Freethought & Rationalism Archive

B. H. Manners · 03-08-2002, 05:15 PM

Does anyone know where I can find source(s) that state that Belshazzar son of Nabonidus king of Babylon was killed in battle by the Persians while defending Babylon? Also does anyone know where I can find sources which authoritatively state what happened to Nabonidus when he surrendered to Cyrus?

Thanks

Vorkosigan · 03-08-2002, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Why? Why Not?:
Does anyone know where I can find source(s) that state that Belshazzar son of Nabonidus king of Babylon was killed in battle by the Persians while defending Babylon? Also does anyone know where I can find sources which authoritatively state what happened to Nabonidus when he surrendered to Cyrus?

Thanks

Shit yes.

See the <a href="http://www.infidels.org/library/magazines/tsr/index.shtml" target="_blank">Skeptical Review</a> right here at infidels, which over most of 2000, 2001 covered the Book of Daniel, with every imaginary reference and chiming in from numerous interested amateurs.

Michael

Sauron · 03-09-2002, 09:57 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Why? Why Not?:
Does anyone know where I can find source(s) that state that Belshazzar son of Nabonidus king of Babylon was killed in battle by the Persians while defending Babylon? Also does anyone know where I can find sources which authoritatively state what happened to Nabonidus when he surrendered to Cyrus?

Thanks

Nabonidus: from my upcoming contribution to the Jury project:

Quote:

It would appear that Cyrus' liberal religious views were welcomed after the discontent aroused by the heresies of Nabonidus. Indeed an inscription of Cyrus from Babylon relates how Marduk, whom Nabonidus had neglected, marched with him and his army 'as a friend and companion.' Nabonidus was later captured in Babylon where, according to Xenophon, he was killed. Cyrus entered Babylon in triumph, forbade looting and appoint a Persian governor, leaving undisturbed the religious institutions and civil administration. [77]

The source is:
[77] Joan L. Oates. Babylon. Thames and Hudson, 1986. Page 135.

As for Belshazzar - Britannica has a reference on it:

Belshazzar, Neo-Babylonian BEL-SHAR-USUR, Greek BALTASAR, or BALTHASAR (d. c. 539 BC), coregent of Babylon who was killed at the capture of the city by the Persians.

I found it in another (older) reference as well:

Quote:

[i]When Cyrus with his Persians and Medes invaded Babylonia, Nabuna'id [Nabunidus] sent against them his son Belshar-utsur - - the Belshazzar of the book of Daniel. There is still extant a cylinder of Nabuna'id inscribed with a prayer to the gods on behalf of the young prince.

The prayer was not heard. Belshazzar was totally defeated. Nabuna'id shut himself up in Babylon, whose mighty walls and storehouses should have withstood siege for years, probably until the strength of the army of Cyrus was broken; but there was treachery within the gates. We are all familiar with the old story of how Cyrus diverted the Euphrates, marched his troops up the dry river-bed into the town and took it by surprise on a night of feasting. That is all pure romance. [47]

The source is:
James Baikie, "The Cradle of Civilization, The Historic Lands Along the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers Where Briton is Fighting Turk", National Geographic, Volume XXIX, No. 2, February 1916. Page 161.

B. H. Manners · 03-09-2002, 10:54 PM

Guys, thanks for the help. However, the reason I asked about Belshazzar is because of the controversy over the date of Daniel. How can I prove to my Fundie friends that Belshazzar was wrongly named king of Babylon when our arguments from secular history are inconsistent?

For example the source from the previous post said Nabonidus was killed by Cyrus, but I have read he was not only spared but made governor of a province!

Another source states Nabonidus was in Babylon when it fell to Cyrus while another source says he was in Arabia. You see the Fundie will declare victory by default and I do not want this.

Does anyone know where I can find an ancient testimony of what actually happened?

Thanks

Sauron · 03-10-2002, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Why? Why Not?:
Guys, thanks for the help. However, the reason I asked about Belshazzar is because of the controversy over the date of Daniel. How can I prove to my Fundie friends that Belshazzar was wrongly named king of Babylon when our arguments from secular history are inconsistent?

Belshazzar ruled as regent in place of his father, Nabonidus. The elder king, Nabonidus, was away in Arabia (Taima) at the time. From my Jury contribution:

Quote:

In many ways, Nabonidus was an enigmatic and unlikely figure. As a monarch, he was more of a priestly scholar than a warrior or politician. His mother was a votaress of the moon god, Sin, which no doubt was an influence on his later life. Like his mother, he was a devoted follower of the cult of Sin. Nabonidus spent much time studying the religious rituals of Babylon's predecessors, the empires of Sumer and Akkad. At one point in his reign, we know that he went on a ten-year pilgrimage in the deserts of Arabia, in obedience to a divine command that he is said to have received in a dream. Perhaps he also was building military or trade alliances with the Arabs against the Persians; there are records of a base being built at Taima. The details of Nabonidus' sojourn in the deserts have puzzled historians and archaeologists for many years; to this day, the reasons for his long absence from Babylon are still not clear.

