User talk:Nepaheshgar/Some academic sources on Cyrus

work in progress...

Revisionist Claim

Someone has stated numerous times that the positive legacy of Cyrus the Great is simply the last “Shah's propaganda” and anyone who has a positive viewpoint on Cyrus the Great is a "Iranian nationalist" or a "jewish fundamentalist" or etc.. Observing the one-sided viewpoint, I decided to compile different classical and modern sources (many before the last Shah) and show that there is no such conspiracy theory. These sources meet WP:RS and WP:Verifiability(none of them also are written by Iranians), and some have been incorporated to different Wikipedia articles. So I just plan to collect a list of sources that can be used to balance some wikipedia articles.

Classical Sources

Note most of these sources are Greek sources. It should be noted the ancient Persian and Greeks were rivals and th Achaemenid empire incorporated most of the Greek speaking lands (including Anatolia) to its empire. But the Greeks still had a positive viewpoint of Cyrus the Great. This is an important point to note since the norm is usually for rival civilizations vilify important characters of their competitors.

Plato in Laws 693D-698A :

“ Under Cyrus the Persians liberated themselves and became master of others, but allowed some freedom to subjects, even allowed them to be equals; so soldiers were loyal and wise counselors could be found and there was a spirit of freedom, friendship and community. ”

Diodorus Siculus, Greek historian of 1st century B.C.:

“ Cyrus, the son of Cambyses and Mandane, the daughter of Astyages who was king of the Medes, was pre-eminent among the men of his time in bravery and sagacity and the other virtues; for his father had reared him after the manner of kings and had made him zealous to emulate the highest achievements. And it was clear that he would take hold of great affairs, since he revealed an excellence beyond his years.

When Astyages, the king of the Medes, had been defeated and was in disgraceful flight, he vented his wrath upon his soldiers; and he displaced all who had been assigned positions of command, appointing others in their stead, and he picked out all who were responsible for the flight and put them to the sword, thinking that by punishing them in that way he could force the rest to show themselves brave fighters in times of danger, since he was a cruel man and, by nature, hard. Nevertheless, the people were not dismayed at the harsh treatment he meted out; on the contrary, every man, hating his violent and lawless manner, yearned for a change of affairs. Consequently there were gatherings of small groups and seditious conversations, the larger number exhorting one another to take vengeance on him.

Cyrus, we are told, was not only a courageous man in war, but he was also considerate and humane in his treatment of his subjects. And it was for this reason that the Persians called him Father.

”

Aeschylus in his poem Persae(the Persians) pays tribute to Cyrus:

“ Her brave hosts

A Mede first led. The virtue of his son

Fixed firm the empire, for his temperate soul

Breathed Prudence. Cyrus next, by fortune graced,

Adorned the throne, and blessed his graceful friends

With peace: he to his mighty monarchy

Joined Lydia, and the Phyrgians; to his power

Ionia bent reluctant; but gods

with victory his gentle virtues crowned

”

Xenophon:

“ Thus, as we meditated on this analogy, we were inclined to conclude that for man, as he is constituted, it is easier to rule over any and all other creatures than to rule over men. But when we reflected that, who reduced to obedience a vast number of men and cities and nations, we were then compelled to change our opinion and decide that to rule men might be a task neither impossible nor even difficult, if one should only go about it in an intelligent manner. At all events, we know that people obeyed Cyrus willingly, although some of them were distant from him a journey of many days, and others of many months; others, although they had never seen him, and still others who knew well that they never should see him. Nevertheless they were all willing to be his subjects.

...

But all this is not so surprising after all, so very different was he from all other kings, both those who have inherited their thrones from their fathers and those who have gained their crowns by their own efforts; the Scythian king, for instance, would never be able to extend his rule over any other nation besides his own, although the Scythians are very numerous, but he would be well content if he could maintain himself in power over his own people; so the Thracian king with his Thracians, the Illyrian with his Illyrians, and so also all other nations, we are told. Those in Europe, at any rate, are said to be free and independent of one another even to this day. But Cyrus, finding the nations in Asia also independent in exactly the same way, started out with a little band of Persians and became the leader of the Medes by their full consent and of the Hyrcanians by theirs; he then conquered Syria, Assyria, Arabia, Cappadocia, both Phrygias, Lydia, Caria, Phoenicia, and Babylonia; he ruled also over Bactria, India, and Cilicia; and he was likewise king of the Sacians, Paphlagonians, Magadidae, and very many other nations, of which one could not even tell the names; he brought under his sway the Asiatic Greeks also; and, descending to the sea, he added both Cyprus and Egypt to his empire.

