----- Original Message ----
From: Ever Wilson lars1950@...



I'm not drawing conclusions. The Bible says that Nehemiah was the cupbearer
to Artaxerxes for his entire rule and lived down into the rule of Darius I.

********
Yeah, and Parson Weems says that little Georgie Washington chopped down the
cherry tree.

We like to have nice stories about our famous leaders of the past.

If Nehemiah was at Artie's elbow (or on his lap -- was that also your
suggestion?) for 41 years, when did he have time to drop in on Jerusalem and
supervise the rebuilding of the Temple, take a census, and everything else he
was supposed to have done? (Aren't there Scriptural prohibitions on eunuchs
being in Temple service?)
********

Artaxerxes is shown with his cupbearer at Persepolis. The cupbearer is not
a Mede and not a Persian. That is consistent with Nehemiah being a Jew.

********
Right ... the world contained three kinds of people: Medes, Persians, and Jews.
********

IF this is actually Nehemiah, and the theme at Persepolis is to represent
the various ethnic groups, then this particular costume style was adopted by
the Jews apparently. If this costume was similar and used by others
closely related to the Jews,then that's fine too. It doesn't exclude
Nehemiah. Besides, this could be very local and focussed at Persepolis,
with the decision of this garb being used for the Jews, regardless of how
popular it was with some other groups. But your point is well taken.

Pierre Briant's "From Cyrus to Alexander. A History
>of the Persian Empire" would be a good place to start before posting
>co-rulerships of the Achaemenids, eunuch cup-bearing viziers and the
>like.
>Trudy Kawami

I apologize. I forgot generally this co-rulership is not recognized. But
(I'll have to hunt down the quote), William Albright commented on this and
concluded the way the two kings were represented was consistent with a
co-rulership. That is, the kings's heads were at the same level. They were
the same enlarged size compared to the others, etc. In some depictions,
Xerxes is holding onto the back of the throne of Darius, in others his hand
it turned sidewise. The question might be was holding onto the throne
symbolic of co-rulership or mere succession? So at least one archaeologist
interpreted it that way. But you know how that goes.

********
Eh? Presumably you refer to Albright as "one archeologist"? Since when are
archeologists also specialists in art history?

Albright certainly considered himself a jack-of-all-trades. Remember the other
half of that line?

Albright has been dead for almost forty years. If biblical fundamentalists can't
find any other biblical scholar to appeal to, maybe they should stop trying to
pretend to be biblical scholars.

In 1973, when the Oriental Institute News & Notes newsletter for the lay members
was invented, and assigned to me to edit, the very first article I was asked to
prepare, for the very first issue, was an obituary/appreciation of the late W.
F. Albright. (Unfortunately I never met him.) I started it, "William Foxwell
Albright was the greatest biblical archeologist ...." The Director of the
Oriental Institute changed it to "William Foxwell Albright was the dean of
biblical archeologists ...."

(There, Niels Peter -- is that what you were expecting?)
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...