The history of the world

§. V. A more particular examination of one opinion touching the number, persons, and raignes of the Babylonian Kings.

OTher suppositions, little different in substance from this of Mercator, [unspec 50] I purposely forbeare to rehearse, as falling vnder the same answere. That of Ioseph Scaliger I may not forget, as deseruing to be consi∣dered apart from the rest. He giues to Nebuchadnezzar 44. yeres, to Euilmerodach 2, to Belsazer, 5: and to Nabonidus 17. So that from

the 19. of Nabuchadnezzar, in which Ierusalem was destroyed, vnto the time of Cyrus he accompteth onely 59. yeeres; beginning (as many doe) the captiuitie 11. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 sooner, from the transportation of Iechonia. But hereof enough hath beene said al∣ready. That which we are now to consider, is his distribution of the time running betweene the 19. of Nabuchadnezzar, and the fall of the Caldoean Empire: wherein if he haue 〈◊〉〈◊〉, then is all further inquisition friuolous.

Concerning the length of Nabuchadnezzars raigne, I shall hereafter vpon better occasion 〈◊〉〈◊〉 my opinion. The time which he giues to 〈◊〉〈◊〉, is very short, and more precisely 〈◊〉〈◊〉 with Berosus than with the Scriptures. For wee find in Ieremie, that this Euilmerodach in the first of his raigne, shewing all fauour to [unspec 10] Iechonia, did among other things take order for him at his table; and that he did con∣tinually eate bread before him all the dayes of his life. His portion was a continuall portion giuen him of the King of Babel, euery day a certaine, all the dayes of his life* 1.1 vntill he died. The very sound of these words (which is more to be esteemed, than the authoritie of Berosus, were he perfectly extant) imports a farre longer time than two yeeres, wherin Iechonia, vnder this gentle Prince, enioyed the comfort sent by God, whose commaundement he had obeyed in yeelding himselfe to Nabuchadnez∣zar. Indeed how long Iechonia did liue it can not be proued; but plaine it is hereby, that all his remaining daies hee did cate bread before this King. Now that hee li∣ued not so short a while after this as 2. yeeres, it is more than likely, for he was but [unspec 20] 55. yeeres old when he was set at liberty, hauing bin 37. yeeres in the prison, where∣into he was cast at the age of 18. yeeres; after which time it seemes plaine that hee begat Salathiel, as well by the age of Zorobabel, who is said to haue beene but a yong man, and one of Darius his Pages threescore yeeres after this, as by other circum∣stances of his imprisonment it selfe.

Of Belsazer, to whom Scaliger giues the next fiue yeeres, naming him also Labo∣rosoardoch, I should wonder why he calls him Nabuchadnezzars daughters sonne, were it not that herein I find him very carefull to helpe out Berosus, by shifting in his Niriglissoroor, as husband to Nabuchadnezzars daughter, and Protector of his son foure of these yeeres; by which meanes there remaines about one yeere to Bel∣sazer [unspec 30] alone, agreeing neerely with the 9. moneths assigned by Berosus to the sonne of Niglisar. But Ieremie hath told vs that it was to Nabuchadnezzar, and to his son, and to his sonnes sonne (not to his daughters sonne) that the Empire was promi∣sed: which difficultie if Scaliger could not helpe, it was well done of him, to passe it ouer with silence.

Nabonidas the last of these (whome others, desirous to reconcile Berosus to the Scriptures) haue iudged to be all one with Balthasar, is by 〈◊〉〈◊〉 thought to bee Darius of the Medes. But herein Scaliger is no firme Berosian: for Berosus makes him of the same stocke or race a Babylonian. I speake not this to disgrace the trauaile of that most learned man (for it highly commends his diligence and iudgement, that [unspec 40] he was not so wedded to any author, as affected with the loue of truth) but to shew that he himselfe hauing in some points disliked those Writers, whome in generall he approueth, might with greater reason haue wholly reformed them by the Scrip∣tures, wherein can be no errour. Two things there are which chiefly did breed or confirme this opinion in Scaliger, that hee whome 〈◊〉〈◊〉 calls Nabonidus, was the same whom Daniel had called Darius of the Medes: First, the phrase of Scrip∣ture, which signifies vnto vs, that Darius tooke the kingdome, not saying that hee wanne it by force ofarmes; Secondly, a fragment of Megasthenes found in Eusebius, wherein this Nabonidus is called the Median. Touching the word of the Originall, or of the Greeke translation, which expressing no force of armes, doth only signifie, [unspec 50] that Darius tooke or receiued the kingdome; I see no reason why we should ther∣upon inferre, that the next king entred by Election: seeing Daniel relateth not the meanes and circumstances of Balthasars death, but onely the swift accomplishment of his owne prophecie. Neither could it indeede haue properly beene said (if Da∣niel

