Historical chronology of Daniel 1 and the approximate age of the prophet

The historical context of Daniel 1 begins a few years before Daniel's deportation.

Josiah, king of Judah, dies at Megiddo after trying to stop Pharaoh Necho (2 Kings 23.29-30; 2 Chronicles 35.20-24).

His death, generally placed in 609 BC, opens a period of deep political instability for Judah.

His son Jehoahaz succeeds him, but his reign lasts only three months (2 Kings 23.31-33).

Necho removes him and installs Eliakim in his place, changing his name to Jehoiakim (2 Kings 23.34).

Judah is then under strong Egyptian influence.

Jehoiakim reigns eleven years in Jerusalem (2 Kings 23.36).

At the beginning of his reign, the main foreign power dominating Judah is Egypt.

This situation changes when Babylon confronts the Egyptian forces in the region of the Euphrates.

Jeremiah explicitly associates this confrontation with the fourth year of Jehoiakim:

“Concerning the army of Pharaoh Necho, king of Egypt, which was by the river Euphrates at Carchemish and which Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon defeated in the fourth year of Jehoiakim the son of Josiah, king of Judah.” (Jeremiah 46.2)

The battle of Carchemish thus marks a major turning point in the political balance of the Near East.

The Babylonian victory at Carchemish is generally dated to 605 BC.

It marks the decisive decline of Egyptian power in Syria-Palestine and the emergence of Babylon as the dominant power in the region.

It is in this context that the opening of the scroll — show definition INF237 of Daniel must be understood:

“In the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and besieged it.” (Daniel 1.1)

The dating of Daniel 1 must therefore be related to the events of 605 BC.

A difficulty appears immediately.

Daniel 1.1 speaks of the third year of Jehoiakim.

Jeremiah 46.2 speaks of his fourth year.

Jeremiah 25.1 also establishes a correspondence between the fourth year of Jehoiakim and the first year of Nebuchadnezzar:

“The fourth year of Jehoiakim ... that was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon.” (Jeremiah 25.1)

This difference does not necessarily require us to suppose two different historical years.

It can be explained by distinct systems of reckoning regnal years.

In the so-called “accession year” system, the period between a king's coming to power and the start of his first official year is not counted as his first year of reign.

It constitutes his accession year.

The first numbered year then begins with the new administrative year.

Depending on the system used, the same historical interval can therefore be called the “third year” in one reckoning and the “fourth year” in another.

This explanation is commonly proposed to bring Daniel 1.1 closer to Jeremiah 25.1 and Jeremiah 46.2.

The question, however, deserves specific analysis and will be taken up again in the appendix devoted to the third and fourth years of Jehoiakim.

At the time of the Carchemish campaign, Nebuchadnezzar acts first as crown prince and commander of the Babylonian armies.

The death of his father Nabopolassar occurs the same year.

Nebuchadnezzar then returns to Babylon and ascends the throne.

This transition explains why the events of 605 lie precisely at the junction between his military campaigns as crown prince and the beginning of his reign.

The book of Daniel can naturally refer to Nebuchadnezzar by the title under which he will be known in the narrative, without this designation necessarily implying that he was already king at the start of each event mentioned.

Daniel 1 presents the transfer of certain objects from the Temple and the presence in Babylon of young Judeans, notably from royal or noble backgrounds (Daniel 1.2-6).

This intervention must be distinguished from the later great deportations.

The capture of Jerusalem under Jehoiachin and the major deportation of 597 BC are reported in 2 Kings 24 (2 Kings 24.10-16).

The destruction of Jerusalem and the Temple comes afterward, in 586 BC according to the generally accepted chronology (2 Kings 25.1-10).

Daniel 1 therefore comes before these two major catastrophes.

The chronology adopted in this study places Daniel's arrival in Babylon around 605 BC.

Nevertheless, the wording “around 605” should be kept whenever absolute precision is not needed.

The biblical text establishes the setting under Jehoiakim and Nebuchadnezzar, but provides neither the day nor the month of Daniel’s arrival in Babylon.

The date of 605 is therefore the best general historical marker rather than a day-by-day date supplied by Daniel 1.

