Daric (Hastings' Dictionary)

See Monet. "DARIUS (^^iV^, Aaperos)— 1. Darius, the son of HystasjH'S (Vistashpa), written Darayavaush in Old I'ersian, was the true founder of the Persian empire. The usurpation of the crown by the Marian Gaumata, who pretended to be Smerdis the brother of Cambyses, had thoroughly shaken the empire of Cyrus, and the murder of the usurper by Darius and six others (H.c. 521) caused it to break up.

The nations of which it was composed revolted under different pretenders, and had to be reeijnquered and reorganized by Darius. The history of all this is given in the trilingual inscrip- tion he caused to be engraved on the rock of Behistun (Bagistana). First Susiana rebelled under Atrina, then Babylon under Nidiuta-Bel, who pretended to be Nebuchadrezzar, son of Nabo- nidus. Contract-tablets show that the latter pre- tender reigned from i_)ctober li.c 521 to August B.C.

520, when Babylon was taken and Nidinta-Bel himself put to death.

Xext came the revolts of Martiya in Susiana ; of Phraortes in Media, who sailed himself liiishathrita, descendant of Uvakh- shatara ; of the Armenians ; of Chitrantakhma in Sagartia, who said he was a descendant of Uvakh- shatara ; of Phraortes in Parthia and Hyrcania, where Hystaspes was satrap ; of Friida in Margiana ; of a second false Smerdis in Persia itself ; and of the Armenian Arakha, son of Khaldita, in Babylon, who professed to be Nebuchadrezzar, the son of Nabonidus.

Rut the revolts were all suppressed and the leaders impaled, though many months of hard fighting were needed for the work. D. ascribes all his successes to the help of Ahuramazda (Oriuazd), the supreme god of the Zoroastrian faith. Ill' now set about the organization of the empire, which he placed under a bureaucracy centralized in himself.

The provinces were governed by satraps appointed by the king, and each province was re(|uired to furnish the royal treasury with a fixed amount of annual tribute. Tustice was adminis- tered by royal judges who went on circuit. The second revolt of Babylon probably took jilace in n.c. 514, iis no Bab. contract-tablets have been found dated in the seventh year of Darius, and after its suppression a part of the walls of the city were pulled down.

Soon afterwards Darius over- came Iskuuka the Sakian or Scyth, and hencefor- ward the Sakians formed part of the Persian army. The expedition against the Scyths of Europe was still later. Darius crossed the Danube near Ismail by a bridge constructed by the lonians, who had already performed the same service in the case of the Bosphorus, and, leaving it in charge of the Ionian ' tyrants,' he marched eastward to the Don.

Eight fortresses were built on the banks of the Oarus (probably the Volga), and Darius then returned through a desert country to the Danube, harassed by the Scyths. Histiieus of Miletus .saved his army by dissuading the Greeks from destroying the bridge. Uisti;ens was afterwanis tlie indirect cause of the Ionian revolt, which led to the burning of Sardis by the Athenians, and the determination of Darius to punish Athens and aimex Greece. Thrace and Macedonia had already submitted. •• CopyTight.

1698, hy Mardonius, the son of Gobryas, was sent against Attica; but his ships were wrecked ofl Mount Athos, and he was compelled to return. Another army was despatched accordingly the following year. Eretria was pillaged ; but the Persian host was utterly defeatetl by the Athenians at Marathon (B.C. 491), and compelled to retreat. Darius now fitted out another expedition on a larger scale, but just as it was ready to start Egypt revolted. D. had already explored the Indian Ocean.

Skylax of Karyandria sailed down the Indus, and, after a voyage of thirty months, reached Suez. One of the results of the expedition was the sub- jugation of the Indians. The Egyptian revolt was followed by the death of the king, B.t'. 48'!. He had married the daughter of Gobryas in early life, and Artobarzanes, his eldest son by her, was not allowed to succeed him, as lie had been born w'hile Darius was still a private citizen.

