Richard N. Frye THEHISTORY OF ANCIENT IRAN Verlag C-H- Beck THE HISTORY OF ANCIENT IRAN BY RICHARD N. FRYE AGA KHAN PROFESSOR OF IRANIAN HARVARD UNIVERSITY C. H. BECK'SCHE VERLAGSBUCHHANDLUNG MÜNCHEN HANDBUCH DER ALTERTUMSWISSENSCHAFT BEGRÜNDET VON IWAN VON MÜLLER ERWEITERT VON WALTER OTTO FORTGEFÜHRT VON HERMANN BENGTSON DRITTE ABTEILUNG, SIEBENTER TEIL Mit 3 Karten im Anhang CIP-Kurztitelaufnahme der Deutschen Bibliothek Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft / begr. von Iwan von Müller. Erw. von Walter Otto. Fortgef. von Hermann Bengtson. - München : Beck NE: Müller, Iwan von [Begr.]; Bengtson, Hermann [Hrsg.] Abt. 3. Teil 7. -» Frye, Richard N.: The history of andern Iran Frye, Richard N.: The history of ancient Iran / by Richard N. Frye. - München : Beck, 1983. (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft : Abt. 3; Teil 7) ISBN 3 406 09397 3 ISBN 3 406 09397 3 C. H. Beck'sche Verlagsbuchhandlung (Oscar Beck) München 1984 Satz: Spottiswoode Ballantyne Ltd., Colchester, England Druck: C. H. Beck'sche Buchdruckerei Nördlingen Printed in Germany Nels der Zukunft gewidmet TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction IX Abbreviations XV Chapter I. Geographical Survey 1 Chapter II. Demography 21 Chapter III. Pre-Iranian History of the Plateau and Central Asia ... 45 Chapter IV. Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 65 Chapter V. Achaemenids 87 Chapter VI. Alexander the Great and the Seleucids 137 Chapter VII. Greco-Bactrians, Sakas and Parthians 177 Chapter VIII. The Parthians on the Plateau 205 Chapter IX. The Kushans 249 Chapter X. Minor Dynasties on the Plateau 271 Chapter XI. The Sasanians 287 Chapter XII. Eastern Iran and Central Asia 341 APPENDICES Appendix 1 . Genealogical Tables of the Achaemenid, Parthian and Sasanian Dynasties 359 Appendix 2. The Behistun Inscription of Darius near Kermanshah, Iran 363 Appendix 3. The Bactrian Inscription of Surkh Kotal near Baghlan in Afghanistan 369 Appendix 4. The Inscription of Shapur I at Naqsh-e Rustam in Fars . . 371 Appendix 5. The MP Inscription of Narseh at Paikuii north of Khanaqin, Iraq 375 Index 379 Maps INTRODUCTION PROLEGOMENA The Leitmotiv of this book is the continuity in the history of western Iran from the earliest times to the Arab conquest, and in certain respects even down to the present. In spite of constant invasion and widespread destruction, like a phoenix the Persians have reasserted themselves often in the face of great adversity. The continuity is observable in many realms, one of the most striking of which is the language of ancient Persis, today the province of Fars, which developed from an Old Persian through a Middle to a New Persian stage with many admixtures, of course, and literary remains of all three stages exist. Of all the present day peoples of the Middle East, the Persians are the most conscious of their pre-Islamic past, and in many senses, traces of the ancient heritage of the area are better preserved in Persia than in Syria, Egypt, or elsewhere. In the present book the word 'Persia' refers to the contemporary land with the capital of Tehran. The term 'Iran,' however, is used for a greater, and unfortunately more imprecise, area including those regions where predominantly Iranian languages were spoken in antiquity. It must be emphasized that the term has no political connotations, and the word 'Iranian' is used primarily in a linguistic sense to differentiate the Speakers of Iranian languages from Semitic Speakers, Indians, or others. Persis or Parsa, on the other hand, is the modern province of Fars. The main source for Median and early Achaemenid history is the Ionian historian Herodotus, whose reliability, however, has been questioned many times. Many scholars, on the other hand, swear by his veracity when his data fits their theories, but reject or ignore him when his information goes counter to their reconstructions. On the whole, I believe one should follow the general rule that Herodotus generally reports what he heard and adds his own views in those matters where he moralizes, such as in the invasion of Greece by the Achaemenids, or the like. Whether his sources were reliable, of course, is another problem, but on the whole even if he reports stories which were current in his time, these stories are important for reconstructing ancient views. The second feature of this book, which is emphasized, is the extension of the Iranian cultural realm in antiquity to the borders of China, Siberia and South Russia. It is not the intention here to attempt to write a history of the steppes before the rise of the Turks but simply to stress the importance of Central Asia as an Iranian cultural area overshadowed by the Achaemenids and the Sasanians, but important in its own right as an independent source of Iranian ideas, art motifs, forms of society and government which had more of an impact on the Far East and Russia than heretofore realized. The post-Islamic-conquest flourishing of Bukhara, Samarqand and Khwarazm as great centers of Islamic learning and culture has puzzled many scholars who did not find the same phenomenon in the former Sasanian Empire. Central Asia was not a pale provincial reflection of the Sasanian Empire; rather it was a flourishing, independent X Introduction mercantile civilization before the coming of the Arabs. The profuse results of a Plethora of Soviet archaeological excavations in Central Asia have not only enormously enriched our knowledge of this area in antiquity, but they have revised long held ideas that here nomads roamed and culture was almost non-existent. It is virtually impossible for one person to keep abreast of the ongoing work in Central Asia, both in the western and in the eastern (Sinkiang) regions. Although no attempt has been made to cover the history of Sinkiang or even adequately other parts of Central Asia, nonetheless constant reference to contacts between Central Asia and the more settled lands to the south, east and west has been made. It is hoped that the importance of this area, far from Europe, will be realized by the reader. The chapters of the present book pass from east to west and hopefully the differences as well as the affinities of the two Iranian areas will appear. Central Asia always has been bound with eastern Iran (present Afghanistan) rather than with Persia, and so it will be treated as part of eastern Iranian history. Continuity in the east was more frequently interrupted than in Persia, but it is also a feature of east Iranian culture. GENERAL WORKS ON THE ANCIENT HISTORY OF IRAN Unlike Greek, Roman, or even Egyptian and Mesopotamian history, there have been relatively few general histories of Iran down to the Arab conquests. The reasons for this lack are not dirficult to discern. First, few historians have ventured into this area which requires formidable linguistic controls; instead the field has been left to philologists and linguists who are more interested in the detailed investigation of words than in the historical significance of texts. Second, the variety of aids one must utilize to reconstruct the history of Iran deters many investigators. One must turn to numismatics, art history, architecture, and, of course, archaeology to help recon- struct the past of a vast area, which again has repelled historians and encouraged archaeologists and art historians to take their place, often with not so happy results. Finally, so many travellers and amateurs have written about Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia that scholars have shied away from writing a general work on the ancient history of the area, preferring instead to concentrate on much needed detailed monographs. It is true that much more investigation is needed on all aspects of the pre-Islamic history of this part of the world, but it is regrettable that syntheses of new discoveries in archaeology, art history, epigraphy and other branches of knowledge have not been made in a general history of the whole Iranian world before Islam. If we survey the books written on the general ancient history of Iran during the past one hundred years, the picture is quite different from that of other parts of the world which have received much more attention from scholars. The earliest general history of ancient Iran which utilized the native Old Persian inscriptions, primarily of Darius, was by George Rawlinson, brother of Henry, who copied and deciphered the Behistun inscription. 1 His first publication dealt with the Achaemenids, as the last of The Five Great Monarchies ojthe Ancient World, but this was soon augmented by the The two-volume history oflran, down to the reliable, while earlier books on ancient Iran by rise of the Sasanians, by le Comte de Gobineau. Thomas Hyde, Sylvestre de Sacy, among others, published in Paris in 1 869, is neither systematic nor did not pretend to be histories. Introduction XI Parthians and Sasanians to become The Seven Great Monarchies. 