Larsguy47

EZRA 6:14 And the older men of the Jews were building and making progress under the prophesying of Hag´gai the prophet and Zech·a·ri´ah the grandson of Id´do, and they built and finished [it] due to the order of the God of Israel and due to the order of Cyrus and Da·ri´us and Ar·ta·xerx´es the king of Persia. 15 And they completed this house by the third day of the lunar month A´dar, that is, in the sixth year of the reign of Da·ri´us the king.

The above is a wonderful example of concise chronology. It tells us the accession year of Artaxerxes was year six of Darius. This also means Darius only ruled for 6 years. Current popular chronology assigns him 36 years, so there is a contradiction. It means that his history was revised by the Persians and expanded. Because this was a government-sponsored revision, actual records supporting the fake 7-36 years of the rule of Darius are suspect. Instead we look to other evidence that might or might not confirm he ruled that long. Persepolis is a city begun by Darius and when we go there for critical evidence, aside from the inscriptions, we find a quick confirmation of his short rule.


http://www.iranchamber.com/history/p...ersepolis1.php


First of all, Persepolis is called a "city" but it's more like a royal compound of about 11 buildings primarily meeting halls, palaces, a Treasury and Harem.



Now it is known that Darius started several buildings here but only was barely able to finish his own palace. Palaces elsewhere in Persia were completed in about two years.

Building records from Persepolis indicate it was begun in the 4th year of the king building it, which could only be Darius I. Yet he was barely able to finish his palace. One inscription there says Darius built it and another says Xerxes completed it. After that he died and the several other buildings that were started by Darius at Persepolis had to be completed by Xerxes.

PROBLEM: If he began to build his palace in his 4th year, and they only took two years to build, then why wasn't he able to finish it? If we take the history for face value, it would seem, therefore, he started a palace in his 4th year and it was still under construction for the next 32 years and still left uncompleted, obliging his son Xerxes to complete it. Sorry, not likely.

Instead, if we follow the Bible, the building records record correctly Persepolis was begun in the 4th year of Darius but due to his untimely death at Marathon, beheaded by a Greek woman whom he saw privately, he died in his 6th, just as he was completing this palace. The fact that Darius was unable to finish a 2-year palace begun in his 4th year indicates he died within 2 years of beginning the project.



Of course, his son and co-ruler, Xerxes, was already involved with the building there and promptly finished the buildings there. Of note, though, when he became sole ruler, he adopted the name of "Artaxerxes." Thus the Throne Hall though begun by Darius and Xerxes is shown as being completed by "Artaxerxes". This is more evidence that Xerxes merely added a name and that Xerxes and Artaxerxes are the same king. I say "added" because there are astronomical texts dated to up to year 27 of a king Artaxerxes who is "also known as ARSES (Xerxes)." But all the alternative names are known for the other two Artaxerxes: Artaxerxes II was "Mneumon," and Artaxerxes III was "Nothus." That leaves Artaxerxes I as "Xerxes." So it was not a name change, but a name addition. But this was not well known to the Greeks, and so Xerxes used this to claim the Artaxerxes ruling was a different person, Xerxes' son.

Darius also prebuilt three tombs at Naqshi-Rustam. He is buried in the tomb #1, but "Artaxerxes" is buried in tomb #2, and Darius I in tomb #3. Of course, there's no problem with this since Xerxes was Artaxerxes and so he is buried in the right tomb. But to cover up the conspiracy and fool the Greeks, another tomb was later placed there for "Xerxes", but it is newer and so new a different sculptor could only copy the artwork from the earlier three tombs. The added tomb is lower and facing another direction than the original three.



Also, Nehemiah is present with Xerxes and Darius proving he was already the cupbearer early in the reign of Darius I. He lived through the reign of Darius I, Artaxerxes I and into the reign of Darius II. With the additional expanded history he would have had to have lived over 143 years of age. When Darius dies at 6 years and no extra 21-year rule given to Xerxes, then Nehemiah easily survies past the rule of Artaxerxes/Xerxes. Xerxes was born the year Cyrus became king. If Nehemiah, who returned from Babylon this year was about 30 years of age, he would have been only 89 when Artaxerxes/Xerxes died 59 years later.

Nehemiah with Darius and Xerxes

Of course, archaeologists avoid Persepolis like a plague. Far too many questions!!

Larsguy47

Cege

Just a quick look around tells me that you've confused the "Darius the Mede" " son of Ahasuerus" mentioned in the Bible with Darius the Great, a Persian emperor.

Biblical "Darius the Mede" hasn't been established as an actual person of history outside the Bible's claim.

Besides that, the verse And they completed this house by the third day of the lunar month A´dar, that is, in the sixth year of the reign of Da·ri´us the king. does not establish that Darius the Mede ruled for only six years. The verse simply does not say that.

3DJay

It took about a century to finish. Where'd you get the "they only took two years to build" from?

