Persia is under attack!

Spiegel article claims "first human rights charter" is a hoax!


Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

Persia is under attack!
by Ali Moayedian
19-Jul-2008
 

First came the 300 Spartans; and now the Spiegel article! The 300 were bunch of good looking and brave guys who fought this vast army of nasty looking and savage Persians. Ok. I can take that; even though from that savagery not much is left in me. In fact I could've really used a bit of that when confronting my neighbors, kids, manager, lender, ..., and above all my wife! But all that looks a distant dream now :-)

But what has kept me going in the last few decades is the fact that the first human rights charter has been attributed to Persians. The Cyrus Cylinder, which is a magnificent ancient piece if nothing else, is supposedly inscribed with the human rights charter as decreed by the king of Persia, Cyrus the Great. In fact whenever someone makes too much noise about Iran, that's one of the tricks that I pull out of my hat to conquer them: "See, long before you could say human, we had established his and her rights!"

But that illusion too was shattered into pieces yesterday when I read the article by Matthias Schulz in Spiegel. Not only Schulz rules out Cyrus as a human rights advocate, he labels him as a despot who is responsible for death of millions. He also claims that the whole affair around the Cyrus Cylinder has rather been a hoax!

UN Treasure Honors Persian Despot
By Matthias Schulz, Spiegel, Germany

A 2,500-year-old cuneiform document ceremoniously displayed in a glass case at the United Nations in New York is revered as an "ancient declaration of human rights." But in fact, argue researchers, the document was the work of a despot who had his enemies tortured...

But the Shah knew better. Cyrus, he announced, was a very special man: noble and filled with love and kindness. The Shah insisted that Cyrus was the first to establish a right to "freedom of opinion."...

Art historian Klaus Gallas, who is preparing a German-Iranian cultural festival to take place in Weimar next summer, has now brought the matter to the public's attention. During his preparations for the festival he discovered the inconsistencies between the Shah's claims and the Cyrus decree. "The UN made a serious mistake," says Gallas>>>

But I really think Schulz is misinformed here. First, he doesn't have enough data to prove his claims. For one thing, he hasn't provided any incriminating photos or videos! We on the other hand have the Cylinder!! Second, Schulz doesn't understand what it takes to spread human rights and democracy. Case in point: Iraq. In his attempt to spread democracy in Iraq and to drag the Iraqis into civilization, President Bush has had to make some difficult decisions. As a result, over one million Iraqis are dead and few millions are homeless. And the country has been declared a disaster zone. The cost to Americans has been very high too; millions of people have been deprived of essentials in order to pay for the cost of the war. But even then, Mr. Bush is still recognized as the leader of the free world. No one is calling him a despot. In fact he sits at the table with the heads of the civilized states such as Germany and continues to ask for more troops from these countries for expansion of his "democratic" rule. And no one asks him about the human rights violations that have been sanctioned by him.

So why is Schulz attacking Cyrus? Why not go after a living King instead? Perhaps it's because he thinks the dead cannot defend themselves. But believe me that's an incorrect assumption. In fact the demise of the army of Cyrus has been greatly exaggerated! Soon enough you'll see his faithful disciples pouring over the internet giving Mr. Schulz a good lesson in history. And by good we mean the way it will be taught :-)

Of course we cannot deny that millions of people have died as a consequence of the wars of ancient times. But does that mean Cyrus was a despot? One perhaps has to recognize that being tough was the norm in the old times rather than the exception. It was a fact of life that only the strong survive (I wonder how different it is today?). So even if Cyrus had a little soft side that will perhaps qualify him as a human rights advocate!

Another surprising thing is the way Schulz with a stroke of a pen writes off the claim that Cyrus has been the savior of the Jews, even when so much has been written about this:

The Bible describes him as the "anointed one," because he supposedly permitted the abducted Jews to return to Israel. But modern historians have long since debunked such reports as flattery.

But as bad as Schulz's article was, the day wasn't wasted. By the end of the day another article came out, this time by National Geographic, that paints a very different picture of the old Persia. In particular, a line in that article caught my unbiased eyes: "Mainly you see emblems suggesting that something humane went on here."  I think that's all I needed to hear!

I don't think one can claim everything was ideal in ancient Persia.  But one also has to realize that ideal is a relative term. Even now, in the 21st century, things are far from ideal. For example we have a sacred piece of document here in the United States, and that's the constitution. But does that mean there are no despots here? No wrongs happen here? Human rights are not violated? Racism has been eradicated? And so on and so forth... Of course not. But that doesn't reduce the value of the constitution.