After his accession he married Atossa, the daughter of Cyrus and wife of Camby.ses and of the pseudo-Smerdis, as well as Parmys the daughter of Smerdis, and Phfedyma the daughter of Otanes. Xerxes, his son by Atossa, was hia successor to the crown. It was in the reign of Darius that the second temple of Jerusalem was finished.

The work had languished till the second year of his reign, when Haggai and Zechariah excited Zerubbabel, ' the governor of Judah,' and the high priest Joshua to undertake it afresh (Ezr S'f-). This made Tattenai, the Persian governor of Syria, inquire by what authority they acted (v.'*'-). On being told that it was a decree of Cyrus, he wrote to Darius, who had search made for the decree, which was found in the palace of Ecbatana.

Darius caused it to be pub- lished, and added that money for the building should be given out of the reveiuie of the province, as well as cattle and other things for the temple services, ' tliat they may offer sacrifice . . and pray for the life of the king and of his sons.' Accordingly, the temple was completed on the 3rd of Adar, in the sixth year of Darius (6'-i*). According to Joseph us {Ant. XI. i. 3), whose narra- tive rests on clis.

2 and 3 of 1 Es, the goodwill of Darius towards the Jews went back to the time when he was a pri"ate individual, and had vowed that if he became king he would restore the sacred vessels to the temple of Jerusalem. He and Zerubbabel were old friends, and, after the return of the Jewish prince from Jerusalem, Darius made him one of ills bodyguard.

In this cai>acity Zerubbabel was called on to amuse the king one night when he was slee))less, in the first year of his reign, by determining the relative strength of 'wine, kings, women, and truth.' His explanation that truth was the stror.gest pleased Darius, who promised to grant whatever he asked. He therefore re- minded the king of bis ])romise to build .

lerusaleni and its temple, and Darius thereupon did all he could to further the work, giving fifty talents towards it, and relieving the Jews of all taxation. 2. DAUlUri the Persian (Neh 12, ). Which king of Persia is meant is uncertain. Some commen- tators have supposed it to be Darius II. (Nothus) B.C. 423-404, but it was more probably Darius HI. (Codomannus), the last king of Persia, and the contemporary of the high priest Jaddua, who is mentioned in the same veree. Darius III.

reigned from B.C. 33() to 330, when he was overthrown by Alexander of Macedon in the decisive battle of Arbela, and the Persian empire destroyed. 3. I)Ai;ii's in 1 Mac 12" AV is a false reading for the Eacedivmonian Areus. See AlilUS. 4. Dai:ii"S the Mede.—See next article. LiTERATrRB.— Si)i<'gel, Uie altpersi/ichen Kt'ilinschrtfUn (ISHl). A. H. SAVCIi. Charles Scribrur't Soru DAEIUS THE MEDE DARKNESS 559 DARIUS THE MEDE (n^n rin^ Dn 11', Aram. •«;7? '" {Kcthibh), .iK-if 'I (Kere)'& [Eng.

5"]), the son of Aliasuerua ( = Xerxes), ' of the seed of the Medes' (9'), is said (5") to have succeeded to the Bab. kingdom after Belshazzar's violent death, and to have Deen 62 years old when he ' received the kingdom.' His hrst year only is mentioned (5" 9' 11'). ^Vho this D. was, is difficult to ascertain with certainty. Besides other proposals, D. the Mede has l>een identilied witli (1) Cyaxares II., the son and successor of Astyages (Jos. Ant. X. xi.

4), but no proof is given to support this theory ; (2) Darius Hystaspis ; (3) Astyages himself ; but all these identitications seem quite untenable. It is true that D. Hystaspis conquered Babylon, but that was some thirty years later. Besides this, he was a Persian, not a Alede ; and he was about thirty-six years old, not sixty-two, when he began to reign.

The passage in Dn 5" where he is described as havine received the kingdom (RV) leads one to ask whether, in spite of the title of king which is given to him (6'-' etc.), he may not have been really governor only. In the Gr. historians and in the Bab. Chronule the name of D. the Mede does not occur, he who preceded Cyrus to Babylon, on the occasion of the siege and capture of that city, being Gobryas, who may thus be regarded as having ' received the kingdom for him.'

