The Persian Empire. Course Guidebook

Citation preview

Topic History

“Pure intellectual stimulation that can be popped into the [audio or video player] anytime.” —Harvard Magazine

The Persian Empire

“Passionate, erudite, living legend lecturers. Academia’s best lecturers are being captured on tape.” —The Los Angeles Times “A serious force in American education.” —The Wall Street Journal

The Persian Empire Course Guidebook Professor John W. I. Lee University of California, Santa Barbara

Professor John W. I. Lee is Associate Professor of History at the University of California, Santa Barbara. A specialist on warfare in the ancient Mediterranean world, Professor Lee received his Ph.D. from Cornell University. He has conducted field research and has led travel-study groups in Greece and Turkey. He is director of the Ancient Mediterranean Studies program at UC Santa Barbara and co-organizer of the University of California Multi-Campus Research Group on Ancient Borderlands.

Cover Image: © Aleksandar Todorovic/Shutterstock. Course No. 3117 © 2012 The Teaching Company.

PB3117A

Guidebook

THE GREAT COURSES ® Corporate Headquarters 4840 Westfields Boulevard, Suite 500 Chantilly, VA 20151-2299 USA Phone: 1-800-832-2412 www.thegreatcourses.com

Subtopic Ancient History

PUBLISHED BY: THE GREAT COURSES Corporate Headquarters 4840 Westfields Boulevard, Suite 500 Chantilly, Virginia 20151-2299 Phone: 1-800-832-2412 Fax: 703-378-3819 www.thegreatcourses.com

Copyright © The Teaching Company, 2012

Printed in the United States of America This book is in copyright. All rights reserved. Without limiting the rights under copyright reserved above, no part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in or introduced into a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form, or by any means (electronic, mechanical, photocopying, recording, or otherwise), without the prior written permission of The Teaching Company.

John W. I. Lee, Ph.D. Associate Professor of History University of California, Santa Barbara

P

rofessor John W. I. Lee is Associate Professor of History at the University of California, Santa Barbara. He grew up in Southeast Asia and Hawaii. After studying history at the University of Washington, he earned his Ph.D. in History from Cornell University. Professor Lee’s research specialty is the history of warfare in the ancient world. He has published on ancient mercenary soldiers, Greek and Persian armies, women in ancient war, the origins of military autobiography, and urban combat in antiquity. He is the author of A Greek Army on the March: Soldiers and Survival in Xenophon’s “Anabasis,” published by Cambridge University Press. Professor Lee has won a UC Santa Barbara Academic Senate Distinguished Teaching Award for 2003–2004 and the University’s Harold J. Plous Award for 2005–2006, which is given to the outstanding Assistant Professor for “performance and promise as measured by creative action and contribution to the intellectual life of the college community.” Professor Lee has conducted ¿eld research and has led travel-study groups in Greece and Turkey. He is currently director of the Ancient Mediterranean Studies program at UC Santa Barbara and co-organizer of the University of California Multi-Campus Research Group on Ancient Borderlands. Ŷ

i

Acknowledgments With deepest thanks to the international community of scholars who generously and graciously shared information and images for this course. John Hyland, Associate Professor Department of History, Christopher Newport University Florian Knauss, Director of the Collection State Collections of Antiquities and Glyptotek, Munich, Germany Dr. Lâtife Summerer, lecturer and research associate Institute of Classical Archaeology at Ludwig Maximilian University of Munich C. Brian Rose, James B. Pritchard Professor of Archaeology University of Pennsylvania Alison V. G. Betts, Associate Professor Department of Archaeology, The University of Sydney Rémy Boucharlat, Director Maison de l’Orient et de la Méditerranée Jona Lendering, Dutch Historian of Ancient History http://www.livius.org/ Nicholas D. Cahill, Professor, Department of Art History University of Wisconsini Madison BahadÕr YÕldÕrÕm, Expedition Administrator Archaeological Exploration of Sardis

ii

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION Professor Biography ............................................................................i Acknowledgments .............................................................................. ii Course Scope .....................................................................................1 LECTURE GUIDES LECTURE 1 Rethinking the Persian Empire ..........................................................5 LECTURE 2 Questioning the Sources .................................................................. 11 LECTURE 3 The World before Cyrus ...................................................................20 LECTURE 4 Cyrus and Cambyses—Founders of the Empire ..............................27 LECTURE 5 Darius I—Creator of the Imperial System .........................................34 LECTURE 6 Persian Capitals and Royal Palaces ................................................40 LECTURE 7 The Great King—Images and Realities ............................................47 LECTURE 8 Royal Roads and Provinces .............................................................54 LECTURE 9 East of Persepolis.............................................................................61

iii

Table of Contents LECTURE 10 Challenges in the West, 513–494 B.C. ............................................68 LECTURE 11 Across the Bitter Sea, 493–490 B.C. ...............................................76 LECTURE 12 Xerxes Becomes King ......................................................................83 LECTURE 13 Xerxes’s War, 480–479 B.C. ............................................................89 LECTURE 14 Cultures in Contact ...........................................................................96 LECTURE 15 Achaemenid Religion......................................................................103 LECTURE 16 From Expansion to Stability, 479–405 B.C. ................................... 110 LECTURE 17 The War of the Two Brothers .......................................................... 118 LECTURE 18 Persian Gold ...................................................................................125 LECTURE 19 City and Countryside ......................................................................132 LECTURE 20 Women in the Persian Empire ........................................................139 LECTURE 21 Artaxerxes II—The Longest-Ruling King ........................................146 LECTURE 22 Persia and Macedon, 359–333 B.C. ..............................................154 iv

Table of Contents LECTURE 23 The End of an Empire, 333–323 B.C. ............................................161 LECTURE 24 Legacies of the Persian Empire......................................................168 SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL Timeline ..........................................................................................175 Glossary .........................................................................................185 Biographical Notes .........................................................................190 Bibliography and Suggested Reading ............................................199

v

vi

The Persian Empire Scope:

I

n its time, the Persian Empire was the largest and greatest empire the world had ever seen. The empire arose beginning in 559 B.C. under Cyrus the Great and lasted more than two centuries, until 330 B.C. It eventually encompassed lands stretching from Greece, Asia Minor, and Egypt in the west, across Mesopotamia and Iran, through central Asia, and all the way to the Indus Valley in the east. During its ascension, the empire developed an ef¿cient bureaucracy, a postal service, a complex economy, and a powerful army. The Persians numbered only about one million people, yet through advanced communication networks and a policy of local tolerance, they ruled successfully over a multiethnic and multicultural population of at least 25 million. Despite the amazing achievements and enduring legacies of the Persians, many people associate the empire with despotism, decadence, and barbarism. Still others have attempted to paint the opposite picture, with the Persian Empire as a sort of perfect state, ruled by ideal kings. This course goes beyond simple demonization or idealization to explore the multifaceted reality of ancient Persia’s history. The ¿rst lecture brieÀy describes the origins and evolution of stereotypes about the Persians and contrasts these with some of the accomplishments of the Achaemenid kings and their subjects. Lecture 2 examines the sources we have for ancient Persian history, including Greek narratives, some books of the Hebrew Bible, royal inscriptions, archaeological evidence, and ancient letters. Although Greek historians are our primary sources for much of the Persian Empire, we must always bear in mind that these writers give us the perspective of a biased outsider. Having explored the available sources for ancient Persian history and learned some of their de¿ciencies, we begin to put these tools to use in Lecture 3. Here, we set the stage for the rise of the Persians by tracing the history of west Asian peoples and empires from about 1000 to 550 B.C., including the Assyrians, Neo-Babylonians, Medes, Elamites, and the early Persians themselves. In Lecture 4, we witness the founding of the empire under the kings Cyrus and Cambyses in a span of only four decades, from 560 to 522 B.C., and Lecture 5 focuses on the rise 1

to power and the accomplishments of the man we might call the empire’s second founder, Darius I.

Scope

In Lecture 6, we visit the palaces and capital cities from which Darius ruled the new Achaemenid Empire, including the ancient Elamite capital of Susa, Ecbatana in Media, Babylon, Pasargadae, and Parsa or Persepolis, the new capital of Darius. Then, in Lecture 7, we take a closer look at the images and realities of Persian kingship and see the inner workings of the palaces. In Lectures 8 and 9, we leave behind the Great King and the imperial center to journey out to the provinces of the empire. We ¿rst take a road trip in the west, starting our journey in Pasargadae and going all the way to Egypt and Asia Minor. We then head east, traveling through eastern Iran to central Asia and on to India. With Lecture 10, we return to our historical narrative in the year 513 B.C. With his empire uni¿ed and strong, Darius was looking to expand further, into the land of Scythia. His efforts there were unsuccessful, and he then faced the Ionian Revolt; both of these experiences show the challenges the Persians faced in governing their distant provinces, as well as the limits of imperial military power. With the Ionian Revolt suppressed, the Persians looked west to punish Athens. Lecture 11 takes us through the Persian advance on mainland Greece, starting in 493 B.C. and ending at Marathon in 490. This story is almost always told from the Greek viewpoint, but in this lecture, we look at it from the Persian perspective. After the defeat at Marathon, Darius started preparing a larger expedition against Greece, as well as one against Egypt, but he died in 486 B.C. before setting out. In Lecture 12, we look in detail at the upbringing and education of Darius’s successor, his son Xerxes, and we see how Xerxes continued his father’s plans at home and abroad. Most importantly, Xerxes decided to invade Greece, and Lecture 13 covers the results of that decision: Xerxes’s War. In early 480, Xerxes advanced, and by the summer of that year, he had taken much of Greece, achieved an important victory at Thermopylae, and destroyed Athens. But his decision to send his navy against the Greek Àeet at Salamis, rather than pursuing the attack on land, cost him the war. After defeats at Plataea and Mycale, Persian forces withdrew and never again directly threatened mainland Greece.

2

In Lecture 14, we shift gears, from conÀict in the empire to cultural contact and exchange—the sharing of artifacts, ways of doing things, and ideas. Then, in Lecture 15, we zoom in on just one aspect of ancient Persian culture: religion. In both cases, we’ll see how the Persians inÀuenced the people they conquered and what they learned from their imperial subjects. With Lecture 16, we return to our historical narrative, picking up in the later years of Xerxes and then looking at the kings who followed him: Artaxerxes I and Darius II. This period—from the mid- to late 5th century B.C.—saw a major shift in imperial aims and approaches, from expansion to stability and from brute force to diplomacy. With the death of Darius, however, conÀict broke out again, this time, between Darius’s sons and competitors for the throne, Arses (Artaxerxes II) and Cyrus. Lecture 17 describes the War of the Two Brothers and the famous march up-country by Cyrus’s troops, the showdown at Cunaxa that resulted in Cyrus’s death, and the retreat of the surviving rebel forces out of Mesopotamia under the leadership of Xenophon. Lecture 18 gives us a glimpse of the economy of the Persian Empire, with a description of the royal, temple, and private sectors. We also look at two fascinating sets of tablets that allow us to see the business dealings of two ancient entrepreneurial families. Having learned about those at the top of the economic scale, we turn, in Lecture 19, to the ordinary people who lived in the cities of the empire and the countryside. This lecture gives us an opportunity to study the patterns of agriculture, herding, and the seasons that shaped the lives of most imperial subjects. In Lecture 20, our topic is women in the Persian Empire; as we’ll see, these women enjoyed a great deal of economic and legal power compared to their sisters in Greece. With Lecture 21, we return once again to our narrative of Persian history, with a look at the 45-year reign of Artaxerxes II. As king, Artaxerxes defeated a revolt by his brother, stabilized the empire, and enjoyed major military and diplomatic successes. Although he suffered some setbacks— notably against the Spartan Agesilaus at Sardis—it was thanks to him that the Persian Empire was supreme over the Greeks for much of the 4th century. Lecture 22 brings us to the accession of Artaxerxes III in 359/8 B.C. and the rise of a new power in the Greek world: the kingdom of Macedon. The king of the Macedonians, Philip II, developed an army unlike anything ever seen in the ancient world, but neither Artaxerxes III nor his successor, 3

Scope

Artaxerxes IV, would live to face the power of the Macedonians. It was the new Persian king, Darius III, who would clash with Philip’s army, led by his son, Alexander the Great. Lecture 23 puts us at the battle of Issus, where Darius ¿rst surprised Alexander but then Àed in the course of the ¿ghting. Alexander then headed south to take Egypt, but Darius was building up an army in Babylonia. The two kings met again at Gaugamela in 331 B.C., but Darius Àed once more. From that point on, the Persian capitals fell to Alexander, and Darius was killed by Persian nobles before he could make a last stand at Bactria. Ultimately, Alexander took the title Great King, but with his death in 323 B.C., any hope of a uni¿ed empire came to an end. Nevertheless, as we see in Lecture 24, the Achaemenid legacy lived on long after the last Great King of Persia and was transmitted and reimagined in myriad ways. Ŷ

4

Rethinking the Persian Empire Lecture 1

I

n its time, the Persian Empire was the largest and greatest empire the world had seen. From 559 to 530 B.C., under the empire’s founder, Cyrus the Great, the Persians rose from relative obscurity to conquer vast territories. By 500 B.C., when Rome was still just a small village on the banks of the Tiber River and China was still divided into warring states, the Persian Empire had uni¿ed the lands stretching from Greece, Asia Minor, and Egypt in the west, across Mesopotamia and Iran, through central Asia, all the way to the Indus Valley in the east. For more than two centuries, until 330 B.C., the Persian Empire was the single greatest power anywhere on earth. In these lectures, we will explore the history and culture of the Persian Empire, drawing on recent research in the relatively new ¿eld of Achaemenid studies. We begin in this ¿rst lecture by reviewing some of the accomplishments of the Achaemenid kings and dispelling some stereotypes that have persisted about the empire since the early 19th century. The Accomplishments of the Achaemenid Kings x Like most dynasties throughout ancient history, the Achaemenids faced civil wars and ¿ghts for the throne, but overall, Persian rule was remarkably stable: In 236 years, there were only 14 kings—an average of 16 years per king—and a few kings ruled for more than 40 years. x

These kings built an empire of world-historical signi¿cance. The Persians learned from the great empires that had preceded them—the Babylonians and Assyrians—and put those lessons to use on a new world stage.

x

From their origins in southern Iran, the Persians expanded east and west, bringing together the great civilizations of ancient west Asia, including the Babylonians, Egyptians, Greeks, Jews, and others.

x

The Persian Empire had an ef¿cient bureaucracy, a postal service, a highly complex economy, and a powerful army. The Persians themselves 5

Lecture 1: Rethinking the Persian Empire

numbered only about 1 million people, but they ruled over a multiethnic and multicultural population of at least 25 million. x

The Persian rulers were tolerant imperialists who allowed their subjects to practice their own religions, maintain their own customs, and enjoy local autonomy. It was the Great King Cyrus of Persia who released the Jewish people from captivity in Babylon, allowing them to return to Jerusalem to rebuild their Temple and practice their religion unhindered.

x

Across the vast territories of the empire, people of many ethnicities and traditions enjoyed peace and stability. Trade Àourished, ideas were exchanged, new cities emerged, and diverse cultures met and mingled. For the ¿rst time in world history, Europe and Asia were in direct, sustained contact, with the stability of a single empire to promote trade and exchange.

x

Even after the empire ended in 330 B.C., its legacy continued. The Persian example inÀuenced the succeeding dynasties of the Seleucids, the Parthians, and the Sasanians.

Getting Beyond Stereotypes x For all the amazing achievements and enduring legacies of the Persian Empire, many people today have another image of the empire. Ancient Persian is often associated with despotism, decadence, effeminacy, barbarism, and slavery. x

This negative image can be at least partly explained by the fact that much of the narrative history of the early 5th century B.C. was written by the Greeks in the wake of their successful defenses against Persian invasions.

x

In response to the negative image of Persia, some have moved in the opposite direction, imagining the Persian Empire as a sort of perfect state and presenting Cyrus and the kings who followed him as ideal rulers. But the true story of the empire is more fascinating and complex than any one-sided stereotype, whether positive or negative.

6

x

Some people believe that the wars between the Greeks and Persians were the beginning of a split between East and West that endures to this day. Yet during the Persian invasions of Greece in the early 5th century B.C., thousands of Greeks fought willingly for the Persian side; further, both before and after the invasions, thousands of Greeks worked in the Persian Empire.

x

Despite the stereotype of a chasm between East and West, there was a great deal of contact and cultural interchange between Greeks and Persians. It’s safe to say that these two peoples developed side by side and were shaped by their intimate interactions with each other.

x

As for the struggles between Persia and Greece, if we look at the entirety of Persian history, rather than just the Greek viewpoint of the early 5th century B.C., we can see that Persian defeats in Greece were not as earth-shaking for the empire as some would believe. In later years, the Persians managed to restore the balance of power. Only in the later 4th century would a new power—the kingdom of Macedon—arise to challenge Persian supremacy.

x

The issue of Persian tolerance also illustrates the complexity of our subject matter in these lectures. Those who seek to idealize the Persian Empire often point to its tolerance of local customs and religions, but this tolerance grew out of the simple fact that the ratio of Persians to imperial subjects was about 1 to 25. Given those numbers, tolerance was a necessary strategy for success; the Persians simply couldn’t watch every nook and cranny of the empire.

The Study of Empires x If we can get past seeing the Persians as either demons or angels, we can compare them to other important empires of the ancient world, such as Rome or China. x

From the beginning, the Persians had to deal several with older, more advanced civilizations within the borders of their empire—the Egyptians and Babylonians, both with long imperial traditions of their own. The Romans didn’t have this sort of challenge, nor did the Chinese. 7

Unlike the Romans and Chinese, the Persians didn’t impose a single imperial culture on their subjects. Thus, the Persian Empire had to deal with the downsides of diversity, from having to coordinate different types of troops in imperial armies to using multiple languages for administration.

x

Local diversity also made the Persian Empire very loose in some respects compared to the Chinese and the Romans. The Persians relied on a mixture of satraps (provincial governors), client kings, and local, semiautonomous cities to govern their empire, which resulted in overlapping and sometimes conÀicting spheres of authority. There were even some areas inside the empire where imperial control didn’t reach.

x

Both the Romans and Chinese are famous for their border forti¿cations, Hadrian’s Wall, for example, or the Great Wall of China. The Persians, in contrast, ruled an empire whose borders were often porous or ambiguous.

x

The Persians also had more challenging geography than the Unlike the famous border forti¿cations built by Romans or the Chinese. the Romans and the Chinese, the borders in The Romans had the Persia were often porous or ambiguous. Mediterranean to speed communications, while the Chinese had great rivers and canals. The Persian Empire, though, didn’t have many natural boundaries or frontiers, and its territory included zones that didn’t knit easily together.

8

© Photodisc/Thinkstock.

Lecture 1: Rethinking the Persian Empire

x

x

Finally, the Persian Empire is particularly fascinating for the speed with which it grew and collapsed. The Persians exploded onto the world stage in a very brief time—just a few decades—under the rule of Cyrus the Great and his son Cambyses, unlike the Romans, who grew more gradually over the centuries. And, in just a decade, the attack of Alexander and his Macedonians crushed the Persian Empire.

Achaemenid Studies x The study of the Persian Empire is a relatively new ¿eld of history. As noted earlier, the most accessible sources concerning the empire were Greek historians, who painted a relatively (although not entirely) negative picture of the Persians. x

With the rise of European imperialism in the early 19th century, the negative image of Persia was emphasized. As Western Europeans began to identify themselves with the ancient Greeks, they came to view the Persians as nothing more than the “bad guys” of ancient Greek history. This negative stereotype of the empire as despotic and authoritarian has survived into the present day.

x

Against this tradition, however, a new view of the Persian Empire has appeared, leading to a Àood of research and the discovery of new texts and archaeology. In this course, we will seek a more accurate, more balanced portrait of ancient Persia.

Distinguishing Persia and Iran x Ancient Persia is part of the historical and cultural legacy of modern Iran, but that doesn’t mean that the ancient Persians are the same people as the modern Iranians. x

In this course, when we talk about the Persians, we’re referring to the ancient people whose homeland was in the ancient region of Parsa. This region corresponds to the modern Fars province of southern Iran.

x

When we talk about the ancient Iranians, we mean a set of people who inhabited a wide region stretching outside the boundaries of the modern nation-state of Iran—from the Ukraine to modern Iran into Afghanistan, 9

Kazakhstan, and beyond. If the ancient Persians are a speci¿c group from one particular area in a larger region, then we can think of the ancient Iranians as their wider set of cousins. x

With this distinction in mind, we will turn, in our next lecture, to an examination of the sources for the history of the Persian Empire. As we will see, studying ancient Persia is a bit like detective work. We can’t rely on just one witness but must combine multiple sources, archaeological ¿ndings, and scienti¿c research to get the truest picture of this amazing ancient empire.

Name to Know Cyrus II (Cyrus the Great, r. 559–530 B.C.): King and founder of the Persian Empire.

Suggested Reading Allen, The Persian Empire.

Lecture 1: Rethinking the Persian Empire

Harrison, Writing Ancient Persia.

Questions to Consider 1. As we start these lectures, consider what you currently know about the Persian Empire. What aspects of your current knowledge stand out in your mind?

2. How have you seen the Persian Empire portrayed in popular media, such as novels, television, or movies?

10

Questioning the Sources Lecture 2

H

ow do we know what we know? That might sound like a philosopher’s question rather than a historian’s, but it lies at the heart of what historians do. Before we can form any conclusions about the past, we need to understand and evaluate the sources we’re using. And that’s especially true for the Persian Empire. To study the Persians, we must be detectives, questioning and analyzing our witnesses—our sources—carefully. In this lecture, we’ll meet these witnesses, including the Greek narrative sources, some books of the Hebrew Bible, the inscription at Bisitun, archaeological evidence, and ancient letters from Egypt.

x

The most important Greek witness is Herodotus (b. c. 485 B.C.), the ancient world’s ¿rst historian. In the Histories, Herodotus recounts the events that led to the wars between the Persians and Greeks from about 499 to 479 B.C. He also discusses the early histories of the Persians, as well as the Egyptians, Lydians, and Scythians.

x

Herodotus provides a signi¿cant amount of invaluable evidence about the Persian Empire, and his stirring account of the empire’s defeat at the hands of the Greeks has become quite popular. We must remember, however,

© Hemera/Thinkstock.

The Greek Narrative Sources x Our ¿rst “witnesses” are narrative histories written by ancient Greek authors; not surprisingly, these provide a biased outsider’s perspective.

Whether one thinks of him as the “father of history” or the “father of lies,” Herodotus provided us with invaluable evidence about the Persians. 11

Lecture 2: Questioning the Sources

that Herodotus was more interested in glorifying the Greeks and telling a good story than he was in giving an accurate picture of the Persian Empire. x

The Greek historian Thucydides (c. 460–400 B.C.) picked up after Herodotus and also offers some valuable information about the Persians. But Thucydides was more interested in internal Greek affairs, especially the Peloponnesian War (431–404 B.C.) between Athens and Sparta.

x

The next Greek writer we have available is Xenophon (c. 427–c. 355 B.C.). At the age of 26, Xenophon, an aristocrat, joined the army of the Persian prince Cyrus the Younger, who was trying to overthrow his brother Artaxerxes II, the Great King of Persia. After many years as a mercenary, Xenophon returned to Greece and started writing.

x

In the Anabasis (The March Upcountry), Xenophon recounts the story of the war between Cyrus and Artaxerxes and the retreat of Cyrus’s mercenaries across Anatolia (Asia Minor). The Anabasis gives us a snapshot of what the empire was like in around 400 B.C., when Cyrus and his army were marching through Persian lands.

x

Xenophon also wrote a more conventional history of the late 5th and early 4th centuries B.C. called the Hellenika (Greek Affairs). In this work, he discusses the activities of the Persian satraps of western Anatolia, Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus, who were key players in the empire.

x

In the Cyropaedia (The Education of Cyrus), Xenophon recounts the deeds of Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Persian Empire. But the picture Xenophon draws is highly idealized; he contrasts the virtuous Cyrus with the supposedly decadent Persians of his own day. The Cyropaedia gives us an idea of how Greeks viewed the Persians—with a mixture of admiration and disdain.

x

Ctesias was a Greek doctor who served as the personal physician of King Artaxerxes II from about 405 to 398 B.C. During or after this time, he wrote several works, including a 23-volume Persiká (Persian Affairs), which survives only as fragments. Ctesias is not particularly

12

reliable and not always accurate, although his narrative is all we have to rely on for parts of the 4th century B.C. x

For the ¿nal years of the empire, we have the historian Arrian (A.D. 85–160), who lived in the Roman Empire but wrote in Greek. Arrian’s Anabasis of Alexander describes the campaigns of Alexander the Great and the Macedonians against the Persians and King Darius III.

x

Like Xenophon’s Anabasis, Arrian’s work gives us a snapshot of the Persian Empire, this time, in the late 4th century B.C. Arrian is important for the evidence he provides about the eastern part of the empire, which few Greek authors wrote about. He also had access to earlier Greek histories that are now lost to us. Still, Arrian glori¿es Alexander and often makes the Persians look unrealistically bad.

x

One last important Greek witness is the biographer Plutarch (c. A.D. 45–120), who also lived under the Roman Empire but wrote in Greek. His biographies, especially those of Alexander and Artaxerxes II, offer a great deal of valuable information.

Sources from the Hebrew Bible x The Hebrew Bible also gives us some accounts of the Persian kings. For example, in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, the Persian kings are depicted favorably, helping the Jews return to their homeland and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. x

The picture in the book of Esther is less positive, because this book was written in the 2nd century B.C., long after the Persian Empire had passed away. The Hebrew Bible also inÀuenced later Jewish authors, such as Josephus, who lived under the Roman Empire.

x

These biblical sources are important because they give us the viewpoint of a small, weak minority under the rule of the Persians and reveal the Persian policies of tolerance and local self-government.

13

Lecture 2: Questioning the Sources

Bisitun and the Decipherment of Cuneiform x For many centuries, the Greek and biblical sources were all that early scholars had to work with. But as European explorers and merchants began traveling to the ancient lands of the Persian Empire, new witnesses began to emerge. x

In the early 1800s, a young German schoolteacher, Georg Grotefend, connected cuneiform inscriptions found at Persepolis with writings in the ancient language of Avestan. Grotefend was able to recognize the names of kings from Greek and Hebrew texts (Darius and Xerxes) in the cuneiform writings. From there, he tentatively reconstructed the Old Persian alphabet.

x

What scholars needed at this point was a much larger inscription to complete the decipherment. Such an inscription was available at a place called Bisitun, near the city of Kermanshah in western Iran, carved on a vertical cliff face. During the 1830s and 1840s, a British army of¿cer named Henry Rawlinson copied down this inscription, which was found to be in Old Persian and two other ancient languages.

x

Drawing on the decipherment of Old Persian, scholars were able to decipher the languages behind the other two scripts. One of these was Akkadian (or Babylonian), a Semitic language related to Hebrew. The other was Elamite, an ancient language of southwestern Iran. The decoding of these languages opened a new window on the history of the Persian Empire.

Archaeology and Clay Tablets x From the mid-1800s onward, archaeologists began investigating the palaces and cities of the Persian Empire. In 1852, for example, a British explorer identi¿ed the palace of Susa in southwestern Iran, and French scholars began digging there in the 1880s. Other early archaeologists excavated at Babylon and other ancient cities of Mesopotamia. x

14

One amazing discovery was made early on. In 1879, the archaeologist Hormuzd Rassam, who was working at Babylon, found a roughly

football-sized clay cylinder carved with a royal inscription of Cyrus the Great, the founder of the Persian Empire. As their digs continued, archaeologists found more and more cuneiform writing, especially on clay tablets. In 1893, an American team exploring the city of Nippur, southwest of modern Baghdad, discovered more than 900 cuneiform tablets written in Akkadian. This was the archive of the Murashu family, entrepreneurs who Àourished in the time of King Darius II (r. 424/3–405/4 B.C.).

x

Early excavators were often in such a rush to ¿nd valuables that they dug straight through mud-brick walls, destroying evidence. But in 1899, the German scholar Robert Koldewey instituted more careful procedures at his site in Babylon.

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

x

The deciphering of the cuneiforms at the ruins of Persepolis enabled scholars— for the ¿rst time—to view ancient Persia through Persian eyes rather than through Greek or Jewish eyes. 15

Lecture 2: Questioning the Sources

x

In 1931, a team from the University of Chicago’s Oriental Institute started work at Persepolis. In 1933, near the Persepolis forti¿cation wall, these archaeologists began ¿nding cuneiform tablets—eventually, about 20,000 of them! The Persepolis Forti¿cation Tablets date from the reign of King Darius I (522–486 B.C.).

x

In 1936, a smaller group of 750 tablets, dating from the early 5th century B.C., turned up in the treasury building at Persepolis. Most of the Forti¿cation and Treasury tablets are written in Elamite, but others are in Aramaic, Greek, and other languages. Together, these two sets of tablets give us an inside look at the administration of the Persian Empire.

x

Thousands of these tablets remain to be studied, and new discoveries are still being made. For example, in 2006, researchers at Chicago discovered an administrative record in Old Persian—an amazing ¿nd because scholars had previously thought that the language was used only for royal inscriptions.

Aramaic Letters x The dry conditions of Egypt have preserved many documents written on papyrus. For example, we have letters and business records written in Aramaic from the site of Elephantine on the Nile River, where Jewish mercenaries served the Persian Empire. Another important collection is an archive of about a dozen pieces of correspondence from Arshama, the Persian satrap of Egypt in the late 5th century B.C. x

In just the last few years, another amazing collection has been found: a set of 30 parchment documents and 18 wooden strips, written in Aramaic. These documents, said to come from Afghanistan, date to the very last years of the Achaemenid Empire and the reign of King Darius III, who fought Alexander.

The Discoveries Continue x In recent years, excavations in places as far apart as Egypt, Pakistan, and Turkey have continued to turn up new archaeological evidence for Persian history. This evidence often sheds light on aspects of life that no written sources cover, such as eating and drinking habits. 16

x

Survey archaeology—wide-scale studies of habitation patterns— is showing us where and how ancient Persia’s ordinary people lived. New technologies, such as ground-penetrating radar and geomagnetic sensing, have helped us ¿nd Persian-period sites, even without digging.

The Need to Question Sources x Some people might ask why it’s important to carefully review the sources of our historical information. The answer is that if we believe in the search for truth and the need to learn about the past, then thinking about how we know what we know should always be in the front of our minds. x

Paying attention to our sources also makes learning about the past even more interesting, because it allows us to untangle the mysteries and puzzles that our witnesses present.

Names to Know Darius (OP: DƗrayavahuš): “Guardian of good”; the name of three Persian kings Darius I (r. 522–486 B.C.): Though not a descendant of Cyrus, Darius I became Great King after a violent struggle with other claimants following the death of Cambyses. Darius II (r. 424/3–405/4 B.C.): Darius II took the throne following the murder of his half-brother Xerxes II after a reign of only 45 days. Darius III (r. 336–330 B.C.): The last of the line of Persian Great Kings, Darius III acceded to the throne in the same year that Alexander the Great became king of Macedon. Herodotus (c. 484–c. 425 B.C.): Hailed as the father of history, his account of the wars between the Greeks and the Persians is the chief source of early Greek history, as well as that of contemporary peoples of the Near East.

17

Murashu family: Entrepreneurial family from Nippur whose business dealings are known to us through an archive of almost 900 tablets, dating from 454 to 414 B.C. Plutarch (c. A.D. 45–c. 120): L. Mestrius Plutarchus is an excellent example of the truly Greco-Roman culture that the Romans forged in the imperial period. Born and raised in Chaeronea in central Greece, he traveled widely in the empire, including to Egypt and Rome, but lived most of his life in Greece. Thucydides, son of Olorus (460–400 B.C.): Athenian general regarded as one of the greatest historians. Tissaphernes (d. 395 B.C.): Persian satrap of Sardis who was a key player in the empire during the reigns of Darius II and Artaxerxes II. Under Darius, he sought to exploit the war between Sparta and Athens for the bene¿t of the Persians. Xenophon (427–355 B.C.): Athenian mercenary general, historian, philosopher, and student of Socrates who served with Cyrus the Younger and recorded the march of the Ten Thousand in Anabasis.

Lecture 2: Questioning the Sources

Xerxes (XšayƗršƗ): “The one who rules over heroes”; the name of two Persian kings, Xerxes I (r. 486–465 B.C.) and Xerxes II (r. 424/3).

Suggested Reading Brosius, The Persian Empire from Cyrus II to Artaxerxes I. Curtis and Tallis, eds., Forgotten Empire.

Questions to Consider 1. Compared to other historical eras you’ve studied, what are the special challenges of studying the Persian Empire?

18

2. If you had to choose between losing either the Greek and biblical narrative sources or the Persian documentary sources, which would you choose?

19

The World before Cyrus Lecture 3

I

n this lecture, we examine the stage of ancient west Asia—stretching from the Mediterranean to Mesopotamia to Iran—from about 1000 to 550 B.C., in order to understand the forces that shaped early Persian history. To get a full picture of this early world, we’ll work our way from the Mediterranean eastward to the center. First, we’ll focus on the Assyrian Empire and the Neo-Babylonian Empire that arose in the wake of Assyria’s collapse. Then, we’ll look at three peoples—the Medes, the Elamites, and the early Persians themselves—who together would play a crucial role in the conquests of Cyrus and Cambyses and the subsequent rise of the Achaemenid Empire.

Lecture 3: The World before Cyrus

The Mediterranean Shore x Along the shores of the Mediterranean and Aegean seas, the Mycenaean civilization of the Bronze Age had collapsed by around 1100 B.C. Around 750, after a period of poverty and isolation, the tiny villages of mainland Greece and the Aegean began climbing back into the civilized world. x

Moving east, across the Aegean to Anatolia—an area that roughly corresponds to modern Turkey—the Hittite Empire had also disintegrated at the end of the Bronze Age. In the 1st millennium B.C., the Lydian kingdom, centered on its capital at Sardis, controlled an area ranging from the Greek cities on the Aegean coast inland to central Anatolia.

x

On the east coast of the Mediterranean, the region of the Levant had been a sort of borderland in the Bronze Age, with Hittites and Egyptians struggling for control. In the early 1st millennium, the Levantine coast saw the rise of a number of tiny independent states, including Israel and the Phoenician kingdom of Tyre.

20

x

Unlike the Hittites and Mycenaeans, the Egyptians managed to survive the Bronze Age, but from 1000 to 700 B.C., they had to deal with numerous outside invaders, including the Libyans, Nubians (or Kushites), and Assyrians. In the 660s, the Saïte dynasty ¿nally restored native Egyptian rule, expelling the Assyrians and promoting trade and diplomacy with Greeks, Lydians, and others.

The Assyrians x Lydia and Egypt were regional powers, but the real international power of the early 1st millennium B.C. was the Neo-Assyrian Empire, which lasted from 934 to 610 B.C. The Assyrian homeland lay on the upper Tigris River, in what is today northeastern Iraq, east to the region of modern Mosul and Kirkuk. The capital city of Assur was settled around 3500 B.C., and the Assyrians had other great cities, including Nimrud and Nineveh. x

In the late Bronze Age, the Assyrians dominated northern Mesopotamia all the way to Babylon and west as far as Phoenicia. The troubles at the end of the Bronze Age severely damaged Assyrian power but didn’t destroy it. By the 900s B.C., the Assyrians had recovered and began to expand again; by around 700, Assyria had become the most powerful empire of the west Asian world.

x

The Assyrian Empire succeeded because it was aggressive, organized, and lucky. The Assyrians ¿elded the best army yet seen, with infantry, cavalry, and chariots working together. They had engineers and siege machinery but were also masters at terrorizing their enemies.

x

The Assyrian imperial administration was highly militarized. Conquered peoples were incorporated into the empire, sometimes as semiindependent clients who paid tribute but also as imperial provinces with Assyrian governors.

x

The stereotype of the Assyrians as warlike and cruel is not entirely on the mark. The Assyrians did not force conquered peoples to worship Assyrian gods, and they were skillful administrators, road builders, and librarians. 21

x

The Assyrians had a series of skilled, savvy kings, but in the late 600s B.C., their luck in this regard ran out. Succession problems arose following the death of the last great Assyrian king, Ashurbanipal (r. c. 668–627 B.C.). Babylon broke free and allied with the Medes of the Zagros Mountains, and together, the Babylonians and Medes attacked Assyria. By 612, they had sacked the cities of Ashur, Nineveh, and Nimrud, and by 600, the Assyrian Empire was destroyed.

Lecture 3: The World before Cyrus

x

22

The Neo-Babylonians campaigned far to the west, encountering the Saïte Egyptians, who were also looking to expand into the vacuum left by Assyria’s collapse. Nebuchadnezzar beat the Egyptians and crushed the tiny Levantine kingdoms that tried to assert their independence. In 587/6 B.C., he destroyed

© Hemera/Thinkstock.

The Neo-Babylonians x The Neo-Babylonian Empire (626–539 B.C.) arose in the wake of the Assyrian fall. The ¿rst Neo-Babylonian king, Nabopolassar, began as an Assyrian general but then revolted and led the Babylonians in the ¿nal war on Assyria. Nabopolassar (r. c. 630– 605 B.C.) and his son Nebuchadnezzar (r. c. 605–562 B.C.) absorbed the former Assyrian lands of Mesopotamia.

After destroying the kingdom of Judah, Nebuchadnezzar captured Jerusalem and—in very Assyrian style—deported its population to Babylon.

the southern Israelite kingdom of Judah. He captured Jerusalem and deported its population to Babylon. x

The Neo-Babylonians preserved many aspects of Assyrian rule, including the provincial administration. They built magni¿cent structures in Babylon and forged diplomatic connections with other rising states, including the Lydians in Anatolia.

x

In 555 B.C., the Neo-Babylonian king Nabonidus came to power. He tried to reshape Babylonian religion but also remained an empire builder, attacking the Levant during the 550s.

The “Median Empire” x The ancestors of the Medes began arriving in Iran from central Asia in the 3rd millennium B.C. By around 1000, the Medes had established themselves in the Zagros Mountains, which run northwest to southeast along the western side of modern Iran. x

The Medes begin showing up in Assyrian records from the 9th century B.C., not as a uni¿ed state but as separate chiefdoms. The Assyrians especially associated the Medes with cavalry. By the late 700s, the Assyrians brieÀy got control over the Zagros, and Medes began to appear at the Assyrian court.

x

According to the account of Herodotus, the Medes started building a powerful empire around 700 B.C., bringing in the Persians around 650. But the archaeological evidence from western Iran doesn’t match Herodotus’s picture of a Median Empire.

x

For example, the remains of a forti¿ed settlement have been found at Tepe Nush-i Jan in western Iran. Flourishing in the 8th and 7th centuries, this settlement was reduced to poverty by the early 500s, the time when, according to Herodotus, the Medes were at the height of their power. A similar pattern appears at other sites. Such contrary evidence raises doubt among scholars that there ever was a centralized Median Empire.