Now based on this I'll argue that the Cyrus Cylinder, even with all its shortcomings, can be treated as the first declaration of human rights. And Cyrus the Great will obviously get the credit for it. I'll of course leave it to the historians to come out and make the authoritative arguments. But no matter what the outcome of those arguments, for me, and I'm sure for most Iranians, Cyrus Cylinder will always be a sacred piece of our ancient history. And we will continue to praise it as an achievement in the history of mankind.

I do want to point out that I don't think Schulz has anything in particular against Persia. I found another article of his where he had bashed the Italians for fantasizing about the birth of Rome:

Is Italy's Spectacular Find Authentic?
Matthias Schulz, Spiegel, Germany, 11/29/2007

Italy has been rocked by soccer violence, the government is divided and the economy is sluggish. Now archaeologists have entered the scene to save the country's national pride. On a hill in the center of the nation's capital, they have allegedly found the sacred cave of the founders of Rome...

In modern Italy, which loves to bask in the glory of ancient Rome, every child knows the legend. All nations have their myths and symbols. While the French have their Gallic Rooster, the Greeks revere Mount Olympus and the British tell the tale of King Arthur, the citizens of that Mediterranean country south of the Alps venerate two infants -- fathered by Mars, the god of war -- who were set adrift in a basket on the Tiber...

But the legend is simply too fabulous to die. It is recounted in school textbooks and displayed on banners. There are stamps that portray the kindhearted wolf and tourist offices that attract visitors with the famous mythical tale>>>

After reading the above story, one will realize that Schulz is really just a legend killer :-) His stories are obviously interesting to read. But somehow I cannot appreciate his attempts at killing the legends of nations. Legends are best left alone. Why ruin a good story like that of Santa Clause or Rostam and Sohrab? Why ruin the magic by unraveling a good illusion?

Moral of the Story: When Schulz attacked the Birth of Rome legend,  the British, the French and the Persians stood by. When he went after the Cyrus Cylinder, the British and the French remained silent. By the time he got to the tale of King Arthur, there was no one left standing :-)  Time to stop this legend killer now!

About Cyrus Cylinder
Discovered in 1879), the Cyrus Cylinder, also known as the 'Cyrus the Great Cylinder', is an artifact consisting of a declaration issued by the emperor Cyrus the Great of Persia inscribed in Babylonian (Akkadian) cuneiform on a clay cylinder. What follows is a translation of the Cyrus cylinder, paraphrased from "The Ancient Near East, Volume I: An Anthology of Pictures", edited by James B. Pritchard:

(one line destroyed)

[r]ims (of the world) a weakling has been installed as the enu [Sumerian title for king] of his country; [the correct images of the gods he removed from their thrones, imi]tations he ordered to place upon them. A replica of the temple Esagila he has  for Ur and the other sacred cities inappropriate rituals  daily he did blabber [incorrect prayers]. He (furthermore) interrupted in a fiendish way the regular offerings, he did  he established within the sacred cities. The worship of Marduk, the king of the gods, he [chang]ed into abomination, daily he used to do evil against his (i.e. Marduk's) city  He [tormented] its [inhabitant]s with corvee-work (lit. a toke) without relief, he ruined them all.

Upon their complaints the lord of the gods became terribly angry and [he departed from] their region, (also) the (other) gods living among them left their mansions, wroth that he had brought (them) into Babylon. (but) Marduk [who does care for]  on account of (the fact that) the sanctuaries of all their settlements were in ruins and the inhabitants of Sumer and Akkad had become like (living) dead, turned back (his countenance) [his] an[ger] [abated] and he had mercy (upon them). He scanned and looked (through) all the countries, searching for a righteous ruler willing to lead him (i.e. Marduk) (in the annual procession). (Then) he pronounced the name of Cyrus, king of Anshan, declared him to be(come) the ruler of all the world. He made the Guti country and all the Manda-hordes bow in submission to his (i.e. Cyrus') feet. And he (Cyrus) did always endeavor to treat according the justice the black-headed whom he (Marduk) had made him conquer. Marduk, the great lord, a protector of his people/worshipers, beheld with pleasure his (i.e. Cyrus') good deeds and his upright mind (and therefore) ordered him to march against his city Babylon. He made him set out on the road to Babylon going at his side like a real friend. His widespread troops  their number, like that of the water of a river, could not be established  strolled along, their weapons packed away. Without any battle, he made him enter his town Babylon, sparing Babylon any calamity. He delivered into his (i.e. Cyrus') hands Nabonidus, the king who did not worship him (i.e. Marduk). All the inhabitants of Sumer and Akkad, princes and governors (included), bowed to him (Cyrus) and kissed his feet, jubilant that he (had received) the kingship, and with shining faces. Happily they greeted him as a master through whose help they had come (again) to life from death (and) had all been spared damage and disaster, and they worshiped his (very) name.