* Gobryas, like Darius the Mede (6'), appointed governors in Babj'lon, and seems also to have been in the attack which resulted in Belshazzar's death [Bah. Chronicle, Rev. col. i. 1. 22). It will thus be seen that Cyrus gave great power to (iobryas, who was, in fact, his viceroy, t Apparently, therefore, the later Jewish writers looked upon Gobryas as hav- ing as much authority as Belshazzar, whom they regarded likewise as king, though he does not appear ever to have reigned.

The confusion of the names of I), the Mede and Gobryas of Gutium (he being governor of that place, which is regarded as having included a part of Media), may have been due to the scribes, who, being more familiar with the Gr. form of the name of D. (the end of which, when carelessly pronounced, bears a certain resemblance to that of Gobrvas in that language) than with the Heb.

form Daryawesh, wrote one name for the other ; and there is also the possi- bility that one of Gobryas' names was Darius,t which would account for the mistake. Under these circumstances we must accept, until further proof, the explanation, that D. tiie Mede was no other than Gobryas of Gutium, who, being practi- cally viceroy, may have been regarded as king during the absence of Cyrus from Babylon, and who, under the name of D.

the Mede, by which he was known to the Hebrews later on, conquered and entered Babylon on the lOtli Tammuz, called Daniel to the very high dignity of 'one of the three presidents who were placed over the hundred and twenty satraps,' and issued a decree, after Daniel's miraculous deliverance, enjoining ' rever- ence for the God of Daniel ' througliout his dominions. Jose)>huB gets rid of all ditliculties presented by the title of ' king ' which is given to D.

the Mede in Daniel, by explaining that he took Daniel the prophet with tiini into Media, and that it was there that he appointed him one of the thrt« presidents whom he set over his ' three hundred and sixty ' provinces. According to this • He brought the array of Cyrus to Babylon on the 16th Tammuz, Cynis arriving^ nearly four months later, on the 3rd Marcheshvan. t It is noteworthy that Xcnophon (Cyrxtp. N. 6) aaya that Oohryaa waa ' a man in yean*.' I .los. {A nt. X. xi.

4, days that Darius (the Mrde). whom he represcnta aa the kinsman of Oynis, ' ha'i another name amon^ the Ort-eka.' Apparently, the name of Uobryaa waa present to bis mind when be wrote this. authority, therefore, D. the Mede was in fact never ruler of Babylonia.* I. A. PINCHES. DARKNESS (Heb. ■riyn and '75X [and their cog- nates], nc';;, ^:.-si^, Gr. crKirrot, (Tkot/o, ^"0005). Besiies its literal meaning, darkness is frequently used in Scrip, metaphorically.

Since God is light, because the perfect embodiment of rational and moral truth, and since the knowledge of Him is man's light, darkness is the natural antithesis of these ideas. Hence in OT it is emblematic of uothinguess (Job 3*- '• ') ; more freq. it is equivalent to death (Job 1021. a 15a 1712-u, 1S29, Ec IPetc), and to the un- known or undiscovered (Job 12'^ 28', Is 45' etc. ).

So, too, it is the emblem of mysterious affliction, and of the ignorance and frailty of human life (2 S 22=», Job 19» 23", Ps 18-^ 107'"- ', Is 9» 29" 42'. '8 etc.) ; of moral depravity (Is 5™ 60^ Pr 2'^), and of confu.sion and destruction visited on the wicked (Job 5'^ 15»" 20»', Ps 82», Pr 4'" 20", Is 8-= 59^ Ec 2'<, Jer 2^' etc.) It is also the symbol of that which causes terror and distress (Gn 15'", Is 5" 47', La 3^, Ezk 32"* etc.)

Since, moreover, God is incomprehensible, H'ls ways mysterious, and His judgments severe, darkne.ss is sometimes associated with His operations in providence (Ps 18". "), in punishing (Am 5', Zeph 1'), and in His self-manifestations generally (Ps 97^, 1 K S'", 2 Ch 6'), even as the guiding 'pillar' was light to Israel but darkness to the Egyptians (Ex li'"), and Sinai was covered with dark clouds when J" descended on it (Ex 2U", Dt 4" 5", Heb 12'»).