23

x

The Medes who helped the Neo-Babylonians destroy Assyria were powerful warriors, but the Neo-Babylonians reaped the bene¿ts of the Median efforts. The former Assyrian territories fell into Babylonian hands. Ironically, some Median cities had prospered through trade with the Assyrians, but after the fall of Assyria, the Medes seem to have reverted to a pastoralist lifestyle.

x

Herodotus’s story of the Median Empire may be mostly myth, but there’s no denying that the Medes later played an important role in the Achaemenid Empire. Median styles of clothing were widely adopted by the Persians; the magi, or priest-councillor were associated with the Medes; and Median troops, especially cavalry, would form a signi¿cant part of Persia’s armed forces.

Lecture 3: The World before Cyrus

The Elamites x Elamite history stretches back almost to the beginnings of civilization. The great Elamite city of Susa was founded about 4000 B.C., and by the 2000s, the Elamites had formed a series of royal dynasties. The heartland of Elam lay in southwestern Iran, in the modern province of Khuzetan, but Elamite territory sometimes stretched west into Mesopotamia and east toward central Asia. x

Elam prospered in the Bronze Age, was swept by destructions around 1100 B.C., and recovered by around 800. During the 700s, the Elamites had a powerful kingdom centered at Susa and often allied with Babylon against Assyria.

x

The later Elamite dynasties were squeezed between the Assyrians to the west and the Zagros Mountain peoples, such as the Medes and Persians, to the east. Over time, the Elamite kingdoms splintered, and the Persians took over some of them. Around 646 B.C., the Assyrian king Ashurbanipal destroyed Susa and deported its population. The surviving Elamites gradually merged with the Persians.

x

The Elamites played an important role in early Persian history. The Persians adopted the Elamite model of an organized state centered on

24

a king. The continued use of the Elamite language shows that the early Persian kings relied on Elam’s scribes and administrators. x

Under the Persians, Elam would become a major province of the empire, behind only Media and Persia itself. The ancient city of Susa, restored by the Achaemenids, would become a major administrative center, and the Persians would adopt elements of Elamite culture and religion.

The Earliest Persians x Like the Medes, the Persians started arriving in Iran around 2500 B.C. By around 1000 B.C., they may have settled two separate parts of western Iran: the Zagros Mountains of modern Kermanshah province (Parsua) and the region of Anshan in modern Fars province. x

The Persians who lived in Parsua were exposed to direct Assyrian assault and to inÀuence from the Medes to their north. Over time, they may have been absorbed by the Medes or, perhaps, migrated south to Fars. But the Persians in Anshan were shielded from direct Assyrian assault by Elamite territory.

x

As the Assyrians pressed Elam from the west, the Persians in Fars gained power among the splintered Elamite kingdoms. Sometime between roughly 700 and 650 B.C., Persians came to dominate what had once been Elamite Anshan. By 645, an Assyrian annal records a Persian king named Kuraš or Kurush. This is the ¿rst named king of Persia and may be the grandfather of Cyrus.

x

The Persians in Fars took advantage of Elamite fragmentation and started building their own state but adopted the Elamite written language, administration, and artistic styles. Scholars increasingly believe that the earliest Persian kings were Iranians who saw themselves as heirs to the Elamite royal tradition.

x

At the start of the 550s B.C., Assyria was gone, the small towns of Athens and Sparta in Greece were focused on local concerns, Egypt and Lydia were prospering, and the new king at Babylon was consolidating his power. The Medes were powerful but loosely organized, and in 25

Anshan, the Elamites had splintered and mixed with the Persians. The stage was set for the rise of a new power that would, for the ¿rst time, bring together the histories of these far-Àung regions.

Names to Know Ashurbanipal (r. c. 668–627 B.C.): Son of the Assyrian ruler Esarhaddon, Ashurbanipal was challenged by his brother, who allied with the Elamites and the Babylonians to rebel against him. Nabonidus (Akk.: Nabû-nƗ-id, r. c. 555–539 B.C.): Neo-Babylonian king; ruler who alienated Babylonia after he moved the capital to a desert oasis in the Arabian desert, perhaps because he wished to promote the worship of the moon god Sin. Nebuchadnezzar (r. c. 605–562 B.C.): Neo-Babylonian ruler who succeeded his father, Nabopolassar.

Suggested Reading Morris and Scheidel, eds., The Dynamics of Ancient Empires.

Lecture 3: The World before Cyrus

Potts, The Archaeology of Elam.

Questions to Consider 1. How did geography inÀuence the early history of the Persians? 2. Who do you think had the most signi¿cant inÀuence on the early Persians: the Assyrians, the Medes, or the Elamites? Why?

26

Cyrus and Cambyses—Founders of the Empire Lecture 4

T

his lecture focuses on a brief but crucial era of four decades, from 560 to 522 B.C., during which time the Persian kings Cyrus and Cambyses assembled a world-spanning empire. Scholars and others often ask what causes historical change: Do great men and women shape history, or are deeper societal processes and currents responsible, including the lives of those who may have shaped history but are not recorded by it? The likely answer is that we need to combine these perspectives to gain a true understanding of the past. In this lecture, we’ll see that Cyrus and Cambyses were the right leaders who emerged at the right time among the right people. Cyrus II of Anshan (r. 559–530 B.C.) x The founder of the Persian Empire was Cyrus of Anshan, who came to the throne in 559 B.C. Anshan was a kingdom of Elamite origin that lay in the modern province of Fars in southern Iran. x

Cyrus is one of the most remarkable ¿gures in ancient world history, known from Herodotus as the son of a Median princess and a Persian, from Ctesias as a poor man, and from the Hebrew Bible as anointed by God to carry out the divine purpose of rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem.

x

To understand the real Cyrus, we begin by examining the Cyrus Cylinder. This is a football-size clay oblong inscribed with cuneiform characters, discovered at Babylon in 1879.

x

On the cylinder, Cyrus calls himself the great king, the king of Anshan, “son of Cambyses, grandson of Cyrus, descendant of Teispes.” A stamped seal from Persepolis provides some independent con¿rmation of this royal genealogy.

x

The ¿rst stages of Cyrus’s reign are dif¿cult to recover. Possibly his ¿rst move was to reconquer the old Elamite city of Susa. That victory may 27

Lecture 4: Cyrus and Cambyses—Founders of the Empire

have brought him into conÀict with the Medes in the central Zagros. Babylonian chronicles record wars between the Medes and Anshan in the later 550s. x

Cyrus ultimately conquered the Medes but then made sure to present himself as a legitimate Median king. He honored the former Median king, Astyages, and perhaps married one of his daughters. Ecbatana, along with Susa, became an important Persian administrative center.

x

Median soldiers joined Cyrus’s army, and many central Asian tribesmen who had once followed Astyages now swore allegiance to Cyrus. These actions set a pattern for Cyrus’s later conquests: Use local traditions to create legitimacy, govern with a light touch, and keep up the momentum by incorporating locals into the army.

Croesus, Lydia, and Sardis x The fall of the Medes brought another player into the picture: King Croesus of Lydia. During the 700s and 600s, Lydia had risen to dominate western Anatolia but had been blocked by the Medes from expansion to the east. x

In 546 B.C., Croesus sent his powerful army eastward across the Halys River, where the Lydians ran into Cyrus. The initial ¿ght was a draw, and because winter was approaching, Croesus withdrew to Sardis, likely planning to return in the spring.

x

Instead of hunkering down for the winter, the Persians marched on Sardis. Croesus led his troops out to meet Cyrus, but according to Herodotus, the scent and appearance of Persian camels arrayed on the front line spooked the Lydian horses. After a hard ¿ght, the Persians trapped the Lydians in Sardis.

x

The walled city of Sardis was formidable, but Cyrus announced that the ¿rst man to scale the wall would be rewarded. A Persian named Hyroeades led an assault party up a path he had observed being used by a Lydian; the city fell and Croesus was taken alive.

28

© Clipart.

His men’s horses possibly spooked by camels, King Croesus of Lydia was captured after a hard ¿ght at Sardis and was retained by Cyrus to serve in his royal entourage.

x

Cyrus was generous with Croesus, retaining him in the royal entourage. The Persian king put a garrison in Sardis and sent Lydian gold east to ¿ll his own coffers.

x

Cyrus then hurried back east, but the Lydian governor he left behind almost immediately rebelled, with the help of some Ionian Greek cities. Cyrus sent troops back to Lydia and Ionia. The Persians managed to quell the revolt, but the conquest of Ionia wasn’t yet complete.

Nabonidus, Babylon, and the Cyrus Cylinder x Cyrus spent much of the rest of the 540s expanding his empire in central Asia, but the real prize lay in the Tigris and Euphrates valley: the ancient city of Babylon. x

At the time, King Nabonidus ruled Babylon, but some of his subjects allied with Cyrus, including the governor Gobryas. Nabonidus had a 29

x

As he had done with the Medes and the Lydians, Cyrus spared Nabonidus and presented himself in local terms to gain legitimacy. In inscriptions and poems, he was praised as a protector of the Babylonian people and a supporter of Babylon’s traditional gods.

x

On the Cyrus Cylinder, the Persian king appears as a just ruler and protector, chosen by the god Marduk to save Babylon from the oppression and impiety of Nabonidus. In format and content, the cylinder follows time-honored Babylonian style.

x

In addition to restoring Marduk, Cyrus allowed the people of Israel and others who’d been deported to Babylon to return home. To the Hebrew people, he allowed the right of rebuilding the Temple in Jerusalem.

x

In 1971, as part of a celebration of the 2500th anniversary of the founding of Cyrus’s empire, the sister of the shah of Iran A false translation of the text on the ancient Cyrus Cylinder appeared online in the early presented the United 2000s, duping many people. Nations with a replica of the Cyrus Cylinder, along with a proclamation describing it as a declaration on human rights. It’s ironic that a document written in Iraq for propaganda purposes came to be seen as a source of modern ideas about political freedom and as part of Iranian identity.

The Final Years and Death of Cyrus x The last years of Cyrus’s life were spent at war. He died in 530, in battle against the nomads of central Asia. He was buried at Pasargadae.

30

© Mike Peel (www.mikepeel.net).

Lecture 4: Cyrus and Cambyses—Founders of the Empire

strong army and held out against Cyrus for several years. At last, on October 12, 539 B.C., a Persian army under Gobryas entered Babylon; Cyrus himself arrived soon after, and Nabonidus was taken alive.

x

Cyrus must have been a brilliant military leader, not only in terms of strategic decisiveness and battle tactics but also in inspiring his troops. He seems to have had a keen sense of the strengths of his people, great diplomatic skill, a deep knowledge of history, and a superb understanding of public relations.

Cambyses II (r. 530–522 B.C.) x If Cyrus became an idealized good king in later traditions, Cambyses has become the stereotypical bad king. Yet a closer look tells a different story. x

Cambyses was the son of Cyrus and Cassandane, who died young. He probably began ¿ghting alongside his father as soon as he was able. The fact that Greek sources record no animosity between Cyrus and Cambyses suggests that father and son had a good relationship. Both the Cyrus Cylinder and Babylonian documents provide some evidence to back up this idea.

x

Cambyses’s transition to power after his father’s death was smooth. He retained many of Cyrus’s advisors and stayed true to his father’s plans. The Persians were willing to follow Cambyses, and he led them on to a great victory against the toughest foe they had yet faced: the Egyptians.

x

Cyrus had begun planning the invasion of Egypt in the 530s, but it was left to Cambyses to complete the task. The Egyptians had tried to take advantage of Assyria’s collapse in the late 600s, and in the 580s, they’d tried to grab the Levant from the Neo-Babylonians. Cambyses knew he had to strike at Egypt before it turned its attention to the fragile Persian Empire.

x

Under the pharaoh Amasis, the Egyptians had a strong position. They were protected from land invasion by the waterless Sinai Desert. They had a powerful army and navy and were allied with Polykrates, the Greek tyrant of the island of Samos.

x

For several years, the Persians prepared to attack Egypt. Through diplomacy, Cambyses brought the naval powers of Cyprus and 31

Lecture 4: Cyrus and Cambyses—Founders of the Empire

Phoenicia—formerly Egyptian allies—to his side, giving the Persians their ¿rst Àeet. Polykrates of Samos also sent 40 oared war galleys, called “triremes”. x

The Egyptians, meanwhile, were in trouble. Some of their mercenaries defected, including a Greek named Phanes who provided valuable intelligence on how to cross the desert. In another blow, the elderly Amasis died in 526. His son Psamtik (Psammetichos) succeeded him.

x

On land, Cambyses allied with the desert Arabs, who helped him set up water depots and pipelines to supply his army. Then, he mustered his army, which included Persians and Medes, as well as Ionian Greeks.

x

In the spring of 525 B.C., Cambyses’s army crossed the Sinai Desert. Ships from his new navy probably sailed along the coast in support. Psamtik was waiting for him in the Nile Delta. In bitter ¿ghting, the Persians routed the Egyptians, then took the delta port of Pelusium. They then besieged Memphis and forced the Egyptians to surrender.

x

By taking Egypt, Cambyses ensured that the Persian hold on the eastern Mediterranean would be long-lasting. In the coming years, Egypt sometimes regained its independence, but it was never again a major force on the international scene.

x

The conquest of Egypt eliminated the last possible rival to Persian power and ensured that the Persians could hold the vast territories they’d conquered.

x

According to Herodotus, and some other sources, Cambyses grew increasingly insane the longer he stayed in Egypt. In truth, however, he was not a “mad king.” After some initial disorder, Egyptian papyrus documents show that the Persians took over the existing administration and successfully managed Egypt.

x

Egyptian sources also suggest that Cambyses promoted Egyptian religion and took on the role of an Egyptian pharaoh, a necessary step to gain legitimacy in this ancient land.

32

x

Herodotus would have visited Egypt at a time after the initial conquest, when revolts had broken out among some Egyptians who had grown tired of the Persian presence. In that environment, we can imagine that the Egyptians would have passed on some nasty stories about Cambyses.

x

Cambyses spent three years consolidating power in Egypt. In March 522 B.C., a revolt broke out in the center of the empire, and Cambyses hastened back to deal with it. He fell ill en route and died in western Syria in July or August 522.

Names to Know Astyages (Akk.: Ishtumegu): Last king of the Medes. According to Herodotus, when he became cruel and despotic, the Persians, who had previously been brought into the “Median Empire” revolted, under Cyrus the Great. Cambyses II (r. 530–522 B.C.): King of Persia and son of Cyrus I, he conquered Egypt in 525–522 B.C. Gobryas (OP: Gaubaruva): (1) A Babylonian governor who allied with Cyrus against King Nabonidus in 539 B.C. (2) An ally of Darius I.

Suggested Reading Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, chaps 1–2. Kuhrt, The Persian Empire, chaps 3–4.

Questions to Consider 1. If you could go back in time and talk with either Cyrus or Cambyses in person, whom would you choose to meet?

2. How has the nature of the evidence shaped our understanding of Cyrus and Cambyses?

33

Darius I—Creator of the Imperial System Lecture 5

M

Lecture 5: Darius I—Creator of the Imperial System

any people know of Darius I (r. 522–486 B.C.) from events at the end of his reign—he’s the king who sent troops to ¿ght the Greeks at Marathon in 490 B.C.—but fewer know how he rose to power. How Darius became king is one of the most fascinating mysteries of Persian history, and we’ll look into his murky beginnings in this lecture. We’ll also see that the reign of Darius I was a crucial moment in Persian history. The territories conquered by Cyrus and Cambyses were not yet integrated in a single whole; many of them had leaders who might want to reclaim their independence. Darius showed that he was capable of meeting this challenge and establishing an imperial ideology that would endure for almost 200 years. Cambyses and Bardiya x According to Herodotus, the reason Cambyses left Egypt in early 522 to return to Ecbatana was that a pretender using the name Bardiya (also the name of Cambyses’s younger brother) had taken the Persian throne. Cambyses died on his way to deal with the pretender, and Bardiya ruled for seven months before he was exposed and killed by a group of nobles. In the wake of Bardiya’s death, Darius won the throne. x

To get the real story behind Darius’s ascension, we need to turn to the man himself. Darius was related to Cyrus and Cambyses but not closely. His father, Hystaspes, led troops in eastern Iran for Cambyses, and Darius served with Cambyses in Egypt. In 522 B.C., Darius was about 30 years old. All the Greek accounts of his rise to power derive at least partly from an inscription he carved on the cliff face at Bisitun.

The Bisitun Inscription x In ancient times, the main road from Babylon to Ecbatana climbed northeast into the Zagros Mountains, curving around Mount Bisitun. On the southeast slopes of Bisitun, on a cliff face 300 feet above the road, Darius carved an inscription in 521 B.C., the year after he took power. 34

x

The inscription’s centerpiece is a 10-foot-high by 18-foot-wide relief that shows Darius, attended by an archer and a spearman, crushing a rebel underfoot. Before Darius stand eight more rebels roped together, and above them hovers a ¿gure in a winged disk, the divine symbol of the god Ahuramazda.

x

Beside and below the reliefs is an inscription repeated in three languages: Elamite, Babylonian, and Old Persian. The inscription presents Darius as a restorer, inspired by the god Ahuramazda to kill Gaumata (the impersonator who had taken the throne) and seize the kingship.

x

Both Greek and Persian sources con¿rm that Cambyses died of natural causes or an accident on his way home from Egypt. He may have killed his brother Bardiya, or Bardiya may have rebelled against Cambyses and set himself up as king. Documents from Babylonia show that a king named Bardiya did rule from April to September 522.

x

If Cambyses killed Bardiya, it would have been possible for an impersonator (Gaumata) to seize the throne, but most scholars today believe that Gaumata never existed. It’s likely that Darius invented Gaumata and claimed that Cambyses killed Bardiya in order to hide the real murderer: Darius himself.

x

If Darius was lying, that means that Bardiya legitimately came to power after the death of Cambyses. Bardiya was murdered by Darius, who invented the ¿gure of Gaumata to divert attention from his guilt.

x

If Darius was telling the truth, Cambyses had Bardiya killed, and Gaumata seized power and claimed to be Bardiya. Darius overthrew him, restoring the legitimate line of Cyrus. Given the evidence we have, a complete solution is impossible.

Reconquering the Empire x The death of Bardiya/Gaumata didn’t give Darius automatic control of the empire. In fact, only about a third of the Bisitun inscription covers Bardiya/Gaumata. Roughly the next third covers Darius’s actions from 522 to 520 B.C. 35

Lecture 5: Darius I—Creator of the Imperial System

This period was akin to a time of civil war, with opponents of Darius possibly aiming to grab the empire for themselves and Persians, Elamites, and Medes ¿ghting on both sides. In several areas, large military forces broke with Darius, but he also had support from some powerful Persian noble families and skilled generals.

x

In the Bisitun inscription, Darius gives precise dates for his re-conquests. If these are accurate, they show a lightning series of marches and battles and coordination of far-Àung detachments.

© Photos.com/Thinkstock.

x

Darius I was a very successful imperial ruler. His reign was a crucial moment in Persian history.

x

Darius killed Gaumata in Media in late September 522 B.C. Soon, both Elam and Babylonia revolted, with locals declaring themselves kings in both places. Darius’s supporters quickly crushed the revolt in Elam, but Darius himself had a hard ¿ght before he took Babylon in late December.

x

At Babylon, news of further revolts in Media, Assyria, Armenia, and eastern Iran arrived. Fortunately, Darius had loyal commanders to deal with these uprisings. He headed back to Ecbatana, the capital of Media, with his army. By May 521 B.C., Darius had quelled the Median revolt and impaled its leader outside the royal palace at Ecbatana.

x

That summer, Darius’s father, Hystaspes, secured northeastern Iran, while Darius and his allies put down further revolts in the fall. There were last gasps of revolt in Babylon and Elam down to 520, but by 519,

36

Darius had defeated his last challenger. He ¿nally traveled to Egypt and Lydia, where he managed to control stirrings of rebellion. Creating a Dynasty x Darius knew he couldn’t keep power by force alone. He had to establish a new basis for stability. Otherwise, civil war would break out repeatedly, and the Persian conquests would fall apart. In this regard, the Bisitun inscription gives us a new vision of empire, unlike anything Cyrus and Cambyses had imagined. x

Cyrus and Cambyses had been kings of Anshan, drawing on an Elamite political tradition. Darius was to be the Great King, the king of kings, with an emphasis on the Persian-ness of the imperial ruling class.

x

Darius’s ¿rst step in the inscription was to create a royal genealogy linking himself directly to Cyrus, and it’s possible that he shared a descendant with Cambyses’s mother. Next, he made the favor of the god Ahuramazda central to his claim to power and presented his rule as just and moral.

x

The Bisitun inscription promises reward for those who care for Darius’s monument in the future and destruction for those who vandalize it.

x

The inscription also set out the relationship between ruler and ruled. Faithful subjects obey and bring tribute; when the king asks something, they do it. In return, Darius promises to reward the loyal and punish the faithless and disrespectful.

x

The next element is a new Persian identity for the empire. In the very ¿rst line of the Bisitun inscription, Darius calls himself not king of Anshan but “King in Persia.” When he lists the peoples who obey him, Persia is ¿rst. His description of the re-conquest highlights the Persian generals who helped him. Darius’s lands consist of many peoples, but the Persians are always ¿rst.

37

x

To ensure that his subjects understood the of¿cial view, Darius had copies of the Bisitun text sent across the empire, in several different languages, and carved new inscriptions everywhere.

Lecture 5: Darius I—Creator of the Imperial System

Building the Empire x Creating this new imperial ideology would be impressive in its own right, but Darius also took some practical steps to ensure that his dynasty would continue. He eliminated nobles who challenged him and married numerous royal women, including the daughters of Cyrus and Bardiya. x

Next, Darius re¿ned the empire’s administration. Under Cyrus and Cambyses, satraps had been appointed to rule conquered areas, but their satrapies weren’t well de¿ned. Darius probably ¿xed the boundaries of the 20 or so satrapies more clearly and replaced those governors who disobeyed him. He also regularized the garrisons and military settlements that Cyrus and Cambyses had established.

x

Satrapies had to provide both troops and tribute, and Darius established a system of ¿xed quotas that helped prevent satraps from squeezing their provinces to try to gain favor with the king. To help standardize tribute payments, he introduced the ¿rst real Persian coins.

x

Darius also began an ambitious program of construction and expanded imperial communications to enable tight control of his far-Àung territories. He improved existing road networks and added new routes and rest stops.

x

Finally, Darius added new lands to the empire. In the ¿rst years of his reign, he launched several expeditions, successfully conquering parts of modern India and Pakistan, Thrace (roughly the area of modern Bulgaria), and the Greek island of Samos.

The Secrets to Darius’s Success x Darius managed to seize power in 522 and hold it until he died in bed in 486. He was able to do so through the support of his family and allies and with the legacy of Cyrus and Cambyses. The earlier kings had left

38

him both veteran troops and commanders and the practical example of tolerance and local autonomy in the lands he ruled. x

Finally, Darius had the “right stuff” as a leader. In a time of upheaval and rapid change, he was able to adapt and was a master of both image and the practicalities of governing. Perhaps most important, Darius had the vision to see beyond his own lifetime and create an imperial system that would endure for the next two centuries.

Name to Know Hystaspes (VištƗspa): (1) Skilled general under Cambyses and father of Darius I; in the summer of 521 B.C., he assisted his son by securing northeastern Iran. (2) Youngest brother of Artaxerxes I; he may have led a revolt in Bactria against his brother.

Important Term Ahuramazda (also Ahura Mazda or Auramazda): Zoroastrian deity. The supreme creator god in the Persian pantheon.

Suggested Reading Cook, The Persian Empire. Kuhrt, The Persian Empire, chap 5.

Questions to Consider 1. Was Darius a murderous usurper or a righteous restorer? Do you think he’s telling the truth in the Bisitun inscription?

2. How might the Persian Empire have developed differently if the real Bardiya had succeeded Cambyses and Darius had never come to the throne?

39

Persian Capitals and Royal Palaces Lecture 6

T

Lecture 6: Persian Capitals and Royal Palaces

he Persian Empire had not one but ¿ve capital cities among which the king and his court traveled, and in this lecture, we will explore each of these cities. We’ll see how these sites functioned as the nerve centers of the empire and as symbolic statements of Persian power. In ancient west Asia, palaces were often royal residences, but they were set in strategic locations and could function as administrative centers of government. Palaces had treasuries for gold and silver, as well as storerooms for such goods as wine, grain, and leather. As we’ll see, a palace could also be a symbolic center—a place that embodied the power of a kingdom or empire and a site for religious rituals. The Achaemenid palaces drew on the long west Asian palace tradition, but the Persians shaped their palaces to ¿t their own speci¿c needs and goals. Pasargadae x Pasargadae lies in a fertile highland valley in the modern Fars province of Iran, on an important route north from modern Shiraz. The Pasargadae region has a moderate climate, with summers in the 80s and winters in the low 40s F. With up to 20 inches of rain yearly, plus a river nearby, the site has plenty of water. x

Cyrus the Great built his palace on this beautiful plain, spreading the buildings out over a wide park-like area of more than 400 acres. We will focus on three elements: the Throne Hill at the northeast, the palaces and gardens in the center, and the tomb of Cyrus at the south.

x

On top of the hill are remains of a great stone platform, perhaps for a palace. The construction may have been interrupted by Cyrus’s death or the troubles that followed Cambyses and was never ¿nished, although Darius forti¿ed the hill with mud-brick walls. The Throne Hill may have been a storehouse or treasury, with space for a garrison.

40

The central palace area is entered from the southeast by passing through a freestanding, covered gateway. Only broken remains survive, but they’re enough to show that the gate was huge: more than 80 by 70 feet, with a hall of columns more than 50 feet tall! Most of the gate was mud brick, but one stone pillar has survived, with a carved relief more than 10 feet tall.

x

From this gateway, we walk north to a small palace, probably used for public receptions. This palace had an airy central hall, with GreekinÀuenced covered porticoes on its four sides. The stone capitals were carved with lions, bulls, and other animals. This palace is an early, modest version of the apadana, or great hall with columns, that we’ll see at Susa and Persepolis.

x

Walking north, we see a larger palace and a set of pavilions set around a rectangular garden. This palace also had a central hall with columns, and its southern portico looked out onto the garden. Remains of the stone irrigation channels for the garden have also been discovered.

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

x

Pasargadae, once with its open spaces and gardens, is the perfect symbol of Cyrus, the conqueror who spent his life on the move outdoors. 41

x

A half mile south of the palace area sits the stone tomb of Cyrus. The tomb consists of a rectangular chamber with a pitched roof, on top of a stepped platform. The whole thing is less than 40 feet high. The design shows Lydian, Ionian, and possibly Mesopotamian inÀuences, put together in a uniquely Persian way.

x

As research continues at Pasargadae, it is becoming clear that the site’s apparent emptiness is deceiving. Remote sensing equipment has detected extensive landscaping and additional buildings near the palaces. It may be that tents, rather than permanent buildings, were used to house troops and of¿cials when the king was in residence.

Lecture 6: Persian Capitals and Royal Palaces

Ecbatana x From Pasargadae, we loop northwest, skirting the Àanks of the Zagros Mountains, to Ecbatana. This region can be cold—as low as 13 degrees in the winter—and wet—12 inches of snow or rain yearly. The highland plains around Ecbatana are very fertile, and in ancient times, they were famous for horses and wheat. x

Ecbatana was the capital of the Medes, conquered by Cyrus and taken over by Darius and the Achaemenids. According to Xenophon, it was the kings’ summer residence, and Herodotus says it had seven concentric walls, but this can’t be con¿rmed because the modern city of Hamadan sits atop the ancient city. So far, only some mud-brick walls and stone column bases have been found.

x

It’s dif¿cult to determine what relics truly belong to Ecbatana because Hamadan was long a center for the illicit antiquities trade. In the 1800s and 1900s, many items, either forgeries or genuine articles looted from elsewhere, passed through Hamadan.

x

Ecbatana was famed for its beauty. Greek sources mention cedar and cypress roofs, sheathed in gold and silver, with silver tiles and silversheathed columns. This decoration displayed Persian wealth, but it was also a way to store precious metals in an attractive and space-saving fashion.

42

x

Ecbatana commanded the major land route across the Zagros Mountains and gave the Persians control over vital sources of horses and grain. From Darius until the end of the empire, Ecbatana was a rallying point for troops coming from eastern Iran and beyond.

Babylon x From Ecbatana, we travel about 300 miles southwest, across the Zagros Mountains, to Babylon—a Semitic word meaning “God’s Gate.” Babylon is in the Mesopotamian plain, about 55 miles south of modern Baghdad. In ancient times, the Euphrates River ran through the middle of the city. Temperatures in Babylon can get above 120 degrees in the summer, while winters sometimes get into the 40s, with very little rain. x

Babylon ¿rst Àourished in the 18th century B.C. under King Hammurabi. Its second boom time came under the Neo-Babylonian kings in the early 500s B.C. These kings totally renovated the city, constructing a grand palace, the legendary Hanging Gardens, the Ishtar Gate, and Processional Way. Ancient Babylon covered about 2,000 acres and had a population of about 100,000.

x

Both Cyrus and Cambyses used Babylon as a capital, and like those rulers, Darius took the title king of Babylon. The city had immense practical value because of its strategic location on land and river routes, its great wealth, and its population.

Susa x About 200 miles east of Babylon is Susa, in modern southwestern Iran. Susa lies in an arid plain, but rivers bring water to it. Like Babylon, Susa’s temperatures can reach 120 degrees in summer and dip only into the 40s in winter. The main part of Susa consists of three mounds, or tells, built up from the accumulated deposits of 40 centuries of human occupation. x

Darius completely remodeled Susa, focusing on the three mounds: the Apadana Mound on the north, the Royal City mound on the east, and the Acropolis on the south. His workers cleared some earlier, run-down buildings, then leveled the north and east mounds to an even height. 43

Lecture 6: Persian Capitals and Royal Palaces

The mounds were shored up with a massive retaining wall, enclosing about 250 acres. Between the three mounds, there may have been a landscaped garden. x

The remains of a huge gate are visible on the east side of Susa, and another one has recently been found on the northwest of the Apadana mound.

x

There is little sign of Persian building on the Royal City mound. Scholars believe that this may actually have been an open area where soldiers and of¿cials lived in tents while the king was in residence at the palace.

x

A paved brick path leads from the Royal City mound to the Gate of Darius. Only ruins remain of this gate today, but it once measured 98 by 130 feet and had waiting room for 100 people. The most amazing ¿nd here was a statue of Darius—almost 10 feet tall—carved from Egyptian granite.

x

Passing through the Gate of Darius onto the Apadana mound, the palace of Darius would have towered ahead. The most impressive part was the Persian-style apadana, or great hall with columns, inspired by the halls of Pasargadae. Attached to its south side was a palace in the traditional Elamite-Mesopotamian plan, with rooms surrounding a series of central courts.

x

Because good stone was scarce near Susa, Darius’s builders used clay bricks of the kind the Elamites had been making for more than 1,000 years. The plain bricks were sun-dried, but the fancy ones were kilnbaked. Some of these have molded relief, while on others, the relief décor is glazed with metallic enamels.

x

Originally, visitors had to walk north along the side of the palace before turning left to reach the apadana entry. The apadana was about 65 feet high, with a central hall of 190 square feet and six rows of six columns. Today only the foundations remain. We also have remains of glazed

44

brick murals, showing life-size Persian soldiers, standing at attention with spears and bows. x

South of the apadana is the Acropolis mound. It’s taller than the other two mounds and has remains of a thick mud-brick wall, perhaps to protect a royal treasury. No trace of the gold and silver survives, but excavations have found a bronze lion and a Greek bronze weight.

x

Susa had a strategic location, in the settled lowlands near Babylon. It was never snow-bound, so travel there was possible year-round, and because the nearby rivers were navigable, one could reach the Persian Gulf by water.

x

More than 50 copies of Darius’s foundation charter, carved on clay tablets, glazed bricks, and stone, have been found at Susa. The charter describes in detail who built each part of the palace. By naming peoples in this way, Darius claimed power over their labor and the resources of their lands.

Persepolis x Finally, we head southeast about 400 miles to Persepolis, about 25 miles southwest of Pasargadae. Like Pasargadae, Persepolis has a moderate climate and good water and commands a fertile plain. The area also has good stone quarries for building and carving. x

Persepolis is the best-preserved Achaemenid palace, begun by Darius in 518 B.C. His workers erected an immense platform, covering almost 34 acres, at the base of a mountain. On the north and west, the platform had stone retaining walls 36 feet high, topped with forti¿cations, while on the south and east, there was a 20-foot-high mud-brick wall with 40-foot tall towers. The original entrance was from the south.

x

On the west edge of this platform, Darius placed his great apadana, standing 10 feet above the rest of the platform. The apadana is approached by monumental zigzag stairways on the north and east sides. Both stairways are decorated with carved relief sculptures that were originally brightly painted. 45

x

Going up the stairs into the apadana, the main hall measures almost 200 feet on a side, with six rows of six narrow stone columns, 64 feet tall. The columns can be read as a metaphor for the empire’s people supporting the king’s power. The roofs were cedar and the walls, plastered mud brick. The apadana could hold, perhaps, 10,000 people.

x

Directly south of the apadana is Darius’s small rectangular palace, the Taþara. The location is similar to that of the palace at Susa, but the design recalls that of Cyrus’s palaces at Pasargadae. Egyptian inÀuences are also visible. To the east was the treasury, holding gold and silver, works of art, and trophies from Persian conquests.

x

Persepolis symbolized an empire that had come of age. Ecbatana, Babylon, and Susa were nods to the past, and Pasargadae was a monument to the legacy of Cyrus, but for Darius, Persepolis was a bold stride into the future.

Lecture 6: Persian Capitals and Royal Palaces

Important Term apadana: Old Persian term for a great columned hall, like those at Susa and Persepolis.

Suggested Reading Curtis and Tallis, eds., Forgotten Empire. Schmidt, Persepolis I.

Questions to Consider 1. What different roles did the Achaemenid palaces play? Why didn’t the Persians just pick one capital and focus on it?

2. Is there anything missing from the Achaemenid palaces that you would have expected to see?

46

The Great King—Images and Realities Lecture 7

“T

he Great King; the king of kings; the king of lands, the king of peoples.” Darius and his successors used these titles in their inscriptions, but what did it really mean to be the Great King? We’ve already encountered some of the perspectives of outsiders, such as the Greeks: generous Cyrus, crazy Cambyses, sneaky Darius. But in this lecture, we get beyond the stereotypes of tyranny, decadence, and weakness to look at the Achaemenid kings from their own perspective. We’ll return to Persepolis, visit the nearby royal tombs at Naqsh-i Rustam, and study some of the institutions and people who surrounded the king. Public Image at Persepolis x In the time of Darius, the enormous Gate of All Lands stood at the top of the grand staircase on the northwest edge of the platform at Persepolis. An inscription records that it was built by Xerxes, the son of Darius. Xerxes also tells us that he and his father built much else that is beautiful at Persepolis. x

Recall from the last lecture the apadana, the great columned hall, at Persepolis, featuring zigzag staircases on its north and east sides. The sides of the staircases are covered on one side with sculpted reliefs of 23 nations bringing tribute and, on the other side, Persian guardsmen and nobles. The central part of each staircase shows the enthroned king. The reliefs were once brightly painted, but the paint has not survived.

x

Some have said that these reliefs are artless imitations, or that they depended on the genius of Greek sculptors, but neither of these views holds water. The kings themselves planned and directed the artistic program, and the sculptures were carved in sections by multi-ethnic teams, including Greeks, Babylonians, and Egyptians, all under Persian direction.

47

The apadana sculptures, along with other reliefs at Persepolis, present a consistent, idealized version of kingship and empire, of piety, order, and harmony. Darius and Xerxes knew their history; they were acutely conscious of the great empires of Assyria, Babylonia, and Egypt. And they used the artisans and resources of many nations to shape a new vision of ruler and ruled.

x

The tribute-bearer reliefs reÀect the Egyptian style of using individual ¿gures with speci¿c clothing and looks to stand in for whole peoples. But where Egyptian monuments show kneeling subjects, the 23 nations on the apadana are upright and digni¿ed. Each nation is separated from the next by a cypress tree, a symbol of prosperity, but there is no sense that some nations are better than others.

x

The fact that some delegates carry weapons reveals a difference from earlier west Asian empires, such as the Assyrian, that emphasized subjugation. The apadana reliefs at Persepolis stress cooperation and voluntary support for the Great King; he trusts his people to carry

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

Lecture 7: The Great King—Images and Realities

x

The apadana reliefs stress cooperation and voluntary support for the Great King. 48

weapons, and they love him so much that they bring their arms to serve him. x

At the head of each delegation, a Persian court of¿cial gently takes the hand of the delegation leader to lead him into the presence of the king. This gesture marks a contrast with Egyptian or Assyrian monuments, emphasizing reverence and piety toward the king, rather than submission.

x

On the other side of the staircase are reliefs of Persian guardsmen and nobles. The message here is that the Persians are set apart from the other nations of the empire, but they are not the king’s equals. The Great King’s troops stand serenely at attention, conveying the idea that the world has been paci¿ed, but the Persians are nonetheless ready to defend their empire.

x

In the central panel, the king sits under a canopy, looking toward the tribute-bearers. Even sitting, he is taller than those around him; he’s a man set apart from others. Standing directly behind him is the crown prince—the spitting image of his father and, thus, of dynastic continuity and stability. Behind the prince stand the royal arms-bearer and a court of¿cial, symbols of the king’s military and political power.

x

Dominating the northeast quarter of the platform is the HundredColumned Hall, begun by Xerxes and ¿nished by his son Artaxerxes I (r. 465–424/3). On its southern doorjambs are another set of reliefs, showing the king sitting on his throne. Below the king, three tiers of imperial peoples hold up the throne platform, hands raised above their heads. This “Atlas” pose was a sign of cosmic support and praise for the king.

Naqš-i Rustam: The Royal Tombs x Less than four miles northwest of Persepolis is the site of Naqš-i Rustam, a sheer cliff face where four cross-shaped tomb entries are carved. Inside each tomb are burial pits for a king and his family. These are the ¿nal resting places of Darius, Xerxes, and two of their successors. Two later royal tombs are on the hillside above Persepolis.