The book never gives Daniel's age at the time of his deportation.

Daniel 1.4 describes the persons sought by the king as young men possessing the physical and intellectual qualities required for court training.

This description allows us to suppose that they were relatively young.

It does not, however, allow us to establish a precise age.

We must therefore clearly distinguish:

Biblical information: Daniel belongs to the group of young men who were selected.

Reconstruction: Daniel would have been about fourteen years old.

The age of fourteen is a plausible working hypothesis, not information explicitly given by the text.

If Daniel was about fourteen in 605 BC, his birth could be placed approximately around 619 BC.

The calculation is simple:

605 + 14 ≈ 619 BC.

But the whole chronology of his later ages depends on this first hypothesis.

We should therefore never write that Daniel “was born in 619 BC” as if it were an established historical fact.

The rigorous wording is:

if Daniel was about fourteen years old in 605 BC, he would have been born around 619 BC.

Nebuchadnezzar orders that the young men be trained for three years:

“He wanted them to be educated for three years, at the end of which they were to stand before the king.” (Daniel 1.5)

Starting from a beginning around 605 BC, the end of this training can be placed approximately around 603/602 BC, depending on how partial years and regnal years are counted.

If Daniel was about fourteen at the beginning, he would then be approximately sixteen or seventeen.

Here again, the age remains dependent on the initial hypothesis.

Daniel 2.1 places the dream of the statue in the second year of Nebuchadnezzar:

“In the second year of the reign of Nebuchadnezzar, Nebuchadnezzar dreamed dreams.” (Daniel 2.1)

This indication may seem hard to reconcile with the three years of training in Daniel 1.5.

If Daniel completed three full years of training before being presented to the king, how can he intervene as early as the second year of Nebuchadnezzar?

The difficulty depends largely on the reckoning of accession years and on the way the “three years” of training are counted.

This question deserves independent analysis and will be examined in a specific appendix.

After his training, Daniel enters a long period of service under Nebuchadnezzar.

Daniel 2 shows him interpreting the dream of the statue.

Daniel 4 presents him again beside the king in the account of the great tree.

The precise dates of some episodes are not given.

It would therefore be artificial to assign an exact year to each account when the text itself does not allow it.

The chronology of Daniel — show definition INF221 must retain zones of uncertainty.

The account of the golden statue and the furnace contains no explicit chronological indication.

Various datings have been proposed, notably around 594/593 BC, but they rest on historical reconstructions.

They must not be presented as dates given by Daniel 3.

If this hypothetical dating were adopted and if Daniel was born around 619 BC, he would be about twenty-five or twenty-six.

But both elements of the calculation are hypothetical: the date of the episode and Daniel's initial age.

Daniel 4 presents Nebuchadnezzar at the height of his power and describes a period of judgment followed by restoration.

The chapter, however, gives no regnal year that would allow precise dating.

The episode is generally placed in a relatively late period of Nebuchadnezzar's reign.

A location in the years 570-560 BC can be envisaged in some reconstructions.

It must not be turned into a certain date.

On the hypothesis of a birth around 619 BC, Daniel would then be approximately between forty-five and fifty-five years old.

Daniel 7 provides a new marker:

“In the first year of Belshazzar king of Babylon, Daniel had a dream and visions.” (Daniel 7.1)

This first year is generally placed around 553/552 BC, depending on the reconstruction of Belshazzar's role during the reign of Nabonidus.

If Daniel was about fourteen in 605 BC, he would then be about sixty-six or sixty-seven.

This observation is important: the visions of Daniel 7 and Daniel 8 historically precede the fall of Babylon told in Daniel 5.

Daniel 8 begins this way:

“In the third year of the reign of King Belshazzar, a vision appeared to me, Daniel.” (Daniel 8.1)

This indication is generally placed around 551/550 BC.

On the hypothesis of a birth around 619 BC, Daniel would then be about sixty-eight or sixty-nine.

Daniel is therefore no longer, and has not been for a long time, the young man of Daniel 1 when he receives the great visions of Daniel 7 and Daniel 8.

