Hexapla in Danielem: that is, A six-fold commentarie vpon the most diuine prophesie of Daniel wherein according to the method propounded in Hexapla vpon Genesis and Exodus, sixe things are obserued in euery chapter. 1. The argument and method. 2. The diuers readings. 3. The questions discussed. 4. Doctrines noted. 5. Controversies handled. 6. Morall observations applyed. Wherein many obscure visions, and diuine prophesies are opened, and difficult questions handled with great breuitie, perspicuitie, and varietie ... and the best interpreters both old and new are therein abridged. Diuided into two bookes ... By Andrevv Willet Professour of Diuinitie. The first booke.

1. Quest. What Darius this was, which tooke vpon him the kingdome of Babylon.

1. The author of the scholasticall historie reporteth this to haue beene the opinion of some, that this Darius should be Balthazars grandfather by the mothers side, the sonne of his daughter, who seeing that Balthazar had no children, he thought by this attempt to cut off Balthazar, and so to possesse the kingdome of Babylon. But this is very vnlike, seeing Da∣rius was so well affected vnto Cyrus beeing but his nephew, that he should be so vnnaturall to his grandchild.

2. Theodoret thinketh, that this Darius was grandchild to Nabuchadnezzer by his daughter, and so he was a Chaldean by his mother, and a Mede by his father: and this he would thus prooue, because the kingdome was promised to Nabuchadnezzer, to his sonne, and his sonnes sonne, Ierem. 25. 6, 7. now Balthazar was Nabuchadnezzers sonne, the king∣dome then must according to that prophecie descend yet a degree further to some of Nabu∣chadnezzers stocke, namely vnto this Darius.

Contra. 1. Balthazar, as hath beene shewed before, was not sonne, but sonnes sonne to Nabuchadnezzer: for Euilmerodach was his sonne which next succeeded in the kingdom, 2. king. 25. 27. 2. seeing the kingdome was promised to his sonne, and sonnes sonne, this pro∣phecie could not be fulfilled in Darius, who is supposed to haue beene his daughters sonne, not his sonnes sonne. 3. the kingdome descended not to Darius by inheritance, but was ta∣ken by conquest. Perer.

3. A third opinion is, that this Darius was he which was called Darius Hystaspis, who did warre with the Chaldees, and tooke their citie Babylon, and spoiled it: of this opinion was Porphyrius, as Hierome saith in 9. Daniel▪ and Tertullian. lib. advers. Indae. Cyril. Hierosol; catech. 12. Ioan. Ioannes Lucidus de emendat. temp••r. Gerardus Mercator. in annalib. But these are greatly deceiued, 1. because betweene this Darius the Mede, and Darius Hystaspis there was great difference: for the first was a Mede, the sonne of Assuerus the king, c. 9. 1. and raigned before Cyrus: the other was a Persian, not the sonne of a king, and he raigned the third after Cyrus. 2. And herein is their error, Babylon was twice taken, once by Da∣rius and Cyrus together, and afterward by Darius Hystaspis by Zopyrus meanes.

4. Some other were of opinion, that this Darius was the same with Cyrus, because the Greeke historians ascribe this victorie and taking of Babylon onely vnto Cyrus, which Dani∣el giueth vnto Darius: Theodoret maketh mention of this opinion in the beginning of his sixt oration vpon this booke: But this opinion hath no probabilitie. 1. Darius was a Mede, but Cyrus was of Persia. 2. Darius was now 62. yeares old, and is thought to haue raigned but a short time after, not aboue a yeare or two: but Cyrus was neither so old, held not then to be aboue 40. and he raigned diuers yeares after. 3. And c. 6. 28. Darius and Cy∣rus are named, as two diuers persons.

5. It was the opinion of some, as Hierome writeth vpon the 5. chap. of Daniel, that this Darius was the same, who in Herodotus is called Astyages: of which opinion Eusebius see∣meth to be, who maketh Astyages the last king of the Medes. And this seemeth to be fauou∣red by the Apocryphal storie of Susanna, v. 65. that when Astyages was put or laid vnto his auncestors, Cyrus of Persia tooke his kingdome.

