Watch Tower Interpretation of Daniel 1:1

As noted in the Watch Tower Judean Chronology section the Watch Tower dates Nebuchadnezzar's invasion of Judah as described in 2 Kings 24:1 to sometime in the 8th year of Jehoiakim.

Unusually the Watch Tower has chosen to interpret Daniel 1:1 and 2 Chronicles 36:6 as referring to the siege resulting in Jehoiachin's capture (2 Kings 24:10; the 11th year of Jehoiakim), rather than the earlier invasion resulting in Jehoiakim becoming a vassal for 3 years (2 Kings 24:1).

Insight Book

Regarding Jehoiakim [1, p. 1269]:

Second Kings 24:1 shows that Nebuchadnezzar brought pressure upon the Judean king “and so Jehoiakim became his servant [or vassal] for three years. However, he [Jehoiakim] turned back and rebelled against him [Nebuchadnezzar].” Evidently it is to this third year of Jehoiakim as a vassal king under Babylon that Daniel refers at Daniel 1:1. It could not be Jehoiakim’s third year of his 11-year reign over Judah, for at that time Jehoiakim was a vassal, not to Babylon, but to Egypt’s Pharaoh Necho. It was not until Jehoiakim’s fourth year of rule over Judah that Nebuchadnezzar demolished Egyptian domination over Syria-Palestine by his victory at Carchemish (625 B.C.E. [apparently after Nisan]). (Jer 46:2) Since Jehoiakim’s revolt against Babylon led to his downfall after about 11 years on the throne, the beginning of his three-year vassalage to Babylon must have begun toward the end of his eighth year of rule, or early in 620 B.C.E.

Daniel’s account (1:1, 2) states that Nebuchadnezzar came against Jerusalem and laid siege to it and that Jehoiakim, along with some of the temple utensils, was given into the Babylonian king’s hand. However, the account at 2 Kings 24:10-15 describes the siege of Jerusalem by the Babylonians and shows that Jehoiakim’s son Jehoiachin, whose reign lasted only three months and ten days, was the one who finally capitulated and went out to the Babylonians. It therefore appears that Jehoiakim died during the siege of the city, perhaps in the early part thereof. Jehovah’s prophecy through Jeremiah (22:18, 19; 36:30) indicated that Jehoiakim was not to receive a decent burial; his corpse was to lie unattended outside the gates of Jerusalem, exposed to the sun’s heat by day and the frost by night. Just in what way Jehoiakim was ‘given into the hand of Nebuchadnezzar’ (Da 1:2) is not revealed. It may have been in the sense of his dying under siege and of his son’s thereafter having to go out into captivity, so that Jehoiakim’s line suffered the loss of the kingship at Nebuchadnezzar’s hands. There is no way to confirm the Jewish tradition (recorded by Josephus) that Nebuchadnezzar killed Jehoiakim and commanded that his dead body be thrown outside Jerusalem’s walls. (Jewish Antiquities, X, 97 [vi, 3]) By whatever means Jehoiakim’s death came, it appears that the copper fetters Nebuchadnezzar had brought along to bind Jehoiakim were not used as planned.—2Ch 36:6.

Regarding Daniel [1, p. 576]:

Very little is known of his early life, but he [Daniel] tells of being taken to Babylon, likely as a teenage prince, along with other royal offspring and nobles. (Da 1:3-6) This was in Jehoiakim’s third year (as tributary king to Babylon), which third year started in the spring of 618 B.C.E. (Da 1:1) With Jehoiakim’s inglorious death, Jehoiachin, his son, ruled for a few months before surrendering. Early in 617 B.C.E., Jehoiachin and other “foremost men,” also young Daniel (2Ki 24:15), were taken into captivity by Nebuchadnezzar.

