The Seventh Year of Artaxerxes by W. W. P.

Review and Herald Publishing Association · Takoma Park Station, Washington, D. C. · Feb 22, 1912

The Seventh Year of Artaxerxes

By W. W. P.

Two very important periods of prophecy are the 70 weeks (490 years) of Dan. 9:24, and the 2300 days (years) of Dan. 8:14. A careful study of the eighth and ninth chapters of Daniel, in connection with the history covered by these prophecies, makes it clear that both of these prophetic periods begin at the same time, and it is plainly stated that the 70 weeks are to be reckoned “from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem.” Dan. 9:25. The decree which was issued “in the seventh year of Artaxerxes the king” (Ezra 7:7), and recorded at length in the book of Ezra (Ezra 7:11-26), granted full authority to do the work prescribed in the prophecy, and is the commandment from which to reckon the commencement of the 70 weeks. It is therefore of great importance to establish clearly the time when Artaxerxes Longimanus began his reign, so that the time of the seventh year may be satisfactorily determined. In order to furnish reliable information for the settlement of this question, we submit herewith some extracts in which various authorities are quoted, and the subject is quite fully discussed. These extracts are worthy of careful study by those who desire to deal with this matter understandably. Due credit is given for each of these extracts. They run as follows:—

According to Ptolemy’s Canon (the best and most impartial authority to which we can refer), the reign of Artaxerxes commenced in the year 284 of the Nabonassarean era, which began on Dec. 17, 465 B. C., reckoning in Julian years. And the principle on which Ptolemy’s Canon is constructed is to reckon each king’s reign as beginning on the first day of the month (thoth) of the year in which that king succeeded to the throne; the number of years of each king’s reign being limited to the number of complete years to which his reign extended, reckoning from that time. So that while, according to the principle of the canon, the reign of Artaxerxes is reckoned as beginning with the first day of the year 284 of the Nabonassarean era, we only know from it that the actual commencement of the reign was sometime in the course of that year.

Now the time of the year when he began to reign seems determinable from Ezra and Nehemiah. It appears from Neh. 1:1 and 2:1, that in the twentieth year of the reign of Artaxerxes, and consequently in the other years of his reign, the first Hebrew month, Nisan (March-April), came after the ninth, Chisleu (November-December). Consequently the date of his accession must have been sometime between Nisan and Chisleu. And from Ezra 7:7-10 it follows that in the seventh and therefore in other years of his reign, the fifth month, Ab (July-August), came after the first, or Nisan. Therefore the accession of Artaxerxes was somewhere between the latter end of July and the former part of November, i. e., somewhere about the summer of 464 B. C. Therefore the seventh year of Artaxerxes was from the summer of 458 to the summer of 457.—Rev. W. Goode, D. D., F. S. A., in “Fulfilled Prophecy,” pages 211-213.

I have adhered to the authoritative chronology of the reigns of Xerxes and Artaxerxes. Diodorus (xi, 69) says that Xerxes was murdered by Artabanus, after reigning more than twenty years, when Lysitheus was archon at Athens. Ol. 78, 4, B. C. 465. “According to the canon, he died N. E. 283, i. e., after Dec. 17, B. C. 466, and before Dec. 17, B. C. 465, which coincides with the year Lysitheus.”—Clinton. (Fast. Hell., B. C. 465.) Eusebius agrees with this. Manetho also assigns the same length to the reign of Xerxes, twenty-one years (quoted by Africanus ap. Syncell., page 75, D. Clinton, F. H., c. 18, ii, 380, note). This length of reign corresponds with the dates assigned to his father Darius, and to Artaxerxes, to whom forty-one years are given by Manetho (Ib.), forty by Diodorus (Ib. and xi, 69), which agrees with Thucydides (iv, 50), who mentions his death in the archonship of Stratoches, B. C. 425-424 (Clinton, page 380). The accession of Artaxerxes after the seven months of the assassin Artabanus would fall in the middle of 464 B. C.—Rev. E. B. Pusey, D. D., in “Lectures on Daniel the Prophet,” page 169, note.

5. Xerxes. The twenty-one years of Xerxes include the seven months of Artabanus, whom the canon omits. It has been shown already that the accession of Xerxes is determined to the beginning of B. C. 485. His twentieth year was completed in the beginning of B. C. 465; he would survive his twentieth year about five months, and his death would happen in the beginning of the archonship of Lysitheus. The seven months of Artabanus, completing the twenty-one years, would bring down the accession of Artaxerxes (after the removal of Artabanus) to the beginning of B. C. 464, in the year of Nabonassar 284, where it is placed by the canon [of Ptolemy].