I am Cyrus, king of the world, great king, legitimate king, king of Babylon, king of Sumer and Akkad, king of the four riims (of the earth), son of Cambyses, great king, king of Anshan, grand-son of Cyrus, great king, king of Anshan, descendant of Teispes, great king, king of Anshan, of a family (which) always (exercised) kingship; whose rule Bel and Nebo love, whom they want as king to please their hearts.

When I entered Babylon as a friend and (when) I established the seat of government in the palace of the ruler under jubilation and rejoicing, Marduk, the great lord [induced] the magnanimous inhabitants of Babylon [to love me], and I was daily endeavoring to worship him. My numerous troops walked around in Babylon in peace, I did not allow anybody to terrorize (any place) of the [country of Sumer] and Akkad. I strove for peace in Babylon and in all his (other) sacred cities. As to the inhabitants of Babylon, [who] against the will of the gods [had/were., I abolished] the corvee (lit.: yoke] which was against their (social) standing. I brought relief to their dilapidated housing, putting (thus) an end to their (main) complaints. Marduk, the great lord, was well pleased with my deeds and sent friendly blessings to myself, Cyrus, the king who worships him, to Cambyses, my son, the offspring of [my] loins, as well as to all my troops, and we all [praised] his great [godhead] joyously, standing before him in peace.

All the kings of the entire world from the Upper to the Lower Sea, those who are seated in throne rooms, (those who) live in other [types of buildings as well as] all the kings of the West land living in tents, brought their heavy tributes and kissed my feet in Babylon. (As to the region) from  as far as Ashur and Susa, Agade, Eshnunna, the towns of Zamban, Me-Turnu, Der as well as the region of the Gutians, I returned to (these) sacred cities on the other side of the Tigris, the sanctuaries of which have been ruins for a long time, the images which (used) to live therein and established for them permanent sanctuaries. I (also) gathered all their former inhabitants and returned (to them) their habitations. Furthermore, I resettled upon the command of Marduk, the great lord, all the gods of Sumer and Akkard whom Nabonidus has brought into Babylon to the anger of the lord of the gods, unharmed, in their (former) chapels, the places which made them happy.

May all the gods whom I have resettled in their sacred cities ask Bel and Nebo for a long life for me and may they recommend me (to him); to Marduk, my lord, they may say this: "Cyrus, the king who worships you, and Cambyses, his son, "  all of them I settled in a peaceful place  ducks and doves, . I endeavored to fortify/repair their dwelling places

(six lines destroyed)

Ali Moayedian is the webmaster of payvand.com where this article was first published.


Balatarin
Share/Save/Bookmark

 
default

Arash Kamangir I have a question for you

by John Carpenter III (not verified) on Tue Jul 22, 2008 05:09 PM PDT

You say that IRI is an arab concept. Here you are wrong. IRI is th only middle eastern government based on Shia Islam. The Arab countries follow sunni Islam. You have to update your information. I will agree with you that there was some progress during the Akhmenid and Sassanid dynasty. But we are living in the 21st century and have to deal with today. There was no internet in Tehran during the Sassanid and Akhmenid dynasty. Tehran had no cell phone service during the Akhmenid and Sassanid dynasty. There were no satellite dishes in Tehran during the Sassanid and Akhmenid dynasty. There was no subway system in Tehran during the Sassanid and Akhmenid dynasty. There is more advancement today then there ever was during the monarchy. The monarchy just took money from the treasury. the advance during the monarchy would have heppened even if there wasn't a monarchy. I don't know who Shariati and Motahari are, are they your friends or relatives? If they are send my regards, they must be interesting people like yourself.


  •  
programmer craig

The cost to Americans has

by programmer craig on Tue Jul 22, 2008 12:02 PM PDT

The cost to Americans has been very high too; millions of people have
been deprived of essentials in order to pay for the cost of the war.

Say what? My taxes haven't gone up... have yours? 

 


  •  
default

Persia is under attack!

by Hoshang Salamati (not verified) on Mon Jul 21, 2008 10:59 PM PDT

Dear all,
To become obsessed so much about what has been written about a figure dead a couple of thousands years ago is to be on the verge of insanity.
Having lived amongst the remnants of the leftovers of the religion dominant during the reign of Cyrus and his descendants ( that is the Iranian Zarthustis )here in Canada specially in Vancouver and Toronto one can form the correct impression.
There is not a single family amongst these leftovers who have a semblance of morality. Husbands cheat on wives. Wives cheat on Husbands. Grown up kids disown their fathers or their mothers. Lying is on the top of the agenda as a first priority. Ask the wife living as a single woman enjoying with her parttime Joe (of course the old mother is living with the wife as a gossip cover up). Answer is back in Iran and will soon come over. Ask the hubby back in Iran what is happening and answer will be the bitch walked out on me for another guy after emptying the bank account. Ask the kids where is the Pop or Mom and the answer is the same that is back in Iran or have died. Ask the parent back in Iran how are the kids doing in Canada/USA and the answer is they do not consider us as parents anymore. The whole lot will do anything for a few dollars.
Looking at this miserable lot one can honestly come to the conclusion why there was not much resistance to the Arab takeover of Iran and the mass conversion to Islam that followed.
So forget about Cyrus and let us not create a mountain out of molehill as there is already plenty of problems on this nuclear issue.
Praise be to Allah and the Arabs
Farhang Abrishami Mubarakka