2 George Rawlinson, Professor of ancient history at Oxford, based most of his work on Classical sources, but he did use other sources available to him in translation and his work remained a Standard history of ancient Iran for many years. It should be mentioned that the vast lands of eastern Iran (including Afghanistan) and Central Asia were largely untouched in Rawlinson's writings. This was rectified to some extent in a tom- prehensive three-volume account of geography, ethnology, religions and history by Friedrich Spiegel, a philologist in the widest sense of the word, a professor of Oriental languages at the University of Erlangen over a Century ago. In this encyclopedic work, Spiegel utilized Oriental as well as Classical sources. His historical survey was followed on the whole by Ferdinand Justi, who was Professor of Indogermanische Philologie at Marburg University, first in a general world history edited by W. Oncken in 1879, and then in the Grundriß der iranischen Philologie, published in Strasbourg between 1896 and 1904. This latter publication long remained the Standard survey of the ancient history of Iran. The populär work of Brigadier-General Sir Percy M. Sykes, A History ofPersia, vol. 1 (London, 1915), contributed little, and the book of the Orientalist Clement Huart, La perse antique et la civilisation iranienne (Paris, 1925), is notable only for including results of the many years of excavation at the site of Susa, and the consequent addition of the history of the Elamites to the ancient history of Iran. The book by Huart was revised several times, and the title was changed to L'Iran antique, Elam et Perses, and remained the Standard reference work in French until R. Ghirshman, an archaeologist, wrote his history called Iran (Payot, Paris, 1951), translated into English and published for the Penguin paperbacks in 1954. The work, as to be expected, was well illustrated and emphasis was on cultural history, art and archaeology. The same was true of the general history of ancient Iran by the Soviet Orientalist and archaeologist M. M. Dyakonov, published posthumously in 1961 . 3 In this work the eastern Iranian world, including Central Asia, first received more than cursory attention, primarily as a result of Soviet archaeological work there. This trend was further elaborated in the book of R. N. Frye, The Heritage of Persia (London, 1962), which, in spite of its title, chosen by the publisher for British readers, Covers all areas where Iranian peoples lived in antiquity. The Cambridge History of Iran, vols. 2 and 3, will treat the early plus Achaemenid periods and the Parthians and Sasanians respectively, but even in those comprehensive volumes lacunae exist. It is clear that histories in the sense of a history of Greece, Rome, much less of France or England, cannot be written about ancient Iran; rather, a short sketch of ancient Iranian civilization, including art and archaeology as well as other fields, must be substituted in many periods. Nonetheless, an attempt is made here to utilize many works for a composite picture of the past, based on available sources. Naturally secondary sources have provided the basis for much of this com- prehensive history, even though disagreements may exist, since monographs and specialists on restricted periods and regions have been able to concentrate on problems 2 His first work on the 'five monarchies' was 3 Ocherk istorii dtevnego Iran (Moscow, 1961), published in London between 1 862 and 1 867, and 441 . the 'seven monarchies' came out in 1 873 and 1 875 respectively. X Introduction mercantile civilization before the Coming of the Arabs. The profuse results of a plethora of Soviet archaeological excavations in Central Asia have not only enormously enriched our knowledge of this area in antiquity, but they have revised long held ideas that here nomads roamed and culture was almost non-existent. It is virtually impossible for one person to keep abreast of the ongoing work in Central Asia, both in the western and in the eastern (Sinkiang) regions. Although no attempt has been made to cover the history of Sinkiang or even adequately other parts of Central Asia, nonetheless constant reference to contacts between Central Asia and the more settled lands to the south, east and west has been made. It is hoped that the importance of this area, far from Europe, will be realized by the reader. The chapters of the present book pass from east to west and hopefully the differences as well as the affinities of the two Iranian areas will appear. Central Asia always has been bound with eastern Iran (present Afghanistan) rather than with Persia, and so it will be treated as part of eastern Iranian history. Continuity in the east was more frequently interrupted than in Persia, but it is also a feature of east Iranian culture. GENERAL WORKS ON THE ANCIENT HISTORY OF IRAN Unlike Greek, Roman, or even Egyptian and Mesopotamian history, there have been relatively few general histories of Iran down to the Arab conquests. The reasons for this lack are not dimcult to discern. First, few historians have ventured into this area which requires formidable linguistic controls; instead the field has been left to philologists and linguists who are more interested in the detailed investigation of words than in the historical significance of texts. Second, the variety of aids one must utilize to reconstruct the history of Iran deters many investigators. One must turn to numismatics, art history, architecture, and, of course, archaeology to help recon- struct the past of a vast area, which again has repelled historians and encouraged archaeologists and art historians to take their place, often with not so happy results. Finally, so many travellers and amateurs have written about Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia that scholars have shied away from writing a general work on the ancient history of the area, preferring instead to concentrate on much needed detailed monographs. It is true that much more investigation is needed on all aspects of the pre-Islamic history of this part of the world, but it is regrettable that syntheses of new discoveries in archaeology, art history, epigraphy and other branches of knowledge have not been made in a general history of the whole Iranian world before Islam. If we survey the books written on the general ancient history of Iran during the past one hundred years, the picture is quite different from that of other parts of the world which have received much more attention from scholars. The earliest general history of ancient Iran which utilized the native Old Persian inscriptions, primarily of Darius, was by George Rawlinson, brother of Henry, who copied and deciphered the Behistun inscription. 1 His first publication dealt with the Achaemenids, as the last of The Five Great Monarchies ofthe Ancient World, but this was soon augmented by the The two-volume history of Iran, down to the reliable, while earlier books on ancient Iran by rise of the Sasanians, by le Comte de Gobineau, Thomas Hyde, Sylvestre de Sacy, among others, published in Paris in 1 869, is neither systematic nor did not pretend to be histories. Introduction XI Parthians and Sasanians to become The Seven Great Monarchies. 2 George Rawlinson, Professor of ancient history at Oxford, based most of his work on Classical sources, but he did use other sources available to him in translation and his work remained a Standard history of ancient Iran for many years. It should be mentioned that the vast lands of eastern Iran (including Afghanistan) and Central Asia were largely untouched in Rawlinson's writings. This was rectified to some extent in a com- prehensive three-volume account of geography, ethnology, religions and history by Friedrich Spiegel, a philologist in the widest sense of the word, a professor of Oriental languages at the University of Erlangen over a Century ago. In this encyclopedic work, Spiegel utilized Oriental as well as Classical sources. His historical survey was followed on the whole by Ferdinand Justi, who was Professor of Indogermanische Philologie at Marburg University, first in a general world history edited by W. Oncken in 1879, and then in the Grundriß der iranischen Philologie, published in Strasbourg between 1896 and 1904. This latter publication long remained the Standard survey of the ancient history of Iran. The populär work of Brigadier-General Sir Percy M. Sykes, A History ofPersia, vol. 1 (London, 1915), contributed little, and the book of the Orientalist Clement Huart, La perse antique et la civilisation iranienne (Paris, 1925), is notable only for including results of the many years of excavation at the site of Susa, and the consequent addition of the history of the Elamites to the ancient history of Iran. The book by Huart was revised several times, and the title was changed to L'lran antique, tilam et Perses, and remained the Standard reference work in French until R. Ghirshman, an archaeologist, wrote his history called Iran (Payot, Paris, 1951), translated into English and published for the Penguin paperbacks in 1954. The work, as to be expected, was well illustrated and emphasis was on cultural history, art and archaeology. The same was true of the general history of ancient Iran by the Soviet Orientalist and archaeologist M. M. Dyakonov, published posthumously in 1 961 . 