Changes

== Original Sources ==

== Original Sources ==

The son of [[Astyages]], [[Cyaxares II]] (not to be confused with [[Cyaxares I]], father of [[Astyages]]) does not ''specifically'' exist in any surviving or currently available extant cuniform tablets or the likes; but he does possibly exist with a potential dual reference in the absolutely monumental [[bas-relief]] [[Behistun (inscription)|Behistun Inscription]] (''see below'').  Meanwhile the strongest ''specific'' literary evidence for his existence lies within the pages [[Xenophon|Xenohon's]] ''[[Cyropaedia]]'', who as a Greek military commander served in [[Cyrus the Younger|Cyrus']] army.  This work was so highly prized by [[Alexander the Great]], that he made it his perpetual study<ref>Xenophon, 'Cyropaedia'', Introduction, Delphi Classics, 2013, Hastings, UK</ref>; by extension it was obviously also recommended to him by his mentor and tutor [[Aristotle]]. Likewise did [[Julius Caesar]]<ref>Xenophon, 'Cyropaedia'', Introduction, Delphi Classics, 2013, Hastings, UK</ref>.  Meanwhile [[Scipio Africanus]] is reported to have carried it with him everywhere<ref>Xenophon, 'Cyropaedia'', Introduction, Delphi Classics, 2013, Hastings, UK</ref>.  This combined with a possible identity match with Josephus' [[Darius the Mede|Darius, King of Media]]<ref>Josephus, ''Histories'', 10.11.2; https://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-10.htm</ref>, "the son of Astyages, and had another name among the Greeks.<ref>Josephus, ''Histories'', 10.11.4; https://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-10.htm</ref>" creates a good case.  Compoundingly, two of the rebels listed in [[Darius I|Darius I's]] [[Behistun (inscription)|Behistun Inscription]] claimed "to be of the family of Cyaxares": which has naturally created debate if these are references to [[Cyaxares I]] or to the possible [[Cyaxares II]].

The son of [[Astyages]], [[Cyaxares II]] (not to be confused with [[Cyaxares I]], father of [[Astyages]]) does not ''specifically'' exist in any surviving or currently available extant cuniform tablets or the likes; but he does possibly exist with a potential dual reference in the absolutely monumental [[bas-relief]] [[Behistun (inscription)|Behistun Inscription]] (''see below'').

Alternitively, [[Cyaxares II]] does not appear in Ptolemy's Canon<ref>Livius, Ptolemy's Canon; https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/ptolemys-canon/</ref> or the Uruk King List<ref>Livius, Uruk King List;https://www.livius.org/sources/content/uruk-king-list/</ref>, but neither of these feature [[Belshazzar]] who became effective king of Babylon after his father [[Nabonidas]] capture: now confirmed to us by the Nabonidus Cylinder (from Ur)<ref>Livius, ''Nabonidus Cylinder from Ur'',https://www.livius.org/sources/content/nabonidus-cylinder-from-ur/</ref><ref>Livius, ''ABC 7 (Nabonidus Chronicle)'', Column iii.16, https://www.livius.org/sources/content/mesopotamian-chronicles-content/abc-7-nabonidus-chronicle/</ref>.

Meanwhile the strongest ''specific'' literary evidence for his existence lies within the pages [[Xenophon|Xenohon's]] crowning work, the ''[[Cyropaedia]]'', who as a Greek military commander served in [[Cyrus the Younger|Cyrus']] army.  This work was so highly prized by [[Alexander the Great]], that he made it his perpetual study<ref>Xenophon, 'Cyropaedia'', Introduction, Delphi Classics, 2013, Hastings, UK</ref>; by extension it was obviously also recommended to him by his mentor and tutor [[Aristotle]]. Likewise did [[Julius Caesar]]<ref>Xenophon, 'Cyropaedia'', Introduction, Delphi Classics, 2013, Hastings, UK</ref>.  Meanwhile [[Scipio Africanus]] is reported to have carried it with him everywhere<ref>Xenophon, 'Cyropaedia'', Introduction, Delphi Classics, 2013, Hastings, UK</ref>.  This combined with a possible identity match with [[Josephus|Josephus']] [[Darius the Mede|Darius, King of Media]]<ref>Josephus, ''Antiquities of the Jews'', 10.11.2; https://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-10.htm</ref>, "the son of Astyages, [who] had another name among the Greeks"<ref>Josephus, ''Antiquities of the Jews'', 10.11.4; https://www.sacred-texts.com/jud/josephus/ant-10.htm</ref> creates a good case.  Compoundingly, two of the rebels listed in [[Darius I|Darius I's]] [[Behistun (inscription)|Behistun Inscription]] claimed "to be of the family of Cyaxares": which has naturally created debate if these are references to [[Cyaxares I]] or to the possible [[Cyaxares II]].  Finally those who accept the [[Book of Daniel]] to be true, note that it was [[Darius the Mede]] who officially seized the kingdom<ref>Daniel 5:31</ref>, which happily correlates all three of these literary sources to their reasoning.

Meanwhile [[Cyaxares II]] existence is further called into question when the [[Nabonidus Chronicle]] openly states that: 1. [[Cyrus|Cyrus the Great]] attacked [[Astyages]] and that the army betrayed [[Astyages]]<ref>Livius, ''ABC 7 (Nabonidus Chronicle)'', Column ii, https://www.livius.org/sources/content/mesopotamian-chronicles-content/abc-7-nabonidus-chronicle/</ref> thereby 2. denying [[Astyages]] throne passed to [[Cyaxares II]] at all.  This account is in harmony with Herodotus' narrative which is probably derived from the [[Nabonidus Chronicle|Chronicle]].

Alternitively, [[Cyaxares II]] does not appear in [[Ptolemy's Canon]]<ref>Livius, Ptolemy's Canon; https://www.livius.org/articles/concept/ptolemys-canon/</ref> or the [[Uruk King List]]<ref>Livius, Uruk King List;https://www.livius.org/sources/content/uruk-king-list/</ref>.  But neither of these feature [[Belshazzar]] who became effective king of Babylon after his father [[Nabonidas]] capture now confirmed to us by the Nabonidus Cylinder (from Ur)<ref>Livius, ''Nabonidus Cylinder from Ur'',https://www.livius.org/sources/content/nabonidus-cylinder-from-ur/</ref><ref>Livius, ''ABC 7 (Nabonidus Chronicle)'', Column iii.16, https://www.livius.org/sources/content/mesopotamian-chronicles-content/abc-7-nabonidus-chronicle/</ref>. Similarly [[Ptolemy's Canon|Ptolemy]] does not list [[Nerglissar|Nerglissar's]] son [[Labasi-Marduk]] while the [[Uruk King List|Uruk]] does.

In the following sections we shall examine these sources in more detail.

 

Clearly, legitimate debate over these sources does exist.  Therefore in the following sections we shall examine these sources in more detail.

=== In the works of Xenophon ===

=== In the works of Xenophon ===