Albert Barnes Commentary Daniel 5:31

"And Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about threescore and two years old." — Daniel 5:31 (ASV)

And Darius the Median took the kingdom - The city and kingdom were actually taken by Cyrus, though acting in the name and by the authority of Darius, or Cyaxares, who was his uncle. For a full explanation of the conquests of Cyrus, and of the reason why the city is said to have been taken by Darius, see the notes at Isaiah 41:2. In regard to the question of who Darius the Median was, see the Introduction to Daniel 6, section II. The name Darius—דריושׁ dâr^eyâvêsh—is the name under which three Medo-Persian kings are mentioned in the Old Testament.

There is some difference of opinion as to its meaning. Herodotus (vi. 98) says that it is equivalent to ἑρξίης herxiēs—“one who restrains”; but Hesychius says that it is the same as φρόνιμος phronimos—“prudent.” Grotefend, who found it in the cuneiform inscriptions at Persepolis as Darheush, or Darjeush (Heeren’s Ideen, i. 2, p. 350), considers it a compound word, the first part being an abbreviation of Dara, “Lord,” and the latter portion coming from kshah, “king.” Martin reads the name Dareiousch Vyschtasponea on the Persepolitan inscriptions; that is, Darius, son of Vishtaspo. Lassen, however, gives Darhawus Vistaspaha, the latter word being equivalent to the Gustasp of the modern Persian, and meaning “one whose employment is about horses.” See Anthon’s Class. Dict., and Kitto’s Cyclo., art. “Darius.” Compare Niebuhr, Reisebeschr., Part II. Tab. 24, G. and B.

According to Gesenius, Lex., this Darius is supposed to be Cyaxares II (Introduction to Daniel 6, Section II), the son and successor of Astyages, the uncle and father-in-law of Cyrus, who held the empire of Media between Astyages and Cyrus, 569–536 B.C.

Being - Margin, “He as son of.” The marginal reading is in accordance with the Chaldee: כבר k^ebar. It is not unusual in Oriental languages to denote a person's age by saying he is the son of so many years.

About - Margin, “or, now.” The word, both in the text and the margin, is intended to express the supposed sense of his “being the son of sixty years.” The original language, however, would be accurately expressed by saying that he was then sixty years old. Though Cyrus was the active agent in taking Babylon, it was done in the name and by the authority of Cyaxares or Darius. As Darius was the actual sovereign, the name of his general, Cyrus, is not mentioned here. This is despite Cyrus being, in fact, the most important agent in taking the city and ultimately becoming much more celebrated than Darius.

This portion of history is the closing scene in the reign of a mighty monarch and in the independent existence of one of the most powerful kingdoms ever to exist on earth. It is full of instructive lessons. In view of the chapter as thus explained, we may make the following remarks.

Remarks

1. We have here an impressive illustration of the sin of sacrilege (Daniel 5:2–3). In all ages and among all people, this has been regarded as a sin of peculiar enormity. It is quite evident that God, in this solemn scene, meant to confirm humanity's general judgment on the subject.

   Although the materials themselves—gold, silver, wood, and stone—possess no essential holiness, they derive sacredness from being set apart for divine purposes. It has always been considered a high crime to treat them with indignity or contempt, such as robbing altars or desecrating holy places.

   It was clearly God's design to confirm this general human understanding in the case before us. The sacred vessels of the temple, consecrated in the most solemn manner to the worship of Jehovah, were profanely used for purposes of revelry.

   God had patiently endured the removal of those vessels from the temple in Jerusalem and their storage as spoils of victory in Babylonian temples. However, when they were profaned for purposes of revelry—brought out to grace a pagan festival and used amidst scenes of riot and dissipation—it was time for Him to intervene and show these profane revelers that there is a God in heaven.

2. We may see the peril of such festivals as that celebrated by Belshazzar and his lords (Daniel 5:1 and following). It is highly improbable that when the feast was planned and arranged, anything like what actually occurred was intended.

   There was no deliberate plan to introduce the women of the harem to this scene of revelry, much less to use the sacred vessels dedicated to Jehovah’s worship to adorn the midnight revelry. It is likely they would have initially been shocked at such an outrage against what was considered proper, or what all people would have deemed sacred.

   These things were proposed only after the king had tasted the wine. None who attend such a banquet, none who gather for drinking and feasting, can predict what they might be led to do under the influence of wine and strong drink.

   No one who gives himself up to such indulgences can be certain of avoiding foolish and wicked actions. No one knows what he might do that could cause bitter regret and deep humiliation in retrospect.

3. God has the means of access to the consciences of men (Daniel 5:5). In this case, it was by writing on the wall with His own fingers certain mysterious words that no one could interpret, yet everyone knew were of fearful significance. It appears no one present doubted that what was written was somehow connected with some terrible judgment. The fearfulness of what they dreaded clearly arose from their own consciousness of guilt.

   God does not often come forth in this way to alarm the guilty, but He has a thousand methods of doing so. No one can be sure that He will not, in an instant, bring all the sins of their past life to remembrance.

   He could write our guilt in letters of light before us—in the chamber where we sleep, in the hall where we engage in revelry, on the face of the sky at night. Or He can make it as plain to our minds as if it were thus written out.

   He showed this to Belshazzar in his palace, surrounded by his lords; He can do the same thing to us, whether in society or in solitude. No sinner can have any assurance that they may not, in a moment, be overwhelmed with the conviction of their own depravity and with dreadful apprehension of the wrath to come.

4. We have in this chapter (Daniel 5:6) a striking illustration of the effects of a sudden alarm to the guilty. The monarch's countenance changed; his thoughts troubled him; the joints of his loins were loosed, and his knees smote together. Such effects are not uncommon when a sinner is made to feel that he is in God's presence, and when his thoughts are directed toward the future world.

   The human body is so made that these changes occur, indicating the troubles the mind experiences. The fact that it is agitated in this way shows the power God has over us.

   No guilty person can be sure that he will not be alarmed in this way when he contemplates the possibility of soon being called before his Maker. The fact that he may be so alarmed should be one of the considerations influencing his mind to lead him to a course of virtue and religion.

   Such terror is proof of conscious guilt, for the innocent have nothing to dread. If a person is sure that he is prepared to appear before God, he is not alarmed at the prospect.

   Those who live in sin, indulge in revelry, are profane and sacrilegious, abuse God's mercies, and live to mock sacred things, can never be certain that they will not, in a moment, be overwhelmed with the deepest consternation by the revelation of their guilt to their own souls and by a sudden message from the eternal world. Their countenances may become deathly pale, their joints may be loosed, and their limbs may tremble.

   Only the righteous can look calmly at the judgment.

5. We may see from this chapter one of the effects of the terror of a guilty conscience. Indeed, it is not said that the mysterious fingers on the wall recorded the monarch's guilt. But they recorded something; they were making some record that clearly related to him.

   How natural it was to suppose that it was a record of his guilt! And who is there who could bear a record made in that manner of his own thoughts and purposes, of his desires and feelings, of what he is conscious is passing within the chambers of his own soul?

   There is no one who would not turn pale if he saw a mysterious hand writing all his thoughts and purposes—all the deeds of his past life—on the wall of his chamber at night, bringing all his concealed thoughts and forgotten deeds before his mind at once.

   And if this is so, how will the sinner bear the disclosures that will be made at the Day of Judgment?