Regarding Jehoiachin [1, p. 1267]:

At the age of 18 Jehoiachin became king and continued the bad practices of his father. (2Ki 24:8, 9; 2Ch 36:9, ftn) Jehoiachin’s father, Jehoiakim, had been under subjection to Babylonian King Nebuchadnezzar but rebelled in his third year of such vassalage (618 B.C.E.). (2Ki 24:1) This resulted in a siege being laid against Jerusalem. The expression “during that time” (2Ki 24:10) may refer, not to Jehoiachin’s brief reign, but to the general period in which it fits, hence allowing for the siege to have begun during his father Jehoiakim’s reign, as Daniel 1:1, 2 seems to indicate. It appears that Jehoiakim died during this siege and Jehoiachin ascended the throne of Judah. His rule ended, however, a mere three months and ten days later, when he surrendered to Nebuchadnezzar in 617 B.C.E. (in the month of Adar, according to a Babylonian chronicle). (2Ki 24:11, 12; 2Ch 36:9; Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, by A. Grayson, 1975, p. 102) In fulfillment of Jehovah’s word through Jeremiah, he was taken into Babylonian exile. (Jer 22:24-27; 24:1; 27:19, 20; 29:1, 2) Other members of the royal household, court officials, craftsmen, and warriors were also exiled.—2Ki 24:14-16

Daniel Book

Regarding Daniel 1:1 and the 8th year of Jehoiakim (621 BC) [2, p. 18]:

Daniel 1:1 reads: “In the third year of the kingship of Jehoiakim the king of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon came to Jerusalem and proceeded to lay siege to it.” Critics have found fault with this scripture because it does not seem to agree with Jeremiah, who says that the fourth year of Jehoiakim was the first year of Nebuchadnezzar. (Jeremiah 25:1; 46:2) Was Daniel contradicting Jeremiah? With more information, the matter is readily clarified. When first made king in 628 B.C.E. by Pharaoh Necho, Jehoiakim became a mere puppet of that Egyptian ruler. This was about three years before Nebuchadnezzar succeeded his father to the throne of Babylon, in 624 B.C.E. Soon thereafter (in 620 B.C.E.), Nebuchadnezzar invaded Judah and made Jehoiakim a vassal king under Babylon. (2 Kings 23:34; 24:1) To a Jew living in Babylon, Jehoiakim’s “third year” would have been the third year of that king’s vassal service to Babylon. Daniel wrote from that perspective. Jeremiah, however, wrote from the perspective of the Jews living right in Jerusalem. So he referred to Jehoiakim’s kingship as starting when Pharaoh Necho made him king.

Regarding the battle of Carchemish in the 4th year of Jehoiakim (625 BC) [2, p. 31]:

In 625 B.C.E., Egyptian Pharaoh Necho... led his army to Carchemish... The Babylonian army, led by Crown Prince Nebuchadnezzar, inflicted a devastating blow on Pharaoh Necho’s forces. (Jeremiah 46:2) Riding on the momentum of his victory, Nebuchadnezzar swept over Syria and Palestine and, for all practical purposes, put an end to Egyptian domination in this region. It was only the death of his father, Nabopolassar, that brought a temporary halt to his campaign.

The next year, Nebuchadnezzar—now enthroned as king of Babylon—once again turned his attention to his military campaigns in Syria and Palestine. It was during this period that he came to Jerusalem for the first time. The Bible reports: “In his days Nebuchadnezzar the king of Babylon came up, and so Jehoiakim became his servant for three years. However, he turned back and rebelled against him.”—2 Kings 24:1.

Let Your Kingdom Come

Let Your Kingdom Come connects this issue with the various interpretation's of Jeremiah's 70-year prophecy [3, p. 188]:

Later writers quote Berossus as saying that after the battle of Carchemish Nebuchadnezzar extended Babylonian influence into all Syria-Palestine and, when returning to Babylon (in his accession year, 605 B.C.E.), he took Jewish captives into exile. Thus they figure the 70 years as a period of servitude to Babylon beginning in 605 B.C.E. That would mean that the 70-year period would expire in 535 B.C.E.

But there are a number of major problems with this interpretation:

Though Berossus claims that Nebuchadnezzar took Jewish captives in his accession year, there are no cuneiform documents supporting this. More significantly, Jeremiah 52:28-30 carefully reports that Nebuchadnezzar took Jews captive in his seventh year, his 18th year and his 23rd year, not his accession year. Also, Jewish historian Josephus states that in the year of the battle of Carchemish Nebuchadnezzar conquered all of Syria-Palestine “excepting Judea,” thus contradicting Berossus and conflicting with the claim that 70 years of Jewish servitude began in Nebuchadnezzar’s accession year.—Antiquities of the Jews X, vi, 1.