49

Lecture 7: The Great King—Images and Realities

x

The entry to Darius’s tomb is 50 feet above today’s ground level. The horizontal bar of the cross, containing the actual doorway to the tomb, depicts the front of a palace. On the topmost part of the vertical bar, a relief shows Darius standing on a low plinth, whose base is supported by two tiers of imperial peoples. At the edges of the relief are ¿gures of court of¿cials and warriors.

x

Across from Darius, a sacred ¿re burns on an altar, and above and between the two hovers the winged ¿gure of Ahuramazda. The crescent moon at the top right may symbolize death and the afterlife. The king’s hand is raised to salute Ahuramazda, who returns the salute—a visual reminder of Darius’s message that Ahuramazda granted him the empire.

x

The inscriptions on the tomb face give us an amazing picture of the ideal Great King, spoken in his own voice. Darius probably had them carved early in his reign. One text starts by praising Ahuramazda, then describes Darius’s noble Persian lineage and names the nations he rules.

x

A second inscription lists Darius’s ruling principles. He draws on older models of Assyrian, Babylonian, and Elamite kingship but reshapes them into a distinctively Persian ethical form. Darius tells us that he is moral, strong in both mind and body, self-controlled, and courageous.

x

Herodotus never saw this inscription, but it matches his description of Persian values, and Xenophon’s eulogy of Prince Cyrus the Younger describes Cyrus in much the same terms. It seems, thus, that these values were widely held among Persians and known even to outsiders.

x

Interestingly, both Greek and Persian sources also portray the king as a good gardener. As such, the king showed he could bring order from chaos, and the gardens themselves were symbols of fertility and renewal.

The Great King: Realities of Power x The Great King stood at the head of a complex administration that commanded immense political, military, and economic power. To understand these realities, let’s return to Persepolis, this time, to the

50

treasury building, in the southeast corner of the platform. The treasury was a combination storeroom, arsenal, archive, and museum. The Forti¿cation and Treasury tablets—clay documents written in Elamite—found at Persepolis aren’t great literature, but these receipts and memos show that the Persian kings bene¿ted from a smooth Elamite-style administration, using professional, multilingual secretaries from across the empire.

x

These of¿cials handled diplomatic and military correspondence and issued passports. At the top was a central of¿ce, with a dedicated staff of its own. One of the most important of¿cials was the treasurer, who kept track of incoming taxes and supervised payments to palace staff, priests, and workers.

x

Another set of of¿cials ran royal agricultural enterprises and workshops. The court was involved in leather processing, but it also produced cattle, grain, oil, beer, and wine. Warehouses around Persepolis stored these products until the court or the army needed them. The palace workforce included both ordinary laborers and expert artisans, grouped in teams of 10 to 1,500 people.

x

The Great King also put trusted men in ceremonial posts, such as spear-bearer, bow-bearer, and cup-bearer. The cup-bearer had the vital job of testing the king’s drinks to make sure they weren’t poisoned.

x

One of the most important of¿cials was the chiliarch, or hazarapatiš—literally,

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

x

The great columned hall at Persepolis featured zigzag entry staircases on its north and east sides. 51

Lecture 7: The Great King—Images and Realities

“commander of a thousand.” The hazarapatiš is sometimes called a prime minister or grand vizier, but Achaemenid documents suggest that he didn’t have overwhelming power at the court. x

An imperial guard of 10,000—foot soldiers, skilled with spear and bow—protected the king. They were called Immortals because their units were always kept at full strength. The Immortals guarded the gates and walls, and some of them garrisoned the citadel just above Persepolis.

x

Magi and other priests also attended the king. The magi interpreted dreams and omens, but they were also political advisors and cultural counselors, keepers of Persian wisdom and tradition, and tutors for the royal children. There were physicians at court, too, especially Egyptians and Greeks.

x

Royal women and families were another part of the court. Darius and some later Achaemenid kings had multiple wives and numerous children. The court also included castrated males, whom the Greeks called eunuchs, or “bed supervisors,” but who were actually responsible for much more than just beds.

x

As if this operation wasn’t complex enough, imagine putting the court on the move. The Great King traveled between Persepolis, Ecbatana, and Susa and sometimes to Babylon, although some cities had permanent administrative staffs that stayed in place when the king moved.

The Paradox of the Great King x Taking the Great King on his own terms can be challenging. The acts of bringing tribute and holding up the throne might seem like mass subjugation, the opposite of the individualism and freedom we worship. But the empire’s people were faithful subjects—not because they were stupid or subhuman, but because they found real satisfaction in being loyal contributors to the empire. x

52

At the same time, we should remember that the Persian image of the ideal king could be combined with brutal realpolitik. As we’ll see in a coming lecture, at the same time that Darius’s artisans were at work

on Persepolis, his armies were busy invading Scythia and crushing the rebellious Greek cities of Ionia.

Important Terms chiliarch (hazarapatiš): Literally, “commander of a thousand”; a highranking Persian court of¿cial. Naqsh-i Rustam (Naqš-i Rustam): Achaemenid royal tombs, carved into a cliff face northeast of Persepolis; the ¿nal resting place of Darius I, Xerxes I, and two of their successors.

Suggested Reading Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, chaps 5–8. Kuhrt, The Persian Empire, chap 11.

Questions to Consider 1. How did Darius borrow from earlier Near Eastern visions of kingship, and how did he shape these traditions into something distinctively Persian?

2. Can you see any drawbacks or disadvantages to the Persian court system and its complex bureaucracy?

53

Royal Roads and Provinces Lecture 8

I

n this lecture, we leave behind the Great King and the imperial center to journey out to the provinces of the empire. Herodotus wrote about the royal road from Susa to Sardis, but there was actually a whole network of roads, rivers, and canals, and they carried more than just couriers. These routes were packed with travelers—of¿cials, workers, soldiers, diplomats, businessmen, priests, and others. Achaemenid Persia was an empire on the move. There were roughly 25 million people in the empire, and on any given day, tens of thousands of them were traveling. By following them, we can see how the Persians were able to hold together the satrapies of a vast and diverse empire stretching 4,000 miles from the Mediterranean Sea to India.

Lecture 8: Royal Roads and Provinces

Roads, Rivers, Canals x By the 600s B.C., the Assyrians had built a road network stretching from Syria to Iran, with rest stations, guards, and mounted couriers. The Persians took over and greatly expanded this network. Their roads ran from the Persian capitals east to India and Afghanistan and west to Egypt and Anatolia. x

The original purpose of these ancient roads was strategic. They connected the imperial center with provincial capitals, so that troops, supplies, and information could move swiftly.

x

Aside from a few short stretches near Persepolis, Achaemenid roads were mostly unpaved. Even in cities, usually only the main avenues were paved. We know, however, that the Persians had road engineers and surveyors, so the main highways were well planned and suitable for wheeled traf¿c. Persian engineers also built bridges, especially pontoon bridges.

x

Along the main roads, the Persians placed relay stations about 15 miles apart for their mounted messengers. For people going on foot or by cart, there were other rest stops at shorter intervals. These stops had food and

54

water depots to supply troops and of¿cial travelers and work crews to maintain the roads. The Persians measured their road journeys in parasangs, perhaps the equivalent of about three miles or about an hour’s walk. In ancient Persia, a relaxed travel pace was four or ¿ve parasangs per day, but soldiers could slog up to 10 a day for short periods.

x

Persian horses were justly famous, but not everyone could afford to ride, so most ordinary people walked. For carrying heavy loads, there were donkeys, camels, and human porters; chariots and light, two-wheeled carts were also seen on the roads.

x

In some parts of the empire, one could travel by water. For example, in Mesopotamia, boats navigated the Tigris and Euphrates rivers. In the eastern empire, the Indus River and its tributaries had boat traf¿c, and in Egypt, of course, there was the Nile. Darius completed what has been called the ¿rst Suez Canal, leading from the Nile Delta to the head of the Red Sea.

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

x

In addition to road travel, boat travel was also possible in some parts of the empire, for example, on the Euphrates River. 55

x

Although sea travel was less vital to the Persians than it later was to the Romans, there were still important sailing routes from Egypt up the Levantine coast to Syria, west to Cyprus and Ionia, and north from there into the Black Sea. From the Red Sea and Persian Gulf, ships could sail as far east as India.

Lecture 8: Royal Roads and Provinces

Road Trip! x Let’s imagine a road trip from Parsargadae to visit the provinces of the Persian Empire in about 500 B.C. We ¿rst travel to Persepolis, about 30 miles away. There, we can get passports that authorize us to get food and shelter on our journey. Passports were written on leather in Aramaic, used throughout the empire as an administrative language. x

From Persepolis, we head northwest across the Zagros Mountains to Susa, about 373 miles. There are about 20 rest stops, each a day’s ride (about 15 miles) apart. The riders of the imperial messenger service (the pirradaziš) moved at a much faster pace. High-priority messages were passed from one rider to the next at a series of relay stations, reaching Susa from Persepolis in less than 24 hours.

x

The royal road to Susa loops south of the mountains, but further north, another main road goes through the narrow Persian Gates (Meyran Pass). Passes like the Persian Gates had garrisons and forti¿cations and were vital to the empire’s defense. The guards at the Persian Gates were not Persians but mountain tribesmen called the Uxians.

x

Leaving the mountains of Parsa, we enter the satrapy of Elam, the capital of which was Susa, a major communications hub. From here, a highway runs 1,677 miles northwest up the Tigris valley, then west across Anatolia. We will travel west about 200 miles to Babylon, using a combination of roads and canals.

On the Road between Susa and Babylon x Between Susa and Babylon, we make several boat changes. Note that every satrap had to maintain the roads, waterways, and rest stops in his satrapy, operating much like a state department of transportation.

56

x

Babylonia was densely populated, with maybe 5 million people. Some of the ¿elds in this province belonged to soldier-settlers, who had received land allotments in return for military service. The men were grouped into units called ha‫ܒ‬ru and controlled by the satrap. They were often settled far from their homelands to minimize the chance of revolt.

x

Babylon was the most diverse city of the empire, with 100 different nations represented. The city was also a major ¿nancial and religious center.

x

From Babylon a highway goes northeast to Ecbatana, passing the Bisitun inscription. We will turn north up the Tigris valley to pass through Assyria. The old cities of the Assyrian Empire are deserted, but the countryside here is still fertile and full of villages.

x

Near the ruins of Nineveh, around modern Mosul, we turn west, skirting the mountains of central Anatolia. This is the most direct route to the Mediterranean coast.

x

Instead of going straight to Sardis, we head for the city of Thapsakos on the upper Euphrates, where we can cross on a pontoon bridge. From Thapsakos, we go south through Syria toward Phoenicia.

Phoenicia, Judaea, and Egypt x Having reached the eastern shore of the Mediterranean, we head south for Egypt. Along the way, we pass the cities of Phoenicia, including Tyre and Sidon. These cities had their own kings, but there was also a Persian administrator based in Sidon. The Phoenician cities, especially Sidon, were important to imperial trade. x

South of Phoenicia, we come to Jerusalem. As we saw in earlier lectures, the Neo-Babylonians destroyed Jerusalem and deported the population to Babylon in 586 B.C. Cyrus later allowed the exiles to return. Around 500 B.C., Jerusalem was still getting back on its feet, as various groups of exiles struggled to de¿ne the Jewish community.

57

Lecture 8: Royal Roads and Provinces

x

The Second Temple, replacing the one the Neo-Babylonians had destroyed, had been completed in 515. By around 450 B.C., Jerusalem became the capital of Yehud, a province unfailingly loyal to the Persians.

x

We head down the coast on the land route to Egypt, where we arrive about three months after leaving Persepolis. Like Babylonia, Egypt has a population of around 5 million. In the 25 years since Cambyses conquered Egypt, the country has been brought under close Persian control. There are numerous mercenary garrisons at strategic spots.

x

If we wanted to explore Egypt, we could easily travel by water, using the Nile or canals built by Darius. In the countryside, we’d ¿nd Egyptian villages, as well as prosperous estates belonging to Persian nobles. Because of its population and prosperity, Egypt is one of the key provinces of the empire.

x

We embark on a boat in the Nile Delta and head north by sea. Coasting past Phoenicia, we stop at Cyprus, which was divided into a dozen semiautonomous cities.

x

We then cross to Cilicia on the south coast of Anatolia. Cilicia was an independent kingdom, but its rulers swore allegiance to the Persian kings. Cilicia was rich and populous, and it controlled the vital passes leading through the Taurus Mountains toward Cappadocia.

x

Moving westward from Cilicia, we pass Rhodes, then turn north. We’re now on the eastern shores of the Aegean Sea, in the region we call Ionia. The most important cities of Ionia were Miletus and Ephesus. Just offshore from the mainland cities are the large islands of Samos, Chios, and Lesbos. We disembark at Ephesus and head inland to Lydia and its capital, Sardis.

Satrapal Government x Most satraps were Persians from a trusted, narrow circle of families. Satrapal capitals, like Sardis, replicated many of the features of the imperial court: At Sardis, we’d ¿nd a palace, treasury, and gardens, along with a skilled administrative staff. 58

x

Satraps had two major duties: to collect taxes and provide troops. Most of the taxes were sent back to the king, but satraps kept some for local use, such as maintaining roads and paying mercenary garrisons. The satrap was responsible for the defense of his province but also had to send troops to the royal army when ordered.

x

Given that the empire was so vast, an ambitious satrap might be tempted to set up shop for himself. But the imperial messenger system meant that the king could get reports and send orders quickly, even to the most distant provinces. If need be, a disobedient satrap could be called to court, replaced, or even executed.

Back to Persepolis x We now follow the royal road east almost 550 miles back to Babylonia. From there, we turn left and head northeast into the province of Media. If we kept going, we could follow this road all the way to India, but on this trip, we go only as far as Ecbatana, the capital city of Media. x

From there, we turn back south toward Persepolis, where we started our travels. Altogether, the round trip we’ve just taken has covered about 3,000 miles. Even with horses, such a journey could have taken a year or more!

x

Our trip has shown us the utility of the Persian transport network and the vast area it covered. The royal road, which the Persians inherited from the Assyrians, was so useful that it continued to inÀuence later empires. Many Roman roads of the eastern Mediterranean, for example, basically follow the same lines.

x

Our travels have also shown us what held the Persian Empire together and how the Great King was able to control his vast territories. The keys here were the communications network, ef¿cient administration, and the express messengers. Good communications—and the control of information that came with it—allowed the Great Kings to keep track of their vast domains, manage their satraps, and respond to threats on a scale that no previous empire had ever achieved in history.

59

Suggested Reading Graf, “The Persian Royal Road System.” Kuhrt, The Persian Empire, chap 15.

Questions to Consider 1. How would the weather and seasons have inÀuenced travel in the Persian Empire?

2. What were some of the challenges you might face if you were traveling

Lecture 8: Royal Roads and Provinces

in the Persian Empire without of¿cial documents?

60

East of Persepolis Lecture 9

P

eople often think of the Persian Empire in terms of its western frontier, but as we’ll see in this lecture, Persian power extended east, all the way to central Asia and India. These eastern regions were wealthy and populous and important to the empire’s military and economy. One challenge we have as we journey eastward is evidence. We don’t get local perspectives on Persian power, as we do with the Greeks or Jews, which means we have to depend on Persian records. We receive some help from the many archaeological discoveries that have been made in this area, although modern politics often makes this type of research dif¿cult. We will begin our journey again in Persepolis. From there, our route will take us through eastern Iran to central Asia and on to India. The View from Persepolis x As mentioned in the last lecture, Persian administrative documents record long-distance travel to and from the capitals and provinces of the empire. Interestingly, much of this travel involved large groups of people visiting the eastern provinces. x

Persepolis tablet records of courier deliveries reveal that provincial administrators also worked in the east, just as in the west. In addition, some fragments of documents have been found in the eastern provinces, including Elamite tablets, Aramaic leather texts, and of¿cial seal impressions stamped on clay.

x

Although some of the peoples of eastern Iran and central Asia were linguistically and ethnically related to the Persian ruling class, they were not accorded special status. In fact, Darius had to put down revolts in eastern Iran when he ¿rst came to the throne, and uprisings also occurred elsewhere in the east during the 5th century.

61

x

Hyrcania was on the southern shore of the Caspian Sea, stretching from the Elburz Mountains of northern Iran into southern Turkmenistan. It was fertile and well-watered, with prosperous towns. Parthia was a harder land, with more mountains and desert, and was sometimes lumped into the same satrapy as Hyrcania. Both Hyrcania and Parthia had excellent cavalry.

x

From Parthia, the main road heads east, to Bactria and India. In fact, we’re now on part of the famous Silk Road, actually a web of roads and caravan routes running from the Mediterranean across central Asia to China. Under the Achaemenids, roughly half of the Silk Road (more than 2,000 miles) was under the control of a single power.

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

Lecture 9: East of Persepolis

From Persepolis to Chorasmia x Let’s again imagine that we are on a journey in about 500 B.C., this time, to the east. From Persepolis, the main road loops northwest along the edge of the Great Salt Desert to Ecbatana and, from there, heads northeast through Media. Traveling east from the city of Rhagae, we pass through the Caspian Gates into the lands of Hyrcania and Parthia.

Ancient peoples thrived in the fertile oases of the Aral Sea, but today the sea is polluted and shrunken. 62

x

We can make a side trip from Parthia to visit the northernmost satrapy of the empire: Chorasmia, in modern Turkmenistan and southern Uzbekistan, east of the Caspian Sea and south of the Aral Sea. Today, much of this area is desert, but ancient people thrived there in fertile oases.

x

The Persians conquered Chorasmia by 520 B.C. We know that Chorasmia had a satrap, and it must have had a local administration. Chorasmian soldiers took part in the invasion of Greece in 480 B.C., and others served alongside Greeks and Jews as mercenaries in Egypt, illustrating the military importance of the east.

x

A Chorasmian site found by Soviet archaeologists at Guzeli-gyr, on the south bank of the Oxus River, reveals a forti¿cation wall with towers, a palace, and possibly, a Persian-style ¿re altar. This may have been the capital of a local dynasty under Persian rule. The city wall encloses a large open area, possibly to allow nomads to bring their herds inside for protection.

x

Across the Oxus River in Uzbekistan, Uzbek and Australian archaeologists have made some amazing discoveries since the 1990s. At two separate sites, they’ve found what may be the earliest known Zoroastrian ¿re temple and a forti¿ed town, both of which may go back to Achaemenid times.

x

Turning back south to Parthia, we continue east on the main road. Along the way, we pass through the beautiful country of Margiana, with its capital at the oasis city of Margush (modern Merv in the nation of Turkmenistan).

Bactria, Sogdiana, and the Nomadic Lands Beyond x Bactria is basically northern and central Afghanistan. Its capital was at Balkh, near modern Mazar-e Sharif. In ancient times, Bactria was famous for its fertile lands and livestock, its gold, and its people. It might have had a population of up to 2 million. The Bactrians had a complex society even before the Achaemenids arrived.

63

x

Because Bactria was wealthy and powerful, the Great Kings tried to keep it under close control. Some amazing archaeological ¿nds, including a set of leather documents and what may have been a Persian satrap’s residence, are shedding more light on Persian power in this region.

x

From Bactria, we travel north, across the Oxus River into Sogdiana, roughly eastern Uzbekistan and western Tajikistan on a modern map. Sogdiana is a rugged and mountainous land. Its main city—called Afrasiyab in Persian times—was in modern Uzbekistan, at the site now known as Samarkand. Ancient Samarkand is one of the oldest cities in central Asia.

x

Even before the Persians came, ancient Samarkand had a forti¿cation wall and an irrigation system, as well as an open area within the wall for nomads. The Persians took over this city as a satrapal capital. From ancient Persian times onward, Samarkand has remained a major center of culture and trade, as well as the subject of poetry and legend.

Lecture 9: East of Persepolis

Areia, Drangiana, Arachosia x Just as in Chorasmia and Bactria, some of the Sogdian people were nomads. Other nomads lived north and west of Sogdiana. Today, the Kizilkum (Red Sand) Desert covers much of this area, but in ancient times, it had good grazing. x

The Persians called these nomadic peoples the Saka; we call them Scythians. Many different groups of Scythians lived at the margins of the empire. They were organized into tribes and sometimes into larger confederations. As early as the 600s B.C., Scythians had invaded the settled lands of eastern Iran, and various Scythian groups continued to cause problems for the Achaemenids throughout the empire.

x

To defend against the nomads, the Achaemenid kings built forts. Centuries later, Alexander and his men encountered a chain of these forts along the Jaxartes River. In modern times, forti¿ed sites dating from the Achaemenid Empire have been found in eastern Uzbekistan.

64

x

Evidence found at one of these forts, Nur-Tepe, shows intermixing of Persians and locals, reminding us that not all the Saka opposed Persian power. In fact, Saka troops were important to the Persian military. At the battle of Marathon, Saka troops held the center of the Persian line and routed the Athenian troops who opposed them.

x

The complexities of Persian power in this region show up in the socalled Oxus Treasure, a collection of about 170 artifacts, mostly gold and silver. These objects were found along the Oxus River in the late 1800s and provide some clues about Persian inÀuence in central Asia.

x

From the edges of the empire in Sogdiana, we return to Bactria, then travel southeast, through the Hindu Kush mountains. Our path takes us to what is today Kabul in eastern Afghanistan.

x

From Kabul, one could head southwest, back toward the Persian capitals. Along the way, you’d pass through Arachosia, Drangiana, and Areia. Arachosia stretched from southern Afghanistan into eastern Iran; its capital was at Kandahar. Amazingly, excavations at ancient Kandahar in the 1970s turned up fragments of Elamite tablets, evidence of imperial administration.

x

West of Arachosia was Drangiana, in Sistan province in eastern Iran. The people here spoke a language related to Old Persian and lived in cities. Drangiana was also known for its tin mines. Finally, Areia was around Herat, in western Afghanistan. The Areians were noted for their great wines. From Areia, the main road led back west to Hyrcania and Parthia.

x

Instead of turning back, we will go on east more than 150 miles, following the Cophen (Kabul) River valley, into what is today northwestern Pakistan. The Persians called this land Gandhara. Its people were distant cousins of the Persians and spoke related IndoIranian languages.

x

Even before the Persians arrived, the Gandharans had cities and kingdoms. Imperial control in Gandhara relied on local elites from 65

Lecture 9: East of Persepolis

these cities and kingdoms, but some Persians also came out as settlers, bringing new goods and ideas with them. x

From Gandhara, we head south down the Indus River. The Indians don’t show up at Bisitun, but they contributed ivory for Susa and are on the apadana at Persepolis, bringing gold as tribute. This means that India must have been brought into the empire sometime around 515 B.C.

x

The Indians sent troops for Darius’s armies, and Indians took jobs in the imperial capitals, but for much of the rest of the Persian Empire, it’s unclear what was going on in these regions. There may have been times when Gandhara and India fell out of Persian control. By the time Alexander got to south Asia in the late 300s B.C., several local kings were vying for power.

x

We’re used to thinking about the Persians in the context of west Asia, but their inÀuence is present in south Asia, as well. The Aramaic alphabet may have inÀuenced the later scripts of south Asia, and Achaemenid styles affected later Indian architecture. In turn, the Persians borrowed Indian military technology: elephants and deadly scythed chariots.

The Return Journey x From the Indus Delta, we could go west by land, but that route runs through the dry and desolate territory of the Maka in western Pakistan and far southeast Iran. After Maka, we’d reach fertile Carmania, in what is today southeast Iran. Carmania is the last stop before the road returns to Persepolis. x

To avoid the desert, we could also go by sea. Along the way, we could stop at ports on the islands and coasts of the Persian Gulf. Sailing would take us all the way west to the head of the Persian Gulf, where we could transfer for a canal boat to Susa, then return to Persepolis.

x

The eastern empire was a source of strength for the Persian kings— providing troops, taxes, and resources—but it was also a challenge. For

66

the Persians, controlling Bactria and dealing with the Saka nomads was as much on their minds as anything in the west.

Suggested Reading Errington, ed., From Persepolis to the Punjab. Frye, The Heritage of Central Asia.

Questions to Consider 1. How different was the political and cultural situation the Persians faced in their eastern provinces from what they encountered in the western provinces? What similarities were there between east and west?

2. Why do you think some Saka (Scythian) nomads chose to side with the Achaemenids?

67

Challenges in the West, 513–494 B.C. Lecture 10

I

Lecture 10: Challenges in the West, 513–494 B.C.

n the last few lectures, we’ve explored the cities and provinces of Persia’s vast empire in the time of Darius. In this lecture, we pick up our historical narrative in the year 513 B.C. With his empire uni¿ed and strong, Darius was looking to expand further, this time, into the land of Scythia. Although he wasn’t successful there, he did manage to take Thrace, giving the Persians a foothold in northern Greece. The Great King then faced the Ionian Revolt, which serves for us as a kind of case study for understanding the challenges the Persians faced in governing their far-Àung provinces. Thrace and Scythia x Scythia lies along the northern coast of the Black Sea, in what is today the Ukraine. To attack this region, the Persians had to cross over the Bosporus, the strait separating Europe from Asia. Today, the city of Istanbul lies on the Bosporus, but in 513 B.C., there was just a small town called Byzantium. x

Darius assembled his forces at the Bosporus early in 513 and built a pontoon bridge over it so that his army could cross without ferries. After crossing, the Persians marched through Thrace—roughly modern-day Bulgaria—to the Danube River. There, they met their Àeet, manned by Ionians and bringing supplies.

x

The Persians erected another bridge across the Danube, left the Ionians to guard it, and advanced north into Scythia. Darius probably planned to make a reconnaissance in force.

x

The Scythians Darius was about to ¿ght were distant cousins of the Saka nomads from central Asia. Most Scythians were pastoral nomads, but they were also skilled mounted archers and ¿erce in battle.

x

The Scythian campaign didn’t go well for the Persians. Many of the tribes agreed on a common plan: to avoid battle. Darius couldn’t get the

68

Scythians to stay in one place and ¿ght. Wherever the Persians marched, the Scythians withdrew, splitting up so that the Persians couldn’t follow all of them. x

In frustration, the Persians ravaged the steppe, but the Scythians harassed Persian foraging parties and defeated Persian cavalry in skirmishes. Then, they lured the Persians into barren territory by planting some of their herds as bait. As time wore on, the Persians were in danger of being destroyed.

x

After several months, Darius gave up. The Persians managed to slip away at night and retreat to the Danube. The Scythians actually reached the Danube bridge ahead of the Persians and tried to entice the Ionians to destroy the bridge, but the Greek generals stayed loyal. The Scythians then turned back to ¿nd the Persian army, but Darius evaded them and got safely back across the Danube.

x

Darius had managed to disrupt the Scythians, which—for a while at least—kept them from raiding the empire. More importantly, the Persians brought Thrace into the empire. Thrace was rich in gold and commanded the sea route from the Aegean to the Black Sea. It also gave the Persians a foothold in northern Greece, particularly in Macedon.

The Ionian Revolt x Ionia is a fascinating and important region, and—thanks to Herodotus— we can use it as a kind of case study to understand the challenges the Persians faced in governing their far-Àung provinces. x

Ionia is on the central west coast of modern Turkey. There were many Greek cities up and down this coast, but the 12 cities of Ionia were the greatest. Ten were on the mainland, plus the two large islands of Samos and Chios, just offshore. North of Samos and Chios was another large island, Lesbos, which often joined the Ionians.

x

Miletus, in the Maeander River Valley, was perhaps the foremost Ionian city. In ancient times, it was directly on the sea, although the geography has changed in modern times. The Milesians were known 69

x

The Ionian cities were often constructed on peninsulas with strong walls to protect the landward side. A great example is the wall of Phocaea, parts of which can still be seen today at Foça in Turkey. The Ionians were also master sailors and had a great warrior tradition, often ¿ghting among themselves.

x

Recall that after Cyrus conquered Lydia around 545 B.C., he had hurried back east. The Lydian governor he left behind soon rebelled, with the help of some Ionian Greek cities. Fortunately, Cyrus’s generals crushed this rebellion.

x

From 545–500 B.C., Ionia prospered under Persian rule. Notably, it didn’t revolt in 522, when Darius seized power. Instead of ruling directly, the Persians supported local strongmen in each city, who in turn, reported to the satrap at Sardis.

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

Lecture 10: Challenges in the West, 513–494 B.C.

as philosophers and merchants and founded colonies as far away as the Black Sea.

Although the Persians besieged and sacked Miletus in 494, recent excavations show that the city was soon rebuilt, and Milesian survivors came back to resettle it. 70

x

In the late 500s, Ionia was much more tranquil than mainland Greece, where the Athenians had just had a revolution and installed a radical popular government. In 499 B.C., though, the Ionians revolted against Persian control. The real cause of the revolt may have had more to do with internal politics in the Ionian cities than Persian control.

x

Under the temporary leadership of Aristagoras in Miletus, the Ionians rejected their local bosses and took control of the Ionian Àeet. Aristagoras then appealed to Sparta and Athens for help. The Athenians, who’d just had a radical popular revolution, sent 20 ships to the Ionians, with about 2,000 men. The city of Eretria, north of Athens, also sent 5 ships.

x

In 498 B.C., the Athenians and Eretrians sailed across the Aegean and met up with the Ionians at the city of Ephesus, north of Miletus. From there, the Greeks marched northeast to Sardis and launched a surprise attack on the Persians.

x

After heavy street ¿ghting and a ¿re in the city, the Greeks retreated toward Ephesus, but the Persians caught up and defeated them in battle. The Athenians and Eretrians returned home, leaving the Ionians on their own.

Offensives: Hellespont and Cyprus x For the ¿rst year (498–497 B.C.) after the sack of Sardis, the Ionians had momentum on their side. They went on the offensive, sailing north through the Hellespont as far as Byzantium, and forced the Greek cities there to join them. Like a fast-moving virus, rebellion in the Persian Empire could spread quickly from one province to the next. x

Around the same time, the island of Cyprus also revolted. Cyprus at this time was divided into 12 small kingdoms, with a mixed Greek, Egyptian, and Anatolian culture. The Cypriotes may have seen an opportunity to rebel while the Persians were distracted by events in Ionia, but internal power struggles also played a role.

71

x

In 496 B.C., the Ionians sent their Àeet and army to assist Cyprus, but the Persians sent ships and troops, too. The rebel alliance decided that the Ionians would ¿ght the Persians at sea and the Cypriotes would face them on land. The Ionians won at sea, but the Cypriotes on land retreated.

x

After the Persians defeated the Cypriotes in battle, they chased them into their cities and besieged them. Excavations at Old Paphos, on the west coast of Cyprus, give us valuable information about both Persian siege techniques and the defense of the city.

Lecture 10: Challenges in the West, 513–494 B.C.

Persian Counteroffensive and the Battle of Lade x Starting in 497 B.C., the Persians launched a three-pronged offensive to quell the continuing revolt. A Persian Àeet regained control of the Hellespont, then headed south for Caria. Another force secured the Sea of Marmara and the area around Troy. From Sardis, a third prong was directed against Ionia. Aristagoras, who had started the revolt, abandoned the cause and headed to Thrace, where he was later killed. x

It took the Persians two years, from 497–495 B.C., to subdue Caria, but by 494, the Persian army and Àeet were closing in on Miletus, the center of the revolt. The Ionian cities kept their troops at home but concentrated their ships at Miletus, by the island of Lade. The ¿nal showdown would be a naval battle.

x

The ships used by both sides in this battle were called triremes. These were oared war galleys, with 170 rowers stacked in three tiers, each man pulling one oar. Triremes had sails for long-distance travel, but in battle, they were rowed. They fought by ramming, using their bronze-tipped prows to smash into enemy ships. According to Herodotus, the Ionians had 353 ships, while the Persians had 600.

x

Because of their inferior numbers, the Ionians hoped to use better tactics to defeat the Persians. They would deploy their ships in columns instead of lines and use a tactic called the diekplous, literally “breaking through and out,” to row through the Persian squadrons and attack them in the Àanks.

72

© Dorling Kindersley RF.

The ¿nal showdown between the Persians and the Ionians was a naval battle, in which both sides used triremes.

x

The battle of Lade was a confused melée. In later years, the Ionian cities blamed each other for deserting. The squadron from Samos seems to have Àed early, except for 11 ships that fought until the end. The Chians held out the longest. The other Ionians scattered.

x

The Persians then besieged Miletus and, in 494, sacked the city. The destruction, however, wasn’t total. Recent excavations show that the city was soon rebuilt and Milesian survivors came back to resettle it. From Miletus, the Persians fanned out to bring the rest of Ionia and the islands under control.

x

To restore control over Ionia, the Persians used both sticks and carrots. The sticks included brutal punishment, but the carrots were responses to Ionian concerns. For example, the satrap Artaphernes made sure the 73

Ionian cities arbitrated their disputes instead of raiding and plundering one another. He also enacted a kind of land reform that distributed the tax burden more fairly. The result was that many Ionians would remain loyal to the Great King for years to come.

Lecture 10: Challenges in the West, 513–494 B.C.

Lessons Learned from Rebellion x Both Scythia and Ionia show the limits of imperial military power and the constraints of space and time. In Scythia, the nomads’ strategy of avoidance defeated the Persians. In Ionia, the Persians needed time to muster enough forces to overcome the rebels, but once the counteroffensive got going, the Persians did well. x

The Persian settlement after the revolt shows the skill of Achaemenid statecraft. The combination of brutal punishments to make an example and practical reforms to address local grievances was the key to keeping people loyal.

x

If the Ionians had succeeded in gaining independence from Persia, the focal point of Greek civilization would have stayed in the eastern Aegean rather than shifting to mainland Greece. The Greeks would have been in much closer contact with the Persians and other Near Eastern peoples. Rather than a strong ideological divide between East and West, we might have seen more of a hybrid culture develop.

Name to Know Artaphernes (OP: *Artafarnah): Persian satrap; half-brother of Darius.

Suggested Reading Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, chap 4. Stark, Ionia: A Quest.

74

Questions to Consider 1. Was the failure of the Ionian Revolt inevitable or not? 2. What strategies would you have pursued if you were leading the revolt? What about if you were the satrap at Sardis?

75

Across the Bitter Sea, 493–490 B.C. Lecture 11

W

Lecture 11: Across the Bitter Sea, 493–490 B.C.

“

ho are these Athenians?” According to Herodotus, that’s what Darius asked when he heard about the sack of Sardis and the outbreak of the Ionian Revolt. For Darius, the likely answer was that the Athenians were liars and betrayers. After all, Athenian ambassadors had come to Sardis, sworn oaths to the satrap Artaphernes, and made ritual offerings in acceptance of Persian power. But they had later refused to take back their exiled ruler, Hippias, and had taken part in the sneak attack on Sardis. From an ethical standpoint, Darius probably felt religiously bound to punish the Athenians for their actions. At the same time, the Athenians had shown that they could launch raids across the Aegean, and left unchecked, they would continue to threaten imperial power in the west. Punishing Athens would protect the wealthy regions of Lydia and Ionia, and it would be a practical lesson for others who thought about lying to the Great King. The story of what happened next—of the Persian advance on mainland Greece, starting in 493 B.C. and ending with the famous battle of Marathon in 490—has been told many times, but almost always from the Greek viewpoint. In this lecture, we will look at it from the Persian perspective. Mardonius and Macedon, 492 B.C. x After crushing the Ionian Revolt, Darius decided to send an expedition across the Hellespont into Thrace. The man Darius chose to lead this mission was Marduniya, or Mardonius, as the Greeks called him, an aristocrat in his mid-30s.

x

In 492 B.C., Mardonius led an army west into Thrace and northern Greece. At the same time, a Àeet sailed through the northern Aegean to capture the island of Thasos. Unfortunately, the Àeet ran into a storm off the peninsula of Mount Athos, and many ships were lost.

x

Mardonius’s mission in northern Greece was a success. He defeated the Thracians and brought the small kingdom of Macedon, ruled by a king

76

named Alexander (the ancestor of Alexander the Great), under the wing of Persia. The Expedition of Datiya and Irdaparna, 490 B.C. x While Mardonius was still in northern Greece, Darius prepared for another expedition. The mission this time was to take control of the Aegean islands, especially Naxos, and punish Eretria and Athens for supporting the Ionian rebels. For this, Darius chose two experienced commanders. One was his nephew Artaphernes, and the other was a Mede named Datiya, whom the Greeks called Datis. x

While Artaphernes and Datis prepared to sail, Darius sent heralds across the Aegean, asking the Greeks to offer earth and water. If the Greek cities offered loyalty without a ¿ght, Darius wouldn’t have to force them into submission. According to Herodotus, however, when the Persian herald reached Athens, he was thrown into a pit.

x

In the spring of 490 B.C., Datis and Artaphernes set out from Cilicia; they sailed west, then north to Samos, where they picked up more ships and troops. The whole expedition had perhaps 200 ships; 10,000 to 15,000 soldiers, plus siege engineers and supply experts; and 500 cavalry. Datis and Artaphernes also brought the exiled Athenian tyrant, Hippias, with them; the plan was to put him back in power at Athens.

x

The Persians headed west across the Aegean—the Bitter Sea—to capture the Cycladic islands. They pillaged the island of Naxos, then went northwest to Delos, the sacred island of Apollo and Artemis. Instead of sacking Delos, the Persians announced that they would protect it. By showing respect for the local gods, Darius hoped to win over the Greeks—just as Cyrus had done at Babylon and Cambyses had done in Egypt.

x

By mid-summer, the Persian force was at the island of Euboea, just offshore of the eastern coast of mainland Greece. The Persian objective was the city of Eretria, on the west side of Euboea. Instead of heading straight to Eretria, Datis and Artaphernes landed troops at three sites, then converged on the city. The Eretrians had been known for their 77

Lecture 11: Across the Bitter Sea, 493–490 B.C.

strong cavalry, but they ran behind their walls. The Persians besieged them for a week before capturing and burning the city. x

After a short pause to rest their troops, Datis and Artaphernes headed for Attica, the territory of Athens. From Eretria, it was only a day’s sail down the coast to the plain of Marathon.

x

The Marathon plain is about ¿ve miles long, south to north, and two miles wide. It’s surrounded by rugged hills, and the main road to Athens enters from the south of the plain. The Persians drew their ships up on the beach and camped at the north end, where there was water and fodder for their horses.

x

The Athenians had waited nervously all summer as reports of the Persian advance came in. They had sent aid to Eretria but withdrew when they saw that Eretria was doomed. With Persian troops on their home soil, it was the Athenians’ turn. Across Attica, citizens picked up their arms and streamed toward Marathon.

x

The Athenians received about 600 men from Plataea, a town north of Athens. In mid-August 490 B.C., about 10,000 Athenians and the 600 allies camped at the south end of the Marathon plain.