...

he was able to awaken in all so lively a desire to please him, that they always wished to be guided by his will. ... Believing this man to be deserving of all admiration, we have therefore investigated who he was in his origin, what natural endowments he possessed, and what sort of education he had enjoyed, that he so greatly excelled in governing men. Accordingly, what we have found out or think we know concerning him we shall now endeavour to present. ... The father of Cyrus is said to have been Cambyses, king of the Persians: this Cambyses belonged to the stock of the Persidae, and the Persidae derive their name from Perseus. His mother, it is generally agreed, was Mandane; and this Mandane was the daughter of Astyages, sometime king of the Medes. And even to this day the barbarians tell in story and in song that Cyrus was most handsome in person, most generous of heart, most devoted to learning, and most ambitious, so that he endured all sorts of labour and faced all sorts of danger for the sake of praise. .. Such then were the natural endowments, physical and spiritual, that he is reputed to have had; but he was educated in conformity with the laws of the Persians; and these laws appear in their care for the common weal not to start from the same point as they do in most states. For most states permit every one to train his own children just as he will, and the older people themselves to live as they please; and then they command them not to steal and not to rob, not to break into anybody's house, not to strike a person whom they have no right to strike, not to commit adultery, not to disobey an officer, and so forth; and if a man transgress anyone one of these laws, they punish him. ... The Persian laws, however, begin at the beginning and take care that from the first their citizens shall not be of such a character as ever to desire anything improper or immoral; and the measures they take are as follows.They have their so-called "Free Square," where the royal palace and other government buildings are located. The hucksters with their wares, their cries, and their vulgarities are excluded from this and relegated to another part of the city, in order that their tumult may not intrude upon the orderly life of the cultured.

”

Herodotus 3:89:

“ The Persians have a saying that Cyrus was a father because, in kindness of his heart, he always occupied with plans for their well being ”

Among the classical Jewish sources, besides the old testament, Joseph Flavius mentions the (1st century A.D.) mentions that Cyrus freed the Jews from captivity and helped rebuild the temple. He also wrote to the rulers and governors that they shold contribute to the rebuilding of the temple and assisted them in rebuilding the temple. A letter from Cyrus to the Jews is described by Joseph Flavius:

“ I have given leave to as many of the Jews that dwell in my country as please to return to their own country, and to rebuild their city, and to build the temple of God at Jerusalem on the same place where it was before. I have also sent my treasurer Mithridates, and Zorobabel, the governor of the Jews, that they may lay the foundations of the temple, and may build it sixty cubits high, and of the same latitude, making three edifices of polished stones, and one of the wood of the country, and the same order extends to the altar whereon they offer sacrifices to God. I require also that the expenses for these things may be given out of my revenues. Moreover, I have also sent the vessels which king Nebuchadnezzar pillaged out of the temple, and have given them to Mithridates the treasurer, and to Zorobabel the governor of the Jews, that they may have them carried to Jerusalem, and may restore them to the temple of God. Now their number is as follows: Fifty chargers of gold, and five hundred of silver; forty Thericlean cups of gold, and five hundred of silver; fifty basons of gold, and five hundred of silver; thirty vessels for pouring [the drink-offerings], and three hundred of silver; thirty vials of gold, and two thousand four hundred of silver; with a thousand other large vessels. (3) I permit them to have the same honor which they were used to have from their forefathers, as also for their small cattle, and for wine and oil, two hundred and five thousand and five hundred drachme; and for wheat flour, twenty thousand and five hundred artabae; and I give order that these expenses shall be given them out of the tributes due from Samaria. The priests shall also offer these sacrifices according to the laws of Moses in Jerusalem; and when they offer them, they shall pray to God for the preservation of the king and of his family, that the kingdom of Persia may continue. But my will is, that those who disobey these injunctions, and make them void, shall be hung upon a cross, and their substance brought into the king's treasury.". ”

Cyrus and the Bible

Dandamayev mentions: "According to the Cyrus cylinder, he permitted foreigners who had been forcibly settled in Babylonia to return to their own lands, including the Jews of the Babylonian cap­tivity, who were also permitted to rebuild their temple in Jerusalem. Two versions of his edict on the latter point have been preserved in the Book of Ezra, one in Hebrew, the other in Aramaic." .

Fried, reflecting on the Cyrus cylinder and the priets of Marduk believes that the Duetero-Isaiah: delivered up to the Persian conquerer the entire theology that had defined the local king. Like his counterparts in Egypt and Babylon, Deutero-Isaiah was convinced that Cyrus was in actuality the genuine Judean king, i.e., YHWH's anointed, his Messiah, because he brought back the status quo ante. He rebuilt the temple, ordered the temple vessels replaced in it, and permitted the Jews to return to worship their God in Zion restored.

