Fact-checked by Grok 2 weeks ago

Fall of Babylon

The Fall of Babylon denotes the capture of the ancient Mesopotamian city-state and its empire's capital by Cyrus the Great, founder of the Achaemenid Persian Empire, in October 539 BCE, culminating the Neo-Babylonian Empire's collapse after Nabonidus's reign.^[1]^[2] Contemporary accounts, including the Nabonidus Chronicle—a cuneiform tablet documenting Babylonian royal annals—record that Persian forces under general Ugbaru defeated Babylonian troops at Opis, prompting the surrender of Sippar, followed by entry into Babylon itself without combat on the 16th of Tashritu (October).^[2] The chronicle notes the killing of Nabonidus's son Belshazzar during these events, with the priesthood and populace reportedly greeting Cyrus as a liberator amid discontent with Nabonidus's religious policies favoring the moon god Sin over Marduk.^[2] The Cyrus Cylinder, a clay foundation deposit inscribed in Akkadian and deposited in Babylon's temples, details Cyrus's self-presentation as chosen by Marduk to restore order, repair shrines, and return exiles and cult images seized by Babylonian rulers, signaling a policy of religious tolerance that contrasted with prior imperial conquests.^[3] This transition integrated Babylonia's vast territories—spanning modern Iraq, Syria, and Palestine—into Persia's burgeoning domain, averting widespread destruction and enabling administrative continuity under satrapal governance.^[1]^[4]

Historical Background

Decline of the Neo-Babylonian Empire

The Neo-Babylonian Empire, which reached its zenith under Nebuchadnezzar II (r. 605–562 BCE), experienced political instability following his death due to a series of short-lived and contested successions.^[5] Nebuchadnezzar's son, Amel-Marduk, ruled briefly from 562 to 560 BCE before his assassination amid palace intrigue.^[6] He was succeeded by Neriglissar (r. 560–556 BCE), a military figure who stabilized the throne temporarily but died after a short reign, leaving his young son Labashi-Marduk, whose rule lasted only months before he was deposed and murdered.^[6] This rapid turnover eroded central authority and highlighted factional divisions within the Babylonian elite, weakening the empire's cohesion at a time when external threats, including the rising Achaemenid Persians, loomed.^[7] Nabonidus ascended the throne in 556 BCE through unclear means, possibly a coup, and his reign marked a deepening of internal divisions through unconventional religious policies.^[8] He elevated the moon god Sin—associated with his hometown Harran—above Babylon's patron deity Marduk, renovating Sin's temples in Ur and Harran while sidelining Marduk's cult, as evidenced by his own inscriptions and contemporary cuneiform texts.^[9] This favoritism alienated the influential Marduk priesthood in Babylon, who viewed the annual Akitu New Year festival—essential for royal legitimacy—as neglected under Nabonidus, fostering resentment among religious and noble classes.^[9] Such reforms disrupted traditional power structures, contributing to political fragmentation without unifying the empire against Persian expansion.^[10] Compounding these issues, Nabonidus absented himself from Babylon for approximately 10 years, from around 552/551 BCE to 543/542 BCE, residing in the Arabian oasis of Tayma (Tema).^[9] During this period, documented in the Nabonidus Chronicle, he left his son Belshazzar as regent, possibly to pursue trade extensions, personal devotion to Sin, or recover from illness as suggested in the "Prayer of Nabonidus."^[9] The prolonged absence halted key rituals like the Akitu festival, symbolizing a breakdown in divine kingship and provoking widespread discontent among priests and officials who interpreted it as royal neglect of Babylonian traditions.^[10] Upon his return, Nabonidus faced entrenched opposition, as Belshazzar's effective regency had shifted loyalties, further undermining unified leadership.^[10] These internal fissures manifested in economic and social decay, as described in propagandistic texts like the Verse Account of Nabonidus, which portray lawlessness, property seizures, and disrupted temple economies—core to Babylonian prosperity.^[10] Agricultural lands went unprotected, leading to famine and rural ruin, while trade routes faltered amid elite infighting and overreliance on temple institutions now destabilized by religious shifts.^[10] Militarily, the empire adopted a defensive stance with limited successful campaigns, its overextended frontiers vulnerable without the aggressive expansions of earlier rulers, setting the stage for Cyrus the Great's conquest in 539 BCE.^[11] Archaeological evidence from cuneiform archives confirms this erosion, showing no reversal of decline despite Nabonidus' infrastructure efforts like wall repairs.^[9]

Rise of the Achaemenid Empire under Cyrus

Cyrus II, later known as Cyrus the Great, ascended the throne of Anshan (a Persian kingdom in southwestern Iran) around 559 BCE as a vassal under the Median Empire ruled by his grandfather Astyages.^[12] The Medes had dominated the Persians since the mid-6th century BCE, but internal discontent with Astyages' rule, including reports of his harsh governance and failed campaigns, created opportunities for rebellion.^[13] By 553 BCE, Cyrus had begun open revolt, leveraging Persian tribal loyalties and Median defections, particularly from disaffected nobles like Harpagus.^[14] In 550 BCE, Cyrus decisively defeated Astyages near Ecbatana (modern Hamadan), capturing the Median capital and effectively ending Median suzerainty; Astyages was deposed, and Cyrus incorporated Median territories and administrative structures into his realm, marking the foundation of the Achaemenid Empire.^[12] This victory unified the Iranian plateau under Persian leadership, with Cyrus adopting Median court customs and cavalry tactics while positioning himself as a liberator rather than a mere usurper, as evidenced by later Persian inscriptions and Greek accounts.^[13] The empire's core now spanned from the Persian Gulf to the Caspian Sea, with an estimated army bolstered by Median forces numbering in the tens of thousands, enabling rapid expansion.^[14] Turning westward to secure flanks against potential threats, Cyrus invaded Lydia around 547 BCE, prompted by King Croesus' alliance with Babylon and Egypt against the rising Persian power.^[15] Croesus, wealthy from Lydian gold mines and inventor of coined currency, advanced into Persian territory but retreated after initial setbacks; Cyrus pursued, winning the Battle of Thymbra in early 546 BCE through superior camel-mounted infantry disrupting Lydian cavalry.^[16] This led to the 14-day siege of Sardis, Lydia's capital, which fell in 546 BCE, granting Persia control over western Anatolia, Ionian Greek cities, and vast tribute resources that funded further conquests.^[15] Archaeological evidence from Sardis, including Achaemenid arrowheads and structures, corroborates the Persian occupation and administrative integration.^[16] These successive victories transformed a regional Persian polity into a burgeoning empire capable of challenging Mesopotamian powers, with Cyrus' policies emphasizing tolerance toward conquered elites to minimize resistance and foster loyalty, as seen in his retention of local rulers in Lydia.^[13] By 540 BCE, Persian forces had consolidated gains, positioning Cyrus for the campaign against Babylonia, whose internal weaknesses under Nabonidus amplified the strategic opening.^[17]