Marathon: A Persian Perspective x The Athenians were equipped as hoplites—heavy infantry soldiers. They carried large round shields, spears, and short swords. Some had bronze breastplates and helmets, but many had linen or leather armor. x

To the Persians, the Athenians, with no real unit organization, would not have seemed like a real army. The Great King’s army, in contrast, had squads of 10, companies of 100, regiments of 1,000, and even divisions of 10,000.

x

Unlike the Athenians, Persian troopers were used to having comrades from many lands. In this strike force alone, there were Persian and central Asian Saka soldiers, plus Greek, Phoenician, and Cilician marines and sailors. The Persian troopers had cooks and quartermasters,

78

while the homogenous Greek militia cooked their own food and bought their own gear. x

The Athenians and Plataeans—like most Greek warriors—were farmers or craftsmen, but the Persian troops at Marathon were the professional core of the imperial army. They took pride in their skills with bow and spear; some had iron breastplates and helmets, but many wore padded linen armor. They carried short spears, bows, and short daggers; many of the Saka also had battleaxes.

x

Some Persian troopers carried large, rectangular wicker shields. In battle, each of these shield-bearers worked with an archer, protecting him from arrows. When the foe got close, both shield-bearer and archer used their spears. The Persian cavalry had longer lances and bows but no shields, and their horses were better than any in Greece. Ideally, cavalry and infantry would work together in battle.

x

One of the challenges faced by the Persian military was that it wasn’t a single institution. Instead, imperial units from across the vast empire retained their own weapons, training, and language. This meant that the Persian military didn’t have a uni¿ed doctrine, making it dif¿cult for leaders to issue complicated orders in battle.

x

With their tough, disciplined forces, however, Datis and Artaphernes had every reason to expect that the Athenians would collapse, as the Eretrians had. If anything worried the Persians, it was the cavalry. The horses had fought hard at Eretria, sea travel had worn them down, and they were short of fodder and water.

x

For several days, the Persians drew up their battle line—more than a mile long—at the north end of the Marathon plain, while the Greeks held their positions at the south end. To provoke them, the Persians sent out raiding parties, but the Greeks didn’t budge. As time passed, the Persian troops became lax.

79

Lecture 11: Across the Bitter Sea, 493–490 B.C.

The Day of Battle x On the morning of the battle, the Persians saw the Greeks coming north across the plain at a trot. The Persians prepared to meet the attack, but where was the cavalry? It has been suggested that the Persian cavalry had been sent to the north end of the Marathon plain to graze. Other scholars believe that the Persians had lost patience and had already put their horses back on the transports. x

The idea of running at the Persians is usually considered a genius move on the part of the Athenian general Miltiades. Miltiades had actually served the Great King at one point, so he knew how the Persian military worked. Others among the Athenians had seen the Persian tactics ¿rsthand in Ionia. They may also have played a role in shaping the Greek battle plan.

x

The Greeks reached the Persian battle line quickly, but the Persians stood ¿rm. In the center, the Persians and Saka actually defeated the Athenian hoplites and began chasing them south. The Greeks, though, managed to win on both Àanks. As the Persian center rushed forward, the Greeks were able to hit them from the sides.

x

The Persians and Saka fought on as long as they could, but ¿nally they broke and ran for the safety of their ships, drawn up on the beach. The Greeks followed, and there was more ¿ghting at the beach, with the Greeks trying to capture the ships and the Persians trying to get free. In the end, the Greeks took seven ships, but the rest got safely away.

x

According to Herodotus, 192 Athenians and 6,400 Persians were killed. The numbers may be off, but the proportions make sense. In ancient battles, the losing side often suffered much greater losses, because Àeeing soldiers couldn’t protect themselves from enemy blows.

The Signi¿cance of Marathon x From the Athenian perspective, Marathon was a signi¿cant victory. The battle de¿ned a generation of Athenians. Forever after, they were the Marathonomachoi, “the Marathon ¿ghters.” Athens had done what

80

the powerful Ionian Greek cities, such as Miletus, couldn’t: beat the Persians in open battle. And the Athenians took heart from this lesson. x

No Persian source makes any reference to the battle, but the loss at Marathon must have been something of a shock, especially to the Persian troopers who had previously gone from one victory to the next. Marathon showed that under the right conditions, Greek hoplites could beat Persian archers and spearmen. The Persians realized they needed more troops and better infantry-cavalry coordination.

x

How did Darius react to the news of Marathon? Again, according to Herodotus, he Àew into a rage, but that seems out of character for a Persian king who took pride in controlling his emotions. Nevertheless, Darius ordered his staff to prepare another, larger expedition to Greece. Darius himself wouldn’t live to see this armada set forth; it would be left to his son Xerxes to carry on the war against Greece.

Name to Know Mardonius (OP: Marduniya, early 5th century B.C.): Persian general under Darius I and Xerxes who urged a policy of aggression against Greece in the hope of becoming satrap of the Hellenic lands once the conquest was achieved.

Suggested Reading Krentz, The Battle of Marathon. Tuplin, “Marathon: In Search of a Persian Perspective.”

81

Questions to Consider 1. Do you think the expeditions of Mardonius, Datis, and Artaphernes were part of a grand plan to capture Greece, as some suggest? Why or why not?

2. Which of the theories about the Athenian run at Marathon and the

Lecture 11: Across the Bitter Sea, 493–490 B.C.

absence of the Persian cavalry do you ¿nd most convincing? Why?

82

Xerxes Becomes King Lecture 12

I

n the modern Western literary tradition, the name Xerxes has become shorthand for despotism, arrogance, and impiety. If Cyrus is revered as the good king of ancient Persia, Xerxes is “Oriental despotism” gone wild. This view is rooted in the writings of the Greeks. For example, The Persians, the famous play of Aeschylus, played a signi¿cant role in shaping Western visions of Xerxes. In our own time, Hollywood has taken the stereotype of Xerxes to extremes in such ¿lms as 300. Interestingly, the Jewish tradition, particularly the historian Josephus, presents a more favorable view of Xerxes. In this lecture, we will go beyond these stereotypes and get a more balanced view of Xerxes. To do so, we’ll explore the upbringing and education of the Persian elite, examine life at the imperial court, trace the transition from Darius to Xerxes, and look at imperial policies in two key provinces—Egypt and Babylonia. Finally, we’ll see how Xerxes continued his father’s plans at home and abroad. Young Xerxes x Xerxes was born about 515 B.C. His Old Persian name was Kshayarshah—“he who rules over heroes.” His father, of course, was Darius; his mother was Atossa, the daughter of Cyrus the Great. x

Xerxes grew up in a world of palaces, ceremony, and formality but also a world of business, with a stream of generals and diplomats, messengers and administrators coming to the court. As a child, he would have seen the inner workings of the imperial nerve centers ¿rsthand. And, regularly moving from capital to capital, young Xerxes would have seen the vastness of the Persian realm.

x

Family was extremely important in Persian culture, and it’s unlikely that the king’s family was any different. Even as a child, Xerxes understood that he was part of a large family. Darius’s wives, his mother, and his older children ate with him while trusted eunuch servants cared for the younger children. 83

Lecture 12: Xerxes Becomes King

x

The Persepolis tablets give us an idea of the quantities sent to the king’s table. One tablet from 500 B.C. lists 423 ducks, geese, and other birds. Another one mentions 46,000 quarts of grain, and still another lists 3,262 gallons of wine. We don’t know how long these allocations were meant to last or how many people they served, but still, the tablets show that the Persian court could host banquets for thousands of people.

x

Such banquets weren’t only displays of gluttony. Instead, they were important public events with both symbolic and practical functions. For example, the king gave out seats of honor and choice bits of food to reward guests who had earned royal favor. In return, guests had to display good manners—controlling their appetites and taking modest portions.

x

Another part of young Xerxes’s life was the royal hunt, an ancient tradition in the Near East. The king and his companions hunted with bows, nets, or traps and brought along their favorite hunting dogs. Like banqueting, hunting wasn’t just for fun; it was practice for war and a way to display status.

Educating the Elite x From the age of 5 until 20 or 25, noble Persian boys underwent a strict program of mental and physical preparation. This program included learning moral values and self-control; the art of ¿ghting on horseback and foot, with spear and bow; Persian customs and traditions; and how to grow plants and herbs. As a “¿nal exam,” the young Persians went out in the wilderness, where they survived by hunting and foraging. x

As the son of the king, Xerxes was not exempted from this strict upbringing, and he was expected to lead by example. He also learned to rely on his fellow nobles and family members. He later chose no less than 12 of his brothers and half-brothers as commanders for the invasion of Greece.

x

As he grew older, Xerxes came to realize that a close aristocratic circle of Persian families ran the empire. A small group of noble families had helped Darius take power, and even though their inÀuence declined over

84

time, the nobles of Persia were still tight-knit. Non-Persians could work their way up to important jobs, but the highest of¿cials were almost always Persians or Medes. From Darius to Xerxes x Both Greek and Persian sources tell us that Darius explicitly chose Xerxes to succeed him, even though Darius had older sons. It’s likely that Xerxes became crown prince around 495 B.C. When he was chosen, a special ceremony marked the occasion, and his image was carved into reliefs at Persepolis, standing behind the king. x

According to a later Roman author, Xerxes’s oldest half-brother challenged him for the throne after Darius died. The rivals took their dispute to their uncle Artaphernes, the satrap of Sardis, who listened to both sides, then picked Xerxes.

x

Whether or not this story is true, it suggests a possible downside to the family-centric base of Persian rule: the potential for sibling rivalry for power. But it also shows that a respected family elder could defuse such tensions. The fact that the two brothers remained friends afterwards reveals the family interest in maintaining harmony to ensure that the dynasty would stay intact.

x

When Darius died in late 486 B.C., Xerxes stepped smoothly into his place. Across the empire, Persians put out their sacred ¿res and clipped their horses’ manes in mourning. Xerxes escorted his father’s body to the royal tomb at Naqš-i Rustam near Persepolis. Then, he went to Pasargadae, the old capital of Cyrus.

x

There, he entered the sanctuary of the goddess Anahita and donned the robes of his grandfather Cyrus. He ate a ¿g cake and resinous terebinth (a plant used to make turpentine), chased with sour milk—reminders of the hard life Cyrus had led on campaign.

Xerxes and Egypt x Xerxes’s ¿rst job was to deal with the Egyptian revolt. Recall that Cambyses had brought Egypt into the Persian Empire in 525 B.C. and 85

Lecture 12: Xerxes Becomes King

presented himself as a traditional Egyptian pharaoh. Like Cambyses, Darius presented himself as a pharaoh; he built temples and public works and supervised a revision of the Egyptian law code. x

Some Egyptians, including a doctor and of¿cial named Udjahorresne, welcomed the Persians. This man led the Egyptian Àeet during Cambyses’s invasion and may have defected to the Persian side. On his inscribed statue in the Vatican Museum, Udjahorresne calls Cambyses a liberator who puri¿ed Egyptian temples. He later became an advisor to Darius and even traveled to Susa.

x

Thanks in part to help from Egyptians like Udjahorresne, it’s notable that Egypt didn’t rebel in 522 B.C., when Darius ¿rst took power. But some Egyptians resented the Persian occupation from the beginning, especially the priests who lost their temple tax exemptions. For this reason, Cambyses and Darius set up mercenary garrisons throughout Egypt.

x

To win Egyptian hearts and minds, the Persians had invested a great deal in Egypt’s infrastructure. Darius built a 50-mile canal from the Nile River to the Red Sea. The Persians also built new irrigation systems that helped the Egyptians grow more crops.

x

Why, then, did the Egyptians revolt in 486 B.C.? Some scholars believe they were led by unhappy priests, but there are other possibilities. Some Egyptians may have seen that Darius was aging and believed that it was time to revolt before a young, vigorous king took the throne.

x

The economy may also have played a role. The Egyptians may have resented having to pay for the new Àeet Darius had been building. It’s also possible that the Persian defeat at Marathon had inspired the Egyptians. In general, young Egyptians may have felt that they could better rule their own nation than foreigners and their aging puppets.

x

However the revolt got started, it didn’t last long. In 485 B.C., Xerxes headed for Egypt, probably with both naval and land forces. He also probably received help from the Persian garrisons stationed in Egypt.

86

The Egyptian rebels were full of energy, but they couldn’t beat the imperial military. The revolt was smashed within a year. x

Xerxes appointed his brother Achaemenes as governor and left a strong occupation force in Egypt, then returned east. Achaemenes kept Egypt under control, but his harsh methods and the presence of additional garrisons made the Egyptians more resentful of Persia. It wouldn’t be long before Egypt revolted again.

Babylonian Problems x In 484 B.C., revolts broke out in Babylonia. Again, the causes are unclear, but some Babylonian tablets suggest that rich businessmen were causing economic problems by squeezing poor farmers. We know that Xerxes later restructured the economies in some of the Babylonian cities, perhaps to deal with these problems. x

Another possibility is that there was a dispute about the Babylonian temples. Herodotus says that Xerxes carried off the statue of Marduk, the patron god of Babylon. Recent research, however, shows no evidence that the cult of Marduk came to an end.

x

Again, whatever the causes of the Babylonian revolt, Xerxes crushed it in less than a year. Just as he’d put Egypt under tighter control, Xerxes now tied Babylonia more closely into the satrapy structure, eliminating some of the autonomy it had enjoyed before.

The Legacy of Darius x The revolts in Egypt and Babylonia didn’t stop Xerxes from continuing his father’s work at home. He ¿nished projects that Darius had started, including the apadana we saw during our visits to Persepolis. Xerxes also built a new palace, called the Hadiš, and other buildings, on the south part of the Persepolis Terrace. x

In his inscriptions, Xerxes made clear that he saw himself as continuing his father’s legacy. Only in one respect did Xerxes vary from his father’s formula: Where Darius, on his inscriptions, had referred to Ahuramazda as a great god, Xerxes sometimes called him “the greatest of the gods.” 87

x

Xerxes also faced a decision regarding his father’s plan to invade Greece. He wanted to carry on Darius’s legacy, as his inscriptions show, but the desire to take lawful vengeance on Sardis and avenge the defeat at Marathon were probably also on his mind. Further, conquering mainland Greece would bring security and stability to the western satrapies.

x

To top it all off, if Xerxes was successful, he would do what Darius had been unable to accomplish and add another glorious achievement to his family’s history. Xerxes made his decision: The Persian spear would go to Greece.

Name to Know Udjahorresne: An Egyptian of¿cial and physician who served Cambyses and Darius. His inscribed statue is in the Vatican Museum.

Suggested Reading Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, chap 13. Kuhrt, The Persian Empire, chap 7.

Lecture 12: Xerxes Becomes King

Questions to Consider 1. How would you compare the relationship between Darius and Xerxes to that between Cyrus and Cambyses?

2. What do you think would have happened if Xerxes had decided not to invade Greece?

88

Xerxes’s War, 480–479 B.C. Lecture 13

M

any people know about the battles of Thermopylae, Salamis, and Plataea from the Greek perspective, as told by Herodotus. Of course, in this lecture, we will take a fresh look at Xerxes’s War from the Persian point of view. Even for those who are diehard lovers of Greek culture, understanding the Persian side is essential to understanding the real nature of the Greek victory. As we’ll see, the Persians did much better than they usually get credit for, but we will not shy away from pointing out Persian mistakes—mistakes that, in the end, cost them victory. Size Matters: The Fleet and Army of Xerxes x Xerxes had a goal to bring mainland Greece ¿rmly into the empire, but to accomplish this, he would need additional troops. A naval expedition straight across the Aegean wouldn’t be possible, because the navy couldn’t carry the necessary troops, horses, and supplies. x

The Persian successes in northern Greece under Mardonius offered a solution: approach by land, using the Àeet and army together. The army would secure beaches where the Àeet could rest, while the Àeet would carry supplies and protect the army from the Greek Àeet.

x

Xerxes probably had about 80,000 infantry and 10,000 cavalry. The main ¿ghting force was from Persia, Media, and the eastern Iranian satrapies; there were also central Asians, such as the Saka and Bactrians, as well as the Immortals. In the Àeet, the Persians had between 400 and 600 triremes.

Logistical Preparations x While Xerxes’s forces mustered, his staff planned the logistics. In 483 B.C., the Persians started cutting a canal through the Athos peninsula of northern Greece. In the 1990s, a British and Greek team, using sophisticated geophysical instruments and core sampling, was able to trace the mile-long line of this canal. 89

From the Persian point of view, the canal had practical importance. Once mainland Greece was conquered, the Persians would need to integrate it into the imperial communications network, and the canal would allow year-round sea contact between Greece and Ionia.

x

Xerxes also had two bridges built across the Hellespont, the channel that separates Europe from Asia. These bridges were engineering marvels and were an intimidating display to the Greeks. Again, they were also practical: The bridges would allow the Persian army to cross the Hellespont quickly, instead of wasting time on ferries.

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

Lecture 13: Xerxes’s War, 480–479 B.C.

x

From the Persian point of view, the bridges over Hellespont were not only practical but were psychological warfare—how could the Greeks resist people who could walk over water? 90

x

Finally, Xerxes’s staff set up supply dumps in northern Greece, and scouts checked out the army’s route to ensure the availability of campsites.

From Sardis into Greece x By late 481 B.C., Xerxes’s army had assembled at Sardis in western Anatolia. Xerxes himself arrived with the imperial guard, traveling along the royal road from Susa to Sardis. The troops spent the winter of 481–480 drilling and preparing. x

Meanwhile, Xerxes talked strategy and politics with his staff. He got advice from Greeks, including an exiled Spartan king. From these discussions, Xerxes knew that the mainland Greeks often squabbled with each other. Skillful diplomacy and psychological warfare could enable the Persians to win over many Greeks without a ¿ght.

x

Xerxes’s staff estimated that the Greeks could ¿eld a combined force of maybe 40,000 hoplites, including Spartans and their Peloponnesian allies. The Greek navy was mostly Athenian, with about 400 triremes.

x

In early 480 B.C., Xerxes and his army set off on the 800-mile journey to Athens. At a pace of about 10 miles a day, the Persians marched north from Sardis to the Hellespont, crossed the Hellespont bridges, went north into Thrace, and from there, turned west toward Macedon in northern Greece.

x

For the people in its path, the Persian advance must have been an incredible sight. Residents of the small towns of Greece watched as miles of uniformed troops tramped by. The locals made a show of hospitality to the Persians but also kept their families indoors and hid food to survive.

x

In Macedon, Xerxes received support from King Alexander I, the ancestor of Alexander the Great. Although he was formally a Persian client, Alexander also gave advice to the Greeks. From Macedon, the Persians marched south past Mount Olympus and into Thessaly.

91

x

The Thessalians enthusiastically joined the Persians. Many central Greeks, notably the Thebans, also sent messengers to Xerxes, offering earth and water. Other Greeks called these Persian supporters “Medizers.” The support of the Medizing Greeks reveals the extent of disunity in Greece.

x

So far, the land campaign was a success for the Persians; they had managed to take half of Greece without a ¿ght. At sea, the Persian Àeet had also advanced but had lost some ships in a storm, with others run aground on uncharted reefs.

Lecture 13: Xerxes’s War, 480–479 B.C.

Thermopylae and Artemisium x Led by Sparta and Athens, about 30 Greek cities had formed a defensive league. Realizing they were outnumbered on both land and sea, the Greeks pursued a strategy of ¿nding narrow passes or straits in which to battle. In the end, they chose a forward defense in central Greece, at the pass of Thermopylae and the straits of Artemisium. x

In 480 B.C., Thermopylae was a narrow pass, about 60 to 90 feet wide, with mountains on one side and the sea on the other. East of Thermopylae were the straits of Artemisium, formed by the island of Euboea that stretches down the eastern coast of Greece. The Persian Àeet would have to get past Artemisium in order to sail south through the channel separating Euboea and the mainland.

x

When Xerxes reached Thermopylae in August 480 B.C., he found an entrenched force of about 7,000 Greeks, including 300 Spartans under their king, Leonidas. The full Greek force hadn’t yet assembled. To the east, at Artemisium, Themistocles and the Greek Àeet awaited.

x

For several days, Xerxes distracted the Greeks with frontal attacks. Meanwhile, he found a path through the mountains inland and sent his Immortals to outÀank the Greek position. When Leonidas discovered this maneuver, he ordered the other Greeks to withdraw, while he and the Spartans remained. The Persians surrounded and killed them. In less than a week, Xerxes had cracked the last viable defensive position on the way to Athens.

92

x

At Artemisium, the naval ¿ght was more evenly matched, with both sides taking losses. With Thermopylae lost, though, the Àeet had no choice but to withdraw down the Euboea channel to Athens.

x

South from Thermopylae, Xerxes’s army marched past the friendly territory of Boeotia and the city of Thebes. In late August, the Persians reached Athens.

x

Most of the Athenians Àed to the nearby island of Salamis, except for a few diehards who holed up on the Acropolis. Xerxes’s troops stormed the Acropolis and slaughtered the defenders; then, they burned Athens.

Defeat from Victory: Salamis x At this point, Xerxes should have pressed the attack on land. If he had ignored the Greek Àeet and headed for the Peloponnese, he could have split the Greek alliance. The Spartans and their allies would have rushed home to defend the Peloponnese, leaving the Athenians stuck on Salamis. Instead, Xerxes sent his navy against the Greek Àeet; it was a mistake that cost him the war. x

The battle of Salamis took place in early September 480 B.C. The Greeks knew the waters and the winds, while the Persians were in uncharted waters.

x

When the Persian squadrons pressed forward into the straits between Salamis and Athens, they were smashed by the Greek triremes. At day’s end, the waters off Salamis were ¿lled with the wreckage of ships and men; the Greeks had won.

x

The wounded Persian Àeet was forced to withdraw, which meant that the Persian army could no longer depend on naval supply. The Persians moved north to Thebes for the winter. Xerxes left Mardonius there with a strong force, then returned to Sardis with the rest of the army. By leaving, Xerxes broke from the examples of Cyrus, Cambyses, and Darius and encouraged the Greeks to continue their resistance.

93

Lecture 13: Xerxes’s War, 480–479 B.C.

Plataea and Mycale x In spring 479 B.C., Mardonius retook Athens and tried to negotiate with the Athenians but with no luck. The Persian army had to fall back and set up a forti¿ed camp on the plain of Plataea in central Greece. The allied Greeks, led by Sparta and Athens, pursued them. They also sent their Àeet across the Aegean to attack Ionia. x

Plataea wasn’t so much a single battle as a series of clashes over several weeks. The Persians and their Theban Greek allies were stronger in cavalry, but the Spartans and Athenians reinforced their hoplites with light infantry. The two armies were about equal in numbers—maybe 50,000 on each side.

x

Mardonius could see that the Greeks were getting reinforcements; to split them, he sent his cavalry to attack their food and water supplies. The Greeks tried to pull back during the night to restore their supply lines, but things got confused, and when day broke, the Greek army was scattered across the plain. Thinking the Greeks were on the run, the Persians charged in disorder.

x

In the confusion that followed, the hardest ¿ghting was around a small temple of Demeter. Here, the Persian infantry ¿rst shot volleys of arrows, then dropped their bows and fought the Greeks with spear and sword.

x

The turning point came when Mardonius himself fell. The Persians and their Greek allies lost heart and Àed. The Athenians and Spartans cut down the Persians as they ran and captured the Persian camp.

x

The surviving Persian troops faced a long trudge back to Sardis. Along the way, they heard that the Greek Àeet had made an amphibious landing on Cape Mycale in Ionia and defeated a Persian force in battle. Xerxes’s War, begun with such promise, was turning sour.

94

The Signi¿cance of Defeat x Hostilities between the Greeks and Persians continued for years after Plataea and Mycale, but 479 was the last time the Persians directly threatened mainland Greece. x

Defeating the Persian invasion was a signi¿cant moment for the Greeks, but how important was Xerxes’s War to the Persian Empire? Although the empire thrived for 150 years after the invasion, every Persian king after Xerxes would have to deal with aggressive Greeks making trouble in the west of the empire.

x

Inscriptions from Xerxes’s later years place greater emphasis on loyalty to the king and the worship of Ahuramazda. It’s possible that these tough imperial statements reÀect unease caused by the failure of Xerxes’s War.

x

There were no parades or parties for the men who came back from Greece. No matter how bravely they’d fought, the empire wanted to forget.

Suggested Reading Cawkwell, The Greek Wars. Strassler, ed., The Landmark Herodotus.

Questions to Consider 1. What was more important for the failure of Xerxes’s War: the mistakes that the Persians made or the Greek resistance?

2. What lessons do you think the Persians learned from the failure of the invasion?

95

Cultures in Contact Lecture 14

T

Lecture 14: Cultures in Contact

his lecture explores cultural contact and exchange within the Persian Empire—the sharing of artifacts, ways of doing things, and ideas. Recent research is changing old stereotypes of Persian culture as weak or derivative. These days, it’s apparent that the Achaemenid Empire was a crucial time in the development of global history. Never before had such a large area of the globe come under the control of a single power, and never before had people come together to the degree they did under the Persian Empire. Just as in today’s globalized world, cultural interaction during ancient times was a complex process. Territorial expansion brought the Persians into contact with diverse peoples, each of whom responded differently. Some adopted Persian styles to emphasize their links to the imperial elite. Others opposed the borrowing of new practices and goods because it threatened local ways of doing things. And in ancient times just as in modern, people didn’t just copy cultural practices wholesale. They reshaped them for their own purposes, mixing them with existing cultural traditions. Athens and Persia x People often think that the Greeks, especially the Athenians, saw the Persians as barbaric. Yet at the same time that the Athenians were deriding the Persians as weak, effeminate, and despotic, they were busy borrowing from Achaemenid culture. x

The Ionian Revolt and subsequent Persian invasions gave many Athenians ¿rsthand experience of Persians. When the Persians ¿nally withdrew from mainland Greece, the Athenians captured massive amounts of Persian booty, both luxury goods and ordinary items. Persian slaves also came to Athens as the spoils of war.

x

During the 5th century B.C., Persian styles became all the rage at Athens. This trend is particularly evident when we look at Athenian fashions. For example, before the mid-400s B.C., sleeves were uncommon in Greek

96

clothing, but later, both men and women started wearing long-sleeved garments called chitons, patterned on Persian styles. Some of these clothes were made in Athens, and some seem to have been imported from the Persian Empire. x

The Athenians also emulated the Persian kandys, a sort of leather cloak or jacket. They modi¿ed this garment by making it in linen and enlarging the sleeves. Persian slippers also became popular, as did Persian metalware.

x

Wealthy Athenians went further, raising peacocks as pets and carrying parasols in emulation of Persian fashions. In the Near East, royalty or nobles often appeared with parasols, and both men and women carried them in Athens to display their status. In one Athenian comedy, the demigod Prometheus even tries to hide under a parasol!

x

By the end of the 5th century, Persian-style items, from clothing to cups, were everywhere in Athens. Of course, the elites then decided that Persia was no longer fashionable. The upper-class youth of Athens turned to imitating Sparta, wearing rough cloaks and adopting Laconic accents.

x

Persian styling also found its way into Athenian public architecture. The Odeon, a music and assembly hall built on the south slopes of the Acropolis around 450 B.C., may have been inspired by the Persian tent of the general Mardonius or by the great halls of the Persian palaces.

x

It’s also possible that the Persepolis reliefs inÀuenced the Parthenon, the great temple on the Athenian Acropolis. Recall that the apadana reliefs in Persepolis show tribute-bearers representing the nations of the empire. The Panathenaic frieze on the Parthenon, which shows a similar procession, echoes those Persepolis reliefs.

Cultural Interchange within the Empire x One way ancient empires introduced new cultural forms was to impose them from the top down. The Romans, for example, built Roman-style amphitheaters, aqueducts, and arches across the Mediterranean. Citizens who served in the Roman army learned to take orders in Latin and to 97

think and act “Roman.” The rulers of ancient China likewise tried to impose uniformity on their empires. x

Recent research has shown that the Persians had greater physical impact on their empire than was once thought. For example, excavations at the satrapal capital of Sardis have revealed that the Persians rebuilt the old city walls, erected an enormous palace on the acropolis, and took over the existing altar of a local goddess.

Lecture 14: Cultures in Contact

Eating and Drinking in Persian Style x Overall, the Persians didn’t focus as much on building projects as the Romans and Chinese did, but Persian culture spread in other ways. For example, after the Persian conquest of Lydia, Achaemenid-style bowls began to replace the older Lydian-Greek drinking cup at Sardis. The people there probably saw that emulating the conquerors’ drinking styles was a way to gain status and prestige. x

Eating styles at Sardis also changed under Persian inÀuence. Persianstyle shallow trays for baking thin, crisp bread became more common. This bread may have been paired with liquid foods served in deep Iranian-style bowls, examples of which have been found at Sardis.

x

These phenomena weren’t con¿ned only to satrapal capitals; in fact, we have evidence of similar processes in the far eastern part of the empire. Recent excavations in northwestern Pakistan have uncovered local versions of the distinctive rhyta, or pouring vessels, used at Persianstyle drinking parties, as well as local versions of Achaemenid bowls. Likewise, excavations in the Caucasus Mountains have revealed local pottery emulating Persian styles.

Philosophical and Religious Exchange x Cultural contact also occurred through service to the empire, as a military of¿cer, doctor, or administrator. The Persepolis tablets give us a glimpse of the activities of one such of¿cial. Around 500 B.C., a Greek named Yauna (literally, “the Ionian”) was the primary aide of Pharnakes, the uncle of Darius I. Yauna’s immediate co-workers included Iranians,

98

Elamites, and Babylonians. There were also Indians, Scythians, and others on the imperial staff. x

Working at court could expose administrators like Yauna to Persian philosophy and thought. Fragments of the Greek philosopher Heraclitus, for example, speak of “ever-living ¿re” and ¿re as a judge of things at the end of the world, which is similar to the emphasis on ¿re as an instrument of truth and justice in Achaemenid culture.

x

Such parallels may reÀect discussions between Greek and Persian thinkers. In fact, the record in the Persepolis tablets of Yauna transmitting a message to a magus named Limepirda offers one tantalizing suggestion of just such a meeting of the minds.

x

Scholars have also noted strong parallels between the development of Jewish monotheism and the Persian emphasis on the single creator god, Ahuramazda, during the 5th century B.C. It’s unlikely that the Persians were the driving force behind the Jewish move to monotheism, but it’s possible that the Persian presence could have added impetus to a move that was already underway.

x

At the non-elite level, artisans from across the empire worked on the great construction projects at Persepolis and Susa and brought the tools and techniques of their homelands into Achaemenid imperial architecture.

Cultural Interchange in the Achaemenid Military x Unlike the Roman army, the Persian military didn’t have a uniform language or regulations; thus, there was a good deal of room for cultural contact and diversity. Xenophon, for example, describes a mercenary captain who spoke with a Boeotian (central Greek) accent, had his ears pierced in the Lydian style, and commanded a company of 100 men who probably came from a dozen different Greek cities. x

Garrison life in far-Àung provinces stimulated both cultural contact and intermarriage. Documents from the site of Elephantine in Egypt show Jews, Aramaeans, Greeks, Carians, and others in close contact. Through 99

such contact, people learned other languages, ate new foods, and were introduced to new gods. x

For local elites in the empire, intermarriage with Persians was highly desirable, because it created a direct tie to the imperial ruling class. The children of such mixed marriages were accepted as Persians and themselves intermarried. Over the generations, the ruling class of the empire included more people who were ethnically mixed.

x

It’s also clear that the Persians used Athenian pottery. Remains of pots, Àasks, and other vessels have been found in many parts of the empire, both in the capitals and the provinces. Some Greek potters even started painting their vessels with scenes calculated to appeal to Persian customers.

x

Recent research has revealed god Bes became very popular with the Persians, eventually wearing another case of Persian borrowing, Persian clothes and headdresses. this one involving the Egyptian god Bes. Bes was originally the commoner’s god; he protected the home, pregnant women, and ordinary soldiers. In art, Bes appears as a diminutive, comic ¿gure. In the late

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

Lecture 14: Cultures in Contact

InÀuences on the Persians x Herodotus claims that the Persians had a tendency to adopt foreign customs, and we’ve seen some of this in previous lectures. One such practice noted by Herodotus is pederasty—ritualized erotic and emotional relations between adult men and teenage youths. Classical Greeks, including Spartan warriors, engaged in pederasty, and other Greek writers, in addition to Herodotus, provide evidence for it among the Persians.

In the 5th century, the Egyptian

100

500s B.C., there seems to have been an explosion of Bes images across the Persian Empire, and in the 5th century, Bes actually began to look more Persian! x

Finally, a source from the time of the Roman Empire mentions a Persian named Mithradates, who lived in the 4th century B.C. Mithradates was apparently a follower of Plato and set up a statue of Plato in the Academy at Athens. If this story about Mithradates is true, it means that at least one Persian took part in the philosophical discussions of classical Athens.

The Question of “Persian-izing” x Although cultural exchange was everywhere in the Persian Empire, it’s worth remembering that it wasn’t always received positively. At moments of crisis, those who didn’t ¿t neatly into a cultural box could ¿nd themselves in trouble. Further, for those who sought to set themselves apart, too much intermixing could threaten a community’s distinctive identity. x

Perhaps what’s most fascinating about cultural exchange in the Persian Empire, as opposed to, say, the Roman Empire, is that Persian culture never became the single dominant culture; the Persians didn’t “Persianize” their subjects in the same way that the Romans later tried to “Romanize” their empire. In the Persian Empire, there was room for diversity and local autonomy.

x

The reason for this tolerance was practical: With so few Persians— maybe only 1 million in an empire of 25 million—the Persians could hardly have reshaped every corner of the empire in their image. Thus, they made a virtue out of necessity, tolerating local customs and drawing local elites in through intermarriage. The diversity allowed by this approach worked well for the Persians, although in the long run, it meant that the imperial presence blended into the background.

101

Important Terms chiton: A long-sleeved garment worn by Greek men and woman and patterned on Persian styles. kandys: A Persian-style leather cloak or jacket. magus (plural magi): From Old Persian magu, a priest-councillor. A magus was a Persian wise man, star-watcher, magician (hence the English term “magic”), and priest of Ahuramazda. Magi carried the sacred ¿re altars when Persian kings went forth to war.

Suggested Reading Dusinberre, Aspects of Empire in Achaemenid Sardis. Miller, Athens and Persia in the Fifth Century BC.

Questions to Consider 1. How does the study of cultural contact in the Persian Empire break down stereotypes about “Eastern” and “Western” civilization?

2. What do you think was the most important effect of cultural exchange in Lecture 14: Cultures in Contact

the Persian Empire?

102

Achaemenid Religion Lecture 15

I

n the last lecture, we looked at various cultural contacts in the Persian Empire, but in this one, we focus on one speci¿c aspect of ancient Persia’s culture: religion. We’ll see how the ethical principles developed by the sage Zarathustra, or Zoroaster, inÀuenced Persian religious practice and ideals. We’ll also learn about the many gods the Persians worshiped, the various types of priests, and sacri¿cial and burial customs. It’s important to note that a great deal of uncertainty surrounds the study of ancient Persian religion. For much of our information, we’re forced to rely on descriptions written by outsiders, much later Iranian religious texts, and often-ambiguous archaeological material. Zoroaster (Zarathustra) and Zoroastrianism x The sage Zarathustra had a de¿ning inÀuence on ancient Persian religion. Many traditions surround Zarathustra, and his dates are dif¿cult to pin down. Indeed, some people have argued that he wasn’t a single individual. Many scholars believe that Zarathustra may have lived around 1000 B.C., perhaps somewhere in what is today northeast Iran or southern Turkmenistan. x

To understand the teachings of Zarathustra, we must turn to the Avesta, the sacred texts of the Zoroastrian religious tradition. The oldest part of the Avesta, the Gathas, is attributed to Zarathustra himself. However, the oldest surviving manuscripts of the Avesta are only about 800 years old, so parts of the tradition must have been transmitted orally for many centuries.

x

According to the tradition, Zarathustra lived in the polytheistic world of the ancient Iranian tribes. The Iranians at this time worshiped a variety of deities, including Ahuramazda, the sun god Mithra, the war god Indra, and others.

103

Lecture 15: Achaemenid Religion

Zarathustra emphasized principles rather than gods. He stressed the opposition between truth or order and falsehood or chaos. He elevated Ahuramazda as the supreme god but not the only one. Ahuramazda created people and gave them free will. Because of this, the world was divided between followers of truth and of falsehood.

x

Zarathustra did not abolish sacri¿ce, but he changed some cultic practices to minimize violence and overindulgence. He also introduced the idea of a last judgment for both men and women. Those who supported the good were promised paradise, while hell awaited those who had promoted evil.

x

The new beliefs that Zarathustra set forth seem to have spread gradually. According to tradition, he won over a Zarathustra, or Zoroaster as local ruler, who helped and protected the Greeks called him, had a huge, de¿ning inÀuence on him. Zarathustra’s teachings eventually ancient Persian religion. made their way westward to other areas of ancient Iran, where they were incorporated with existing religious traditions and eventually became part of the religion of the Achaemenid Persians.

x

It’s important to remember that the ancient Iranians had many religious traditions and worshiped many different gods. Over time, the path promoted by Zarathustra and his followers became prominent, but it was never the of¿cial religion of the Achaemenids. Persian religion was ultimately a polytheistic system in which many sets of beliefs coexisted.

x

At least since the rise of Islam in the 600s A.D. and down to the present day, followers of Zarathustra’s teachings have been called Zoroastrians.

104

© Dorling Kindersley RF.

x

The Achaemenids, however, preferred to call themselves followers of Ahuramazda and did not strictly follow Zoroastrian doctrine. For our purposes, it’s safe to say that the Achaemenids practiced one of the early forms of Zoroastrianism. Gods and Goddesses x Evidence shows that the Persians worshiped many gods, the elements of ¿re and water, and sacred mountains and rivers. The prime creator god was Ahuramazda, or the Wise Lord. The Persian kings from Darius onward considered Ahuramazda their patron and protector. x

Other gods included Mithra (the god of sun and light), Anahita (goddess of water and fertility), Spenta (the earth goddess), and Agni (the ¿re god).

x

Even before embarking on their imperial career, the Persians had probably picked up gods from the Elamites of southwestern Iran. As their domains expanded, the Persians often promoted or adopted the gods of areas they conquered.

x

Most of the time, these foreign gods weren’t imported directly into Persia, but sometimes they were. For example, the Persians borrowed the protector god Bes from Egypt. Over time, Persian and other gods also sometimes syncretized, or mixed.

x

Herodotus says that the Persians thought it was foolish to make statues of the gods, but on cylinder seals and other art, ¿gures appear that can be identi¿ed as gods. Ahuramazda, in particular, may be shown as a human ¿gure in a winged disk.

x

In contrast to the image we sometimes get from Greek writers or even Hollywood movies, the Persian kings saw themselves as humans, not gods. They were the instruments of the gods and gained power from being divinely favored, but they never demanded worship.