3 In this work the eastern Iranian world, including Central Asia, first received more than cursory attention, primarily as a result of Soviet archaeological work there. This trend was further elaborated in the book of R. N. Frye, The Heritage of Persia (London, 1962), which, in spite of its title, chosen by the publisher for British readers, Covers all areas where Iranian peoples lived in antiquity. The Cambridge History of Iran, vols. 2 and 3, will treat the early plus Achaemenid periods and the Parthians and Sasanians respectively, but even in those comprehensive volumes lacunae exist. It is clear that histories in the sense of a history of Greece, Rome, much less of France or England, cannot be written about ancient Iran; rather, a short sketch of ancient Iranian civilization, including art and archaeology as well as other fields, must be substituted in many periods. Nonetheless, an attempt is made here to utilize many works for a composite picture of the past, based on available sources. Naturally secondary sources have provided the basis for much of this com- prehensive history, even though disagreements may exist, since monographs and specialists on restricted periods and regions have been able to concentrate on problems 2 His first work on the 'five monarchies' was 3 Ocherk islorii drevnego Iran (Moscow, 1961), published in London between 1 862 and 1 867, and 441 . the 'seven monarchies' came out in 1873 and 1875 respectively. XII Introduction which can only be touched by the present work, and reference is made to them for further information. For pre-Achaemenid history the writings of I. M. Dyakonov have proved especially valuable, while M. Dandamayev and W. Hinz have concentrated on the Achaemenids. Seleucid history in Iran is not so well served while J. Wolski is our man on the early Parthians as is V. G. Lukonin for the early Sasanians. Other scholars and their works are cited in the various chapters, but obviously it is impossible to cover or cite everything one should. Many times, rather than increase the volume by adding bibliographies, reference has been made to other works where extensive bibliographies are given. In the forthcoming age of Computers and easily recalled bibliographies, the present book will become antiquated, but for the time being I hope it will be of some aid in finding one's way in the undergrowth and proliferation of writings on ancient Iran and Central Asia. TECHNICALITIES When one marvels at books of the past which were handset and printed with Greek and Oriental fonts by many experts, as well as a series of editors, one question which may arise is 'what price pedantry?' The use of diacritical points and macrons is necessary in linguistic arguments but hardly in a general history where those who read Oriental languages know what is meant, while to those who do not it is superfluous. Therefore I have omitted such banes to printers and proof-readers as much as possible, although in Arabic and other Semitic language words a more strict system of transliteration at times has been followed. I have tried to be consistent in spellings and only hope not too many slips will provide grist for reviewers. I must plead guilty to inconsistency in the usage of Latin and Greek forms of names and words, especially such details as final -us and -os. On the whole I have followed commonly accepted spellings except certain names, e.g. Priskos for Priscus, but again I hope that at least consistency has been observed in one and the same name. One explanation for variations, though not excuse, is that this book was originally intended to be written in German, but I found that my strength and ability by this time were not equal to the task and after much lost time and effort, I decided I would have to write in English. In the shift some 'un-English' forms of names may have survived. Also, in the case of transcripitions, rather than transliterations, of Middle Persian or other Iranian forms of names or words, consistency has not always been observed, for example: Weh not Veh but Neu rather than New, so one would not mistake the latter with the English word new.' Again, I hope no one will be confused ; specialists will not be, and those who are not should realize that there are many forms of transcription of foreign sounds and written forms. I have used the antiquated Wade-Giles System of transcribing Chinese characters, since it will be easy to consult the dictionaries and change into other forms of transcription with which I am not familiär. I must reiterate that this book is a general history of pre-Islamic Iran in its widest sense and not a philological treatise. The endings of Russian names cause trouble since forms in western European languages differ from the original. Thus we find Litvinskii written as Litvinsky and Perikhanyan written as Perikhanian, but hopefully the reader will understand such inconsistencies. Introduction XIII One Innovation different from the usual Interpretation of numismatics should be mentioned. Numismatists, on the basis of styles and iconography, assign coin series to certain time periods, and the suspicion that archaizing tendencies may negate their conclusions rarely becomes a factor to consider. Studies of Sogdian silver in the fifth and sixth centuries of our era have revealed archaic forms similar to similar objects of the Parthian and even Achaemenid periods. Coinage likewise may confuse one by archaic styles. Also the continuity of series of coins in eastern Iran or Central Asia, even one style lasting several centuries, as in Bukhara, frequently has been ignored by numismatists. In western Iran we find dynastic continuity while in the east we have lip-service to dynastic allegiance. Unfortunately, the history of eastern Iran is a vast area in itself and here it can only be touched with reference to bibliographies for further study. Finally, it is somewhat of a miracle that this volume appears since it was begun years ago when I was director of the Asia Institute of Pahlavi University in Shiraz, and I will not bürden the reader with stories of the vicissitudes of lost books and portions of the manuscript, as well as the lack of aid in preparing the MS. This book should have been written by an old-fashioned Ordinarius with several assistants to compile bibliographies, fetch books, check references and read proofs. Unfortunately, I have been alone with many burdens and if it were not for the süperb typing of Carolyn Cross, secretary of the Department of Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations at Harvard University, the book would not have seen the light of day. I would have preferred to have colleagues read the MS. and save me from errors, but today no one has time or inclination. Perhaps in the future machines will allow more time for such tasks but until then one should strive the best one can. If this work provides a useful guide to the history of ancient Iran I will be grateful. Richard N. Frye Hamburg, Shiraz and Cambridge, Mass. ABBREVIATIONS USED IN THIS BOOK Acta Antiqua Academiae Scientiarum Hungarkae (Budapest) Abhandlungen der Akademie der Wissenschaften und Literatur, Mainz Abhandlungen Altorientalische Forschung (Berlin) Abhandlungen der -» GWG Acta Iranica (Leiden) Annali dell' Istituto Orientale (Naples) American Journal of Archaeology (New York) American Journal of Ancient History (Cambridge, Mass.) American Journal of Semitic Languages (Chicago) Asia Major (London) Archaeologische Mitteilungen aus Iran (Berlin) American Numismatic Society (New York) American Numismatic Society Museum Notes (New York) Archiv Orientälnl (Prague) seeAbk.PAW Bulletin de l'icole francaise de l'Extrime Orient (Paris) Bibliotheca Orientalis (Amsterdam) Bulletin de la sociM linguistique (Paris) Bulletin of the School ofOriental (and African) Studies (London) Beiträge zur Namenforschung (Heidelberg) Central Asian Journal (Wiesbaden) Cambridge History of Iran (Cambridge, England) Centre national des recherches scientifiques (Paris) Comptes Rendus de l'Acadimie des Inscriptions et Beiles Lettres (Paris) Corpus Scriptorum Christianorum Orientalium (Paris) Darius, Naqsh-e Rustam inscription d in R. Kent, Old Persian (New Haven, 1953) Darius, Suez inscription Epigrafika Vostoka (Leningrad) East and West (Rome) Fragmenta Historicorum Craecorum, ed. C. Müller (Paris) Die' Fragmente der Griechischen Historiker, ed. F. Jacoby (Berlin and Leiden) Gesellschaft der Wissenschaften zu Göttingen Handbuch des Altpersischen, W. Brandenstein u. M. Mayrhofer (Wiesbaden, 1964) Handbuch der Orientalistik, ed. B. Spuler (Leiden) Iranica Antiqua (Leiden) Indogermanische Forschungen (Berlin) Indo-Iranian Journal (The Hague) Journal of the British Institute of Persian Studies (London) Istituto Italiano per il Medio ed Estremo Oriente (Rome) Journal Asiatique (Paris) Journal of the American Oriental Society (New Haven) Journal of the Economic and Social History of the Orient (Leiden) Journal of Indo European Studies (Washington, D.C.) Journal of the K. R. Cama Oriental Institute (Bombay) Journal of the Oriental Society of Australia (Canberra) Journal of Near Eastern Studies (Chicago) Journal of the Numismatic Society of India (Benares) Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society (London) Kartir Ka'bah of Zardusht at Naqsh-e Rustam Kuhns Zeitschrift für vergleichende Sprachwissenschaft (Göttingen) XVI Abbreviations MIA Materialy i Issledovaniya po Arkheologii SSSR (Moscow) MMAI Mtmoires de la mission archiologique en Iran (Paris) MDAFA Mtmoires de la dtltgation archMogique francaise en Afghanistan (Paris) MP Middle Persian (Pahlavi) MSS Münchener Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft (Munich) NC Numismatic Chronicle (London) NNM Numismatic Notes and Monographs (ANS) (New York) NP New Persian NTS Norsk Tidsskriß fer Sprogvidenskap (Oslo) OAW Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Vienna) OLZ Orientalische Literaturzeitung (Berlin) OP Old Persian OS Orientalia Süecana (Uppsala) PAW Preussische Akademie der Wissenschaften (Berlin) PO Patrologia Orientalis (Paris) PW Pauly Wissowa's Realenzyklopädie der Altertumswissenschaft (Stuttgart) RIzA Revue des hudes Armtniennes (Paris) RHR Revue de l'histoire des religions (Paris) RN Revue numismatique (Paris) RSO Rivista degli Studi Orientali (Rome) SA Sovetskaya Arkheologiya (Moscow) Sb Sitzungsberichte SHAW Sitzungsber. der Heidelberger A.W. (Heidelberg) SWAW see Sb., WAW SI Studia Iranica (Paris) SKZ Shapur Ka'bah of Zardusht SPA Survey of Persian Art, ed. A. U. Pope (Oxford, 1939) TP Toung Pao (Leiden) TPS Transactions of the Philobgical Society (London) UCLA University of California in Los Angeles VDl Vestnik Drevnei Istorii (Moscow) WAW Wiener Akademie der Wissenschaften (Vienna) WZKM Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde des Morgenlandes (Vienna) XPf Xerxes, Persepolis inscription f in R. Kent, Old Persian (New Haven, 1953) ZA Zeitschrift für Assyriologie (Berlin) ZDMC Zeitschrift der Morgenldndischen Gesellschaft (Wiesbaden) ZU