“The Article of Cyrus Cylinder in Wikipedia is being vandalized.”
By: Koorosh Ahmadi
"Cyrus the Great", may soon need to reassemble his army of Immortals! However, this time, instead of 10’000 highly trained warriors, he may only require a few IT experts; as these days, his articles in Wikipedia are controlled by a group of cyber-vadalists, led by a person called Jona Lendering, who specializes in attacks on Iranian Art, Culture and History; his major area of activity is Internet; he has collected a team of Wikipedia users to maliciously change the articles of Iranian History, especially the records of "Cyrus the Great" and the "Cyrus Cylinder" in Wikipedia.
Unsurprisingly, the Islamic government of Iran has found him useable and has provided him with funds and an office in Tehran to ensure that he has a much more effective performance in execrating the Ancient Iran! Worth mentioning that recently, the Islamic rulers of Iran have made tremendous effort to return the "Cyrus Cylinder" from Britain to Iran (however unsuccessful so far), which if done, undoubtedly, would be the end for the Cylinder; by the same plan, in which, is to flood the Cyrus's Tomb located in "Pasargad" by constructing the Sivand dam, also destroying many other archaeological remains of the Per-Islamic Iran such as the "Temple of Anahita" and the "Palace of Apadana" in "Persepolis".
The article below from Rozaneh Magazine provides more details about his co-operations with the radical Islamic regime of Iran;
Here is more information on Jona Lendering and his activities;
Lendering began his attacks on "Cyrus the Great" in Wikipedia back in 2006, taken from his own Wiki Talk Page;
“I think the family tree is fine; and I've improved the year of Cyrus' death. I wonder if we shouldn't include something on modern propaganda in the Cyrus Cylinder article like I included at my own page (here? Jona Lendering 21:35, 22 December 2006 (UTC)”
He then imposed the baseless topic of “Shah’s propaganda”, which is a Political subject, from his own website to the article of “Cyrus Cylinder”;
“The cylinder played an important role in the imperial propaganda of Shah Mohammad Reza Palavi, who in 1971 used it as symbol of the celebration of what he called the 2,500th anniversary of the Persian monarchy. A copy was given to the United Nations (text). The Shah tried to prove that the secular Iran with religious freedom that he wanted to promote had existed before, and in this context, the Cyrus Cylinder has been called the ‘world's human rights charter...’”
Then he extended his usefulness by pushing for two articles against Cyrus the Great to be written in the Spiegel Magazine and the Daily Telegraph:
Spiegel’s attack on Cyrus (15/07/2008)
Daily Telegraph’s attack on Cyrus (16/07/2008)
[It has now become obvious that he has links to Spiegel and Daily Telegraph - just as he has links inside Iran - he has an office in Tehran and works there with another Dutch journalist.]
Then in 2008, Lendering had this comment added, this time to the main scholastic body of the “Cyrus Cylinder” article in Wikipedia;
(Interestingly, right after the Spiegel/Daily Telegraph articles):
“The type and formulation of the cylinder was typically Babylonian and stands in a Mesopotamian tradition, dating back to the third millennium BC, of kings making similar declarations of their own righteousness when beginning their reigns.”
[referenced to: Lendering, Jona (2007-01-28). "The Cyrus Cylinder". livius.org. http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/cyrus_cylinder.html. Retrieved 2008-07-30. ]
Before we get to the matter of the similarity of the cylinders, we have to challenge this assertion that cylinders are only part of the Babylonian/Mesopotamian tradition; In reality, the use of cylinders and writing on cylinders go back to the invention of cylinder seals in Iran and Mesopotamia together, as is mentioned in the British Museum website: “Cylinder seals were invented around 3500 BC in southern Mesopotamia (now Iraq) or south-western Iran, and were used as an administrative tool, as jewellery and as magical amulets until around 300 BC. Cylinder seals were linked to the invention of cuneiform writing on clay.”