History of the Interpretation

The idea behind interpreting Daniel 1:1 Jehoiakim as actually referring to the siege described in 2 Kings 24:10 may have originated with first-century historian Josephus, who dates the beginning of Jehoiakim's servitude to his 8th year [4, pp. Ant X 6–7]:

1. NOW in the fourth year of the reign of Jehoiakim, one whose name was Nebuchadnezzar took the government over the Babylonians, who at the same time went up with a great army to the city Carchemish, which was at Euphrates, upon a resolution he had taken to fight with Neco king of Egypt, under whom all Syria then was. And when Neco understood the intention of the king of Babylon, and that this expedition was made against him, he did not despise his attempt, but made haste with a great band of men to Euphrates to defend himself from Nebuchadnezzar; and when they had joined battle, he was beaten, and lost many ten thousands [of his soldiers] in the battle. So the king of Babylon passed over Euphrates, and took all Syria, as far as Pelusium, excepting Judea. But when Nebuchadnezzar had already reigned four years, which was the eighth of Jehoiakim's government over the Hebrews, the king of Babylon made an expedition with mighty forces against the Jews, and required tribute of Jehoiakim, and threatened upon his refusal to make war against him. He was aftrighted at his threatening, and bought his peace with money, and brought the tribute he was ordered to bring for three years.

2. But on the third year, upon hearing that the king of the Babylonians made an expedition against the Egyptians, he did not pay his tribute; yet was he disappointed of his hope, for the Egyptians durst not fight at this time...

3. Now, a little time afterwards, the king of Babylon made an expedition against Jehoiakim, whom he received [into the city], and this out of fear of the foregoing predictions of this prophet, as supposing he should suffer nothing that was terrible, because he neither shut the gates, nor fought against him; yet when he was come into the city, he did not observe the covenants he had made, but he slew such as were in the flower of their age, and such as were of the greatest dignity, together with their king Jehoiakim, whom he commanded to be thrown before the walls, without any burial; and made his son Jehoiachin king of the country, and of the city: he also took the principal persons in dignity for captives, three thousand in number, and led them away to Babylon; among which was the prophet Ezekiel, who was then but young. And this was the end of king Jehoiakim, when he had lived thirty-six years, and of them reigned eleven. But Jehoiachin succeeded him in the kingdom, whose mother's name was Nehushta; she was a citizen of Jerusalem. He reigned three months and ten days. 1. BUT a terror seized on the king of Babylon, who had given the kingdom to Jehoiachin, and that immediately; he was afraid that he should bear him a grudge, because of his killing his father, and thereupon should make the country revolt from him; wherefore he sent an army, and besieged Jehoiachin in Jerusalem; but because he was of a gentle and just disposition, he did not desire to see the city endangered on his account, but he took his mother and kindred, and delivered them to the commanders sent by the king of Babylon...

The earliest reference I could find in the Watch Tower Index for Daniel 1:1 was the 1946 book Equipped for Every Good Work [5, p. 225], which was published a decade before the translation of the Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle BM 21946:

But Daniel 1:1, 2 fixes the start of this first captivity in the "third year" of Jehoiakim, who started to reign in Judah in 628 B.C. Would not this mean the captivity of Daniel and others started in 626 B.C., Jehoiakim's third year as king of Judah? No, this could not be, because Nebuchadnezzar was not enthroned till the following year, 625 B.C. Actually, the opening verse of Daniel means that in "the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim king of Judah" as a tributary king of Babylon "came Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon unto Jerusalem, and besieged it". How so? Because Jehoiakim was put on the throne by Egyptian decree and was tributary to Egypt for several years, but when Babylon defeated Egypt Jehoiakim came under Babylonian control and so remained for three years, after which three year period as tributary to Babylon the Judean king rebelled. (2 Ki. 24:1) That third year as tributary king to Nebuchadnezzar was the eleventh and last of his total kingship, because the Babylonian monarch came against the rebellious Jewish king and quickly completed the conquest during the three-month reign of Jehoiakim's successor Jehoiachin. Hence 618 B.C. was the time of the first captivity and the starting point of history in the book of Daniel.