Key Figures and Internal Dynamics

Nabonidus' Policies and Unpopularity

Nabonidus, who ascended the throne in 556 BC following the brief reign and assassination of Labashi-Marduk, pursued religious policies that emphasized the supremacy of the moon god Sîn over the traditional Babylonian pantheon headed by Marduk. In inscriptions such as the Harran stelae and his building cylinders, Nabonidus described divine visions from Sîn commissioning temple restorations and portrayed the god as the ultimate authority granting kingship and prosperity, a elevation evident from his second regnal year onward when he appointed a daughter as high priestess of Sîn at Ur.^[9]^[8] These actions, while rooted in personal devotion—possibly inherited from his mother Adad-guppi's piety toward Sîn—clashed with Babylonian orthodoxy, where Marduk's Esagila temple and cult held central ritual and political significance.^[18] A key manifestation of this policy was Nabonidus's extended residence in the Arabian oasis of Tayma from his seventh to thirteenth regnal years (c. 550–543 BC), during which he established a royal court there amid campaigns to secure trade routes and subdue local tribes.^[2] The Nabonidus Chronicle records that, as a result, the essential Akitu New Year festival in Babylon was disrupted for multiple years, with the statues of Nabu from Borsippa and Bel (Marduk) failing to process to the city because the king was absent, preventing the ritual affirmation of cosmic order and royal legitimacy.^[2] This neglect, whether driven by Sîn-focused pilgrimage, economic interests in incense trade, or archaeological pursuits at ancient sites, left regency to his son Belshazzar and fostered perceptions of royal abandonment of Babylonian core institutions.^[19]^[20] These policies contributed to Nabonidus's unpopularity among the Marduk priesthood and urban elite, as reflected in post-conquest texts like the Verse Account, which depicts him as divinely rejected for scorning Marduk, obsessively favoring Sîn, and exhibiting erratic behavior akin to madness.^[21] While the Verse Account, analyzed as propagandistic literature justifying Persian rule, may exaggerate for rhetorical effect, the Chronicle's neutral record of festival lapses and the empire's swift collapse without significant resistance in 539 BC—Sippar fell without fight, Babylon surrendered peacefully—indicate underlying internal fractures rather than mere invention.^[2] Scholars note that, despite military successes like conquering northern Arabia, Nabonidus's deviation from ritual norms eroded elite loyalty, prioritizing personal theology over communal expectations in a theocratic system where priestly support underpinned stability.^[11] Some analyses temper claims of outright "reform" as overstated by biased sources, emphasizing instead pragmatic cultic adjustments amid empire maintenance, yet the causal link to discontent remains evident from the passive reception of Cyrus's forces.^[21]

Role of Belshazzar and Priestly Discontent

Belshazzar, the eldest son of Nabonidus, functioned as coregent and de facto ruler of Babylon during his father's extended absences, including a decade-long residence in the Arabian oasis of Teima from approximately 552 to 543 BCE, as evidenced by cuneiform inscriptions such as the Nabonidus Cylinder.^[22] In this capacity, Belshazzar oversaw the kingdom's administration, military defenses, and daily governance, allowing Nabonidus to pursue personal religious and exploratory interests.^[23] By 539 BCE, as Persian forces under Cyrus advanced, Belshazzar remained in Babylon to direct its fortifications and resistance, while Nabonidus reportedly fled or was absent from the immediate front.^[24] Historical accounts, including the Nabonidus Chronicle, indicate that Belshazzar was killed during the Persian entry into the city on October 12, 539 BCE, marking the effective end of Neo-Babylonian royal authority in the capital.^[22] Archaeological evidence, such as temple inscriptions from Ur naming Belshazzar as granting royal privileges, corroborates his substantive authority short of full kingship, explaining administrative references to him as subordinate to Nabonidus yet capable of issuing decrees.^[23] His role in the fall underscores internal dynastic divisions, as Nabonidus's unpopularity may have limited unified command, though no direct evidence shows Belshazzar actively undermining defenses.^[9] Parallel to these dynamics, significant discontent brewed among the Babylonian priesthood, particularly the influential clergy of Marduk, Babylon's patron deity, due to Nabonidus's religious policies favoring the moon god Sin. Nabonidus prioritized Sin's cult, excavating and restoring temples to Sin in Harran and Ur while reportedly neglecting Marduk's Esagila temple and skipping the Akitu New Year festival—a ritual essential for royal legitimacy and Marduk's supremacy—for over a decade.^[10]^[25] This shift, documented in contemporary Babylonian texts and later Persian propaganda like the Cyrus Cylinder, alienated the Marduk priests, who viewed it as a direct challenge to traditional theology and their institutional power. The priestly opposition likely weakened internal cohesion during the Persian siege, with some scholars arguing it facilitated a relatively bloodless capitulation; the Nabonidus Chronicle notes Babylon's capture without major battle, and the Cyrus Cylinder claims Marduk "opened his gates" for Cyrus, portraying divine and clerical endorsement of the invader as a restorer of orthodox worship.^[10]^[1] While the Cylinder reflects Achaemenid bias, the pattern of priestly friction aligns with Nabonidus's own inscriptions admitting elite resistance to his reforms, contributing to a causal erosion of loyalty that Belshazzar, as a perceived extension of his father's regime, could not fully mitigate.^[26]^[21]

Military Campaign

Persian Preparations and Diversions

Cyrus the Great undertook military preparations for the invasion of Babylonia following his consolidation of the Median and Lydian territories, mobilizing a composite army of Persians, Medes, and other allies by 539 BCE. Earlier musters, such as in 547 BCE when Cyrus crossed the Tigris below Arbela to campaign in an unidentified region, demonstrated ongoing efforts to project power into Mesopotamian spheres and secure logistical routes.^[2] These steps positioned Persian forces for a swift incursion eastward across the Tigris River into Babylonian territory.^[16] The decisive engagement occurred at Opis on the banks of the Tigris, where Cyrus's army clashed with the Babylonian forces around early October 539 BCE, resulting in a rout of the Akkadian troops, widespread slaughter, and plunder of the city. This victory at Opis crippled the Babylonian military capacity, paving the way for unopposed advances to Sippar and Babylon without further pitched battles.^[2] The rapid sequence—from Opis to Sippar's capture on the 14th of Tashritu (circa October 13) and entry into Babylon on the 16th—highlights the effectiveness of Persian strategic momentum and possible internal Babylonian disarray rather than prolonged sieges.^[2] Accounts of tactical diversions, such as Herodotus's description of Cyrus channeling the Euphrates into basins to lower its level for an undetected entry via the riverbed during a Babylonian festival, lack corroboration in contemporary cuneiform records like the Nabonidus Chronicle, which report peaceful surrender facilitated by Ugbaru (Gobryas), Cyrus's governor.^[27] Herodotus, writing over a century later, may have conflated the 539 BCE events with Darius I's later reconquest of a rebellious Babylon using similar engineering feats, including diversions of the Gyndes River.^[27] The Chronicle's emphasis on minimal resistance underscores that Persian success stemmed more from superior field victory at Opis and elite defections than elaborate water diversions at the capital.^[2]

Siege and Capture of Babylon

Following the Persian victory at Opis on the 13th of Ululu (late September 539 BC), where Cyrus's forces defeated the Babylonian army, resulting in retreats, plunder, and slaughter of opponents, the city of Sippar surrendered without resistance on the 14th of Ululu.^[2] The Nabonidus Chronicle, a contemporary cuneiform record, details that on the 16th of Tishri (approximately October 12, 539 BC), Ugbaru, the governor of Gutium and a high-ranking Persian commander, along with Cyrus's troops, entered Babylon without battle.^[2] This rapid ingress indicates minimal organized defense, likely facilitated by internal divisions and priestly support for Cyrus, who positioned himself as a liberator restoring traditional cults neglected under Nabonidus.^[2] Opponents within the city were reportedly killed following the entry, and Nabonidus, who had fled, was subsequently captured.^[2] Three days later, on the 3rd of Arahsamna, Cyrus himself entered Babylon, where peace was established, and he assumed the throne amid ceremonies including the Akitu festival.^[2] Ugbaru was appointed governor, installing sub-governors in Babylonian strongholds, though he died shortly after on the 11th of Arahsamna.^[2] The Cyrus Cylinder, a Babylonian proclamation attributed to Cyrus, corroborates this peaceful transition, claiming the city's inhabitants welcomed him and that no damage occurred to temples or infrastructure.^[28] Later Greek accounts, such as Herodotus's Histories, describe a more dramatic siege tactic: Cyrus diverting the Euphrates River into basins to lower its level, enabling troops to wade through the riverbed and enter via unguarded gates during a festival when Babylonians were distracted.^[27] However, this narrative, composed over a century later without access to Babylonian records, aligns only with the Opis battle and overall capture but lacks corroboration from primary sources like the Chronicle, which emphasize unopposed entry rather than engineering feats or prolonged siege.^[27] Scholars assess Herodotus's details as potentially embellished folklore, given the Chronicle's silence on any river diversion or extended resistance, pointing instead to strategic collapse after upstream defeats.^[27]

