Establishment

How are we to reconcile the account of Ezekiel 26 attri­buting the disastrous fall to Nebuchad­nezzar with Eze­kiel 29:17 20 and the non biblical accounts that indi­cate Babylon’s apparent inability to capture Tyre?¹⁹⁶ Jerome says that the Tyrians carried off all wealth when it became apparent the city would fall.¹⁹⁷
Some would argue that the destruction of Tyre refers to a mainland city with that name, while the failure to gain pay (Ezekiel 29) refers to the island fortress. A refer­ence in ANET, p. 477, from the thirteenth century B.C. indicates two cities: “Let me tell you of another strange city, named Byblos. What was it like? And its goddess? Once again[thou] hast not trodden it. Pray instruct me about Beirut, about Sidon and Sarepta. Where is the stream of the Litani? What is Uzu [ed. note=“old Tyre on the mainland”] like? They say another town is in the sea, named Tyre-the-port. Water is taken (to) it by the boats, and it is richer in fish than the sands.”
More likely, however, the prophecy has both specific and general implications. Having begun in a generalized way: nations (1 6), he became particu­lar with Babylon (7 11), but he became general again in v. 12. “They” (the na­tions) will despoil her. At this point we are looking to the subsequent devasta­ting cala­mity under Alexander the Great.

In his fourth year (601 B.C.) Nebuchadnezzar began further law enforcement in “Hatti land.” At that time, he decided to invade Egypt. He was met by the Saite king, Necho II and the battle was fiercely fought. Egypt had reorganized and reprovisioned her army after the Carchemish debacle and the battle was a stand off. The Chronicle says, “In open battle they smote the breast (of) each other and inflicted great havoc on each other. The king of Akkad [Nebuchadnezzar] and his troops turned back and returned to Babylon. In the fifth year the king of Akkad (stayed) in his own land and gathered together his chariots and horses in great num­bers.”¹⁹⁸
Jehoiakim apparently thought this battle indicated Egyptian superiority and shifted his allegiance from Babylon to Egypt. He rebelled after three years (2 Kings 24:1-2), and Nebuchad­nez­zer dealt with him by encouraging bands of brigands until he could deal with him himself. Jehoia­kim died mysteriously (Jer. 22:19), possibly murdered to placate Nebuchadnezzar. In any event, “in the seventh year [598], the month of Kislev, the king of Akkad mustered his troops, marched to the Hatti-land, and encamped against (i.e. besieged) the city of Judah and on the second day of the month of Adar he seized the city and captured the king [Jehoiachin]. He appointed there a king of his own choice (lit. heart) [Zedekiah], received its heavy tribute and sent (them) to Babylon.”¹⁹⁹
An internal rebellion took place 595/4. The text is fairly cryptic: “In the tenth year the king of Akkad (was) in his own land; from the month of Kislev to the month of Tebet there was rebellion in Akkad . . . . with arms he slew many of his own army [Wiseman reads in Nebuchad­rez­zar, p. 34, “his numerous leading persons/officials”]. His own hand captured his enemy.”²⁰⁰ Wiseman also links this event with Jeremiah 29 (written shortly after 597) were Jeremiah says that the King of Babylon roasted a certain Zedekiah and Ahab in fire.²⁰¹
Zedekiah, refusing to learn from the mistake of Jehoiakim and to listen to Jeremiah’s warnings, rebelled against Babylon (Jer. 27:1-11). The data of the last days of Zedekiah come from the Bible (the Chronicle is missing at this point). Zedekiah rebelled in 588 and Nebuchad­nezzar besieged the city with the intent of starving it into submission. Apries, the new Egyptian king responded to Zedekiah’s appeals, probably with a limited force (Ezek. 17:15 for the appeal). The city fell in 586.

