Nehemiah found at Persepolis!!!

Is Persepolis avoided by archaeologists because it creates too many puzzles
or supports the Bible too much? Case in point:

1. Ezra 6:14,15 says Darius died in his 6th year. Persepolis began to be
built in the 4th year of Darius. He completed only a palace which took
about 2 years and then his son Xerxes had to finish the city, proving he
died after only 2 years investment in the city.

2. Ezra 6:14,15 names "Artaxerxes" as the successor to Darius. History
confirms that "Xerxes" succeeded Darius. But Persian custom for the kings
included their adopting a new name when they became king (Darius II was
Nothus, Artaxerxes II Mnomon, Artaxerxes III was Nothus, Darius III was
Cadomannus, etc.). What was the althernative name for Xerxes? It was
Artaxerxes. But this convention not well known or established allowed him
to claim he was his own son after he lost to the Greeks at Salamis and they
became a threat. Thus the bad king with the bad reputation died, and a new
king emerged. The chronology was adjusted and extended to account for the
age difference and extra rulership.

3. NEHEMIAH. But Nehemiah also presents a problem. It is clear he
returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel in the 1st of Cyrus and served as the
king's secretary who made all the decisions. But the Bible indicates he
lived down into the reign of Darius II. If he were around 30 when he
returned he'd have to be over 143 years of age. Yet Persepolis shows
Nehemiah was already the prime minister and chief cupbearer with Xerxes and
Darius when they were co-rulers. Below gives the bas-reliefs to compare
that shows the same Jewish cupbearer with Artaxerxes with Darius. But that
might be the problem. If you identity this cupbearer with Artaxerxes as
Nehemiah, you have to explain why he was preseent earlier with Darius.

When checking out Nehemiah note that the Persians are identified by their
fluted caps, the Medes their round ones. Nehemiah is wearing a hooded cap
which is the Jewish ethnic reference (Note King Jehu had a hooded cap on in
a bas-relief of Shalmaneser III).

Thus the hard archaeological evidence, the buildings, the bas-reliefs, not
things easily changed, agree with the Bible. Faked business documents and
some inscriptions, which are easily added to buildings or created reflect
the revised chronology. This was effectively done, paying off Greek
historians to rewrite the new history (like Herodotus) but the original
timeline, thanks to the double-dating to 511BCE for year 37 of
Nebuchadnezzar found in the VAT4956 allow us to resolve this contradictions,
which are only "historical contradictions" and not true "archaeological"
contradictions as we see from Persepolis.

Unfortunately, abundant and interesting subtleties and details that we could
learn about Nehemiah which are at Persepolis is lost when revisionism is not
considered part of ancient investigation. Generally the Bible is just
dismissed as being incorrect and then other evidence ignored such as at
Persepolis. Fortunately artwork and buildings are harder to revise than
clay tablets and inscriptions.

L. Wilson

=============
So sometimes "lack of evidence" argument when it comes to chronology might
simply be due to not recognizing revisions in the timeline.

On the other hand, the "lack of evidence" argument is applied to Darius whom
the Bible claims (Ezra 6:14,15) ruled for just six years!!! versus 36.
In this case, therefore, we would look for critical evidence beyond his
sixth year in archaeology. But guess what? There is none! He began
Persepolis in his fourth year and finished his own palace in just two and
everything else he started had to be finished by his son Xerxes, who had
changed his name to Artaxerxes. Darius was gung-ho about building up the
monuments of Pesia to match that of Greece. Why in 36 years is there only a
few buildings? Why is Artaxerxes I buried between Darius I and Darius II?
And why did Darius I stop talking after Besitun? He was so talkative and
documentaroial about everything he did, but only for the first couple of
years. Nothing in the last 30 years of his reign, when there should have
been an abundance? Instead, an abundance of excuses and explanations where
there should be buildings come forth to explain his longer reign. Of course
business clay tablets and inscriptions were faked as one would be expected
but you can get past that easily. Further, once you know that Xerxes and
Artaxerxes were the same king, the archaeological comparisons are quite
revealing. For instance, Artaxerxes was known as "Longimanus" for his
longer hand. At Persepolis, it is Xerxes who has his hand on display from
both sides as he stands behind Darius I. The reason for that was because
his hand anomaly was already fmous! The sculptors showed it from both
sides to help preserve it for antiquity.

