Daniel 5:1

THE HANDWRITING ON THE WALL.-- Daniel 5:1-12; Daniel 5:25-28.

GOLDEN TEXT. -- Thou art weighed in the balances, and art found wanting. -- Daniel 5:27. TIME. --According to Sir Henry Rawlinson, B. C. 538. PLACE. --Babylon. HELPFUL READINGS. -- Esther 1:1-22; Daniel 1:1-10; Jeremiah 52:19; Isaiah 21:2. LESSON ANALYSIS. --1. An Impious Feast; 2.. Drunken King; 3.. Great Sacrilege; 4. An Awful Portent; 5.. Dreadful Interpretation.

INTRODUCTION.

. period of sixty-eight years, according to the best chronology, had passed since the captivity began, with the death of Jehoiakim and the carrying of Daniel and his follow exiles to Babylon. He was now an old man, not far from eighty years old. The period had come for great changes in the world's history, for the overthrow of one of the great universal empires; for the "head of gold" to give way to "the breast and arms of silver;" for the Babylonian empire to be supplanted by the Medo-Persian power, and for the children of Israel, as. consequence, to return from exile. Nebuchadnezzar had long been dead, and his successors had been far from showing his vigor and ability. At the same time. power had been developing itself to the eastward that was ready to begin the struggle for the mastery of the world. The Medes had been growing in strength for several generations, but recently, on account of the surpassing ability of Cyrus the Great, the Persians were in the ascendant. He was king of Persia, the son of. Persian father, but grandson of the Medan king by his mother, and the ruling spirit of the united kingdoms, though his uncle Cyaxares or Darius remained. nominal king until his death. Already Cyrus had defeated the Babylonian armies in battle and had then conquered the kingdom of Lydia, lying in Asia Minor, and at this time, he marched to lay siege to Babylon.

Belshazzar, spoken of as king and as son of Nebuchadnezzar, has caused some trouble to the critics. Several ancient historians have affirmed that the last king of Babylon was Nabonedus. Hence there were those who asserted that there was no such king as Belshazzar. All has been made plain by the discoveries of Sir Henry Rawlinson. He has discovered inscriptions, and translated them, which give. history of the exploits of king Nabonedus. This states that he had associated his son Belshazzar with him in the kingdom. He was defeated in the field and retreated into Borsippa, where he was besieged, while Belshazzar was in Babylon and held royal honors until his death. This discovery explains why Daniel was made the third ruler of Babylon. King Nabonedus was first; king Belshazzar was second, and Daniel of course could not be more than third. Belshazzar was the, grandson, or descendant of Nebuchadnezzar,. sense in which son is often used.

At the date of this lesson the Persian armies were around Babylon. The walls however were 300 feet high and of immense thickness. There were great quantities of provisions in the city, and the Babylonians had no fears of the success of their enemies. But, as we learn from ancient historians, Cyrus constructed great canals to draw off the waters of the Euphrates, which ran through the city, under walls that were carried over it on arches; and choosing. night when the Babylonians engaged in. drunken feast in honor of one of their gods, he turned off the waters, marched under the arches and was in the city engaged in the work of death before the drunken Babylonians knew he had entered. It will be noted that this account agrees with that of the Bible which represents Belshazzar and. thousand lords as engaged in. drunken religious feast the night the city was taken.

1. Belshazzar, the king.

According to the inscriptions referred to above, the son of Nabonedus, who was also king, but besieged at Borsippa, while Belshazzar exercised royal authority in Babylon, where he was at this time besieged by Cyrus. The accounts agree in making him. prince much given to pleasure and license.

Made. great feast to. thousand of his lords.

Xenophon says that the night the city of Babylon was taken the people were engaged in. drunken feast in honor of one of their gods, and that while the whole city was given to feasting and revelry the Persians broke in. This account agrees well with that of Daniel. The religions feasts of the pagans were usually drunken and licentious revels. The king was evidently the leader in the orgies.

He drank wine

before his thousand lords and set them the example of high wassail. The others drank also, but the object of the sacred writer is to portray his conduct, as all concentrates in him.