Jeremiah predicted Babylonian attacks on Egypt (43:8-13), but there is little evidence in the Babylonian records for it.²⁰² Ezekiel’s prophecy (29:17-20) seems to contradict what is known of Egyptian history during the Babylonian period. The usual point made is that Nebuchad­nezzar did not invade Egypt, but Persia did.²⁰³ During the Babylonian period, it is said, Egypt prospered. For an excellent presentation of an alternate view, see J. B. Reilly, “The His­tori­city of Nebuchad­nezzar’s Invasion of Egypt,” Th.M. thesis, DTS. He argues three basic points:
(1) Amasis (Egyptian ruler during Nebuchadnezzar’s time) was confined to the western part of the delta with Greek mercenaries. Any discussion of prosperity for Egypt should be confined to that area.
(2) Cambyses (the Persian ruler who invaded Egypt) did not go south of the Delta and did not destroy Egypt. The Elephantine papyri should read, “They [Babylon] had destroyed the temples of Egypt, but not the temple of Yaho.”²⁰⁴
(3) The period from 567 B.C. (Nebuchadnezzar’s invasion) to 525 B.C. is the forty years of destruction spoken of by Ezekiel. After Persia’s entrance, Egypt began to prosper.
“Nebuchadnezzar died about August-September, 562 B.C., and was succeeded by his son Amel-Marduk (562-560 B.C.), whom Jeremiah calls Evil-Merodach.”²⁰⁵
Amel-Marduk (Evil-Merodach) (562-560 B.C.)

Josephus quotes Berosus who says of Amel-Marduk: “After beginning the wall of which I have spoken, Nabuchodonosor fell sick and died, after a reign of forty-three years, and the realm passed to his son Evilmaraduch. This prince, whose government was arbitrary and licentious, fell a victim to a plot, being assassinated by his sister’s husband, Neriglisar, after a reign of two years.”²⁰⁶
Amel-Marduk ruled only two years. From Jeremiah 52:31-34 we learn: “Now it came about in the thirty-seventh year of the exile of Jehoiachin king of Judah (560 B.C.), in the twelfth month, on the twenty-fifth of the month, that Evil-merodach king of Babylon, in the first year of his reign, showed favor to Jehoiachin king of Judah and brought him out of prison. Then he spoke kindly to him and set his throne above the thrones of the kings who were with him in Babylon. So Jehoiachin changed his prison clothes, and had his meals in the king’s presence regularly all the days of his life. And for his allowance, a regular allowance was given him by the king of Babylon, a daily portion all the days of his life until the day of his death” (see also 2 Kings 25:27-30). “10 (sila to Ia-ku-u-ki-nu, the son of the king of Ia-ku-du (i.e. Judah). 2 1/2 sila for the 5 sons of the king of Judah.”²⁰⁷ This tablet actually comes from Nebuchadnezzar’s time, and so Amel-Marduk increased the ration established by his father. Thompson says, “He was given little time to prove his worth; the two years of his brief reign are merely enough to show that political conditions were again hostile to the royal house.”²⁰⁸
Nergal-sharra-usur (Neriglissar) (559-556 B.C.)
Whether there was a revolution or Amel-marduk died in 559 is not clear, but Neriglissar succeeded him to the throne.²⁰⁹ He was married to a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar and may have been next in line after Amel-marduk. “He is probably to be identified with Nergal-sharezer who held the office of rab mag at the siege of Jerusalem in 586 B.C. If, as seems likely, the Neri­glissar is also the same man, he was already middle-aged on his accession.”²¹⁰ Little is known about this man except that he restored temples in Babylon and Borsippa. Wiseman translates a tablet that for the first time reveals an extensive military campaign in Cilicia.²¹¹
The six or so years of the reign of these two kings are passed over in silence in the Bible, except for the elevation of Jehoiachin. Daniel is involved through 539 when Cyrus comes to Babylon, but no mention is made of Amel-Marduk or Neriglissar. Ezekiel’s prophecies do not extend beyond 571 B.C. when Nebuchad­nezzar was still ruling.
Labashi-marduk (556 B.C.)

Neriglissar died in 556 B.C. of unknown causes. His son Labashi-marduk attempted to assume the throne but was opposed. After just three months of rule, he was overthrown by officers of the state. They placed Nabu-na’id (Nabonidus) on the throne.
Nabu-na’id (Nabonidus) (556-539 B.C.)
Nabonidus usurped the throne though he was not a direct descendant of Nebuchadnezzar. Wiseman suggests that he may have married a daughter of Nebuchadnezzar which would make Belshazzar a grandson (and hence a “son”) of the sacker of Jerusalem.²¹²
Nabonidus was probably rather old when he ascended the throne. He had connections with the city of Haran (the last stronghold of the Assyrians in 609 B.C.). Either his father or mother was a priest(ess) of the Moon God at Haran.²¹³
Nabonidus took his army west, but withdrew from Palestine in 553. The excuse he gives is to rebuild the temple in Haran. This homage to a foreign deity (to the Babylonians) apparently created hostility in the priests of Babylon.
There follows a very mysterious time in Nabonidus’ life. “He let (everything) go, entrusted the kingship to him and, himself, he started out for a long journey, the (military) forces of Akkad marching with him; he turned towards Tema (deep) in the west. He started out the expedition on a path (leading) to a distant (region). When he arrived there, he killed in battle the prince of Tema, slaughtered the flocks of those who dwell in the city (as well as) in the countryside, and he, himself, took his residence in [Te]ma, the forces of Akkad [were also stationed] there.”²¹⁴