  •  
default

Shultz Be doon-e Sharh

by Shamse Vazir (not verified) on Mon Jul 21, 2008 04:44 PM PDT


  •  
choghok

Kooroshe Bozorg

by choghok on Mon Jul 21, 2008 03:16 PM PDT

First of all I am against nationalism and these kind of crap. It is a tool used just like religion so the rich people can fool poor people to fight and kill each other. Just count how many rich Iraqis and Americans died in the Iraq war (beside the Saddam and his buddies). Compare it then with the casualties of mid-lower class and then listen to the rethoric used for the war... Yes Religion and good old American Patriotism.

So now back to the Koorosh part. I do beleive this Spiegel guy when he says the atrocities made by Cyrus. Hey you can not make an omelett without breaking eggs. You can not free your nation and conquest others without war. And if you are somehow logical you know that you can not make war without atrocities.

That said I still think we can be proud of Koorosh. We cannot compare him to democratic leaders of today and with enlightened people of today. In those times the only rule was the rule of the jungle. The Persians themselves were subjects of Medes and Mesopotamians (slave to them as the guy mentioned). So Koorosh decides to make his people free. So he starts to fight other tribes and soon he is leading a vast army to fight, and to bring peace to his people he needs a proxy (like many other empires after him), or maybe he wants to tame the world :-). He is however willing to allow his new subjects their religion. He even worships with his new subjects and allow their leaders to remain in power as long as they pay their tax (like Ceasar did in Rome, does Spiegel call him a despot as well?).

The Spiegel guy forgot also to tell us why Hebrews are fond of him if he just looked after Persians. Why doesnt Greek historians who were pretty partial in their tellings make any bad remarks of Cyrus. Even the opposite, they had very high regards for him. So much as when Alexander passed by his army he made special visit to his grave.

And also he could explain why such a country like Iran which has not done anything right in centuries when it comes to PR could be such a good salesman for Cyrus? This bullshit is in the same league as dayi jan napelons theory about the English.

/Bidar bash ke ma bekhabim


  •  
Darius Kadivar

Also Prince of Persia: The Sands of TIme ...

by Darius Kadivar on Mon Jul 21, 2008 02:19 PM PDT

A Persian Prince in the Making

//www.payvand.com/news/08/jul/1200.html


  •  
Darius Kadivar

Help Cyrus Kar finish his film on Cyrus the Great...

by Darius Kadivar on Mon Jul 21, 2008 02:17 PM PDT

He is Awake: Close Up on Cyrus Kar

//www.payvand.com/news/07/jan/1334.html

 


  •  
Abarmard

oh come on

by Abarmard on Mon Jul 21, 2008 08:30 AM PDT

Who cares about this Schulz guy. He is absolutely no body. Let him be sad that he is just that, a no body. Don't give him any attention, that's probably what he wants.

There are many people in this world that like to catch a fish from a muddy water! (Az aab e gell alood maahi migiran)

Bee khiyaalesh


  •  
default

Reply to John Carpenter 3

by Arash Kamangir (not verified) on Mon Jul 21, 2008 07:48 AM PDT

Reply to John Carpenter 3

It is a nonsense to claim"all progressive Iranians came to Iran after Islam". This sounds very much like Motaheri and Shariati and other islamists claim and all want to show off Islam as progressive.

If you read about Sassanid dynasty in wikipedia, it can tell you that Iranian civilisation before the Arab invasion was amongst the highest in the World and it could be compared only to Byzantine( eastern Romans). The biggest university in Asia was in Jondishahpur(Khusestan)and the roads and buildings were among the most developed.Iran was nearly as vast as it was under Achaemnids and it could be only ruled by a developed civilisation. Arabs only brought Terror to Iran like IRI.
It is necessary even for a pro-IRI like yourself that you should get your facts straight before you start writing about things you know the least about.