Daniel 5 brings the narrative to Belshazzar's last night:

“That very night Belshazzar, king of the Chaldeans, was killed.” (Daniel 5.30)

The fall of Babylon to the forces of Cyrus is historically placed in 539 BC.

If Daniel was about fourteen in 605 BC, he would then be approximately eighty.

This estimate helps us better understand the contrast between the young captive of Daniel 1 and the experienced man summoned before Belshazzar in Daniel 5.

Daniel 5.31 introduces Darius the Mede after the fall of Belshazzar:

“Darius the Mede received the kingdom, being about sixty-two years old.” (Daniel 5.31)

Daniel 6 then presents Daniel holding a high position in the new administration (Daniel 5.31-6.3).

Daniel 9.1 also places a revelation in the first year of Darius (Daniel 9.1).

The precise historical identification of Darius the Mede remains one of the debated difficulties of the book.

It must not be resolved artificially in a chronology that claims to go beyond the available data.

Daniel 1.21 states that Daniel remains until the first year of Cyrus.

Within the framework of Persian rule over Babylon, this first year is generally placed around 538/537 BC.

This period also corresponds to the decree presented at the beginning of the book of Ezra:

“In the first year of Cyrus king of Persia ... the the Eternal — show definition INF038 stirred up the spirit of Cyrus.” (Ezra 1.1)

The decree authorizes the rebuilding of the Temple and the return to Jerusalem (Ezra 1.2-4).

Daniel 1.21 thus leads the reader symbolically from the beginning of the Babylonian exile to the opening of the period of return.

If Daniel was about fourteen in 605 BC, he would be approximately eighty-one or eighty-two around 538/537 BC.

This calculation helps us measure the length of his presence in the successive administrations.

It still does not allow us to turn the hypothetical age of fourteen into a certainty.

The distinction between historical chronology and reconstructed biographical chronology must be maintained.

Daniel 10 provides the last explicit chronological marker concerning Daniel:

“In the third year of Cyrus king of Persia a word was revealed to Daniel, who was named Belteshazzar.” (Daniel 10.1)

This year can be placed approximately around 536/535 BC, depending on the system of reckoning adopted.

If Daniel was fourteen in 605 BC, he would then be about eighty-three or eighty-four.

This estimate is more coherent than the categorical claim of an age of eighty-five in 534 BC, which depends on a more particular chronological reconstruction.

The comparison of these two texts is essential.

Daniel 1.21 declares:

“So Daniel continued until the first year of King Cyrus.”

Daniel 10.1 still places Daniel in the third year of Cyrus.

The first text therefore does not give the date of his death.

It indicates rather that Daniel lives through the whole Babylonian period and reaches the time of Cyrus.

Daniel 10.1 then extends his presence beyond that boundary.

No date of death is given.

Daniel 12 ends with a word addressed to the prophet:

“But go your way till the end. You shall rest and shall stand in your allotted place at the end of the days.” (Daniel 12.13)

This word announces the end of his course without supplying a date.

It is therefore impossible to establish historically the year of Daniel’s death from the biblical book.

Any precise date would go beyond the available information.

Cyrus's decree opens the possibility of return (Ezra 1.1-4).

The book, however, reports no return of Daniel to Judah.

His advanced age might explain why he remained in the Persian Empire, but this explanation remains hypothetical.

We should therefore retain only the certain datum:

no return of Daniel to Jerusalem is recounted in the book of Daniel.

It would be excessive to conclude from this that we know with certainty where he spent the last years of his life.

Several elements can be retained with a reasonable degree of confidence.

Daniel belongs to the generation taken to Babylon at the beginning of Babylonian domination over Judah.

His activity extends to the Persian period.

He is still alive in the third year of Cyrus (Daniel 10.1).

His career therefore spans several decades and several changes of regime.

This length of time is a fundamental datum for understanding the person.

On the other hand, several elements must remain presented as hypotheses.

The text does not say that Daniel was exactly fourteen.

It does not give his year of birth.

It does not provide a precise date for Daniel 3 or Daniel 4.

It does not tell of his return to Jerusalem.

It does not give the date of his death.

An academic chronology must preserve these distinctions so as not to turn useful reconstructions into biblical data.