Thomas County cat. [volume] (Colby, Kan.) 1885-1891, 1886-03-18
DANIEL.

The Discovery of Tablets Which Prove the
Authenticity of This Portion of the Old
Testament.
1t is only few years ago that the
Book of Daniel was one whose history
the Christian believer found it very
hard to defend. The unbelieving crit
les could not deny that the prophecies
of the last six chapters described the
times of Antiochus Epiphanes, and they
incontinently declared that it could not
possibly be any earlier than his time.
They were sure the historical part of
the book was also pure legend, and
was proved SO by its utter falseness to
all the history of Babylon that had
come down to us from Greek authors.
Especially the story of the capture of
the city by the Modes, and the death of
the King Belshazzar. slain on the night
of the capture, by Darius the Mede,
was utterly irreconcilable with the ac-
count given by Greek writers of its
capture by Cyrus the Persian, who took
the King Nabonidus alive, at Borsippa:
10 reconcile these two stories seemed
impossible.
But they were both true. and the
tablets inscribed by the orders of Ma
bonidus and Cyrus themselves. in their
own life-times, prove it. First there
was found an inscription of Nabonidus,
in which he prayed the gods to bless
his son BelshaZzar, of whom he spoke
in way which made it almost certain
that the two were cO-regents, as were
NebuchadneZzar and his father. That
inscription gave the KEY to the mys-
terry. Then followed, within the last few
years, the discovery of another tablet,
dated in the third year Of BelshaZzar,
except that the name of the god Bel
was replaced by his other name, Nero
dach. There were also discovered the
histories of the campaign. from which
we learned that when Cyrus came with
his army, BelshaZZar himself took the
field, but that as the danger became
more imminent, BelshaZzar returned to
the capital. and his father, Nabonidus,
led the army. At last Nabonidus was
conquered. and Cyrus Lieutenant. Go
bryas, the Mede, captured the city
without fighting" The day on which
the capture took place was just that
day in the month sacred to ThammuZ
and lshtar, in which prOmiscuous
and licentious feast would be most
likely to be celebrated. This story ex-
plains every thing, down to the reason
why Daniel was offered the honor of
being the ''third ruler in the king
DOM"
So throughout the whole historical
part of Daniel difficulties vanish almost
everywhere. 1t is shown to be impos-
sible that a book so full of the color of
the life and institutions of the Babylon
of Nebuchadnezzar and CYRUS could
have been written three or four hun
dred years later. when the Persian, like
the Babylonian Empire, had passed
away. all swallowed up by the Greek
conquest and civilization. 1t would
have required a veritable archaologist.
such as never lived in the ancient days.
TO recover the spirit of the times, sep
arated nearly as far from Epiphanes as
we are from Chaucer, and put them in
a realistic story. What might have
been done then in the way of historical
invention is seen in the Book of Judith,
an evident romance, false and impos-
sible in every part. Here, as every
where, research, while it can not be
asked to substantiate the miracles, does
all that is possible in clearing away
the objections of historical criticism.
and proving the historical crcdibility
of all that comes within the province
of such criticism.-N Y. independent.