Talk:Cyrus the Great

Disputable claim about human rights in Cyrus Cylinder

The first paragraph of the article claims the Cyrus Cylinder contained a declaration of human rights. However, Wikipedia's article on the Cyrus Cylinder appears to dispute that claim: The Cylinder has also been claimed to be an early "human rights charter", though the British Museum and a number of scholars of the ancient Near Eastern history reject this view as anachronistic and a misunderstanding of the Cylinder's generic nature. SEppley (talk) 14:51, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

The article on the cylinder is more precise and the lead here is a simplification. Afaik within the academic community most distinguished scholars support the first view. However there are some exceptions. Also even educated opinions on the subject seemed to be strongly influenced by nationality and the academic field and you definitely reputable sources for both views. So it is difficult to give an appropriate and accurate description in a single sentence.--Kmhkmh (talk) 16:15, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

It may be no longer the case that most distinguished scholars support the first view. In any case, I reworded the lead slightly. Dougweller (talk) 12:03, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

I should add that there are sources disputing the HR interpretation in this article, but in perhaps an obscure place. Dougweller (talk) 12:04, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Return of the exiles

I was just looking at Finkelstein and Silberman's book The Bible Unearthed in response to a query about the Babylonian Exile (for which they find archaeological evidence but no extra-biblical evidence, although they don't query it, and found (p 308):

"From Kings to Priests

The edict of Cyrus the Great allowing a group of Judahite exiles io return to Jerusalem could hardly have been prompted by sympathy for the people remaining in Judah or for the suffering of the exiles. Rather, it should be seen as a well-calculated policy that aimed to serve the interests of the Persian empire. The Persians tolerated and even promoted local cults as a way to ensure the loyalty of local groups to the wider empire; both Cyrus and his son Cambyses supported the building of temples and encouraged the return of displaced populations elsewhere in their vast empire. Their policy was to grant autonomy to loyal local elites.

Many scholars agree that the Persian Icings encouraged the rise of a loyal elite in Yehud, because of the provinces strategic and sensitive location on the border of Egypt. This loyal elite was recruited from the Jewish exile community in Babylonia and was led by dignitaries who were closely connected to the Persian administration. They were mainly individuals of high social and economic status, families who had resisted assimilation and who were most probably close to the Deuteronomistic ideas. Though the returnees were a minority in Yehud, their religious, socioeconomic, and political status, and their concentration in and around Jerusalem, gave them power far beyond their number."

A short mention of this seems appropriate. Dougweller (talk) 10:05, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

2007 Amélie Kuhrt online

See "Ancient Near Eastern History: The Case of Cyrus the Great of Persia" Dougweller (talk) 12:07, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

OK, but see what purpose in particular. Some context would be appreciated.--Kmhkmh (talk) 13:55, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

The context is that it's an online paper by a noted scholar on the subject of this article. I assumed that people might be interested in using it as a source. Maybe at the moment it should be made an EL? Dougweller (talk) 14:15, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

ah ok. Yes Kuhrt is certainly a notable source. I just thought you might have had a particular piece of content or information in mind. I see no reason not to add it externals links.--Kmhkmh (talk) 14:50, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

P.S. Given the current structure of the article it could also be included under "further reading", which might actually the better option, since it seems to be a chapter from an academic book rather than a mere online source.--Kmhkmh (talk) 15:06, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Good idea. I haven't read it yet. I got to it via the request at Babylonian captivity for historical non-biblical material which I discuss above. But editing this article to suggest the viewpoint that Cyrus was a brilliant leader but not a human rights reformer is difficult. Dougweller (talk) 15:49, 17 July 2012 (UTC)

Sources for questions on authenticity

I agree it needs expanding, but not that it shouldn't have a separate section or that it should be worded as though only one person doubts its authenticity. See [1] for a start. Dougweller (talk) 12:37, 10 December 2012 (UTC)

Diletant Pahlavist propaganda

Issue:

After the Iranian revolution, the tomb of Cyrus the Great survived the initial chaos and vandalism propagated by the Islamic revolutionary hardliners who equated Persian imperial historical artifacts with the late Shah of Iran. There are allegations of the tomb being in danger of damage from the construction of the Sivand Dam on river Polvar (located in the province of Pars) and flooding, but there is no official acknowledgement of this claim. This has nonetheless, caused a petition to be drafted to the U.N. demanding protection of this historical entity.

I've removed this part because it's nothing but diletant propaganda by apologists of former regime. Tomb of Cyrus isn't isolated case, you can find similar nonsenses about "attempts of bulldozing Persepolis", "plans for destroying Cyrus cylinder", etc. None of such claims are supported either by reliable sources (try Iranica) or UNESCO. This is what J. Lendering says about this specific issue:

The report that the Iranian authorities will endanger the site of Pasargadae by building a dam in the Sivand, which has often surfaced in the blogosphere and probably is a hoax, was repeated on the CAIS website with a remark that "Iran's pre-Islamic past and Iranians' non-Islamic-national-identity and heritage have always been the subjects of abhorrence for the clerics. This diabolical plot by Ayatollahs in Tehran was set in motion in 1979 to destroy and erase all pre-Islamic Iranian past from the consciousness of the Iranian nation as part of their de-Iranianisation campaign." This is sheer innuendo.^[2]

I left this notice because User:Zheek has removed my edits twice, so I hope everything is clear now. --109.60.45.72 (talk) 11:11, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

OK. After reading your comments on talk page (and my talk page), I think your edit is correct/clear and has no problem. So I don't revert it again. But it's good to write better edit summaries. Thanks. Zheek (talk) 16:36, 9 January 2013 (UTC)

cyrus was the first king of the pesia and iran. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 176.221.71.51 (talk) 07:21, 13 August 2013 (UTC)

Confusion

Is this guy not to be confused with Miley Cyrus? --[[Tariqmudallal · my talk]] 00:03, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

Lol. Debresser (talk) 00:27, 6 December 2013 (UTC)

25 year discrepancy on his Birth Year?

There is no elaboration on why that is, and the links in the not 40 just lead to Google book searches. Ussher in Annals of the world favors the 600/599 date, but it's precisely reading him giving those dates that I feel the younger is more likely, Example he has Evilmerodoch reigning way to soon.