Even by some accounts, it is possible that the use of cylinder seals had first started in Iran, as according to Prof. Edith Porada: “The Cylindrical shape appeared in about 3500 BC at the early site of Uruk in southern Mesopotamia and at the contemporary site of Susa in south-western Iran... The alluvial country of Mesopotamia lacks good stone for carving; hence the large stones of early cylinders were imported... probably from Iran.”
Also, along with the recent discoveries of cylinder seals on the other side of the Alborz Mountains, at the Kelar Mound in Mazandaran and in the East Azerbaijan, the idea that cylinder seals had had a longer and broader usage in Iran comes closer to fact.
Therefore, the assertion that cylinders are only part of the Mesopotamian tradition is wrong! Then, the matter of similarity of Cyrus Cylinder to other cylinders of the era is another false claim that we will investigate later in the text. In fact, this Cylinder may be similar to the other cylinders in appearance (as they are following the same tradition and as one of the few tools to record events and issue decrees at that time) but, at a time that kings proudly announce their degree of viciousness and notoriety upon the conquered people, the actual content and the humane standards of the Cyrus Cylinder makes it totally unique and unrivalled among other cylinders. Later we realize that this specific false claim is in fact, their major point of support for their arguments.
Worth repeating that Lendering holds a bunch of Wiki users to do his IT jobs and help him watchdog the Articles. [Three of those users are: ChrisO (who is active against Iranian history on a number of forums), Doug Weller and 3rdAlcove, but the ring-leader is Jona Lendering himself.]
Their activities are considered as vandalism as their comments have either no reliable ground or "Citation" in Wiki terms, or they are mostly based on the biased views of some not so accountable individuals. They mainly use the ideas of a person called “Amélie Kuhrt” who apparently has started all of this baseless campaign against “Cyrus the Great” as far back as 1979; weird enough that she is the first person in the History that has hated Cyrus the Great, someone whom even his enemies loved him!
For instance, a line in that same section, by referring to Amélie Kuhrt says:
“The interpretation of the cylinder as a "charter of human rights" has been criticized by some scholars and characterized as political propaganda on the part of the Pahlavi regime.”
[referenced to: Amélie Kuhrt, "The Cyrus Cylinder and Achaemenid imperial policy" in Journal of Studies of the Old Testament 25, p. 84; Lendering, Jona (2007-01-28). "The Cyrus Cylinder". livius.org. http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/cyrus_cylinder.html. Retrieved 2008-07-30.]
By studying the whole article and considering the number of times that they have used the word “Propaganda” and libelling it about both “Cyrus” and the former “Shah” of Iran, we realize that they are trying to deliberately mix a historical and archaeological subject with politics, plus relate it to a contemporary political figure and then forcibly include it to the article of “Cyrus Cylinder”. This is while these accusations by themselves had all been groundless personal opinions introduced by “Kuhrt” in 1979.
Ever since, even Lendering himself has been cited as a source and his citations been added to the article on regular basis! Even though, “Amelie Kuhrt” was the person who began all of this.
Although his comments have too little of value to be taken into account, but he constantly denies the facts about the destruction of Pasargad by the Islamic regime of Iran, in different forums e.g. “Charges as Iran would pursue policy to destroy the Pre-Islamic heritage (for example. Sivand dam the hoax), is simply incorrect, such as each archaeologist can tell.”