Zeitschrift für Indologie und Iranistik (Leipzig) CHAPTER I GEOGRAPHICAL SURVEY The scholarly investigation of the geography of the Iranian plateau and Central Asia is relatively recent. Until the beginning of systematic collections of data on temperatures, water utilization, soils, and the like, geographical questions were mostly discussed by travellers and amateurs. Historical geography, on the other hand, was primarily the concern of academics who rarely if ever ventured into the field, and consequently misconceptions and gaps in knowledge abounded. Because of the Strategie importance of Persia and Afghanistan, primarily British and Russian officers, but also others, sought to map the entire area at various times, and the result is today we have aerial photographs and maps of considerable detail. It is not possible to review all of the relevant geographical literature, but those works which aid the Student of history will be mentioned under the three geographical headings of Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia. Literature: Iran, generali The general gazetteer prepared by the army under the direction of Gen. Husain 'All Razmarä' in ten volumes Farhang-e Joghräflyä-ye Iran (Tehran, 1950-54), lists the towns and villages in each province, giving the location, population, main language, rehgion, prineipal occupatio™ and industries, and similar information. Although in need of correction this collection of information is surpassed only by the comprehensive gazetteer of villages, based on the census of 1966, the Farhang-e Abädl-hä-ye Kishvar, of which 27 volumes have appeared in Tehran beginning in 1969. Another gazetteer in English based on the above, as well as on the British India Office archives is less comprehensive but useful. 1 Perhaps the most comprehensive textbook on the geography of Iran is the three-volume work of Mas 'od Kayhän, Joghräfiya-ye mufassal-e Iran (Tehran, 1 937), but now see E. Ehlers, Iran, Grundziige einer geographischen Landeskunde (Darmstadt, 1980). For the historical geography of Iran, we have F. Justi, Beitrage zur alten Geographie Persiens, Zwei Abtheilungen (Marburg, 1869), 56 S., who tried to identify place names in the Avesta with those of Classical and Islamic geographies. W. Tomaschek concentrated on Classical place names, especially in the Tabula Peutingeriana, a world map probably made by a Roman called Castorius in the third Century but preserved in a thirteenth-century copy. He also identified many sites with place names in Arabic geographies. 2 The most erudite and produetive historical geographer, however, was Joseph Marquart (later changed to Markwart) who clarified many identifications of site names in ancient Iran in his publications. 3 His commentaries to an edition and translation of an Armenian geography attributed to Moses of Chorene were perhaps his most valuable contribution to the historical geography of the entire Iranian world. 4 The old Geographie der Griechen und Römer of Konrad Mannen, fünfter Theil (Leipzig, 1829), is still useful. Sources: The classical books relevant to historical geography are first, Herodotus, with the useful Lexicon to Herodotus by J. E. Powell (Hildesheim, 1966), based on the edition of Hude (Oxford, 1926). Then we have Ptolemy in three editions by C. F. Nobbe (1 843 ; reprinted Hildesheim, 1 966), F. G. Wilberg (Essen, 1845) and C. Müller (Paris, 1883), which is the basic work on place names in the pre-Christian east. The 'L.W. Adamec, ed., Historical Gazetteer o/Iran, von Iran, 2 Hefte (Göttingen, 1 896) ; "Beiträge zur 1 (Graz, 1977) and foll. Geschichte und Sage von Eran," ZDMG, 49 2 W. Tomaschek, "Zur historischen Topogra- (1895), 628-70, as well as his A Catalogue of the phie von Persien," Sb WA W,\02 (1883), 146-231, Provincial Capitals of Eranshahr (Rome, 1931). and 108 (1885), 583-652, issued in book form in 4 Eriiüahr nach der Geographie des Ps. Moses 1972. Xorenac'i, Abh. GWG (Berlin, 1901). 3 Especially his Untersuchungen zur Geschichte Chapter I Parthian Stations of Isidore of Charax, ed. by C. Müller in Geographi Graeci Minores (Paris, 1 855) and in Frg. Hist. (Dritter Teil C, Zweiter Band) has a list of towns on the silk road to the east. The geography of Strabo, written about the time of Christ, with several editions in the Loeb Classical Series, as well as the Teubner edition by A. Meineke (Leipzig, 1853 foll.), contains much information on Iran and the Caucasus. Pliny's Natural History is less valuable, but also has interesting details about lands of the east, and both Strabo and Pliny give place names and Information older than their own times of writing. 5 For the Sasanian period the number of geographical sources increases but the quality does not, for the vanous cosmographii in the Geographi Latini Minores give very little information on the east. 6 The historian Ammianus Marcellinus, especially in book 23, mentions the provinces and cities of the Sasanian Empire. 7 Useful for details about place names and peoples are the lexicon of Hesychius (fifth Century) where some Persian and 'Scythian' words and names are explained, the geography or Ethnika of Stephan of Byzantium (sixth Century), and the dictionary of Suidas (tenth Century). 8 The anonymous geographer of Ravenna (seventh Century) based much of his work on the Tabula Peutingeriana of Castorius and does not add much on the east. 9 A secondary source on Armenian place names is a useful reference work for that region. 10 Talmudic geography is of minimum value to our concerns, although the Talmudic dictionary of Aruch contains interesting items, especially for the Sasanian period. 1 ' Syriac sources also are not particularly helpful, although the corpus of Nestorian synods with the locations of bishoprics, as well as the acts of martyrs, occasionally give geographical information not found elsewhere. 12 Thus, it is obvious that the historical geographer of pre-Islamic Iran must rely on items of information from many and varied sources. Not only the works mentioned above must be considered but the results of archaeology as well, which bring new materials for our understanding of the past almost yearly. For example, the site of the Parthian capital of Hekatompylos was not estabhshed, until a survey of the area and excavations showed that it was the Islamic site of Qumis between present-day Damghan and Semnan. 1 3 It is obviously impossible to give a bibliography for all the surveys and site excavations which have some relevance to historical geography. The yearly survey of excavations published in the Journal Iran, however, gives a good picture of work in that country since 1965. This is paralleled by publications of the annual symposia on archaeological research in Iran organized by the Iranian Centre for Archaeological Research in Tehran, since 1 972, as well as the Journal Bastan Chenassi va Honar-e Iran, also printed in Tehran. By far the most detailed sources of geographical information for the ancient as well as medieval periods are the geographies in the Arabic or Persian language. Fortunately, a comprehensive survey of the sources relevant to western Iran was made by Paul Schwarz, to which one may add a few items which were not known to him. 14 The Hudüd al-'älam is perhaps the most important new source, especially for eastern 5 Plinii Naturalis Historia, ed. by C. MayhofT (Dresden, 1905; reprinted Stuttgart, 1967); also Loeb Classical Library (Cambridge, Mass- London). 6 A. Riese, ed., Geographi Laiini Minores (Heil- bronn, 1878; reprinted Hildesheim, 1964) esp. 45, 61, 74. 7 Ammianus Marcellinus, ed. by W. Seyfarth, 4 vols. (Berlin, 1968-71), and in the Loeb Classical Series. Both have a translation as well as Latin text. K. Latte, ed., Hesychii Alexandrini Lexicon, 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1953, 1966, 1977); A. Mein- ecke, ed., Stephan von Byzanz Ethnika (Berlin, 1849; reprinted Graz, 1958); Ada Adler, ed., Suidae Lexicon (Leipzig, 1928-35), 4 vols. J. Schnetz, Itineraria Romana II: Ravennatis anonymi cosmographia (Leipzig, 1940) trans. by Schnetz, Ravennas Anonymus: Cosmographia, in Nomina Germanica, 10 (Uppsala, 1951). H. Hübschmann, "Die altarmenischen Orts- namen," IF, 16 (1904), 197^90; also issued as a book in 1969. The book by A Neubauer, La geographie du Talmud (Paris, 1 868), is still useful, as is A. Berliner, Beitrage zur Geographie und Ethnographie Babylo- niens (Berlin, 1884). For the Talmudic geography of Mesopotamia the best work is by J. Obermeyer, Die Landschaft Babylonien im Zeitalter des Talmuds und des Gaonats (Frankfurt, 1929). See also Additamenta ad Librum Aruch Completum, ed. by A. Kohut (Wien, 1937; reprinted New York, 1955). 1 2 J -B. Chabot, Synodicon Orientale (Paris, 1 902) ; G Hoffmann, Auszüge aus syrischen Akten persischer Märtyrer (Leipzig, 1880), and O. Braun, Ausgewählte Akten persischer Märtyrer (Kempten- Mumch, 1915). 1 3 J Hansman, "The Problem of Qumn,." JRAS (1968) 111-40. 1 •* P. Schwarz, Iran im Mittelalter (Leipzig, 1927-36) The book of G. LeStrange, Lands ofthe Eastern Caliphate (Cambridge, 1905; reprinted 1930), is less detailed but useful. The Istoriko- geograficheskii obzor Irana (St Petersburg, 1903, of Bartold, reprinted in his Sochineniya, 7, Moscow, 1971) contains much material of pre-Islamic geography, but it is especially valuable for Afghanistan, below. The value of Islamic sources for ancient history is shown by such publications as Geographica! Survey 3 Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia. 15 The second source, previously known from quotations in Yaqut's geographical dictionary and elsewhere, was found in a manuscript in Meshhed, Iran and published twice. 16 A later source The Jahän-näme contains little new except a few items, such as the building of a long wall in Gurgan by the Sasanians to protect settled people from raids by nomads.' 