PERSEPOLIS: New focus in redating discovery

After the discovery of 511BCE subdating in the VAT4956 confirming
comprehensive revisions by the Persians of their timeline, Persepolis
becomes the new focus for answers regarding the most successful
conterintellence scheme in ancient history. But ironically it was likely in
Persepolis that the concept of claiming Xerxes was the father of Artaxerxes
began in the first place. Herotodus tells us that Themistocles fled to
Persia after being ostracised in Greece and insisted upon an audience with
then king Xerxes after a two year period to learn the local language. I
suppose he trusted no one. He likely toured Persia and the monument to
great Persian architecture Persepolis. On casual observation, one finds
bas-reliefs of a father and son co-rulership who begin building the city
which is then finished by his son after his father dies prematurely after
only two years into the building the compound. But of note, when Persian
kings took they throne they customarily adopted a new name. In this case,
Xerxes adopted the name Artaxerxes so some parts of the city representing
the new king reflected that name change. Without knowing the local custom,
it would appear there were three different kings who built Persepolis:
Darius, Xerxes and Artaxerxes. But in actuality, it was Darius and Xerxes
together as co-rulers that began the city in the fourth year of Darius, and
after Darius' death two years later in his sixth year, the compound was
completed by Xerxes using the name Artaxerxes. This likely inspired
Themistocles to get Xerxes to claim Artaxerxes was a third king, his own
son, and avoid an invasion by angry Greek factions who wanted revenge for
Xerxes' invasion of Greece.

As a further irony, since Themistocles had been betrayed by private letters,
he leaked a counterintelligence letter into Greece from himself to
Artaxerxes casually mentioning the recent death of the king's father,
Xerxes. There was no denying that King Artaxerxes was now on the throne
but historians comparing notes later on absolutely contradicted that the
claim that Themistocles went over to Artaxerxes but claimed for sure it was
Xerxes. They never caught on he was the same king. That controversy raged
on even during the time of Plutarch who lists the numerous historians who
contradict the claim that Artaxerxes was ruling when Themistocles fled to
Persia:

"Thucydides and Charon relate that Xerxes was then dead, and that it was his
son Artaxerxes that Themistocles addressed himself. But Ephorus, Dinon,
Clitarchus, Heraclides, and several others, write that Xerxes was then upon
the throne. The opinion of Thucydides seems most agreeable to chronology,
though this is not perfectly well settled" (Themistocles, XXVII, Langhorne's
trans.).



As I noted, the Greeks never really caught on that Themistocles was lying
and Thucydides simply published a copy of the leaked letter and because he
was considered otherwise reliable his account was taken as fact. Now that
we are looking back at this period, it is clear to see why this scheme
became so effective.

But from an archaeological point of view, removing 82 years of faked history
from a series of Persian kings should be quite challenging since apparently
it hasn't been noticed before. This is where Persepolis again comes into
focus, because the "city" is really only 12 palacial buildings used about
once a year for the New Year's festival including the palaces of the kings,
some fabulous meeting halls and some administrative buildings (i.e. a
treasury and harem). The city began to be built in the fourth year of
Darius with his palace which was completed before he died, taking only about
two years. He had built two other palaces in about the same time including
one for Xerxes at Babylon. After his death, though, Xerxes was formed to
finish the buildings started by Darius, some of them reflecting himself as
sole ruler Artaxerxes.

So in other words, a royal compound of about 11 buildings that only took
five years to complete (final primary building completed in the 7th year of
Artaxerxes) is being claimed to have been in the process of building for
over 57 years. Five years vs 57 years!

Thus if the conspiracy really happened, setting aside building inscriptions
or faked business documents to fill in the extra years, how is it that
archaeologists haven't figured out this city only took five years to
complete instead of 57 years to complete? And if so, why aren't they saying
anything about it?

The Bible says Darius I only ruled for six years and was followed on the
throne by "Artaxerxes." This is consistent with Xerxes changing his name to
Artaxerxes when he became king. The Bible otherwise never mentions any
Xerxes. But the Bible also says the 4th king in line from Cyrus, who would
be the king after Darius, would attack Greece and become the greatest of all
Persian kings. Thus the Greek history for Xerxes now crosses over with the
history of Artaxerxes per the Bible, focusing on a research project to
discover if in fact Xerxes and Artaxerxes were truly the same king or if
there is substantial archaeological evidence that they were different kings.
But Persepolis already does not extend Darius' rule past six years as noted
above since he died shortly after completing his palace which only took two
years to build and the building was begun in the fourth year of his reign.
Of course, once one focuses on actually disproving that Xerxes and
Artaxerxes were the same king, one finds this can't be done and other
discoveries at Persepolis turn up to show they were indeed the same king.
Not only at Persepolis either. For instance, at the tombs of these kings at
Naqshi-Rustam, Artaxerxes is mysteriorly buried in the tomb between Darius I
and Darius II, a tomb completed before the tomb claimed to be that of Xerxes
which is newer and only imitates the decorative art for the first there
tombs.