Lendering also makes scornful statements, such as:
“Iranian art only looks beautiful but is actually ugly when you see it for real”
Both posted in a Dutch website “Onze Man in Tehran” [Our Man in Tehran]
As a result of this shameless vandalism of historical facts, some students from Iran have written this petition: (PLEASE SIGN AND DISTRIBUTE WIDELY)
Protest against Jona Lendering's anti-Iranian campaign
Now, before we start to analyse these acts of article vandalism and the motives behind them, it is important for us to study the text of the “Cyrus Cylinder” and understand its notional quality before making any judgement. In addition, we need to consider the fact that apart from the supporting documents such as the “Verse account of Nabonidus”, “Nabonidus Chronicle”, various instances in the “Bible” and “Quran”, the best reference for understanding the Cylinder’s message, is the “Cylinder” itself. It is by considering the literal meaning of the words and comparing them to other cylinders of the time that the audience is able to investigate the aspects of “Human Rights” in Cyrus’s acts. For example; the word “Peace” is repeated three (four by some accounts) times in “Cyrus Cylinder”, which by itself is a novel word for the time; it has no record of usage in other cylinders of the same tradition, in which there was no hint of mercy or compassion. Almost all other cylinders proudly load their text by describing the amount of violence exerted by the conquerors; this is indeed one of the aspects that make “Cyrus Cylinder” different to the others; below is part of Cylinder’s translation from the British Museum website;
“When I went as harbinger of peace i[nt]o Babylon, I founded my sovereign residence within the palace amid celebration and rejoicing... My vast troops were marching peaceably in Babylon, and the whole of [Sumer] and Akkad had nothing to fear... and I have enabled all the lands to live in peace.”
Then, there is the Cylinder’s innovative attention to the Human values that is unique to itself, such as:
Liberation of Slaves; “As for the population of Babylon […, w]ho as if without div[ine intention] had endured a yoke not decreed for them, I soothed their weariness; I freed them from their bonds.”
Repatriation; “I collected together all of their people and returned them to their settlements.”
Freedom of Worship; “From [Shuanna] I sent back to their places to the city of Ashur and Susa, Akkad, the land of Eshnunna, the city of Zamban, the city of Meturnu, Der, as far as the border of the land of Guti - the sanctuaries across the river Tigris - whose shrines had earlier become dilapidated, the gods who lived therein, and made permanent sanctuaries for them... and the gods of the land of Sumer and Akkad which Nabonidus – to the fury of the lord of the gods – had brought into Shuanna, at the command of Marduk, the great lord, I returned them unharmed to their cells, in the sanctuaries that make them happy. May all the gods that I returned to their sanctuaries, every day before Bel and Nabu, ask for a long life for me, and mention my good deeds.”
Worth mentioning, along with the Cylinder itself, one may also feel the need of investigating the character and life of “Cyrus the great” as well; in that case, they can refer to various sources, such as the records of Herodotus, Xenophon, Plutarch and many other ancient and modern historians, scholars and individuals, who have almost all revered Cyrus as a distinguished and influential figure in History.
Now, if we return to the article of “Cyrus Cylinder” in Wikipedia; by the first glance, we immediately realize that there is a deliberate and systematic effort throughout the whole article to undermine not only the “Cylinder” but the character of “Cyrus” himself. The vandalists have tried to conceal the positive aspects of the Cylinder and instead, by referring to the words of some not so credible individuals, putting all their efforts to scrutinize Cyrus’s deeds in such an unlogical manner, dubbing them as ancient “Propaganda”..! This is while with a little research about the credibility of those cited individuals; we realize that from the scholastic and academic point of view, they may even hardly fall into the out of the mainstream category.
Furthermore, those few Wiki users who cooperate with Lendering to maintain his control over the article have an odd and contemptuous attitude towards Iranian History in general, as it is found in other related articles as well; the tone and the manner of their comments are so deliberate and primitive that even an untrained eye will realize the amount of bias and personal hatred. Worse is that they think they own the articles and usually bludgeon other users who try to contribute to the articles. They have even been warned by other users that they are violating the Wikipedia terms, but they do not take any notice.
However, once again, we have to bear in mind that their major gripping point for backing their arguments is that they claim that “Cyrus Cylinder is only following a long tradition of issuing such objects and is similar to other cylinders in all aspects”; while we prove that this opinion is by itself too naive too stand on, as the Cylinder may bear similarities to other cylinders in appearance, but its message and the legacy of the person behind it is uniquely peculiar to itself.
