Did Daniel Go Back to Jerusalem?

The question of whether Daniel went back to Jerusalem is a common one among those interested in biblical history and theology. This query pertains primarily to the biblical narrative found in the Book of Daniel, which chronicles Daniel’s experiences and visions during his Babylonian captivity.

Archaeology and Historical Context

It's important to understand that the Book of Daniel is not an historical account, but rather a novel compiled around 167 BCE. One of the critical pieces of evidence for this is the author’s portrayal of King Darius, who is correctly identified as the son of Xerxes. However, historical records indicate that King Darius I was not the son of Xerxes I but his successor. Additionally, King Cyrus the Great, who conquered Babylon in 539 BCE, did not have a son named Darius. The confusion likely arose from a later misunderstanding of the lineage.

The Book of Daniel

The Book of Daniel, as it stands, concludes with Daniel serving in the court of the Persian King Darius, son of Xerxes, who had defeated the Babylonians. This narrative does not mention Daniel returning to Jerusalem. In fact, the last mention of Daniel in the Book is in Daniel 12:13, where it speaks of him resting and standing in his lot at the end of days, without any account of his return to Jerusalem.

Historical Accuracy and Confusion

The events described in the book are largely symbolic and allegorical, reflecting the author’s perspective on political, religious, and social issues of the time. The King Darius mentioned in the book is not a historical figure but a composite or symbolic representation used to illustrate theological themes. This is further evidenced by the specific dates and parentage attributed to Darius and Xerxes, which do not align with historical records. Similarly, the biblical account does not provide a historical account of Daniel's return to Jerusalem, as it is focused on prophetic visions and moral lessons.

The Apocryphal Text and Theologic Interpretation

Some sources, such as the apocryphal text known as the Midrash, indicate that Daniel died during the events described in the Book of Esther, where he is mentioned as an advisor to King Ahasuerus. This further supports the idea that the book of Daniel does not present a historically accurate account of Daniel's return to Jerusalem, but rather centers on broader theological and prophetic themes.

Conclusion

In summary, based on the biblical text and historical evidence, it is clear that Daniel did not return to Jerusalem. Instead, the Book of Daniel focuses on Daniel’s experiences in Babylon, his prophetic visions, and theological observations. The confusion around the character and lineage of King Darius and his son Xerxes is a result of later misunderstandings and inaccuracies. For a deeper exploration of this topic, you may want to delve into the theological and historical scholarship surrounding the Book of Daniel.