Without recourse. All Rights Reserved. Tree of Life^©

Statement of belief: “Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth.” (John 17:17 KJV)

Created 5940(?) 05 16 2026 [2010-07-29]

Last edited 5940(?) 05 17 2026 [2010-07-30]

Haggai vs Zechariah Reckoning

Finally Resolved!

-

A Study in Progress:

(Therefore, please forgive me for any errors, whether words remaining from past thinking and not yet corrected or thoughts of mine that are still suffering from being in error until somehow I am given additional rays of light!)

Abstract:

As it turns out Haggai must be recognized, not only as using the Babylonian calendar, which begins its years with Nisan 1, but also as using a different event, and thus also a different date, for the beginning of Darius’ reign than does Zechariah. That is, Haggai’s reckoning is based upon a recognition of the existence of a reign of the False Smerdis, whereas the reckoning of Zechariah is disregarding that reign as if it never existed… as did also King Darius himself!

Given that the False Smerdis reigned from Av 6, 523 BCE to Nisan 10, 522 BCE this makes for a one year difference in the numbering of the calendar being used by the scribe. That is, regardless of whether or not such a scribe is using the Scriptural or the Babylonian calendar!

Thus it follows that Zechariah’s 11^th month of Darius’ 2^nd year precedes Haggai’s 9^th month of the 2^nd year. Yes, even by a full eight months!

(Parenthetically, this discovery affects also a 500 year prophecy referenced by Ellen G. White re the timing of the prophetic utterance of Zechariah 9:9 vs. the birth of Yeshua.)

Considerations:

It may have appeared as though the question re the different reckoning of Haggai vs. Zechariah have been even previously resolved, that is, merely by recognizing that Haggai is using the Babylonian calendar whereas Zechariah is using the Scriptural calendar…

But is that really true? Is that resolving all our questions? Perhaps no one has found reasons for looking even deeper? Perhaps the waters of our understanding these issues have been so muddled that no one has even heretofore recognized that there is even more of an apparent discrepancy that needs resolving?

As I was reviewing my prior work[1] re these items it suddenly dawned on me that these particulars have never before been fully resolved by myself. In particular, how is it that the 8^th and 11^th months of Darius’ 2^nd year of reign (Zechariah 1:1, 7,) Scriptural calendar reckoning, per Zechariah both precede (Zechariah 1:17) the 6^th, 7^th, and 9^th month of what may seem to be much the same 2^nd year of Darius’ reign, Babylonian calendar, per Haggai? This dilemma cannot be resolved merely by recognizing that Haggai is using the Babylonian calendar while Zechariah is using the Scriptural calendar, can it? It cannot!

This fact brought me to return to the basics: What event initiated Darius’ reign, and when did it occur? Having discovered some years ago Darius’ autobiographical report re his actions it suddenly came to me that Darius’ words are in themselves the resolution to this dilemma, that is (emphasis in bold blue and red font added:)

“10 And DARIUS the King says: This is, what I did, by the grace of ORMAZD, when I gained the kingdom: The named CAMBYSES, son of CYRUS, was king here before me. This CAMBYSES had a brother, named SMERDIS (BARDIYA), they had the same mother and the same father. Afterwards, this CAMBYSES killed SMERDIS. When CAMBYSES killed SMERDIS, the people did not know, that SMERDIS was killed. Then CAMBYSES went to Egypt. The people became bad, and many falsehoods grew up in the provinces, as well in Persia, as in Media, as in the other lands. And then a man, a Magian, named GOMATES, from Pasargada,[2] near the mount named Arakadris, there he arose. On the 14^th day of the month Viyakhna,[3] thus he arose: To the people he told lies, and {p.90} said: "I am SMERDIS, the son of CYRUS, the brother of CAMBYSES." Then all the people revolted from CAMBYSES, went over to him, and the Persians, and the Medes, and the other nations. He seized the kingdom. On the 6^th day of the month Garmapada[4] he took the royalty from CAMBYSES. Then CAMBYSES[5] died, killing himself.
“11 And DARIUS the King says: Of this my kingdom the Magian GOMATES had deprived CAMBYSES, this kingdom had belonged to our race since the most ancient times. Now, GOMATES the Magian, deprived CAMBYSES as well of the Persians, as of the Medians, as of the other nations, he did according to his own will, and seized the royalty over them.
“12 And DARIUS the King says: There was neither a man in Persia, nor a Median, nor any one of our race who would have dispossessed GOMATES the Magian of the kingdom. The people feared him utterly. He killed many people who had known the former SMERDIS. He killed many persons for the following reason, thinking: "May they not acknowledge me, that I am not SMERDIS, son of CYRUS?" And nobody dared to say about GOMATES the Magian, any thing whatever, until I came. And I prayed to ORMAZD. ORMAZD was my helper. By the grace of ORMAZD, on the 10^th day of the month of Bagayadis,[6] then accompanied by a few men, I killed {p.91} GOMATES the Magian, and with him the men who were his principal adherents. There is a fortress, named Sikhyuvatis,[7] in the country called Nisaea, in Media; there I killed him, I dispossessed him of the royalty, by the grace of ORMAZD, I had the kingly power, ORMAZD gave to me the royalty.
“13 And DARIUS the King says: The kingdom which had been robbed from our race, I restored it. I put again in its place. As it had been before me, thus I did. I re-established the temples of the gods which GOMATES the Magian had destroyed, and I reinstituted, in favour of the people, the calendar and the holy language, and I gave back to the families what GOMATES the Magian had taken away. And I replaced (the) people in their ancient state, as well the Persians, as the Medians, as the other nations, just as they had been before. I restored {p.92} what had been robbed. By the grace of ORMAZD, thus I did; I made great efforts, until I established again our house in its state, as it had been before; and thus I made my efforts, by the grace of ORMAZD, as if GOMATES the Magian had never dispossessed our family.”