7 Finally, local geographies and histories occasionally give items of interest. The bibliographical references to the most important books below refer to pages in Storey's Persian Literature, a bio-bibliographical survey in its enlarged Russian translation. 18 The oldest is the history of Qom (p. 1008), which contains Information about the Arab conquests and di visions of land and irrigation. The Qualities of lsfahan, a similar book, existed in Arabicand in an old Persian translation (101 1-1 2), and histories ofYazd (1021), and especially the Färs name of Ibn al-Balkhl, which contains much Information about the geography of Fars in Sasanian times (1027), are to be noted. The city histories of Baihaq and of Nishapur in Khurasan (1041 , 1044), and Herat in Afghanistan (1043, 1046) have items of geographical interest, whereas the city histories of Kerman are less useful (1056-63). The local history of Tabaristan (present Mazandaran) is important for ancient geography and history (e.g. the letter of Tansar), while other books on the Caspian Sea Coast provinces are less important (1071-77). The local history of Seistan is an important source book for the historical geography, as well as history, ofthat province (1078-81), but its legends obscure much of the history. The same is true of the local history of Shustar in Khuzistan (1082). Azerbaijan and Kurdistan have a number of local histories (such as the Sharaf-näme, 1097), but they help little with the ancient history or historical geography of the respective regions. Finally, European travellers from the time of Marco Polo occasionally provide geographical information relevant to ancient times not found elsewhere. A survey of such accounts may be found in a book by Alfons Gabriel, 1 9 but his book contains errors and has an insufficient bibliography hence must be used with caution. There are also general bibliographies of Iran which are useful to consult. 20 Literature: Afghanistan, general: Parallel to Iran, there exists a gazetteer in Persian as well as a Pashto edition, the Qämüs Joghräßyä-ye Afghanistan in four volumes and several reprintings in Kabul (first ed. 1952). The English language parallel is the Historical and Political Gazetteer of Afghanistan, ed. by L. Adamec in six volumes, five of which have appeared. 21 A general, physical geography of Afghanistan is the work by Johannes Humlum, La geographie de Y Afghanistan (Copenhagen, 1959). On the historical M. Streck, Die alte Landschaft Babylonien nach den Vorderasiens," in 10. Internationaler Kongreß für arabischen Geographen (Leiden, 1900). Namenforschung, (Vienna, 1969), 123-30 15 Text, ed. by ManQchehr Sotodeh (Tehran, 20 Y. M. Nawabi, ed., A Bibliography oflran, 2 1340/1962), trans. with notes by V. Minorsky vols. (Tehran, 1969 and 1971); A. Abolhamid and (London, 1937). The MS is now in Leningrad and N. Pakdaman, Bibliographie francaise de Civilisation was published in facsimile by V. Bartold (Lenin- Iranienne, 3 vols. (Tehran, 1972-74); A. Kazemi, grad, 1930). "Addenda" to the book were pub- Iran Bibliographie, Deutschsprachige Abhandlungen, lished by V. Minorsky in the BSOAS, 17 (1955), Dissertationen, usw. (Tehran, 1970). In Persian are 250-270. the valuable Fihrist Kitäbhäye chäpl Farsl, ed. by 16 V. Minorsky, ed., Abu-Dulaf Mis'ar ibn Kh. Moshär, 5 vols. (Tehran, 1972-77) an index of Muhalhil's Travels in Iran, circa A.D. 950 (Cairo U. printed books, as well as the Fihrist-e maqalat-e Press, 1955) and P. G. Bulgakov and A. B. Fürst, ed. by I. Afshär (Tehran, 1961), which is an Khalidov, eds., Vtoraya zapiska Abu Dulafa (Mos- index of articles published in Persian from 1910- cow, 1960). 58, Two other works in Persian by I. Afshär are 17 Fol 1. 19a, line 23 of Muh. b Najib Bakran, useful, the Bibliography of Bibliographies on Iranian Dzhahan-name, ed. by Yu. Borshchevskii (Mos- Studies (Tehran, 1964), and Directory for Iranian cow, 1960), also ed. by M. Amin RiyähT (Tehran, Studies (Tehran, 1971). Other bibliographies exist 1964), 82. m profusion, but noteworthy is W. G. Oxtoby, Storey's work was published in London in Ancient Iran and Zoroastrianism in Festschriften fascicules (1927-72), and the enlarged translation (Pahlavi University, Shiraz, 1974), and the Russian Persidskaya Literatura, ed by Yu. Bregel and Yu. language Bibliografiya po geografii Irana by M. P. Borshchevskii in 3 vols. (Moscow, 1972). Petrov (Ashkabad, 1955), an annotated A. Gabriel, Die Erforschung Persiens (Wien, bibliography. 1952). There is not space here to mention many 2I The three provinces or areas covered in the special, detailed studies on historical geography, three published volumes are Badakhshan (Graz, but the articles by W. Eilers on this subject should 1972) Farah and Southwestern Afghanistan (Graz, be noted, "Der Name Demawend," /lO, 22 (1954), 1973) and Herat and Northwestern Afghanistan 267-374 and 24 (1956), 183-224, and "Zur (Graz, 1975), all compiled from British-Indian Ortsnamengebung und Ortsnamen-Forschung gazeteers. 4 Chapter I geography of the area, the same sources mentioned above for Iran also apply to the east, but the works of Markwart, notably his Wehrot und Arang (Leiden, 1 938), are particularly useful for this part of the world. A special study of Ptolemy's geography by Italo Ronca, and the relevant chapters of Bartold's Istoriko- geograficheskii obzot Irana are noteworthy. 22 Also V. Bartold's Turkestan down to the Mongol Invasion (London, 1968) Covers northern Afghanistan as well as Central Asia. Sources: In addition to the Classical sources listed for Iran, especially Herodotus, Strabo, Pliny and Isidore, particular mention must be made of the historians of Alexander's campaign, for they give a few items of geographical Information not found elsewhere. 23 Unfortunately, Indian texts give us no help, and even the geography of Varahamihira, except for names of tribes in the north west of the subcontinent, is too vague to be of much value. 2 * More informative are Chinese sources, especially the life and the travels of Buddhist monks or laymen such as Fa-hsien (c. 400 B.c.), Sung-yUn (c. 518) and especially Hsüan-tsang (629 B.c.). 25 These travel accounts, however, frequently give us names which are difficult to identify in non-Chinese texts. In addition to the accounts of travellers, the dynastic histories of China also have a modicum of geographical information about lands comprising present-day Afghanistan. Most of the sections about Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia in those texts fortunately have been translated into European languages thus making them available to those who do not read classical Chinese. The oldest account comes from an embassy sent by the Chinese court starting about 138 B.c. headed by Ch'ang Ch'ien, whose account was incorporated in the history of the former Han dynasty (Ch'ien Han Shu). 26 The annals of the later Han dynasty, the Hou Han Shu, do not add much to the account of the western regions in the annals of the former Han. 27 Later dynastic histories such as the Wei-Ho and the Chou Shu, give additional information. 28 Even later Chinese sources are still useful for the earlier historical geography of the western regions (in Chinese eyes), such as the voyage of another Buddhist monk Huei- cha o about 726 A.D., and the later dynastic histories of the Sui and Tang. 29 The same geographical books in Arabic and Persian, mentioned above, also contain information about Afghanistan, but the Hudud al-ä'latn is especially detailed. Since the mountainous regions of Afghanistan were converted to Islam long after the Arab conquests in Iran, several later histories relating to Afghanistan are more valuable for the earlier historical geography than one would expect. These are the 22 Italo Ronco, Ptolemaios, Geographie 6, 9-21, Ostiran und Zentralasien (Rome, 1971). See also A. Berthelot, L'Asie ancienne centrale et sud-orientale d'apres Ptolemke (Paris, 1930). 23 The principal sources are Arrian, Diodorus Siculus and Quintus Curtius, all available in either the Loeb or Teubner series of Classical texts. In the appendices to W. Tarn's The Creeks in Bactria and India (Cambridge, 1951), many geographical questions are discussed. 24 H. Kern, ed., The Brihat Sanhita, Bibliotheca Indica, 48 (Calcutta, 1865), also ed. by S. Dvivedi (Benares, 1895-7), Sanskrit Brihatsamhitä . Trans, into English by Kern in JRAS, new series 4 (1 869), 430-79; 5 (1870), 45-90, esp. eh. 14 on the division of the globe 81-86; 6 (1872), 279-338; 7 (1874), 81-134. 25 Classical Chinese texts are available in many printings and only translations are mentioned here. For Fa-hsien and Sung-yUn see S. Beal, Travels of Fah-hian and Sung-yun (London, 1869), also his translation of 77ie Life of Hiuen-Tsiang (London, 191 1). The best translation of Sung-yUn, however, is by E. Chavannes in the BEFEO, 3, no. 3 (Hanoi, 1903). For Hsüan-tsang's travels the translation by T. Watters, On Yuang Chwang's Travels, 2 vols. (London, 1904) is better than Beal's (London, 1884). 26 The Ch'ien Han Shu, relevant chapters have been translated by J. J. deGroot in Chinesische Urkunden zur Geschichte Asiens, die Westlande Chinas in der vorchristlichen Zeit (Berlin, 1926), 9- 19. Also trans. by F. Hirth, "The Story of Chang K'ien," JAOS, 37 (1917), 89-162. 27 E. Chavannes, "Les pays d'Occident d'apres le Heou han Chou," TP (1907), 149-234. The translations of Iakinf Bichurin into Russian of this and other Chinese accounts are outdated: N. Ya. Bichurin, Sobranie svedenii o narodakh obitavshikh v Srednei Azii, 3 vols. (Moscow, 1950-53) also his Sobranie svedenii po istoricheskoi geografii vostochnoi i srednoi Azii (Cheboksarai, 1960), both reprints. The same is true of the old French translations of Chinese texts by S. Julien. 