Establishing the Date 457 BC

To Seventh-day Adventists, the prophecy of Daniel 8 and 9 is of great significance, for here we find a time prophecy that we believe reaches down to the coming of the Messiah and His baptism in AD 27 and also to 1844, and points us out as the people of God, raised on time to proclaim the last message of warning to the world. If we are correct in making this claim, then we ought to be able to justify our claim by producing evidence that will support it.

Seventh-day Adventists believe that “the command to restore and to build Jerusalem …” in Daniel 9:25 marks not only the beginning of the 69 weeks and the 70 weeks but also the beginning of the 2,300 days mentioned in Daniel 8:14. It is thus of great importance that this ’commandment’ or decree be correctly identified and correctly dated. It is the purpose of this chapter to do this.

Which Decree Marks the Starting Date?

When one studies the history of the restoration of God’s people from Babylonian captivity by the Persians, it will be seen that Persian Kings gave three or possibly four decrees. Which one then is the decree God intended should be used as the one from which the time calculations should begin? A study of each of these four decrees will make it clear which is the correct one.

The Decree of Cyrus

In the first year of his reign, Cyrus gave the first decree, which was 538–537 BC. (See Ezra 1:1, 6:1 and 2 Chron. 36:22-23). Now we are not told when in the first year this decree was given, so we do not know if it was in 538 BC or 537 BC. Furthermore, we are not told when they arrived in Jerusalem; thus, we do not know when the decree of Cyrus became effective. Since the Bible is rather vague about these details, we could hardly argue that this was the all-important decree. Furthermore, it hardly fits the specifications of Daniel 9:25, for it says virtually nothing about the restoration of government but only of building. Furthermore, if we start with this decree, we do not reach anywhere near the required date for the baptism of Jesus—His anointing, which took place in AD 27.

The Decree of Darius

The second decree of Darius the Great is not dated in Scripture at all, so it is not of any use to anyone. All we know is that it was given in the early years of his reign because, as a result, the rebuilding of the temple was completed, and it was then dedicated, and we are given dates for both the beginning of the rebuilding program and for the dedication. The rebuilding is dated in Haggai 2:10-18 as the twenty-fourth day, the ninth month of the second year of Darius. This date equals December 15, 520 BC. So the decree of Darius must have proceeded this date, but it could have been anywhere in the ascension year or first or second year of the reign of Darius. The dedication of the temple is mentioned in Ezra 6:15 as the third day, the twelfth month of the six year of Darius, which equals March 15, 515 BC.

This decree is not of much use either. It is even vaguer than that of Cyrus, and logic would require that if God intended either of these decrees to be the correct one to begin a prophecy as important as the 2,300 days, He would have seen to it that the details needed were recorded in the Bible.

The Decree of Artaxerxes

For this decree, we had recorded the dates when Ezra left Babylon with the decree and when he arrived in Jerusalem, and the decree went into effect. These details tell us that Artaxerxes issued the decree in the seventh year of his reign, and this information is recorded in Ezra 7:8-9. Here we are told that Ezra left Babylon on the first day of the first month of the seventh year of the reign of Artaxerxes and that he and his group arrived in Jerusalem on the first day of the fifth month of the same year. For no other decree are such details given. This should alert us. Indeed God is saying something to us when He is so explicit, something He was not for the two decrees mentioned above.

Furthermore, we are told that this decree made mention of the restoration of local government on a scale note mentioned in the other decrees. Note Ezra 7:21-28. Here the judiciary was empowered to punish wrong-doers up to the death decree. Another line of evidence is found in Ezra 6:14, where the decrees of the three kings, Cyrus, Darius, and Artaxerxes, are linked together, showing the fact that they are all related.

However, perhaps the greatest argument of all is that when the date for this decree 457 BC is taken as the beginning date, the prophecy reaches the baptism of Jesus when He was anointed, and thus became the Messiah (Messiah means the anointed One). This is the decree God intended us to use. He gave us details about its date and when it went into effect and then about the baptism of Jesus on time, puts the seal of authenticity on it. It is just too accurate to be wrong! One thought found in Daniel 9:24 is that the events that would take place within the 70 weeks would set God’s seal of approval on the whole of the prophecy. It would show that the prophecy was divinely given and thus absolutely dependable. No other date even begins to satisfy the demands of this prophecy.