Nabonidus spent his declining years in this pleasant oasis for unknown reasons. Perhaps he was unwelcome in Babylon or perhaps Haran was not safe from the Medes.²¹⁵ “Seventh year [549 B.C.]: The king (i.e. Nabonidus, stayed) in Tema; the crown prince, his officials and his army (were) in Akkad. . . .Eighth year: (blank of two lines). . . .Ninth year: Nabonidus, the king, (stayed) in Tema; the crown prince, the officials and the army (were) in Akkad. . . .Tenth year: The king (stayed) in Tema; the crown prince, his officials and his army (were) in Akkad. . . .Elev­enth year [545 B.C.]: The king (stayed) in Tema; the crown prince, the officials and his army (were) in Akkad.”²¹⁶ By 547 Cyrus was already putting pressure on Babylon. An Elamite governor was apparently appointed in Erech. This would mean that Cyrus had a pincer movement on Babylon ten years before conquering it.²¹⁷
During Nabonidus’ stay in Teima his son and crown prince, Belshazzar was ruling in Babylon. Until recent times, the existence of this man was unknown outside the Bible and provoked much skepticism as to his authenticity. With the publication of the Babylonian materials, he is now well-known as the “vice-regent” in Babylon in the absence of his aged father.
“ [Seventeenth year:]. . . Nebo [went] from Borsippa for the procession of [Bel. . . ] [the king (Nabonidus)] entered the temple. . . .In the month of Tashritu, when Cyrus attacked the army of Akkad in Opis on the Tigris, the inhabitants of Akkad revolted, but he (Nabonidus) massacred the confused inhabitants. In the 14th day, Sippar was seized without battle. Nabonidus fled. The 16th day, Gobryas (Ugbaru), the governor of Gutium and the army of Cyrus entered Babylon without battle. Afterwards Nabonidus was arrested in Babylon when he returned (there). . . .In the month of Arahshamnu, the 3rd day, Cyrus entered Babylon, green twigs were spread in front of himthe state of ‘Peace’ was imposed upon the city. Cyrus sent greetings to all Babylon. Gobryas, his governor, installed (sub-)governors in Babylon.”²¹⁸ Oates says, “The reasons for the king’s return to Babylon are as obscure as those which led to his departure. After 10 years, and now certainly approaching 70 years of age, he left Taima.”²¹⁹ He came back, for whatever reason, and resumed the religious ritual. After the defeat at Opis mentioned above, he fled to Babylon. There Herodotus tells us, while the Babylonians were reveling (“Belshazzar the King made a great feast to a thousand of his lords and drank wine before the thousand”), the Persians broke into the city unopposed. Herodotus preserves the story (doubted by some) that Cyrus diverted the Euphrates River (flowing through Babylon) and was able thus to enter the city.²²⁰ Belshazzar was killed that night (Dan. 5:30), but “The old king Nabonidus was given Carmania to rule, or much more probably as a place of abode in a new land.”²²¹
Connections of the Neo-Babylonian Empire with Daniel and Ezekiel
The key issues in Daniel are:
The captivity of Daniel (fourth year/third year) and whether there was a deportation.

The identity of Darius the Mede (perhaps the most knotty of all the problems).

The historicity of Balshazzar (now proven).