(THE SOCIETY OF BIBLICAL ARCHAEOLOGY, RECORDS OF THE PAST, Vol. 7)

It follows that, per the reckoning of Darius, the False Smerdis was obliterated ab initio out of history.

Evidently, Zechariah subscribed to this way of reckoning, thus ignoring the false pretender to the throne, the False Smerdis. It follows that the name of someone else must be used to fill the gap. Whose name? Well, who was considered the rightful heir, if not Darius… even ab initio!

Thus, per Haggai, the beginning of Darius’ reign was, per the above given quote: “The 10^th day of the month of Bagayadis,[8]” i.e. Nisan 10, 522 BCE.

And, per Zechariah, the beginning of Darius’ reign was: “The 6^th day of the month Garmapada,[9]” i.e. Av 6, 523 BCE.

This difference between Haggai and Zechariah, advances the numbering of the years of Darius by one full year the reckoning of both the Babylonian and the Scriptural calendar as perceived from the perspective of Zechariah, and, indeed, even from the perspective of Darius himself as reflected by the above quote!

. . . . . . .

A note re certain words of Zechariah from the prophetic pen of Ellen G. White

(Parenthetically, another consequence of this reckoning is that a prophetic utterance of Ellen G. White re a 500 year difference between the prophetic utterance of Zechariah and the birth of Yeshua now finds a potential maximum 502 year difference, that is, whereas before I found a maximum 501 year difference between these events.)

Comments and donations freely accepted at:

Tree of Life^©

c/o General Delivery

Nora [near SE-713 01]

Sweden Republic^© in Adamah Republic^©

eMail: TreeOfLifeTime@gmail.com

Free counter

…

…

^...

The GateWays into Tree of Life Chronology Forums^©

The GateWays of Entry into the Tree of Life Time Chronology Touching upon the Book of Daniel^©

Pearls & Mannah – “I found it!”

Home

GotLinks?com Links

Feel free to use, and for sharing freely with others, any of the truth and blessings belonging to God alone. I retain all the copyrights to the within, such that no one may lawfully restrain my use and my sharing of it with others. Including also all the errors that remain. Please let only me know about those. I need to know in order to correct them. Others don’t need to be focused upon the errors that belong to me alone. Please respect that, and please do not hesitate to let me know of any certain error that you find!

Without recourse. All Rights Reserved. Tree of Life^©

---

[1] Copy pasting my prior note as found [with some current corrections and edits] under the Events column at year zero of The False Smerdis and of Darius, that is, at the Scripture years beginning 523 and 524 BCE [currently cells P994-P995:]

Darius' decree in his 2nd year of reign:
"From the view point of Bible history the chief event during the reign of Cyrus (c. 553 - 530 B.C.), first king of the Persian Empire, was the decree of his first regnal year authorizing the Jews to return to Palestine in 536..., and to rebuild the Temple (Ezra 5:13). Pursuant to this decree Zerubbabel led some 50,000 Jews back to Judea and began the rebuilding of the Temple (Ezra 1:5, 6; 3:1-10). After a time, however, work came to a halt as the result of various difficulties and discouragements that arose (see Ezra 4:1-5, 24; cf. Haggai 1:1-4). So far as the Jews were concerned the reign of Cambyses (530-522), son and successor of Cyrus, was of minor importance, for he seems to have taken little if any interest in their welfare. But soon after Darius Hystaspes (522-486) ascended the throne he confirmed the original decree of Cyrus by issuing one of his own (see Ezra 4:24; 6:1), which resulted in the completion of the Zerubbabel Temple in 515 B.C. (see Ezra 6:1, 15)." (SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 3, p. 459:5.)