Nehemiah Appointed Governor

Nehemiah was appointed governor in 444 BC in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes (Neh. 1:1-3; 2:1). If anyone wants to take the date of this event as a beginning date, he would be a long way out for the date of the baptism of Jesus. Josh McDowell takes this event as his beginning decree, but he gives the wrong date, to begin with, and then he has to use a bizarre and elaborate formula to arrive at the date he gives for the crucifixion—AD 32. We cannot follow his methods because his dates are incorrect.

Therefore, the only conclusion is that the decree God intended is that of Ezra 7—the seventh year of Artaxerxes, which was 457 BC. Some books indeed give 458 BC as the date for this decree, so we will now set forth evidence to show that it was 457 BC

Study of Some Ancient Calendars

Before we can find which is the seventh year of Artaxerxes, we will need to become familiar with the calendars used by the people who lived at the time.

The calendar we use came basically from the Romans. It begins on January 1 and ends on December 31. No other people of ancient times used this calendar. It is sometimes called the Julian Calendar.

The Babylonians, Persians, and the Jews, as far as their religious year or religious calendar was concerned, used a spring-to-spring calendar. Spring in the Northern Hemisphere begins around the beginning of April. Thus we can show the following pattern. Our calendar is shown with the spring-to-spring (Northern Hemisphere) calendar.

If a spring-to-spring calendar is used for Ezra 7, we get 458 BC as the date for the decree. However, we know that the Jews also used a fall-to-fall (autumn-to-autumn) calendar when counting the reigns of both their own and foreign kings. When this information is recognized, the date is 457 BC. We will now set forth three lines of Bible evidence to show that the Jews had used this fall-to-fall calendar at times.

1. Example from the Reign of Solomon

1 Kings 6:1, 37-38. These verses tell us that Solomon began to build the temple in the fourth year of his reign, in the month Zif, which is the second month of the Jewish year. They also tell us that he finished the temple in the eleventh year of his reign in the month Bul, the eighth month of the Jewish year. Furthermore, we are told that he spent seven years building the temple.

Now with these facts, let us see what happens when we use a spring-to-spring year.

The building of the temple on a spring-to-spring year would have taken eight years—7 .5 literally, which the Jews would have counted as eight years with their inclusive reckoning. Hence the spring-to-spring calendar does not fit the facts the Bible has given us.

Now let us consider the Jewish fall-to-fall calendar and see if it fits the facts. It should be pointed out that the spring-to-spring calendar is the calendar that decides the order of the months. Thus Nisan, which is the first month of the Jewish spring-to-spring calendar, becomes the seventh month in the Fall to Fall calendar. Tishri, the seventh month of the spring-to-spring calendar, becomes the first month of the fall-to-fall calendar. The following diagram explains the relationship. Months are shown by numbers based on the spring-to-spring calendar.

Perhaps the best comparison we can make to illustrate this relationship is to compare the Australian financial year or taxation year with our calendar. January is our first month, but it is the seventh month of the Australian financial year, which runs from July 1 to June 30. Thus, as shown above, whenever a fall-to-fall year is shown the order of the months is always 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, thus following the order of the months of the Spring to Spring year. Now we shall show how this applies to the building of Solomon’s temple.

Note that the fall-to-fall reckoning, as shown above, comes to SEVEN years, as the Bible says. Hence it is clear that a fall-to-fall calendar was used in counting the reign of Solomon.

2. Example from Josiah

In 2 Kings 22:3 and 2 Kings 23:21-23, we read details about the reforms that King Josiah of Judah initiated, followed by a Passover celebration, all in the eighteenth year of his reign. If one reads the verses in 2 Kings 22 and 23 carefully, one will see that the work of reform is described in some detail. Josiah sent his men throughout his kingdom to call on the people to forsake the worship of idols and turn to the true God. Places of pagan worship were to be destroyed, the groves cut down, and the people were then invited to assemble in Jerusalem for the Passover. It is not hard to see that a certain amount of time would be required for Josiah’s men to accomplish all of the work described. It would also take the people some time to travel to Jerusalem, especially if they lived some distance from the city.