Regarding Daniel 2:1 it says [5, p. 226]:

The time of this dream and its interpretation is stated as the second year of Nebuchadnezzar's reign. Actually, Nebuchadnezzar had been reigning over Babylon alone much longer than two years. Why, at the time of this dream the young captive Daniel had completed his three years of special court training and had been introduced to Nebuchadnezzar and had gained quite a reputation for wisdom, particularly in dreams and visions. In the nineteenth year of his reign Nebuchadnezzar was used as God's executioner to destroy faithless Jerusalem and end Israel's history as an independent Theocratic nation. Then Nebuchadnezzar began reigning in a unique way, as the first of the world rulers of the Gentile times. In the second year of his reign in this special capacity the dream showing the end of Satan's organization and rule and the taking over of power by Christ's kingdom came to Nebuchadnezzar, as recorded at chapter 2 . Here again, as at Daniel 1:1, the peculiarity which the writer of this book has of making a secondary reckoning of the years of a king's reign is demonstrated. He reckons by counting from epochal events within the reign that put the king in a new relationship.

Criticism

The Watch Tower's interpretation has a number of serious flaws, especially in light of the more recent discoveries of the Babylonian chronicles.

'Kingship' in Daniel 1:1 and Daniel 2:1

First the Watch Tower Society is reading Daniel 1:1 in a strange way - where 'kingship' is understood to refer not to the length of Jehoiakim's rule over Judah, but to his time as a vassal to Nebuchadnezzar. Against this interpretation Mercer argues [6, p. 180]:

Several commentators take the third year of Jehoiakim as being the last of the three years of servitude to Babylon mentioned in 2 Kgs 24:1. This solution is unlikely, for the text of Daniel states that Nebuchadnezzar besieged Jerusalem "in the third year of the reign of Jehoiakim" (bšnṯ šlwš lmlḵwṯ), not "in the third year of the servitude of Jehoiakim" (bšnṯ šlwš lᶜḇwḏh)—as one might expect if the statement in Dan 1:1 were derived from 2 Kgs 24:1.

This causes an even more substantial problem — in Daniel 2:1 he speaks with Nebuchadnezzar during 'the second year of his kingship' - this would be impossible if Daniel was taken captive sometime around the 7th or 8th year of Nebuchadnezzar. This forces the Watch Tower to use yet another definition for 'kingship' [7, p. 481] [1, p. 576] [1, p. 1186] [8, p. 18] [2, p. 46]

The book of Daniel states that it was in “the second year” of Nebuchadnezzar’s kingship (probably counting from the destruction of Jerusalem in 607 B.C.E. and therefore actually referring to his 20th regnal year) that Nebuchadnezzar had the dream about the golden-headed image.

He had effectively become world ruler in 607 B.C.E. when Jehovah God allowed him to destroy Jerusalem and its temple. In the second year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign as world ruler (606/605 B.C.E.), God sent him a terrifying dream.

In support of a less specific translation of 'kingship' or 'reign' Foley says [9, p. 33] [9, pp. Appendix 6]:

In understanding the first problem, it may be important that the Hebrew word translated reign in Daniel 1:1 (NIV) is malchut which appears to be a less specific term for the years of reign than regnal years, since its use conveys the thought of “kingship” or “sovereign power”... It is often used without a specific length of time, (e.g., Ezra 4:5– 6, Nehemiah 12:22, Jeremiah 49:34) or used in a different way, as in 2 Chronicles 15:10, where the fifteenth year of Asa’s reign (kingship) is probably dated from his birth rather than from his accession year. Thus Daniel 1:1 could be translated “in the third year of the kingship of Jehoiakim” and could reflect a less precise reckoning that ignores the month to month differences and sees his reign beginning in 608 BC and the current year being 605 BC, a difference of three years. This approach may also help us to understand the second problem, since it should be noted that the Hebrew word for reign in Daniel 2:1 is also malchut , so 603 BC must be the second year of Nebuchadnezzar.

