34d COMPUTATION OF DANIEL’S WEEKS. —[EXERC. XV.
sundry names, much more might several men have the same name in successive generations. Thus, after Joshua was high priest, there was another Joshua chief of the Levites, Neh. xii. 7, 8. And that about this time there were two Zerubbabels,—one of the house of Nathan, the other of the posterity of Solomon,—we shall make it appear, in the consideration of the genealogies of Matthew and Luke. Thirdly, That this was not the Nehemiah that went up with Zerub- babel, the sacred story itself gives us sufficient evidence; for,—(1.) He was ignorant of the state and condition of Jerusalem when he lived in the court of Persia, chap.i. Had he been there before and seen their condition, and but newly returned unto Shushan, he could not have been so surprised as he was, verse 4, upon the account then given him thereof. (2.) Chap. vil. 5, 6, he speaks of it as a great matter that he should find a roll or register of them that came first up to Jerusalem with Zerubbabel in the days of Cyrus, amongst whom that Nehemiah was one. Now, if this had been himself, what reason had he to mention it as a great discovery, which he could not but by his own knowledge be full well acquainted withal ? Unto what time soever, then, the period of his life was extended, there is no colour to surmise that he was amongst them who re- turned from captivity in the days of Cyrus.
16. The account, therefore, before laid down being established, it is certain enough that the decree mentioned by Gabriel, from the going forth whereof the seventy weeks are to be dated, was not that of the first of Cyrus for the return of the captivity and building of the temple; for from thence the period would issue long before the just time allotted unto it, yea, before the beginning of the reign of Herod the Great, where Eusebius would have it to expire. We must therefore inquire for some other word, decree, or command- ment, from whence to date the four hundred and ninety years inquired after.
17. The second decree of the kings of Persia in reference unto the Jews was that of Darius, made in his second year, when the work of the building of the temple was carried on through the pro- phecy of Haggai and Zechariah. This is the decree or command- ment mentioned in Ezra vi., granted by Darius, upon appeal made unto him from the neighbouring governors; and it was a mere re- vival of the decree of Cyrus, the roll whereof was found in Achmetha, in the province of the Medes, verse 2. And this is that which Haggai and Zechariah relate unto, dating their prophecies from the second year of Darius, Hag. i. 2, 15; Zech. i. 1. Upon the roll of the kings of Persia we find three called by the name of Darius, or Darianes, as the Jews term him:—(1.) Darius Hystaspes, who suc- ceeded Cambyses, by the election of the princes of Persia, upon the killing of Smerdis Magus the usurper. (2.) Darius Nothus, who
SECT. 16-18. ] COMPUTATION OF DANIEL’S WEEKS. 345
succeeded Artaxerxes Longimanus; (8.) Darius Codomannus, in whom the Persian empire had its period by Alexander the Great. That the last of these can be no way concerned in the decree is notorious, The two others are disputed. Most learned men grant that it was Darius Hystaspes which was the author of this decree; and indeed that it was so, at least that it can be ascribed unto no other Darius, we shall afterwards undeniably prove. And it is not unlikely that he was inclined unto this favour and moderation towards the Jews by his general design to relieve men from under the oppressions that were upon them during the reign of Cambyses, and to renew the acts of Cyrus their first emperor, who was renowned amongst them, to ingratiate himself unto mankind, and confirm himself in that kingdom whereunto he came not by succession. And it is not im- probable but that this was he who was the husband of Esther; though if so, it was not until after this decree made in the second year of his reign, the putting away of Vashti happening in his third, Ksth. i. 38. Now, Cyrus reigned after his first decree three years; Cam- byses with Smerdis, eight; whom succeeded this Darius, who issued out this decree in the second year of his reign,—that is, at most, thirteen years after the decree of Cyrus; or if with some we should grant Cyrus to have reigned twenty years over the whole empire, it was but nineteen or twenty years at the most. Now, the whole sum of years from the first of Cyrus to the cutting off of the Messiah, we have manifested to have been five hundred and sixty-two. Deduct thirteen years from five hundred and sixty-two, and there yet remain five hundred and forty-nine years, which exceed the number of years in- quired after fifty-nine years. Neither doth the addition of seven years to the reign of Cyrus make any alteration in this general account; for on that supposition, his first year must be taken seven years back- wards, and the space of time from thence unto the end of the weeks will be five hundred and sixty-nine years, and the remnant from Darius, as we declared before, five hundred and forty-nine years. So that neither can this be the commandment intended, there being from the going forth of it unto the cutting off of the Messiah, not four hun- dred and ninety years, but, as is declared, five hundred and forty-nine. Besides, indeed, this decree of Darius was no new command, nor had any respect unto the restoration of Jerusalem, but was a mere reno- vation or a new acknowledgment of the decree of Cyrus about the re-edifying of the temple; and so, doubtless, was not designed as the signal epoch of the time here limited and determined.