Talk:Persepolis

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Persepolis article.
Article policies
This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, now in the public domain.
This article is within the scope of the following WikiProjects:
This article has an assessment summary page.

Contents

[edit] Unfinished Persepolis

The "unfinished" persepolis insert refers to four videos which are essentially anti-semitic rants of a person with no credibility. It says that Iranians were all massacred by Jews during the Purim and no body lived in Iran after the reign of Xerxes. This is obviously rubbish and I am removing it. Also Persepolis was not built during the time of cyrus, it was built during the reign of Darius and Xerxes —Preceding unsigned comment added by DeusAhrimanus (talk • contribs) 23:47, 9 February 2008 (UTC) I have left the links for anyone interested to watch the videos. ~~

Nikosia (talk) 18:45, 1 March 2008 (UTC) I viewed the videos. It was a documentary and it has something new to say. Everyone can see it with his/her eyes as everything is documented. You can not summarize it in two sentences. I have nothing to do with Purim, the slaughter and history of Iran after Xerxes. I just ask this question of everyone that has viewed the video completely (including you): Is Persepolis unfinished or not? Can you answer main questions proposed in the video? Engineering Association of Iran has issued an official letter according facts put forward in this video that Persepolis is unfinished.

Nikossia (talk) 10:21, 22 March 2008 (UTC) What do you mean by "they are not science"? History is NOT a Science, it is a Theory (I hope you know the difference). Argue about facts instead of removing links. You are just preventing free flow of information.

  • What is ant-semitic here? Slaughter of Persian (Iranian) by Jews is documented in Torah. This is not something new and Purpirar is not the first person claiming this. You can read (and probably read) this in Book of Esther that says Jews killed 75000 Persian (Iranian) people in one day. You can also read a good article written by Bob Deffinbaugh published in Bible.org:

"...The Jews are given license to “kill, destroy, and to annihilate,” not just those who did attack them, but “the entire army of any people who might attack them.” And those whom they could kill included women and children. I may be reading between the lines, but it seems the Jews were granted to kill virtually anyone they perceived to be a threat—or even a potential threat.

What I am about to say is not popular, but I believe it should be said. The Jews, from the days of Esther to the present, celebrate Purim, and thus the defeat of the “enemies of the Jews.” I think the law which permitted the Jews to kill their Persian enemies was no less a permit to practice genocide than were the German laws or principles which permitted their attempt to annihilate the Jewish race. Genocide is genocide, regardless of whether it is practiced against Jews or by Jews. I find it strangely inconsistent for Jews to fiercely protest against the brutality of the Germans and yet to celebrate the slaughter of Persians. The magnitude of these two atrocities may have been different, but the essence seems similar. The law of Mordecai made it legal for the Jews to practice the same brutality against the Persians as Haman had made legal against Jews...."

Find full article here: [1]

  • Purim has occurred in the same era of building of Persepolis; in era of Ahasuerus (Xerxes).
  • You can find numerous cities in Iran that are burnt in that era: Marlik, Shahre Soukhte (Burnt City!!!), Tappe Hassanlu (Hassnlou Hill), Zeive, Jiroft etc. to name a few, but you can not find any city in Iran after that era!!
  • Everything is documented in movie it is a documentary. What you can see in real world is worth more that what you read in books written by someone that no one knows if ever exist.
  • Engineering Association of Iran has issued an official letter according to facts put forward in this video that Persepolis is unfinished.

3/26/08 - Yeah well, you could probably ask Ahmadinejad about it and get the same sort of anti-semitic garbage for an answer. Point being, anti-semitism is anti-semitism. So cut it out. And for the record, about 50% of "history" IS science, relying on archaeology, paleontology and various other sciences in order to draw conclusions about the evidence unearthed in research and excavations, as well as from deciphering and translating texts, inscriptions, reliefs, etc. - Myrddin_Wyllt

[edit] PERSIANS NAMING OF THE GREEKS & THE VARIOUS GREEKS TRIBES THEY WERE AT WAR WITH

There are several types of Yauna in the Achaemenid Royal Inscriptions:

(1) Yaunβ in general: the same as the Greeks known as "Ionians", i.e., those living in Asia Minor. They can already be found in the Behistun Inscription, when the Persian rule had not yet reached Europe. This identification is 100% certain.

(2) Yaunβ takabarβ, the 'Greeks with shield-shaped hats'. First mentioned in DNa ( http://www.livius.org/aa-ac/achaemenians/DNa.html ), where they are distinguished from the "normal" Yaunβ: an almost certain reference to the Macedonian sunhats.

(3 and 4) "The Yaunβ, near and across the sea": another division, for the first time found in DSe ( http://www.livius.org/aa-ac/achaemenians/DSe.html ) and in a slightly different form in the Daiva Inscription by Xerxes (XPh: http://www.livius.org/aa-ac/achaemenians/XPh.html ). The obvious reading is "the Asian Yauna and the European Yauna", i.e., -again- Asian Greeks and Macedonians.

On the other hand, Persian inscriptions are fairly stereotypical, and the fact that there is a small difference between the precise wording of DSe and XPh suggests that there is a difference. Perhaps, there is a difference between the "Yauna across the sea" and the sunhat-Yaunβ. If this is correct, the Yauna across the sea must be either Cypriot Greeks (but why didn't Darius, who seems to have subdued Cyprus, mention them?) or the Thessalians, Boeotians, and Athenians - nations that Xerxes could claim to have conquered.

(5) There is a seal from the age of Xerxes ( http://www.livius.org/a/1/greece/yauna_seal.jpg ) in which the great king defeats someone looking like a Yauna. It is unique, because a second man appears to have a hand in the killing, and this man looks like a Yauna. Is this the Macedonian king Alexander who helps killing a Thessalian/Boeotian/Athenian??