Ezra 4:24 Then ceased the work of the house of God which is at Jerusalem. So it ceased unto the second year of the reign of Darius king of Persia.

>>>NOTICE that Ezra is referencing this event to the 2nd year of Darius. Accordingly, the same event in Haggai must necessarily also have happened at the same time and Haggai's first seven months of the 2nd year of Darius must reference the 1st Biblical year of Darius, i.e. Haggai 1:1, 15; 2:1, and also one must conclude that the words of Zech. 1:1, 7, 12, 16; 2:2 (KJV) referencing events that were still in the future while pointing, not to the beginning of things or of laying the foundation of the house of God, but to the completion thereof - as also indicated by Ezra 5:1-2. There is a much better explanation for this apparent contradiction: Not only is it true that Haggai is obviously using the Babylonian calendar, whereas Zechariah is using the Scriptural calendar, but in addition it is clear that Haggai’s reckoning of Darius’ years of reign is based upon Darius killing the False Smerdis on Nissan 10, 522 BCE, whereas Zechariah’s reckoning of Darius’ years of reign is based upon Darius killing Cambyses, the son of Cyrus on Av 6, 523 BCE, that is, per Zechariah’s reckoning, The False Smerdis had no valid claim to the throne over and above Darius, but was considered only that, a false pretender...

"...There can be no question that Darius I, who reigned from 522-486 B.C., is meant..." (SDA Bible Commentary, Vol. 3, p. 346:last paragraph.)

"In the eighth month, in the second year of Darius, came the word of the LORD unto Zechariah, the son of Berechiah, the son of Iddo the prophet, saying...
"Upon the four and twentieth day of the eleventh month, which is the month Sebat [the 11th month], in the second year of Darius, came the word of the Lord unto Zechariah...
"Then the angel of the LORD answered and said, O LORD of hosts, how long wilt thou not have mercy on Jerusalem and on the cities of Judah, against which thou hast had indignation these threescore and ten years?...
"Therefore thus saith the LORD; I am returned to Jerusalem with mercies: my house shall be built in it, saith the LORD of hosts, and a line shall be stretched forth upon Jerusalem...
"Then said I, Whither goest thou? And he said unto me, To measure Jerusalem, to see what is the breadth thereof, and what is the length thereof." Zech. 1:1, 7, 12, 16; 2:2 (KJV).

>>>NOTICE that as here dated in the 8th and 11th months of Darius' 2nd year, the completion of the house of the Lord in Jerusalem is still future, whereas in the 9th month of Darius' 2nd year as dated by Haggai the foundation of the temple is laid. Thus, the dates given by Zechariah must surround the 9th month referenced by Haggai though[cf. the main point of the within article re Haggai vs. Zechariah reckoning!] Haggai is obviously using a different calendar with a year beginning in Aviv and ending with Adar:

"In the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, in the second year of Darius… Consider now from this day and upward, from the four and twentieth day of the ninth month, even from the day that the foundation of the Lord's temple was laid, consider it". Haggai 2:10,18 (KJV). It may appear as though this is the exact date that the work upon the foundation of the Temple was re-laid/resumed (or is it a reference to the original founding following the decree of Cyrus?) as begun some 12 years prior by "Jeshua the son of Jozadak, and his brethren the priests, and Zerubbabel the son of Shealtiel, and his brethren" Ezra 3:2 (cf. Ezra chapters 1-6, which relate the events prior to Ezra's involvement:)

"Now in the second year of their coming to the house of God at Jerusalem, in the second month, Zerubbabel... began to oversee the work of the house of Jehovah... And when the builders laid the foundation of the temple of Jehovah... to praise Jehovah, according to the ordinance of David king of Israel..." Ezra 3:8-10 (IB).

>>>NOTICE that "the second year" here referenced is more properly referenced as "after the beginning of the new Biblical year," i.e. considering that "השׁנית" is the dual of the word "שׁני" meaning "year" and that what is being referenced here is the being back in Jerusalem within more than one single year, thus the dual/plural grammar being used.

"Then came the same Sheshbazzar, and laid the foundation of the house of God which is in Jerusalem: and since that time even until now hath it been in building, and yet it is not finished." Ezr 5:16.

Ezr 7:8 And he [Ezra] came to Jerusalem in the fifth month, which was in the seventh year of the king [Ahasuerus/Artaxerxes].

>>>NOTICE that this is the 7th year of king Artaxerxes, referencing an event that happened 63 years after the decree of Darius I in 521 BCE, which itself was issued 13 years after the foundation of the temple was laid following the decree of Cyrus in (534 or) 533 BCE, i.e. some 76 year prior to Artaxerxes’ decree.