Now let us see how this would fit into a spring-to-spring year

Thus the maximum possible time in which all this could have been effected would be 14 days, and this is certainly not enough time. Note that the reforms were begun in the eighteenth year, the same year the Passover was held.

Now let us see how the evidence fits into a fall-to-fall year.

The fall-to-fall year thus allows enough time (6.5 months) and was; therefore, the calendar being used in 2 Kings.

3. Example from Nehemiah

In Nehemiah 1:1-4 and Nehemiah 2:1-8, we read that Nehemiah heard the terrible news about the conditions in Jerusalem and, as a result, was sad before the king. It is interesting to note that the dates given for these two events are dated in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes.

In Nehemiah 1:1-4, we read that he heard bad news in the month of Chisleu (or Kislev), which is the ninth month of the Jewish year, in the twentieth year of Artaxerxes. Then in Nehemiah 2:1-8, we read that as a result of this bad news, he was sad in the king’s presence in the same year, in the month of Nisan, which is the first month of the Jewish year. Let us see how this looks when shown on a diagram using a spring-to-spring calendar.

Nehemiah could not be sad in the first month over news that came to him in the ninth month. But in a fall-to-fall calendar, the problem is solved.

Interestingly, this third example shows that the Jews were here using their own fall-to-fall calendar when speaking about a Persian king. The first two examples were of Jewish kings—Solomon and Josiah. But here, we find that Nehemiah used the Jewish fall-to-fall calendar when speaking of a Persian king. This is really significant since the same is true in Ezra 7.

Now some might object that Nehemiah and Ezra are two different books and that we are not free to say Ezra used a fall-to-fall calendar just because Nehemiah did. In reply, we would point out that in the Jewish Old Testament Canon, Ezra and Nehemiah constituted ONE book known as Ezra-Nehemiah. Unless it can be demonstrated to the contrary, therefore, we must accept that a book would be consistent with itself so that a fall-to-fall calendar is also indicated for Ezra.

Of course, all this evidence is biblical, and some could argue that it is not very convincing. However, Dr. S. H. Horn and Dr. L. H. Wood did research work on papyrus manuscripts found in Elephantine Island in the Nile in Upper Egypt. These manuscripts were later rediscovered in a Brooklyn museum in New York. They are important because they were written in the Persian period, around 422–419 BC, by Jewish soldiers stationed in the fortress there. Their real values lie in at least some of them being dated by two different calendars—the Egyptian and the Jewish fall-to-fall calendar. Here now is evidence from outside the Bible that shows the Jews, even away down in Egypt, were using their own fall-to-fall calendar when they referred to the rule of a foreign king. In this case, it was Darius II.

The details of this evidence have been written up in the book ‘Chronology of Ezra 7’ by S. H. Horn and L. H. Wood.¹ Diagrams in this book show how convincing the evidence is. Of particular importance is Kraeling Papyrus No. 6. It is the key one that demonstrates that Jews did use their own fall-to-fall calendar when speaking of Persian kings.

Now then we have established the kind of calendar that Ezra was using in Ezra 7. It was the Jewish fall-to-fall calendar. Now we need to look at how the seventh year of Artaxerxes can be fitted into a BC year scale.

Babylonian and Persian Dating Methods

In the time of the Babylonians and Persians, all events were dated in terms of the king’s reign. All documents that bore dates gave the day number, month name, and year number of the current king’s reign. When a king died and a new king took the throne, the remaining portion of that calendar year was considered or called the accession year (AY) of the new king, and the first year or year 1 was the next full calendar year. Thus:

Now, if we add the Jewish fall-to-fall calendar, we have the following pattern:

As can be readily seen, the length of the accession year may be long or short, depending on when the new king came to the throne. It may also be long or short, depending on which of these two calendars is being used.

To construct a succession of kings, all we need to do is discover how long each king ruled. This may be done by using the king lists where they are available. Another method is that used by Parker and Dubberstein in their useful book Babylonian Chronology.² This method is to find the last three or four tablets for each old king and the first three or four for each new king. Archaeologists have discovered thousands of tablets bearing such dates. By the study of this kind, the length of each king’s reign has been determined. Usually, the month and sometimes almost the day of the month that a king died and his son succeeded can thus be calculated. In this way, we can compile a list of the Babylonian and Persian kings showing how long each ruled.

