Please Support the Bible Translation Work of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV)

$5.00

Belshazzar, a name closely associated with the dramatic fall of Babylon, is a figure whose life and reign are recorded both in biblical scripture and ancient historical sources. The account of Belshazzar as a ruler provides a deeper understanding of the prophetic fulfillment concerning Babylon’s downfall, and it also offers valuable insights into the intersection of biblical prophecy and historical record. Belshazzar, though a co-regent rather than a sole monarch, played a critical role during the last years of the Babylonian Empire. This article will explore the life, actions, and eventual demise of Belshazzar, especially in light of the biblical account found in Daniel chapter 5, and how these events align with historical sources.

Who Was Belshazzar, and How Did He Attain Power?

Belshazzar, whose name in Akkadian likely means “Protect His Life” or possibly “[May] Bel Protect the King,” was the eldest son of Nabonidus, the last official king of the Neo-Babylonian Empire. As a historical figure, Belshazzar’s position and role in Babylon were once debated, with some critics dismissing the biblical references to him. However, archaeological discoveries, such as the Verse Account of Nabonidus and other cuneiform texts, have since confirmed Belshazzar’s historicity and his role as co-regent during his father’s extended absence from Babylon.

Nabonidus, after a few years into his reign, left Babylon for the oasis city of Tema in Arabia, where he remained for much of his rule. According to the Nabonidus Chronicle, Nabonidus entrusted the administration of Babylon to Belshazzar. A portion of the text reads: “He entrusted the ‘Camp’ to his oldest (son), the firstborn [Belshazzar], the troops everywhere in the country he ordered under his (command).” This confirms that Belshazzar was given significant authority over the empire in his father’s absence, effectively functioning as the acting ruler of Babylon, although Nabonidus remained the official king.

This co-regency is reflected in the biblical account. When Belshazzar offers to make Daniel “third ruler” in the kingdom (Daniel 5:16, 29), it implies that Nabonidus held the highest position, with Belshazzar being second. Daniel’s position as third in the kingdom would have been the highest rank Belshazzar could offer, further validating the historical accuracy of the account.

Belshazzar and Nebuchadnezzar: The Family Connection

In Daniel 5:2, 11, 18, and 22, Nebuchadnezzar is referred to as the “father” of Belshazzar. This has led to some speculation regarding the familial relationship between the two figures. It is generally accepted that “father” in this context does not mean a direct paternal relationship but refers to Nebuchadnezzar as a royal predecessor. In ancient terminology, “father” could also denote an ancestor or predecessor in a royal line, just as the Assyrians referred to successive rulers as “sons of Omri,” even when they were not direct descendants of Omri.

This clay cylinder records the restoration of Sin’s ziggurat at Ur by Nabonidus, and also asks him to protect Nabonidus and his son, Belshazzar. From Ur, Iraq

One theory, as advanced by scholars such as R.P. Dougherty in his work Nabonidus and Belshazzar (1929), suggests that Belshazzar’s mother may have been Nitocris, who is believed to have been Nebuchadnezzar’s daughter. If this were the case, then Nebuchadnezzar would have been Belshazzar’s maternal grandfather. This theory, though intriguing, remains speculative as not all scholars agree on the strength of the evidence for such a relationship. Regardless, the term “father” as used in Daniel is likely a formal or honorary title recognizing Nebuchadnezzar’s lasting influence over Babylon and its monarchy.

Belshazzar’s Religious Devotion to Babylonian Gods

As co-regent, Belshazzar took on responsibilities that included not only the administration of the empire but also the religious duties expected of Babylonian kings. Ancient texts indicate that Belshazzar was actively involved in offering sacrifices to Babylonian deities. Six cuneiform documents dating from the 5th to the 13th year of Nabonidus’ reign show Belshazzar presenting gold, silver, and animals to temples in the cities of Erech and Sippar, thus maintaining the religious obligations of a Babylonian ruler in his father’s absence.

This religious devotion is significant because it contrasts sharply with the events that transpire in Daniel chapter 5. The biblical narrative highlights a moment when Belshazzar’s irreverence toward Jehovah, the God of Israel, becomes his downfall. At a great feast he hosted, Belshazzar, under the influence of wine, ordered that the vessels from the temple in Jerusalem, which had been taken by Nebuchadnezzar decades earlier, be brought out so that he and his guests could drink from them. As they did so, they praised the Babylonian gods made of gold, silver, bronze, iron, wood, and stone (Daniel 5:2-4).

This administrative document is dated to the “24th day of Kislimu in the 11th year of Nabonidus, king of Babylon”. It mentions a slave of Bel-sharra-usur (Belshazzar), son of the king. Although Belshazzar is acting as a regent, the formal date shows that Nabonidus is still the reigning king. From Borsippa, Iraq

This act of defiance, particularly involving the sacred vessels, constituted a direct challenge to Jehovah, the God of Israel. Belshazzar’s blasphemy was more than a mere oversight; it was a deliberate affront, demonstrating his disregard for the sanctity of the temple items and the power of Jehovah. The fact that Belshazzar chose to desecrate these vessels in the midst of praising Babylon’s idols showed a heart hardened against divine authority, an action that swiftly brought about judgment.