The identity of the Chaldeans as a special religious class.
These issues have all been confronted by Evangelicals. Robert Dick Wilson, Studies in the Book of Daniel; Wiseman and Kitchen (see below); J. Whitcomb, Darius the Mede. G. Archer, Daniel in EBC.
Nebuchadnezzar’s mental illness.
Is there anything in the extra biblical record to support the biblical statements on Nebuchad­nezzar’s madness? Thompson says: “The name of Nebuchadrezzar became the centre of much romance, notably the story of his madness in the book of Daniel. ‘His own inscriptions speak only of a four year  long suspension of interest in public affairs, which may not be a reference to his malady, though tradition of something of the kind may have lent verisimilitude to the account of it in Daniel’ (C.H.W. Johns, E.Bi. col. 3371). His religious character is illustrated above; like Ashur­banipal he may have suffered some mysterious affliction (p. 127), and this might have been ascribed to a divine visitation.”²²²
Because of Nabonidus’ long stint in Teima, the hostility of the Babylonian priesthood to him and a frag­ment from Qumran attributing a sickness of seven years to Naboni­dus through which he was instructed by a Jewish soothsayer, some want the Nebuchadnezzar story to be transferred to Naboni­dus.²²³ However, there is no reason why the problem could not have hap­pened to Nebuchad­nezzar, and one surely would not expect to find a record of it in the accounts. If Nebuchadnezzar “withdrew from public life for four years,” a seven year hiatus should not be considered improbable.
Was Nebuchadnezzar a believer in the sense of an OT saint? Certainly, he acknow­ledges the existence, position and power of the Most High God. However, the acknowledgement of the person of God in chapter two does not prevent him from trying to kill the three Jewish men for worship­ping the same God in chapter three. Furthermore, in chapter four the same lesson has to be learned again. It seems unlikely to me that he was ever more than a polytheist.
Ezekiel prophesies entirely during Nebuchadnezzar’s reign. The symbolism, metaphors and parables can only be understood with the backdrop of the historical happenings in Babylonia, Egypt and Judah over a ten year period. (Only one prophecy is beyond that era. It is against Tyre and refers to events in 571 B.C.)

Babylon’s Influence on the Bible
Occurrences in the Bible
Babylon, Babylonian, Babylonish
Genesis 10:10; 11:9.

Joshua 7:21 (Babylonish garment).

2 Kings 17-25 = 31 x’s

1 Chronicles = 1

2 Chronicles 32-36 = 9 x’s

Ezra = 15.

Nehemiah = 2

Esther 2:6.

Ps. 87:4; 137:1,8.

Isaiah 13; 14; 21; 39; 43; 47; 48 = 13 x’s.

Jeremiah 20-52 = 168 x’s! (70 x’s in 50-52).

Ezekiel = 20 x’s.

Daniel = 17 x’s.

Micah 45:10

Zech. 2:7; 6:10.

Matt. 4 x’s (genealogy).

Acts 7:43 (Stephen’s sermon).

1 Peter 5:13.

Rev. 14;8; 16:19; 17:5; 18:2,10,21 = 6 x’s.
Total: 370
Chaldea, Chaldean
Gen. 11:28,31; 15:7 = 4 x’s.

Job 1:17

2 Kings 24:2; 25 = 8 x’s.

Ezra 5:12.

Isaiah 13; 23; 43; 47:1,5; 48:14,20 = 7 x’s.

Jeremiah = 42 x’s.

Ezekiel = 8 x’s.

Daniel = 12 x’s.

Hab. 1:6

Acts 7:4.

Total: 85

Chaldee(a/n) Babylon(ia/n) Total

Early: 5 3 8

Eighth century: (Isaiah/Mic) 7 20 27

Seventh century: (Jer/Kg/Ch) 50 203 253

Sixth century:(Ez/Dan/Hab) 21 37 58

Fifth century: 1 23 24

New Testament: 1 12 13

All Occurrences 85 298 383

Observations:
The very early occurrences have to do primarily with the Table of Nations and Abraham.

The eighth century contacts are primarily in Isaiah and have to do with the contacts with Hezekiah and prophet­ically to the Babylo­nian exile.

The seventh century contacts are found in Jeremiah, Kings and Chronicles. This of course is the height of the Neo-Babylonian empire and so we find the most frequent mentions here.
The sixth century contacts are in Ezekiel and Daniel.
The references are diminishing in the following period, because such references are usually to the past.
The importance of Babylon to the Bible.
The beginning of civilization is in the Mesopotamia. Babel along with Erech, Accad and Calneh are attributed to the building enterprises of Nimrod. The Babylonian word Babilu means “Gate of God.” The reference to Babel with the meaning of “confusion of language” is a play on that word. Here originates writing, astrology, languages, pagan religion, mathe­matics, etc. It is Ur of the Chaldees from which Abraham comes as well. The flood account of Genesis has much in common with the Babylonian account.
Babylon becomes sort of an archetype of evil and seems to be used somewhat that way in Isaiah 13/14. The same seems to be true in Zechariah 5 when “evil” is taken to Shinar and a temple is set up for her. Isaiah castigates Babylon for her idolatry (Isa. 47:11-15).
Babylon in Jeremiah’s time was looked upon as a scourge in God’s hand which took credit for what she did to Israel and in turn was punished for it (Isa. 47:6; Jer. 25; Zech. 1:15).