For instance, at the section of “Interpretation” the text immediately start with this baseless title of "As an instrument of legitimizing/elaborating on royal rule";
The text, again by referring to Kuhrt, claims that Cyrus Cylinder is similar to the cylinders of "Sargon II" the Assyrian and "Marduk-apla-iddina II" the Chaldean kings who reigned in “Babylon” before “Cyrus the Great”;
This claim is by far a clear proof of either the author’s deep lack of knowledge or possibly a deliberate distortion of the facts. None of those two cylinders in any way, except from repairing the temples, come to comparison with Cyrus Cylinder, especially from the "Human Rights" point of view. In fact, the amount of violence and atrocity in those two other cylinders is to a point that one may doubt the intellect of the editors for bringing such comments. Even, despite the relatively slighter hint of violence in Marduk-apla-iddina II’s cylinder, yet it has nothing to offer that could be matched with the notional quality of Cyrus Cylinder
For further clarification, we bring parts of the exact translations of those two cylinders taken from reliable sources;
Sargon II’s cylinder translation;
“Without waiting to muster his entire forces, Sargon at once marched against Ashdod. Apprized of his coming, Yamani fled to the south borders of Egypt, and appeared no more, Ashdod, Gath and Ashdodim were besieged and taken; and Yamani’s gods, wife, sons, daughters, treasures and people became the victor’s booty. Sargon peopled the towns with [captive] foreigners.”
British Museum also makes this translation of Sargon II cylinder;
“Sargon thereupon hastily marched against the place and captured it, carrying off the gods of the city with the inhabitants; and Yamani fled to Egypt. Sargon afterwards rebuilt Ashdod and peopled it with captives from various countries.”
Even, in order to become more familiar with the actual character of Sargon II, we can refer to another remaining document from him, “The Annals of Sargon II”; 
“I besieged and occupied the town of Samaria, and took 27,280 of its inhabitants captive... I killed all that belonged to URZAHA the Armenian, in these high mountains. I took with my own hand 250 royal members of his family... The countries of Agag and Ambanda.., had refused their tributes, I destroyed them, laid them waste, and burnt them by fire... I carried away captive IAMAN'S gods, his wife, his sons, his daughters, his money and the contents of his palace, together with the inhabitants of his country... “
Also the translation of Marduk-apla-iddina II’s cylinder;
“He [Marduk-apla-iddina II] defeated the widespread army of Subartu (i.e. Assyria) and shattered their weapons. He brought their overthrow and prevented them from treading on the territory of the land of Akkad.”
For further clarification, note the translations of two other documents from the same tradition-, the cylinders (prisms) of the Assyrian kings; Sennacherib (704-681 BC), son of Sargon II, and of his son Ashurbanipal (685-627 BC), who ruled over the same lands, including Babylon;
Sennacherib invades Jerusalem and Babylon, where after, even the soil was looted!
“I quickly slaughtered them. I slit their throat like sheep. I cut their lives like threads. I caused their blood to flow over the broad earth. I hacked off their lips and I destroyed their pride. Like the sprout of a cucumber I cut off their hands... After I destroyed Babylon, the gods, the gods of which I shattered, I overwhelmed its people with weapons. So that the ground of that city not
be identified. Terror and fearsomeness of Ashur fell upon them... I took away the dirt of Babylon and stored it heaped up like mounds.”
Ashurbanipal’s invasion to Egypt;
“I seized those kings and bound their hand and foot in iron fetters and handcuffs... And the people of Sais, Pindidi and Si'l and those remaining cities... no single man escaped, their bodies were hung up on stakes. They flayed their skins and clad the city wall with them.”
Ashurbanipal’s invasion to Elam, Arabs and Babylon;
“On my fifth campaign... like a furious storm I covered Elam completely. I killed his soldiers without number... I took his soldiers and like thorn bushes and camel thorn I filled the environs of Susa with their corpses... I caused their blood to flow into the river Ulai; I dyed its waters like red wool.”
