Alexander and the tomb of Cyrus the Great [Deep Respect]

Within the enclosure, by the way which led up to the tomb, a small building had been constructed for the Magi who guarded it, a duty which had been handed down from father to son ever since the time of Cyrus' son, Cambyses. They had a grant from the King of a sheep a day, with an allowance of meal and wine, and one horse a month to sacrifice to Cyrus. There was an inscription on the tomb in Persian, signifying:

O man, I am Cyrus son of Cambyses, who founded the empire of Persia and ruled over Asia. Do not grudge me my monument.

Alexander had always intended, after his conquest of Persia, to visit the tomb of Cyrus [2]; and now, when he did so, he found that all it contained except the divan and the coffin had been removed. Even the royal remains had not escaped desecration [3], for the thieves had taken the lid from the coffin and thrown out the body; from the coffin itself they had chipped or broken various bits in an attempt to reduce its weight sufficiently to enable them to .get it away. However, they were unsuccessful and went off without it.

Aristobulus tells us that he himself received orders from Alexander to put the monument into a state of thorough repair: he was to restore to tie coffin what was still preserved of the body and replace the lid; to put right all damage to the coffin itself, fit the divan with new strapping, and to replace with exact replicas of the originals every single object with which it had previously been adorned; and, finally, to do away with the door into the chamber by building it in with stone, covered by a coat of plaster, on which was to be set the royal seal.

Alexander had the Magians who guarded the monument arrested and put to the torture, hoping to extort from them the names of the culprits; but even under torture they were silent, neither confessing their own guilt nor accusing anybody else; so, as they could not be convicted of any sort of complicity in the crime, Alexander released them.

Note 1: This cloak played an important role in the Persian inauguration rituals (see Plutarch of Chaeronea, Life of Artaxerxes 3.1; the custom itself is Babylonian).

Note2: 'He had always intended to visit the tomb of Cyrus': Alexander wanted to be crowned king according to the Persian customs. The word 'always' suggests strongly that the idea had already been in Alexander's mind when he visited Pasargadae in January 330.

Note 3: By this desecration, the ritual enthronement could no longer take place. The desecration must have been an act of native resistance against the Macedonian king.

Read the Bible.

Cyrus is mentioned some 23 times in the literature of the Old Testament. Isaiah refers to Cyrus as Jehovahs shepherd, the Lords anointed, who was providentially appointed to facilitate the divine plan. God would lead this monarch to subdue nations and open doors (an allusion to the Jews release from Babylonian captivity). He would make rough places smooth, i.e., accommodate the Hebrews return to their Palestinean homeland. He would ultimately be responsible for the rebuilding of Jerusalem and the reconstruction of the temple.

Amazingly, the king would accomplish these noble tasks even though he did not know Jehovah (45:4,5). In other words, though he was a pagan in sentiment and practice, yet, as an unconscious tool in the hands of the Lord, he would contribute mightily to the Jewish cause, and so, indirectly, to the coming of Gods greater Anointed, Jesus of Nazareth.

The fulfillment of these plain and specific predictions is set forth in 2 Chronicles 36:22,23 and Ezra 1:1-4,7,8; 3:7; 4:3. The Encyclopedia Britannica, an unlikely source, acknowledges that in 538 [B.C.] Cyrus granted to the Jews, whom Nebuchadressar had transported to Babylonia, the return to Palestine and the rebuilding of Jerusalem and its temple (Vol. 6, 1958, p. 940).

H.G. Wells, in his book, The Outline of History, concedes that the Jews returned to their city, Jerusalem and rebuilt their temple there under the auspices of Cyrus, the Persian monarch (1931, p. 253).

What many people do not realize in reading Isaiah 44:28ff is that this heathen ruler was named by the prophet long before the monarch was even born. Isaiah prophesied in the reigns of Uzziah, Jotham, Ahaz, and Hezekiah (1:1). His ministry thus occurred in the latter portion of the 8th century B.C. (ca. 740-701 B.C.). This was some one hundred fifty years before Cyrus came to the throne!

Incredible declarations of this nature have led critics (who reject the possibility of predictive prophecy) to suggest that these portions of the book of Isaiah were added much later after the fact, as it were. A popular reference work states:

Because the book of Isaiah includes prophecies concerning events during and after the Exile, critical scholars generally attribute portions of the book to one, two, or more prophets in addition to Isaiah (esp. Deutero-Isaiah, chs. 40-55; Trito-Isaiah, chs. 56-66) (The Eerdmans Bible Dictionary, 1987, p. 531).
Here is an example of how the liberal viewpoint is reflected even by a professor in a Christian university. In discussing the promises set forth in Isaiah 44:26-28, John T. Willis of Abilene Christian University says:

All of these promises assume that Jerusalem and the cities of Judah have been razed, that the temple is no longer standing, that Cyrus is on the scene and swiftly growing in power, and that the return of the exiles is imminent (Isaiah, p. 380).
If such is the case, then this material could not possibly have been written by the prophet Isaiah since he died long before these events transpired. The author, in spite of his claim of a conservative approach to the book (p. 31), clearly reflects his opinion that this portion of the book of Isaiah was authored by a writer of the 6th century B.C. (cf. p. 381).

Against such a viewpoint we have the assurance of scripture itself. Earlier, in 41:25ff, Isaiah had spoken of the coming of one . . . from the rising of the sun. Though not called by name, the allusion is clearly to Cyrus, who would bring good tidings regarding Jerusalem.

In 41:26, Isaiah makes it plain that the mission of Cyrus was a matter of prophecy, not educated speculation. It is a reflection of compromised faith to postulate a late date for these prophecies.

Finally, as an interesting sidelight, we note that Josephus, the Jewish historian, states that the Jews in Babylonian captivity showed Cyrus the prophecies of the Old Testament Scriptures which contain his name and described his role in the scheme of God. The historian says that it was this circumstance that motivated the ruler to fulfill what was written (Antiquities 11.1.2), and thus to issue his edict permitting Israels return to her homeland.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.


GGG managers are SunkenCiv, StayAt HomeMother & Ernest_at_the_Beach	join list or digest view topics view or post blog bookmark post a topic subscribe

Just updating the GGG info, not sending a general distribution. To all -- please ping me to other topics which are appropriate for the GGG list.