Three major Hebrew words translate as “reign” in the NIV. The first of these is yom, the word that means “days” or “years”; for example, 1 Chronicles 7:2 translated “during the reign of David” is more literally translated “during the days (or years) of David.” The second word, malak, occurs 350 times, and in the book of Kings is usually translated “began to reign” and may be a word that specifically targets the regnal years of a king. This word is used once in Daniel in Daniel 9:2 with reference to the first year of the reign of Darius the Mede. The third word, malchut , occurs ninety times and seems to be a somewhat less specific word for “kingship” or alternatively for periods of reign calculated using exclusive reckoning. In the book of Daniel it is used in Daniel 1:1, 2:1, 5:26, 6:28 (twice), 8:1, and 8:23.

However, Foley ultimately concludes that Daniel was taken during Nebuchadnezzar's accession year [9, p. 34]:

it would seem most likely that Daniel was taken from Jerusalem late in 605 BC for the purpose of being trained in Babylonian ways. He completed this training very successfully, probably in 602 BC

Death of Jehoiakim

As acknowledged in the Insight book [7, p. 480], BM 21946 states that In the month Kislev [IX] the king of Akkad mustered his army and marched to Hattu, and then that on the second day of the month Adar [XII] he captured the city (and) seized (its) king.

According to 2 Chronicles 36:9 and 2 Kings 24:8, Jehoiachin reigned in Jerusalem for 3 months and 10 days, subtracting this from the end of his rule on 2/XII, his rule must have began (and Jehoiakim must have died) around the end of month VIII, which would be before Nebuchadnezzar marched to Jerusalem. [10, p. 278]

How can Daniel 1:2 where 'Jehovah gave King Jehoiakim of Judah into his hand' (NWT) and 2 Chronicles 36:6 where 'Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came up against him [Jehoiakim] in order to bind him with two copper fetters to take him off to Babylon' (NWT) make sense in this context given that Jehoiakim had already died before Nebuchadnezzar marched against the city?

According to Clines [11, p. 21]:

Some kind of an attack upon Jerusalem during the reign of Jehoiakim is demanded by the evidence of 2 Chr. 36:6f., which recounts that Nebuchadrezzar took Jehoiakim in fetters to BabyIon, and also carried off some of the temple vessels. This cannot have happened at the time of the siege of Jerusalem in early 597 B.C., since Jehoiakim died on December 7, 598, just before the Babylonian troops set out for Jerusalem. So if the Biblical Chronicles tradition is sound, it is reasonable to suppose that at some time during his reign 'Jehoiakim took part of the temple treasure [to Babylon] as a qatrē-offering or as biltu ('tribute') to buy off the Babylonians'. 2 Kings 24:1, 'Nebuchadnezzar came up, and Jehoiakim became his servant three years', may in turn be related to the same circumstances.

In contrast, the siege in the first year of Jehoiachin in 2 Kings 24 is described in an order consistent with the Babylonian account:

6 Then Jehoiakim was laid to rest with his forefathers...
8 Jehoiachin was 18 years old when he became king, and he reigned for three months in Jerusalem... 9 He continued to do what was bad in Jehovah’s eyes, according to all that his father had done. 10 During that time the servants of King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came up against Jerusalem, and the city came under siege. (2 Kings 24:6,8-10, NWT)

Marauder Bands

1 In Jehoiakim’s days King Nebuchadnezzar of Babylon came against him, and Jehoiakim became his servant for three years. However, he turned against him and rebelled. 2 Then Jehovah began to send against him marauder bands of Chaldeans, Syrians, Moabites, and Ammonites. He kept sending them against Judah to destroy it...
6 Then Jehoiakim was laid to rest with his forefathers and his son Jehoiachin became king in his place. (2 Kings 24:1,2,6,10 NWT)

According to the Watch Tower Jehoiakim began his three years servitude in his 8th year 'early in 620 B.C.E.' [1, p. 1269] and then rebelled at the end of the three years resulting in the siege of Jerusalem in '618 B.C.E.' [1, p. 1267]. The Insight book also states that it 'appears that Jehoiakim died during the siege of the city' (or as proven above, he actually died just before it began).