Immediate Aftermath

Cyrus' Entry and Initial Administration

Cyrus the Great entered Babylon on 29 October 539 BC, the third day of the month Arahsamna (Arahšamna), following the city's surrender without significant resistance after the Persian diversion of the Euphrates River and the capture of Sippar.^[2] The Nabonidus Chronicle records that the Persian general Ugbaru (identified by some scholars with the Gobryas of Xenophon) led forces into the city, securing the palace and executing Nabonidus' officials who had not fled, while Cyrus himself advanced without battle, indicating a calculated display of restraint to legitimize his rule among the Babylonian populace.^[2] This entry was portrayed in Babylonian records as divinely sanctioned, with Cyrus welcomed by residents weary of Nabonidus' religious innovations and prolonged absences.^[28] In the immediate aftermath, Ugbaru was appointed as governor of Gutium and all Babylonian lands, overseeing the installation of Cyrus' son Cambyses on the throne of Babylon to participate in the Akitu New Year festival, a key ritual affirming kingship under Marduk's auspices.^[2] Ugbaru's sudden death shortly after prompted administrative adjustments, though the Chronicle notes prayers and offerings for Cyrus' family, signaling continuity in Babylonian cultic practices rather than disruption.^[2] The Cyrus Cylinder, inscribed soon after the conquest, details initial policies of restoring temples and returning displaced divine images—such as those removed by Nabonidus—while emphasizing Cyrus' piety toward Marduk, which served to integrate Persian authority with local religious structures and mitigate potential unrest from priestly elites.^[28] Administrative measures included the pardoning of Nabonidus, who was exiled rather than executed, preserving elite continuity and avoiding martyrdom narratives that could fuel resistance.^[2] Cyrus maintained the existing bureaucracy, issuing proclamations in Babylonian Akkadian to affirm his role as restorer of order, with economic incentives like debt remission and land return aimed at stabilizing loyalty among merchants and landowners affected by Nabonidus' fiscal policies.^[28] These steps reflected pragmatic governance, prioritizing legitimacy through accommodation of Babylonian traditions over immediate Persian centralization, as evidenced by the absence of reported purges or mass deportations in the primary cuneiform records.^[2]

Suppression of Resistance

Following the Persian forces' entry into Babylon on 12 October 539 BC, Ugbaru (Gobryas), Cyrus' general, secured the palace and royal quarter with minimal bloodshed, as the city's defenses had collapsed after the diversion of the Euphrates River and the prior surrender of outlying regions like Sippar. Crown prince Belshazzar, acting as regent in Nabonidus' absence, was killed during the initial takeover, depriving any pro-Chaldean factions of unified leadership and effectively neutralizing organized resistance within the capital.^[2]^[29] Nabonidus himself, having fled but subsequently captured in Babylon, faced no public execution; instead, he was detained and later exiled to Carmania (modern Kerman, Iran), a lenient treatment reflecting Cyrus' strategy to avoid alienating Babylonian elites and priesthood, who had grown discontent with Nabonidus' religious policies. Persian shield-bearers encircled the city's gates for several days post-conquest to maintain order and deter sporadic unrest from troops or loyalists, but the Nabonidus Chronicle reports no widespread revolts or battles within Babylon itself. This rapid consolidation stemmed from pre-existing internal divisions, including priestly opposition to Nabonidus' favoritism toward the moon god Sin over Marduk, which Cyrus exploited by immediately authorizing the return of plundered cult images to their temples.^[2]^[30] Ugbaru's appointment as temporary governor facilitated the transition, though his death four days after installing Cyrus' son Cambyses as sub-king suggests the administration prioritized stability over punitive measures. Economic incentives, such as debt amnesties and irrigation repairs promised in the Cyrus Cylinder, further subdued potential dissent by addressing grievances from Nabonidus' era, ensuring the province's integration without prolonged guerrilla activity or mass deportations in the immediate aftermath. Later satrapal records under Darius I indicate isolated pockets of Chaldean resistance emerged years afterward, but the 539 events evince effective, low-violence suppression through co-optation rather than terror.^[2]^[13]

Long-Term Integration

Partition and Provincial Reorganization

Following the conquest of Babylon in October 539 BCE, Cyrus the Great initially maintained significant administrative continuity in Babylonia to ensure stability, appointing the general Ugbaru (also known as Gubaru) as governor over both Babylon and the region Across-the-River (Eber-Nari, encompassing the Levant west of the Euphrates). Ugbaru's brief tenure, ending with his death approximately three weeks after the city's capture, involved installing sub-governors in key Babylonian cities such as Uruk, Ur, and Sippar, thereby preserving local governance structures without immediate large-scale partition. This approach reflected Cyrus's strategy of co-opting existing Babylonian institutions rather than imposing a wholesale Persian overlay, as evidenced by cuneiform records indicating minimal disruption to temple administrations and land tenures.^[30] In 538 BCE, Cyrus elevated his son Cambyses II to the position of king of Babylonia, a move that formalized Persian overlordship while allowing the title "King of Babylon" to continue, thus integrating the region as a semi-autonomous royal domain under Achaemenid suzerainty rather than dissolving it into fragmented provinces. This personal union preserved Babylonia's unified status temporarily, with Cambyses performing traditional rituals like the akitu festival to legitimize rule among the local priesthood and populace. By 535 BCE, however, Cyrus restructured the administration by merging Babylonia proper with Eber-Nari into a single consolidated province, extending Persian administrative reach westward and streamlining tribute collection and military levies across former Neo-Babylonian territories. This unification subordinated diverse regions—from the Mesopotamian heartland to Phoenician coastal cities—under centralized oversight, marking an early step toward the satrapal framework later expanded by Darius I.^[13]^[30] The nascent provincial system under Cyrus emphasized fiscal and judicial continuity, with Babylonian officials retained in roles such as judges and tax collectors, though Persian oversight increased through royal appointees monitoring temple economies and irrigation networks critical to the region's agriculture. No evidence suggests a rigid partition into multiple satrapies during Cyrus's reign; instead, Babylonia functioned as a core territorial bloc, contributing substantial silver talents in tribute—estimated at 1,000 talents annually based on later Achaemenid records—while retaining internal subdivisions like the districts of Dilmun (eastern Arabia) and parts of Assyria. Subsequent rulers, including Cambyses and Darius I, built on this by subdividing the satrapy around 516 BCE into Babylonia and Athura (northern Mesopotamia and Syria), reflecting evolving needs for defense against nomadic incursions and efficient resource extraction. These adjustments prioritized causal stability over radical reconfiguration, as abrupt partitions risked alienating the urban elite and priesthood whose support Cyrus had secured through policies of religious tolerance.^[30]^[31]