But this opinion may thus be refelled: 1. because none of the forren writers doe make any mention, that Astyages had any warre with the Chaldeans, or that he tooke Babylon. 2. And this Apocryphal storie may be doubted of: for according to Xenophon, Cyaxares raigned after Astyages: and as Herodotus writeth, Cyrus expelled Astyages out of his king∣dome, and sent him to Carmania, and so tooke vpon him the kingdome while he liued: the storie of Susanna agreeth with neither of these reports.

6. The most generall receiued opinion is, that this Darius called Cyaxares, was, as Xeno∣phon writeth, the sonne of Astyages, and vncle by the mothers side to Cyrus, which Cyaxa∣res was king of the Medes after Astyages: this opinion followeth Iosephus, Hierome, Lyra∣nus, Pintus, Oecolampad. Osiander, with others. But this is obiected against this opinion: that Astyages had no sonne, but a daughter, Mandane, the mother of Cyrus, whome Astyages commanded to be slaine, because the Astrologers told him, that he should haue dominion ouer all Asia. And this is affirmed by diuers authors, that Astyages had no sonne, as Vale∣rius

Maxim. lib. 1. cap. de somnijs. Herodot. lib. 1. Severus Sulpitius, lib. 2. sacr. histor. And therefore Iunius vnderstandeth Xenophon to speake not of Astyages naturall, but of his adop∣ted sonne.

7. Iosephus Scaliger in the 8. booke of that exquisite worke, which he hath written de e∣mendat. tempor▪ is of this opinion, that be which is called Balthazar, is the same who is na∣med of other writers Labosardach, the sonne of Ni••octis Nabuchadnezzers daughter, who was slaine by the Babylonians, and then this Darius the Mede, the same who is called Nabo∣nidus, was by a common consent chosen king in his place, who when he had raigned 17. yeares in Babylon, was ouercome by Cyrus, and the citie taken. Iunius also in his annotation vpon this verse, saith that this Darius the Mede, is the same who is called by the historians, Labonidus, or Labynitus.

Contra. 1. If Labosardach and Balthazar were the same, beeing the sonne of Nabu∣chadnezzers daughter, then was not the prophecie fulfilled, that the kingdome should be giuen to Nabuchadnezzers sonne, and his sonnes sonne, for it was to his daughters sonne. 2. when Balthazar was slaine, Darius tooke the kingdom by force, it is not like they would haue chosen him beeing a stranger vnto it. 3. after Balthazar was slain, the kingdom was de∣uided betweene the Medes and Persians it did not then quietly descend vnto the Medes. 4. The Prophet Isai saith, c. 13. 17. Behold I will stirre vp the Medes against thee: the Medes then assaulted Babylon and tooke it by violence: a Mede came not vnto it by election. 5. This Darius was king of the Medes and Persians, as it appeareth in the 6. chapter, how could that be, if he raigned in Babylon, and was ouercome by the power of the Medes and Persi∣ans? 6. Concerning Iunius opinion, I preferre his iudgement in his commentarie vpon v. 11. 12. c. 5. that Balthazar is the same, whome Herodotus called Labunitus, or Nebonidus, which signifieth a Prince expulsed: because he with his father were both expelled by Nigla∣zar: Then Darius the Mede could not be that Nabonidus, or Labynitus, as he hath in his annotation.

8. This then is the most probable opinion, that this Darius called also Cyaxares, was not the sonne, but the brother of Astyages, and great vncle to Cyrus, the sonne of Cambyses and Mandane Astyages daughter: this then was their genealogie: Assuerus or Cyaxares the Elder had two sonnes, Astyages, and Cyaxares the younger, the same is this Darius, who is said to be sonne of Assuerus, c. 9. 1. not of Astyages. Xenophon calleth Cyaxares Astya∣ges sonne, because he adopted him to succeede in the kingdome to preuent Cyrus. Iun. Po∣lan. The author of the scholasticall historie much disagreeth not, who saith that Cyaxares was not the sonne, but the kinsman of Astyages, whome he adopted to be his heire. This Darius was also father in law to Cyrus, to whome together with his daughter, he resigned the kingdome of Media. Iun.