Below are photos of the two bas-reliefs in question that link Xerxes to
Artaxerxes by his famous hand. This scene with Darius, Xerxes and
Nehemiah(chief cupbearer who was already in that position with Dariux-Xerxes
co-rulership) is shown from both sides with nothing of significance other
than the hand of Xerxes is seen from the inside and the outisde, the best
way to scupt a famous hand. Furthermore, this hand was turned sidewise
behind the throne for the purpose of scultiping the hand in lieu of the
material gesture taken elsewhere, which is with him holding onto the throne
(palm down) indicating the co-rulership. .

Here is the outer hand of Xerxes/Artaxerxes on display:

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3B10_4.html

(outer)



Go here to see the same scene only his inner hand and notice how odd the
hand looks in comparison to the rest of the scrupture!! The hand creases
are sculpted in detail for emphasis. If this was considered Artaxerxes
"Longimanus" no one would questoin why the hand is prominent in these
bas-reliefs.



http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3C5_4.html

(inne r)

Go here to see Xerxes behind Darius in a simlar pose on his hand is palm
down holding onto the back of the throne, a gesture indicating he was
actually "sharing" the throne and not simply succeeding. The size of Darius
and Xerxes are equal and their heads are higher than all others but also
equal, thus definitely a co-rulership. Why don't archaelogists recognize
this co-rulership?. When the timeline is reduced and corrected, Xerxes
begins his rule in the 3rd year of Darius. Darius begins building Perspolis
in his 4th year while they were co-rulers, reflecting this, but dies after
two years. When Xerxes finished the cities after taking up the throne name
"Artaxerxes" which was the Persian custom, he depicted himself alone and
claims he had to fiinish the buildings his father had begun. If we didn't
have to deal with the revisionism, Persepolis would show not only the
co-rulership, the emphasis on the longer hand anomaly of Xerxes/Artaxerxes,
but that Darius died shortly aftre beginning this city. Still
archaeologists should be able to confirm that the buldings in question were
all completed within 5 years or could have been. But Persepolis is by far
an "untouchable" topic.



http://www.babyloniangal.com/files/tours/Tripylon_Darius_1.jpg



Finally, it's quite embarrassing so see that the cupbearer for Darius and
Xerxes is a Jewish enuch, who must be Nehemiah! This is the "evidence"
that is there because you can see Nehemiah following behind Artaxerxes as
his cupbearer!!! He is Jewish because his clothing depicts him with a hood
and not a fluted cap (Persian) or a rounded cap (Mede) even though he holds
the highest court position and follows right behind Xerxes when he's in the
scene with Darius and Xerxes. Which is another issue. If you look for
evidence of the cupbearer of Artaxerxes who is supposed to be Nehemiah at
Persepolis, you find it!!! You find him in at least three scenes at
Persepolis with Artaxerxes with his distinctive covered beard, hooded cap
(Jewish) and his badge of office, his cuptowel. But this is the very same
Jewish-eunuch-cupbearer with Darius and Xerxes when they were co-rulers,
dating Nehemiah in the court of Darius and Xerxes. The Bible, of course,
says Nehemiah returned with Zerubabbel and was first the secretary to Cyrus
(the "Tirshatha"). So this shows he got a promotion. So the Biblical
evidence is there, that Nehemiah was the cupbearer to Artaxerxes, but also
Xerxes and Darius, which lends to Xerxes being the same king as Artaxerxes
since he would have kept this same cupbearer. So archaelogists, influenced
by poor history or well-done fake history either ignore or misinterpret what
is right before them.

Take a look at these and let me know what you think:

Nehemiah series:

Here is Jewish cupbearer, notice hooded cap, covered beard (eunuch) and
cuptowel in hand.

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3B10_4.html

Here is same cupbearer with - obserse

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2E9_4.html



Again the another scene with Nehemiah behind Artaxerxes...

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2F3_72dpi.html



To show how favored he was, here is Nehemiah with Artaxerxes alone...

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2F9_72dpi.html



Now if I were reading the Bible and just looking at the evidence at
Persepolis, the archaeology woudl fill in the blanks of the Bible. It would
tell us that after being the secretary to Cyrus at first when the Jews
returned to Babylon, he then became the Prime Minister of all of Persia
beginnig with the co-rulership of Xerxes and Darius and then when Xerxes
became sole ruler and changed his name to Artaxerxes he remained the favored
Prime Minister (cupbearer) until Artaxerxed died at age 59. Nehemiah
survived him into the reign of Darius II. Persepolis would also show me
that Darius died 2 years into building the city (only 11 buildings!) which
if he began in his 4th year it would mean he died after just two years.