When therefore would the multiple attacks of marauder bands have occurred if Jehoiakim's rebellion (at the end of three years servitude) is immediately followed by his death and the accession of Jehoiachin?

The Utensils and the Captives

Comparing the statements (NWT) regarding the loot taken from Jerusalem it does not seem to be consistent to place Daniel 1:2 and 2 Chronicles 36:7 as the same event as the siege resulting in Jehoiachin's capture:

And likewise for the captives taken:

Against this argument the Watch Tower states in the Kingdom Come book [3, p. 188]:

Jeremiah 52:28-30 carefully reports that Nebuchadnezzar took Jews captive in his seventh year, his 18th year and his 23rd year, not his accession year.

However, it is already been demonstrated that Jeremiah does not contain a complete count of the captives since it contradicts the number (and also year, depending on interpretation) of captives described in 2 Kings 24:14 (3023 in the 7th year vs 10,000+ in the 8th year), so Jeremiah 52 surely should not be treated as an exhaustive list of all captives taken by Nebuchadnezzar. [1, p. 415]

Nebuchadnezzar's Conquest of Hattu

The Nebuchadnezzar Chronicle BM 21946 provides a detailed account of Nebuchadnezzar's activities during his early years as king:

Accession Year:

[The twenty-first year]: The king of Akkad stayed home (while) Nebuchadnezzar (II), his eldest son (and) the crown prince, mustered [the army of Akkad]. He took his army's lead and marched to Carchemish which is on the bank of the Euphrates. He crossed the river [to encounter the army of Egypt] which was encamped at Carchemish. [...] They did battle together. The army of Egypt retreated before him. He inflicted a [defeat] upon them (and) finished them off completely. In the district of Hamath the army of Akkad overtook the remainder of the army of [Egypt which] managed to escape [from] the defeat and which was not overcome. They (the army of Akkad) inflicted a defeat upon them (so that) a single (Egyptian) man [did not return] home. At that time Nebuchadnezzar (II) conquered all of Ha[ma]th. For twenty-one years Nabopolassar ruled Babylon. In (his) accession year Nebuchadnezzar (II) returned to Hattu. Until the month Shebat he marched about victoriously in Hattu. In the month Shebat he took the vast booty of Hattu to Babylon. In the month Nisan he took the hand of Bel and the son of Bel (and) celebrated the Akitu festival.

First Year:

The first year of Nebuchadnezzar (II): In the month Sivan he mustered his army and marched to Hattu. Until the month Kislev he marched about victoriously in Hattu. All the kings of Hattu came into his presence and he received their vast tribute. He marched to Ashkelon and in the month Kislev he captured it, seized its king, plundered [and sac]ked it. He turned the city into a ruin heap. In the month Shebat he marched away and [returned] to Bab[ylon].

Second Year:

The sec[ond year]: In the month Iyyar the king of Akkad strengthened his large army and [marched to Hattu]. He encamped [...] ... large siege towers he moved acr[oss ... ... from the month] Iyyar until the month [... he marched about victoriously in Hattu].

Third Year:

[The third year: In the month ..., on] the thirteenth [day] Nabu-shumu-lishir [...] > [In the month ... the king of Akka]d mustered his army and [marched] to Hattu. [... ...] He brought the vast [booty] of Hattu into Akkad. [...]

Fourth Year:

The fourth year: The king of Akkad mustered his army and marched to Hattu. [He marched about victoriously] in Hattu. In the month Kislev he took his army's lead and marched to Egypt. (When) the king of Egypt heard (the news) he m[ustered] his army. They fought one another in the battlefield and both sides suffered severe losses (lit. they inflicted a major defeat upon one another). The king of Akkad and his army turned and [went back] to Babylon.

Fifth Year:

The fifth year: The king of Akkad stayed home (and) refitted his numerous horses and chariotry.

Sixth Year:

The sixth year: In the month Kislev the king of Akkad mustered his army and marched to Hattu. He despatched his army from Hattu and they went off to the desert. They plundered extensively the possessions, animals, and gods of the numerous Arabs. In the month Adar the king went home.