No matter what his reasons for going, however, Nabonidus' long absence had several effects back in Babylon, effects that form the background of events here. First, during his absence, Nabonidus placed his son Belshazzar on the throne, to rule as co-regent. Second, the king's long absence meant that the New Year's Festival could not be celebrated in Babylon. (More information about this particular festival will come later. For now, suffice it to say that an important annual feast-event was canceled for several years in a row, while the king was away in a foreign country.)

Sources for this are several; email me at omnedon1@hotmail.com if you need detailed specifics.

There is a "wrongly named king", if by that you mean the Babylonian king who wandered in the desert, and was assumed to be insane. In actuality, that king was Nabonidus, as we saw above. The book of Daniel, however, transposes those events and attaches them to Nebuchadnezzar, which is simply nonsense.

Quote:

For example the source from the previous post said Nabonidus was killed by Cyrus, but I have read he was not only spared but made governor of a province!

Highly unlikely. Part of Cyrus' invasion plan hinged on being able to remove the popular support and legitimacy from Nabonidus' rule. His method of doing that was to appeal to the priestly class and the people, pointing out that Nabonidus had abandoned the gods of Babylon. This particular approach worked, because (as indicated above) Nabonidus was a follower of the older religion of Sumer and Akkad - something which was not popular with the people, and which threatened the priestly classes.

Quote:

Another source states Nabonidus was in Babylon when it fell to Cyrus while another source says he was in Arabia. You see the Fundie will declare victory by default and I do not want this.

Nabonidus was not in Arabia during the Persian attack. In fact, it was due to the need to defend Bablyon against Cyrus II that Nabonidus returned home to Babylon. (ref: Joan Oates, Babylon, p. 135).

Moreover, once Nabonidus returned to Bablyon, it was clear that popular resentment was heaped against him. So in order to shore up his "legitimacy" as the protector of the Babylonian religion, he called for all the various god-statues from surrounding cities to be brought to Babylon for protection. From my contribution:

Quote:

Reading all the signs, no doubt Nabonidus sensed the rope tightening around his neck. By emphasizing his role as the legitimate trustee of Marduk, Nabonidus hoped to improve his standing with the religious establishment and garner public support for his rule. In the spring of the year 539 BCE, a full six months prior to the actual Persian invasion, Nabonidus had already ordered that the local statues of the various Mesopotamian gods be brought to Babylon for safekeeping:

By the beginning of 539 BC it was apparent that an attack by Cyrus the Persian was imminent, and divine statues of major temples were brought to the capital, to prevent their falling into enemy hands. But Nabonidus had forfeited the support of the religious establishment, and when the Persian army, accompanied by a defecting Babylonian governor, cross the Tigris it captured first Sippar and then Babylon without a battle.

Source:
H. W. F. Saggs. Peoples of the Past: Babylonians. University of Oklahoma Press, 1995. Pages 171-172.

Quote:

Does anyone know where I can find an ancient testimony of what actually happened?

Thanks

Does the above help any?

[ March 10, 2002: Message edited by: Omnedon1 ]

spin · 03-10-2002, 07:07 PM

I think J.B. Pritchard's "Ancient Near East Texts" (ANET) has what you are looking for.

spin · 03-10-2002, 07:49 PM

<<There is a "wrongly named king", if by that you mean the Babylonian king who wandered in the desert, and was assumed to be insane. In actuality, that king was Nabonidus, as we saw above. The book of Daniel, however, transposes those events and attaches them to Nebuchadnezzar, which is simply nonsense.>>

It is not nonsense to Daniel.

In the Dead Sea Scrolls there is a text called the prayer to Nabonidus, which is related to the Daniel material. It is probable that while the audience of Daniel should know "Nebuchadnezzar" they certainly wouldn't know Nabonidus, so I would say that the writer(s) changed the name purposefully. After all he (they) were not trying to write history, except as a means to demonstrate God's intervention in the world in the form of a transparent crypto-history which could "masquerade" as Danielic prophecy.

B. H. Manners · 03-10-2002, 08:15 PM

Once again, thank you for your assistance. Are any of the books mentioned by you guys online? Also, where can I find a copy of a translation of this "Prayer of Nabonidus."

spin · 03-10-2002, 08:33 PM

You'll find the prayer in any complete edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls.

eg Florentino Garcia Martinez, "The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated", Brill/Eerdmans, 1994. p.289 (4Q242)

He suffers from a malignant inflammation and so was banished from men and stayed at Teiman. A Jewish exicist forgave his sin and he was cured.