The Handwriting on the Wall: Divine Judgment

In the midst of Belshazzar’s feast, a miraculous and terrifying event occurred: a hand appeared and began writing on the wall of the banquet hall. The message—mene, mene, tekel, parsin—was a mystery to all the wise men and enchanters in the room, none of whom could interpret its meaning (Daniel 5:5-8). Belshazzar, visibly shaken and terrified, called for someone who could explain the writing.

At this point, the queen (likely Nitocris, Belshazzar’s mother and Nebuchadnezzar’s daughter) entered and recommended that Daniel be summoned, as he had previously been able to interpret dreams and visions during Nebuchadnezzar’s reign (Daniel 5:10-12). Daniel was brought before the king and, after reminding Belshazzar of Nebuchadnezzar’s humiliation and acknowledgment of Jehovah’s supremacy (Daniel 5:18-21), interpreted the writing.

The message, Daniel explained, was a pronouncement of divine judgment on Belshazzar and his kingdom. The word mene meant that God had numbered the days of his reign and brought it to an end. The word tekel meant that Belshazzar had been weighed in the balance and found wanting. The word parsin (the singular form peres is used in verse 28) indicated that his kingdom would be divided and given to the Medes and Persians (Daniel 5:25-28). This interpretation not only prophesied the immediate fall of Babylon but also identified the conquerors by name, highlighting the fulfillment of Isaiah’s prophecy regarding the Medes (Isaiah 13:17) and Daniel’s earlier vision of the coming Medo-Persian Empire (Daniel 8:20).

Though Daniel’s message was one of doom, Belshazzar honored his promise and elevated Daniel to the position of third ruler in the kingdom (Daniel 5:29). However, this promotion was short-lived, as the prophecy came to pass that very night.

The Fall of Babylon and the Death of Belshazzar

On the night of October 5, 539 B.C.E. (Gregorian calendar; October 11, Julian calendar), the Medo-Persian forces under Cyrus the Great and his general Gobryas entered Babylon. According to the Nabonidus Chronicle, the Persian army entered the city without a battle. This aligns with Herodotus’ account, which records that the Persians diverted the Euphrates River, allowing their forces to slip into the city through the riverbed. Babylon, confident in its seemingly impregnable walls and abundant supplies, was caught off guard and fell swiftly.

That same night, Belshazzar was killed, bringing an end to the Neo-Babylonian Empire (Daniel 5:30). The swift and decisive nature of Babylon’s fall serves as a powerful testament to the accuracy of both biblical prophecy and historical record. Jeremiah had prophesied that Babylon’s mighty men would cease to fight (Jeremiah 51:30), and Isaiah had foretold the overthrow of Babylon long before Cyrus was born (Isaiah 44:28; 45:1-2).

Belshazzar’s death, recorded in both biblical and historical sources, marked the end of the Babylonian dynasty established by Nebuchadnezzar. His demise was the fulfillment of divine judgment against a ruler who had blasphemed the God of Israel. The rise of the Medo-Persian Empire, with Cyrus at its head, ushered in a new era in world history, one in which the exiled Jews would soon be granted the opportunity to return to their homeland, as prophesied by Isaiah (Isaiah 45:13).

Why Was Belshazzar Referred to as King?

One question that arises from the biblical account is why Belshazzar was referred to as “king” when historical sources only recognize him as a crown prince or co-regent. This discrepancy is addressed by modern scholarship and archaeology. In 1979, a statue unearthed in northern Syria provided an interesting parallel. The statue bore two inscriptions, one in the imperial Assyrian language and the other in Aramaic. The Assyrian inscription referred to the individual as a “governor,” while the Aramaic inscription called him a “king.” This suggests that in local or informal usage, certain officials who held significant authority, though not technically kings, could still be referred to as kings by the people.

In the case of Belshazzar, while he was never officially king in the eyes of Babylonian law (as that title belonged to Nabonidus), his position as co-regent and acting ruler in his father’s absence meant that he functioned as king. Therefore, it would have been natural for the people, as well as the biblical account in Daniel, to refer to him as such. This linguistic flexibility explains why Belshazzar could be called “king” in the Book of Daniel, even though Nabonidus was still the official ruler of Babylon.

Conclusion: Belshazzar’s Legacy in Scripture and History

Belshazzar’s reign as co-regent of Babylon, though brief and marked by his final defiant act against Jehovah, offers a vivid reminder of the dangers of pride and irreverence toward God. His story, preserved in the biblical narrative and confirmed by historical texts, stands as a testament to the accuracy of scripture and the fulfillment of prophecy. The fall of Babylon, foretold by prophets like Isaiah and Jeremiah, came to pass in exact detail, demonstrating that God’s sovereignty extends over nations and rulers alike. Belshazzar, like his predecessor Nebuchadnezzar, learned that defiance against the God of Israel results in divine judgment, but unlike Nebuchadnezzar, he did not live to repent.

As history shows, the Medo-Persian Empire rose to power after Babylon’s fall, and through the leadership of Cyrus, the Jews would soon be allowed to return to Jerusalem, fulfilling yet another aspect of God’s plan for His people.

About the Author

EDWARD D. ANDREWS (AS in Criminal Justice, BS in Religion, MA in Biblical Studies, and MDiv in Theology) is CEO and President of Christian Publishing House. He has authored over 220+ books. In addition, Andrews is the Chief Translator of the Updated American Standard Version (UASV).