pothos.org

Hello,

As you say Amyntoros, the photos of virtual Persepolis could do with some people there to give it a bit of perspective- for sure.

Paralus said,

The example -- both the religious and the thirst for ever expanding conquests -- was not lost on Alexander.

Yes and Renault wasn't slow to enumerate at length, the similarities in her "nature" of Alexander and Cyrus.
and neither was Xenophon's Cyropedia lost on Alexander either.
As you say,Paralus, it seems that Cyrus adopted a policy of allowing local religions to be observed, although I am confused as to why there is, in Cyrus' cylinder mention of Marduk- a Babylonian god and there is also mention of Bel(the same god?) in the cylinder.
Why Cyrus would mention Marduk is unclear but I suppose that it has to do with what you say, when in Rome do as the Romans do, just as "Pharoah" Alexander did in Egypt.

Best regards,
Dean

dean wrote: As you say,Paralus, it seems that Cyrus adopted a policy of allowing local religions to be observed, although I am confused as to why there is, in Cyrus' cylinder mention of Marduk- a Babylonian god and there is also mention of Bel(the same god?) in the cylinder.
Why Cyrus would mention Marduk is unclear but I suppose that it has to do with what you say, when in Rome do as the Romans do, just as "Pharoah" Alexander did in Egypt.

G'day Dean.

Yes, quite a bit of "when in Rome.." there. Cyrus seemed definitely to have developed the habit of treating defeated enemies -- for the ancient world -- rather kindly. Astyages and Croesus come to mind, although, for reasons that are obvious, punitive measures were employed against the rebellious Lydians later.

As to Bel/Marduk, this had become the primary god of the "Land of the two Rivers" (Babylonia). The priests -- as with those of the Nile -- had extensive religious-political influence and holdings. Their erstwhile overlord, Narbonidus, had attempted -- over the last ten or so years -- to supplant them. Indeed he did not even rule from Babylon (think Egypt and Akhenaten, though not likely as stark).

Cyrus not only restored them, he took the accolade as Marduk's favoured or chosen one as ruler. This confirmed the "priest-ocracy" in its position and no doubt led to happy collaboration. Cyrus also set about restoring the temples and iconography. I believe either he , or his son Cambyses, even submitted to what was an apparent ritual of humility to Marduk which the king was to do each year.

The clever bugger -- always with an eye cocked to further gains, like Philip II -- restored the servile population of Babylon (the Jews) to Israel. This gained him enormous gratitude and good will. The rebuilding of the Temple didn't hurt either. It would come in awful handy when imperial Persian pothos turned expansionist eyes on the inevitable temptation of the Egyptian prize.

Little did the owner of those eyes realise how much blood and treasure successive Achaemenids would profligately spend in attempting to hold, control or recover that prize; a province too far.

I hadn't realised I ruffled so many feathers - I guess my comments were a little strong.

What i found objectionable was the comment made - that Zoroastrianism hadn't taken hold in the Achaemenid court till Darius the third? - Whats that all about?

Yes your right - whatever the case may be, sources need to be provided! precisely the point. What sources support the notion of Achaemenids being Zoroastrian?

In anycase, if people were offended, it was not my intention.

Cheers!