[2] Pasargada, in Persian Paisiyauvrula, literally, Valley of Sources, a spot near Darabdjerd, in the South-east of Farsistan, where exist till now the ruins of the fortress which enclosed the tomb of Cyrus. I explained myself on this question in the Journal Asiatique, 1872, 1. xix., p. 548. Pesiachada is not accompanied by the word hise, "named," it was therefore a very well known place.
Murghab with its tomb cannot be possibly the Pasargada of the ancients, and the monument of Murghab is not the tomb of Cyrus. It is on the same river as Persepolis, on the Araxes, while Pasargada was situated on the river Cyrus, which goes into the Persian Gulf.
Moreover, the monument now seen at Murghab, and named "Throne of the Mother of Suleiman," is surely the tomb of a woman. No archaeologist can be uncertain on this point, as the same difference, now observed in the East, between the flat or round covers of men s sepulchres, and the covers of female tombs in form of a gable-roof, is to be found in the royal tombs of Persepolis. The modern inhabitants of Persia have not been mistaken on that subject. But the construction of the Murghab monuments is due to Cyrus, whose inscriptions exist there; it was the ancient Marrhasion. I therefore consider it as almost certain that the monument, often erroneously styled the tomb of Cyrus, although already Lassen suggested judicious remarks against that opinion, is in fact the sepulchre of Kassandana, the beloved wife of Cyrus, mother of Cambyses. Compare Her. II.

[3] The month of Viyakhna is the Assyrian Adar, March. On the supposition, that the Persians had a solar year, commencing with the vernal equinox, falling at the epoch of Darius, March 22 Gregorian, March 23, Julian, 14th of the Viyakhna would be the 6th or the I2th of March, 522, or 9,479, in adding 10,000 years to the Christian era. I have adopted this way of computation in order to prevent the inconvenience of the negative numbers.

[4] If Garmapada is August as it is probable, the 10th Garmapada would coincide with the end of July.

[5] Cambyses killed himself. A suicide is evidently in the thought of Darius, and by no means an accident. His mother was Kassandana, Persian Kaiandana, with the swan's neck, de kazanda, swan.

[6] Bagayadis must be the Nisan; the Assyrian coincidence is lost. As Garnapada, "the time of the heat," must be July August, or Ab, the Magian reigned just seven months, as says Herodotus, who adds many details, more or less credible. But the first arising of the Magian amounts still until midst of March, 14 Viyakhna, 522 BC; 9,479.
In taking as a base the now existing commencement of the Persian year, at the spring's equinox, we would have for the dates:
First revolt of the Magian ... 4 March 522; 9,479
Real accession to the royal power .... 1 August 522; 9,479
Death of the Magian ... 2 April 521; 9,480.

[7] The name of the spot where the Magian was killed, is Cikhyuvatis not Cikhthwatis. The character y has been taken for th. Here the statement of Darius proves a minor error of Herodotus, who says that the Pseudo-Smerdis was killed at Susa. But the Father of History is right, in speaking of the love that all people, except the Persian, had towards the Magian, who had retired to Media.
The revolt of the first Pseudo-Smerdis was not only the rebellion of an indignant impostor, who took only the name of Smerdis for his proper purposes. It was an attempt to restore the ancient Median dynasty and to abate the faith of Zoroaster, reigning since the accession of Cyrus, 560. The Magian changed the calendar, I think (gaitha the world) and the language maniya, or the faith, which Darius restored "for the sake of the people" (Persian karahyu abicaris, Median Dassumunna nutas). Darius restored the temples of the gods which Gomates had destroyed. It was therefore a political and religious revolution.
There is a difficulty which nobody, I think, suggested. How is it possible that the son Smerdis should have abolished all that his father, Cyrus, had established? At least, the Magian borrowed the name of the son of Cyrus. It was therefore only a measure to take possession of the kingly power under a pretext, and to throw off the mask, when he believed that he could do so without any danger.

[8] Bagayadis must be the Nisan; the Assyrian coincidence is lost. As Garnapada, "the time of the heat," must be July August, or Ab, the Magian reigned just seven months, as says Herodotus, who adds many details, more or less credible. But the first arising of the Magian amounts still until midst of March, 14 Viyakhna, 522 BC; 9,479.
In taking as a base the now existing commencement of the Persian year, at the spring's equinox, we would have for the dates:
First revolt of the Magian ... 4 March 522; 9,479
Real accession to the royal power .... 1 August 522; 9,479
Death of the Magian ... 2 April 521; 9,480.

[9] If Garmapada is August as it is probable, the 10th Garmapada would coincide with the end of July.