Pierre Briant also comments that:

“ The terms used by Isiah are reminiscent of certain passages in the Cyrus Cylinder ”

Modern Sources

According to Professor Richard Frye:

“ It is a testimony to the capability of the founder of the Achaemenian empire that it continued to expand after his death and lasted for more than two centuries. But Cyrus was not only a great conqueror and administrator; he held a place in the minds of the Persian people similar to that of Romulus and Remus in Rome or Moses for the Israelites. His saga follows in many details the stories of hero and conquerors from elsewhere in the ancient world. The manner in which the baby Cyrus was given to a shepherd to raise is reminiscent of Moses in the bulrushes in Egypt, and the overthrow of his tyrannical grandfather has echoes in other myths and legends. There is no doubt that the Cyrus saga arose early among the Persians and was known to the Greeks. The sentiments of esteem or even awe in which Persians held him were transmitted to the Greeks, and it was no accident that Xenophon chose Cyrus to be the model of a ruler for the lessons he wished to impart to his fellow Greeks.

In short, the figure of Cyrus has survived throughout history as more than a great man who founded an empire. He became the epitome of the great qualities expected of a ruler in antiquity, and he assumed heroic features as a conqueror who was tolerant and magnanimous as well as brave and daring. His personality as seen by the Greeks influenced them and Alexander the Great, and, as the tradition was transmitted by the Romans, may be considered to influence our thinking even now. In the year 1971, Iran celebrated the 2,500th anniversary of the founding of the monarchy by Cyrus.

”

Dandamayev mentions. :

“ Chapters 40-55 of the Book of Isaiah were probably written by a witness to the fall of Babylon, and some extended passages are similar in both spirit and context to contemporary Babylonian texts praising Cyrus and condemning Nabonidus. Cyrus is mentioned twice by name and designated as the anointed one (messiah) of Yahweh: “Thus says the Lord to Kōreš his anointed, Kōreš whom he has taken by his right hand to subdue nations before him . . . . I will go before you” (Isaiah 45:1-2). Yahweh also says to Cyrus: “You shall be My shepherd to carry out all My purpose” (Isaiah 44:28). In the Hebrew tradition embodied in 2 Chronicles 36:23 and Ezra 1:1-2 Cyrus is regarded with favor, and he has figured prominently in Jewish thought through the ages (Netzer, p. 35; cf. Jenni, pp. 242-43, 255-56; see bible i, ii).

Cyrus thus seems generally to have respected the customs and religions of conquered lands. The Per­sians themselves called him their father (Herodotus, 3.89). The priests of Babylon recognized him as the appointed of Marduk and the Jews as a messiah sent by Yahweh. Even the Greeks considered him a great conqueror and a wise statesman (e.g., Plato, Laws 3.694A-D); Xenophon, in his Cyropaedia, portrayed him as an ideal ruler (Avery, pp. 529-31; Hirsch, pp. 84-86).

”

Professor Max Mallowan stated that

“ Religious toleration was a remarkable feature of Persian rule and there is no question that Cyrus himself was a liberal-minded promoter of this humane and intelligent policy.

One remarkable characteristic which many historians have attributed to Cyrus is his clemency to fallen rulers, in true fashion of medieval chivarly.

”

The late Professor Will Durant noted that:

“ The first principle of his [Cyrus the Great] policy was that the various peoples of his empires would be left free in their religious worship and beliefs, for he fully understood the first principle of statesmanship - that religion is stronger than the state. Instead of sacking cities and wrecking temples he showed a courteous respect for the deities of the conquered, and contributed to maintain their shrines, even the Babylonians who had resisted him so long, warmed towards him when they found him preserving their sanctuaries and honoring their pantheon. Wherever he went in his unprecedented career he offered pious sacrifice to the local divinities. Like Napoleon he accepted indifferently all religions, and-with much better grace-honored all the gods. ”

Professors David E. Graf, Steven W. Hirsch, Kathryn Gleason, and Friedrich Klefter have noted that:

“ Cyrus administered his expanded realm with the same tact and generosity that distinguished his moments of victory. Wherever possible he kept local governments in place, demanding only a pledge of fealty and tribute. Even as king of Babylonia he rested his hand lightly on the instruments of power. In the Greek cities of Ionia, he supported local rulers who were compliant with his imperial designs. In most cases he displayed a remarkable tolerance for local customs and institutions ”

Professor T. Cuyler Young Jr. has noted that:

“ Because of the religious, ethnic and social tolerance with which the Achaemenids chose to rule, one cannot speak of an imperial social structure. Earlier attempts at empire in ancient West Asia had been anything but tolerant. Why therefore were the Achaemenids so different? The answer to the question is two-fold: on the one hand, tolerance was a realistic policy. Given the size and diversity of their empire, probably no other approach would have worked. On the other hand, such a policy probably fitted their own idealized traditions of social structure… ”