Also of interest we find the Jewish cupbearer Nehemiah already the prime
minister (i.e. cupbearer held the court position of prime minister, the
highest court position under the king) of Persia during the co-rulership of
Xerxes and Darius. He is also seen wearing his distinctive Jewish garb and
beard cover (eunuchs covered their beardless faces) in bas reliefs with
Artaxerxes. The Bible tells us that Nehemiah served Xerxes/Artaxerxes
throughout his entire kingship and lived down into the reign of Darius II.
Nehemiah returned from Babylon with Zerubabbel and likely being at least 30
years of age could have outlived Xerxes' 59 years who was born the same year
Cyrus became king. However, when the kingships were split and Artaxerxes
claimed his full 41-year rule as Artaxerxes though 21 years were assigned to
Xerxes, Nehemiah suddenly has to be over 143 years of age to survive this
period. Thus references to Nehemiah in the Bible being the person who
returned from Babylon are dismissed and efforts made to claim this was a
different Nehemiah. But the bas-reliefs at Persepolis confirm this was the
same cupbearer during the reign of Xerxes and Darius as with Artaxerxes.
So the architecture at Persepolis in no way supports the claimed 36-year
rule of Darius which was actually expanded by 30 years. It does support
only a 6-year rule maximum for Darius with the king dying before finishing a
city which he only began 2 years earlier.

The sensitivity of identifying Nehemiah in the bas-reliefs during the
co-reign of Darius and Xerxes seems to be one of the finds suppressed in the
scholarship about Persepolis, though it is obvious once pointed out.

Since Persepolis is the primary architectural remains from Persia during the
reigns of these three (actually two) kings, the expanded 82-years of Persian
history quickly caves in upon itself as testified at Persepolis itself.
Darius' accounts at Bisitun, of course, talk extensively only about his
first couple of years as king in three different languages and then is
completely silent after that. Also that Darius died at a young age is the
history that his father visited is tomb at Naqshi-Rustam and per an
inscription by Xerxes found in the foundation of one of the buildings at
Persepolis, Darius' grandfather was also alive at the time.

The faked 82 years of Persian history can be resolved as follows based upon
comparative research:

-1 year for a 7-year vs 8-year rule by Kambyses who was co-ruler one year
with father Cyrus.
-30 years from Darius I, who ruled only 6 years per Jewish records (Ezra
6:14,15).
-30 years from Artaxerxes II vs 17 years, a king whom we know nothing of
except from the Greeks.
-21 years for the overlap rulership of Xerxes who was Artaxerxes
______
82 years totally removed without any critical archaeological evidence to
prevent the truth from finally shining through.

The VAT4956 double-dating for year 37 of Nebuchadnezzar in 511 BCE, the
original date for that king, dates the 1st of Cyrus to 455BCE based upon
Jewish records (Joephus and the Bible) setting an interval of 70 years from
year 23 (last deportation) to the 1st of Cyrus. The Neo-Babylonian records,
which were revised represent a 26-year shorter Neo-Babylonian Period, redued
to help offset the added years to the Persian Period. Ancient chronology
beyond the reign of Nebuchadnezzar 2 is thus effectively downdated by 57-60
years, allowing poor Solomon to regain some credibility for a rule from
910-870BCE where he actually belongs, rather than earlier where
archaeologists have criticized a less developed Jerusalem during those years
though acknowledge the development by the time of Omri whose reign currently
ends in 870BCE. Now Solomon's rule ends that year and so the archaeology of
Persepolis far away and many years past impacts upon the credibility of
Solomon as well.

Why hasn't this come out before? Oh it has, but it's a pandora's box for
sure and because of that, Persepolis has been casually ignored
archaeologically though it holds all the answers. Religious and political
bias over what the true time would effect are the likely reasons this well
orchestrated revision has remained in place even now. But thanks to
astronomical texts which contain the original dates, we can specifically
redate (at least Nebuchadnezzar's rule) to the specific original year and
reconstruct the original timeline.

Larry

Nehemiah with Artaxerxes when he was sole ruler:
http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2E9_72dpi.html

Nehemiah in same garb (hooded (Jewish) cap, holding cuptowel as cupbearer,
covered beard as eunuch:
http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TRE/3B10_72dpi.html

Nehemiah in greatly favored position alone with Artaxerxes in another
bas-relief:
http://oi.uchicago.edu/OI/MUS/PA/IRAN/PAAI/IMAGES/PER/TH/2F9_72dpi.html


The PLAN of Persepolis, just nine major buildings that only took five years
to complete is said to have taken 57 years to complete based upon the
distorted history. Did it really take 57 years to finish eight buildings
started during the reign of Darius when his own palace was finished in just
two years? Why haven't archaeologists figured this out before? 57 years.
A complete wall around Jerusalem only took 16 years and a new temple only
two 22 years (with a 2-year interruption).

Once the critical 36-year rule of Darius is dismissed back down to six
years, then the rest of the timeline will collapse as well, and of course,
Nehemiah won't have to live to 143 years of age for the Jewish timeline to
remain valid and reliable. (Note: after Xerxes successfully claimed to be
Artaxerxes extra years were added to the Persian kings and the Persian
timeline to accommodate the revisions)

Larry Wilson

More details to come. It's time to revisit the original scene of the crime:
PERSEPOLIS REVISITED.


.

Quantcast