Please note, JWs along with many others teach that the Nehemiah who
returned
from Babylon with Zerubbabel was a different Nehemiah than who served
under
Artaxerxes I. That's because he'd have to be too old, over 143 years of
age
to live into the rule of Darius II. But that's based on the revised
chronology which expands the Persian Period by 82 years!! Once the
timeline
is corrected then Nehemiah could be 30 years of age when he returned from
Babylon and still outlike Xerxes-Artaxerxes, who died at 59, born the same
year Cyrus became king in 455 BCE.
==============
Interesting, the chief cupbearer of Artaxerxes is known by the Bible to be
Nehemiah. Artaxerxes shows his cupbear with him in several bas-reliefs at
Persepolis. The clothing of those appearing in the artwork represent
their
national background. Artaxerxes' cupbear is neither Mede nor Persian.
Further, the beard or beardless chin of the cupbearer is covered, believed
to mean he is a eunuch since a man not s****ting a beard is considered
shameful. So what's the problem identifying this person with Nehemiah?
http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/nehemiah.html
(Nehemiah at Persepolis)
There is no excuse. EXCEPT the complication that once you identify
Artaxerxes' cupbear as the eunuch, Nehemiah, then it is clear he was
already
cupbearer during the co-ruler****p reign of Darius and Artaxerxes!!! In
that
case, throwing a wrench into the traditional history that assigns a 36
year
rule to Darius I followed by a 21-year rule of "Xerxes."
Only we have extant do***entation of a king ruling into year 38 was an
"Arxes [Xerxes] also known as Artaxerxes."
Unfortunately comparison with the dating formulae of the Astronomical
Diaries does not help very much. In these formulae the name of the father
of
the reigning king is never mentioned. The formula used here is: PN sa PN2
(LUGAL) MU-sú na-bu-ú, "PN, who is called king PN2." See for example AD I,
p. 152, no. -346, left edge: MU 12.KAM mÚ-ma-kus sá mÁr-tak-sat-su LUGAL
MU-sú na-bu-ú, "year 12 of Ochos, who is called king Artaxerxes (III)"; MU
38.KAM mÁr-sú LUGAL sá mÁr-tak-sat-su LUGAL MU-sú [na-bu-ú], "year 38 of
king Arses, who is called king Artaxerxes (II)" (AD I, p. 136, no. -366 B
lower edge; on tablet A left edge the title LUGAL, "king," added to both
names, has been omitted in both cases); mÚ-ma-kus sá mDa-a-ri-mus MU-sú
SA4,
"Ochos, who is called Darius (II)" (AD I, p. 66, no. -391 B obv. 1).
Skip the comments. The only king who could have the double name of
Xerxes/Artaxerxes who ruled for 38 years was Xerxes himself. Thus we
know
that Xerxes was Artaxerxes originally. He just used his double name to
fake
his own death and claim he was a different king. But I guess that is too
much for archaeologists to deal with, so they close their eyes to
identifying Artaxerxes' cupbearer, which is the position of Prime
Minister,
as Nehemiah. PERSEPOLIS sup****ts the Biblical requirement that Xerxes
and
Artaxerxes were the same king (i.e. Ezra 6:14,15).
Most Christian scholars, likewise, dissociate the "Nehemiah" that returns
from Babylon with Zerubbabel as the later Nehemiah who becomes the
cupbearer
to Artaxerxes, Longimanus. Mistake. Incompetence. Negligence or
academic
bias. So far a lack of integrity by archaeologists reflects how they
might
be affected by whomever pays their grant funding. Thus money ultimately
compromises most things, even truth or "insight".
http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/xerxeshand.html
(Xerxes hand position)
http://www.geocities.com/siaxares/dariusxerxespalace.JPG
(Xerxes at
Palace
of Darius)
But maybe, now in the age of "freedom of information" archaeology will own
up to the archaeology and actually acknowledge the Bible's account of
Nehemiah being the cupbearer to Artaxerxes is confirmed by the bas-reliefs
at Pesepolis, only it also tends to prove that Xerxes and Artaxerxes were
the same king! Which, of course, the Bible also confirms.
Lars
|