Professor Arthur Cotterell has noted that:

“ …the Persian respect for the religious sensibilities of a subject people [the Jews] shown in the edict [Cyrus’ proclamation on behalf of the Jews in the book of Ezra] contrasts sharply with the Hellenizing policies of the later Seleucid Dynasty (312-64 BC) which gave rise to the Maccabean revolt. ”

The late Joseph Arthur Comte de Gobineau:

“ He [Cyrus the Great] can be said without fear of contradiction to rank amongst the five of six greatest leaders of humanity [p.31] …Although Babylon had been taken it was not looted or burnt. Cyrus did not destroy the walls or remove the gates [p.43]… Under his [Cyrus the Great] regime, which did not differentiate between classes or religions, the Jews were treated in exactly the same way as anyone else [p.47]… ”

The late Professor G. Buchanan Gray:

“ Making all allowance for the natural bias in Cyrus’ own inscriptions, and for the Nabonidus-Cyrus Chronicle written and completed after his success was achieved and he had become king of Babylon, it is clear that Cyrus obtained the throne and empire of Babylon with the acquiescence, not to say on the invitation, of a large part of the population. He cam to free them from a ruler who had forfeited their adhesion: he accepted the throne as the gift of their own god Marduk [p.12] …He was the founder of a new dynasty over a willing people, not a foreign conqueror indifferent to them and their interests [p.12-13]…Cyrus immediately reversed the religious policy of Nabonidus, which had provoked great resentment, and in other respects in his attitude to the Babylonian gods he put himself right with the people. Whereas Nabonidus…had gathered into the capital the images of the gods of from various outlying temples…Cyrus sent back the gods and human beings, also who had been exiled, to their cities and re-established them there. Among the districts to which he sent back the gods were Western Elam…[p.13] ”

.

As noted by Professor Michael Axworthy:

“ …without romanticizing Cyrus unduly, it seems he has aspired to rule an empire different from others that had preceded it in the region. Portentous inscriptions recording the military glory of kings and the supposed favour of their terrible war-gods were commonplace in the Middle east in the centuries preceding Cyrus’ ascension [p.12]… the message of the Cylinder [Cyrus Cylinder] particularly when combined with what is known of Cyrus’ religious policy from the books of Ezra and Isaiah, is nonetheless remarkable [p.13]... Cyrus chose to present himself showing respect to the Babylonian deity, Marduk…we know that he [Cyrus the Great] permitted freedom of worship to the Jews [p.14]…Cyrus and his successors permitted them [the Jews] to return home from exile and to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem. For these acts they [Achaemenid rulers] were accorded in the Jewish scriptures a unique status among gentile monarchs [p.15]…the logic of statecraft alone might have suggested that it would be more sustainable in the long run to let subjects conduct their own affairs and worship as they pleased. But that policy had to be acceptable to the Iranian elite, including the priests – the Magi…it is reasonable to see in the policy some of the spirit of moral earnestness and justice that pervaded the religion of Zoroaster. The presence of those values in the background helps to explain why the Cyrus Cylinder is couched in such different terms from the militaristic thunder and arrogance of Sennacherib. The old answer was terror and a big stick, but the Persian Empire would be run in a more devolved, permissive spirit. Once again, an encounter with complexity, acceptance of the complexity, and a response. This was something new. [p.15] ”

.

Woods comments on the Cyrus Cylinder

“ Some modern scholars have called these words the world's first declaration of human rights. ”

Laursen comments: {{Obviously the friendship of the Greek temples could not be obtained if Cyrus was not benevolent towards the Greek priests and their religion. As we shall see shortly, there is further evidence that indeed these temples were granted special privilege by at least some of the Achaemenid Kings.}}

Curtis, Tallis and Salvini comment:

“ Because of the reference to just and peaceful rule, and to the restoration of deported peoples and their gods the cylinder has in recent years been referred to in some quarters as a kind of 'Charter of Human Rights'. Such a concept would have been quite alien to Cyrus's contemporaries, and indeed the cylinder says nothing of human rights; but return of the Jews and of other deported peoples were a significant reversal of the policies of ealier Assyrian and Babylonian Kings ”

Talbott opines on the issue of Human Rights and Cyrus and believes the concept of human rights is a 20th century concept. Nevertheless he states:

“ Perhaps the earliest known advocate of religious tolerance was Cyrus the Great, king of Persia in the sixth century B.C.E. Cyrus also opposed slavery and freed thousands of slaves. These facts do not make Cyrus or Ashoka an advocate of human rights. They do show that ideas that led to the development of human rights are not limited to one cultural tradition. ”