Such instances are extremely rare since only a handful of original Persian texts have survived.There are of references by Darius I in the Behistun Inscription to Sardis (OP Sparda), Ionia (OP Yauna) and Cappadocia (OP Katpatuka). There are also a couple of statements concerning the Greeks and their tribes in the Babylonian tablets.

[edit] Persepolis Recreated - The Movie Documentary

Seized and burned by Alexander the Great's conquering army, shaken by uncounted earthquakes, eroded by 25 centuries of rain, fluctuating temperatures and scouring winds, Persepolis-the greatest of the royal residences of ancient Persia-is a definitive ancient ruin.

Yet, the place remains an awesomely impressive sight 2,500 years after it was built. Even today, those who step up to its gigantic terrace of 125,000 square meters and see its majestic columns are filled with a sense of awe drifting into a dream-like trance.

A dream in which one tries to visualize the beauty and dazzling splendor of Persepolitan palaces before their sad destruction.

"Persepolis Recreated" is the name of the most recent documentary film , which is available and you can view here online at this site:

[edit] History

This article badly needs a history section about who built it and when.. --K a s h Talk | email 23:04, 2 June 2006 (UTC)

No one built Persepolis. Persepolis was a city. You can't say who built New York City. Yes the Apadana Palace among with other Palaces such as Xerxes are built at the same area by different kings such as Darius The Great, Xerxes, etc. Different kings added their own Palace to the old Palace making bigger and bigger. 66.36.129.159 20:24, 8 June 2006 (UTC)
Not to be a pedant, but Persepolis wasn't a city. It was a palace complex. When the Persian court wasn't there, who remained? It was a series of royal buildings built to accommodate a very specific purpose. If you look at other Persian sites, you'll see all sorts of non-royal buildings. However, what was on top of the Persepolis platform was not a city. We can make at least educated guesses about who built what.
As far I know Persepolis was actually 'build' - by Darius I (despite that article mentions Cyrus II). And there was a city around the palace complex. There was an occupation on the site after Achaemenids were defeated and Persepolis was burnt down.
Perspolis Was made by paid workers in 200 years ordered from Darius the great to Darius III ,The place is used only 30 days a year as a holly place,and maybe some other special meetings.It is built on the one of strongest grounds of fars.The time of using perspolis was at start of spring (When lion attacks the cow). —Preceding unsigned comment added by 80.191.122.15 (talk) 13:43, 31 January 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Do you need any more pictures

I have pictures from when I visited persepolis if you need any -User: Farzon Lotfi

Farzon: If we can put a picture gallery up, it will be awesome. --Axamir (talk) 08:32, 1 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] living rock

What is 'living rock'? Njál 15:01, 27 September 2006 (UTC)


I have often wondered about why this phrase is used (since no rock is "living"). It does have a meaning in standard English, although the meaning is more poetic than scientific. "Living rock" is rock that is part of the planet - rock that has not been cut away from the earth.
It's hard to explain except with examples. A rock you can pick up in your hand is NOT "living rock," and a rock, no matter how large, that has been quarried (cut) and carried somewhere else, is also NOT "living rock." If you can move it, or see a break between it and the earth, it's NOT "living rock." If you dig through dirt or sand you will come down to "living rock."
In other words, if you could travel through the rock, you would not pass through it to something else - instead, you would come to the center of the earth. (Of course this is not necessarily strictly true - maybe there is something else down deep, like water or oil - but this is the spirit or idea conveyed by "living rock"). Does that make any sense?
Vcrs 23:09, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Rating explanations:

Think there would be no real contests about the top importance of Persepolis as a core topic on the History of Iran and as it belongs to the UNESCO list.

The article needs a coordinated work, being about daily edited with minor imports. Such work shall include a better ordered plan, developp some sections (history of the site, art & architecture, complex itself (terrace) including description and fonctionnal approach of each monument, other elements not being in the terrace (royal tombs, downtown, drains and water channels, garden, tablets). A chapter should also summarize the controversies about the site and its functions/occupations. The article is poorly sourced, notes and references should be seriously reworked.

One can have a look into the french wikipedia version to see what I mean 217.15.92.33 12:24, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree it needs cleanup.
Some sections are clear in themselves, but have information that is repeated in other places in the article, and/or information that does not belong under that heading.
Some sections are not clear at all, like "Archeological Research," which includes the internally contradictory sentence: "The bases and the capitals were always of stones, even on wooden shafts, but the existence of wooden capitals is probable." (Which is it? Capitals were always [only] stone, or, probably also of wood?) The last paragraph of that section has information that belongs (and mostly is) elsewhere, and the paragraph begins with a poetic (rather than encyclopedic) statement about the "hearts and beliefs of the ancient Iranians."

Capitals were of stone as the basis of the columns, but the columns themselve were either of stone such as in the apadana, or wood like in the 100 columns Palace. All references and explanations are detailed in the french article wich was featured or in its spanish version, also featured. In fact, a wikitranslator could help boosting the article's quality.

Also, when I was there, I thought someone said that there was some dispute about whether Alexander really did destroy Persepolis or whether he never went there? Could be I misunderstood, but if there are alternate theories they should be mentioned.
He did and also didn't: He arsoned some Palaces, but the site still existed and was used by the Seleucids and later by the Sasanians. Persepolis died itself being progressively abandoned with the developpement of Neighbouring Istakhr. Sources aloso in the two considered articleson Fr. and Es.
Vcrs 23:16, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] References

  • The French article has some lovely English-language references; this would be a good starting place for referencing this article. -- phoebe/(talk) 00:41, 27 March 2007 (UTC)