Babylon’s downfall is predicted in drastic terms in Isaiah 13 and 21, but this probably refers to the fall to Sennacherib in 689 B.C. Jeremiah’s prediction (using much of Isaiah’s termin­ology) has to refer to 539 B.C., since he is prophesying fifty years later (Jer. 25:12; 50-51). The language of Jeremiah is “destruction language” and refers to the fact that the empire was utterly defeated by the Persians. The city continued for another two hundred years and only gradually fell into the ruin we now see.
Most commentators take the reference to Babylon in Revelation 17-18 as symbolic, referring actually to Rome. Peter’s reference, in my opinion, is probably to be taken literally: there was a Jewish community near Babylon on into the fifth century A.D. The Rabbi’s used Babylon to refer to Rome, saying that Babylon destroyed the temple twice, 586 B.C. and 70 A.D.²²⁴

19. JUDAH AND PERSIA
“When Cyrus entered Babylon in 539 B.C., the world was old. More significant, it knew its antiquity.”²²⁵
“The story of the ancient Orient is drawing to its close. And yet, by a strange contrast, on the very eve of the final crisis it achieves its maximum extension, unifica­tion and power. Up to and beyond its boundaries, from India to Libya, a single empire is built up from diverse peoples, and the synthesis which had existed momen­tarily under the Assyrians now becomes a stable condition, reinforced by an en­lightened policy of liberality and tolerance.”²²⁶
The chief actors in this new phase of history are Indo-Euro­peans, known to be present long since on the Iranian plateau, but who form strong political organisms only during the first millen­nium.
The prologue to the new chapter of history is provided by the empire of the Medes, who are of Iranian stock and closely related to the Persians. In the seventh century B.C., they es­tablished a powerful state and, under king Cyaxares, defeated Assyria and penetrated into Armenia and Anatolia, checked only at the river Halys by the resistance of the Lydians (along with Nabopo­lassar,²²⁷). The empire disappeared soon after its rise. In the middle of the following century, Cyrus’ Persians threw off its yoke, took over the power and set out along the open road of expansion (note maps for Median expan­sion alongside the Neo-Babyl­onian empire). The ancient name Hakhamanish or Achaemenes becomes the dynastic title and the Persian rulers are henceforth known as the Achae­menids.
Cyrus II (550-529)

The story of Astyages, king of the Medes who married his daugh­ter to an unimpor­tant Persian (Cambyses Ia king but under Median thumb) is recounted by Hero­dotus.²²⁸ Of this marriage was born Cyrus who was destined to death by Astyages (because of a dream that his daughter gave birth to water which flooded the world) but was kept alive by a herdsman. Harpagus had been assigned the task of killing the child, and when Cyrus grew up, Astyages discovered him and cooked Har­pagus’ son and fed him to him.
Cyrus became king of Anshan in 560 or 559 B.C.²²⁹ and made his move against the Medes in 550 B.C. and Harpagus deserted to his side. “Ecbatana was captured, and its wealth of gold, silver, and precious objects was carried off to Anshan.”²³⁰ Cyrus became the ruler of the Medes and the Persians and conquered an empire that stretched to India in the East and to the western edge of Anatolia. This vast empire, with its disparate peoples could only have come about through a policy of the Persians that differed immensely from their predecessors. Cyrus allowed a measure of local autonomy and allowed the return of various gods, the rebuilding of temples, and the recognition of local cultures. Isaiah (40-45) tells us that God raised him up as his anointed (Isaiah 45:1-2). The Jews benefited from the policy in that they were allowed to return to their land, rebuild their temple, and restore their worship system. The decree of Cyrus, found on the Cyrus Cylinder is as follows: “All the kings of the entire world from the Upper to the Lower Sea, those who are seated in throne rooms, (those who) live in other [types of buildings as well as] all the kings of the West land living in tents, brought their heavy tributes and kissed my feet in Babylon. (As to the region) from . . . as far as Ashur and Susa, Agade, Eshnunna, the towns Zamban, Me-Turnu, Der as well as the region of the Gutians, I returned to (these) sacred cities on the other side of the Tigris, the sanctuaries of which have been ruins for a long time, the images which (used) to live therein and established for them permanent sanctuaries. I (also) gathered all their (former) inhabitants and returned (to them) their habitations. Further­more, I resettled upon the command of Marduk, the great lord, all the gods of Sumer and Akkad whom Nabonidus has brought into Babylon to the anger of the lord of the gods, unharmed, in their (former) chapels, the places which make them happy.”²³¹