Payandeh Iran


  •  
default

Persia is under attack?

by Faribors Maleknasri M.D. (not verified) on Mon Jul 21, 2008 07:41 AM PDT

Spiegel article? Simply do not ignore! let them bark, let them grunt, some day they all will be disappeard from the earth. dont worry be happy. Greeting


  •  
default

No doubt the most anti- iranian regime since Arab invasion

by Arash Kamangir (not verified) on Mon Jul 21, 2008 07:11 AM PDT

I fully agree with you. We have not forgotten that the devil himself Khalkhali tried to destroy Takhtejamshid shortly after revolution but the locals around there resisted and did not allow it. It has always been the biggest priority of IRI to destroy iranian heritage and culture whichever way they can.
They have tried so hard to stop people from celebrating Norooz but they have not succeeded yet.

Payandeh Iran


  •  
default

Gohar va SarCheshMeh

by Joubin Houshyar (not verified) on Sun Jul 20, 2008 10:08 PM PDT

Salaam,

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=7o6vD-__Tqc

So what is so special about Iran Zameen?

Well, there are a lot of 'Gohars' in Iran Zameen, and one supposes that is the distinguishing characteristic of that Land from others which are just strewn with pebbles and rocks .. So, something about 'distinguished' hardened matter as opposed to the common rock. (Razi, Firdowsi, etc.)

Khaakh'e "Sar Cheshmeh" -- "ALI AYIN" in Hebrew -- is a direct reference to Amir Al Moemenin, ALI (a.s.), "Father of Dust/Khaak" as termed by Prophet Mohammad (s.a.w.s.).

//mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt1055.htm

(That's by Prophet Isaiah (a.s.), appropriately enough ...)

Amir being Arabic for Prince -- and esoterically to Prophet Joseph (A.S.) whose "branches 'overflow' the 'Well'", who, do recall, Rules Egypt as a King:

עֲלֵי-עָיִן < Sar Cheshmeh or ALI AYIN

//mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0149.htm

Speaking of [12] "branches" and "wells" [Genesis 49:22], a certain Hidden Imam (A.S.) of the "Shia Muslims" is said (by some) to be 'in a well'.

The Ulama in Qom Inc. are surely aware (?) that in his (A.S.) Return he will Rule as a "King", and will do away with over-reaching "Ayatollah" cum "Valiey Faqihs" ...

This is not to mention Isa Massih, who Rules as "King of Kings" or as we say in Iran Zameen, ShahAnShah.

/& Salaam!


  •  
default

Actually that's King Solomon ...

by Joubin Houshyar (not verified) on Sun Jul 20, 2008 09:41 PM PDT

Salaam,

... that smiles at the ants. (Nevertheless quite amusing.)

Almost as amusing as the gentleman that is attempting to pass off the list of distinguished Iranian scientists and scholars as a side-effect of Iran being ruled by foreign (nominally Muslim) kings. They lived under rule of sovereigns, regardless of the form of rule.

He also definitely needs to brush up on his history of knowledge and sciences (ilm) in the ancient world. No less a towering figure than Pythagoras got his training in the Kingdom of Persia, under the Majoos, as just one example. Much of our pre-Islamic history of learning is obscured due to the senseless destruction of libraries, and a general tendency to keep knowledge away from the masses.

There are a few things to keep in mind regarding the notion of King and Islam:

First, 'Remember' that one of the ("Beautiful" ..) Names of ALLAH Is Al-Malik, The KING. If Sadegh is paying attention to his prayers in namaaz, then he must recognize that Malik is one of the "oft repeated" Names of ALLAH. ALLAH clearly likes that Name.

Would GOD deign to assume a name that connotes an inferior notion of 'Governance' of a 'Realm'? Is Sadegh more informed than the All Knowing KING of Eternity?

The Prophet (s.a.w.s.) himself refers to ALLAH as a King:

"[E]very king has a preserve, and the things ALLAH Has declared unlawful are His preserves" [Sahih Muslim Book 010, Number 3882]

Then there was the following episode:

Narrated 'Abdullah:

A Jew came to the Prophet and said, "O Muhammad! Allah will hold the heavens on a Finger, and the mountains on a Finger, and the trees on a Finger, and all the creation on a Finger, and then He will say, 'I am the KING!'

On that Allah's Apostle smiled till his premolar teeth became visible, and then recited:--

'No just estimate have they made of Allah such as due to him.... (Q 39.67) [... Sahih Bukhari Volume 9, Book 93, Number 510]

Of course, we know of a specific "Beloved" of ALLAH, named (naturally enough) Daw'vood (s.a.w.s.) and was he not a King? A great King, as a matter of scriptural fact, and so was his son (a.s.) -- the 'King' that smiles at the 'unduly concerned' "little ants".

//www.forgiving-merciful.net/quran/suras/027/

/& Salaam

p.s. "democratic republic". That is conflating two distinct and perhaps ultimately incompatible forms of government.

//www.google.com/search?hl=en&q=democracy+rep...