Cultural and Religious Policies

Cyrus's religious policies in Babylonia emphasized restoration of local cults to legitimize Persian rule and appease the priesthood alienated by Nabonidus's favoritism toward the moon god Sin over Marduk. The Cyrus Cylinder, inscribed in Akkadian shortly after the 539 BCE conquest, declares that Cyrus repaired the Esagila temple of Marduk in Babylon and the Ezida temple of Nabu in Borsippa, returning displaced divine images to their shrines and reinstating neglected rituals.^[28] This reversal addressed grievances documented in Babylonian chronicles, where Nabonidus's 17-year absence from Babylon and prioritization of Sin's temple in Harran had provoked priestly discontent.^[32] By portraying himself as Marduk's anointed king who ended Nabonidus's "impieties," Cyrus aligned with Babylonian theology, a standard Mesopotamian royal strategy rather than a novel universal tolerance.^[13] Broader Achaemenid practice under Cyrus avoided imposing Zoroastrian elements on Babylonian religion, permitting the continuation of polytheistic cults and temple economies in exchange for loyalty and tribute.^[13] Temples regained autonomy in managing lands and festivals, with Persian oversight limited to satrapal taxation, including adoption of the Babylonian one-tenth temple tithe system.^[33] This pragmatic integration stabilized the region, as evidenced by cuneiform texts showing uninterrupted scribal traditions in Babylonian astronomy and divination under early Persian kings.^[34] Culturally, Persian administrators preserved Babylonian scholarly institutions, incorporating cuneiform for imperial records alongside Aramaic, while adopting architectural motifs like glazed brickwork and ziggurat-inspired platforms in Achaemenid palaces.^[34] Local elites retained influence in education and law, with no evidence of forced Persianization; instead, hybrid influences emerged, such as Babylonian astronomical data informing Persian calendars.^[35] Over time, this policy of respecting indigenous customs—extending to language and trade practices—facilitated economic continuity, with Babylonian merchants operating under familiar legal codes.^[35] Such measures prioritized administrative efficiency over cultural erasure, contrasting with Assyrian deportations but rooted in self-interest rather than ideological universalism.^[32]

Primary Historical Sources

Babylonian Chronicles and Cuneiform Records

The Babylonian Chronicles comprise a series of cuneiform tablets inscribed in Akkadian script, compiled by scribes or priests to document significant political, military, and religious events in Babylonian history on a year-by-year basis. These records, spanning from the 8th century BC onward, provide terse, annalistic accounts without overt ideological embellishment, though they reflect the perspective of Babylonian elites, particularly those associated with the Esagil temple in Babylon.^[36] The chronicles for the Neo-Babylonian period, including the fall to Persian forces in 539 BC, derive from clay tablets excavated or acquired in the 19th century, with authenticity confirmed through paleographic analysis and colophons indicating scribal traditions.^[2] The primary chronicle detailing the fall of Babylon is ABC 7, known as the Nabonidus Chronicle (British Museum tablet BM 35382), which covers the reign of Nabonidus from 556 to 539 BC. This four-column tablet, though fragmentary with lacunas due to breakage, records events in reverse chronological order per regnal year, focusing on temple activities, royal actions, and external threats. For Nabonidus' 17th year (corresponding to 539 BC), it describes Cyrus the Great's campaign as commencing with a battle at Opis on the Tigris River against the Babylonian army of Akkad, resulting in retreat, plunder, and slaughter among the defenders.^[2] ^[36] Sippar fell without resistance on the 14th of Tashritu (September/October), prompting Nabonidus to flee; two days later, on the 16th, Ugbaru (likely Gubaru, a Persian governor) and Cyrus' troops entered Babylon bloodlessly, capturing Nabonidus upon his return.^[2] Subsequent entries note Cyrus' formal entry into Babylon on the 3rd of Arahsamna (late October), where he imposed peace, appointed sub-governors, and ensured no disruption to the Esagil temple's rituals, with Gutian (Persian) forces stationed at its gates but not interfering. The chronicle records the return of divine images from outlying shrines to their temples between Kislimu and Addaru, signaling administrative continuity under Persian rule, alongside Ugbaru's death on the 11th of Arahsamna.^[2] ^[36] Nabonidus' fate post-capture is unstated beyond his arrest, but the text omits any prolonged siege or urban combat in Babylon itself, emphasizing orderly transition and Marduk's apparent favor toward Cyrus through the restoration of cult practices.^[2] Complementary cuneiform records include administrative tablets from Babylonian archives, such as those from the Eanna temple in Uruk and Nippur, which document tax collections, land grants, and personnel changes immediately following October 539 BC, indicating rapid integration into Achaemenid governance without evidence of widespread destruction or economic collapse. These economic texts, numbering in the thousands, corroborate the chronicle's portrayal of minimal disruption in core Babylonian institutions.^[36] Scholarly editions, such as A. K. Grayson's collation, affirm the chronicle's reliability as a near-contemporary source, though its priestly origin may prioritize religious over military details, potentially understating Babylonian agency in the surrender.^[36] No other dedicated chronicles survive for this event, but fragments like ABC 6 reference prior tensions under Nabonidus, contextualizing the empire's vulnerability.^[2]

Cyrus Cylinder as Propaganda

The Cyrus Cylinder, a barrel-shaped clay artifact inscribed in Akkadian cuneiform and measuring about 23 centimeters in length, was likely composed in Babylon around 539–538 BCE under Cyrus the Great's authority following his conquest of the city.^[28] The text opens with praise for Marduk, Babylon's chief deity, who is depicted as dissatisfied with Nabonidus for neglecting traditional cults and imposing the worship of Sin, prompting Marduk to seek a righteous ruler elsewhere.^[37] It portrays Cyrus—explicitly identified as king of Persia, not initially of Babylon—as Marduk's chosen instrument, entering the city peacefully amid rejoicing crowds, without significant resistance or destruction.^[37] This narrative functions as deliberate propaganda to legitimize Cyrus's usurpation of Babylonian sovereignty by co-opting local religious ideology, a tactic rooted in Mesopotamian royal inscription traditions where conquerors invoked divine endorsement to mask foreign origins and military imposition.^[38] By emphasizing Cyrus's restitution of plundered divine images (numbering in the thousands, per the text), repair of temples like the Esagila, and repatriation of displaced populations to their original settlements, the cylinder constructs an image of Cyrus as a restorer of cosmic and social order, contrasting sharply with Nabonidus's alleged impiety.^[37] Such omissions of any coercive elements in the conquest—evident in divergent accounts like the Nabonidus Chronicle—underscore its selective framing to foster acquiescence among Babylonian priesthoods and elites, whose support was essential for administrative continuity. Scholars classify the cylinder within Achaemenid imperial strategy, where propaganda inscriptions blended Persian expansionism with subject peoples' theologies to minimize unrest, as analyzed by Amélie Kuhrt in her examination of its role in policy toward conquered regions.^[39] While the text's claims of benevolence align with broader evidence of Cyrus's tolerance toward local cults, its hyperbolic divine favoritism and erasure of Persian agency reflect calculated rhetoric rather than unvarnished history, akin to Assyrian predecessors like Assurbanipal whose inscriptions it echoes in structure and motif.^[40] Modern appropriations, such as Iranian revolutionary-era portrayals of it as a universal human rights charter, exemplify further propagandistic reinterpretation detached from its original context of monarchical self-justification.^[41]

Accounts from Greek Historians

Herodotus, writing in the mid-fifth century BCE, describes Cyrus the Great's capture of Babylon in 539 BCE as a feat of engineering and opportunism. In Histories 1.188–192, he recounts that Cyrus, advancing toward Babylon, first diverted the Gyndes River—angry over the drowning of a sacred white horse—into 360 channels, delaying his army until the following spring. Upon arrival, exploiting a pre-existing basin dug by Queen Nitocris to divert the Euphrates during floods, Cyrus lowered the river's level by channeling it away, allowing Persian troops to ford the dry bed and enter the city undetected. The Babylonians, preoccupied with a festival and confident in their impregnable walls and provisions, failed to guard the river gates, enabling the surprise seizure of the citadel.^[27] Xenophon, in his semi-fictional Cyropaedia composed around 370 BCE, portrays the conquest as a demonstration of Cyrus' leadership and siegecraft rather than hydraulic diversion. In Book 7.5, Cyrus encircles Babylon with his multinational army, surveys the formidable defenses, and initiates a prolonged blockade. Recognizing the city's vast grain stores could sustain a long defense, he constructs earthen ramps higher than the walls and deploys siege engines, while simultaneously undermining morale through displays of Persian discipline and promises of equitable rule. The narrative culminates in the Babylonian king being killed in the fighting, with the populace surrendering after witnessing the Persians' superiority, avoiding wholesale destruction but emphasizing Cyrus' strategic patience over a single ruse.^[42]^[43] Ctesias of Cnidus, a fifth-century BCE physician at the Persian court whose Persica covered Assyrian, Median, and early Achaemenid history, included Cyrus' Babylonian campaign in his 23-book chronicle, but surviving fragments via later excerpts like Photius provide no specifics on the capture method. His account diverges from Herodotus in Cyrus' Median origins and early exploits, suggesting reliance on Persian oral traditions, yet prioritizes dramatic elements like betrayals and battles over logistical details for Babylon itself.^[44]^[45] Berossus, a third-century BCE Chaldean priest authoring Babyloniaca in Greek for a Hellenistic audience, draws from temple archives to depict Cyrus entering Babylon bloodlessly after Nabonidus' forces were routed at Opis in October 539 BCE. In preserved fragments, the city welcomes Cyrus as a liberator honoring Marduk, though Berossus uniquely claims Cyrus later razed the outer walls—a detail absent from contemporary cuneiform but possibly reflecting later Achaemenid actions or interpretive bias toward emphasizing Persian dominance. This version, closer to Babylonian records, contrasts the more embellished Greek siege tales by highlighting administrative handover over military drama.^[46]^[47]

Biblical Accounts

Prophetic Foretellings in Isaiah and Jeremiah

The Book of Isaiah attributes to the prophet Isaiah son of Amoz several oracles foretelling Babylon's downfall, primarily in chapters 13–14 and 21, composed around the 8th century BCE during the Assyrian period when Babylon was not yet dominant. Isaiah 13:1–22 depicts a "burden" or oracle against Babylon as a day of the Lord involving cosmic upheaval, with the Medes stirred to attack and utterly destroy the city, leaving it desolate and uninhabited, a haunt for wild beasts like jackals and ostriches, with its walls fallen and houses ruined.^[48]^[49] This prophecy emphasizes irreversible desolation, stating Babylon "will never be inhabited or lived in from generation to generation," aligning with later emphases on perpetual ruin but contrasting the relatively intact physical fall in 539 BCE.^[50] Isaiah 14:1–23 extends the oracle with taunts against Babylon's king, portraying his descent to Sheol amid the city's fall, and reaffirms the Medes' role in breaking bows and not sparing the young men, rendering the land a wilderness of thorns.^[51] Isaiah 21:1–10, titled "The fall of Babylon," envisions watchmen crying out upon seeing dust from approaching riders and chariots, confirming Elam and Media's mobilization to besiege and destroy Babylon, with the prophet experiencing anguish like a woman in labor.^[52] Scholarly analyses, including examinations of linguistic and thematic links to earlier Assyrian-era contexts, support an 8th-century dating for these proto-Isaianic passages, viewing them as predictive warnings against imperial hubris rather than ex eventu compositions.^[53] The Book of Jeremiah, attributed to the prophet active from the late 7th to early 6th century BCE, devotes chapters 50–51 to extended oracles against Babylon, delivered amid Judah's subjugation and predicting retribution for the 586 BCE destruction of Jerusalem. Jeremiah 50:1–46 proclaims Babylon's sudden desolation by invaders from the north, with its land uninhabited and arrows like a skilled warrior's striking without missing, while God summons the kings of the Medes to repay Babylon for its violence against the temple.^[54] Key predictions include the drying of waters (evoking Cyrus' Euphrates diversion in 539 BCE), breached walls, and captured idols, rendering Babylon a desolation where none dwell.^[55] Jeremiah 51:1–64 intensifies the imagery, naming "Leb Kamai" (a code for Babylon) and detailing a destroying wind from the north, with Median kings—alongside Ararat, Minni, and Ashkenaz—mobilized to shatter the city like a potter's vessel, its sea waters dried up and land scorched.^[55] The oracle commands stones and dust hurled upon Babylon, ensuring it sinks to rise no more because of offenses against the Lord, with specific calls for its watchmen to announce the attack and inhabitants to flee.^[56] Structural analyses of these chapters highlight poetic parallelism and perspectives on divine sovereignty, generally dating them to Jeremiah's pre-exilic ministry, though editorial shaping occurred post-586 BCE, positioning them as authentic warnings of imperial reversal.^[57] Both prophetic corpora emphasize Median involvement and utter desolation, elements partially echoed in historical accounts but amplified for theological emphasis on judgment.

Daniel's Narrative of the Fall

In the Book of Daniel, chapter 5, the narrative portrays the fall of Babylon as an abrupt divine judgment during a feast hosted by King Belshazzar, described as the son of Nebuchadnezzar and ruler in his place.^[58] Belshazzar commands the use of golden and silver vessels looted from the Temple in Jerusalem by his predecessor Nebuchadnezzar decades earlier, leading his lords, wives, and concubines to drink wine from them while praising idols of gold, silver, bronze, iron, wood, and stone.^[59] This act of sacrilege prompts the appearance of the fingers of a human hand writing on the plastered wall of the royal palace, visible to the king opposite the lampstand; the inscription reads MENE, MENE, TEKEL, UPHARSIN.^[60] Terrified, Belshazzar summons his enchanters, astrologers, and diviners, offering the interpreter royal robes, a gold chain, and the position of third ruler in the kingdom—reflecting his own status as second to his father Nabonidus—but none can read or interpret the writing.^[61] The queen mother advises calling Daniel, an aged Jewish exile elevated under Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar’s grandfather for his wisdom from God, dismissing payment but urging accurate interpretation.^[62] Daniel rebukes Belshazzar for failing to humble himself despite knowing Nebuchadnezzar’s humiliation for pride, interpreting the words as: MENE (God has numbered your kingdom's days and finished it), TEKEL (you are weighed in the balances and found wanting), and PERES (your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians); he links Upharsin (singular of Peres) to this division.^[63] Belshazzar honors Daniel with purple robes, a gold chain, and proclamation as third ruler, yet that same night he is killed, and "Darius the Mede" takes the kingdom at about 62 years old.^[64] The account frames Babylon's collapse as retribution for blasphemy against the God of Israel, contrasting Babylonian hubris with divine sovereignty over empires, consistent with Daniel's earlier visions of successive kingdoms supplanted by God's eternal rule.^[65] While the narrative aligns with the 539 BCE conquest by Cyrus the Great, it introduces "Darius the Mede" as conqueror, a figure unattested in extrabiblical records like the Nabonidus Chronicle, which confirms Belshazzar's role as crown prince but attributes the city's surrender to Persian forces under Cyrus without immediate regicide.^[2]

Scholarly Interpretations and Debates

Evidence for Peaceful versus Violent Conquest

The Babylonian Chronicle, a contemporary cuneiform record known as ABC 7 or the Nabonidus Chronicle, provides the primary evidence for a largely peaceful conquest of Babylon itself. It details that after Persian forces under Cyrus defeated the Babylonian army at Opis on October 14, 539 BCE, the cities of Sippar and Babylon surrendered without resistance; general Ugbaru (identified with Gobryas) entered Babylon on October 16 without battle, while King Nabonidus fled to the palace. Cyrus himself entered the city three days later amid celebrations, with the chronicle noting that "all the people of Babylon, the entire land of Sumer and Akkad, princes and governors, bowed to him and kissed his feet."^[2] This account, inscribed shortly after the events by Babylonian scribes, emphasizes submission rather than combat within the city walls, suggesting internal discontent with Nabonidus facilitated the bloodless handover.^[66] Corroborating this is the Cyrus Cylinder, a clay inscription commissioned by Cyrus' administration in late 539 BCE, which proclaims his "peaceful" entry into Babylon, where the populace greeted him joyfully and he restored temples neglected under Nabonidus. While propagandistic in tone—aimed at legitimizing Persian rule by portraying Cyrus as a liberator rather than conqueror—it aligns with the chronicle's narrative of minimal violence in the capital and reflects the administrative perspective immediately post-conquest.^[28] Scholars note that such royal inscriptions often downplay conflict to emphasize divine favor, yet the absence of claims about storming the city or punishing resistors supports the chronicle's depiction of capitulation over siege.^[67] In contrast, later Greek historians like Herodotus and Xenophon describe a more dramatic, violent scenario. Herodotus, writing in the mid-5th century BCE, recounts Cyrus diverting the Euphrates River to lower its level, enabling Persian troops to wade in and surprise revelers during a festival, capturing the city by stealth. Xenophon's Cyropaedia, from the early 4th century BCE, similarly depicts an engineered river crossing for undetected entry. These accounts, however, rely on oral traditions over a century removed from the events and include legendary elements inconsistent with contemporary records; for instance, Herodotus' details on Babylonian customs and engineering feats have been critiqued for inaccuracies elsewhere.^[27]^[68] Archaeological evidence tilts toward the peaceful interpretation, as excavations in Babylon—such as those by Robert Koldewey in the early 20th century and later German and Iraqi projects—reveal no widespread destruction layers, burn marks, or mass casualties datable to 539 BCE, unlike clear signs of violence from earlier conquests like Sennacherib's in 689 BCE. The continuity of Neo-Babylonian structures into the Achaemenid period, including the Ishtar Gate's intact state, indicates the city avoided sacking. Scholarly consensus, drawing on these primaries and the lack of contradictory material evidence, favors a conquest involving peripheral battles (e.g., at Opis) but peaceful submission of Babylon due to Nabonidus' unpopularity and strategic Persian maneuvers, dismissing Greek tales as embellished folklore.^[10]

Archaeological Corroboration and Gaps

Excavations at the site of ancient Babylon, conducted primarily by Robert Koldewey between 1899 and 1917 under the Deutsche Orient-Gesellschaft, uncovered extensive Neo-Babylonian structures such as the Ishtar Gate and the Processional Way, which showed no signs of destruction or burn layers datable to 539 BC.^[69] These findings align with cuneiform records indicating that Persian forces under Cyrus entered the city without significant resistance following battles upstream at Opis and Sippar, suggesting administrative continuity rather than violent upheaval in the urban core.^[10] Post-conquest Persian-period artifacts and architectural modifications, including repairs to existing temples, further corroborate a transition marked by preservation of Babylonian infrastructure rather than wholesale ruin.^[70] Archaeological evidence from nearby sites, such as Nippur, reveals cuneiform tablet archives spanning the Neo-Babylonian to Achaemenid transition, documenting regime change through shifts in administrative personnel and seals but without indicators of widespread physical disruption.^[71] At Ur, excavations by Leonard Woolley uncovered Neo-Babylonian and Persian layers demonstrating occupational continuity, with temples and residential areas intact into the Achaemenid era, supporting the broader pattern of Persian policy favoring integration over demolition.^[72] This material record thus bolsters textual claims of Cyrus' strategy emphasizing legitimacy through temple restorations, as evidenced by foundation deposits like the Cyrus Cylinder embedded in Babylonian structures.^[28] Significant gaps persist due to incomplete excavation coverage; only a fraction of Babylon's 2500-acre site has been systematically explored, with key areas like potential defensive outworks remaining unprobed amid modern agricultural and urban overlays.^[73] Saddam Hussein's 1980s reconstructions, including rebuilt palaces using modern bricks, have obscured original stratigraphy, hindering precise dating of transitional layers.^[74] Political instability and restricted access in Iraq since the 1990s Gulf Wars have curtailed fieldwork, leaving sites like Opis—scene of the decisive pre-conquest battle—entirely unexcavated and reliant on textual inference alone.^[10] Interpretive challenges arise from the scarcity of datable artifacts directly tied to 539 BC events, compounded by looting and erosion, which limit confirmation of localized violence or the scale of Persian military presence within the city.^[75]

Modern Reassessments of Nabonidus' Role

Modern historiography has increasingly challenged the traditional narrative of Nabonidus as an erratic or unpopular ruler whose religious deviations precipitated Babylon's collapse, a view shaped by Persian propaganda in the Cyrus Cylinder and amplified by later Greek and biblical traditions. Instead, reassessments portray him as a pragmatic monarch navigating a decaying empire built hastily on Assyrian foundations, with policies aimed at economic revitalization and religious reconfiguration rather than mere fanaticism. Paul-Alain Beaulieu's analysis of Nabonidus' royal inscriptions and administrative texts concludes that he was a capable administrator who implemented reforms to counter fiscal strains and external threats, evidenced by his extensive temple restorations and over 3,000 surviving cuneiform documents—far exceeding those of prior Neo-Babylonian kings—which document deliberate efforts to legitimize his rule through antiquarian interests and divine mandates from Sin.^[76]^[9] Nabonidus' elevation of the moon god Sin, centered at Harran and Teima, over Marduk—the patron of Babylon—has been reevaluated not as a primary cause of elite alienation but as a strategic bid for ideological unity across a diverse realm, potentially drawing on his non-royal origins to forge a broader cultic base amid priestly factionalism. While earlier scholars inferred widespread discontent from the Cylinder's depiction of Nabonidus as neglectful of urban cults, empirical review of Babylonian chronicles reveals no explicit internal revolt during the 539 BCE conquest; rather, his decade-long sojourn in Teima (likely 552–543 BCE) secured Arabian trade routes against nomadic incursions and Arab allies of Persia, reflecting calculated peripheral defense over central neglect. Beaulieu attributes any perceived unpopularity to post-conquest vilification, noting that Nabonidus maintained regnal continuity through his son Belshazzar and enjoyed documented support from provincial governors.^[76]^[10] Archaeological and textual evidence further nuances Nabonidus' culpability in the empire's fall, emphasizing systemic vulnerabilities like overextension from Nebuchadnezzar II's conquests and inadequate military mobilization against Cyrus the Great's campaigns, rather than personal eccentricity. His self-proclaimed "archaeological" excavations at ancient temple sites, such as Ur and Sippar, demonstrate a forward-thinking ruler invoking historical precedents for legitimacy, not delusion, as corroborated by foundation deposits dated to his reign (556–539 BCE). Recent syntheses argue that while Nabonidus' absence from Babylon eroded ceremonial cohesion—potentially easing Persian entry via the Euphrates diversion—the decisive factors were Cyrus' propaganda-fueled defections among border garrisons and the empire's fiscal exhaustion from prior wars, not a wholesale rejection of Nabonidus' piety. This perspective, grounded in primary cuneiform sources over secondary biases, posits his role as contributory but not causal, with the Neo-Babylonian collapse rooted in unsustainable imperial structures predating his accession.^[9]^[10]^[76]