28 E. Chavannes, "Les pays d'oeeident d'apres le Wei-lio," TP (1905), 519-71; R. A. Miller, Accounts of Western Nations in the History of the Northern Chou Dynasty (Berkeley, 1959). 29 For the monk see W. Fuchs, "Huei-cha o's Pilgerreise durch Nordwestindien and Zenral- Asien um 726," Sb PAW, 30 (1938), 426-69. For the histories, the collection and translations in E. Chavannes, Documents sur les Tou-kiue (Turcs) Occidentaux (St. Petersburg, 1900; reprinted Paris, 1946), esp. the discussion of sources on the "western countries", pp. 99-100, is very useful. Geographica Survey 5 history of Gardlzland that of JazjänT, both of whom were natives of the area. 30 There are no extant local histories of Kabul, Qandahar, Ghazna, Bamiyan or other cities, although Balkh has a local history which gives very little ancient history or topography of the surroundings. 31 Finally, European travel accounts occasionally contain items of value for the historical geography of the land. Archaeology has been the monopoly of the French until after World War II, and the series MDAFA contains much valuable Information, while the latest information about archaeology may be found in the Journal Afghanistan, published in English or French by the Historical Society of Afghanistan. Several bibliographies of Afghanistan exist which are useful for specific references in modern literature, and together they offer good coverage of writings on the land. 32 Literature: Central Asia, general : There are no gazetteers as above, but rather lists of place names as in B. Volostnov, Slovar geograficheskikh nazvanii SSSR (Moscow, 1968) and S. V. Kalesnik, Entsiklopedicheskii Slovar geograficheskikh nazvanii (Moscow, 1973). For each of the Transcaucasian and Central Asian republics of the USSR there exists a general geography, in the series Souetskii Soyuz, and some of these books have been translated into English in abbreviated form, but only the Russian Originals should be consulted; for Uzbekistan, see Korzhenevskii, N. L., Uzbekskaya SSR (Moscow, Geografgiz, 1956); for Turkmenistan, Z. G. Freikin, Turkmenskaya SSR (Moscow, 1957). and for Tajikistan, I. K. Narzikulov, Tadzhikskaya SSR (Moscow, 1956). 33 For older works see the bibliography in I. M. Kaufman, Geograficheskie Slovari i bibliografiya (Moscow, 1964). Sources: The same Classical sources which have been mentioned above are also relevant for Central Asia, especially Herodotus, Strabo and Ptolemy. Particularly to be noted for this area is Ctesias, who constantly must be checked, however, with other sources. 34 Among secondary publications, the works of Markwart are indispensable for anyone studying the historical geography of Central Asia. In addition to Wehrot und Arang (Leiden, 1938), the continuation ofthat book, printed in two articles, as well as an earlier study of Tomaschek, are noteworthy. 35 The Islamic and Chinese sources for the historical geography of Central Asia are the same as those mentioned for Afghanistan. The pioneering work of V. Bartold, Turkestan down to the Mongol Invasion, as well as Minorsky's notes to his translation of the Hudad al-'älam, are both very informative. For archaeology in Central Asia and the Transcaucasus, the yearly reports of field work, Arkheologicheskie Otkrytiya, ed. by B. A. Rybakov for the year 1975 (Moscow, 1976), as well as the Journal Sovetskaya Arkheohgiya, are indispensable reference works. Most of the republics have their own surveys of archaeological work done within the borders of the republic every year, as, for example, Arkheologicheskie Raboty v Tadzhikistane, vypusk II (Dushanbe, 1975). Other publications of value for the geography of Central Asia are the series of the Vostochnaya Komissiya geograficheskogo Obshchestva SSSR, called Strany i Narody Vostoka, vol. 1 6 of which (Moscow, 1 975) is devoted entirely to the Pamirs, also the Trudy and the Materialy of the Khorezmskoi Ekspeditsii and the same for Turkmenistan in the Yuzhno-Turkmenistanskoi 30 'Abd al-Hayy Hablbl, ed., Zain al-akhbär of 33 There are other books in series with useful GardTzI (Tehran, 1969), esp. the final chapters; he information, such as the general survey of each also edited the Jabaaat-e Naslrl of JnzjänT (Kabul, republic, e.g., D. A. Chumichev, Tadzhikistan 1965) in two vols., the second with notes. (Moscow, 1968), on climate, physical features, 31 See the Fadäi'l-e Balkh, ed. by 'A. HablbT production, etc. Also the Atlas Tadzhik SSR (Tehran, 1972). The contemporary book on (Moscow, 1 968) has historical, as well as contem- Qandahar by Muh. Wali Dzalmai (Kabul, 1973) porary, maps. The Atlas of Uzbekistan, on the does give geographical information, but it is other hand, is quite poor. written in Pashto. 34 See F. W. König, Die Persika des Ktesias von 32 T. I. Kukhtina.ed., Bibliografiya Afghanistana, Knidos (Graz, 1972), and several articles by I. V. literatura na Russkom Yazyke (Moscow, 1 965) ; W. Pyankov in the VD1, such as "Svedeniya Ktesiya o Kraus, ed., Bibliographie der Afghanistan-Literatur vladeniyakh Bardii na vostoke Irana," no. 4 (1961), 1945-1967, Teil 1, Literatur in Europäischen 98-103, "Istoriya Persii Ktesiya i sredneaziatskie Sprachen (Hamburg, 1 968), and Teil 2, Literatur satrapii Akhemenidov," VDI, no. 2 (1 965), 35-50. in persischer Sprache und Paschtu, ed. by G. Knabe 35 Markwart, "Die Sogdiana des Ptolemaios," (Hamburg, 1971); D. Wilber, Annotated Bibli- Orientalia, 14 (1945), 123-49,and 15 (1946),286- ography of Afghanistan (New Haven, 1968); E. 323; W. Tomaschek, "Zentralasiatische Studien" Naby, Recent Books about Afghanistan 1968-1973 Sb WAW, 87 (1877). (Afghanistan Council, The Asia Society, New York, 1973). 6 Chapter I arkheohgicheskoi kompleksnoi ekspeditsii. 36 Central Asia is also well-represented in the series Matetialy i issledovaniya po arkheologii SSSR. The vast field of archaeology, of course, cannot be covered and individual publications will be mentioned in the succeeding chapters relative to particular questions. City histories are also of value for the historical geography of these lands, and the most famous in Central Asia is the history of Bukhara by Narshakhi in Persian (Storey-Bregel, 1108), while the counterpart for Samarqand, known as al-Qandiyya (1112) does not contain pre-Islamic information as does Narshakhi. Other local histories of Bukhara or Samarqand are too recent to have information relevant to ancient history or geography. The memoirs of the first Moghul emperor, Babur, contain a geographical sketch of the Ferghana Valley and surroundings (828, 1 187). Other texts, unfortunately, are of little or no value for ancient times. A word should be added about maps, since now very detailed aerial maps exist for most of Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia, but, unfortunately, access to them is frequently difficult. For example, the photomaps of Afghanistan, prepared for the government ofthat country by Fairchild Aerial Surveys of Los Angeles (or Teledyne Geotronics), have a scale of 1 : 50,000 and show surprising details, but they are not available for general use. A stereo-topographic survey of Afghanistan in 1959, produced maps of 1 :100,000, printed in 1960. For ordinary purposes, however, maps of 1 :1 ,000,000 are adequate, and these exist in many editions for the entire area. The various Soviet republics have such maps, published by the Glavnoe Upravlenie geodezii i kartografii gos. geologicheskago komiteta SSSR, in Moscow in the 1960's, while the U.S. Army Map Service, Corps of Engineers has available a series of world road maps. The German Army maps, made in the 1930's are also very good for topographical details over the entire area. Unfortunately, no good atlases or series of maps on the ancient history of Iran, Afghanistan or Central Asia exist, and many ancient names cannot be identified with present sites, but at least we are much better informed about geography today than only a few decades ago. THE ENTIRE AREA It is no exaggeration to say that rugged mountains and barren deserts have conditioned the lives of Iranians on the Iranian plateau and in Central Asia perhaps more than have similar conditions for other peoples. For the mountains and deserts have divided and separated the people more than rivers or lakes, and consequently many peoples, many languages and dialects and ways of life have developed in isolated Valleys. Geography is vitally important for a study and understanding of this part of the world. A common feature of most of the areas under discussion here (modern Iran, Afghanistan, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan) is that they all are on a plateau or series of plateaus, the middle parts of which have the lowest altitudes, while the highest mountain ranges are on the peripheries. Rivers and streams drain into the central depressions, frequently forming salt lakes or dried lake beds which are deserts today. The greatest contrast in height and depth is found between the highest peak of the Elburz ränge, Mt. Demavend (5604 m.) and the Caspian Sea, less than 100 km. to the north, which is below sea level. Both the Elburz ränge in the north and the Zagros ränge to the west, branch off from the Caucasus in the northwest of Iran, the former extending to the east and the latter to the southeast, with many Valleys and mountain offshoots. In the east the Elburz ränge becomes lower with one series of mountains continuing into Afghanistan, while another branch, of less altitude, extends south to the depression of Seistan. The main characteristic of the Iranian plateau is the drainage of rivers into salt lakes 36 The southern Turkmen expeditions have a tematike yuzhna-Turkmanistanskoi arkh. komp. eksp. bibliography of writings about them from 1949- Akademii Nauk Turkmen. SSR (Ashkhabad, 1970). 