had cared to vse the most expressiue termes) that Darius of the Medes breaking into the citie, did win the kingdome; seeing this was performed by Cyrus in the ab∣sence of Darius, though by his forces, and to his vse. Now concerning the fragment of Megasthenes, true it is, that in Eusebius his workes printed at Basile, in the yeere 1559. I finde onely thus much of Megasthenes, cited out of 〈◊〉〈◊〉; That Nabu∣chodonosor was more valiant than Hercules; that hee subdued all Lybia, and the rest of Asia as farre as to the Armenians; and that as the Chaldoeans report, being re∣turned into his kingdome, and rapt with a diuine furie, he cried with a loude voice: O Babylonians, I foretell yee of a great calamitie that shall come vpon you, which neyther Bel, nor any of the Gods shall auert: There will come a Persian, halfe an Asse, that shall bring [unspec 10] slauery vpon yee: and that, this and the like when he had spoken, he vanished. Of all this I beleeue little or nothing, sauing that Nabuchodonosor knew before-hand, that his Empire should be translated, as Daniel had foretold from the golden head, to the siluer brest. But that he wan all Africa or Lybia, I hold it neither true nor pro∣bable.

If Scaligers copy of Eusebius were the more perfect, out of which Megasthenes tells vs that Nabuchodonosor wanne both Afrike and Spaine, I beleeue the fragment so much the lesse: and am as little moued with the authoritie of it, where it calls a Median the pride and confidence of the Assyrians, as where it tells of Nebuchad∣nezzar his owne vanishing away. Indeed that same title of halfe an Asse, by which [unspec 20] he calleth Cyrus, makes me to suspect the fable as cunningly forged out of Apollo his Oracle, wherein he termeth him a Mule, because his parentage was more noble on the mothers side, than on the fathers; as Mules are begotten by Asses vpon Mares. And thus much in answer of the two principall foundations whereon this opinion is built. As for the concinnitie and coherence which it hath within it selfe, I easily allow it. But this proues nothing, for meere fictions haue not wanted these com∣mendations: neither can any man beleeue that one so iudicious, industrious and deepely learned as Ioseph Scaliger, would ouer-shoote himselfe in setting downe re∣pugnancies.

It now remaineth to examine the agreement of this with the Scriptures, from [unspec 30] which there is no appeale. And herein it seemes that Scaliger, well knowing his owne sufficiencie, hath beene little carefull to satisfie men that would frame Argu∣ments against him. For if the prophecie of Daniel were true, that the kingdome of Balthasar was diuided, and giuen to the Medes and Persians, either wee must thinke that Darius of the Medes was not Nabonidus, or else wee must bethinke our selues what Persian it might be that shared the kingdome with him. For it is not more certaine, that Balthasar lost his life and kingdome, than that his kingdome was diui∣ded and giuen to the Medes and Persians. Neither did the Medes and Persians fall out and fight for it, as by supposing Nabonidus to haue beene Darius, they should be thought to haue done; but these two Nations did compound the body of that [unspec 40] Empire, and were accounted as Lords ouer all the subiect prouinces, in so much that the Greeke Historians did commonly call those warres which Darius, and after him Xerxes, made vpon Greece, The warres of the Medes. Yea to cleare this point, 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Daniel himselfe resembles that King, with whom Alexander fought, vnto a Ramme* 1.2 with two hornes, calling him the King of the Medes and Persians. Wherefore the whole Nation of Chronologers were not to haue been condemned by Ioseph Scaliger, for maintaining vpon such good grounds, that Darius of the Medes, was partner with Cyrus in his victories, and not a Chaldoean King by him subdued. Neither was Iosephus to be the lesse regarded, for affirming that Balthasar was destroyed by Dari∣us [unspec 50] of the Medes, and his nephew Cyrus, though herein hee varied from Berosus, and others, whose authoritie elsewhere he gladly citeth. For Iosephus had no reason to beleeue any mans faith or knowledge of those times, halfe so well as Daniels, whom I beleeue that hee vnderstood as farre as was needefull in this case. Lawfull it was for him to alleage all Authors that had any mention, though vnperfect of the same

things that were contained in the writings of the Iewes, to whose histories thereby he procured reputation in the Roman world, where they were strangers, and might seeme fabulous. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 so 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Eusebius, and other 〈◊〉〈◊〉 Writers, willingly em∣brace the testimonies of heathen bookes making for the truth in some particulars; yet will they not therefore be tried in generall by the selfe same Ethnicke philoso∣phers, but leaue them where they are against the truth; as Iosephus in this case hath left Berosus. And thus much I thought it meete to say of Scaligers opinion in this point; holding neuerthelesse in due regard his learning and iudgement, which if in some things it had not failed, the miracle had beene very great. [unspec 10]

Notes

• * 1.1

  〈◊〉〈◊〉. 52. 〈◊〉〈◊〉 33. & 34.
• * 1.2

  Dan. 8. 20.