Imperialism and Religion x As we’ve seen, the Persians didn’t impose their religion on the places they conquered, but at the same time, religion helped the Great Kings 105

legitimize their power and keep internal critics in line. According to Darius, Ahuramazda gave him the empire; thus, obeying the king’s authority was a religious duty, not just a political one. x

The Persians also used religion to justify imperial expansion and conquest. For the king to bring new territory into the empire was a symbol of the triumph of truth over falsehood and order over chaos. In a sense, every Persian victory was a step closer to restoring the original order and goodness of the earth and stamping out barbarism and chaos.

x

Those who resisted Persian rule or tried to rebel weren’t just opponents of the king or the empire. They were also enemies of truth, morality, and good. Such enemies could justi¿ably be tortured or killed.

Lecture 15: Achaemenid Religion

Magi and Other Priests x There were several priestly classes in the Persian Empire, the best known of which were the magi (singular: “magus”). Although the Greeks and Romans connected the magi with sorcery, astrology, and magic, this perception is inaccurate. The magi were priests who performed rituals, interpreters of dreams and omens, advisors and counselors and keepers of sacred hymns. x

Magi accompanied the king everywhere, even on military campaigns, where they functioned as advisors and soothsayers. The magi cared for the past and future of the Great Kings: They instructed young Persian princes and guarded the royal tombs. They also presided over sacri¿ces.

x

The Persepolis tablets mention other priests called the shatin. These priests usually supervised the worship of Elamite and Babylonian gods, although they sometimes carried out rites for Iranian gods or even worked with the magi.

x

We also ¿nd Persians serving as priests for other religious traditions in the empire. For example, the sacred guardian of the Temple of Artemis at Ephesus was called the Megabyzos, reÀecting the Persian origins of the family who held the post in the 4th century B.C.

106

Religious Practices x Herodotus claims that the Persians never set up statues, temples, or altars, but there is much evidence to the contrary. For example, at Sardis, the Lydian altar of Cybele may have been converted into a ¿re altar, and ¿re altars are known from excavations in other parts of the empire. x

Herodotus may be more accurate when he says that the Persians climbed up to high mountaintops to offer sacri¿ce. He also describes Persians making libations to the sea and sacri¿cing white horses to a river during Xerxes’s invasion of Greece. In fact, the Persepolis tablets list offerings for mountains and rivers, including animal sacri¿ces.

x

We don’t have step-by-step knowledge of Persian religious rituals, but purity and proper form were crucial. Fire played a major role, and celebrants covered their mouths so they wouldn’t pollute the sacred Àames. They might also carry Àowers or bundles of sticks called barsoms.

x

In contrast with later Zoroastrian practice, the Achaemenid Persians de¿nitely performed animal sacri¿ce. According to Herodotus, a Persian who wanted to make a sacri¿ce put on a tiara, preferably of myrtle, then led the chosen animal to an appropriate place. The celebrant was supposed to pray for the welfare of the Great King and the empire, rather than only for himself.

x

The Persians also continued the ancient Iranian haoma rituals. Haoma was both a god and a plant. These rituals involved crushing some sort of vegetation to produce a liquid that was mixed with milk and water and drunk. The ritual was intended to increase the celebrant’s awareness and power.

x

Another important ritual was the lan ceremony, in which priests gave offerings to the gods. Priests performed lan ceremonies probably every month at Persepolis and other cities.

x

At Persepolis, the Great King himself performed rituals for the health and power of the empire. A special ceremony was also performed 107

when a king proclaimed a son as his successor, and a successor king underwent an initiate rite before taking the throne.

Lecture 15: Achaemenid Religion

Death and Burial x Despite the fact that both the Great Kings and ordinary people practiced burial rather than exposure, Herodotus records seeing some Persian corpses left out to be dragged around by a bird or dog before burial. Others, he says, were covered in wax before burial. These customs may have been practiced by a select few, such as the magi. x

For kings and nobles, special tombs were built. The tomb of Cyrus at Pasargadae is a freestanding stone hut on top of a stepped platform, about 36 feet high. Darius I and three of his successors were buried in tombs cut into the rock of a cliff face northwest of Persepolis. Inside these tombs are vaulted chambers with cists or pits for cof¿ns.

x

Persian aristocrats living in the provinces sometimes retained traditional Persian burial practices, but others adopted local funerary styles. Some were buried in tombs that look like the tombs of local nobles but with Persian contents.

x

Ordinary Persians were sometimes buried in clay cof¿ns. Grave offerings included pottery, bronze pins, and bracelets. Men were sometimes buried with weapons, such as spear points. Sometimes, stone mounds marked graves.

x

Persian troops on campaign buried their dead comrades as best they could. Herodotus records that when the Persian of¿cer Artachaias died during Xerxes’s invasion, his troops heaped up a burial mound for him.

Our Thinking about Achaemenid Religion x We can’t trace any direct connections from the Achaemenids to later religious thought, but it’s interesting that the Persians developed the ideas of a last judgment, of paradise and hell, and an emphasis on ethical conduct, similar to the three great monotheistic faiths we know today.

108

x

The ancient Persians must have had the same variety of responses to religion that people have today: from unquestioning belief to cynical manipulation and every shade in between. Understanding this helps us see the ancient Persians as humans rather than distant abstractions.

Important Terms Avesta: Zoroastrian sacred texts, of which the Gathas are the oldest part and are attributed to Zarathustra himself. barsom: A bundle of sticks or Àowers, used in Achaemenid ritual. Megabyzos (OP: Bagabuxša): The speci¿c title of the neokoros (temple guardian) at the Temple of Ephesian Artemis. The title reÀects the Persian origins of the family who held the post in the 4th century B.C. Haoma: Name of a Persian god and an intoxicating plant used in Achaemenid rituals. lan ceremony: An of¿cial Persian religious ritual involving monthly offerings to the gods. shatin (El.: šatin): A type of priest in Achaemenid religion.

Suggested Reading Kuhrt, The Persian Empire, chap 11, pp. 548–74. Lincoln, Religion, Empire, and Torture.

Questions to Consider 1. What are some of the challenges we face when studying Achaemenid religion?

2. How does the Achaemenid use of religion to justify imperialism compare with the practices of other empires, ancient or modern? 109

From Expansion to Stability, 479–405 B.C. Lecture 16

I

Lecture 16: From Expansion to Stability, 479–405 B.C.

n this lecture, we return to our narrative of Persian history, picking up in the later years of Xerxes, then looking at the kings who followed him: Artaxerxes I (r. 465–424/3 B.C.) and Darius II (r. 424/3–404/3 B.C.). This period—the mid- to late 5th century B.C.—saw a major shift in Persian history. Xerxes’s War in Greece was the empire’s last major attempt at expansion. After that, the Great Kings of the 5th century focused on maintaining stability and security through the use of diplomacy. Note that studying this era presents some serious source problems. We are forced to rely on the unreliable Ctesias, who served as royal physician at the Persian court in the late 5th century and wrote a history of Persia that survives only in fragments. Xerxes’s Later Years: 479–465 B.C. x Recall that in 479 B.C., the Spartan/Athenian-led alliance had defeated the Persian army at Plataea, while the Greek Àeet won a major victory at Mycale in Ionia. After that, the islands of Lesbos, Chios, and Samos broke away from Persia. The Persians were on the defensive. x

In 478 B.C., the Greeks, led by Athens, met on the island of Delos to form an anti-Persian alliance called the Delian League. Over the next few years, the Delian League brought over more Ionian cities, launched attacks on Persian territories, and took the city of Byzantium, giving the Greeks control over access to the Black Sea.

x

Xerxes didn’t strike back right away, at least partly because military losses in Greece had been high. Further, the loss of the Aegean islands and Ionian cities weakened the Persian Àeet. The Persians may also have faced revolts elsewhere in the empire, perhaps in central Asia.

x

The Delian League didn’t represent a signi¿cant threat to Xerxes. The Greeks could nibble at the edges in the west, but they couldn’t destroy

110

the Persian Empire. In addition, Xerxes received support from some of the Greeks of western Anatolia. x

Sometime between 469 and 466 B.C., Xerxes sent a Àeet west along the coast from Phoenicia, with the goal of rolling back the Greek advances in Ionia and Caria. The Àeet met up with a Persian army at the river Eurymedon.

x

The Persians already had 200 ships and were waiting for reinforcements from Cyprus. Unfortunately, the Greeks got wind of the plan. The Delian League Àeet, led by the Athenian general Cimon, surprised the Persians at Eurymedon. The Greeks smashed the Persian Àeet at sea, then landed and defeated the Persian army.

x

Eurymedon was a great victory for the Greeks and a humiliation for the Persians. Given that both sides were evenly matched in numbers of troops and ships, why did the Persians do so poorly? By this time, the Delian League forces had been ¿ghting together for several years, but the Persians had to rely on inexperienced troops.

x

The Eurymedon Vase, produced by an Athenian potter a few years after the battle, reveals that the Greeks equated victory in war with sexual conquest and shows the Greeks’ arrogance and con¿dence with regard to the Persians.

x

Judging from the Persepolis tablets, the imperial administration continued to run smoothly after Eurymedon, although Xerxes did make some changes in later years. He seems to have laid out a stricter royal ideology, with greater emphasis on proper religious form and loyalty to the Great King.

The Death of Xerxes x In July or August 465 B.C., Xerxes was assassinated; he was about 60 years old. A Babylonian tablet tells us that he was killed by his son but doesn’t give us the name. His three legitimate sons with his wife Amestris were Darius, Artaxerxes, and Hystaspes.

111

According to Ctesias, Artapanus, an adviser of Xerxes, hatched a conspiracy to assassinate the Great King and convinced Artaxerxes, the middle son, that his older brother, Darius, was the murderer. Artaxerxes killed Darius and took power, but then, Artapanus began plotting against Artaxerxes. Soon after, Artaxerxes discovered the truth and had Artapanus executed.

x

Another Greek writer, Diodorus, says that Artapanus snuck into Xerxes’s bedroom at night and killed the king in order to take the throne for himself. In the confusion that followed, Artapanus claimed that Darius was the murderer. That same night, Artaxerxes killed Darius but then realized that Artapanus was behind the plot. Artapanus and Artaxerxes fought, and Artaxerxes stabbed Artapanus to death.

x

If Artapanus truly sought to become king, this story shows how powerful advisors could become at the Achaemenid court—to the degree that they might think they had a reasonable chance of taking the throne. If one of Xerxes’s own sons was the assassin, this reminds us that the succession to the Achaemenid throne was never automatic.

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

Lecture 16: From Expansion to Stability, 479–405 B.C.

x

Xerxes and other Persian kings are buried in the Naqš-i Rustam Tombs. 112

x

In the end, once Artaxerxes ¿rmly established himself, the family lined up behind the new Great King.

Artaxerxes I (r. 465–424/3 B.C.) x Artaxerxes was kept busy from the start of his reign. A revolt in Bactria was quickly suppressed, but more serious unrest broke out in Egypt in 463 B.C. against Achaemenes, Egyptian governor and brother of Xerxes. The leader of the revolt was Inaros, who killed Achaemenes early on. Even so, some Egyptians stayed loyal to the Great King. Inaros needed help, and he sent ambassadors to Athens seeking an alliance. x

An Athenian Àeet of 200 triremes was already in the eastern Mediterranean, raiding Cyprus and Phoenicia. This Àeet sailed south from Cyprus toward Egypt. In 462–461 B.C., the Egyptian-Athenian alliance won victories against the Persians. The Athenians sailed up the Nile and besieged the city of Memphis.

x

Seeking to exploit existing tensions between Athens and Sparta, Artaxerxes offered the Spartans money to attack Athens. The Spartans didn’t accept, but this move marked a new trend in Persian foreign policy. From this point on, the Persians made greater use of diplomacy and money in conÀicts rather than relying on military power.

x

In 460 B.C., Persian forces sent by Artaxerxes beat the Egyptians and Athenians in battle and lifted the siege of Memphis. The Athenians tried to escape but were trapped near the island of Prosopitis in the western Nile Delta. After 18 months, they surrendered.

x

Some Athenians managed to get away, but most were killed or captured, along with perhaps 100 triremes. The Persian Àeet also surprised a reinforcing Athenian naval squadron and wiped it out. Finally, the Persians captured Inaros and cruci¿ed him.

x

By 457 B.C., Egypt was mostly under Persian control, and around 450, the Persians and Greeks signed a treaty, the Peace of Callias. The Athenians agreed not to attack Persia, and the Persians handed over the coastal Ionian cities to the Athenians. Despite the treaty, both sides did 113

Lecture 16: From Expansion to Stability, 479–405 B.C.

a bit of Cold War–style meddling in each other’s sphere of inÀuence, giving covert support to rebel cities and satraps. x

The Peace of Callias marked a new stage in the Persian Empire’s relations with the Greeks. The formal diplomatic agreement shows that the Persians were learning how to deal with the Greeks on Greek terms.

x

The peace enabled Artaxerxes to return to domestic projects his father had started. At Persepolis, he ¿nished the great Hundred-Columned Hall and a large palace at the southwest edge of the platform. At Susa, he started rebuilding the apadana after it was destroyed by ¿re.

x

In the years after 450 B.C., Artaxerxes won a reputation as a wise and tolerant ruler, especially from the Jews. Under Artaxerxes, the Jews enjoyed local autonomy and received funds to assist in rebuilding Jerusalem’s walls and restoring the Temple.

x

In 431 B.C., the Peloponnesian War broke out between the rival alliances of Sparta and Athens. At ¿rst, Artaxerxes was happy to sit back and watch the Greeks kill each other, but then, the Athenians started harassing Persian allies in Anatolia. An envoy sent by Artaxerxes to Sparta was detained by Athenians.

x

According to Ctesias, Artaxerxes died peacefully in bed, probably at Susa, in late 424 B.C. He had ruled for 41 years—longer than either Darius or Xerxes—and was successful in both war and peace.

Xerxes II and Sogdianus (December 424–February 423 B.C.) x Upon Artaxerxes’s death, his son Xerxes II became Great King, but Xerxes ruled for only 45 days before he was murdered by his halfbrother Sogdianus. x

114

According to Ctesias, the Persian army soon rallied around another half-brother, Umakush, or Ochus, as the Greeks called him, satrap of Hyrcania in northern Iran. Once Ochus was crowned, he quickly executed Sogdianus. By February 423 B.C., Ochus’s power was secure; he ruled as Darius II for almost 20 years.

Darius II (r. 424/3–405/4 B.C.) x Darius II faced challenges throughout his reign. First, there were sporadic revolts across the empire, especially in the far west. In order to defend the western provinces, governors had hired large mercenary forces, but these mercenaries were often more loyal to local satraps than to the Great King, forming ready-made rebel armies. x

Darius also faced the question of what to do with the Greeks. Initially, he continued his father’s policy of non-involvement, but by 413 B.C., he was changing his mind. If the Persians could play Athens and Sparta against each other using diplomacy, they could wear down the Greeks at little cost to themselves.

x

To execute his strategy, Darius relied on two satraps, Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus. In 412 B.C., Tissaphernes, on behalf of the king, agreed to send aid to the Spartans, which they could use to build a Àeet. In return, the Spartans allowed the Persians to reassert control over the Greek cities of Anatolia. Pharnabazus made similar offers to both the Spartans and the Athenians.

x

Scattered sources suggest that Darius also had his hands full outside of Anatolia: from economic problems in Babylonia and unrest in Media, to legal disputes between Jews and Egyptians, to de¿ance of Persian authority by various mountain tribesmen.

x

At the same time, Darius was also thinking about his successor. He groomed his oldest son, Arses, for the position, but he also had con¿dence in another son, Cyrus. In 407 B.C., Darius sent Cyrus to Sardis to take over from Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus. Cyrus quickly established a reputation as a shrewd leader, but he also made an enemy: Tissaphernes.

x

By 405 B.C., the Peloponnesian War was ending. Thanks to the ¿nancial support of the Persians, the Spartans were tightening their grip around Athens, and soon, Athens would surrender. But Darius didn’t have long to savor this triumph. In the fall of 405, he fell ill and summoned his two

115

eldest sons to his bedside, setting the stage for another struggle over the Persian throne.

Names to Know Achaemenes (OP: HakhƗmanis‫)ޞ‬: Legendary ancestor of Cyrus and Darius; also the name of various Persian nobles, including the brother of Xerxes I, appointed as governor of Egypt. Amestris (OP: AmƗstrƯ, “strong woman”): First wife of Xerxes I, by whom he had three legitimate sons: Darius, Artaxerxes, and Hystaspes. Darius or Artaxerxes may have been involved in the assassination of Xerxes.

Lecture 16: From Expansion to Stability, 479–405 B.C.

Artapanus: An inÀuential advisor of Xerxes who, according to Ctesias, hatched a conspiracy to assassinate the Great King and assume the throne himself. Artaxerxes I (r. 465–424/3 B.C.): This son of Xerxes is best known in the context of the Greek and Persian wars for having concluded a peace with the Athenians in 449 B.C. Sogdianus: Illegitimate son of Artaxerxes I; ruled brieÀy after killing Xerxes II, his half-brother. Xerxes II: (r. 424/3): Great King of Persia for 45 days, before being murdered by his half-brother Sogdianus.

Important Terms Eurymedon: River in southwest Anatolia in the province of Pamphylia. Site of the stunning defeat of Xerxes I by the Delian League sometime between 469 and 466 B.C. Mycale: Site in Ionia where, in 479 B.C., a Greek Àeet made an amphibious landing and defeated Persian forces.

116

Suggested Reading Kuhrt, The Persian Empire, chap 8. Llewellyn-Jones and Robson, Ctesias’ History of Persia.

Questions to Consider 1. What do the upheavals that occurred following the deaths of Xerxes and Artaxerxes I tell you about the nature of the Achaemenid family and the imperial court?

2. Who do you think was more successful as Great King: Artaxerxes or Darius II?

117

The War of the Two Brothers Lecture 17

W

hen we closed the last lecture, the year was 405 B.C., and the brothers Cyrus and Arses were at the bedside of their dying father, King Darius II. Darius preferred his oldest son, Arses, as his successor. But Parysatis, Darius’s wife, favored her younger son, Cyrus. When Darius died in late 405 or early 404 B.C., Arses became king and took the name Artaxerxes, while Cyrus returned to Sardis. There, Cyrus assembled a mercenary force and plotted the assassination of his brother. In this lecture, we focus closely on the struggle between these two brothers. It was a crucial moment when the fate of the empire hung in the balance.

Lecture 17: The War of the Two Brothers

The Successor to Darius II x When Darius fell ill in 405 B.C., he summoned his two sons by his wife Parysatis. The elder son, Arses, was already at the palace, but the younger, Cyrus, was serving as overlord of the western satrapies and had to come from Sardis to Susa. x

Allegedly, Parysatis tried to get Darius to designate Cyrus as crown prince instead of Arses, but Darius refused. When Darius died in late 405 or early 404 B.C., Arses became king and took the royal name of his grandfather, Artaxerxes; we call him Artaxerxes II (r. 405/4–359/8 B.C.).

x

Cyrus was not happy, and Artaxerxes, worried that his brother was planning to assassinate him, had Cyrus arrested. Parysatis intervened before Artaxerxes could execute Cyrus, and Cyrus was allowed to return to Sardis. There, he began plotting to seize the throne for himself.

Cyrus Prepares for Revolt x In 404 B.C., a major revolt broke out in Egypt, diverting Artaxerxes’s attention away from Cyrus’s preparations. All the while, Cyrus secretly built up his army. He probably had about 20,000 satrapal troops and recruited more than 12,000 mercenaries. 118

x

The majority of the mercenaries (about 10,000) were hoplites—armored spearmen with large round shields. The rest were light infantry— slingers, archers, and javelin throwers. The force was multi-ethnic, but most of them were Greeks, especially the hoplites.

x

The hoplite mercenaries were split into separate brigades, each with its own general. The best known of these generals was Clearchus, a rogue Spartan. Cyrus liked Clearchus because he was a skilled drillmaster, but the general had a short temper and an independent streak and could be overcon¿dent.

x

Another member of Cyrus’s mercenary force was a 28-year-old Athenian aristocrat named Xenophon. He describes his role as a kind of observer—neither general nor captain nor common soldier.

The March Upcountry x In early 401 B.C., Cyrus and his troops were ready. Cyrus’s plan was to kill Artaxerxes and take the Persian throne, but he had to hide his plan from his army and keep Artaxerxes guessing. Only Cyrus’s Persian noblemen and the commander Clearchus knew the true purpose of the expedition. Everyone else was told that they were going to attack the Pisidians, a mountain people who were raiding Cyrus’s lands. x

Over the spring and early summer, the army marched east across Anatolia. The further east they went, the more suspicious the mercenaries became. When the army reached Tarsus, there was almost a mutiny, and it was only thanks to Clearchus that the men kept going.

x

Meanwhile, Artaxerxes had been warned that Cyrus was coming. Messengers sped out from the royal capitals, carrying orders for troops to assemble in defense of the empire.

x

In late June, Cyrus and his army reached the Euphrates crossing at Thapsacus. There, the prince ¿nally disclosed his true goal: Babylon. The mercenaries were angry but also greedy. Cyrus promised them extra pay, plus bonuses of more than a year’s wages per man. The mercenaries crossed the Euphrates. 119

Lecture 17: The War of the Two Brothers

Showdown at Cunaxa x From Thapsacus, the main road to Babylon led east, then south down the Tigris River, while a secondary road went southeast through the desert, along the Euphrates River. Cyrus feinted toward the Tigris but then took the Euphrates road. x

In early August, Cyrus and his army entered Babylonia. Encountering no defenses and believing that Artaxerxes might have lost his nerve, they let down their guard. But the army of Artaxerxes lay in wait near Babylon, letting Cyrus’s forces come to them. Artaxerxes’s troops would be rested, while Cyrus’s would be tired from their long march.

x

Artaxerxes sprang his trap less than 50 miles north of Babylon, near a village called Cunaxa. It was mid-morning and Cyrus’s troops were marching in disorder. Suddenly, a scout raised the alarm. As Cyrus and his generals scrambled to move their troops from marching column into battle formation, Artaxerxes’s army appeared through the dust on the horizon.

x

It took hours for the two armies to settle into position; the opposing lines stretched more than a mile up from the banks of the Euphrates River, across the Àat desert plain. Each commander put himself in the center of the line. Cyrus had perhaps 30,000 troops, while Artaxerxes had perhaps 40,000. Artaxerxes also had a secret weapon: scythed chariots. These chariots had sharp cutting blades attached to their axles and undercarriages to rip up enemy formations.

x

Cunaxa may be the only battle in ancient history for which we have eyewitness accounts from both sides: Xenophon, who was with Cyrus, and Ctesias, who was the court doctor of Artaxerxes.

x

Artaxerxes planned to outÀank Cyrus on the right and crush him against the Euphrates, while Cyrus was counting on his mercenaries’ ¿ghting skill. Artaxerxes sent forward his scythed chariots, but with little success. Cyrus’s men were able to open their ranks and let the chariots pass harmlessly through.

120

x

With the chariots gone, the Greek mercenaries on Cyrus’s right Àank pushed forward. They routed Artaxerxes’s left and chased it for several miles, removing themselves from the action. On the other side of the ¿eld, Artaxerxes won and wheeled to encircle Cyrus. Cyrus’s only chance was to charge straight at Artaxerxes. If he could kill his brother, victory would be his.

x

Artaxerxes saw Cyrus coming and met the challenge. Two of the best cavalry forces in the world clashed head on, as did two brothers. Cyrus wounded Artaxerxes ¿rst but was then wounded himself and fell. The king’s men got hold of Cyrus’s body and cut off his head and right hand.

x

Even though he was injured, Artaxerxes didn’t leave the ¿eld. He led his troops against the remnants of his brother’s army. As the sun set, the battle of Cunaxa came to a close. Cyrus had failed and Artaxerxes was still the Great King.

Aftermath x With Cyrus dead, his second-in-command went over to Artaxerxes, leaving the mercenaries stranded. Clearchus, who had taken charge of the mercenaries, was ultimately lured to a parley, seized, and beheaded. The remaining mercenaries chose new leaders, including Xenophon, and made a ¿ghting retreat out of Mesopotamia. x

Five months later, in January 400 B.C., the mercenaries reached the Black Sea at Trapezus (modern Trabzon in Turkey). From there, they plundered along the coast, not returning to Ionia until the spring of 399. In two years, the mercenaries of Cyrus had marched almost 2,000 miles, their campaign recorded in Xenophon’s Anabasis.

A Snapshot of the Empire x The Anabasis gives us a great deal of information about local conditions in the Persian Empire around 400 B.C. The infrastructure of the empire extended far and wide, even into peripheral provinces. As they marched, the mercenaries encountered roads, villages, ration depots, and forti¿ed administrative centers—all evidence of how the Persians controlled their vast territories. 121

Lecture 17: The War of the Two Brothers

x

At the same time, the Anabasis suggests that the imperial presence was sometimes very thin or even nonexistent. The best-known example of this is Carduchia, in what is today eastern Turkey and northern Iraq. The Carduchians were ¿erce mountain people, who had once destroyed a Persian army sent against them. In fact, the mercenaries from Cunaxa barely got out of Carduchia alive.

x

The Anabasis also reveals the limits of the Greek perspective. For example, the mercenaries saw only villages and scattered Persian troops during their march through the satrapy of Armenia, but other parts of Armenia were more closely controlled. In fact, recent excavations near Lake Van in Turkey have revealed a satrapal capital with wall paintings and Elamite administrative tablets.

x

Some people believe that Alexander the Great read the Anabasis and used it as an inspiration for his invasion of Persia, but this popular interpretation seems incorrect. It’s true that Xenophon stresses the superiority of the Greeks over the Persians, but the Anabasis is also very much about the dif¿culties of invading Persia and the disunity among the Greeks.

“What If?” x The War of the Two Brothers was one of the greatest “what if” moments in Persian history. Most people who study this war focus on the mercenaries of Cyrus, but it’s even more interesting to ask what might have happened if Cyrus had killed his brother at Cunaxa. x

From Cunaxa, Cyrus would have marched to Babylon, then on to Persepolis and become Great King. His Greek mercenaries, once at the margins of the empire, would now be within steps of the ultimate power.

x

Would Cyrus have used his mercenary generals to revitalize and reform the Persian army? The victory at Cunaxa would have made such reforms thinkable. With their new high status, Greek mercenary of¿cers might have married Persian noblewomen, creating a mixed Greco-Persian ruling class.

122

x

With so much Greek inÀuence at his court, perhaps King Cyrus would have been inspired to launch a new invasion of Greece, bringing those lands back under Persian control. If the Persians took Athens, Xenophon and his oligarchic friends might have replaced the Athenian democracy with a new government, run by men who believed in the institution of philosopher-kings.

x

A powerful Persian Empire under King Cyrus could also have reconquered the kingdom of Macedon, which would mean there would be no Alexander to attack Persia. The Persian Empire could have gone on for several centuries longer than it did. If so, when Rome ¿nally came to the world stage, it might have met a single strong opponent in the eastern Mediterranean.

x

Cyrus’s victory truly could have been a turning point not just in Persian history but in world history. As it turned out, though, on that day at Cunaxa, Artaxerxes’s breastplate deÀected his younger brother’s blow just enough. Artaxerxes II would rule for more than 40 years.

Names to Know Artaxerxes II (r. 405/4–359/8 B.C.): As Great King, Artaxerxes worked through the Spartan diplomat Antalcidas to impose the King’s Peace of 386 B.C. on Athens, Sparta, and the other warring city-states of Greece. Parysatis: Queen of Persia, wife and half-sister of King Darius II, and mother of Cyrus and Artaxerxes II. She favored Cyrus the Younger and secured his appointment as lord (karanos) of the western satrapies of Asia Minor.

Suggested Reading Lee, A Greek Army on the March. Water¿eld, The Expedition of Cyrus.

123

Questions to Consider 1. Do you think it would have been better if Parysatis had not intervened on behalf of Cyrus?

2. What does the battle of Cunaxa tell you about the military strengths and

Lecture 17: The War of the Two Brothers

weaknesses of Achaemenid armies around 400 B.C.?

124

Persian Gold Lecture 18

M

ention the words “gold” and “Persia” together, and images of wealth and luxury spring quickly to mind. From Herodotus onward, the Greek authors never tired of describing the wealth of Persia. But the Persian Empire wasn’t completely devoted to ostentation. Under the Persians, agriculture, trade, and manufacturing Àourished. The royal administration played a major role in the empire’s economic life, but there was also a thriving private sector. And, thanks to the survival of Persian documents, we can get an inside look at the workings of the empire’s economy. In this lecture, we start with an overview of the Persian economy, then zoom in on some of the people who became wealthy as “entrepreneurs of empire.” The Economies of the Achaemenid Empire x The Persian Empire was as diverse economically as it was culturally. Just as they didn’t push their religion or language on others, the Persians also didn’t impose a uniform economy. x

One important part of the empire’s economic diversity was coinage. The Lydians invented coinage around 600 B.C., and after Cyrus conquered Lydia in the 540s, he continued minting Lydian-style coins at Sardis.

x

Darius introduced the famous gold coins known as darics. The earliest of these coins, dating to around 515 B.C., show a crowned archer standing in pro¿le. A daric was worth about a month’s pay for an ordinary person and may have been used to standardize imperial tribute payments. Darius also introduced silver coins called siglos.

x

Coinage was most often used at the edges of the empire. For example, most of the empire’s darics and sigloi were minted at Sardis and used in Anatolia.

125

x

The Persians didn’t insist that everyone use only imperial coinage. In fact, Greeks, Phoenicians, and Cilicians continued to mint and use their own coins, as did the Indian cities of Gandara. In Babylonia and Parsa, sheets or bars of silver remained the main medium of exchange.

Lecture 18: Persian Gold

Royal, Temple, and Private Sectors x The Persian Empire’s economy had three major sectors: royal, temple, and private. x

The royal or state economy included lands, industries, and workers that the king or his of¿cials controlled. For example, the king had direct or indirect control of the workforce at his palaces, the land allotments given to soldier-settlers, and the royal treasuries.

x

The Persians had a reputation for good accounting that can be traced back to Cyrus the Great. According to the Hebrew Bible, Cyrus ordered his treasurer to catalog the plunder that Nebuchadnezzar had taken from the Temple so that the Jewish exiles could take it back with them to Jerusalem.

x

Temples were the second important economic sector, especially in Babylonia and Egypt. Temples owned land and produced goods in temple workshops. Like palaces, temples often had workforces, including slaves.

x

In both the royal and temple sectors, workers and others were paid through the mechanism of redistribution. Under this system, taxes, tithes, or other income came to a palace or temple, which then redistributed goods as needed: rations for priests and workers, pay for soldiers, and so on.

x

Earlier scholars believed that the Persians had no private enterprise or that the king owned all land in the empire, but we now have clear evidence that the private sector was the third important part of the economy. Across the empire, people could buy and sell land or other property, engage in market transactions, and become entrepreneurs.

126

x

Persians in the provinces were often active in the private sector, even when they already had of¿cial jobs. For example, we have Aramaic letters of the satrap Arshama that discuss his business activities in Egypt.

x

The royal, temple, and private sectors were all based on agriculture. As we’ve seen, trade Àourished under the Persians, but neither trade nor manufacturing was as important as agriculture in creating wealth. Given that technology and education didn’t change much, that means that the empire’s economy grew very slowly—perhaps only about 0.1 percent a year.

The Archives of the Egibi Family x Since the 19th century, archaeologists have discovered thousands of business documents in Babylonia, written on clay tablets in Akkadian. These tablets, often referred to as archives, are typically found in groups belonging to a single extended family and often cover several generations of private business activities, such as loans, real estate, and farming. x

We know the Egibi family from an archive of about 1,700 tablets spanning ¿ve generations—from around 600 B.C. in the NeoBabylonian period down to 482 B.C.

x

The traditional way to get rich in Babylonia was through urban real estate or political connections. The Egibis, though, got their start as rural food merchants. At ¿rst, the Egibis bought supplies, such as grain, dates, onions, and wool, in the countryside and sold these goods in Babylon.

x

The Neo-Babylonian period was a boom time in Babylon; the city was under renovation, and such projects as the Ishtar Gate and the Hanging Gardens were underway. The Egibis supplied food to the many workers and temple employees needed to complete these projects.

x

In less than two generations, the Egibis became rich through trade. They invested some of their pro¿ts in farmland, farm equipment, and laborers—both for their own ¿elds and to rent out to others. They bought urban real estate and became landlords, went into manufacturing, 127

Lecture 18: Persian Gold

x

Further, the Egibis became lenders, making both longand short-term loans of silver. The interest rates they charged were sometimes as high as 20 percent a year.

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

and engaged in the slave trade.

With renovation projects such as the building of the Ishtar Gate underway, the Egibi family paved its path to riches by supplying the abundance of workers with food and other materials.

x

The practical and Àexible approach to business in Babylonia assisted the Egibi family and others like them. The Babylonians used a standardized set of contracts that could be easily adapted to suit many different kinds of economic activity.

x

The Egibis also entered business partnerships, called harranu. Basically, one side of the harranu partnership put up capital, while the other side did the work. The partners then divided the pro¿ts according to the terms of the contract.

x

The daughters of the Egibi family married other wealthy businessmen, city of¿cials, and temple administrators, linking the family to the most powerful people in Babylonia. Women could participate in money lending, investing, and other ¿nancial activities, so it’s even possible that the Egibi women were active players in the family business!

x

After Cyrus conquered Babylon in 539 B.C., the Egibi family continued to prosper and was especially active in Darius’s reign, from 522 to 486 B.C. The tablets show that Egibi family members held of¿cial positions in the imperial administration, at temples, and elsewhere. Thanks to these connections, the Egibis received tax breaks, as well as access to state-owned boats, harbors, and bridges.

128

x

The Egibi family archive reveals a high degree of economic and business continuity from the time of the Neo-Babylonians into the Persian Empire. Early in the reign of Xerxes, however, the Egibi tablets run out. It’s possible that the Egibis got caught on the wrong side of the revolts that were taking place in Babylonia during that time.

The Archives of the Murašû (Murashu) Family x The Murashu (“Wildcat”) family was based in the city of Nippur, about 50 miles southeast of Babylon. The archive of this family has almost 900 tablets; covers about 50 years, from 454 to 414 B.C.; and mentions four generations of Murashus. The Murashu tablets are mostly in Akkadian cuneiform. x

We can’t tell how the Murashus ¿rst made their money, but their archive shows that the family had imperial patronage and connections with the Persian aristocrats around Nippur.

x

The family did a fair bit of lending, but its core business was agricultural management. Using their own stock of laborers (slaves and dependents) and equipment, the Murashus ran large estates for Persian nobles and managed temple lands. Like the Egibis, the Murashus also invested money in harranu business partnerships.

x

The Murashu tablets provide evidence that the imperial economy did not suffer a shortage of silver, and the family’s activities reveal that the 5th century was a time of economic growth in Babylon.

x

One problem in the economy, however, was unequal distribution of wealth. Recall that under the ha‫ܒ‬ru system, soldier-settlers received land allotments in exchange for military service and taxes. These allotments—around 30 to 40 acres—couldn’t be sold but could be passed on to a son or given to a daughter as a dowry.

x

When the Persians opened up more farmland in Babylonia, demand for farm labor and equipment increased, as did irrigation fees for water from government-owned canals. The result was that some ha‫ܒ‬ru men had dif¿culty making ends meet on their modest allotments. Because 129

Lecture 18: Persian Gold

of high irrigation fees, they couldn’t produce enough crops and, thus, couldn’t pay their taxes or buy equipment when called up for duty. x

The Murashus provided an answer to this problem in the form of shortterm mortgages. Under such an arrangement, a soldier-settler could borrow silver until the next harvest and repay in barley or dates, as long as he put up his land as collateral. Those who couldn’t repay on time stayed on the land and paid rent to the Murashus. The Murashus might also farm the land themselves and pay the taxes on it.

x

The bene¿ts of economic growth in this arrangement were spread unevenly. Land and wealth became concentrated in the hands of a few wealthy people, such as the Murashus, while the ha‫ܒ‬ru men and other small farmers suffered.

x

The Murashu mortgage documents also give us an inside look at the struggle for the throne between Darius II and Sogdianus after the death of King Artaxerxes in late in 424 B.C. The signi¿cant increase in mortgages ¿nanced by the Murashus at this time may reÀect sudden demands from the new King Darius II, who needed money and troops to secure his power.

x

The Murashus ultimately lost their royal patronage; perhaps they had become so wealthy that they presented a risk to the Persian nobles around Nippur. By 413 B.C., an older cousin of Darius, Prince Arshama, had taken over the Murashu family business.

x

We tend to think of ourselves as heirs to the Greek tradition, but the economies of the Greek city-states were quite small compared to those of the Persians. It’s likely that we citizens of the 21st century would feel more at home in Achaemenid Babylonia than we might think.

Names to Know Arshama (AršƗma): Persian governor of Egypt in the late 5th century B.C.; about a dozen of his letters are extant.

130

Egibi family: Babylonian family whose business dealings are known to us through an archive of about 1,700 tablets, dating from about 600 B.C. down to 482 B.C Nebuchadnezzar (r. c. 605–562 B.C.): Neo-Babylonian ruler who succeeded his father, Nabopolassar.

Important Terms harranu: A Babylonian business partnership. ha‫ܒ‬ru: A community unit of soldier-settlers who received land allotments in return for military service.

Suggested Reading Bedford, “The Persian Near East.” Joannès, “Private Commerce and Banking in Achaemenid Babylonia.”

Questions to Consider 1. What aspects of the Achaemenid economy were you most surprised to learn about?

2. In what ways did the Egibi and Murashu families form a link among the royal, temple, and private sectors of the Persian economy?

131

City and Countryside Lecture 19

H

istorians sometimes talk about a split between event history, on the one hand, and long-duration history, on the other. Event history is how people often think about the past: kings, battles, treaties, and so on. Long-duration history encompasses the underlying currents of events— the enduring rhythms of agriculture, herding, and the seasons—that shape the lives of ordinary people. By studying these currents, we can understand the long-term Àow of the sea of history, in addition to seeing the individual events on the surface. In this lecture, we’ll look at some basic patterns in the lives of city-dwellers, farmers, nomads, and others across the vast Persian Empire.

Lecture 19: City and Countryside

City and Countryside x The Persian Empire had many cities, but unlike the Greeks and Romans, the Persians were not generally founders of cities—at least partly because they didn’t have to be. In his conquests, Cyrus had captured the major cities of ancient west Asia, such as Babylon, Memphis, and Sardis. Thus, the Persians focused on expanding existing sites rather than founding new ones. x

This non-urban emphasis makes sense when we think about the mobile court of the Great King. At Persepolis, the Persians deliberately kept the surrounding area undeveloped to ensure that open land was available for farming and grazing to support the palace. At Susa and Pasargadae, instead of building permanent structures, the Persians left open areas for of¿cials and soldiers to live in tents.

x

Keeping areas un-urbanized could also be a means of control. For example, the decision on the part of the Persians not to rebuild the former Assyrian cities may have been a deliberate attempt to prevent the Assyrians from restoring their former power.