Just grabbed it off the net:

Words of the prayer, said by Nabonidus, king of Babylonia, the great king, when afflicted with an ulcer on command of the most high God in Tem�:
�� 'I, Nabonidus, was afflicted with an evil ulcer for seven years, and far from men is was driven, until I prayed to the most high God. And an exorcist pardoned my sins. He was a Jew from among the children of the exile of Judah, and said: "Recount this in writing to glorify and exalt the name of the most high God." Then I wrote this: "When I was afflicted for seven years by the most high God with an evil ulcer during my stay at Tem�, I prayed to the gods of silver and gold, bronze and iron, wood, stone and lime, because I thought and considered them gods..."' [the end is missing]

B. H. Manners · 03-10-2002, 09:01 PM

O.K., here is another question. Do we have any fragments or texts of biblical works dating from a pre-Qumran period. If so, do any of these go back to the time before the captivity. From what I have read it seems no is the answer. Archeologists have been all over the Holy Land digging up sites for the past 100 years and I am surprised that all Biblicists have to brag about is the Dead Sea Scrolls. They just barely seem to turn up jar sherds with names on it. It just seems to me if the Bible was true they would be finding more scraps and manuscripts than they have. Also, has anyone ever been charged and proven guilty of trying to fake manuscripts of the Bible to make it seem older than it really is?

03-08-2002, 05:15 PM	#1
B. H. Manners Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 1,213	Belshazzar Does anyone know where I can find source(s) that state that Belshazzar son of Nabonidus king of Babylon was killed in battle by the Persians while defending Babylon? Also does anyone know where I can find sources which authoritatively state what happened to Nabonidus when he surrendered to Cyrus? Thanks

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-09-2002, 10:54 PM	#4
B. H. Manners Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 1,213	Guys, thanks for the help. However, the reason I asked about Belshazzar is because of the controversy over the date of Daniel. How can I prove to my Fundie friends that Belshazzar was wrongly named king of Babylon when our arguments from secular history are inconsistent? For example the source from the previous post said Nabonidus was killed by Cyrus, but I have read he was not only spared but made governor of a province! Another source states Nabonidus was in Babylon when it fell to Cyrus while another source says he was in Arabia. You see the Fundie will declare victory by default and I do not want this. Does anyone know where I can find an ancient testimony of what actually happened? Thanks

03-10-2002, 07:07 PM	#6
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	I think J.B. Pritchard's "Ancient Near East Texts" (ANET) has what you are looking for.

03-10-2002, 07:49 PM	#7
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	<<There is a "wrongly named king", if by that you mean the Babylonian king who wandered in the desert, and was assumed to be insane. In actuality, that king was Nabonidus, as we saw above. The book of Daniel, however, transposes those events and attaches them to Nebuchadnezzar, which is simply nonsense.>> It is not nonsense to Daniel. In the Dead Sea Scrolls there is a text called the prayer to Nabonidus, which is related to the Daniel material. It is probable that while the audience of Daniel should know "Nebuchadnezzar" they certainly wouldn't know Nabonidus, so I would say that the writer(s) changed the name purposefully. After all he (they) were not trying to write history, except as a means to demonstrate God's intervention in the world in the form of a transparent crypto-history which could "masquerade" as Danielic prophecy.

03-10-2002, 08:15 PM	#8
B. H. Manners Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 1,213	Once again, thank you for your assistance. Are any of the books mentioned by you guys online? Also, where can I find a copy of a translation of this "Prayer of Nabonidus."

03-10-2002, 08:33 PM	#9
spin Contributor Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: nowhere Posts: 15,747	You'll find the prayer in any complete edition of the Dead Sea Scrolls. eg Florentino Garcia Martinez, "The Dead Sea Scrolls Translated", Brill/Eerdmans, 1994. p.289 (4Q242) He suffers from a malignant inflammation and so was banished from men and stayed at Teiman. A Jewish exicist forgave his sin and he was cured. Just grabbed it off the net: Words of the prayer, said by Nabonidus, king of Babylonia, the great king, when afflicted with an ulcer on command of the most high God in Tem�: �� 'I, Nabonidus, was afflicted with an evil ulcer for seven years, and far from men is was driven, until I prayed to the most high God. And an exorcist pardoned my sins. He was a Jew from among the children of the exile of Judah, and said: "Recount this in writing to glorify and exalt the name of the most high God." Then I wrote this: "When I was afflicted for seven years by the most high God with an evil ulcer during my stay at Tem�, I prayed to the gods of silver and gold, bronze and iron, wood, stone and lime, because I thought and considered them gods..."' [the end is missing]

03-10-2002, 09:01 PM	#10
B. H. Manners Veteran Member Join Date: Jan 2002 Location: Texas Posts: 1,213	O.K., here is another question. Do we have any fragments or texts of biblical works dating from a pre-Qumran period. If so, do any of these go back to the time before the captivity. From what I have read it seems no is the answer. Archeologists have been all over the Holy Land digging up sites for the past 100 years and I am surprised that all Biblicists have to brag about is the Dead Sea Scrolls. They just barely seem to turn up jar sherds with names on it. It just seems to me if the Bible was true they would be finding more scraps and manuscripts than they have. Also, has anyone ever been charged and proven guilty of trying to fake manuscripts of the Bible to make it seem older than it really is?

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.