arnoldo

How old would he have been by then, 85?

mens_sana

These are some cuneiform tablets from the period that Arnoldo seemed uninteresting in considering. The information can be found in Raymond Philip Dougherty, Nabonidus and Belshazzar: A Study of the Closing Events of the Neo-Babylonian Empire. New Haven: Yale University Press, 1929. Yale Oriental Series, Researches, Vol. 15.

The dating of these tablets applies to the end of Nabonidus’ reign and the beginning of that of Cyrus. The last completely dated tablet of the reign of Nabonidus belongs to the 10th day of the 8th month of his 17th year. An incompletely dated tablet belongs to the 9th month of the same year. The earliest tablet dated in the reign of Cyrus belongs to the 7th month of his accession year, the day of the month being illegible. The next Cyrus tablet belongs to the 24th day of the 8th month of his accession year. The situation can be explained best by listing from available cuneiform sources the important dates of the Babylonia year, the first part of which is known as the 17th year of Nabonidus and the last part of which is known as the accession year of Cyrus.

.................................Month... Day
New Year’s Festival observed....1 ....__
Opis attacked by Cyrus.......... 7 .....__
Sippar captured by Cyrus.........7 .... 14
Babylon taken by Gobryas........7 .....16
First Cyrus Tablet.................7 .....__
Babylon entered by Cyrus.........8 .....3
Next to last Nabonidus tablet.......... 10
Death of a prominent person.....8 ....11
Second Cyrus tablet......................24
Last Nabonidus tablet............ 9 ....__
Beginning of period of ...........12 ...28 mourning for Nabonidus' queen

Between months 7 and 9, there seems to be some confusion among the scribes about who was king. This may well be due to hold-outs, those loyal to Nabonidus until the last, while others accepted Cyrus at first opportunity. This would certainly seem plausible among scribes associated with Nabonidus personally and those associated with the temples, as the priesthood is thought to have facilitated Cyrus’ victory.

Notice, also, that there is no mention of Darius the Mede as king between Nabonidus and Cyrus.

mens_sana

Please answer the question — but don't overlook the cuneiform tablets in the post above.

arnoldo

According to my source from the last century he would be around 85 years old around the time of Cyrus the Persian took over babylon. here

arnoldo

I just want to say that I learned a lot from all of your valuble input on this subject, thanks.

Here is a good timeline on events that occur in the Book of Daniel
timeline

And here is a link to Susa,Iran which is mentioned in the Book of Daniel

Susa

spin

You are certainly making things up. As I said, "that's normally called fibbing, but the good thing is, when you con yourself, it's really not a fib". Actually, that's how I see a lot of religious ideas developing. Because of your commitments, when you make things up, you feel justified, because that's the way, you assume, it must have been. You see you are thus free to make things up while convincing yourself that that's the way it. It's got nothing at all to do with evidence or the real world.

In another post you said that the prayer "to me is a clear extra-biblical reference to Daniel. Please forgive me." There is no reference to Daniel. There is no reference to Nebuchadrezzar (or even Nebuchadnezzar). There is no reference to eating grass or a comparable illness. You merely insinuate Daniel into the text. You're happy with this, ie making up the fact that it is "a clear extra-biblical reference to Daniel." You can do that by self-delusion. That's how you can peddle falsehoods without lying. Your conclusions dictate the perversion of the material. You wish to see, so you do.


spin

spin

Yes.


spin

spin

You've learned how to delude yourself for weeks, ignoring evidence and looking for websites that simply support your conclusions, though you haven't learned how to discern the quality of the websites you crib from.

With incorporated errors based on shoehorning a non-historical text into a historical context.

Which part of the word "scholarship" don't you understand?


spin

makerowner

Doesn't really seem like it.

No, it's a bullshit timeline: "Darius was most likely Gubaru, whom Cyrus installed as governor over Babylon." Only in Fundieland™.
Well if it mentions a real place, I guess everything in it has to be true.
Was there a point to posting that link?

Sheshonq

The problem is that your source isn't credible.
Which means you don't have any source.

Try again! :rolling: