Nabonidus Chronicle

Confirms the biblical account of Babylon's fall and corroborates Daniel's portrayal of Belshazzar as a royal figure exercising authority in Babylon.

The Nabonidus Chronicle is a clay tablet written in Babylonian cuneiform script. It belongs to a class of texts known as Babylonian chronicles, which were administrative or scribal records kept by Babylonian priests and scholars to document important events year by year. Unlike royal propaganda, these chronicles tend to record facts relatively plainly, including military defeats and political difficulties, which makes them valuable historical sources.

The tablet was discovered in 1879 by Hormuzd Rassam, an Assyrian-born archaeologist working under the supervision of the British Museum. Rassam conducted extensive excavations at sites in Mesopotamia throughout the 1870s and 1880s. The Nabonidus Chronicle was recovered from somewhere in the Babylon region, though the exact find spot was not precisely recorded, which was common practice at the time. The tablet was transported to London and has been housed in the British Museum ever since.

The chronicle covers events from the reign of Nabonidus, who ruled Babylon from 556 to 539 BCE. Nabonidus was an unusual king in Babylonian terms. He devoted himself to the moon god Sin rather than the chief Babylonian deity Marduk, which created significant tension with the powerful Marduk priesthood in Babylon. The chronicle records that Nabonidus spent several years at Tema in Arabia, far from Babylon, leaving the capital in the hands of his son Belshazzar. During those years, the chronicle notes that the New Year festival, which required the king's physical presence to be performed properly, was not celebrated. This was considered a serious religious failure in Babylon.

The most historically significant section of the chronicle covers 539 BCE and the fall of Babylon to Cyrus the Great of Persia. The text records that Cyrus defeated the Babylonian army at Opis on the Tigris River, that Sippar fell without a battle, and then that Babylon itself was entered by Persian forces without significant resistance. The chronicle states that Gobryas, a general under Cyrus, entered Babylon with his troops and that Nabonidus was later captured. Cyrus himself entered the city shortly afterward and was received peacefully.

This account is notable for describing the fall of one of the ancient world's greatest cities as essentially a non-event militarily. Babylon was not burned or destroyed. The temple of Marduk was not looted. The chronicle specifically states that Cyrus ordered his troops not to harm the inhabitants. This corroborates other sources describing Cyrus as a relatively tolerant conqueror who preferred to win loyalty rather than impose domination through violence.

The chronicle's references to Belshazzar during the years Nabonidus spent at Tema have been important for biblical scholarship. For a long time, critics of the book of Daniel pointed out that no ancient source mentioned Belshazzar as a Babylonian king, and that Nabonidus rather than Belshazzar was the last independent Babylonian ruler. The Nabonidus Chronicle, combined with other documents including the Verse Account of Nabonidus and contracts from the period, confirms that Belshazzar was Nabonidus's son and served as acting ruler in Babylon during his father's extended absence. He held royal authority and is described in administrative texts as if he had kingly status within Babylon, even though he was technically not the king.

The tablet itself is damaged in places, and some portions of the text are missing or difficult to read. Scholars have worked to reconstruct the full text using multiple copies of similar chronicles and parallel inscriptions such as the Cyrus Cylinder. The British Museum holds the original tablet, and published transliterations and translations are available in standard reference collections of Mesopotamian texts.

• Records Cyrus the Great's capture of Babylon in 539 BCE as a largely peaceful takeover, with no significant battle for the city itself
• Documents Nabonidus's extended absence at Tema in Arabia, during which Belshazzar held royal authority in Babylon
• Confirms that the New Year festival at Babylon was not celebrated during Nabonidus's absence, showing the religious and political disruption his absence caused
• Records the Persian general Gobryas entering Babylon with troops before Cyrus himself arrived, describing an orderly occupation rather than a destructive conquest
• States that Cyrus gave orders protecting the inhabitants of Babylon and the city's temples from harm
• Part of a broader class of Babylonian chronicle texts that record events in a relatively objective administrative style, making them reliable historical sources
• Corroborates the Cyrus Cylinder's account of Cyrus presenting himself as a liberator restoring proper worship to Babylonian shrines

The Nabonidus Chronicle connects most directly to the book of Daniel. Daniel 5:1 describes a great feast held by King Belshazzar during which mysterious writing appeared on the wall. The chapter consistently treats Belshazzar as the ruling king of Babylon. Critics once used the absence of Belshazzar from known historical records to argue that the author of Daniel was unfamiliar with actual Babylonian history and had invented the character. The Nabonidus Chronicle, along with other administrative documents, demonstrates that Belshazzar was a real historical figure who functioned as the effective ruler of Babylon while his father Nabonidus was away. This explains why Daniel 5:29 says Daniel would be made the third ruler in the kingdom after interpreting the writing: Belshazzar himself was second to his absent father, making third the highest rank he could offer. Daniel 5:30 records that Belshazzar was slain that very night when Babylon fell. The Nabonidus Chronicle confirms that Babylon did fall in 539 BCE, consistent with the Daniel account. Daniel 6:28 then transitions to the reign of Darius and then Cyrus, reflecting the Persian takeover. Isaiah 47:1 had earlier prophesied the humiliation of Babylon, describing how the city would fall from its position of power, which the chronicle's account of Babylon's quiet surrender illustrates.