69, Perechcn ' opublikovannykh rabot i materialov po Geographica Survey 7 or into the sands in the interior. Other than the Caspian Sea, the largest lake in the world, the sah lake of Urmia (formerly Rezaiye) is the main place of drainage for streams in Azerbaijan. Other lakes are seasonal, spreading over large areas at the end of Winter and almost vanishing at the end of summer. Such are the Darya-ye Namak (Salt Lake) east of Qom, the Bakhtegan lake south of Persepolis and Maharlu lake south of Shiraz. In the east, the Hamun in Seistan receives the water of the Helmand River, while other seasonal lakes are much smaller. It is possible that in antiquity all over Iran more water was available than in recent times, and certainly in many regions, such as the mountains of Fars, the Vegetation and number of trees were greater than today. But on the whole the land is much the same today as it was 3000 years ago, in both temperatures and landscape. Water and Vegetation are and were more plentiful in Azerbaijan than elsewhere, except on the Caspian Sea coast, and the land becomes more arid as one goes south and east, where extensive irrigation was and is necessary for cultivation. The creation and extension of the Underground canal system for irrigation, called qanat in Iran and karez in Afghanistan and Central Asia, developed probably at the beginning of the first millennium b.c., according to some archaeologists, enabled people to move out upon the plains from mountain Valleys, thus enabling a larger population to develop. 37 It is conceivable that the spread of the Iranians on the plateau was aided by the qanat irrigation System, but in any case the spread of both occurred roughly at the same time. Afghanistan and Central Asia have much the same geographical features as Iran, except the eastern part of Afghanistan, which lies in the drainage zone of the Indus River basin. Yet even here, in the relation of the mountain highlands of the Hindukush ränge to the plains of India, we have a parallel with the Zagros ränge in the west and the plains of Mesopotamia. Internal lakes, into which streams drain, are fewer, smaller and generally higher in altitude in Afghanistan than in Iran. In that part of Central Asia where Iranians in the past established extensive Settlements (present Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan and Tajikistan), rivers, on the whole, drained into the Caspian or Aral Seas. North of these three areas streams fed the seasonal Lake Balkash and the deep Issyk Kul. The vast steppe lands to the north, however, placed limits on Iranian settlement in that distant region. The general picture of the entire area of Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia is the same for all, mountains on the edges and in the middle lands sloping from the mountain ranges, with drainage into internal seas, lakes or marshes. Deserts and general aridity also characterize the entire area, which, for the most part, has a Continental climate, except for the narrow bands of land which are adjacent to the Caspian Sea, the Persian Gulf, or the plains of India. Since geography has played such an important role in the history of this part of the world, a more detailed local survey is appropriate. We Start with the area of present Iran, then Afghanistan, and finally Central Asia. 7 On the origins of the important qanat System, Annales: honomies-societe's-cwilisations, 18 (Paris, see P. W. English, The Origin and Spread of 1962), 499-520. B. Brentjes, "Studien zum Bewäs- Qanats in the Old World," Proceedings of the serungsackerbau," Schriften zur Geschichte und American Philosophical Society, 112 (Philadelphia, Kultur des alten Orients, 11, AF, 1 (1974), 53-4, 1 968), 1 70-81 , and H. Goblot, "Dans l'ancien Iran, suggests that qanats are an Urartian discovery. les techniques de l'eau et la grande histoire," g Chapter I IRAN Since Persis (OP Parsa, NP Fars) was the center from which both the Achaemenid and the Sasanian dynasties arose, we can Start with the geography of this part of Iran. Fars can be described best as a series of Steps leading from the Persian Gulf to the central deserts of Iran, with the largest and most fertile step or piain being that of present Marvdasht where the ruins of Persepolis stand. It was in the rieh Valleys running northwest to southeast between ridges of the Zagros ränge, that the human resources were found several times to expand and create empires. The average annual rainfall of 350 mm. at Shiraz, compared with over a thousand mm. along the Caspian Sea coast, indicates the relative aridity of the south. Nonetheless, the altitude of the mountain Valleys, plus water from melting snows provided sufficient water for irrigation, thus enabling a sizable population to live in the broad Valleys. The mountains between Pasargadae and Abadeh (the latter still included in Fars) in the past have provided a barrier for Communications with the north. The salt and swamp depression, leading from east of modern Abarqu southeast to the pass east of Darab, also provided a natural barrier isolating Fars from the rest of the plateau. The boundaries of Fars, of course, varied at different times because of political events, more than sketched above, but the geographical boundaries can be determined as encompassing the land between the Persian Gulf and the mountains on the north and the salt depression in the east. The salt depression, of course, was nothing like the central deserts of Kavir and Lut, but it was nonetheless an inhospitable band of land varying from 50 to 100 km. in width and descending to 400 m. above sea level east of Darab. Settlements in Fars, as elsewhere on the plateau, were primarily in oases where water was obtainable for raising vegetables and gardens. These Settlements were either in the warm district (garmslr) or in the cold district (sardslr), aecording to the classical Islamic geographers. By this they meant that a settlement could grow either tropical plants or trees (such as date palms) or temperate ones (apples, pear trees). The oases, of course, could be large or small, but the character of an oasis is determined by the availablility of water. In some plains or broad Valleys a succession of small Settlements or oases flourished, while in others water was led to a central town, and throughout history the site of this town might vary from place to place. The Marvdasht region is really a series of connecting plains separated by individual mountains but not by ranges. In other words, one could travel from Malyan tepe (in the Baida district), the site of the ancient Elamite city of Anshan, to Persepolis, continuing to the Bakhtegan salt lake in the south without crossing any mountain pass. To go to Pasargadae from this piain, however, meant following a river, at times through gorges, to climb to a higher altitude where it was much colder in winter. The piain and rolling hüls around Pasargadae were better suited for shepherds than for settled folk, and this region, in any case, was the last eultivated area before one reached the mountains of Fars to the north, which were not high but wide and with little Vegetation. From Marvdasht (alt. 1737 m.) to the west one descended, passing over mountain ranges, to the next and lower step on the plateau, the present Shiraz- Käwar-Khafr-Jahrum series of plains going south, or Shiraz-Guyum-Ardakan to the north. Again no high mountain passes break up this chain of Valleys or plains, and the drainage of water is also into a salt lake, called today Maharlu, to the south of Shiraz. Geographica Suruey 9 The altitudes of Settlements also are lower towards the south, from c. 2212 m. at Ardakan to c. 1600 m. at Shiraz and 1065 m. at Jahrum. Three side plains were located southeast of Maharlu lake, that of Sarvistan (alt. c. 1645 m.), Fasa (c. 1560 m.) and Darab (c. 1 1 88 m.). The altitudes are important to show the descent from a higher northern part of the step to a lower one. The next step towards the Gulf was down to the plains of Firuzabad (c. 1350 m.), Kazerun (c. 815 m.), Fahliyan (886 m.) and even lower, Behbehan (335 m.), actually in Khuzistan province, where the greatest altitude, unlike the other steps, is reversed, descending from south to north. After this, we find mountain ranges going down to sea level on the Persian Gulf. Only the coastal piain of Borazjan-Bushire is wide enough for extensive Settlements, depending primarily on the date palm as their major agricultural product. In the south of Fars a few isolated Valleys, which have never supported a large population, have served as way stations for merchants travelling from the Gulf to northern centers. The most important valley is that of Khunj-Ivaz— Lar (909 m.) where even today local dialects are spoken, an indication of its isolation from the rest of Fars. Thus, Fars itself is isolated on all sides, from the mountains rising from the Gulf to the great altitude drop in the Bandar 'Abbas depression east of Darab and the sah desert band east of Abarqu and north and east of Darab. The cohesion of this part of Iran, seen also in the dialects which constitute a unity with modern Persian, strikes the traveller in comparison with other parts of the country. None of the rivers here are navigable, and mountains dominate the landscape. Also the people, especially in villages, seem less variegated than elsewhere in Iran, probably the result of the isolation. Finally, because of the variety of climate, altitudes and large tracts fit only for herding, traditionally Fars has been a province with the greatest variety of migrating nomads in all of Iran. Nomadism seems to have flourished here from early times, and the relatively short distances from summer to winter quarters, just as on the