  •  
samsam1111

Cyrus,

by samsam1111 on Sun Jul 20, 2008 08:53 PM PDT

smiling to tiny ants!!


  •  
default

It is not my idea of

by KavehV (not verified) on Sun Jul 20, 2008 06:10 PM PDT

It is not my idea of friendship to attend a bi-cultural festival that mocks one culture and history as hoax just in time for the event.

Where were these people to voice their concern when the story of this "son of an insignificant minor king" became a worldwide hoax in 1971, or before ? Where were the Wiesehöfers, or his mentors to voice opposition, or concerns. The fact remains that there were Weissbach's and others (whom I don't recall right now) who gave us the interpretations we know of today, at the turn of the century (1900s). This may well be the by product of the politically motivated modern European revisionism blessed with Islamo-fascists revisionism to snuff out any chance for revived Iranian national unity.


  •  
Safa Ali

Who cares about Matthias Schulz

by Safa Ali on Sun Jul 20, 2008 04:20 PM PDT

Who cares what this retard says, he can kiss my ass


  •  
default

The Article was Accurate. Monarchy was just wrong for Iran.

by John Carpenter III (not verified) on Sun Jul 20, 2008 04:15 PM PDT

Let us face the facts. Historians have time and time again proved that Ancient Persia was no bed of roses. All the progressive Iranians came after Islam came to Iran. Abu Rayhaan Biruuni, Abu Ali Sina (Avicenna-scientist), Jeber Ibn Hayaan (the father of Algebra), Zakariyaa Al-Raazi (inventor of rubbing alcohol), Albol Ghaasem Firdowsi (poet and author of the Shah-Nameh was a religious Shia Muslim), Hafez (a poet who had memorized the Koran). You can go on and on. The monarchy for Iran was a dysfunctional form of government. If you believe evolution then Monarchy is like the Neanderthal Man, it is not a full evolved human being. The Democratic Republic is true freedom. Monarchy in any form, even a constitutional monarchy is a waste of time. Constitutional monarchs are welfare recipients. We must put that part of history behind us and deal with what is important. We must look for substance and advancement of society.
Let us once and for all bury the topic of monarchy and move on. Why shouldn't we?

There is no mention of a monarch in the "Ay Iran" Anthem. And that is the way it ought to be.

"Ay Iran ay marz por gohar"
"Ay khaakat sar cheshmehyeh honar"

should we re-write it to read:
"Ay Iran ay mamlekateh paadeshaahi"
"Ke ghayr az shaheh moft-khor cheezee degar nadaari"?

Wake up and smell the coffee.

Dam'et Garm!


  •  
sadegh

The article was accurate,

by sadegh on Sun Jul 20, 2008 03:32 PM PDT

The article was accurate, GET OVER IT!!! Perhaps if Iranians spent less time chasing after fraudulent mythology, indulging their chauvinistic egos (with respect to events in which they played no part, assuming they were even worthy of our esteem, which they aren't) etc..., and more time working towards their future then we wouldn't today be up shit-creak without a paddle...

Iranophobia??? Come on...

Josef Wiesehöfer is amongst the leading scholars in the world on ancient Persian history and knows what he is talking about...what we are witnessing here is little more than the manipulation of ancient symbols for the purposes of modern propaganda...and on another level a retrospective and totally distorted misreading of ancient artifacts, through the eyes so to speak, of contemporary and post-Enlightenment concepts, ideas and intellectual history...

And don't attack me as pro-IRI...it's pathetic...the history of Islamic Iran has equally condemnable moments...Nader Shah butchered 20 to 30,000 Indians in a single day after he invaded and ransacked their country and subjugated India's leaders to his will who he promised to smash with an iron fist if they dared put a step wrong. 

Finally we all know the human rights record of the mullahs is absolutely disgraceful and wretched...successive purges and massacres, suppression of dissidents etc... have left so much blood on their hands that they're f**king drowning in it for crying out loud...

Ba Arezu-ye Movafaghiat, Sadegh

 


  •  
default

Persia have been under attack since the "Revolution" !

by Aryo the Persian (not verified) on Sun Jul 20, 2008 01:39 PM PDT

this is nothing comparing to " Islamic Republic's Historians " ! im sure all of us have heard (AT LEAST) the names of so called "ostad (!!!)" PoorPirar ( and it's his fake name by the way!!!) and mr. moradi ghias abadi !!!

these gentlemen are giving lectures and attacking our history and our culture in our own country's universities! and it seems that no one cares! these gentlemen are publishing similar BOOKS in our own country and no one can stop them! nobody even bothered these gentlemen by a simple question!

if you didn't know this, -please- just take a look at Islamic websites and weblogs! take a look at one of the Islamic Schools (Iranian ones) websites!

or search for "Poor Pirar" in google. if this was happening in a country like "Turkey" or even "Saudi Arabia", mr. fakenamed PoorPirar wouldn't be alive today!

mr. Schulz's article is absolutely nothing, comparing to Islamic historians !