The Evidence of Ancient Eclipses

We now need to find a way of locking the reigns of these kings into our BC calendar. Archaeologists have found records of many ancient eclipses. They give us the dates they occurred in terms of the reigns of the kings. By using ancient dated eclipses, we can now assign dates to the reigns of these kings. At least one eclipse was actually predicted to take place in the seventh year of Cambyses, and the prediction has been proven correct. This fact speaks for itself about the high standard of astronomical science practiced by these ancient people. When such a tablet is found and translated by an archaeologist, information is then given to astronomers, who calculate mathematically when the eclipse described in that tablet took place. Thus precise dates can be given, and guesswork is eliminated. Babylonian and Persian periods of history are thus among the very best documented periods of history as far as chronological studies are concerned.

The following list gives some of the eclipses for which we have records, especially those concerning the period of history we are concerned in this study .³

The Date for the Seventh Year of Artaxerxes

With such a wealth of information regarding the chronology of this period, we can now turn to the question of the dating of the reign of Artaxerxes with confidence, knowing that the seventh year of his reign was mentioned in Ezra 7 can be positively ascertained.

Xerxes, the predecessor of Artaxerxes, was murdered sometime between December 17, 465 BC and January 3, 464 BC. The last tablet dated to the reign of Xerxes bears the date of the twenty-first year of his reign and the ninth month of that year. The first known date for Artaxerxes is from the Elephantine Papyri records in Egypt, and in our BC dating scale is third January 464 BC.

Since this date comes from Egyptian records, most scholars will agree that Xerxes died before the end of December, as it is hardly likely that news of his death would travel from Persia to Southern Egypt in three days.

Thus it appears certain that Xerxes’ death must be dated in late December 465 BC. With this information, we can now construct a timeline for the early years of Artaxerxes and thus arrive at the all-important seventh year of his reign. Remember that we calculate that year according to the Jewish Fall to Fall calendar and that the order of months in the fall to fall year run 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6.

Note: AY = Accession Year

The vital seventh year is shown below in enlarged form for clarity.

When these two dates found in Ezra 7 are projected onto our BC scale, it can be easily seen that the date is 457 BC. Some scholars ignore the Jewish fall-to-fall calendar, using only the Spring-to-spring calendar, or are not aware of it, and hence give 458 BC as the seventh year of Artaxerxes, but the correct date as shown is 457 BC.

It is interesting to note that William Miller and his associates used a different method for calculating the seventh year of Artaxerxes. They based their work on Ptolemy’s Canon and came up with the same date we have arrived at above. This certainly is gratifying reassurance of the demonstrable trustworthiness of our position.

This study should help to reassure our faith in the message we bear to the world. As the apostle Peter declared 2 Peter 1:16, “We have not followed cunningly devised fables.” May God grant that our confidence in the message He has given us may strengthen day by day.

_______________

SUPPORTING SOURCES

Horn, S. H. and Wood, L. H. The Chronology of Ezra 7. Washington DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association USA 1953.

Nichol, F. D. Seventh-day Adventist Bible Commentary, vols. 3-4. Washington DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association, Washington D.C. USA, 1954.

Parker, Richard A and Dubberstein, Waldo H. Babylon Chronology 626 BC-AD 75. Providence Rhode Island: Brown University Press, 1969.

Thiele, E. R. The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings. Exeter, Devon England: Paternoster Press, 1965.

Tolhurst, L. P. “Establishing the Date 457 BC,” in Ministry Magazine. April.

Washington DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1988.

Wiseman, D. J. Chronical of the Chaldaen Kings (626-556 BC). In the British Museum, Trustees of the British Museum, London, England, 1961.

__________

¹ Seigfreid H. Horn and Lynn H. Wood, The Chronology of Ezra 7, Washington DC: Review and Herald Publishing Association, 1953.

² Richard A. Parker and Waldo H. Dubberstein, Babylon Chronology 626 BC-AD 75, Providence Rhode Island: Brown University Press, 1969.

³ Edwin R. Thiele, The Mysterious Numbers of the Hebrew Kings, Exeter, Devon England: Paternoster Press, 1965, p. 218.