132

x

The empire’s most urbanized zone was Mesopotamia, and Babylon was probably its largest city, with about 100,000 people. Around Babylon were a half dozen other large cities and 20 moderate-sized ones.

x

Urban life was also popular in the far west of the empire, although few of these cities had populations of more than 10,000. Important cities in this region included Sardis, Halicarnassus, and Ephesus. The eastern Mediterranean coast also had many cities, including Jerusalem.

x

The Persians took over some cities, such as Memphis in Egypt, as satrapal capitals. In central Asia, settlements on trade routes, such as Merv or Kandahar, grew into true cities. There were also some important Indian cities. Perhaps 15 percent of the empire’s population lived in urban areas.

x

Ordinary city-dwellers in the Persian Empire were more likely to see overt symbols of imperial control, such as royal inscriptions or the satrap’s palace. However, urban people were also more likely to enjoy political autonomy. For example, there were citizen assemblies in the Greek cities, in Babylonia, and elsewhere.

x

The Persian Empire’s cities were administrative centers, but they were also economically important. Potters, metalworkers, weavers, and others all practiced their crafts in the cities. Coastal or riverside cities brought in trade and ¿sh. And many people worked for urban institutions, such as temples.

Rural Life: Farming x Cities were important, but as we saw in the last lecture, the basis of the empire’s wealth was agriculture, and most people made a living as settled farmers. x

In Egypt and Mesopotamia, organized irrigated farming had been going on for more than 3,000 years. The Persians took over these systems but didn’t fundamentally change them. It’s likely that the Indus Valley was treated in much the same way.

133

Lecture 19: City and Countryside

x

Farming life along the Nile was easier than it was near the Tigris or Euphrates. The Nile had a gentle, predictable cycle by which Egyptian farmers timed their lives. The rivers in Mesopotamia were less predictable and deposited a good deal of silt in irrigation canals. Both silt and Àoods were problems in the Indus Valley.

x

The Persians irrigated many areas using what are called qanƗts, underground channels that could carry water long distances without losing it to evaporation. QanƗts were designed to take advantage of gravity, so pumps weren’t needed, and had vertical maintenance shafts for cleaning.

x

Archaeologists have found a set of qanƗts in the Kharga Oasis of southern Egypt, dating to the time of Artaxerxes I (r. 464–424/3 B.C.). The qanƗts collected water seeping in from the bedrock and carried it to reservoirs. This Persian system made the Kharga Oasis livable for the ¿rst time in centuries, and it stayed in use for 700 years.

x

In many areas, people farmed without irrigation, depending on rain to water their crops. In such places as Assyria, Phoenicia, and Ionia, people planted in the fall, when rain had softened the ground, and harvested in the spring. Dry farming also worked in more mountainous areas, where people built terraces for their crops.

x

The western provinces of the empire and the regions along the eastern Mediterranean shore produced olives, grapes, and grain. In Egypt and Mesopotamia, barley and dates were common, along with a kind of wheat called emmer. In the highlands of Iran and Bactria, people grew hardy wheat varieties. In India, there was cotton.

x

Throughout the empire, herdsmen tended sheep and goats, and one could ¿nd pigs, ducks, and geese. Ordinary people mostly ate grains and vegetables that they gathered or grew; meat was for special occasions.

x

Rural people often lived together in villages. In Mesopotamia and Egypt, the village density was high, but in other places, there were many miles between villages.

134

Pastoral Nomads x When we think of ancient empires, we tend to envision settled farmers living inside the empire and pastoral nomads beyond the borders, but this pattern does not hold true for the Persian Empire. x

Pastoral nomads plan their year around their herds, moving season by season to ¿nd the best grazing. In the Persian Empire, we ¿nd two basic patterns of nomadism, which we’ll designate as vertical and horizontal.

x

Vertical nomads were people who spent summers in the cool mountain pastures and winters in the lowlands. These were mostly sheep and goat herders, and their movements were fairly short range. This kind of nomadism was found especially in the Zagros Mountains of Iran and around Persepolis.

x

In central Asia and Arabia, horizontal nomads were common. These people spent winters in the steppe or desert and, in the summer, traveled to the lowlands or river valleys. Horizontal nomads were more likely to move long distances and to be horse or camel riders.

x

There was often a fuzzy line between the mobile and sedentary lifestyles. Some of the Persian herders of the Zagros Mountains, for example, also farmed. In central Asia, people sometimes switched between nomadic and settled lifestyles, depending on changes in the climate, the outbreak of famine, or as a way to avoid paying taxes.

Social and Legal Status x Social and legal status was an important current in the lives of ordinary people. The Persians didn’t impose a single legal system on the empire, but we can isolate some basic patterns. x

We’ve already met the elites of the empire: Persian nobles and of¿cials or wealthy families engaged in business, such as the Egibis and Murashus. This elite class owned most of the land and property, even though it was a tiny part of the overall population.

135

Lecture 19: City and Countryside

x

Below the elites was a large class of ordinary free people, including land-owning farmers or merchants and craftsmen in cities. Some of these people had formal citizenship ties to cities; others were free but didn’t enjoy full citizen rights. Ordinary people could migrate in search of work, which made the empire’s population highly mobile in comparison to the Greek world.

x

A wonderful example of small-scale business among ordinary individuals comes from a papyrus letter found in Egypt, dating from the late 5th or early 4th century B.C. The letter is written in Aramaic and describes the endeavors of two Persians and two Egyptians to trade in grain.

x

A third social class consisted of people known as dependents, who weren’t slaves but weren’t entirely free either. A good example of a dependent group is the kurtash, the palace workforce of the king. Some kurtash were war prisoners, but others were free people carrying out labor service that they owed as taxes to the king.

x

In the early 5th century B.C., Persepolis and Susa had more than 16,000 kurtash—laborers, skilled metalworkers, sculptors, and carpenters. The kurtash worked in teams of 10 to 1,500 people, sometimes including women and children. Some documents show that women could run work teams and even be in charge of men.

x

Both in cities and in the countryside, many other people worked for temples or the estates of Persian nobles. These people weren’t legally slaves, but they depended on temple administrators or imperial of¿cials for rations and housing.

x

Deportees made up another kind of dependent group. The Persians expanded the Assyrian and Neo-Babylonian practice of deportation as a way to punish rebels or defeated enemies. For example, in 490 B.C., the Persians deported the people of Eretria from the Greek island of Euboea to Susa, more than 1,000 miles away. Deportees generally received land and were able to maintain their group identity.

136

x

Slaves constituted the lowest class of dependent people. Slaves could be taken as war prisoners or bought at slave markets. In some cases, people were enslaved for unpaid debts. The children of slaves also remained slaves.

x

People in the provinces kept up their existing traditions of slavery. For example, the Ionian Greeks continued to have slaves, just as they had before the Persian conquest. In the eastern satrapies of Iran and central Asia, slavery seems to have been less common, but some Persian nobles, especially in Babylonia and Egypt, became major slave owners.

x

Of course, some slaves had horrible lives, especially if they worked in mining or agriculture. But some aspects of slavery during the Persian period might seem surprising to us. In Babylonia, slaves could own houses, buy and sell property, and go to court. Some wealthy Babylonian slaves even bought slaves of their own or hired freemen to work for them.

Ordinary Experience in the Empire x For ordinary people who worked on the estate of a Persian noble or were part of the kurtash, it may have seemed that the empire was always breathing down one’s neck. But because the empire was so decentralized and because the Persians relied on existing administrative mechanisms, for many people, it was not such a constant presence. x

Many individuals would have pointed to their local chief or city council as a way of de¿ning their identities. And many may have de¿ned their world by the rhythms of planting, sowing, harvesting, and herding.

Important Terms Kharga Oasis: Site in southern Egypt where archaeologists have found a set of qanƗts, underground irrigation channels, dating to the reign of Artaxerxes I (r. 464–424).

137

kurtash: Dependent royal workers, such as laborers, skilled metalworkers, sculptors, weavers, and carpenters. qanƗt: An underground irrigation channel.

Suggested Reading Dandamaev and Lukonin, The Cultural and Social Institutions of Ancient Iran, chap 2. Sasson, ed., Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. I, pp. 123–224.

Questions to Consider 1. Do you think the Persians should have tried to impose a single lifestyle on everyone in the empire? Why or why not?

2. Can you think of other long-duration currents that might have inÀuenced

Lecture 19: City and Countryside

the lives of ordinary people in the Persian Empire?

138

Women in the Persian Empire Lecture 20

W

omen in the Persian Empire enjoyed a great deal of economic and legal power compared to their sisters in Athens and elsewhere in the Greek world, and when Greek authors wrote about Persian women, their writing was shaped by their own society’s negative views of women. They emphasized the dangers of women’s power and often portrayed Persian kings as slaves to their women. Herodotus, for example, claims that Darius’s wife Atossa was the real force behind the invasion of Greece and later pulled strings to make sure her son Xerxes became king. Xerxes’s wife Amestris is said to have mutilated her rivals, buried some people alive, and cruci¿ed others. Parysatis, the half-sister and wife of Darius II, supposedly poisoned her daughter-in-law Stateira and made human sacri¿ces. Such stories helped Greek authors create a myth of Persian effeminacy and decadence that persists even today. To understand the realities of women’s lives in the Persian Empire, we need to look beyond the Greek tales of oversexed princesses and bloodthirsty queens. Fortunately, we can do so—thanks to the tablets from Persepolis and business documents from Babylonia. Marriage and Children x Polygamy was common for wealthy men in the Persian Empire, but even the kings didn’t always follow this practice. For example, Darius I had six wives, but Xerxes had only one. x

It wasn’t uncommon for Persian women to marry close relatives, including their cousins and uncles. These endogamous (“in-family”) marriages were part of a male strategy to keep wealth and power within the family. To maintain the power of the Achaemenid dynasty, some royal women married their half-brothers or brothers.

x

We don’t know much about ancient Persian weddings, but according to the Greek author Arrian, the wedding began with the groom seated in a chair. Then, after a ceremonial libation, the bride entered and sat next to 139

Lecture 20: Women in the Persian Empire

the groom, who took her hand and kissed her. The two then shared slices from the same loaf of bread. There were probably written marriage contracts, but none survives for us to study. x

The Persians placed great value on having many children, especially sons. This attitude makes a lot of sense considering that the Persians were a small minority—maybe only 1 million people—in an empire of about 25 million.

x

According to Herodotus, the Great King sent yearly gifts to men who had the most sons. Another Greek source says that the Persian kings distributed a gold coin to each mother during their tours of the provinces. Tablets from Persepolis con¿rm these stories. The tablets also show that a woman who gave birth got extra rations—twice as much extra if her child was a boy.

x

Family ties were extremely important to the ancient Persians, as were tribe and clan loyalties. Both mothers and fathers displayed great affection for their children, and scenes of mother and child appear in Achaemenid art.

x

Like the Spartan women who told their menfolk “Come back with your shield or on it,” the women of Persia could be outspoken. The Greek author Ctesias tells a story of Persian women taunting men who tried to Àee from a battle with the Medes in the time of Cyrus.

Royal Women x The royal women of the Achaemenid dynasty played an important role in the life of the empire. Some kings had genuine affection for their royal wives and concubines. Cyrus, for example, mourned greatly when his wife Cassandane died young. But remember, for Persian kings, as for many monarchs in world history, marriage was politics. x

140

The marriage practices of the Persian kings changed over time. The early kings followed the ancient west Asian practice of making dynastic marriages with foreign princesses to cement alliances. Darius I expanded on this precedent by marrying the daughters of Persian nobles who had

supported him in the civil war that followed the death of Cambyses in 522 B.C. Darius also married the widows of Cambyses. He needed multiple wives to solidify his power base. x

In every generation of the empire, the king’s sisters and daughters entered marriages that were important to the Achaemenid dynasty’s survival. Through their marriage alliances, these women provided the family connections needed to control the empire. And satraps who managed to marry into the royal family were lucky indeed.

x

The Persepolis tablets show that the king’s mother and wife were honored with Elamite royal titles. The king’s daughters received the title of princess. Just as some kings took throne names, some royal women also adopted throne names to honor famous ancestors.

x

Royal women participated in palace ceremonies and banquets at court. The Greeks had a hard time understanding this custom. In Greece, only prostitutes and mistresses attended banquets with men.

x

There is some evidence of royal Persian women using weapons. For example, in the 4th century B.C., Roxane, a relative of King Artaxerxes II, was an expert with the bow and javelin. Royal women also learned how to ride and may even have gone on royal hunts.

x

Did royal women have any real political power? They weren’t of¿cial advisors, but it’s likely that they exercised informal inÀuence. Archaeological evidence also suggests that royal women held public audiences, just as the kings did.

Concubines, Harems, and Eunuchs x Greek authors took delight in writing about Persian concubines, but the Greek idea of a concubine was different from the Persian reality. x

In Greece, married and unmarried men kept concubines as bed partners, and many Greek concubines had previous careers as prostitutes or courtesans. In contrast, the Persian king’s concubines were often foreign

141

Lecture 20: Women in the Persian Empire

women of high rank, prisoners of war, or women sent as tribute from the imperial provinces. x

For Persians, the difference between royal wives and concubines was that concubines were non-Persians, which meant that they couldn’t formally marry the king, and their children—at least in principle— couldn’t become king. In reality, though, concubines’ sons did become king, as Darius II did in 424 B.C.

x

Greek authors believed that Persian royal wives and concubines lived in seclusion, guarded by eunuchs. Although royal wives and children may have had separate quarters, royal women ate meals with the king. Royal women and concubines were also allowed to travel and accompanied the Persian army on campaigns.

x

Eunuchs, or castrated males, had long been known in the royal courts of ancient west Asia. The word “eunuch” comes from a Greek word meaning “bed supervisor,” but eunuchs were involved in many areas of palace administration. We even know of eunuch warriors and generals. It’s also true that not all men whom the Greeks called eunuchs were actually castrated.

Economic Power x The Persepolis tablets show that royal women were fully plugged into the imperial economy. One of the most interesting royal women in the Persepolis tablets is Irdabama, who lived during the time of Darius I. Irdabama signed her documents with a ¿ne cylinder seal, suggesting that she had very high status. She was also rich, controlling almost 500 dependent kurtash workers. Irdabama may have been Darius’s oldest wife. x

142

Other Persian documents show that royal women and wealthy noblewomen owned major estates across the empire. Like Persian men, Persian noblewomen took full advantage of their privileged status as imperial rulers to exploit the provinces.

x

The Persepolis tablets also tell us about the activities of ordinary women in the kurtash, the palace workforce. Women worked in weaving, food production, and other industries and could run work teams, supervise men, and receive higher rations than men.

Non-Persian Women in the Empire x Other women in many regions of the empire had substantial legal and economic rights. Again, the provinces retained their existing practices with regard to marriage, economic activity, and so on. For example, even though the Persians practiced polygamy, the Egyptians, Greeks, Jews, and others continued to emphasize monogamy. x

In Babylonia and Elam, women could buy, own, and sell property. Babylonian women received dowries when they got married, and wealthy women were able to invest these assets to make a pro¿t. Business documents show that women could make contracts, and marriage documents reveal that women in some provinces had rights if their marriages ended in divorce.

Women with Power: Artemisia, Mania, and Epyaxa x Artemisia was queen of Halicarnassus, an important city in southwestern Asia Minor. In 480 B.C., she personally commanded her naval forces at the battle of Salamis and won the respect of Xerxes and the Persian generals. Later inscriptions show that Artemisia passed down her power. x

Mania of Dardanus is one of the least known but most fascinating women of the Persian Empire. She was married to Zenis, who had been appointed by the satrap Pharnabazus to assist in governing Dardanus. Around 400 B.C., Zenis died, and Mania convinced Pharnabazus to appoint herself as his replacement. She proved to be a capable administrator and often commanded her troops of Greek mercenaries in attacks on enemy cities.

x

Epyaxa of Cilicia lived around the same time as Mania. Her husband, Syennesis, ruled Cilicia, a powerful autonomous kingdom in southern Asia Minor. In 401 B.C., during the War of the Two Brothers, Epyaxa and Syennesis weren’t sure which side would win, so they craftily 143

played both sides: While Syennesis made a show of supporting Artaxerxes, Epyaxa and her bodyguard went to Cyrus with money for his Greek mercenaries. The Study of Women’s History x The study of women’s history in ancient Persia isn’t just a matter of political correctness. Instead, learning about the women of Persia has implications for our understanding of the entire empire. By dispelling the myths of Persian effeminacy and decadence, we gain a better understanding of the true nature of Persian politics and society. x

At the same time, we don’t want to romanticize the lives of Persian women or overstate the freedoms they enjoyed. There was never a Persian queen, for example. Concubines might have had high status, but they were still foreigners compelled to serve the king sexually. And for every wealthy Persian woman, many poor women labored in ¿elds and workshops for little reward.

Names to Know

Lecture 20: Women in the Persian Empire

Irdabama: Wealthy Persian noblewoman mentioned in the Persepolis tablets; she may have been the eldest wife of Darius I. Mania (b. c. 440 B.C.): Wife of Zenis, sub-satrap of Dardanus under Pharnabazus. When her husband died, she assumed his position and ran the northwestern corner of Asia Minor. Pharnabazus (late 5th century B.C.–early 4th century B.C.): A Persian noble in charge of a satrapy in northern Asia Minor that stretched along the Hellespont, the Sea of Marmara, and the Bosporus (with a capital at Dascylium). Stateira: Wife of Darius III. She accompanied Darius on campaign against Alexander and was taken captive at Issus in 333 B.C.

144

Suggested Reading Brosius, Women in Ancient Persia. Llewellyn-Jones, “Eunuchs and the Royal Harem in Achaemenid Persia.”

Questions to Consider 1. What aspects of women’s lives in the Achaemenid Empire were you most surprised to learn about?

2. The Persian Empire was a monarchy, but its women enjoyed more rights than did the women of democratic Athens. How would you explain that?

145

Artaxerxes II—The Longest-Ruling King Lecture 21

W

Lecture 21: Artaxerxes II—The Longest-Ruling King

e last saw King Artaxerxes II in 401 B.C., just after his victory over Cyrus at the battle of Cunaxa. Artaxerxes II ruled for more than 45 years, from 405/4 to 359/8 B.C., making him the longestruling Great King of the Achaemenid dynasty. As king, Artaxerxes defeated a revolt by his brother Cyrus, stabilized the empire, and enjoyed major military and diplomatic success. He was a great builder and innovator. For all that, Artaxerxes II is one of the least appreciated Persian kings. When people talk about Persia in this period, they often fall into stereotypes of decline and weakness. But as we’ll see in this lecture, the successes of Artaxerxes were far greater than his setbacks. Stabilizing the Empire x After defeating his brother Cyrus in 401 B.C., Artaxerxes’s ¿rst challenge was to stabilize the empire. He pardoned many of the Persian nobles who had supported Cyrus, because he realized that granting pardons—rather than settling scores—was the best way for the empire to get past the divisions of the recent civil war. x

The next task was to deal with the western frontiers, especially Egypt and Asia Minor. Artaxerxes sent more troops to Egypt, which had been in revolt since 404 B.C. But he also knew that Asia Minor had been the center of Cyrus’s revolt, and the Spartans were still causing trouble there. Thus, Asia Minor became Artaxerxes’s top priority.

x

To carry out his policies in Asia Minor, Artaxerxes relied on the satraps Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus. Tissaphernes had supported Artaxerxes against Cyrus. He was reappointed as satrap at Sardis and got the job of karanos, or “super-satrap,” that Cyrus had held. Pharnabazus had his capital at Dascyleion in northwestern Asia Minor, in the region called Hellespontine Phrygia.

146

Asia Minor and the Spartan Threat x The primary power Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus had to deal with was Sparta, which had launched a series of campaigns in Asia Minor starting in 399 B.C. Most of Sparta’s troops, though, were not actually Spartans, and its armies never numbered more than about 12,000. x

To counter the Spartan armies, Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus relied on their forti¿cations and local defense forces, which included some Persian nobles, as well as local allies, mercenaries, and ha‫ܒ‬ru soldiersettlers. The forti¿cations were fairly modest—along the lines of mudbrick towers—but the satrapal capitals of Sardis and Dascyleion were heavily forti¿ed.

x

The site of Larisa, about 20 miles north of the modern city of Izmir, serves as an example of one of these forti¿cations. It was originally a colony of Egyptian soldiers, settled there by Cyrus the Great. The Spartans surrounded Larisa in 399 B.C., but the citizens launched a strong counterattack, forcing the Spartans to retreat.

x

Although the Spartans took some cities, they had dif¿culty recruiting allies. Even Greek cities preferred to stay with the Persians rather than go over to the Spartans. This state of affairs is yet another sign that the Persian Empire was not in decline.

x

In countering the Spartans, Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus had to deal with the unfavorable geography of western Asia Minor—river valleys separated by mountain ranges running east to west. Because the Spartans were coming from the coast, they could pick which river valley to attack, but the mountains made it dif¿cult for the Persians to shift forces quickly from one area to another.

x

In spring 396 B.C., the Spartan king Agesilaus (b. 445 B.C., r. 400– 359 B.C.) arrived to lead the army in person. After landing at Ephesus, on the west coast of Asia Minor, Agesilaus’s ¿rst attack was against Daskyleion, the satrapal capital of Pharnabazus.

147

The Spartans sent out cavalry to scout the territory around Daskyleion. As they came to the top of a ridge, the Greek cavalry ran into Persian horsemen of roughly equal numbers. The two sides were only about 400 feet apart.

x

The Greeks formed a line, while the Persians stayed in a column. The Persians charged ¿rst, and when the two sides got into hand-to-hand combat, the Persians, who may have been wearing armor, had the advantage. The Persians quickly killed 12 Greek horsemen, and the Greek cavalry Àed.

x

In the fall of 395 B.C., Agesilaus made another raid against Phrygia, in the territory of Dascyleion. The land here was fruitful, and Agesilaus’s troops became so distracted by plundering that they failed to maintain a guard. Pharnabazus was able to surprise and defeat them with two scythed chariots and about 400 horsemen.

x

Agesilaus scored one major success in the spring of 395 B.C., when he launched an offensive from his base at Ephesus. Agesilaus tricked

© Tarawneh/Wikimedia Commons/PD-Art.

Lecture 21: Artaxerxes II—The Longest-Ruling King

x

Scythed chariots were ¿tted with blades on the axles and undercarriage to chop up enemies. 148

Tissaphernes by feinting southward, then went northeast to Sardis. He gleefully plundered the region around Sardis, and when Tissaphernes’s troops ¿nally arrived, the Spartans defeated them. x

The Spartans had little time to exploit this victory. In 395 B.C., the cities of Athens, Corinth, and Thebes allied against Sparta. Agesilaus had to return home to face this threat.

x

To maintain Spartan power in Asia Minor, Agesilaus left behind a navy, but Artaxerxes had been building a new Àeet. In 394 B.C., off the island of Cnidus in the southern Aegean, Pharnabazus, King Baalshillem of Sidon, and the Athenian admiral Conon crushed the Spartan Àeet.

x

The Persians also gave the Corinthians and Athenians money to help them ¿ght the Spartans. Here again, we see Artaxerxes practicing effective Persian diplomacy, craftily turning the Greeks against one another to wear them all down.

x

The Spartans, now worried that they’d have to ¿ght both their Greek enemies and the Persian Empire, ¿nally signed the King’s Peace with Persia in 386 B.C. The treaty called for Sparta to cede power over Asia Minor and Cyprus to the Persians in return for a free hand in Greece.

x

The battle of Cnidus and the King’s Peace show that the stereotypes of Persian decline in the early 4th century don’t make sense. In reality, the empire was strong enough to dictate terms to the Greeks. The power of Athens and Sparta, on the other hand, was clearly fading. For the next 50 years or so, the Greeks were reduced to squabbling with one another in mainland Greece.

Other Challenges: Egypt and Cilicia x With the Greeks taken care of, Artaxerxes could now turn to Egypt, where a serious revolt had broken out in 404 B.C. Sometime between 401 and 399 B.C., the Persians completely lost control of Egypt, and the region remained unsettled for many years.

149

Lecture 21: Artaxerxes II—The Longest-Ruling King

x

After the King’s Peace of 386 B.C., Artaxerxes could focus on Egypt. But by now, the Egyptians had consolidated their power and were even supporting anti-Persian rebels elsewhere in the empire. From 385 to 383 B.C., the Persians attacked Egypt, only to be defeated.

x

The Greek orator Isocrates (one of the few sources we have for this period) began to argue that Persia was a weak and declining power. He received applause in Greece, but his speeches didn’t reÀect the empire’s reality.

x

By 374 B.C., Artaxerxes was ready for another try at Egypt. This time, he sent an army under Pharnabazus, along with about 20,000 mercenaries commanded by the Athenian Iphicrates.

x

The Persians faced a strong defense. The Egyptian pharaoh Nectanebo had forti¿ed the Nile Delta with towers and walls at strategic locations. Nectanebo also built barriers that kept ships from sailing into the delta and Àooded the lowlands to make it harder for troops to approach.

x

Pharnabazus and Iphicrates knew Nectanebo couldn’t be strong everywhere at once. They moved by sea, looping out into the Mediterranean, so the Egyptians couldn’t tell where they would land. Then, they launched a surprise attack in the Nile Delta and captured a port there. Now the Persians had a foothold in Egypt and could sail up the Nile to Memphis, the Egyptian capital.

x

Iphicrates wanted to march straight for Memphis and take it before the Egyptians could dig in, but Pharnabazus advised caution. Meanwhile, the Egyptians brought in reinforcements. Persian progress was also slowed by the annual Àood of the Nile. In June 373 B.C., Pharnabazus and Iphicrates were forced to withdraw.

x

The failure of this Egyptian expedition was a major blow for Artaxerxes, and he didn’t make a third try. Not until 343 B.C. would the empire retake Egypt.

150

The Cadusian Campaign and the “Great Satraps’ Revolt” x During the 370s B.C., Artaxerxes personally led an army against mountain tribesmen called the Cadusians and was able to win their allegiance. On the Cadusian expedition, Artaxerxes showed that he was a true leader, in the mold of Cyrus the Great. x

By the 360s, the fourth decade of his reign, Artaxerxes was nearing age 70. His power held steady during this last decade, except for some problems with the aristocratic Persians who ran his satrapies in Anatolia. Some people talk about a “Great Satraps’ Revolt,” but in fact, these were only scattered uprisings.

x

One famous ¿gure from this era is Maussolus of Caria, whose capital was at Halicarnassus. Maussolus was both a satrap and part of a local Carian dynasty and was able to extend his power fairly widely in southwest Asia Minor. He may be best known for his enormous tomb, the Mausoleum at Halicarnassus, one of the wonders of the ancient world.

Artaxerxes at Home x At home, Artaxerxes embarked on a royal building program unlike anything seen since Darius I, more than a century before. He built an apadana at Ecbatana and a new Persian-style palace at Babylon, ¿nished rebuilding the apadana at Susa, and erected a tomb for himself on the slopes just above Persepolis. x

Clearly, the empire could still mobilize enormous resources of labor and materials, just as in the days of Darius. Other evidence indicates that the imperial administration and communications network were still working as smoothly as ever.

x

Finally, Artaxerxes introduced new terms into the formulaic language of royal inscriptions. In his inscriptions at Susa, for example, the king for the ¿rst time mentions the god Mithra and the goddess Anahita, along with the usual invocation of Ahuramazda.

151

© Photos.com/Thinkstock.

Lecture 21: Artaxerxes II—The Longest-Ruling King

Artaxerxes embarked on a royal building program unlike anything seen since Darius I, which included a new Persian-style palace at Babylon.

Artaxerxes the Man x The biographer Plutarch gives us some wonderful stories that provide insight into Artaxerxes’s character. He notes that Artaxerxes was nicknamed Mnêmon, “Ever Mindful,” because of his great memory. The Great King had a gentle manner and a good sense of humor, was quick to forgive and generous. x

Artaxerxes’s ¿rst wife, Stateira, was also popular. Plutarch says that Stateira, unlike other royal women, traveled in an open carriage, so that common people could approach and talk with her. She and her husband had three sons.

Names to Know Agesilaus (b. 445 B.C., r. 400–359 B.C.): Spartan king who raided the territories of Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus during the reign of Artaxerxes II. Baalshillem (Baalšillem, r. c. 401–365): King of Sidon, a Phoenician city that supplied ships to the Persian Empire. 152

Conon (c. 445–390 B.C.): Athenian naval commander who escaped from the disaster at Aegospotami in 405 B.C., maintained an exiled Athenian Àeet of a few triremes in Cyprus during the decade following Athens’ surrender to Sparta, and was ultimately chosen by Artaxerxes II to command a PersianAthenian Àeet against the Spartans. Iphicrates: Athenian mercenary general who commanded Greek troops in Egypt in support of the invasion of Artaxerxes II in 374–373 B.C. Isocrates (436–338 B.C.): Extraordinarily long-lived Athenian teacher of rhetoric, who was still writing remarkable orations at the age of 99. Maussolus of Caria: Satrap of Halicarnassus and builder of the Mausoleum there, one of the wonders of the ancient world.

Important Terms Cadusians: Mountain tribesmen in Iran, known as great warriors. Artaxerxes II won a campaign against them in the 370s. karanos: A regional overlord or “super-satrap.”

Suggested Reading Kuhrt, The Persian Empire, chap 9. Plutarch, Life of Artaxerxes.

Questions to Consider 1. Read Plutarch’s biography of Artaxerxes II. What kind of man was Artaxerxes II, according to Plutarch?

2. Who do you think was the most successful of these three Persian kings: Artaxerxes II; his father, Darius II; or his grandfather, Artaxerxes I?

153

Persia and Macedon, 359–333 B.C. Lecture 22

T

Lecture 22: Persia and Macedon, 359–333 B.C.

hanks to Artaxerxes’s military and diplomatic skills, the Persian Empire remained supreme over the Greeks for much of the 4th century B.C. But all that changed suddenly with the rise of a new power: the kingdom of Macedon and its rulers Philip and Alexander. Philip devoted attention to his military, creating an infantry of pikemen, organizing and drilling his cavalry, and coordinating the actions of his troops. When Alexander took the throne, he almost immediately launched this army against the Persians, forcing them to ¿ght for the very survival of their empire. Artaxerxes III (r. 359/8–338 B.C.) x By 360 B.C., when he was around 70 years old, Artaxerxes had made his eldest son, Darius, the crown prince. But Plutarch tells us that Darius was implicated in a plot to seize the throne, and Artaxerxes had him put on trial, then executed. Shortly afterward, Artaxerxes’s second son, Ariaspes, committed suicide. The king himself died soon after, sometime between November 359 and April 358 B.C. x

Artaxerxes’s third son, Ochus, took his father’s place on the throne. Like previous Persian kings, Ochus changed his name when he became king; we call him Artaxerxes III.

x

This new king consolidated his power quickly and put down revolts in Phoenicia, Cyprus, and Asia Minor. Around 345 B.C., Artaxerxes himself led an army into Egypt and, by 343 B.C., had brought Egypt back into the Persian Empire.

x

Artaxerxes III also had projects at home. He built a new palace at Persepolis and constructed a royal tomb on the slopes above, next to the tomb of his father. The king instituted some administrative reforms and made an important move toward centralizing imperial power, by making his satraps disband their mercenary forces.

154

x

By the late 340s, then, the Persian Empire seemed as strong as ever. But then Artaxerxes received news that the city of Perinthus, on the north coast of the Sea of Marmara, was under siege. The besiegers were Macedonians, under their king, Philip. Artaxerxes ordered his satraps to send troops, money, and supplies to help Perinthus break the siege.

x

Philip II came to the throne of Macedon in 359 B.C., at just 23 years old. The previous king, Philip’s brother, had been killed in battle. Macedon’s neighbors were on the verge of breaking up the kingdom, and the Athenians were supporting a pretender to the throne, which could mean civil war.

© Photos.com/Thinkstock.

Philip II of Macedon x Macedon had always been a kingdom with promise. It had grain, gold, timber, and a large population. Macedon’s nobles, however, tended to get into bitter civil wars, so the kingdom had never quite lived up to its potential.

Phillip II came to the throne of Macedon in 359 B.C., almost the same year Artaxerxes III became Great King of Persia.

x

In less than a decade, by 350 B.C., Philip had completely turned Macedon around, making it the strongest power in northern Greece. By the 340s, Macedonian inÀuence stretched south to Athens and east toward the Hellespont.

x

Philip created a revolutionary kind of army that relied on an infantry of pikemen. These soldiers carried 15- to 18-foot-long pikes, called sarissas, and used a tight block or phalanx formation. Philip drilled his infantry on the art of lifting the pikes to the vertical in order to turn quickly in any direction.

155

Lecture 22: Persia and Macedon, 359–333 B.C.

x

The Macedonian phalanx, unlike earlier Greek phalanxes, could move swiftly even over rugged ground. Philip further divided his phalanx into battalions that could be adapted to any tactical situation.

x

The second important element of Philip’s new army was cavalry. The Macedonian nobles had long been skilled horsemen, but until now, they weren’t well organized. Philip armed the cavalry with long lances, then trained the men to work together in squadrons, using diamond or wedge formations.

x

Leadership also made a difference. Philip promoted winning of¿cers and sacked losers. He cut down the baggage carried by the army and trained his troops to move quickly over long distances. To support the infantry and cavalry, Philip recruited other troops, including slingers, archers, javelin throwers, light cavalry, and Greek hoplite mercenaries.

x

The true power of Philip’s army was that he used his troops together, as a team. First, the light cavalry scouted ahead, to ¿nd the enemy. Then, the phalanx advanced to ¿x or pin the opposing force. Then, the cavalry charged in, looking for an open Àank or a gap in the enemy line. Meanwhile, the light infantry would screen the army’s Àanks.

x

Philip also had engineers who could build siege towers or dig tunnels, and he used the latest siege technology, the katapeltês, or catapult. Philip’s catapults could hurl huge arrows against enemy infantry or throw stone balls weighing up to 20 pounds against city walls.

x

Philip’s setback at Perinthus was only temporary. In 338 B.C., the Macedonians invaded southern Greece. A Greek coalition met them near the town of Chaeronea, about 90 miles northwest of Athens, but Philip’s son Alexander led the cavalry charge that broke the Greek line.

Artaxerxes IV (r. 338–336 B.C.) x In August or September of 338 B.C., Artaxerxes III was poisoned, and his youngest son took the throne as Artaxerxes IV. But this new king ruled for less than two years; we’re told he was murdered in 336.

156

x

A Persian noble named Artashata then took the throne under the name Darius III. This new king was part of the wider Achaemenid family, but he wasn’t a close relative of Artaxerxes IV.

x

Although Darius had a reputation for bravery and connections at court, many Persian nobles doubted his legitimacy. Shortly after he took the throne, revolts popped up in Babylon and perhaps in Egypt. Darius needed time to solidify his hold on power, but time was something he didn’t have. He was about to face an invasion led by one of the most remarkable men of ancient times: Alexander of Macedon.

Alexander III (b. 356 B.C.; r. 336–323 B.C.) x In 336 B.C., the same year Darius III became Great King, Alexander III, the son of Philip, became king of Macedon. Twenty-year-old Alexander took the throne in the wake of his father’s murder by a disgruntled Macedonian noble. x

Alexander immediately showed that he was ruthless. When Thebes revolted in 335 B.C., he razed the Greek city, sparing only temples and the former home of the poet Pindar. With that lesson to keep the Greeks in line, Alexander was ready to take on the Persian Empire. In the spring of 334 B.C., he landed at Troy in northwestern Asia Minor with about 50,000 men, including about 7,000 cavalry.

x

Darius directed the local satraps—Arsites, satrap of Dascyleion, and Sphithridates, satrap at Sardis—to deal with the Macedonian invasion. The commanders quickly gathered about 20,000 cavalry forces and 10,000 Greek mercenary infantry troops. But the Persian leaders and troops were inexperienced, in contrast to the Macedonians, who had been ¿ghting constantly for nearly 20 years.

x

The Greek mercenary commander, Memnon of Rhodes, advised a scorched-earth strategy: Burn the crops and avoid battle, then Alexander would run out of food and have to withdraw. But the local satraps, wanting to save their estates and crops, pressed for battle.

157

Lecture 22: Persia and Macedon, 359–333 B.C.

x

In the summer of 334 B.C., the Persian army took up position on the eastern bank of a shallow river called the Granicus, on the road to Dascyleion. Alexander’s army advanced from the west.

x

The river was a good place for a defense, but the Persian commanders showed their inexperience by deploying very oddly. The Persian cavalry lined the riverbank, while the infantry drew up on a ridge behind them. In these positions, the infantry and cavalry couldn’t support each other.

x

At Granicus, Alexander used the hammer-and-anvil tactics he’d learned from his father. First, the Macedonians hit the Persian left Àank. Some Persians crossed into the river to counter this, creating an opening. The Macedonian phalanx—the anvil—crossed the river to ¿x the enemy, and then Alexander’s cavalry—the hammer—charged in.

x

The Persians fought bravely, but when the cavalry was nearly surrounded, it Àed, leaving the Greek mercenaries on their own. Alexander’s troops surrounded the mercenaries and cut them down.

The Conquest of Anatolia, 334–333 B.C. x The battle of Granicus was a disaster for the Persians; they now had no choice but to fall back and try to hold the cities of Anatolia against Alexander. x

During the summer and fall of 334 B.C., the Macedonians sped through western Anatolia, taking Sardis and Ephesus and besieging Miletus and Halicarnassus. By the end of the year, western Asia Minor was mostly in Macedonian hands.

x

Alexander’s army spent the winter of 334 to 333 in southwestern Anatolia and resumed its advance in the spring of 333, making a wide loop in central Anatolia to conquer the important cities of Celaenae and Gordion. Alexander’s army didn’t stay long in most of these places. Typically, he left a small garrison, perhaps installed a new governor in the existing administration, and was on his way.

158

x

For his part, Darius had sent agents to stir up revolts and was collecting a new army in Babylonia. He appointed Memnon as regional commander out west. Memnon built up a Àeet during 334 B.C. and launched a naval counteroffensive in the spring of 333, taking several Aegean islands. But with Memnon’s sudden death from illness, the counteroffensive ground to a halt.

x

Darius must have faced enormous pressure to attack Alexander immediately, but Granicus had shown that the Macedonian army was unlike anything the Persian Empire had ever faced. Darius knew he had to pick his moment carefully. When his army was ready, Darius led it northwest, to Syria. The Amanus Mountains screened the Persians from Alexander’s scouts.

