Talk:Cambyses I

	Biography portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
	This article is supported by WikiProject Royalty and Nobility.

Ancient Egypt Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Egypt, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Egyptological subjects on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient EgyptWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient EgyptTemplate:WikiProject Ancient EgyptAncient Egypt articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

WikiProject Ancient Egypt to-do list:

Needed articles.

We should have an article on every pyramid and every nome in Ancient Egypt. I'm sure the rest of us can think of other articles we should have.

Cleanup.

To start with, most of the general history articles badly need attention. And I'm told that at least some of the dynasty articles need work. Any other candidates?

Standardize the Chronology.

A boring task, but the benefit of doing it is that you can set the dates !(e.g., why say Khufu lived 2589-2566? As long as you keep the length of his reign correct, or cite a respected source, you can date it 2590-2567 or 2585-2563)

Stub sorting

Anyone? I consider this probably the most unimportant of tasks on Wikipedia, but if you believe it needs to be done . . .

Data sorting.

This is a project I'd like to take on some day, & could be applied to more of Wikipedia than just Ancient Egypt. Take one of the standard authorities of history or culture -- Herotodus, the Elder Pliny, the writings of Breasted or Kenneth Kitchen, & see if you can't smoothly merge quotations or information into relevant articles. Probably a good exercise for someone who owns one of those impressive texts, yet can't get access to a research library.

Iran Low‑importance

	Iran portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Iran, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to articles related to Iran on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please join the project where you can contribute to the discussions and help with our open tasks.IranWikipedia:WikiProject IranTemplate:WikiProject IranIran articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Classical Greece and Rome Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Classical Greece and Rome, a group of contributors interested in Wikipedia's articles on classics. If you would like to join the WikiProject or learn how to contribute, please see our project page. If you need assistance from a classicist, please see our talk page.Classical Greece and RomeWikipedia:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeTemplate:WikiProject Classical Greece and RomeClassical Greece and Rome articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Ancient Near East Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Ancient Near East, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Ancient Near East related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Ancient Near EastWikipedia:WikiProject Ancient Near EastTemplate:WikiProject Ancient Near EastAncient Near East articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Lukeav.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 16:36, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dates and numbers in this article

Wikipedia policy is clear on the use of Eras in articles:

Both the BCE/CE era names and the BC/AD era names are acceptable, but be consistent within an article. Normally you should use plain numbers for years in the Common Era, but when events span the start of the Common Era, use AD or CE for the date at the end of the range (note that AD precedes the date and CE follows it). For example, 1 BC–AD 1 or 1 BCE–1 CE.

It is up to the author(s) of an article to determine the dating system to be used and there must be consistency with each article. In this case, for a non-Christian topic in a non-Christian region of the world, BCE/CE would seem to make the most sense. Sunray 19:49, 2005 May 22 (UTC)

Sigh*, RickK has reverted and until one or more authors of this article indicate a preference for BCE/CE, it will have to remain BC/AD. Sunray 07:07, 2005 May 23 (UTC)

Requested move

The following discussion is an archived discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was move. Deacon of Pndapetzim (Talk) 05:25, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Cambyses of Anshan → Cambyses I — - The name "Cambyses of Anshan" is not used anywhere. And since "Cambyses I" is not ambiguous, and the only one with this name I propose this move. Also using google books test makes sure that Cambyses I is the correct name. --Xashaiar (talk) 12:59, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I will deal with this proposed move and the previous two together. The existing titles are in keeping with Wikipedia naming conventions for royalty since, in the first instance, we disambiguate monarchs by the country they ruled over. We do need the "of Persia" designation with the Dariuses to distinguish them from another Darius, it would be artificial to switch this on and off. PatGallacher (talk) 19:49, 30 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

NO we do not need that "of Persia". There is no ambiguity in simple titles I have proposed and no encyclopaedia uses the extra "of Persia". Xashaiar (talk) 02:14, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia is entitled to adopt its own naming conventions. "Cambyses II" is unambiguous, but so is "Cambyses of Persia". Robert III and James V are unambiguous, but we add the "of Scotland" to the end since it would be artificial to switch the "of Scotland" on and off when going through the Scots Stewart monarchs for reasons which have nothing to do with Scots history, only with developments in other countries. PatGallacher (talk) 12:02, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

So Wikipedia is always right and it is reality which is wrong (reality=the common use of the English language)? I honestly can only wonder in amazement how Alexander the Great managed to avoid the ghastly fate of Napoleon I of France (instead of 'Napoleon Bonaparte' which is used to a overwhelming degree). Flamarande (talk) 22:39, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Support the move, common English names should be used unless strong reasons and evidence to the contrary. Flamarande (talk) 22:38, 1 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

Etymology

I can't understand the English in the new section on etymology that discusses Toynbee. I also think there is too much emphasis on Toynbee. Dougweller (talk) 21:05, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The etymology section is larger than the article was previously. It should be pruned. Debresser (talk) 23:42, 10 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Cambyses I vs Cambyses II

I thought it might be helpful here on the Talk page to discuss how to discern between Cambyses I and Cambyses II. There are a couple of things that make confusion easy - and indeed, you'll find many a scholarly work which confuses the two. Both are the sons of a Cyrus - Cyrus I and Cyrus II. Most frequently, but not always, when Herodotus refers to Cambyses, he is referring to Cambyses II. An example of an exception to this would be Herodotus I.107.^[1] I have two recommendations for clarity, but welcome any other points from other editors that would help future Wikipedians. My two are:

Pay attention to years of life or reign. Cambyses I is born early 7th century and dies mid-6th century. Cambyses II reigns for a short period of time in the early 5th century. If it is 530 BC/BCE or 520s BC/BCE, it is Cambyses II. If it is around 600 BC/BCE through 580 BC/BCE, it will be Cambyses I.
Next, pay attention to what kingdom they are associated with. If it is pre-Persia - and the king is associated with Anshan, Acan, etc. then it will be Cambyses I. If the language clearly associates it with Persia, it is Cambyses II.

These are just meant as rules of thumb, but will hopefully be helpful. DOstendorff (talk) 20:37, 21 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

References

^ Daniels, Pierre Briant ; translated by Peter T. (2002). From Cyrus to Alexander a history of the Persian Empire. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. p. 24. ISBN 9781575065748.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

Life and Reign dates of Cambyses I

The article contradicts the Cyrus the Great article in making both born c.600 BCE. The evidence in the Encyclopedia Iranica seems to me to favor Cyrus II to have been born then, with Cambyses I c.630 BCE, reigning from c.600-559 BCE: [1] Also Cyrus I's reign is dated c.640-600 BCE making Cambyses I reign from around 600: [2] Cornelius (talk) 04:20, 7 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

[1] Daniels, Pierre Briant ; translated by Peter T. (2002). From Cyrus to Alexander a history of the Persian Empire. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. p. 24. ISBN 9781575065748.{{cite book}}: CS1 maint: multiple names: authors list (link)

[1]