Now that we know for sure the Persian Period was artificially expanded
because the VAT4956 evidence, why is it the archaeologists didn't figure all
this out before? Why are Biblicalists jumping up and down that they have
evidence of Nehemiah as cupbearer to Artaxerxes? It's right here, its
just ignored.

So some "lack of evidence" arguments are present because evidence is
destroyed or supprssed or selectively ignored. Who knows what the British
Museum is sitting on in their vaults and haven't decided to release to the
public?



Thanks, again for your commentary. Let me know what you think about
discovering Nehemiah at Persepolis!!

L. Wilson


So sometimes "lack of evidence" argument when it comes to chronology might
simply be due to not recognizing revisions in the timeline.

On the other hand, the "lack of evidence" argument is applied to Darius whom
the Bible claims (Ezra 6:14,15) ruled for just six years!!! versus 36.
In this case, therefore, we would look for critical evidence beyond his
sixth year in archaeology. But guess what? There is none! He began
Persepolis in his fourth year and finished his own palace in just two and
everything else he started had to be finished by his son Xerxes, who had
changed his name to Artaxerxes. Darius was gung-ho about building up the
monuments of Pesia to match that of Greece. Why in 36 years is there only a
few buildings? Why is Artaxerxes I buried between Darius I and Darius II?
And why did Darius I stop talking after Besitun? He was so talkative and
documentaroial about everything he did, but only for the first couple of
years. Nothing in the last 30 years of his reign, when there should have
been an abundance? Instead, an abundance of excuses and explanations where
there should be buildings come forth to explain his longer reign. Of course
business clay tablets and inscriptions were faked as one would be expected
but you can get past that easily. Further, once you know that Xerxes and
Artaxerxes were the same king, the archaeological comparisons are quite
revealing. For instance, Artaxerxes was known as "Longimanus" for his
longer hand. At Persepolis, it is Xerxes who has his hand on display from
both sides as he stands behind Darius I. The reason for that was because
his hand anomaly was already fmous! The sculptors showed it from both
sides to help preserve it for antiquity.

Below are photos of the two bas-reliefs in question that link Xerxes to
Artaxerxes by his famous hand. This scene with Darius, Xerxes and
Nehemiah(chief cupbearer who was already in that position with Dariux-Xerxes
co-rulership) is shown from both sides with nothing of significance other
than the hand of Xerxes is seen from the inside and the outisde, the best
way to scupt a famous hand. Furthermore, this hand was turned sidewise
behind the throne for the purpose of scultiping the hand in lieu of the
material gesture taken elsewhere, which is with him holding onto the throne
(palm down) indicating the co-rulership. .

Here is the outer hand of Xerxes/Artaxerxes on display:

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3B10_4.html

(outer)



Go here to see the same scene only his inner hand and notice how odd the
hand looks in comparison to the rest of the scrupture!! The hand creases
are sculpted in detail for emphasis. If this was considered Artaxerxes
"Longimanus" no one would questoin why the hand is prominent in these
bas-reliefs.



http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3C5_4.html

(inne r)

Go here to see Xerxes behind Darius in a simlar pose on his hand is palm
down holding onto the back of the throne, a gesture indicating he was
actually "sharing" the throne and not simply succeeding. The size of Darius
and Xerxes are equal and their heads are higher than all others but also
equal, thus definitely a co-rulership. Why don't archaelogists recognize
this co-rulership?. When the timeline is reduced and corrected, Xerxes
begins his rule in the 3rd year of Darius. Darius begins building Perspolis
in his 4th year while they were co-rulers, reflecting this, but dies after
two years. When Xerxes finished the cities after taking up the throne name
"Artaxerxes" which was the Persian custom, he depicted himself alone and
claims he had to fiinish the buildings his father had begun. If we didn't
have to deal with the revisionism, Persepolis would show not only the
co-rulership, the emphasis on the longer hand anomaly of Xerxes/Artaxerxes,
but that Darius died shortly aftre beginning this city. Still
archaeologists should be able to confirm that the buldings in question were
all completed within 5 years or could have been. But Persepolis is by far
an "untouchable" topic.