Now, where in these texts would someone find any similarity to Cyrus Cylinder’s text or an act of "Human Rights”? Clearly, Nowhere! By comparing the translations above with the translation of Cyrus, we will understand the amount of bias and misinformation in the Wiki article.
This section of the article is mainly based on the personal views of “Kuhrt" who goes on to make comments like; “the objective for the emergence of Cyrus Cylinder rests on Cyrus's political purposes”.
The assumption that Cyrus was a Political propagandist is merely an assumption! Cyrus only did what he did and apart from that it wasn't Cyrus who inscribed the Cylinder but the Babylonians themselves. It sounds like this author could read Cyrus's mind and is aware of his political tactics..! This claim is as ridiculous as one claims that the anti slavery acts of “Abraham Lincoln” or anti Apartheid movement of "Nelson Mandela”, were all nothing but shameless political tactics to fulfil their own political propaganda! Let alone the idiocy of making such claims about a person who lived 2550 years ago, the fact is that we can't even make such assumptions about the leaders in today’s World, as we can't really claim for sure that it was the motives of political propaganda that "President Obama" became the winner of a "Peace Nobel Prize"! Such comments, I believe are only for the purpose of misleading the audience!
The text continues: "The degree of familiarity with Babylonian tropes suggests that the cylinder was authored not by the Persians but by the Babylonian priests of Marduk, working at the behest of Cyrus"
The fact that the Cylinder was made by Babylonians themselves, not only doesn’t indicate any political agenda, but also it strengthens the fact that the inscription of the Cylinder was a sign of the Babylonians' gratefulness for Cyrus's deeds. Plus, should we note that the priests at that time were a respectable part of their society; the concept of priesthood was relatively different to what we know now. Also, they were often the only literate people who maintained the art of making and inscribing the cylinders. Therefore, the idea that the Cylinder was made by the Babylonian priests and the priests were working at the behest of Cyrus is a baseless idea and has no reliable ground.
The texts goes on: "The cylinder can be compared with another work of around the same time, the Verse Account of Nabonidus, in which the former Babylonian ruler is excoriated as the enemy of the priests of Marduk and Cyrus is presented as the liberator of Babylon."
In fact, the "Verse account of Nabonidus" is another evidence of Cyrus's liberation of Babylon and is counted as a supportive document, which has also mentioned Cyrus’s deeds in appraisal; as we see in this translation:
“For the inhabitants of Babylon, Cyrus declared the state of peace... To the inhabitants of Babylon a joyful heart is now given. They are like prisoners when the prisons are opened. Liberty is restored to those who were surrounded by oppression.”
I don't really know why the editor has brought this here as it would not bear any indication of political agenda by Cyrus..!
The text continues on the same subject: “The Verse Account is so similar to the cylinder inscription that the two texts have been dubbed an example of "literary dependence" - not a direct dependence of one upon the other, but mutual dependence upon a common source, characterised by Morton Smith as "the propaganda put out in Babylonia by Cyrus' agents, shortly before Cyrus' conquest, to prepare the way of their lord.”
Once again, the relation or historical dependency between these two separate subjects could not be considered as reasons for "political propaganda"; in fact, from the archaeological and historical point of view, they back each other up. All I can say is that I name such behaviour as typical sophism or simply playing with words in order to obfuscate the subject..!
As we go ahead, the text persists producing more inaccurate comments as this note from the book “Israel among the Nations: The Persian Period” by “Mary Joan Winn Leith” suggests;
“The text illustrates how Cyrus co-opted local traditions and symbols to legitimize his control of Babylon.”
I have studied that book and unfortunately, with all due respect to the author, I found an unprofessional way of analysing the historical and archaeological facts, plus a tremendous amount of falsity;
In general the author has totally neglected the factor of relativity in investigating the historical topics; she continuously makes personal assumptions and scrutinizes Cyrus's deeds as if they have happened just a few days ago..! She completely overlooks the fact that the incidents, which had happened 26 centuries ago, especially in regards to Cyrus Cylinder, must be considered with respect to the conditions of the era; she keeps calling it a Persian Propaganda, as if Persians had had a long record of propaganda in their résumé..!!! In other place, she writes:
“There is no archaeological evidence for any rebuilding or repairing of Mesopotamian temples during Cyrus' reign.”