  •  
default

bad image caused by IRI

by Arash Kamangir (not verified) on Sun Jul 20, 2008 06:08 AM PDT

Ther is no doubt that there is a certain extent of negative propaganda in the article written by Mr. Schultz. However we as Iranians must admit that in the last 30 years nothing but bad negative acts has come out of Iran for which only IRI is responsible. IRI has worked his way up by all sort of terror acts to the leading terror regime against western way of life. We should not be surprised when articles such as from Mr. Schultz or the famous movie 300 come out and hit our patriotic feelings hard. We should not get too upset!
With regards to Achaemenid dynasty, without doubt they ruled over a vast territory with iron fists. Most recent and ancient historians have written about the great kings in that dynasty.For example the great historian Esmond wright writes the followings about royal achaemenid court in his famous book " the ancient world" published in 1969:
At the banquet to which the quests are advancing the King would eat apart from other quests. When he appeared the quests had to throw themselves down on the ground. If a guest walked, even by accident on the rug before the king's throne, he would be immediately beheaded.
Other historians such as Herodotus have reported similar stories.
The stone cylinder should not make us think that the the ancient dynasties in Iran were democratic.

Payandeh Iran


  •  
Maryam Hojjat

Thanks Guys!

by Maryam Hojjat on Sun Jul 20, 2008 02:00 AM PDT

You all said well about this issue Iranian's bashing.

I am proud of all you nationalistic Iranians.  Love you all!


  •  
default

Video of Mr. Schulz speaking about Cyrus

by Darayavaush (not verified) on Sat Jul 19, 2008 09:36 PM PDT


  •  
default

The comments here are somewhat distressing |OR| Relax ...

by Joubin Houshyar (not verified) on Sat Jul 19, 2008 08:00 PM PDT

Salaam,

Mr. Moayedian,

thank you for bringing this to our attention. One can certainly empathize with the sense of injury that these continued propaganda attacks against Iranian people engender in the long suffering Iranian people.

Are you receptive to the thought that you can flip this coin and look at the other side of this equation? There must be something quite special about these Iranians that everybody and their (hired) mama is coming out of woodwork to attack them!

Regarding some of the comments:

It frankly proves the worst critics of Persians/Iranians that simply because of an article in a corporate rag, that pokes at a 'sacred cow' of the Persians, that some Iranians are ready to condemn the entirety of the German people.

Germany, let us not forget, has a history that spans further back than 20th century. There is a huge list of notable Humans that are known to us as Germans, but I'll just mention my dear Ludwig Van Beethoven. A great man among many great Germans.

The easiest way, for the powers that be, to make fools of Iranians in the public eye of various other Nations is to serially conduct this sort of psyops against Iranians and then sit back and snicker as 'Perzhiaans' start throwing slurs and calumny against the entirety of the nation that hosted the said propaganda agent.

Now its the Germans turn, apparently.

Please, be respectful of other people, if you wish to have their respect. After all, Cyrus lived his life according to his Godly Standards. Now, its your turn to live up to those Standards: Act accordingly, or kindly cease from rising to the defense of Persians or Iranians in this unbecoming manner.

Also, please keep in mind that Germany remains an (nominally) occupied nation (to this day) and to a huge extent under the control of the victors of WWII. Certain matters remain unmentionable in Germany and consequence of exercise of free speech is a prolonged visit to holding cells for political prisoners. (As far as I know, there was never a peace treaty and German unification required the approval of the "Allied Powers". Something to keep in mind.)

That said,

I was also not happy to read that anyone would think that the late Shah of Iran was the sort of man that would react to this sort of transparent goad by taking actions that would "be the end of [the author's] days".

(The poster of that comment apparently has confused the late, great, Shah of Iran with the "Imam" of the Qom Inc.)

Here is how an Iranian King deals with such matters and such hired hands. (Watch and learn!):

//www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQgZ3oLp_WY

I suggest the best response by Iranian community is to simply express wonder that how can a Cultured, Talented, Intelligent, and historically maligned people, such as the Germans, possibly produce the likes of Matthias Schulz?, and then leave it at that.

The (historic) fact remains that Cyrus The Great was such a towering figure in the eye of the Ancients that everybody, to this day, wants to lay claim to him. And Cyrus was simply one of many such wonders that Iran, Praise Be to ALLAH, produces on a continual basis.

Finally please note, that what is under attack is:

a) The notion that Kings can be Just

b) That Individual Character is one of the defining facts of the history of mankind, for the better.

c) That the Prophet Isaiah (a.s.) was a political hack

and subsequently
d) That the Prophets are books of lies.