Darius Surprises Alexander at Issus, 333 B.C. x In early summer 333 B.C., Alexander’s army came down off the Anatolian plateau. Moving swiftly, the Macedonians forced their way through the Cilician Gates. Then, they camped at Tarsus, in the plain of Cilicia, while the satrap of Cilicia fell back to join Darius. x

In early fall—perhaps September—Persian scouts brought word that the Macedonians were marching east from Tarsus to Issus. Darius ¿gured that Alexander would march south along the coast to the Syrian Gates, where he could cross over the Amanus Mountains. That would leave his rear at Issus unprotected.

x

Darius advanced through the Amanus Mountains north of Issus, using a little-known pass that Alexander hadn’t guarded, and came onto the plain of Issus behind Alexander’s army. At Issus, the Persians found a Macedonian hospital and slaughtered the wounded.

x

Alexander had no choice but to turn his army back north to face Darius at Issus. The ¿rst showdown between the two kings was about to begin.

159

Names to Know Artaxerxes III (Ochus; r. 359/8–338 B.C.): The Great King who restored order to much of the Persian Empire and succeeded in reconquering Egypt. Ochus (Bab.: Umasu or Umakuš): Son of Artaxerxes I who took power as Darius II.

Important Terms Chaeronea (ȋĮȚȡȫȞİȚĮ): Town about 90 miles northwest of Athens. Philip defeated a Greek alliance there in 338 B.C., ending the era of independent Greek city-states and making Greece subordinate to Macedonian interests.

Lecture 22: Persia and Macedon, 359–333 B.C.

Granicus: A shallow river on the road to Dascyleion. Site of the defeat of the satraps Arsites and Sphithridates (under Darius III) by Alexander the Great in the summer of 334 B.C. Perinthus: City on the Sea of Marmara. Artaxerxes III (Ochus) opposed Philip II’s attempt to conquer Perinthus, providing the Macedonians with a justi¿cation for attacking Persia.

Suggested Reading Bosworth, Conquest and Empire. Romm, ed., The Landmark Arrian.

Questions to Consider 1. How would you have deployed the Persian forces at the Granicus River? 2. In what ways can you compare Alexander to Cyrus the Great? How were the two different?

160

The End of an Empire, 333–323 B.C. Lecture 23

I

magine an early November afternoon in 333 B.C. The place: a narrow coastal plain, running north to south. To the west, the waters of the Mediterranean Sea lap gently at the shore. To the east rise the low foothills of the Amanus Mountains. Down from the foothills, along a rocky riverbed, runs the river Pinarus. Between mountains and sea, the plain is only a few miles wide. On this plain, separated by the Pinarus River, two armies stand ready. On the north side are the Persians and their Great King, Darius III. On the south are Alexander and his Macedonians. These two kings have never met before, but the stakes couldn’t be higher: control of the Persian Empire. The battle of Issus is about to begin. Issus, 333 B.C. x As we closed the last lecture, Darius had surprised Alexander by swiftly crossing the Amanus Mountains and coming down to Issus from the north, cutting the Macedonians off. Alexander had no choice but to turn back and face Darius, whom he found waiting at the Pinarus. x

Darius kept his infantry and cavalry together, with heavy cavalry on the coast and the infantry holding the center behind the river. He posted other troops in the hills above the plain to outÀank the Macedonian right. Darius himself took position on his chariot in the center of the line, where he could best direct his army.

x

Darius’s army numbered perhaps 50,000 to Alexander’s 40,000. His troops included Greek mercenaries, Persian archers, and new troops called the kardakes—Persian soldiers armed with hoplite shields and spears.

x

Alexander’s men advanced in their usual formation: light troops protecting both Àanks, the phalanx of pikemen in the center, and Alexander with his heavy cavalry on the right wing, looking for an opening. 161

Lecture 23: The End of an Empire, 333–323 B.C.

x

Darius’s plan was to smash the Macedonian left and drive Alexander’s army back onto the Pinarus and the hills above the plain—his own version of the hammer and anvil. The plan was a good one, and it nearly worked.

x

When the Persian right-wing cavalry charged, it did so well that Alexander had to pull troops from his right wing to help his left. In the center, Darius’s Greek mercenaries found gaps in the Macedonian phalanx as it tried to climb the steep banks of the Pinarus.

x

Then, on the right Àank, Alexander led a charge that routed the Persian left wing and brought Alexander within sight of Darius himself. Some Greek sources claim Darius Àed in panic with his left wing, but others say he fought bravely and retreated only after his guard had been killed.

x

The famous Alexander Mosaic, found at Pompeii, helps us imagine this moment when the two kings came face to face. Darius is shown in his chariot with his arm outstretched toward Alexander, frozen in the moment between battle and Àight. The mosaic dates from Roman times, but it was based on a wall painting of about 300 B.C.

x

Darius’s decision to retreat had a cost: He left behind his mother, his wife, and several children. When Darius sent envoys to ask for his family’s release and offer an alliance, Alexander responded that he must come as a supplicant. Otherwise, he warned, the ¿ght would continue.

The Mediterranean Coast and Egypt, 333–331 B.C. x The victory at Issus opened up the eastern Mediterranean coast to Alexander, who headed south for Egypt. As the Macedonians marched through Phoenicia, many cities surrendered without a ¿ght, although Tyre and Gaza held out for much of 332 B.C. x

162

In the winter of 332, Alexander entered Egypt, where the Persian satrap, Mazakes, was waiting to welcome him. The Egyptians would have preferred independence, but given the choice between Darius and Alexander, they enthusiastically chose Alexander.

Gaugamela, 331 B.C. x Meanwhile, Darius was building up an army in Babylonia that included armored cavalry from Bactria and the Saka lands of central Asia. It’s likely that Darius had an army of about 100,000, while the Macedonians probably had about 40,000 infantry and 7,000 cavalry. x

In early 331 B.C., the Macedonians set out from Egypt against Darius. They marched up the Phoenician coast, then turned east, arriving at Thapsacus in upper Mesopotamia in mid-summer, where they could cross the Euphrates River.

x

The Macedonians built pontoon bridges to cross the river, then took a northern route, skirting the Mesopotamian desert, through the Assyrian hills to the Tigris River. From Babylon, Darius moved north and took a position near the village of Gaugamela, east of the Tigris. There was a wide plain here, allowing Darius to make the best use of his superior numbers.

x

Darius’s plan was to draw Alexander into an attack on the plain, use his elephants and chariots to break up the Macedonian phalanx, then outÀank and crush Alexander with his cavalry.

x

On October 1, 331 B.C., Alexander advanced against Darius at Gaugamela. The Persians outnumbered the Macedonians, but Alexander chose to form his men into a square so that they couldn’t be outÀanked, even if the Persians surrounded them.

x

In this square, the Macedonians advanced diagonally against the left Àank of the Persian line, gradually moving off the level area the Persians had cleared. They disabled Darius’s scythed chariots, and Alexander’s cavalry found a gap in the Persian line. Once again, he headed straight for Darius’s chariot.

x

Again, Darius Àed, and the Persian center collapsed. Many Persian troops, however, continued to ¿ght. The Bactrian cavalry was able to withdraw after killing many Macedonians. But when night fell, Alexander held the ¿eld. 163

x

Darius escaped east into the mountains, toward Ecbatana in Media. Although he still had a few loyal troops, there was nothing he could do to stop Alexander.

The Fall of the Persian Capitals x Alexander immediately proclaimed himself Great King and headed for Babylon. There, he presented himself as a liberator and honored the Babylonian patron god Marduk. When the Macedonians left Babylon a month later, Alexander left behind a Persian satrap named Mazaeus. From this point on, he brought more Persians into his administration and began adopting Persian customs.

Lecture 23: The End of an Empire, 333–323 B.C.

x

From Babylon, Alexander went on to take Susa, Persepolis, and Pasargadae. Some Persian forces resisted the Macedonians, but without leadership, they could only delay Alexander, not stop him. Over the winter, the Macedonians stripped Persepolis bare, and when they left in the spring, set ¿re to the city.

Darius’s Last Stand, 330 B.C. x Although he was losing the con¿dence of the Persian nobility, Darius planned to make a stand at Ecbatana. In the spring of 330 B.C., he received news that Alexander was marching on the city. Darius sent for reinforcements, but they never came. He packed his treasury onto wagons and sent it east, then followed with the few thousand troops he had, hoping to carry on the ¿ght from Bactria. x

But Alexander followed, faster than anyone thought he could, and Darius had to leave his treasury wagons behind. Without capitals or money, Darius was now truly a fugitive. He Àed through the Caspian Gates, with Alexander in pursuit.

x

In his ¿nal days, Darius may have considered surrendering to Alexander. But some of his fellow Persians arrested Darius, put him in golden chains, and kept moving east, toward Bactria. When they learned that Alexander and a Macedonian detachment were approaching, the Persian nobles stabbed Darius and left him by the roadside to die.

164

Campaigns in Central Asia and India, 330–324 B.C. x Even with Darius dead, some parts of the empire continued to resist Alexander. From 330 to 327 B.C., the Macedonians had to march back and forth across the eastern provinces, dealing with insurgents. Alexander never really succeeded in bringing these areas under his control. x

In his home satrapy of Bactria, Bessus, the former commander of the Bactrian cavalry and a kinsman of Darius, took the name Artaxerxes V and tried to carry on the ¿ght. Thousands of Bactrians rallied to Bessus, but they weren’t enough. Eventually, some of his own men handed him over to Alexander, and he was executed on the grounds that he had betrayed Darius.

x

From 327 to 325 B.C., Alexander led his troops into the Indus Valley, the easternmost satrapies of the empire. He won some battles on the way down the Indus, but in the end, his troops refused to go farther. Finally, in 324 B.C., the exhausted Macedonians returned to Susa.

The Defeat of the Persians x Among the reasons the Macedonians were able to defeat the Persian Empire was, ¿rst, Alexander himself, perhaps the greatest general of the ancient world. Further, the military system that Philip created and Alexander perfected was the best anyone would see in west Asia until the time of the Roman legions. x

In addition, the Persian Empire had been so successful in the early part of the 4th century B.C. that the imperial armies didn’t get a lot of practice in battle. Meanwhile, the Greeks were constantly at war throughout the 300s B.C., experimenting with new tactics and equipment.

x

Philip and Alexander also had good luck. The empire they faced had trouble at the top—two royal assassinations, followed by a new king of uncertain status.

x

Like Cyrus and Cambyses, Philip and Alexander were the right leaders with the right people at the right time. Darius, on the other hand, had 165

Lecture 23: The End of an Empire, 333–323 B.C.

the misfortune to be king at the wrong time. He didn’t have enough time to consolidate power, and he at ¿rst underestimated the threat the Persians faced. x

Darius was not, as the Greeks would have us believe, a coward. He may have lost his nerve at Issus, but after that, he tried again. He also had more than his share of bad luck. If Memnon hadn’t died suddenly in 334 B.C., for example, Alexander might have been stopped by the Persian naval counteroffensive.

x

The bravery and tenacity of the empire’s military forces also stands out. In many places, from the Granicus onward, the Persians fought bravely. When Alexander invaded Parsa, the Persians fought to defend their homeland, even when all hope was lost.

x

The end of the Persian Empire is usually marked by the death of Darius III, but even under Alexander, the empire lived on. Alexander took the title of Great King and adopted many aspects of Achaemenid ideology, administration, and culture. If he had lived longer, it’s possible that the empire would have become increasingly Persianized. Considered in this light, it was Alexander who was the last of the Achaemenids.

x

But Alexander didn’t live long. On June 10, 323 B.C., the last Great King died at Babylon, and any hope of a uni¿ed empire died with him.

Name to Know Bessus: Bactrian satrap who participated in the assassination of Darius III in 330 B.C. and led the ¿nal Persian resistance against Alexander the Great.

Important Terms Gaugamela: Site of the second major defeat of Darius III by Alexander the Great on October 1, 331 B.C. Mazaeus: Alexander’s ¿rst Persian satrap.

166

Persepolis (Parsa): A Persian capital city in Iran founded by Darius I around 518 B.C.

Suggested Reading Heckel and Tritle, eds., Alexander the Great. Scott-Kilvert, Plutarch: The Age of Alexander.

Questions to Consider 1. If you were Darius III, what strategy would you have used to defend the empire?

2. People sometimes think of Alexander’s campaigns as a war of Persians versus Greeks. How accurate is this perception?

167

Legacies of the Persian Empire Lecture 24

W

Lecture 24: Legacies of the Persian Empire

hen people think about the end of empires, they often imagine a sharp break, with the new empire immediately replacing the old. But the truth is that when an empire falls, its culture and institutions don’t just disappear overnight. Think of the Roman Empire, for example. Even after the fall of Rome, Roman culture continued to inÀuence the societies of Western Europe for centuries, even up to modern times. As we’ll see in this lecture, the same came be said of the Persian Empire: The Achaemenid legacy lived on long after the last Great King of Persia and was transmitted and reimagined in many ways. The Heirs of Ancient Persia: The Seleucids x The story of ancient Persia’s legacy begins with Alexander’s death at Babylon on June 10, 323 B.C. Alexander’s generals paid lip service to the idea of unity but soon started ¿ghting among themselves. When the dust ¿nally settled, around 275 B.C., three Macedonian successor kingdoms dominated west Asia: the Antigonids in Macedon, the Ptolemies in Egypt, and the Seleucids. x

The Seleucids take their name from Seleucus, one of Alexander’s generals. At their height, the Seleucids ruled much of what had once been Persian territory—from western Asia Minor through Mesopotamia and all the way east to the Indus Valley.

x

The Seleucids were the direct heirs of the Achaemenids and retained many Achaemenid practices. They traveled among the old capitals of Ecbatana, Susa, and Babylon; had Persian-style satraps; and employed scribes who kept records in Aramaic and Akkadian. Unlike the Persian kings, however, the Seleucid rulers portrayed themselves as divine.

x

In the countryside, the Seleucid ruling class had elaborate gardens and estates, as the Persians had before. The Seleucids also founded many military colonies in the Persian style, and the economic structure of

168

the Seleucid Empire—with royal, temple, and private sectors—didn’t radically depart from the Persian pattern. The Achaemenid Legacy in South Asia x The Achaemenid legacy also had an indirect inÀuence on the Mauryan Empire (320–185 B.C.) of ancient India. This empire was founded by a remarkable leader, Chandragupta Maurya (r. c. 320–298 B.C.). In the late 300s, Chandragupta, starting from his base in eastern India, built an empire stretching all the way west into what are today parts of Pakistan and Afghanistan. x

From the time of Chandragupta on, the Mauryan Empire adopted many Achaemenid practices, such as using Aramaic in of¿cial inscriptions and emulating the apadanas of Persian palaces. Indian coinage and scripts were also inÀuenced by Persian models. Thus, the Persian legacy lived on for centuries in India and had a long-lasting inÀuence on south Asian civilization.

The Romans and Parthians x Starting around 200 B.C., the Seleucids were squeezed between the rising power of Rome in the west and Parthia in the east. The Parthians had once been pastoral nomads in central Asia, but under their leader Arsaces (r. 247–217 B.C.), they created a new empire. x

By the 1st century B.C., the Seleucid Empire had fallen. Rome and Parthia were now neighbors, with a border on the upper Euphrates. The Parthians and Romans would ¿ght many wars, but neither side was strong enough to conquer the other.

x

In this situation, the Romans and the Parthians carried the legacy of ancient Persia in two different directions. On the one hand, the Romans, heavily inÀuenced by Greek culture, preserved the Greek authors’ vision of the despotic Persians, and they saw the Parthians as the reincarnation of the Achaemenids.

x

On the other hand, the Romans maintained and expanded the communication system of the Achaemenids. The paved roads the 169

Lecture 24: Legacies of the Persian Empire

Romans laid down in their eastern Mediterranean provinces basically followed the lines of the ancient Achaemenid road network. On the local level, bits of Persian identity—including Persian names and religious rituals—survived for centuries in the eastern Roman Empire. x

The Parthians had taken over Parsa, and they, too, maintained some Achaemenid traditions. For example, their rulers still used the ancient title “king of kings” and traveled among the old capitals. But because Parsa wasn’t their homeland and because the Persian Empire came to them from the Seleucids, the Parthians didn’t strongly push their Achaemenid connections.

x

The Parthians ruled for almost 500 years, from about 250 B.C. until A.D. 224. They put a strong stamp on the developing culture of ancient Iran. At the same time, knowledge of the Achaemenids was fading into legend. The names of the Persian kings, the ability to read Old Persian script, and the origins of such monuments as Bisitun faded from memory.

The Sasanians x Around A.D. 224, a new dynasty arose to replace the Parthians. This dynasty had its roots in Parsa, in the area around Persepolis. Its ¿rst king was Ardashir, who traced his lineage back to his grandfather Sasan (hence the name Sasanid dynasty). x

The Sasanian dynasty lasted more than four centuries, from A.D. 224 to A.D. 651., ruling an area that extended from the Euphrates in the west to India in the east. The Sasanians were major rivals of the Romans, but again, neither side was strong enough to conquer the other.

x

The Sasanians portrayed themselves as restorers of the ancient Persian Empire and righteous avengers of the evil invader Alexander. They reused many ancient sites, including Naqsh-i Rustam, the burial place of the Achaemenid kings, and carved new inscriptions on the ruins at Persepolis. At the Sasanian court, poets and sages told stories about the legendary deeds of the ancient Persians.

170

x

The Sasanians also reshaped the Achaemenid legacy in some important ways. For example, unlike the Achaemenids—who tolerated diverse religions—the Sasanians strongly promoted Zoroastrianism and sometimes persecuted other religions. Further, the Sasanians placed a new emphasis on the national idea of Iran in an effort to unify the different peoples who shared similar Iranian languages and cultures.

x

In A.D. 651, the last Sasanian king was killed, and the Sasanian Empire fell to Islamic armies from Arabia. The Islamic invaders brought a new culture of their own. Thus, as the centuries passed, blurred memories of the Achaemenids survived as part of Persian or Iranian culture.

After the Sasanians x Interestingly, it was in Western Europe where some knowledge of the historical Achaemenid kings was preserved, thanks to the Greek and biblical stories. What’s more, when European merchants and travelers began visiting Iran more frequently in the 1500s, they connected the biblical and Greek stories with visible archaeological remains. x

In the 1700s and 1800s, the decipherment of cuneiform and further archaeological discoveries helped revive the long-dormant legacy of the ancient Persians.

x

Achaemenid Persia has continued to have a cultural inÀuence even in modern times. Often, the Persian legacy has been reshaped or reimagined for political purposes. In the West, unfortunately, the ancient Persians have often been pushed into the role of stereotypical “bad guy,” but as we’ve seen in this course, the reality is much more complex.

x

The Achaemenid legacy has also been reimagined by modern Iranians themselves. In the 1800s, ancient Persia became a growing source of national pride for Iranians. In the early 20th century, Iranian poets used references to the glories of ancient Persia to protest against British and Russian colonialism.

x

Reza Shah, the ruler of Iran from 1925 to 1941, actively sponsored efforts to revive Iran’s pre-Islamic past, including encouraging 171

Lecture 24: Legacies of the Persian Empire

archaeological expeditions. His son, Mohammad Reza Shah Pahlavi (r. 1941–1979), carried these revival efforts even further than his father. x

In October 1971, the Shah threw a lavish party at Persepolis to celebrate what he called the 2500th anniversary of the founding of the Iranian monarchy. The celebration has been called one of the greatest abuses of history and archaeology for political purposes, and it helped spur popular discontent with the Shah.

x

The Shah claimed that the Cyrus Cylinder was a declaration of human rights and religious freedom, even though it’s actually a traditional Mesopotamian-style document. Amazingly, this mistaken idea of the Cyrus Cylinder as a human rights declaration lives on.

x

The Cyrus Cylinder drew continuing attention when it was displayed at the National Museum of Tehran in 2010–2011. Some in Iran hoped to use it to promote a nationalist narrative of Iranian glory without relying on religious ideology, while others believed that Iranians should promote the culture of Islam rather than the culture of Iran.

From Cyrus to Alexander… and Beyond x In looking back over what we’ve learned in this course, we can break the life of the empire into four stages: (1) rapid expansion under Cyrus and Cambyses; (2) the shaping of the imperial structure under Darius I and Xerxes I; (3) the shift from expansion to stability under Artaxerxes I, Darius II, and Artaxerxes II; and (4) the defense against Macedonian aggression under Artaxerxes III, Artaxerxes IV, Darius III, and Artaxerxes V. x

172

The quick turnover of kings in the fourth phase of the empire’s lifespan reveals one of the greatest long-term political challenges of the Achaemenids: competition between princes and nobles for the throne. It’s notable, however, that once an Achaemenid king became established, he received the support of the imperial ruling class. That consensus broke down only in the ¿nal years of the empire.

The stereotypical view would say that this consensus was achieved through despotism and force, and it’s true that the Persians had powerful armies and an imperial ideology centered on the Great King. But it’s also true that diplomacy and good government, backed by effective communication, played a major role in the empire’s success.

x

In this course, we’ve also seen the diversity of the Persian Empire and the cultural contact it made possible among many peoples. The Persian tolerance of local customs and religions played a signi¿cant role in the empire’s success.

x

The Persian Empire represents a landmark moment in world history. Under the Persians, for the ¿rst time in history, a single power united the lands from Egypt and Greece to Mesopotamia, central Asia, and all the way out to India.

© iStockphoto/Thinkstock.

x

Using Achaemenid images, the Sasanians visited Persepolis and carved new inscriptions on the ruins there. 173

x

In some areas, such as entrepreneurship or women’s rights, we Westerners might feel more at home with the Persians than with the Greeks. Studying the history of Persia gives us new insight into how we construct our own genealogies from the past.

x

Realizing that the Persians may have been more like us than we thought also reminds us that the study of the Persian Empire is an ongoing enterprise. As we’ve seen throughout this course, new evidence and research is reshaping and overthrowing old myths and stereotypes about ancient Persia. It’s possible that new discoveries will be made in the future that will again change how we understand the Persian Empire.

Suggested Reading Axworthy, A History of Iran. Wiesehöfer, Ancient Persia from 550 BC to 650 AD.

Questions to Consider

Lecture 24: Legacies of the Persian Empire

1. In what ways did Achaemenid Persia inÀuence the dynasties that came after it?

2. Now that you’ve ¿nished the course, how have your views of ancient Persia and the history of Iran changed?

174

Timeline

c. 4000 B.C. .................................... Cities of Babylon and Susa founded. c. 2500 ............................................. Ancestors of the Persians and Medes begin arriving in Iran from central Asia. c. 1100 ............................................. Late Bronze Age troubles across West Asia; some civilizations collapse. c. 1000 ............................................. Persians settled in Parsua (Kermanshah province) and Anshan (Fars province). 934–610........................................... Assyrian Empire. 700–650........................................... Persians dominate Elamite kingdom of Anshan. c. 680–546 ....................................... Under the Mermnad dynasty, Lydia is a powerful regional kingdom. 668–631........................................... Ashurbanipal, last great Assyrian king. 665–525........................................... Saïte pharaohs (Dynasty XXVI) rule Egypt. c. 645 ............................................... Persian king Kurash (Cyrus I) named in an Assyrian text. 626–539........................................... Neo-Babylonian Empire. 612................................................... Babylonians and Medes destroy Ashur, Nineveh, and Nimrud.

175

c. 600–482 ....................................... Period covered by the Egibi archive from Babylon. c. 559 ............................................... Cyrus II (the Great) becomes king of Anshan. 555–539........................................... Nabonidus, last Neo-Babylonian king. c. 546 ............................................... Cyrus conquers Lydia and Sardis. 539................................................... Cyrus takes Babylon; Jewish people return to Jerusalem. 530................................................... Cyrus the Great dies in battle; Cambyses becomes king. 525–522........................................... Cambyses conquers Egypt. 522................................................... Death of Cambyses and Bardiya; Darius I takes power. 521................................................... Darius I carves Bisitun inscription. c. 520 ............................................... Darius I begins construction at Susa, then at Persepolis (518). c. 515 ............................................... Darius I conquers Gandhara and India. 513................................................... Darius I bridges the Bosporus and attacks Scythia.

Timeline

509–493........................................... Years covered by Persepolis Forti¿cation Tablets. 499–494........................................... Ionian Greeks revolt against Persia.

176

498................................................... Greeks attack Sardis, accidentally set ¿re to the city; earliest Persepolis tablet mentioning Xerxes. 494................................................... Persians defeat Ionians at the naval battle of Lade; revolt crushed. 492................................................... Mardonius campaigns in Thrace; Persian Àeet wrecked off Mount Athos. 492–457........................................... Years covered by Persepolis Treasury Tablets. 490................................................... Athenians defeat Persians at Marathon. 486................................................... Egypt revolts; Darius I dies and Xerxes I becomes king. 486/5 ............................................... Xerxes I crushes revolt in Egypt. c. 485 ............................................... Historian Herodotus born in Halicarnassus. 485–c.463 ........................................ Xerxes’s brother Achaemenes is governor of Egypt. 484................................................... Babylonia revolts, but the revolt is quickly crushed. 480s–460s ....................................... Xerxes I completes Darius’s work at Persepolis and starts new buildings. 483................................................... Persians begin cutting a canal through the Athos Peninsula in northern Greece. 480................................................... (Spring) Xerxes I leads his army from Sardis into Greece; (August) Persians 177

outÀank Greek defenses at Thermopylae and take Athens; (September) Greek Àeet led by Athenians defeats the Persian Àeet at Salamis. 479................................................... Persian army under Mardonius defeated at Plataea in central Greece; Persian Àeet defeated at Mycale in Ionia; revolts in Asia Minor against Persians. 478................................................... Greeks form anti-Persian alliance (Delian League) and attack Persian territories in Thrace, Hellespont, and Cyprus. 470s ................................................. Persians restore control over Cyprus. c. 469–466 ....................................... Persian counteroffensive; Persians defeated at Eurymedon River. 465................................................... (July/August) Xerxes I assassinated; Artaxerxes I takes the throne; Artaxerxes I suppresses revolt in Bactria. 463................................................... Inarus leads revolt in Egypt; Athenians send Àeet to help. 460................................................... Artaxerxes I sends Artabazus and Megabyzus to retake Egypt.

Timeline

460s–450s ....................................... Artaxerxes I builds at Persepolis and Susa. 458? ................................................. Persians trap Athenians at Prosopitis in Egypt.

178

457? ................................................. (June) Athenian Àeet surrenders to Persians at Prosopitis. late 450s .......................................... Athenians fail to take Egypt and Cyprus; Egyptian guerrillas hold out. 454–414........................................... Period covered by the Murashu archive from Nippur. 450–440s ......................................... Artaxerxes I supports the Jewish community in Jerusalem. c. 450/449........................................ Peace treaty (“Peace of Callias”) between Athens and Persia. 431................................................... Rival alliances of Athens and Sparta go to war (Peloponnesian War). c. 428–406 ....................................... Aramaic letters of Arshama, satrap of Egypt. c. 427 ............................................... Greek historian Xenophon born in Athens. 425/4 ............................................... Artaxerxes I sends an envoy to Sparta, but Athenians capture him en route. 424/3 ............................................... (December) Artaxerxes I dies in bed, probably at Susa; Xerxes II becomes king; (December–February) Xerxes II rules for 45 days before being murdered; Sogdianus takes power; Ochus challenges him. 424/3 ............................................... Ochus takes the throne as Darius II; Cyrus the Younger is born soon after.

179

420s ................................................. Greek historian Herodotus dies. c. 420–415 ....................................... Pissouthnes, the satrap of Sardis, revolts unsuccessfully; Darius II appoints Tissaphernes to replace Pissouthnes. c. 415 ............................................... Pharnabazus becomes satrap of Dascylium. 415–413........................................... Athenians launch an expedition to Sicily, ending in disaster; around the same time, Amorges, the bastard son of Pissouthnes, revolts in Asia Minor. 413/2 ............................................... On behalf of Darius II, Tissaphernes agrees to support Spartans with money; Pharnabazus offers support to both Spartans and Athenians. 408/7 ............................................... Darius II sends his son Cyrus, aged 16, to Sardis as karanos, or overlord. 405................................................... Darius II falls ill and summons his sons Cyrus and Arses. 405/4 ............................................... Darius II dies; Arses takes the throne as Artaxerxes II.

Timeline

c. 405–398 ....................................... Ctesias of Condos, a Greek physician, serves at the Persian court. 404................................................... Cyrus sent back to Sardis; revolt breaks out in Egypt; Athens surrenders to Sparta, ending the Peloponnesian War.

180

401................................................... Cyrus attempts to take the throne; War of the Two Brothers; (September) Artaxerxes II defeats and kills Cyrus at the battle of Cunaxa. 401–399........................................... Retreat of Cyrus’s mercenaries (the “Ten Thousand”) from Mesopotamia to western Asia Minor; Persians completely lose control of Egypt. 399–395........................................... Spartan armies campaign against Persians in western Asia Minor. 394................................................... Persian Àeet led by Baalshillem, Pharnabazus, and Conon defeats Spartan Àeet at the battle of Cnidus. 393................................................... Persian Àeet sails across the Aegean, cruises the Greek coast. 386................................................... Spartans sign a peace treaty with Artaxerxes II, ceding power over Asia Minor and Cyprus. 385–383........................................... Persians fail to retake Egypt. 380s ................................................. Evagoras of Salamis on Cyprus revolts but is pardoned. 377–353........................................... Maussolus is satrap and ruler of Caria. 374–373........................................... Pharnabazus and Iphicrates attack Egypt without success. 370s ................................................. Artaxerxes II leads a campaign against the Cadusians.

181

360s ................................................. Scattered revolts by satraps in Asia Minor. 359................................................... Philip II (b. 382 B.C.) becomes king of Macedon. 359/8 ............................................... (November–April) Artaxerxes II dies; his third son, Ochus, takes the throne as Artaxerxes III. 356................................................... Philip’s son Alexander is born. c. 355 ............................................... Xenophon dies. 345–343........................................... Artaxerxes III reconquers Egypt. 340................................................... Philip II of Macedon unsuccessfully besieges Perinthus; Artaxerxes III has aid sent to Perinthus. 338................................................... (August/September) Artaxerxes III poisoned; Bagoas, commander of the royal guard, installs Artaxerxes IV on throne.

Timeline

336................................................... Bagoas murders Artaxerxes IV; direct royal line of descent going back to Cyrus is extinguished; Persian nobleman Artashata takes the throne as Darius III; Philip II of Macedon sends advance force to Asia Minor but is then murdered; Alexander takes the throne. 334................................................... Alexander and his Macedonians invade Asia Minor and defeat the Persians at a battle on the Granicus

182

River; Macedonians capture the west coast of Asia Minor. 334/3 ............................................... Macedonians winter in Caria; Darius III builds up a Àeet under Memnon of Rhodes. 333................................................... (Spring) Alexander advances into central Anatolia; Darius III sends Memnon to launch a naval counteroffensive, but Memnon dies of illness; (summer) Alexander almost dies of illness at Tarsus; Macedonian army rests at Tarsus; Darius III advances with his army from Babylon; (fall) Alexander marches south from Tarsus; Darius surprises Alexander; Macedonians defeat Persians at Issus. 332................................................... Alexander besieges and takes Tyre and Gaza; (winter) Alexander takes Egypt without a ¿ght; Darius builds a new army. 331................................................... Alexander invades Mesopotamia and defeats Darius at Gaugamela. 331/0 ............................................... (Fall–winter) Macedonians take Babylon, Susa, Persepolis; Darius withdraws to Ecbatana. 330................................................... Darius tries to make another stand; Macedonians take Ecbatana; Bessus and other Persian nobles kill Darius; taking the name Artaxerxes V, Bessus tries to continue resistance but is betrayed; Alexander executes Bessus. 183

330–324........................................... Macedonians campaign in central Asia and India. 324................................................... Macedonians return to Susa. 323................................................... (June 10) Alexander dies at Babylon. Persian Kings (reign dates) Cyrus I............................................. c. 620–590. Cambyses I ...................................... c. 590–559. Cyrus II (Cyrus the Great). ............. 559–530. Cambyses II .................................... 530–522. Darius I............................................ 522–486. Xerxes I ........................................... 486–465. Artaxerxes I ..................................... 465–424/3. Xerxes II.......................................... 424/3 (45 days). Darius II .......................................... 424/3–405/4. Artaxerxes II ................................... 405/4–359/8. Artaxerxes III .................................. 359/8–338.

Timeline

Artaxerxes IV .................................. 338–336. Darius III ......................................... 336–330. Bessus/Artaxerxes V ....................... 330.

184

Glossary

Note: The asterisk that appears in some Old Persian words listed below marks a form that has been linguistically reconstructed but is unattested in any ancient text. Ahuramazda (also Ahura Mazda or Auramazda): Zoroastrian deity. The supreme creator god in the Persian pantheon. Viewed by the Great Kings as the bestower of empire and the protector of the Achaemenid line. Alinda: The forti¿ed capital of the region of Caria in Asia Minor; ruled by Queen Ada. Amyzon: A town in Caria and the site of a temple of Artemis. apadana: Old Persian term for a great columned hall, like those at Susa and Persepolis. Avesta: Zoroastrian sacred texts, of which the Gathas are the oldest part and are attributed to Zarathustra himself. bandaka: A subject who gives total loyalty to the king (Old Persian). barsom: A bundle of sticks or Àowers, used in Achaemenid ritual. Branchidae: Priests of Apollo at Didyma. Cadusians: Mountain tribesmen in Iran, known as great warriors. Artaxerxes II won a campaign against them in the 370s. Celaenae: City in Asia Minor; conquered by the Macedonians in 333 B.C. Chaeronea (ȋĮȚȡȫȞİȚĮ): Town about 90 miles northwest of Athens. Philip defeated a Greek alliance there in 338 B.C., ending the era of independent Greek city-states and making Greece subordinate to Macedonian interests. 185

chiliarch (hazarapatiš): Literally, “commander of a thousand”; a highranking Persian court of¿cial. chiton: A long-sleeved garment worn by Greek men and woman and patterned on Persian styles. Dascylium: Satrapal capital of Hellespontine Phrygia; governed by Pharnabazus during the reign of Xerxes I. Eurymedon: River in southwest Anatolia in the province of Pamphylia. Site of the stunning defeat of Xerxes I by the Delian League sometime between 469 and 466 B.C. Gaugamela: Site of the second major defeat of Darius III by Alexander the Great on October 1, 331 B.C. Gordium: City in Asia Minor. Granicus: A shallow river on the road to Dascyleion. Site of the defeat of the satraps Arsites and Sphithridates (under Darius III) by Alexander the Great in the summer of 334 B.C. Alexander was able to conquer Asia Minor by his victories at the Granicus and Issus. Hadish (Hadiš): The palace of Xerxes at Persepolis. Haoma: Name of a Persian god and an intoxicating plant used in Achaemenid rituals. harranu: A Babylonian business partnership.

Glossary

ha‫ܒ‬ru: A community unit of soldier-settlers who received land allotments in return for military service. Ha‫ܒ‬ru soldiers were often used for local defense against bandits, rebels, and invaders. hazarapatish: Persian of¿cial and commander of the imperial bodyguard.

186

hetaira: Greek term for a mistress or female companion (or a prostitute); a term used of women, usually foreigners, who hired out their services at symposia. Issus: Coastal Mediterranean site of a battle between Darius III and Alexander the Great in 333 B.C. Darius at ¿rst surprised Alexander by coming up on the rear of his forces, but in the end, Darius Àed and the Persians were defeated. kandys: A Persian-style leather cloak or jacket. karanos: A regional overlord or “super-satrap.” Kharga Oasis: Site in southern Egypt where archaeologists have found a set of qanƗts, underground irrigation channels, dating to the reign of Artaxerxes I (r. 464–424). kurtash: Dependent royal workers, such as laborers, skilled metalworkers, sculptors, weavers, and carpenters. They worked in teams of 10–1,500 people, sometimes including women and children. lan ceremony: An of¿cial Persian religious ritual involving monthly offerings to the gods. The lan ceremony may have originally been Elamite, but the Persians adopted it for their own gods. magus (plural magi): From Old Persian magu, a priest-councillor. A magus was a Persian wise man, star-watcher, magician (hence the English term “magic”), and priest of Ahuramazda. Magi carried the sacred ¿re altars when Persian kings went forth to war. Massagetae: Nomadic tribe of central Asia; their queen was named Tomyris. Megabyzos (OP: Bagabuxša): The speci¿c title of the neokoros (temple guardian) at the Temple of Ephesian Artemis. The title reÀects the Persian origins of the family who held the post in the 4th century B.C.

187

Mycale: Site in Ionia where, in 479 B.C., a Greek Àeet made an amphibious landing and defeated Persian forces. The battle marked a point at which Xerxes’s War started to turn sour for the Persians. Naqsh-i Rustam (Naqš-i Rustam): Achaemenid royal tombs, carved into a cliff face northeast of Persepolis; the ¿nal resting place of Darius I, Xerxes I, and two of their successors. neokoros: Greek term for a temple guardian or sacred of¿cial. Paropamisadae (OP: *Parupairisaena): Ancient name for the Hindu Kush mountains, meaning “the land above the eagle.” Perinthus: City on the Sea of Marmara. Artaxerxes III (Ochus) opposed Philip II’s attempt to conquer Perinthus, providing the Macedonians with a justi¿cation for attacking Persia. Persepolis (Parsa): A Persian capital city in Iran founded by Darius I around 518 B.C. The best preserved of all the Persian capital cities. Finds from Persepolis include the Forti¿cation and Treasury tablets, numerous inscriptions, reliefs from the apadana of Darius I, and various structures. philupêkoos: “One who loves his subjects”; term coined by Plutarch to describe Artaxerxes II. pirradaziš (Greek angareion): Mounted express messenger service used for imperial communications. Messages were conveyed along a chain of relay stations by only the best riders and horses. The pirradaziš enabled the Great Kings to monitor developments in distant provinces and issue orders in response.

Glossary

Pirramazda: Old Persian term perhaps meaning “outstanding memorizer”; applied to a magus named Irdazana on the Persepolis tablets. qanƗt: An underground irrigation channel.

188

satrap (OP: xšaçapƗvan-): “Protector of the kingdom/realm”; a provincial governor. English rendering of the Greek term for a Persian governor who governed territory (a satrapy) on behalf of the Great King. Most satraps were Persian nobles; all were required to muster troops at the Great King’s command and serve as commanders for the contingents from their own satrapies. shatin (El.: šatin): A type of priest in Achaemenid religion. These priests usually supervised the worship of Elamite and Babylonian gods, although they sometimes carried out rites for Iranian gods or even worked together with the magi. Tachara (Taþara): The palace of Darius I at Persepolis.