References

[1]
Cyrus the Great - Livius.org
Oct 12, 2020 · In October 539 BCE, the Persian king Cyrus took Babylon, the ancient capital of an oriental empire covering modern Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and ...
[2]
ABC 7 (Nabonidus Chronicle) - Livius.org
Jul 14, 2020 · The Nabonidus Chronicle tells the story of the rule of Nabonidus, the last king of independent Babylonia.
[3]
Cyrus Cylinder Translation - Livius.org
Jul 13, 2020 · In the Cyrus Cylinder, a cuneiform tablet now in the British Museum, Cyrus describes how he had conquered Babylon (October 539 BCE).
[4]
The Cyrus Cylinder and Ancient Persia: A New Beginning
Inscribed with cuneiform script, the Cylinder records the conquest of Babylon in 539 B.C. by the Persian king Cyrus the Great (ruled 559–530 B.C.). Even ...Missing: BCE | Show results with:BCE
[5]
The Neo-Babylonian Empire - Oxford Academic
Mar 23, 2023 · Quantitatively, texts in Babylonian written in the cuneiform script outnumber by far all other types of sources for the Neo-Babylonian Empire.
[6]
Neo-Babylonian empire | History, Exile, Achievements ... - Britannica
In 556 he was succeeded by his young son Labashi-Marduk, who was murdered soon after taking the throne. Stability was restored when Nabonidus (Akkadian: Nabu- ...
[7]
Neo-Babylonians (Chaldeans) - Middle East And North Africa
Decline and Fall of Neo-Babylonia After Nebuchadnezzar II. After Nebuchadnezzar's death, Babylon once again declined. Babylonian was given up to the Persians ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[8]
https://oxfordre.com/classics/display/10.1093/acrefore/9780199381135.001.0001/acrefore-9780199381135-e-9027
[9]
The Last King of Babylon - Archaeology Magazine - March/April 2022
Cuneiform texts make clear that the Neo-Babylonian king Nabonidus (r. 556–539 B.C.) elevated the status of the moon god Sin at the expense of Babylon's long- ...
[10]
The Fall of Babylon: A Reassessment - Popular Archeology
Apr 10, 2019 · One of the most pivotal points in ancient history is the fall of the Neo-Babylonian Empire[i]. Its demise was sudden and unexpected.
[11]
The Neo-Babylonian empire: (626–539 bc) - Oxford Academic
By and large, Nabonidus's military policies seem to have been soundly based, even if they ultimately failed to save the empire from its fall. Let us now ...<|separator|>
[12]
The Achaemenid Persian Empire (550–330 B.C.)
Oct 1, 2004 · Its formation began in 550 B.C., when King Astyages of Media, who dominated much of Iran and eastern Anatolia (Turkey), was defeated by his ...Missing: rise primary
[13]
CYRUS iii. Cyrus II The Great - Encyclopaedia Iranica
Cyrus II the Great (also known to the Greeks as Cyrus the Elder; b. ca. 600 BCE, d. 530 BCE) was the founder of the Achaemenid empire.
[14]
Cyrus the Great's Conquests - World History Encyclopedia
Aug 15, 2022 · The Achaemenid Persian Empire as a geopolitical unit lasted from c. 550 to 330 BCE, from the reign of Cyrus the Great to Darius III, whose death ...
[15]
Sardis - The Metropolitan Museum of Art
Oct 1, 2004 · In 546 B.C., the Lydian empire was conquered by the Persians under Cyrus the Great, who made Sardis the chief western terminus of a major ...
[16]
Cyrus the Great - World History Encyclopedia
Feb 21, 2018 · CONQUEST OF LYDIA. Cyrus conquered Lydia sometime between the fall of Ecbatana (550 BCE) and the fall of Babylon (539 BCE). The Nabonidus ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[17]
The 220-Year History of the Achaemenid Persian Empire
Mar 12, 2017 · An overview of Persian history starting from Cyrus the Great's conquest of Media (549 BCE.) until Alexander the Great's conquest of Persia (334-329 BCE.)Missing: timeline | Show results with:timeline
[18]
The Cylinders of Nabonidus - World History Edu
Nov 6, 2024 · Nabonidus's promotion of Sin likely contributed to unrest among the Babylonian priesthood and nobility, who perceived his devotion as ...<|separator|>
[19]
Nabonidus: The First Archaeologist - Biblical Archaeology Society
Mar 4, 2024 · Nabonidus returned to Babylon in 542, and likely carried out his archaeological excavation of the Ebabbar temple shortly thereafter. Only a few ...
[20]
The Lost Years of Nabonidus, Last King of the Neo-Babylonian Empire
During many years of his kingship, Nabonidus was absent at the Arabian oasis of Tayma. The reasons for his long absence remain a matter of controversy, with ...
[21]
8 The Religious Reform of Nabonidus: A Sceptical View - MPRL
The reason for the absence of Nabonidus from Babylon is adequately explained in the Chronicle of Nabonidus with his stay in Taima, but Smith ignores this ...Missing: Tema | Show results with:Tema
[22]
[PDF] Nabonidus, Belshazzar, and the Book of Daniel: An Update
The Verse Account refers to Belshazzar as the king's eldest son when the kingship was "entrusted" to him, and the Nabonidus. Chronicle refers to him as the " ...
[23]
Belshazzar: An Archaeological Biography
Jan 19, 2024 · Belshazzar is named as the king who was ruling in Babylon on the night the kingdom fell to the army of Cyrus the Great of Persia.
[24]
The Historicity of Belshazzar - Ministry Magazine
Under six different heads the author classifies the evidence that Belshazzar was associated with his father Nabonidus during the closing years of the Neo- ...
[25]
Fall of Babylon in 539 BC - World History Edu
Nabonidus was the last king of Babylon. He was unpopular, especially among the Marduk priesthood, for favoring the moon god Sin over Marduk, the chief ...
[26]
Nabonidus & Exaltation of Sîn - C'est la vie Priyā - WordPress.com
Mar 25, 2022 · The most discussed of these actions is his religious policy ie trying to establish the supremacy of the moon-god Sîn over Marduk, the supreme god of Babylon.
[27]
Herodotus on Cyrus' capture of Babylon - Livius.org
Jul 14, 2020 · In October 539 BCE, the Persian king Cyrus took Babylon, the ancient capital of an empire covering modern Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Israel.
[28]
cylinder | British Museum
Description: The Cyrus cylinder: clay cylinder; a Babylonian account of the conquest of Babylon by Cyrus in 539 BC, of his restoration to various temples of ...<|separator|>
[29]
BABYLONIAN CHRONICLES - Encyclopaedia Iranica
They began with the reign of Nabu-nāṣir (747-734 BCE) and continued as far as the reign of Seleucus II (245-226 BCE).Missing: details | Show results with:details
[30]
BABYLONIA i. History of Babylonia in the Median and Achaemenid ...
Babylonia came into being early in the second millennium B.C. and lasted until it was conquered by the Persians in 539 B.C. For the early history of Babylonia ...Missing: primary | Show results with:primary
[31]
How Repressive was Achaemenid rule over Babylon? - Academia.edu
Cyrus the Great maintained Babylonian administrative continuity to stabilize the region post-conquest. · The Cyrus cylinder served as propaganda, promoting ...Missing: reorganization | Show results with:reorganization
[32]
Cyrus Cylinder - Livius.org
Oct 12, 2020 · So, Cyrus presented himself to the conquered nation as a normal ruler. There is no evidence that Cyrus inaugurated a new policy of tolerance.
[33]
Babylonia - ACHEMENET
Babylonia, ie, lower Mesopotamia, represented a well-defined geographic territory during Achaemenid times. It revolved around several ensembles defined by ...