Seventh Year:

The seventh year: In the month Kislev the king of Akkad mustered his army and marched to Hattu. He encamped against the city of Judah and on the second day of the month Adar he captured the city (and) seized (its) king. A king of his own choice he appointed in the city (and) taking the vast tribute he brought it into Babylon.

Notably in the 7th year the chronicle describes the siege of Jerusalem where Jehoiachin is captured, and identifies it as being in the area of 'Hattu'. However, from the chronicle we can also see that Nebuchadnezzar also marched through Hattu in his accession, 1st-4th, and 6th years, and even more significantly in the 1st year:

All the kings of Hattu came into his presence and he received their vast tribute.

It therefore seems very unlikely that Jehoiakim did not become a vassal of Nebuchadnezzar until his 8th year as dated by the Watch Tower, instead is it was likely to be sometime as early as the autumn of Nebuchadnezzar's accession year (the 4th year of Jehoiakim).

Against this argument the Kingdom Come book says [3, p. 188]:

Though Berossus claims that Nebuchadnezzar took Jewish captives in his accession year, there are no cuneiform documents supporting this.

However, the tributes described in the chronicles should be interpreted as including captives, such as in 7th year when Nebuchadnezzar took 'vast tribute', which we already know must have included captives (Jer 52:28, 2 Kings 24:14), according to Larsson [12]:

In the 'accession year' Nebuchadrezzar went back again to the Hatti land and until the month of Sebat marched unopposed through the Hatti land; in the month of Sebat he took the heavy tribute of the Hatti territory to Babylon.

It is certain that this 'heavy tribute' consisted not only of treasure but also of prisoners from the conquered countries. To refrain from doing so would have been altogether too alien from the customs of the kings of Babylon and Assyria.

Alternative Solutions

Dates for the start of Jehoiakim's servitude proposed by other authors:

• Tadmor: 1st year of Nebuchadnezzar.
• Jones: 20th year of Nabopolassar (the year before Nebuchadnezzar's accession).
• Malamat: Accession, 1st or 2nd years of Nebuchadnezzar.
• Thiele: 21st year of Nabopolassar (after the battle of Carchemish, but prior to Nebuchadnezzar's accession).
• Albright: 1st or 2nd years of Nebuchadnezzar.
• Hyatt: Accession or 1st years of Nebuchadnezzar.
• Mercer [6, p. 192]: Midsummer of Nebuchadnezzar's accession year.
• Larsson [12, p. 419]: Accession year of Nebuchadnezzar.

If we took the Watch Tower Judean chronology but instead dated the subjugation of Judah to the accession year of Nebuchadnezzar, then this would fall in the forth year of Jehoiakim, or the third year when counting using the Babylonian accession year system, fitting perfectly with Daniel 1:1.

Daniel's Training

Assuming that Daniel was taken at some point in Nebuchadnezzar's accession year then we can count inclusively 3 years of training (Daniel 1:5), but this would be a maximum of about 2 ½ years actual length:

Does this matter? Do the events in chapter 2 do have to follow the 3 years training or could they have taken place concurrently? According to Jones [13, p. 189]:

it simply would not be possible that Daniel and his three friends could be so highly elevated in the affairs of the government of Babylonia in chapter 2 (Dan. 2:48, 49) and afterward still have to appear before King Nebuchadnezzar to obtain his approval by proving their abilities “to stand in the king’s palace” (Dan. 1:4, 18–20) as though they were yet mere students. But such would be the case were the happenings of chapter 2 imbedded somewhere within the three-year time frame of chapter 1.

Clines says [11, p. 28]:

Further, it may be urged that the dates in Daniel are not self-consistent, and that it is not worth attempting to justify the date in Dan. 1:1. If Daniel was taken to Babylon c. June-July 605, and immediately began his three-year education (1:5), he cannot have completed his education before the end of the '2nd year of Nebuchadnezzar' (ended 9 April, 602) in which the king had his dream (2:1) and Daniel, already graduated (1:18ff.), gave its interpretation. This conclusion could be avoided only if it were maintained that the '3 years' of 1:15 (sic) are counted inclusively; but against that must be set the evidence for a fixed period of 3 full years' education, at least in the Persian court.