There is clearly a concerted effort to try and break our Spirit. Please do not box at shadows, wear yourselves out, and thus assist them ...

Remember:

Iranians have always been known for their Minds, first and foremost, and then, the Greatness of our Godly Spirit.

(And certainly not for having thin skins ...)

/& Salaam!


  •  
default

I Knew it was coming

by Kurdish Warrior (not verified) on Sat Jul 19, 2008 07:39 PM PDT

We shouldn't be surprised. Thanks to the Mullahs we are now the nemesis in the eyes of the world.


  •  
default

Lets get together in Weimar in 2009

by KavehV (not verified) on Sat Jul 19, 2008 07:23 PM PDT

I think we should all get together in Weimar next summer to give this asshole; Gallas a deserving reception and let him and others know what Iran and Iranian culture is. Lets have a separate German-Iranian cultural event at the same time, bring your friends.


  •  
default

Out of the birthplace of Nazism

by Shamse Vazir (not verified) on Sat Jul 19, 2008 05:51 PM PDT

No surprise here! One more pile of hate from a nation that gave us the holocaust, two world wars and racism on a scale hereto unknown. I think some Germans think that they can atone for their past actions by trashing Iran. Maybe they think this is a way to make it up to Israel. It is very ill conceived though as you cannot atone for hate and lies by spreading more hate. I guess I just don't share this European value!


  •  
default

Give to Koorosh what is Koorosh’s

by Anonymous 2008 (not verified) on Sat Jul 19, 2008 05:26 PM PDT

In this fiery situation that nationalism is at its zenith all around the world and especially because of Iran affairs, writing articles like this is not totally innocent. Off course things can be seen from different angles but, the problem comes when we want to see things only from one specific angle to get where we want to get.

Yesterday I was listening to a talk-show about a new movie about Chingiz Khan. The filmmaker was saying that he wanted to show a different image of the man; his childhood, his youth and his love affairs… Off course he can do that if he doesn’t try to whitewash his savagery. On the other hand we can tarnish people like Mandela by magnifying his tendencies toward arm struggle.

Although I don’t care about political romanticism looking at our ancient history only as a glorious time to puff my chest, I would be absolutely surprised if Koorosh did not cut noses and ears and not committed atrocities. This would be like blaming him to ride a horse instead of driving a car! He was the head of an empire, a conqueror and the commander of an enormous army in the ancient time. Off course he did all those things that in our time are blameful. The opposite would be surprising in his time. But on the other hand he did give certain “freedom” to conquered people in his declaration. I also believe that this was a political trick to dominate, but still it was an unprecedented idea in his time.

Tomas Jefferson was a man of enlightenment and his name is synonymous to democracy but, he was a slave-owner! What side of him we want to look at?

What about Napoleon, the hero for French who wanted to unite Europe but a butcher for the rest of Europe.

Off course the case of Bush who commits crimes in 21 century has nothing to do with any of these people. In fact he rides a horse in the time of cars!

I have seen pictures of Shah in Paris with De Gaul and Andre Malraux glorifying Iranian Art, few years later I went to see that Art in Louvre; they said the section was closed! I guess the value of Iranian Art was(and is) going up and down relative to oil price.

I can go on and on about this subject but again I try not to be blindly nationalistic while I believe Koorosh's declaration was a positive turning point in history.


  •  
default

No surprise

by MRX1 (not verified) on Sat Jul 19, 2008 05:02 PM PDT

If you want to attack Iranian culture and identity now is a perfect time. With bunch of tazi and tazi parast in charge in Iran what better time than now!


  •  
default

Doe'sn't bother me a bit

by Pesare Cyrus (not verified) on Sat Jul 19, 2008 04:55 PM PDT

This is form a guy who lived in a country that killed 12 million people 60 years ago.

F%*%îng Germans.

They can kiss my royal hairy persian ass.


  •  
default

Garbage

by Estakhri (not verified) on Sat Jul 19, 2008 04:38 PM PDT

This article is despicable, where does this Matthias Schulz get his facts from? This article is spewing with bull, even in the very first sentence.

"Shah Mohammed Reza Pahlevi was planning a record-breaking gala. First he proclaimed the "White Revolution," a land reform program, and then declared himself the "Light of the Aryans.""

White as in peaceful, not as in the color of one's skin. And what to these have to do with the 2,500 year celebration? The White Revolution was 8 years before the celebration.

Although I didn't agree with the Shah's policy, at least he was a nationalist. If the Shah had received wind of this article, Mr. Schulz days would have been numbered. For all the IRI's faults, it would have been somewhat made up for if they were at least proud of their peoples history.

Garbage, simply garbage.


  •  
12next ›last »