[34]
BABYLON - Encyclopaedia Iranica
The influence of Babylonian culture on Achaemenid art is apparent in various remains: e.g., use of terraced platforms in palace construction, wall decoration ...
[35]
History of Iran: Achaemenid Society and Culture
It was a conscious policy of Cyrus and Darius to permit conquered nations to retain their own religion, customs, their methods of doing business, and even to ...
[36]
[PDF] CHRONICLES OF CHALDAEAN KINGS
From about the reign of Nabonassar in the eighth century B.C., when the Assyrian domination of Babylon began, the Chronicles ... Babylonian kingdom (626-539 B.C.) ...
[37]
Cyrus The Great' Cylinder (Transliteration And The Translation)
During excavations at Babylon (1879-82), Assyrian archaeologist Hormuzd Rassam discovered a small (ten inches), clay, barrel-shaped cylinder that contained ...
[38]
Cyrus the Great. Life and Lore. Ilex Series
$$24.95It is concerned with the analysis of propaganda in the ancient sense, which he defines as “a conscious attempt by a social group to impose or encourage an ...
[39]
[PDF] Copyright © 2022 Duncan Andrew Collins
Scholars in this camp closely align the Nabonidus Chronicle with the Cyrus ... “Nabonidus Chronicle: New Readings and the Identity of Darius the Mede.<|control11|><|separator|>
[40]
The idea of an archetype in texts stemming from the empire founded ...
Sep 26, 2024 · This reference to Assurbanipal in the text of the Cyrus Cylinder is one of many signs indicating an active adoption of Mesopotamian and even Assyrian ...
[41]
[PDF] Cyrus cylinder's ancient bill of rights 'is just propaganda'
Cyrus cylinder's ancient bill of rights 'is just propaganda'. A 2500 year old Persian treasure dubbed the world's 'first bill of human rights' has been ...
[42]
Cyropaedia, by Xenophon - Project Gutenberg
A political romance, describing the education of the ideal ruler, trained to rule as a benevolent despot over his admiring and willing subjects.
[43]
Cyropaedia of Xenophon, the Life of Cyrus the Great (book 7)
[7.4.16] On the way to Babylon he subdued Greater Phrygia and Cappadocia and reduced the Arabians to submission. From all these he secured armour for not less ...
[44]
CTESIAS - Encyclopaedia Iranica
Ctesias' overall approach is puzzling, especially as he seems to have had no interest in Greco-Persian relations; the conquest of the Ionian Greeks by Cyrus ...
[45]
Ctesias, Overview of the works - Livius.org
Jun 1, 2020 · Ctesias was a Greek physician who stayed at the court of the Persian king Artaxerxes II Mnemon from 404 to 398/397. He wrote several books about Persia and ...
[46]
BEROSSUS - Encyclopaedia Iranica
Berossus claimed that his history was based on cuneiform sources preserved in the temple of Bel at Babylon, and his claim is amply confirmed by the fragments ...
[47]
The World of Berossos - Bryn Mawr Classical Review
In the first half of the third century BCE, the Babylonian priest Berossus wrote a history of Babylonia ( Babyloniaká) in three volumes.
[48]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2013&version=NIV
[49]
Enduring Word Bible Commentary Isaiah Chapter 13
David Guzik commentary on Isaiah 13, where Isaiah sees judgment against Babylon, describing Babylon as desolated and wasted.<|separator|>
[50]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2013:20&version=NIV
[51]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2014&version=NIV
[52]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Isaiah%2021&version=NIV
[53]
[PDF] The Burden of Babylon: A Study Of Isaiah 13:2--14:23
13-14 provided priinary impetus for dating other pericopes in the book as late, 'reexamination becomes mandatory. The task is now ur5:nt to subject the accepted.
[54]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2050&version=NIV
[55]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2051&version=NIV
[56]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Jeremiah%2051:64&version=NIV
[57]
[PDF] THE ORACLES AGAINST BABYLON IN JEREMIAH 50-51
Of the many questions raised by the oracles against. Babylon in Jeremiah So-51, few have proved more problematical than the literary structure of the.
[58]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%205&version=KJV
[59]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%205%3A1-4&version=KJV
[60]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%205%3A5-6%2C24-28&version=KJV
[61]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%205%3A7-12&version=KJV
[62]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%205%3A10-17&version=KJV
[63]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%205%3A17-28&version=KJV
[64]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%205%3A29-31&version=KJV
[65]
https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Daniel%202%3A31-45%3B7%3A1-28&version=KJV
[66]
The Nabonidus Chronicle Cyrus Takes Babylon
Aug 26, 2014 · We also learn about a short invasion by soldiers from the Sea Land. Throughout this text, 'Akkad' means Babylonia; the first years show ...Missing: ABC5 | Show results with:ABC5
[67]
The Cyrus Cylinder - Cuneiform Digital Library Initiative
... violence, instead highlighting Cyrus' merciful and pious ... Although the document has been used as evidence of the Persian policy towards conquered ...Missing: scholarly | Show results with:scholarly
[68]
THE FALL OF BABYLON AND THE HISTORIAN HERODOTUS
Feb 19, 2018 · It is certain, however, that Babylon fell suddenly. Herodotus is correct in stating that the Euphrates bisected the city, and the Nabonidus ...<|control11|><|separator|>
[69]
Babylon - Current Archaeology
Feb 18, 2015 · ... conquered by Cyrus the Persian in 539 BC, he decided that all the ... Well-funded excavations were set up under Koldewey, who excavated ...
[70]
A Deep History of Babylon - Universität Münster
Jan 23, 2024 · His most important find is certainly the stela of Nabonidus, which he sent to London, along with cylinder seals, cuneiform tablets and ...
[71]
(PDF) Tracing Regime Change during the Transition from the Neo ...
Jan 27, 2023 · A collection of Neo-Babylonian tablets from the 'Tablet Hill' at Nippur is analyzed and its original trench of excavation is pinpointed on the ...
[72]
[PDF] UR EXCAVATIONS THE NEO-BABYLONIAN AND PERSIAN ...
The present volume deals with all the remains and objects dating from the accession of Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon to the final desertion of Ur.
[73]
Iraq's ancient city of Babylon gets long-overdue international ...
Sep 18, 2019 · The 2500-acre site, 50 miles south of Baghdad, comprises both the ruins of the ancient city as well as surrounding villages and agricultural ...
[74]
Excavation in ancient Babylon uncovers nearly 500 artifacts ...
Oct 20, 2024 · Excavations in Iraq's historic Babylon Governorate have led to the discovery of 478 artifacts. including cuneiform tablets and seals.
[75]
Archaeology and Textual Finds from First Millennium BCE Babylon
Nov 3, 2022 · Koldewey's excavations in Babylon, ca. 100 km south of Baghdad, ran from 1899 until 1917, when World War I put an end to the archaeological work.
[76]
[PDF] The Reign of Nabonidus-King of Babylon 556-539 BC
Four literary texts provide accounts of the reign of Nabonidus. The best known are the "Nabonidus Chronicle," which belongs to the Neo-Babylonian Chroni- cle ...