As an academic, I have never found any record of an archaeological discovery or finding in a ruined area that is almost flattened to the ground or several metres underground that itself can be counted as hard evidence for ancient rebuilding or repair activities, unless in cases that the repairs had been left uncompleted and the tools were found among the ruins or literal accounts such as tablets or cylinders, etc. point out such repairs, which is the case with Cyrus Cylinder.
Mary J. W. Leith in other instance in her book says:
“The Cylinder never calls for a general release of deportees or a universal restoration of centres of worship that had suffered in the Babylonian hands.”
I believe the author here has taken the degrees of diffusion to extreme by making up such words as "general release" or "universal restoration"; I don’t think anyone would be able to understand what the author means by making up such phrases; this is a typical use of verbosity to create confusion for the audience! What is obvious is that there are several other accounts besides Cyrus Cylinder itself, pointing out that Cyrus released all captives and deportees and he restored the ruined temples in the conquered regions.
I guess one of the best responses that we can present to these authors for making such fallacies is the comment made by the host “Peter Weller”, in the “History Channel” program of “Engineering an Empire: The Persians”:
“In 539 BC Cyrus conquered Babylon, but he did not present himself as a conqueror, he presented himself as a liberator, rescuing these people from their despotic ruler and then he did a totally unprecedented thing; he freed the Jews, the Jews who had been living in Babylon in captivity ever since Nebuchadnezzar destroyed Jerusalem and their temple and Cyrus freed them. Now it could be said in hindsight or political history that Cyrus was looking for a buffer state between a hostile Egypt and his own empire; but, so what? The point is that no one had ever done anything like this and hardly anyone has ever done anything like it since, subsequently he is the only gentile in the Bible to be referred to as Moshiach or Messiah.”
In addition to the “Cyrus Cylinder” itself, there are many other ancient and modern sources that have accounts of Cyrus’s biography and his conquest of Babylon that almost all of them have regarded “Cyrus the Great” and his policies in utter reverence;
· The Verse account of Nabonidus
· The Prayer of Nabonidus (one of the Dead Sea scrolls)
· The Cyrus Cylinder
· Ctesias (Persica)
· Quintus Curtius Rufus (Library of World History)
· Fragments of Nicolaus of Damascus
· Polyaenus (Stratagems in War)
· Justin (Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus) (English)
· Strabo (History)
· Herodotus; Church, Alfred J., Stories of the East From Herodotus (1891). ISBN 0-7661-8928-7
· Schmitt, Rüdiger. "Achaemenid dynasty". Encycloaedia Iranica. vol. 3. Routledge & Kegan Paul. http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v1f4/v1f4a109.html.
· Cardascia, G.. "Babylon under Achaemenids". Encyclopaedia Iranica. Vol. 3. ISBN 0939214784. http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v3f3/v3f3a070.html.
· Schmitt, Rüdiger; Shahbazi, A. Shapur; Dandamayev, Muhammad A.; Zournatzi, Antigoni. "Cyrus". Encyclopaedia Iranica. Vol. 6. ISBN 0939214784. http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/unicode/v6f5/v6f5a026.html.
· Freeman, Charles (1999). The Greek Achievement: The Foundation of the Western World. Allen Lane. ISBN 0713992247.
· The Cambridge History of Iran: Vol. 2 ; The Median and Achaemenian periods. Cambridge University Press. 1985. ISBN 0521200911.
· The Cambridge Ancient History IV: Persia, Greece, and the Western Mediterranean, C. 525-479 B.C. ISBN 0521228042.
· Dandamaev, M. A. (1989). A political history of the Achaemenid Empire. BRILL. pp. 373. ISBN 9004091726.
