What does Daniel 5:1 mean?

The identity of the king mentioned here is the subject of much debate and controversy. Archaeologists suggest that Babylon never had a king "Belshazzar," and that Nabonidus was the final ruler of Babylon. Historical records of that era are complex, contradictory, and often vague. Untangling the threads of the debate has filled numerous books and studies.

Two main theories harmonize Scripture with secular observations. First is that Belshazzar was a regional name for Evilmerodach, son of Nebuchadnezzar, who would have ruled very briefly before being killed. This implies that the end of this chapter (Daniel 5:30–31) is a summary: glossing over other rulers to reach the king involved in chapter 6. A stronger possibility, derived from ancient records, is that Nabonidus was traveling when Babylon fell, having left his son Belshazzar as co-regent. This also makes sense of Belshazzar's promise to make someone "third ruler" in the kingdom (Daniel 5:7). It would also imply the use of "father" in reference to Nebuchadnezzar to mean "ancestor" (Genesis 28:13; 1 Kings 2:10).

In a display of self-indulgent pride, Belshazzar hosted a massive, drunken party. It's possible this was done to spite the forces of a Persian siege, against which the king felt invincible. Excavations of Babylon have included large rooms with plastered walls (Daniel 5:5). This was foolish enough, but the king's celebration also included idolatry and desecrating Jewish religious artifacts (Daniel 5:2). He would soon learn the truth that excessive pride often leads directly to disaster (Proverbs 16:18).