The Chaldeans
It was previously thought that the use
of the term ‘Chaldean’ (kasdiy כשדימה) to refer to a class of wise men
(Dan. 2:2, 4, 5, 10; 4:7; 5:7, 11) was an anachronism. The term ‘Chaldean’
comes from the Akkadian term Kasdu. In late Akkadian there was a phonetic
shift such that in certain words the sibilant s became l before t
and d, so Kasdu became Kaldu. The term, Kaldu,
appears in Greek writers as Χαλδαιος, hence ‘Chaldean’.
The Kasdu were a people from the region around Ur; Nebuchadnezzar and
his father, Nabopolassar, were Kasdu. Since the ruling dynasty during
the Neo-Babylonian period was Kasdu, it is objected that the author is
in error to use Kasdiy as a class of wise man, rather than as an ethnic
term. In the fifth century Herodotus refers to the Χαλδαιος as priests of Bel (Marduk). It is conjectured
that the term would not have become a technical term for these priests until
the end of Chaldean dynasty.
In fact, the author does use kasdiy
in the ethnic sense (Dan. 5:30; 9:1; pos. 3:8) so his other use of the term
cannot be due to ignorance of its ethnic origins. The designation of certain wise
men as ‘Chaldeans’ cannot be explained by dependence on late sources, such as
Herodotus, since the term kasdiy almost certainly derives from the
earlier Akkadian form of the term. Therefore, we must look for an alternative explanation
for the dual-use of kasdiy in the book of Daniel.
One suggestion proposed by R. D.
Wilson, and defended by Archer, is that two meanings of Kaldu have
separate etymologies. Wilson hypothesized that while Kaldu (ethnic) was
derived from Kasdu, Kaldu (priestly) was derived from the Sumerian
gal-du meaning ‘master builder’. While Kaldu (ethnic) referred to
the race, Kaldu (priestly) referred to a group of high-ranking
officials. However, even if the link between gal-du and Kaldu
could be substantiated, there would be no link with the Hebrew kasdiy.
An alternative suggestion is that both meanings could have been used
concurrently. Despite the early application of ‘Chaldean’ to the priests of
Bel, the term continue to be used in an ethnic sense at least till the first
century BC when it is used by the historian Strabo. Baldwin reasons:
There is nothing about the use of the term in both meanings, nor need it
cause confusion, any more than our use in English of the word “Morocco” to
designate both the country and the leather for which it is famous. (Baldwin, Daniel,
28)
Millard finds a possible analogy with the Magi, who performed a
religious function in the Persian Empire and were probably a tribe of the Medes.
(Millard, ‘Daniel 16’, 70) Given that the Chaldean dynasty was instrumental in
the elevation of Marduk to supreme god, it is possible that the priests of
Marduk were ethnically Chaldean. It is certainly conceivable that the theological
shift towards Marduk would have been characterized as a Chaldean innovation,
even if all the priests were not ethnically Chaldean.
It is interesting to note that there is no extant use of the term Kaldu
in cuneiform texts from the Neo-Babylonian period. This may be due to our lack
of information but it is likely that the term was not used by Chaldeans of
themselves during this period. (Thomas E. Gaston,
Historical Issues in the Book of Daniel [Paternoster Biblical
Monographs; Milton Keynes, U.K.: Paternoster, 2016], 35-36)
