BELSHAZZAR AND THE MONUMENTS.
It is interesting to see how through the dis covery of one ancient record after another, a name which seemed at first but a shadow, slowly become clothed with flesh and made real. In the case of Belshazzar, whom the Book of Daniel describes as the last king of Babylonia, this process has been going on since 1854, when Raw linson first announced the discovery of Belshaz zar's name on a Babylonian monument ; and very late discoveries serve to make his person ality more real to us.
The "critics" claimed for a long time that the name was purely mythical, and the story of his death impossible. The situation was made still more difficult by the fact that all Greek his torians agreed with Berosus that the last king of Babylon was Nabonidus, and that he was not in Babylon at the time of its capture by Cyrus, but in Borsippa a few miles away—that he was captured by the Persian king, was kindly treated and was made a satrap of Caramania.
Rawlinson's important discovery was an his torical inscription of Nabonidus, in which the following passage occurs : "And as to Belshazzar. the exalted son, the offspring of my body, do thou (the moon god Sin) place the adoration of thy great deity in his heart ; may he not give to sin ; may he be satisfied by life's abun dance." Thus it was fully demonstrated that Belshaz zar was an historical and not a fictitious char acter, and that the writer of the Book of Daniel had access to trustworthy sources of informa tion which were unknown to the Greek his torians. The further conclusion seemed to be that the son had a certain right in the kingdom and was probably associated with his father in government as Nebuchadnezzar had been as sociated with his father, Nabopolasser. This being true, the promise made to Daniel that he should be "the third ruler in the kingdom" would he fully explained by the fact that Belshazzar was the second ruler.
The next discovery was that of two historical texts of Cyrus, which were found in 188o, but not correctly translated and fully published until some time afterward. In these two inscriptions Cyrus mentions several times the son of Nabo nidus, and though he does not mention his name, he tells us that when he invaded the country and attacked Babylon, the king's son was at first in the field with the army in 649 B. C.; also that this son held a period of mourning at Sippara on the occasion of his grandmother's death.
The war continued some tcn years, and in the last year Nabonidus took the field and fought a disastrous battle with Cyrus, while we may sup pose that the king's son was at the capital. On the capture of the town, the crown prince lost his life, although Babylon was taken "without fighting," while Nabonidus was taken prisoner.
These inscriptions of Cyrus are of great value for historical purposes, and they show that Nabonidus had a son who was not only crown prince, but was entrusted with important duties such as would belong to the second in command, but they do not mention the name of the son ; we find, however, from the inscription of Nabonidus himself, that the son's name was Belshazzar. Additional facts concerning him
are found in the contract tablets where his name frequently occurs, and hundreds and thousands of these tablets have recently been acquired by the British Museum and other institutions. In deed, the Metropolitan Museum of New York has several hundred of them, many of which were brought to this country by myself ; they are now being copied and published by Mr. Moldenke. Many more are in Philadelphia, having been re covered by the excavations which were conducted by the University of Pennsylvania, under the di rection of Dr. John P. Peters, and are now being copied and published by Professor Hilprecht.
One of these documents in the British Museum, which has been translated by Professor Sayce, records the sale through his steward of Bel shazzar's wool crop : "Twenty manehs of silver ($900) is the price of wool, the property of Bel shazzar, the son of the king, which, by the hands of Nebo-tsabit, the steward of the house of Bel shazzar, the son of the king, and the secretaries of the son of the king, has been handed over to Nadin-Merodach, the son of Basa, the son of Nur-Sin, in the month of Adar. The silver, namely, twenty manehs, he shall give. The house of a certain Persian, and all the prop erty of Nadin-Merodach in town and country shall be the security of Belshazzar, the son of the king, until Belshazzar shall receive in full the money. The debtor shall pay the whole sum of money as well as the interest upon it." The names of six witnesses arc appended, be sides that of the priest who drew up the docu ment, and it is dated on the loth day of Adar, in the eleventh year of Nabonidus.
Another document is Belshazzar's own con tract to carry his sacrifice to the temple of the great sun god at Sippar. This offering con sisted of three oxen and twenty-four sheep, for the conveyance of which in a boat upstream, Belshazzar paid about one dollar of silver, with about three bushels of dates for the food of the boatman.
These apparently unimportant transactions give a sense of personality to one whose very ex istence was denied, and they show that the writer of the Book of Daniel had trustworthy knowledge of the history of Babylon. He knew that Belshazzar was the last ruler of Babylon and that he perished in the destruction of the city, and he did not confound Belshazzar •with his father, Nabonidus.
Whatever we learn from the inscriptions is consistent with the Biblical account and explains it. We may even conjecture that as Cyrus cap tured Babylon on the sixteenth of the month Tammuz, a month sacred to the husband of the Babylonian Venus, it may have been the mid month feast of Tammuz (See TAmmuz) and Ishtar, which was being celebrated by Belshaz zar, and at which he profaned the holy vessels of the Jewish Temple.
William Hayes Ward, D. D., /tom. Rev., Jan., 1894.