http://www.babyloniangal.com/files/tours/Tripylon_Darius_1.jpg



Finally, it's quite embarrassing so see that the cupbearer for Darius and
Xerxes is a Jewish enuch, who must be Nehemiah! This is the "evidence"
that is there because you can see Nehemiah following behind Artaxerxes as
his cupbearer!!! He is Jewish because his clothing depicts him with a hood
and not a fluted cap (Persian) or a rounded cap (Mede) even though he holds
the highest court position and follows right behind Xerxes when he's in the
scene with Darius and Xerxes. Which is another issue. If you look for
evidence of the cupbearer of Artaxerxes who is supposed to be Nehemiah at
Persepolis, you find it!!! You find him in at least three scenes at
Persepolis with Artaxerxes with his distinctive covered beard, hooded cap
(Jewish) and his badge of office, his cuptowel. But this is the very same
Jewish-eunuch-cupbearer with Darius and Xerxes when they were co-rulers,
dating Nehemiah in the court of Darius and Xerxes. The Bible, of course,
says Nehemiah returned with Zerubabbel and was first the secretary to Cyrus
(the "Tirshatha"). So this shows he got a promotion. So the Biblical
evidence is there, that Nehemiah was the cupbearer to Artaxerxes, but also
Xerxes and Darius, which lends to Xerxes being the same king as Artaxerxes
since he would have kept this same cupbearer. So archaelogists, influenced
by poor history or well-done fake history either ignore or misinterpret what
is right before them.

Take a look at these and let me know what you think:

Nehemiah series:

Here is Jewish cupbearer, notice hooded cap, covered beard (eunuch) and
cuptowel in hand.

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3B10_4.html

Here is same cupbearer with - obserse

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2E9_4.html



Again the another scene with Nehemiah behind Artaxerxes...

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2F3_72dpi.html



To show how favored he was, here is Nehemiah with Artaxerxes alone...

http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2F9_72dpi.html



Now if I were reading the Bible and just looking at the evidence at
Persepolis, the archaeology woudl fill in the blanks of the Bible. It would
tell us that after being the secretary to Cyrus at first when the Jews
returned to Babylon, he then became the Prime Minister of all of Persia
beginnig with the co-rulership of Xerxes and Darius and then when Xerxes
became sole ruler and changed his name to Artaxerxes he remained the favored
Prime Minister (cupbearer) until Artaxerxed died at age 59. Nehemiah
survived him into the reign of Darius II. Persepolis would also show me
that Darius died 2 years into building the city (only 11 buildings!) which
if he began in his 4th year it would mean he died after just two years.

Now that we know for sure the Persian Period was artificially expanded
because the VAT4956 evidence, why is it the archaeologists didn't figure all
this out before? Why are Biblicalists jumping up and down that they have
evidence of Nehemiah as cupbearer to Artaxerxes? It's right here, its
just ignored.

So some "lack of evidence" arguments are present because evidence is
destroyed or supprssed or selectively ignored. Who knows what the British
Museum is sitting on in their vaults and haven't decided to release to the
public?



Thanks, again for your commentary. Let me know what you think about
discovering Nehemiah at Persepolis!!

L. Wilson


.

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Nehemiah found at Persepolis!!!
    ... > Is Persepolis avoided by archaeologists because it creates too many ... > confirms that "Xerxes" succeeded Darius. ... > Nothus, Artaxerxes II Mnomon, Artaxerxes III was Nothus, Darius III was ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Nehemiah found at Persepolis!!!
    ... that Artaxerxes had a Jewish cupbearer and that Nehemiah was ... Artaxerxes was buried between Darius I and Darius II ... Xerxes never ruled or was Artaxerxes they created a fourth tomb for Xerxes. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • PERSEPOLIS: New focus in redating discovery
    ... Persepolis that the concept of claiming Xerxes was the father of Artaxerxes ... then king Xerxes after a two year period to learn the local language. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • Re: Persepolis: 6 vs 60 years to build?
    ... Darius started his castle at Persepolis first. ... Whether or not the Throne Hall took 6 years or 60 years should be answerable ... since we know Xerxes and Artaxerxes were actually the same king. ...
    (sci.archaeology)
  • PERSEPOLIS THRONE HALL: Built in 6 or 60 years?
    ... The Throne Hall, built in in 6 or 60 years? ... Because Artaxerxes and Xerxes ... Darius II, proving he followed Darius I, followed by Darius II. ...
    (sci.archaeology)