Mercer says [6, p. 187]:

Some commentators hold that the three years of Dan 1:5 were not three full years (e-g., Driver, p. 17; Young, pp. 55-56). They would say that Daniel was trained during the latter part of Nebuchadnezzar's accession year, all of his first year, and part of his second year. That then would harmonize Dan 1:5 and 2:1. The fact that the three years were a specific period of time set up for education would suggest, however, that the years were three whole years, not a part of three. There is also some evidence that in the Persian period the length of training was indeed three full years (Montgomery, p. 122).

It should be noted, however, that Dan 2 does not necessarily follow Dan 1 chronologically. In addition, the text of Dan 2 suggests that he was not finished with his training. After all, Daniel was evidently not among those who were unable to interpret the dream (vv. 2-1 1; cf. v. 27), nor had he even been informed of the matter (v. 15). Thus it is entirely possible that Dan 2 records an incident that took place after the story in Dan 1:8-17, but before the end of the three-year period.

Timing of Jehoiakim's Rebellion

According to Tadmor [14, p. 229]:

The revolt in 601 might have been connected with the new ascendency of Egypt, whose new strength is evident from the defeat inflicted by Necho on the attacking armies of Babylon in that year.

According to Hyatt [10, p. 280]:

In his 3rd and 4th years Nebuchadrezzar was back in Hatti. In the latter year he came into direct conflict with the Egyptian army. After telling of his marching unopposed in Hatti, the chronicle goes on to say: "In the month Kislev [beginning November 20, 601] he took the lead of his army and marched to Egypt. The king of Egypt heard, and mustered his army. In open battle they smote the breast of each other and inflicted great destruction upon each other. The king of Akkad and his army turned around, and went back to Babylon" (Rev. 11. 6-7). The laconic account of the next year is that the king of Akkad remained at home "and gathered together his chariots and horses in great numbers" (Rev. 1. 8). The outcome of this battle must have been defeat for the Babylonian army, or at best a draw. This battle must lie back of Jehoiakim's change of allegiance, when he withheld tribute from Babylonia, probably making an alliance with Egypt. II Kings 24:1 says that this occurred three years after Jehoiakim became the servant of Nebuchadrezzar; three full years after the submission of Jehoiakim in either 605 or 604 would bring us to this date. It is impossible to tell whether Jehoiakim's change of allegiance brought on the invasion by Nebuchadrezzar, or whether Jehoiakim rebelled after he saw the success of Egypt. The latter seems more logical.

According to Mercer [6, pp. 188, 190]:

At an unspecified time in his fourth year (30 Mar. 601-18 Mar. 600), Nebuchadnezzar returned to Palestine. It was during this campaign (in late 601) that Babylon and Egypt fought to a standstill, and Nebuchadnezzar withdrew to Babylon with no tribute. It was also during this campaign that Jehoiakim of Judah, who had paid tribute for the past three years, rebelled against the Babylonians. This understanding fits 2 Kgs 24:1, which states: "In his [Jehoiakim's] days Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon came up, and Jehohiakim became his servant for three years; but then he turned and rebelled against him."

The impetus behind Jehoiakim's rebellion was probably his renewal of ties with his original overlord, Necho of Egypt, who had made him king (2 Kgs 23:34-35). Jehoiakim's ability to extradite gives evidence that he was at one time a vassal of Egypt (cf. Jer 26:22-23). Necho also imposed a very modest amount of tribute. Jehoiakim was a part of the pro-Egyptian party in Jerusalem and probably hoped that Necho would help him against the Babylonians. This renewed alliance would explain Nebuchadnezzar's march to Egypt in 601.

It would seem likely that Jehoiakim's rebellion was connected with the Egyptian war in Nebuchadnezzar's 4th year, counting back 3 full years during which Jehoiakim paid tribute to Nebuchadnezzar would mean that he must have become vassal somewhere around the accession or 1st year of Nebuchadnezzar.

References