own pleasure in their fasting, instead of really seeking God. Furthermore, he exhorted them to obey the Word of the Lord. After this, but we cannot say how long, the Word of the Lord came to the prophet (8:1) telling of the great future that awaits Jerusalem. In verse 18 of this chapter the final answer is given, and the prediction is made that all of the fasts of the nation will eventually be turned into a period of rejoicing. This 70-year epoch ended the fifth year of Darius, or 517 B.C.E.

The 70-year period of desolations of Jerusalem enables us to check the Biblical chronology with that of Babylon and her kings who succeeded Nebuchadnezzar, showing that our count is absolutely correct. The era of the 70 years of indignation, starting in the seventeenth year of the period of desolations, runs parallel with it for 54 years and extends beyond it for 16 years. This period enables us to check the time between the first year of Cyrus and the third of Darius Hystaspes. The third period, relative to the fall of Jerusalem, simply confirms and corroborates the reckoning based upon the second era of 70 years. Thus by these checks and double checks we may be certain that the chronology as it is worked out is absolutely correct to the very year.
 

As has already been stated, Daniel occupied an official position in the third year of the reign of Belshazzar, 539 B.C.E. (Dan. 8:1). In 538 B.C.E., when the authority of the empire passed from the Babylonians to the Medes and the Persians, Darius may have had the priority over Cyrus. This monarch appointed a satrap over each of the 120 provinces of the kingdom. He also appointed presidents, or chief men, over these leading officials, and in this small higher committee Daniel was given the preeminence. (See Daniel 6.) This was in 538 B.C.E. Daniel held this high position until the third year of Cyrus' sole kingship (Dan. 10:1), at which time the Lord granted him the final vision constituting chapters 10-12 of his book.
 

From Ezra 1:1-4 it seems quite apparent that someone had pointed out to Cyrus the prediction referring to him which Isaiah had made two centuries prior to his day. (See Isaiah 44:24-45:13.) In his decree Cyrus said that God had commanded him to build Him a house in Jerusalem. Since Cyrus was a heathen king, since God usually uses men and means to communicate His truth to the unsaved, and since Daniel was occupying a position of influence and power at the court of Cyrus, it seems most likely that he was the one who pointed out to the king the role he was to play in the unfolding of God's plan relative to Israel. According to Isaiah 44:28, Cyrus would perform all God's pleasure, saying that Jerusalem should be built, and that the temple foundation should be laid. In 45:13 we also find the thought repeated that Cyrus should build "my (God's) city," i.e., Jerusalem, "and let my exiles (Israelites) go free" without price or reward. We are, therefore, justified in believing that the decree of Cyrus included the authority to build the city of Jerusalem as well as to reestablish the temple and its worship.

This position is confirmed by a statement from Josephus, which reads as follows:
"This (the knowledge concerning God's purposes concerning Cyrus) was known to Cyrus by his reading the book which Isaiah left behind him of the prophecies; for this prophet said that God had spoken thus to him in a secret vision: 'My will is, that Cyrus, whom I have appointed to be king over many and great nations, send back my people to their own land, and build my temple.' This was foretold by Isaiah one hundred and forty years before the temple was demolished. Accordingly, when Cyrus read this, and admired the Divine power, an earnest desire and ambition seized upon him to fulfil what was so written; so he called for the most eminent Jews that were in Babylon, and said to them, that he gave them leave to go back to their own country, and to rebuild their city Jerusalem, and the temple of God, for that he would be their assistant, and that he would write to the rulers and governors that were in the neighborhood of their country of Judea, that they should contribute to them gold and silver for the building of the temple, and besides that, beasts for their sacrifice" (Ant. Book XI, chap. 1,2).

In the first year of his reign as sole rex, Cyrus, according to the prediction uttered by Isaiah, issued the decree for the return of those captives who desired to go back to the homeland. Only a small number, comparatively speaking, 42,360, accepted the offer and under the leadership of Zerubbabel, prince of the house of David, and Joshua, the high priest, went back. Judging from the time it took Ezra and his company to return from Babylon to Palestine, we should conclude that these pilgrims made the journey in 4 or 5 months. We see them, however, in the land on the first day of the seventh month of Cyrus' first year (Ez. 3:1).


Footnotes:

* An article in the daily papers announce the fact that in recent months the archaeologists digging at Persepolis, the ancient capital of Persia, have unearthed 150,000 tablets. If this report is correct, it may be that much new and startling light might burst forth, not only on the Persian period, but also upon the preceding as well as following centuries. Let us hope that such will be the case. Before it is known what they may contain, I am bold to go on record, affirming my belief that not one fact which might be brought to light will contradict anything the Scriptures say. Nothing thus far has been discovered that can in the least throw doubt upon these Sacred Oracles. Neither can anything be found that will.

¹ The book of Isaiah has been dissected by the rationalistic critics into a number of various documents, which, they assert, came from different times. Especially has the latter half of it suffered at their hands. The principal argument for such vivisection is based upon differences of style, diction, concepts, and teaching. The evidence cited in support of the theory is indeed insufficient. In fact, for every particle of so-called evidence indisputable facts can be brought forward, which render the claim null and void.

The principal reason motivating the dissection of the book is a desire to break the force of predictive prophecy. The mention of Cyrus by name in this passage, if uttered by Isaiah in the latter half of the eighth century B.C.E., approximately two centuries before the birth of Cyrus, proves the reality of verbal inspiration of the Scriptures. Rationalism will not admit the possibility of a special revelation by the Spirit of God. Hence the bold claim is made that Isaiah did not utter this prediction. Then the theory is advanced that some unknown prophet of the late exilic period, who saw the trend of events and the gains which were being made by Cyrus, and who knew his kindly disposition and political policies, made the shrewd prophecy that he would permit the Jewish captives to return to their land. For this position there is not one particle of evidence.

Many of the utterances of the prophets have been fulfilled to the letter through the centuries. To the open minded person there can be no question concerning the pure Isaianic character of this prediction.
 

Continued on the next page