189

Biographical Notes

Achaemenes (OP: HakhƗmanis‫)ޞ‬: Legendary ancestor of Cyrus and Darius; also the name of various Persian nobles, including the brother of Xerxes I, appointed as governor of Egypt. The term “Achaemenid” derives from this name. Agesilaus (b. 445 B.C., r. 400–359 B.C.): Spartan king who raided the territories of Tissaphernes and Pharnabazus during the reign of Artaxerxes II. Amestris (OP: AmƗstrƯ, “strong woman”): First wife of Xerxes I, by whom he had three legitimate sons: Darius, Artaxerxes, and Hystaspes. Darius or Artaxerxes may have been involved in the assassination of Xerxes. Ariaeus: Persian noble and second-in-command to Cyrus at the battle of Cunaxa. Arrian of Nicomedia (c. 86–c. 160): Flavius Arrianus, born of a wealthy Greek provincial family of Nicomedia. He entered imperial service under Trajan (r. 98–117). He wrote the best surviving account of the campaigns of Alexander the Great, the Anabasis of Alexander. Arses: The birth name of Artaxerxes II. See Artaxerxes II. Arshama (AršƗma): Persian governor of Egypt in the late 5th century B.C.; about a dozen of his letters are extant.

Biographical Notes

Artabanus (Irdabanuš): An uncle of Xerxes I. Artabazus: (1) Veteran of Xerxes’s War and general of Artaxerxes I who commanded a force in Egypt in 460 B.C. (2) The brother-in-law of Memnon who assumed command of Persian naval forces in the Aegean after Memnon’s death in 333 B.C.

190

Artapanus: An inÀuential advisor of Xerxes who, according to Ctesias, hatched a conspiracy to assassinate the Great King and assume the throne himself. Artaphernes (OP: *Artafarnah): Persian satrap; half-brother of Darius. Artaxerxes I (r. 465–424/3 B.C.): This son of Xerxes is best known in the context of the Greek and Persian wars for having concluded a peace with the Athenians in 449 B.C., for recognizing the Athenian sphere of inÀuence in the Aegean and eastern Mediterranean, and for agreeing to end hostilities. The peace is called the Peace of Callias, but its terms—and even its very existence—are still ¿ercely debated by some scholars. Artaxerxes II (r. 405/4–359/8 B.C.): As Great King, Artaxerxes worked through the Spartan diplomat Antalcidas to impose the King’s Peace of 386 B.C. on Athens, Sparta, and the other warring city-states of Greece. In doing so, he regained the Greek cities of Asia Minor but lost Egypt, which was not recovered until the days of his son and successor, Artaxerxes III (Ochus). In the early years of his reign, Artaxerxes II successfully withstood a challenge from his brother Cyrus and Cyrus’s army of 10,000 Greek mercenaries. He was wounded at the decisive Battle of Cunaxa in 401 B.C. and was tended by the Greek physician Ctesias. Artaxerxes III (Ochus; r. 359/8–338 B.C.): The Great King who restored order to much of the Persian Empire and succeeded in reconquering Egypt. His attempt to prevent Philip II of Macedon from capturing the city of Perinthus near Byzantium sparked an undying hostility on the part of the Macedonian kings toward Persia. Artaxerxes III was assassinated through the intrigues of a eunuch named Bagoas. Artaxerxes IV (r. 338–336 B.C.): Youngest surviving son of Artaxerxes III; supposedly installed on the throne by the eunuch Bagoas after the death of his father. He ruled for less than two years and, we’re told, was murdered by Bagoas in 336 B.C. With the death of Artaxerxes IV, the direct Achaemenid line of descent, going all the way back to Darius I, was extinguished.

191

Ashurbanipal (r. c. 668–627 B.C.): Son of the Assyrian ruler Esarhaddon, Ashurbanipal was challenged by his brother, who allied with the Elamites and the Babylonians to rebel against him. The revolt was put down, and Ashurbanipal led a campaign against the capital of Elam, Susa. Of¿cial Assyrian records stop in 639 B.C., although Ashurbanipal ruled another 12 years. Astyages (Akk.: Ishtumegu): Last king of the Medes. According to Herodotus, when he became cruel and despotic, the Persians, who had previously been brought into the “Median Empire” revolted, under Cyrus the Great. Baalshillem (Baalšillem, r. c. 401–365): King of Sidon, a Phoenician city that supplied ships to the Persian Empire. In 394 B.C., off the island of Cnidus in the southern Aegean, he participated with Pharnabazus and Conon in crushing the Spartan Àeet. Bessus: Bactrian satrap who participated in the assassination of Darius III in 330 B.C. and led the ¿nal Persian resistance against Alexander the Great. After the murder of Darius, he returned to his home satrapy and assumed the name Artaxerxes V. Eventually, he was handed over to Alexander by some of his own men and executed.

Biographical Notes

Cambyses I (r. c. 590–559 B.C.): King of Anshan and father of Cyrus the Great. Cambyses II (r. 530–522 B.C.): King of Persia and son of Cyrus I, he conquered Egypt in 525–522 B.C. Through diplomatic efforts with Cyprus and Phoenicia—formerly Egyptian allies—he brought the ¿rst Àeet to Persia. He also allied with the desert Arabs, who helped him set up water depots and pipelines to supply his army. Despite the portrait given to us by Herodotus, Cambyses did not become insane after conquering Egypt; instead, he presented himself as a local ruler and supported Egyptian religion. He died of illness in western Syria, in July or August 522, on a return trip to Ecbatana to suppress a revolt.

192

Conon (c. 445–390 B.C.): Athenian naval commander who escaped from the disaster at Aegospotami in 405 B.C., maintained an exiled Athenian Àeet of a few triremes in Cyprus during the decade following Athens’ surrender to Sparta, and was ultimately chosen by Artaxerxes II to command a Persian-Athenian Àeet against the Spartans. After his great victory off Cnidus in 394 B.C., Conon returned to Athens with enough Persian gold to rebuild the city’s naval base. He was imprisoned by the satrap Tissaphernes during a diplomatic mission and died without ever returning to Athens. His son Timotheus proved a worthy successor in leading the Athenian navy to new victories. Ctesias of Cnidus: A Greek doctor from the island of Cnidus. From about 405 to 398 B.C., he served as the personal physician of Artaxerxes II. During or after this time, he wrote a 23-volume work entitled Persiká (Persian Affairs) that survives only in fragments. Although much of his narrative is unreliable, it is the only source we have for parts of the 4th century B.C. Cyrus I (r. c. 620–590): The ¿rst named king of Persia and, possibly, the grandfather of Cyrus the Great. According to an Assyrian annal from 645 B.C., this king (Kuraš or Kurash) was from “the far side of Elam” and paid tribute to Ashurbanipal after a major Assyrian invasion. Cyrus II (Cyrus the Great, r. 559–530 B.C.): King and founder of the Persian Empire. The version of his birth in Herodotus relates the myth of a foundling, common to the stories of Moses and Romulus. According to this account, Cyrus was the grandson of the king of the Medes, exposed at birth and raised by a shepherd. He became king of the Persians, at that time a minor Iranian tribe. By 549, Cyrus had overthrown the kingdom of Media. By the time of his death in 529, the Persians had conquered Lydia, Babylon, and central Asia, establishing an empire unprecedented in size and power. To later Greeks, especially Xenophon, Cyrus became the model of a good king and an argument in favor of monarchy over democracy. Darius (OP: DƗrayavahuš): “Guardian of good”; the name of three Persian kings, Darius I (r. 522–486 B.C.), Darius II (r. 424/3–405/4 B.C.), and Darius III (r. 336–330 B.C.).

193

Darius I (r. 522–486 B.C.): Though not a descendant of Cyrus, Darius I became Great King after a violent struggle with other claimants following the death of Cambyses. He commemorated his success on the cliff face at Bisitun. Darius I established new capitals at Susa and Persepolis and set up the well-organized administrative system of the empire that was to endure through all subsequent reigns. He added the Indus River Valley, Thrace, and the Aegean islands to the empire but failed to conquer Greece after his army was defeated by the Athenians at the battle of Marathon in 490 B.C. Darius II (r. 424/3–405/4 B.C.): Darius II took the throne following the murder of his half-brother Xerxes II after a reign of only 45 days. Darius faced numerous challenges throughout his reign, including sporadic revolts across the empire, the question of Persian involvement in the Peloponnesian War, economic problems in Babylonia and unrest in Media, legal disputes between Jews and Egyptians, and de¿ance of Persian authority by various mountain tribesmen. His death in 405/4 B.C. set the stage for the War of the Two Brothers. Darius III (r. 336–330 B.C.): The last of the line of Persian Great Kings, Darius III acceded to the throne in the same year that Alexander the Great became king of Macedon. His reign was dominated by his unsuccessful effort to preserve the empire from conquest by Alexander, whom Darius III faced personally at Issus and Gaugamela. He was assassinated by his own courtiers. Artashata or Codommanus were personal names of Darius III.

Biographical Notes

Diodorus Siculus (c. 90–30 B.C.): Greek historian who wrote about the battle of Thermopylae and gives us an account of the murder of Xerxes at the hands of his advisor Artapanus. Egibi family: Babylonian family whose business dealings are known to us through an archive of about 1,700 tablets, dating from about 600 B.C. down to 482 B.C Evagoras of Salamis (b. 435, r. 411–374): King of Salamis, a city on Cyprus. In the late 380s B.C., he sought to unite Cyprus, but his attempt was crushed by the Persians. Afterward, the city of Salamis was returned to him, and he remained a loyal Persian vassal until his death. 194

Gobryas (OP: Gaubaruva): (1) A Babylonian governor who allied with Cyrus against King Nabonidus in 539 B.C. (2) An ally of Darius I. Herodotus (c. 484–c. 425 B.C.): Hailed as the father of history, his account of the wars between the Greeks and the Persians is the chief source of early Greek history, as well as that of contemporary peoples of the Near East. Hystaspes (VištƗspa): (1) Skilled general under Cambyses and father of Darius I; in the summer of 521 B.C., he assisted his son by securing northeastern Iran. (2) Youngest brother of Artaxerxes I; he may have led a revolt in Bactria against his brother. Iphicrates: Athenian mercenary general who commanded Greek troops in Egypt in support of the invasion of Artaxerxes II in 374–373 B.C. Irdabama: Wealthy Persian noblewoman mentioned in the Persepolis tablets; she may have been the eldest wife of Darius I. Isocrates (436–338 B.C.): Extraordinarily long-lived Athenian teacher of rhetoric, who was still writing remarkable orations at the age of 99. He was a pupil of Socrates, a friend of the general Timotheus, and a supporter of Philip II of Macedon’s claims to leadership in the Greek world. In the political arena, Isocrates is most important for his championship of the vision of Panhellenic unity and a Greek crusade against the Persian Empire. Mania (b. c. 440 B.C.): Wife of Zenis, sub-satrap of Dardanus under Pharnabazus. When her husband died, she assumed his position and ran the northwestern corner of Asia Minor. She was both an able administrator and military leader, commanding her Greek mercenaries from her covered carriage as they attacked enemy cities. She was strangled by a jealous sonin-law, Meidias, whom her troops refused to follow after her death. Mardonius (OP: Marduniya, early 5th century B.C.): Persian general under Darius I and Xerxes who urged a policy of aggression against Greece in the hope of becoming satrap of the Hellenic lands once the conquest was achieved. In about 492 B.C., he successfully invaded Thrace on behalf of Darius I. Mardonius is best known, however, as the general left behind 195

by Xerxes with orders to complete the conquest of Greece after the naval disaster at Salamis. He was killed during the battle of Plataea in 479 B.C. Maussolus of Caria: Satrap of Halicarnassus and builder of the Mausoleum there, one of the wonders of the ancient world. Mazaeus: Alexander’s ¿rst Persian satrap. Megabyzus: Veteran of Xerxes’s War and general of Artaxerxes I who commanded a force in Egypt in 460 B.C. Murashu family: Entrepreneurial family from Nippur whose business dealings are known to us through an archive of almost 900 tablets, dating from 454 to 414 B.C. The family name means “wildcat.” Nabonidus (Akk.: Nabû-nƗ-id, r. c. 555–539 B.C.): Neo-Babylonian king; ruler who alienated Babylonia after he moved the capital to a desert oasis in the Arabian desert, perhaps because he wished to promote the worship of the moon god Sin. Nebuchadnezzar (r. c. 605–562 B.C.): Neo-Babylonian ruler who succeeded his father, Nabopolassar. In the wake of the collapse of the Assyrian Empire, he campaigned in Egypt, destroyed the southern Israelite kingdom of Judah, and captured Jerusalem, destroying the Temple there and deporting the population to Babylon. Also called Nebuchadrezzar III.

Biographical Notes

Ochus (Bab.: Umasu or Umakuš): Son of Artaxerxes I who took power as Darius II. See Darius II. Parysatis: Queen of Persia, wife and half-sister of King Darius II, and mother of Cyrus and Artaxerxes II. She favored Cyrus the Younger and secured his appointment as lord (karanos) of the western satrapies of Asia Minor. Pharnabazus (late 5th century B.C.–early 4th century B.C.): A Persian noble in charge of a satrapy in northern Asia Minor that stretched along the Hellespont, the Sea of Marmara, and the Bosporus (with a capital at 196

Dascylium). Pharnabazus strove to help the Spartans overcome the Athenians in the closing years of the Peloponnesian War. Within a decade, he was aiding the Athenian Conon in an effort at sea to destroy Spartan hegemony. Most Greeks found him to be the very pattern of Persian honor and nobility. Pharnaces (Parnaka): Uncle of Darius I and a top administrator at Persepolis. Plutarch (c. A.D. 45–c. 120): L. Mestrius Plutarchus is an excellent example of the truly Greco-Roman culture that the Romans forged in the imperial period. Born and raised in Chaeronea in central Greece, he traveled widely in the empire, including to Egypt and Rome, but lived most of his life in Greece. Yet he considered himself “Roman.” His voluminous writings include his very useful series of Parallel Lives of famous Greek and Roman historical ¿gures. He also wrote rhetorical and philosophical treatises, dialogues, and antiquarian investigations (“Greek Questions” and “Roman Questions”), mostly of a religious bent. Plutarch spent his last 30 years as a priest at Delphi in Greece. His biographies constitute his most useful contributions to this course. Sisygambis: Mother of Darius III. She accompanied Darius on campaign against Alexander and was taken captive at Issus in 333 B.C. Sogdianus: Illegitimate son of Artaxerxes I; ruled brieÀy after killing Xerxes II, his half-brother. See Xerxes II. Stateira: Wife of Darius III. She accompanied Darius on campaign against Alexander and was taken captive at Issus in 333 B.C. Teispes (Tishpish): Ancestor of Darius and Cyrus and king of Anshan. Thucydides, son of Olorus (460–400 B.C.): Athenian general regarded as one of the greatest historians. He was exiled for his failure to relieve Amphipolis and thereafter interviewed participants and wrote a history of the Peloponnesian War. The incomplete account, surviving in eight books, ends at 411 B.C.

197

Tissaphernes (d. 395 B.C.): Persian satrap of Sardis who was a key player in the empire during the reigns of Darius II and Artaxerxes II. Under Darius, he sought to exploit the war between Sparta and Athens for the bene¿t of the Persians. In 407 B.C., he lost power to Darius’s brother Cyrus and later warned Artaxerxes of an attempt at the throne by Cyrus. He commanded forces at Cunaxa in the War of the Two Brothers. His death came by order of Artaxerxes after a defeat by the Spartan king Agesilaus at Phrygia. His name means “with shining splendor.” Udjahorresne: An Egyptian of¿cial and physician who served Cambyses and Darius. His inscribed statue is in the Vatican Museum. Xenophon (427–355 B.C.): Athenian mercenary general, historian, philosopher, and student of Socrates who served with Cyrus the Younger and recorded the march of the Ten Thousand in Anabasis. His narrative Greek history, Hellenica, lacks the precision and insight of Thucydides’s work but is important for understanding the Persian Empire. Works by other authors (e.g., Pseudo-Xenophon, Old Oligarch) were attributed to him. Xerxes (XšayƗršƗ): “The one who rules over heroes”; the name of two Persian kings, Xerxes I (r. 486–465 B.C.) and Xerxes II (r. 424/3).

Biographical Notes

Xerxes I (r. 486–465 B.C.): Son of Darius I, Xerxes was the Great King of Achaemenid Persia who invaded Greece in 480–479 B.C. and met with crushing and astonishing defeat. Herodotus portrays him as one would expect a Greek to: weak, vain, despotic, and capricious. But he was not entirely unreasonable nor unintelligent. He fell to a murderer in 465 B.C., perhaps one of his own sons. Xerxes II: (r. 424/3): Great King of Persia for 45 days, before being murdered by his half-brother Sogdianus.

198

Bibliography and Suggested Reading

Abdi, Kamyar. “Nationalism, Politics, and the Development of Archaeology in Iran.” American Journal of Archaeology 105 (2001): 51–76. A fascinating study of how modern politics shaped the study of archaeology in Iran. ———. “Notes on the Iranianization of Bes in the Achaemenid Empire.” Ars Orientalis 32 (2002): 133–162. Shows how images of the Egyptian protector god Bes spread throughout the empire and how Bes was adapted along the way to ¿t local needs. If you’re interested in cultural interchange in the empire, this is a great read. Abraham, Kathleen. Business and Politics under the Persian Empire: The Financial Dealings of Marduk-nƗЬir-apli of the House of Egibi (521–487 B.C.E.). Bethesda, MD: CDL Press, 2004. If you want to learn more about the Egibis and their business dealings in the time of King Darius, you’ll like this book. Adkins, Leslie. Empires of the Plain: Henry Rawlinson and the Lost Languages of Babylon. New York: St. Martin’s Press, 2003. Tells the story of the decipherment of cuneiform by focusing on Henry Rawlinson, who copied and studied the inscriptions of Bisitun. Alcock, Susan, et al., eds. Empires: Perspectives from Archaeology and History. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2001. A comparative study of empires, from Persia and Rome to Egypt, India, China, and the Americas. Places the Achaemenids into the broader context of empires in the ancient world. Allchin, F. R. The Archaeology of Early Historic South Asia: The Emergence of Cities and States. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995. If you’re interested in the Achaemenid inÀuence on ancient Indian civilization, here’s a good place to start.

199

Allen, Lindsay. The Persian Empire. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2005. The best one-volume introduction to Achaemenid Persian history, with numerous color illustrations. Recommended for Lecture 1. Axworthy, Michael. A History of Iran: Empire of the Mind. New York: Basic Books, 2008. An overview of Iranian/Persian history from ancient to modern times. Recommended for Lecture 24. BakÕr, Tomris, et al., eds. Achaemenid Anatolia. A collection of scholarly essays in English, French, and German focusing on archaeological material from western Turkey. Bedford, Peter. “The Persian Near East.” In The Cambridge Economic History of the Greco-Roman World, edited by Walter Scheidel et al., 302– 329. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. A succinct overview of the Achaemenid economy in the Near East, covering agriculture, urbanization, and public and private economic structures.

Bibliography and Suggested Reading

Boardman, John. Persia and the West: An Archaeological Investigation of the Genesis of Achaemenid Art. London: Thames and Hudson, 2000. A readable comparative study of Greek and Persian art, with many illustrations. Briant, Pierre. From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns, 2002. This de¿nitive scholarly history of the Achaemenids is more than 1,000 pages long. Recommended throughout the course. Briant, Pierre, and Michel Chaveau, eds. Organisation des pouvoirs et contacts culturels dans les pays de l’empire achéménide. Paris: Éditions de Boccard, 2009. A collection of recent research on the Achaemenid Empire, including essays in English on ethnic identity and cultural contact, Egyptians and Greeks in Persia, and Achaemenid taxation. Bridges, Emma, Edith Hall, and P. J. Rhodes, eds. Cultural Responses to the Persian Wars. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007. A lively collection of essays, accessible to non-specialists, that examines the cultural impact of the

200

wars between Greece and Persia. Chaps cover everything from ancient times up to the recent Hollywood movie 300. Brosius, Maria. Women in Ancient Persia, 559–331 BC. Oxford: The Clarendon Press, 1996. An outstanding scholarly study that dispels many stereotypes about Persian women. Examines both royal women and ordinary women, looking at their political, economic, and cultural lives. Recommended for Lecture 19. ———. The Persian Empire from Cyrus II to Artaxerxes I. London: The London Association of Classical Teachers (LACTOR), 2000. An affordable collection of primary source documents and other resources for studying the Persian Empire. Because it’s designed for university students, it’s also very readable. Recommended for Lecture 2. ———. The Persians: An Introduction. London and New York: Routledge, 2006. A brief, readable overview of the Achaemenid Persians, plus chaps on the later Parthian and Sasanid dynasties. Cameron, George. Persepolis Treasury Tablets. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1948. Available for free download online (see list of websites). Cawkwell, George. The Greek Wars: The Failure of Persia. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005. An excellent overview of the wars between Greeks and Persians from the 6th century to Alexander the Great, taken from the Persian perspective. Recommended for Lecture 13. Cook, J. M. The Persian Empire. New York: Schocken Books, 1983. An older but still useful introductory text written for nonacademics. Recommended for Lecture 5. Curtis, John, and St. John Simpson, eds. The World of Achaemenid Persia: History, Art and Society in Iran and the Ancient Near East. London: I. B. Tauris, 2010. A wide-ranging collection of essays by world-renowned experts in Achaemenid archaeology, art, history, and religion.

201

Curtis, John, and Nigel Tallis, eds. Forgotten Empire: The World of Ancient Persia. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 2005. This companion volume to the 2005 British Museum exhibition on ancient Persia contains excellent, readable essays for non-specialists and numerous color photos. Recommended for Lectures 2 and 6. Dandamaev, Muhammad, and Vladimir Lukonin. The Culture and Social Institutions of Ancient Iran. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1989. A monumental work on ancient Persia, drawing heavily from work done by Soviet scholars. Now available in a paperback reprint. Recommended throughout the course, especially for Lecture 19. Daryaee, Touraj. Sasanian Persia: The Rise and Fall of an Empire. London: I. B. Tauris, 2009. A well-written and wide-ranging survey of the last pre-Islamic Persian dynasty. The Sasanians portrayed themselves as the successors of the Achaemenids.

Bibliography and Suggested Reading

Dusinberre, Elizabeth. Aspects of Empire in Achaemenid Sardis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003. A study of cultural interchange among Lydians, Persians, and Greeks, using archaeological and epigraphical evidence. Includes fascinating information about burial practices and eating customs under the Persian Empire. Recommended for Lecture 14. Engels, Donald W. Alexander the Great and the Logistics of the Macedonian Army. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1978. This groundbreaking book analyzes the practical aspects of Alexander’s campaigns, such as supplying food and water for his troops. An excellent antidote to heroic visions about Alexander. Errington, Elizabeth, ed. From Persepolis to the Punjab: Exploring Ancient Iran, Afghanistan, and Pakistan. London: The British Museum Press, 2007. A great set of illustrated essays on Afghanistan and Pakistan from Achaemenid times onward, suitable for non-specialists. Recommended for Lecture 9. Frye, Richard. The Heritage of Central Asia from Antiquity to the Turkish Expansion. Princeton, NJ: Markus Wiener Publishers, 1996. A readable 202

survey of central Asian history and culture, with chaps on the Achaemenids, the Silk Road, and much more. Recommended for Lecture 9. Graf, David. “The Persian Royal Road System.” In Achaemenid History VIII: Continuity and Change, edited by Heleen-Sancisi Weerdenburg, 167–189. Leiden: The Netherlands Institute for the Near East, 1994. Recommended for Lecture 8. Greaves, Alan. The Land of Ionia: Society and Economy in the Archaic Period. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2010. An overview of the eastern Greek region of Ionia, which became part of the western frontier of the Persian Empire. Hallock, Richard. Persepolis Forti¿cation Tablets. Chicago: University of Chicago Oriental Institute Publications, 1969. Available for free download online (see list of websites). Harper, Prudence, et al., eds. The Royal City of Susa: Ancient Near Eastern Treasures in the Louvre. New York: The Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1992. A superb illustrated catalogue of ¿nds from Susa, including the Achaemenid tomb on the Susa Acropolis Mound. Harrison, Thomas. Writing Ancient Persia. London and New York: Bristol Classical Press, 2011. An engaging historiographical essay on how we think and write about Achaemenid Persia. Recommended for Lecture 1. Heckel, Waldemar, and Lawrence Tritle, eds. Alexander the Great: A New History. Malden, MA: Wiley-Blackwell, 2009. This collection of essays examines various aspects of Alexander’s campaign. Worth reading just for Pierre Briant’s two essays on the Persian Empire. Recommended for Lecture 23. Hyland, John. Achaemenid Persia and the Peloponnesian War. Forthcoming. A groundbreaking study of Persian foreign policy in the 5th century B.C., written from the Persian perspective.

203

Isserlin, B. S. J., R. E. Jones, V. Karastathis, S. P. Papamarinopoulos, G. E. Syrides, and J. Uren. “The Canal of Xerxes: Summary of Investigations. 1991–2001.” Annual of the British School at Athens 98 (2003): 369–385. An archaeological and geophysical study of the Persian canal across the Athos peninsula of northern Greece. Ivantchik, Askold, and Vakhtang Licheli. Achaemenid Culture and Local Traditions in Anatolia, Southern Caucasus and Iran. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2007. A collection of scholarly essays, all in English, examining newly discovered archaeological material from the Achaemenid Empire. Jacobs, Bruno, and Robert Rollinger, eds. Der Achämenidenhof/The Achaemenid Court. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag, 2010. A collection of scholarly essays in English and German, analyzing political, religious, economic, and cultural aspects of the Persian royal court.

Bibliography and Suggested Reading

Joannès, Francis. “Private Commerce and Banking in Achaemenid Babylonia.” In Civilizations of the Ancient Near East, vol. II, edited by Jack Sasson, 1475–1485. New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1995. An outstanding overview of Persian-period commerce and banking, written for non-specialists. Recommended for Lecture 18. Kaplan, Philip. “Cross-Cultural Contacts among Mercenary Communities in Saite and Persian Egypt.” Mediterranean Historical Review 18.1 (2003): 1–31. A fascinating study of cultural contact and intermarriage. Krentz, Peter. The Battle of Marathon. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2010. A gripping account of the battle of Marathon, mostly from the Greek perspective. Recommended for Lecture 11. Kuhrt, Amélie. The Ancient Near East, c. 3000–330 BC (2 vols.). London and New York: Routledge, 1995. Written for non-specialists, this survey nicely places the Persians in the wider context of Near Eastern civilization. ———. The Persian Empire: A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid Period. London and New York: Routledge, 2010. An essential collection of translated texts, plus maps and images, now available in an affordable one204

volume paperback edition. Don’t miss this book! Recommended throughout the course. Lane Fox, Robin, ed. The Long March: Xenophon and the Ten Thousand. New Haven and London: Yale University Press, 2004. This collection of scholarly essays mostly covers the Greek perspective, but don’t miss Christopher Tuplin’s essay on the Persian Empire (pp. 154–183). Lanfranchi, Giovanni, et al., eds. Continuity of Empire (?): Assyria, Media, Persia. Padua: Sargon Editrice, 2003. A collection of scholarly essays examining the early history of the Medes, Elamites, and Persians. Lee, John W. I. A Greek Army on the March: Soldiers and Survival in Xenophon’s Anabasis. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. Much information on mercenary soldiers and on local conditions in the Persian Empire. Very accessible for nonacademics. Recommended for Lecture 17. Lewis, David. Sparta and Persia. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1977. An engrossing study of Persian administration and of Spartan-Persian relations in the early 5th century B.C. Lincoln, Bruce. Religion, Empire, and Torture: The Case of Achaemenian Persia, with a Postscript on Abu Ghraib. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2007. A philosophical and theological study of how religion can be used to justify imperialism and violence. Recommended for Lecture 15. Lindenberger, James. Ancient Aramaic and Hebrew Letters. 2nd ed. Atlanta: Society of Biblical Literature, 2003. Translated documents from the Jewish community at Elephantine and from the archive of Arshama, Persian satrap in Egypt during the 5th century. Fascinating stuff if you’re interested in the Jewish experience under the Achaemenids or want an inside look at satrapal administration. Llewellyn-Jones, Lloyd. “Eunuchs and the Royal Harem in Achaemenid Persia.” In Eunuchs in Antiquity and Beyond, edited by Shaun Tougher, 19– 49. London: Duckworth, 2002. An insightful essay on the roles that eunuchs played in the Achaemenid court. 205

Llewellyn-Jones, Lloyd, and James Robson. Ctesias’ History of Persia: Tales of the Orient. London and New York: Routledge, 2010. The ¿rst unabridged English translation of Ctesias’s history, plus a lively and helpful introduction for non-specialists. Recommended for Lecture 16. Magee, Peter, et al. “The Achaemenid Empire in South Asia and Recent Excavations at Akra in Northwest Pakistan.” American Journal of Archaeology 109 (2005): 711–741. Fascinating archaeological study of excavations in Pakistan that were unfortunately cut short by the events of September 11, 2001. Miller, Margaret. Athens and Persia in the Fifth Century BC: A Study in Cultural Receptivity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1997. This groundbreaking analysis explores the ways in which classical Athenians borrowed from Persian culture. Recommended for Lecture 14.

Bibliography and Suggested Reading

Minetti, Alberto. “Ef¿ciency of Equine Express Postal Systems.” Nature 426 (December 2003): 785–786. Compares the Achaemenid messenger system to the Pony Express and other mounted messenger systems. Morris, Ian, and Walter Scheidel, eds. The Dynamics of Ancient Empires: State Power from Assyria to Byzantium. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. A series of essays that sets the Achaemenid Empire into the wider context of Near Eastern and Mediterranean empires. Recommended for Lecture 3. Nielsen, Inge, ed. The Royal Palace Institution in the First Millennium BC. Aarhus: Aarhus University Press, 2001. A collection of scholarly essays placing the Achaemenid palaces into the wider Near Eastern historical context. Petrie, Cameron, et al. “Emulation at the Edge of Empire: The Adoption of Non-Local Vessel Forms in the NWFP, Pakistan during the Mid–Late 1st Millennium BC.” Gandharan Studies 2 (2008): 1–16. An analysis of Achaemenid-style pottery from Pakistan.

206

Potts, D. T. The Archaeology of Elam: Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999. A great place to start learning about the Elamites and their inÀuence on Achaemenid Persia. Recommended for Lecture 3 Rollinger, Robert, et al., eds. Getrennte Wege? Kommunikation, Raum und Wahrnehmung in der alten Welt. Frankfurt am Main: Verlag Antike, 2007. A collection of scholarly writings on Greek-Near Eastern cultural contact. Includes excellent essays (in English) on Achaemenid cities, Greek perceptions of Persia, and Alexander the Great in the Near Eastern context. Romm, James, ed. The Landmark Arrian: The Campaigns of Alexander. New York: Pantheon Books, 2010. The latest addition to the superb Landmark series, combining a clear translation with helpful maps, notes, and commentary. If this volume has a weakness, it’s a tendency to accept Arrian’s exaggerated numbers for Persian armies. Recommended for Lecture 22 Roosevelt, Christopher. The Archaeology of Lydia from Gyges to Alexander. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2009. If you want to learn more about Lydia before and during the Achaemenid period, start here. Root, Margaret Cool. The King and Kingship in Achaemenid Art. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1979. An inÀuential analysis of Achaemenid royal imagery and its relationships to Egyptian and Near Eastern art. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, Heleen, et al., eds. Achaemenid History (vols. I– XV). Leiden: The Netherlands Institute for the Near East, 1987–2010. A pioneering series on the history of Achaemenid Persia, with too many titles to list separately here. The ¿rst eight volumes include the results of annual workshops on Achaemenid history held from 1983 to 1990. Sasson, Jack, ed. Civilizations of the Ancient Near East (vols. I–IV). Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 1995. Almost 3,000 pages in total, these four volumes are a treasury of information, not only on ancient Persia but also on the wider context of Near Eastern civilization. Recommended throughout the course, especially for Lecture 18. 207

Schmidt, Eric. Persepolis I: Structures, Reliefs, Inscriptions. Chicago: University of Chicago Oriental Institute Publications, 1953. The primary scholarly publication of Persepolis; also available for free in electronic format (see list of websites). Recommended throughout the course, especially for Lecture 6. Scott-Kilvert, Ian. Plutarch: The Age of Alexander. London and New York: Penguin Books, 1973. This volume contains translations of nine of Plutarch’s biographies, including Plutarch’s Life of Alexander. Recommended for Lecture 23. Sekunda, Nicholas. The Persian Army, 560–330 BC. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 1992. The Osprey series is meant for war-gamers and modelers, but this volume stands out for its scholarly qualities. Professor Sekunda brings together a wide range of evidence and presents it in a clear and readable text with many illustrations.

Bibliography and Suggested Reading

———. Marathon 490 BC: The First Persian Invasion of Greece. Oxford: Osprey Publishing, 2002. This illustrated book, written for nonacademics, provides a solid treatment of the battle of Marathon. Sekunda mostly takes the Greek perspective but includes some material on the Persian army at Marathon. Recommended for Lecture 11. Sherwin-White, Susan, and Amélie Kuhrt. From Sardis to Samarkand: A New Approach to the Seleucid Empire. Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press, 1993. This groundbreaking work traces the history of the Seleucid dynasty, which carried on many aspects of Achaemenid Persian administration and culture. Out of print but an invaluable resource if you can ¿nd it. Snell, Daniel, ed. A Companion to the Ancient Near East. Malden, MA: Blackwell Publishing, 2005. An excellent set of essays that explains the wider Near Eastern context within which the Persian Empire developed. Don’t miss the essays on public/private distinctions and on democracy and freedom in the ancient Near East!

208

Stolper, Matthew. Entrepreneurs and Empire: The Murašû Archive, the Murašû Firm, and Persian Rule in Babylonia. Istanbul and Leiden: Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, 1985. Groundbreaking study of an archive of cuneiform tablets that records business dealings of the Murašû family from 455 to 404 B.C. Very readable despite the technical subject matter! Unfortunately, out of print. Strassler, Robert, ed. The Landmark Thucydides. New York: The Free Press, 1998. The text of the Greek historian Thucydides, plus maps, plans, notes, and appendices. Especially valuable if you’re interested in Greek-Persian relations during the Peloponnesian War. ———, ed. The Landmark Herodotus: The Histories. New York: Anchor Books, 2009. The text of Herodotus, plus maps, plans, notes, and 21 appendices written for non-specialists (including a contribution from me on the Persian army). A must-have. Recommended throughout the course, especially for Lecture 13. ———, ed. The Landmark Xenophon’s Hellenika. New York: Pantheon Books, 2009. Another entry in the superb Landmark series, with maps, plans, notes, and helpful appendices. Especially recommended if you are interested in the Persian Empire in Anatolia during the 4th century B.C. Summerer, Lâtife, and Alexander von Kienlin, eds. TatarlÕ: renklerin dönüúü / The Return of Colours / Rückkehr der Farben. Istanbul: T.C. Kültür ve Turizm BakanlÕ÷Õ & YapÕ Kredi YayÕnlarÕ, 2010. This lavish trilingual volume with color illustrations showcases the Achaemenid-period TatarlÕ tomb in southwestern Turkey. Tuplin, Christopher, ed. Persian Responses: Political and Cultural Interaction with(in) the Achaemenid Empire. Swansea: Classical Press of Wales, 2007. A collection of scholarly essays on diverse topics, including Greek-Persian cultural contact, Darius in Egypt, Alexander as the last Achaemenid, and Greek receptions of Zarathustra. ———. “All the King’s Horses: In Search of Achaemenid Persian Cavalry.” In New Perspectives on Ancient Warfare, edited by Garrett Fagan and 209

Matthew Trundle, 101–182. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 2010. A detailed analysis of textual and literary evidence, showing that cavalry was not as important to the Persians as is often thought. ———. “Marathon: In Search of a Persian Perspective.” In Marathon: The Battle and the Ancient Deme, edited by Kostas Buraselis and Katerina Meidani. Athens: Institut du livre – A. Kardamitsa, 2010. Reconsiders the battle of Marathon from the Persian point of view. Essential reading for understanding the Persian perspective on Marathon. Recommended for Lecture 11. Vogelsang, W. J. The Rise and Organization of the Achaemenid Empire: The Eastern Iranian Evidence. Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1992. Argues that the Scythians and central Asia had a major inÀuence on the Persian Empire. Fascinating but not an easy read. Water¿eld, Robin. The Expedition of Cyrus. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009. An excellent translation of Xenophon’s Anabasis, with helpful notes. Recommended for Lecture 17.

Bibliography and Suggested Reading

Waters, Matthew. “Cyrus and the Achaemenids.” Iran 42 (2004): 91–102. An analysis of Cyrus the Great’s family, arguing that Cyrus was linked to the Achaemenids through his wife Cassandane. Wiesehöfer, Josef. Ancient Persia from 550 BC to 650 AD. London and New York: I. B. Tauris, 2001. Written for non-specialists, this survey of ancient Iran’s history goes from the Achaemenids through Macedonian domination to the Parthian and Sasanian empires. Recommended for Lecture 24. Woodard, Roger, ed. The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the World’s Ancient Languages. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2004. If you want to read more about Old Persian, Elamite, Akkadian, Aramaic, or any of the other languages used in the Achaemenid Empire, this is the place. Wu, Xin. Central Asia in the Context of the Achaemenid Persian Empire (6th to 4th Centuries B.C.). University of Pennsylvania Ph.D. dissertation, 2005. The title says it all. A superb archaeological and historical study. 210

Young, T. Cuyler. “480/479 B.C.—A Persian Perspective.” Iranica Antiqua 15 (1980): 213–239. Zournatzi, Antigoni, and Seyed Mohammad Reza Darbandi, eds. Ancient Greece and Ancient Iran: Cross-Cultural Encounters. Athens: National Hellenic Research Foundation, 2008. A stimulating collection of historical and archaeological essays, based on a multinational conference jointly hosted by the national research centers of Greece and Iran in 2006. The volume covers a broad range of topics, with many color illustrations. Websites University of Chicago Oriental Institute Publications Online. Offers free downloads of Oriental Institute publications of Persepolis and other sites in PDF ¿les. http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/pubs/catalog/oip/ The Persepolis Forti¿cation Archive. http://oi.uchicago.edu/research/projects/pfa/ Encyclopedia Iranica. An online encyclopedia of Iranian history and civilization from ancient times to the present. http://www.iranica.com/ Persepolis 3D.com. Digital reconstructions of Persepolis and Pasargadae, based on archaeological and architectural research. http://www.persepolis3d.com/frameset.html Communication, Language and Power in the Achaemenid Empire. A scholarly website focusing on the correspondence of the Persian satrap Arshama, who governed Egypt in the late 5th century B.C.

211

http://arshama.classics.ox.ac.uk/ The Bannu Archaeological Project. A joint British-American-Pakistani project focused on northwestern Pakistan. Web site has links to free articles for download.

Bibliography and Suggested Reading

http://www.arch.cam.ac.uk/bannu-archaeological-project/

212