· Frye, Richard N., The Heritage of Persia. Weidenfeld and Nicolson (1962), 40, 43-4, 46-7, 70, 75, 78-90, 93, 104, 108, 122, 127, 206-7. ISBN 1-56859-008-3
· Moorey, P.R.S., The Biblical Lands, VI. Peter Bedrick Books, New York (1991). ISBN 0-87226-247-2
· Olmstead, A. T., History of the Persian Empire [Achaemenid Period]. University of Chicago Press (1948). ISBN 0-226-62777-2
· Palou, Christine; Palou, Jean, La Perse Antique. Presses Universitaires de France (1962).
Before we make a conclusion, I need to remind that the major stand point for those who started and run this campaign against Cyrus the Great and his legacy of Human Rights is that ‘Cyrus Cylinder is just another typical object of legitimization similar to other cylinders of the time’; an assertion that we have proved to be totally wrong. What they don't want to admit is that Babylon in those days was the most significant city in the known world and literally the axis of Human civilization; plus, cylinders were the only way of recording and expressing important events in royal scales. But, what makes Cyrus Cylinder different to the others is the uniqueness of its inscribed content describing Cyrus’s acts and policies, which themselves originate from his ethical and realistic vision towards the lives of Human Beings and the World in general.
What Cyrus did, in position of the leader of a Super Power and literally the strongest man in the World of his time, was completely beyond the ordinary and common sense of people whose life was blended with violence and slavery; following every conquest they had been expecting deportations, captivities and devastations as they were customary practices of the era. Cyrus united all those hostile nations, putting an end on millenia of bloodshed! His acts were not only unprecedented but also far ahead of his time. Therefore, as the United Nations and many credible scholars believe----, we can also, evenly and strongly come to the same conclusion that “Cyrus the Great” deserves all the merit to be considered as the pioneer in the concept of "Humanity" and his Cylinder as the "World's First Declaration of Human Rights".
Koorosh Ahmadi - 27 Feb. 2010 – email@example.com
 The ancient Near East: historical sources in translation By Mark William Chavalas
 United Nations Press Release (SG/SM/1553/HQ263), 14 October 1971
 The Bas-Relief of Cyrus the Great, Bicentennial Park Sydney Australia by Dr. Kurosh Parsi -
 A Report on Mehregan in Sydney 1994 -
 Seven Wonders of the Ancient Middle East by Michael Woods, Mary B. Woods -
 New Cyrus Cylinder Pieces Found in the British Museum by Dr. Claude Mariottini, Professor of Old Testament -
· The Story of Human Rights - www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ot8YGiRtB7U
· Human Rights Evolution - http://sites.google.com/site/humanrightsevolution/
· Cyropaedia - http://www.iranica.com/newsite/articles/v6f5/v6f5a023.html
· Herodotus, Book 1, Section 191
· The ancient Near East: historical sources in translation by Mark William Chavalas
· Rituals of royalty: power and ceremonial in traditional societies by David Cannadine, Simon Price
· Light from the East Or the Witness of the Monuments by C. J. Ball
· Cyrus the Messiah? The Historical Background to Isaiah 45:1 Author(s): Lisbeth S. Fried. Source: The Harvard Theological Review, Vol. 95, No. 4 (Oct., 2002), pp. 373-393
· “Cyrus the Great” by Samuel W. Crompton, Arthur M. Schlesinger, ISBN-13:9780791096369ISBN:079109636X
· Biblical insights from Archaeology by Ferrell Jenkins - http://bibleworld.com/arch01.htm
· Babylonian and Assyrian Literature by Anonymous - http://www.gutenberg.org/etext/10887
· Sargon is Sennacherib by Damien Mackey - http://www.specialtyinterests.net/sargon.html#alleg
· “Cyrus the Great” by Jacob Abbott -
· A collection of various articles from several scholars about “Cyrus the Great” -
· Babylonia, A history of ancient Babylon - A project by History World International 2004 -
· Prof. Charles Roux accounts of Cyrus -