7. Artaxerxes Longimanus reigned forty years, according to Diodorus. . . . Diodorus is confirmed by Thucydides, who records the death of Artaxerxes in the winter of the archon Stratoches. . . . If the death of Artaxerxes was known at Ephesus in the winter of the archon Stratoches, as may be collected from this narrative, he would barely survive the thoth of N. E. 324 [N. E. = Nabonassar Era, commencing B. C. 747], or Dec. 7, B. C. 425, although his reign is extended by the canon to December of the following year. But that is explained by the practise of the canon, which computed to his forty-first year the months of Xerxes II and Sogdianus. The actual reign of Artaxerxes would be something less than forty years.—“Fasti Hellenici,” by Clinton, Vol. II, page 380.

Xerxes’s assassin, Artabanus, was ambitious to bring his own family upon the throne; and he therefore endeavored to put his victim’s sons out of the way. In this he was successful only in the case of the oldest, Darius, whom he caused to be executed on a false charge of having committed the crime. An attempt to murder Artaxerxes failed; it is said that the prince in defending himself, killed Artabanus with his own hand. The eunuch Mithridates, or Aspamithres, the actual assassin of Xerxes, met his end after cruel tortures. A second brother, Hystaspes, was absent at the time, and being older than Artaxerxes, laid claim to the throne. He seems to have taken advantage of an insurrection of the satrap of Bactria to substantiate his claim; but he was defeated after two battles, and together with the satrap was put out of the way. The sons of Artabanus endeavored to carry out their father’s ambitious schemes; and they also had to be conquered before Artaxerxes Longimanus (in Persian, Dargadasta, “long hand”) was firmly established upon the throne, which he occupied from 464 till 425 B. C.—“History of All Nations,” by H. Flathe and others, Vol. II, pages 209, 210. Lea Brothers and Company, Philadelphia and New York.

Xerxes left behind him three sons—Darius, Hystaspes, and Artaxerxes—and two daughters, Amytis and Rhodogune. Hystaspes was satrap of Bactria, and at the time of their father’s death, only Darius and Artaxerxes were at the court. Fearing the eldest son most, Artabanus persuaded Artaxerxes that the assassination of Xerxes was the act of his brother, whereupon Artaxerxes caused him to be put to death, and himself ascended the throne (B. C. 465). Troubles, as usual, accompanied this

irregular accession. Artabanus, not content with exercising an influence under Artaxerxes such as has caused some authors to speak of him as king, aimed at removing the young prince and making himself actual monarch. But his designs being betrayed to Artaxerxes by Megabyzus, and at the same time his former crimes coming to light, he was killed, together with his tool Aspamithres, seven months after the murder of Xerxes. The sons of Artabanus sought to avenge his death, but were defeated by Megabyzus in an engagement, wherein they lost their lives.—George Rawlinson, M. A., in “The Five Great Monarchies,” Vol. III, pages 471, 472.

From the last extract it will be noted that Rawlinson, who is considered good authority, gives B. C. 465 as the date of the accession of Artaxerxes, which would make the seventh year of Artaxerxes B. C. 458. The Encyclopedia Britannica and other encyclopedias based upon it follow Rawlinson. This difference between Rawlinson and those who follow him, and the other authorities quoted, is that Rawlinson does not recognize Artabanus the usurper as one of the Persian kings, although he mentions him as “exercising an influence under Artaxerxes such as has caused some authorities to speak of him as king.” Among these authorities, not mentioned in the foregoing extracts, is Manetho, the Egyptian historian, fragments of whose writings have been preserved until the present time. In his list of the Persian kings constituting the twenty-seventh dynasty, he mentions Artabanus, and assigns the period of seven months to his reign.

The English writers on prophecy, T. R. Birks and H. Grattan Guinness, take the same position on this question as has been maintained uniformly by the teachers of this denomination; namely, that the preponderance of evidence is in favor of B. C. 464 as the time of the accession of Artaxerxes Longimanus, and consequently that “the seventh year of Artaxerxes the king” when the commandment went forth “to restore and to build Jerusalem” would be B. C. 457. On this basis the 70 weeks (490 years) would end in A. D. 34, and the 2300 days (years) would come to a close in A. D. 1844, at which time, according to the prophecy (Dan. 8:14), the cleansing of the sanctuary began. W. W. P.