In NT darkness is prevailingly the emblem of sin as a state of spiritual ignorance and moral depravity (Mt 4'« 6'^, Lk V 11«22", Jn 1' 3'" 8'» 12'". ", Ac 2G'8, Ro 2'» 13", 1 Co i\ 2 Co 6", Eph 5^ " 6'», Col l'^ 1 Th o''- », 1 P 2», 1 Jn 1'- « 2«- »• f"), but also of the desolation of divine punishment (Mt 8" 22" 25*', 2 P 2". ", Jude «• "). Two instances of special darkness, recorded in the Bible, call for notice.

(1) The ninth of the plagues sent by God upon the Egyptians was a plague of darkness (Ex lU-'- ^). Many commentators explain this as due to a storm of tine dust and sand driven from the desert by the S. wind, the Ifamsin, noted for such effects in the spring. The LXX seems to have taken such a view, describing it as ' darkness, thick cloud (yv6(po^), storm (BOiWa.)' Some have regarded it as wholly miraculous ; but the other plagues seem due to God's use of natural agencies.

(2) riie darkness at the crucifixion from the sixth to the ninth hour (Mt 27", Mk lu*-, Lk 23"- "). This the evangelists seem plainly to represent as supernatural. The true text of Lk 23" (roO i)\lo\i ^kXiItoi-toj or ^xXurdn-os, 'the sun failing' or 'hav- ing failed'; RV 'the sun's light fading') has indeed been thought to describe it as an eclipse. This reading and interpretation were noted by Origen, from whose remarks it appears that objectors to Christianity had so explained it.

Origen rejected the reading, attributing it either to a scribe's wish to provide an explanation or to an enemy's wish to pervert the evangelical account (see WII, Notes on selected readings). Origen also rejected the view itself that an eclipse, natural or miraculous (for so some explained it), was intended by Luke, though his language elsewhere seems to imply the true text.

Ihe charge that it was a natural eclipse is put into the mouth of the Jews in the Acts of 1 ilaie, contained in the pseudo- • Driver, who in LOTi pp. 469, 479 n. maintAined a cautious reserve, adniittinj; the {>08sibility that D. the Mede nii^ht prove to be a hist^triral character, acrees in his later editions with Sayce, that the existence of such a ruler is completely excluded by the monuments (cf. Sayce, UCM 5^fT.) The latter, as well as 1'.

llaupt (note on Dn Ci in Haupt's OT^, and a host <>f modem scholars, argue that ' 1>. the Medo ' is due to confusitin with I). IlystjLspis, who conijuered Ilahylnn (B.C. 620). On the theory of the .\hiCcabnao date of Daniel, such a coofuidoa !■ held I to be quit4. explicable. 560 DARKON DAVID Gospel of Xicodemiis. Eusebius {Chronicon) and later Fathers appealed also to the stateini'iit of Phlegon of Tralles (of the 2nd cent.) that in the 202ud Olympiad (July A.l).

29 to 33) there was the greatest eclipse of the sun over known, that it became night at the sixth hour of the day, so that stars appeared, and that there was a great earth- quake in Bitliynia. These writers differ as to the year of the Olympiad, but Wurm and Ideler place it on Nov. 2-1, \.\>. 29 (Wieseler, Hyuopsis of Four (rospels. p. 3ol ; see, on the other hand, Whiston, Teslimi)ivj of Phlegon Vindicateil, Lond. 1732).

The insuperable objections to its identification with the darkness at the crucili.Kion are, even apart from the above date, that at passover the moon was full, and the darkness lasted three hours. Seyffarth's view (ChroH. Sacr. pp. 58, 59), that the Jewish calendar was so deflected that the passover actually fell at a new moon, ha.s founil no advocates, and is wholly improbable, since the Jewish calendar depended on observations of the moon.

There is, however, no need to interpret Luke of an eclipse in the astronomical sense (WH, Notes on selected readings). It is simply a statement that the sun's light failed. See also LUiHT, PLAGUE*. G. T. PfUVF.s.