From your own article:

The fact, that it took a century, means he could have died 3 times over, using 32 years.

Also, from your article:

He says he became king after his father? What's up with that?

It was a 100 year project!

Persepolis

He didn't pre-build 3 tombs. He built his own. The next 3 copied him.

Naqš-i Rustam

Tomb 1:



Tomb 2:



Tomb 3:



Tomb 4:



So what? Have you read how long people live, in the Bible?

Total bull.


Peace

Weltall

Not again...

Pataphysician

Are you trying to prove that the writer of Ezra Chapters 4 and 5 was on crack?

spin

My oh my, what does one take for logorrhea?

Umm, did one ever think of reading what the kings have to say for themselves?

Artaxerxes II gave his own genealogy:

son of Darius the king, of Darius son of Artaxerxes the king, of Artaxerxes son of Xerxes the king, of Xerxes son of Darius the king, of Darius son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenian

This is the sort of thing that was planted in public view around the Persian empire. The particular example was from Susa.

At Persepolis Artaxerxes I -- the one that Larsguy47 wants not to have existed -- wrote on a block found at Persepolis that he was:

son of Xerxes the King, grandson of Darius, an Achaemenian

Darius I himself says in the first column of the Behistun inscription:

My father was Hystaspes; Hystaspes' father was Arsames; Arsames' father was Ariaramnes; Ariaramnes' father was Teispes; Teispes' father was Achaemenes.

To ignore all of this we get quotes from historically unvetted biblical works intermingled with more numerical spaghetti thinking.

The only person who thinks that Artaxerxes I and Xerxes I were the same person is the one who seems unaware of the available evidence.

Worse still he doesn't understand his text of Ezra. When he gets to Ezra 6:14 he didn't notice that there were five chapters before that. He doesn't notice

1. 4:5 which talks of both Cyrus and Darius
2. 4:6 which talks of Xerxes (Ahasuerus)
3. 4:7 which talks of Artaxerxes
4. 4:23-24 which talks of Artaxerxes followed by Darius, and finally
5. 7:1 which talks of Artaxerxes.

We end with

• Cyrus
• Darius I
• Xerxes I
• Artaxerxes I
• Darius II
• Artaxerxes II

This, omitting the truly minor kings, is the order of Persian kings from Cyrus to Artaxerxes II. Larsguy47 has simply goofed -- badly.


spin

Larsguy47

Darius the Mede is more than well established. Where have you been. Interestingly of late attempts have been to try and depress his ID totally. But just to show you how "unconfused" his identity is, Sir Isaac Newton set up his own commentary on the chronology of the Bible and NB Period, and he not only gives the date of the birth of Darius the Mede, but notes he ruled for two years while the Jews were still in exile before Cyrus came to the throne:

Here's the last part of his fasinating "A Short Chronicle":

Darius' 6-year rule was suppressed in the Babylonian records via a standard technique which was camouflaging his identity by splitting it into two different characters. Thus while the Bible confirms that Darius the Mede both helped Cyrus conquer Babylon and then rule for six years after that, as well as dividing up the empire into satrapies, the Cyrus Cylinder claims that this was done by two different people; "Gubaru" and "Ugaru"; with one conquering Babylon wth Cyrus then dying shortly afterwards, then the other ruling for 14 years as "governor" but dividing up the kingdom in satrapies. So they just marginally split the character and includes his history. Since Cambyses came to the throne as co-ruler for one year before Cyrus dies after 9 years, the 14 years works out perfectly as first 6 years as king over Babylon before Cyrus takes over and then the last 8 years as "governor" still ruling at Babylon. But he died and Cambyses came to Babylon to rule for one year before his father died in his 9th year one year later.

Further his character is generally identified in Herodotus as Cyaxares, the king who conquered Babylon with Cyrus. So he's definitely there and prominent in history, just suppressed because his 6-year rule along with 20 years from other kings was taken from the NB kings in order to cover for the expanded rulership of Darius I, who went from 6 to 36 years.


Oh, really? Wow. I must have misread that then. How dumb can one get?!! Where have you been all my life, Cege!! :huh:

Larsguy47

spamandham

...an aside, did anyone else notice that the tombs are all shaped like crosses?

RED DAVE

Larsguy47, how about a scholarly source concerning Darius the Mede later than Isaac Newton (1722)? This does not count as a source as you don't have Newton's sources.

No scholar has ever been able to identify such a figure?

You might start here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Book_of...us_the_Mede.22

RED DAVE

Sauron

Produce the astronomical texts.

Wrong. Britannica:



Complete with alternate name - the same one you said wasn't known for Artaxerxes I.

No, it was a different person - his son.

Uh, no. It was not split up. There would have been no reason to do so.

The bible says nothing about Darius helping Cyrus.

Are you making this up on the spur of the moment or something? The Cyrus Cylinder does not mention either of these two people.
http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/...der2.html#TEXT

No, it isn't.