eastern rim of the plateau in Afghanistan and the plains of India, have encouraged the development of nomadic life. The same Situation, of course, also obtained in the present day province of Khuzistan where nomads moved in the summer from the plains of Mesopotamia onto the Zagros ränge, and this has been a constant feature of the history of this province. The navigable Karun River, widest in Iran, flows through the province, but it must be remembered that the land to the south of Ahwaz, to the Gulf, was not occupied in historic times, except along the river banks, whereas north of Ahwaz the land was fertile and heavily cultivated. A number of tributaries of the Karun make Khuzistan a well-watered province. Here was located the Elamite city of Susa, and other ancient towns, and since this region is an extension of the plains of Mesopotamia to the east, influences from the west always have been strong. The wide mountainous tract to the north and east of Khuzistan is Luristan, where the population is and was different from the people on the plains. Luristan, however, was not like Fars, with wide and long plains between the mountains, but rather many small and narrow Valleys with a variety of Settlements separated from each other. Also roads pass through Luristan, connecting the plains with the plateau, corridors of trade. Thus, the geography of Luristan, unlike Fars, was not conducive to the unity of the people inhabiting this large area. Furthermore, control of Luristan from the outside was always difficult and nominal. 10 Chapter I The only centers of population which could expand, were in Valleys on the edges of Luristan, such as present Borujird. Khurramabad, on the other hand, was important rather for its Strategie location on a trade route to the plains of Khuzistan. Settlements might vary in location frorn age to age, but there was not much livable space between the mountains for great displacements of people. Even as today, Luristan in the past provided summer quarters for the inhabitants of the piain seeking to escape the excessive heat. We find a similar Situation in the northern Zagros mountains, in Kurdistan and Azerbaijan, while the ancient road from Babylon to Khurasan in the east, sometimes called the 'Silk Route,' was a dividing line between Luristan and Kurdistan. The latter, comprising the mountainous areas from Kermanshah north to Lake Urmia at present shows an interesting linguistic division between Kurdish and Turkish Speakers. In the mountains to the west of the valley of the Simin and Zirineh Rivers, where the present-day towns of Mahabad, Saqqiz and Bijar are found, the population is Kurdish- speaking, while in the lower areas, the line of towns from present Miyandoab south through Takab, and in the mountains to the east, the population is Turkish-speaking. It is doubtful whether this present split represents an ancient division rather than being the result of political and other factors. One may rather consider the entire area of Kurdistan and Azerbaijan as a geographic whole, with more of a significant geographical division existing in the mountains between the Van and Urmia lakes than between the Valleys inside of Azerbaijan. Geographically speaking, lake Urmia can be considered a link rather than a barrier between the eastern and western parts of Azerbaijan, and the land along the western shore of the lake from Urmia through Salmas, then north to Khoi and Maku presents no great geographical barrier to the movement of peoples. It is curious that, regardless of political controls and divisions, the ethnic boundary between Armenians and Iranians, in Sasanian times if not earlier, was the line of hüls separating the present district of Urmia from Salmas, and generally this seems to have been the border between the Urartians and the Manneans before the Coming of the Armenians and Iranians. It must be remembered that routes of communication in antiquity did not necessarily follow modern highways, since wheeled vehicles were very little in use in Iran; instead pack animals, such as donkeys, mules and cameis, carried merchandise over mountain passes and plains. Nonetheless, the pack animals followed the lines of least resistance, and the modern road from Mt. Ararat and Maku in the northwest through Tabriz, Mianeh, Qazvin, Tehran, Semnan and to Khurasan, was the main trade artery together with the branch which descended from the plateau at Hamadan through Kermanshah to the plains of Mesopotamia. Since these were also the routes of invasion and conquest from earliest times, the populations along these routes were variegated and did not present the same unity of peoples along them as, for example, the inhabitants of Fars. Control of the 'Silk Route' to the east and of the branch through Azerbaijan to the Black Sea, would ensure control of most of the Iranian plateau, and this control was necessary to maintain an empire, or even unity over the plateau. In Azerbaijan present Settlements along the route, such as Marand, Tabriz, and Mianeh, were also ancient centers, showing the continuity of routes from antiquity. Other towns such as Maragheh, Ardabil and Ahar are not on important routes of communication but owed their importance on the whole to agriculture. It is Geographical Survey li richer in Azerbaijan than elsewhere on the plateau because of the relative abundance of Underground water, as well as streams from melting snow on the mountains, not to mention the soil itself, in many places lava from now extinct volcanoes. One area of Azerbaijan is different from the rest, and that is the low-lying steppe of Mughan, which served in later times as a winter camping ground for the Mongols and Turkish nomads. This lowland, which continues north across the Aras River, was the division in the northeast between Iranian Speakers and the land and people known as Aghvan to Armenians, Arran to the Arabs and Albania to the Greeks. Since this was non-Iranian land in the north we need not describe it. The eastern boundary of Azerbaijan was not the Caspian Sea but rather the high mountains along the coast with a narrow band of coastline which is part of the Caspian provinces, with a landscape very different from the rest of Iran. Those provinces are Talysh, Gilan and Mazandaran. The coastal area of Gilan, including Iranian Talysh, is roughly 225 km. long from north west to southeast and the width varies from 1 5 km. or less in the Talysh area of Astara to over 100 km. by Rasht. The actual piain, however, excluding foothills, is even narrower, varying from a few hundred meters near Astara to 45 km. at Rasht. On the Caspian side of the Elburz mountains are many trees, thick underbrush, called locally a jangal. To the east both water and Vegetation decrease, but many streams descend from the mountains to the Caspian, making Communications along the shore difhcult. Just as in the west the delta of the Safid Rud and its tributaries provided a flat agricultural area for development, with its center at Rasht, so in the east the Haraz and Babol Rivers with many tributaries made the piain of Mazandaran a center of population. But in the east, unlike the west, the piain continues further, to the east of the Caspian Sea, forming the wider piain of Gurgan, ancient Hyrcania. Mazandaran and Gurgan were linked in history, and both were open to invasion from the steppes of Central Asia. The jungles of well-watered Gilan and Mazandaran give way, however, to the forests of the hüls of Gurgan, and the mountains to the south did shield the inhabitants of the Caspian provinces from penetration from the south. Archaeology has uncovered remains of ancient cultures in sites such as Marlik, Kaluraz and Kalardasht, located in the northern foothills, or even in the higher Valleys of the Elburz mountains. It is unlikely that the marshes and jungles of the plains were much inhabited in early times, but the hüls were fertile and watered, enabling people to live there. It has not been possible to determine by archaeology when the Caspian plains were settled, but probably by the Achaemenid period Settlements were being established on the plains. Much like India, the lowlands of the Caspian were invaded, but the reverse, an expansion from the lowlands to the mountains and onto the plateau, was rare. The southern sides of the Elburz mountains on the plateau are the opposite of the north where winds drop their moisture, as they try to cross the lofty ränge. The aridity of the southern slopes is progressive, however, for the further south one goes from the Elburz the less moisture is found. Therefore, the band of land from the mountains, one might say from Hamadan through Qazvin, Tehran to Semnan and Damghan, is, and has been, the most practical route of communication from west to east. Settlements are found on the route where water is available, and this is the main reason for the continuous existence from ancient times of a town at Hamadan, where 12 Chapter I Springs and streams from Mt. Alvand bring water. Likewise at Qazvin not only do streams bring water from the nearby mountains, but the Strategie location as a crossroads to the Caspian provinces, to Azerbaijan, to Hamadan and to the east, insures the continuous existence of a town from antiquity. Further, at Semnan but especially at Damghan, which is probably a much older site, the presence of water enables Settlements to flourish. North of Damghan the copious spring, today called Chashmeh-ye 'Ali, undoubtedly provided water for early settlement on the piain, first at Hekatompylos (present ruins of Qumis) and later at Damghan. Thus along the trade route to the east, access to water provided the means of settlement. The same is true of the road south to Fars along the edge of the Kavir salt desert. At Kashan the spring of water at Fin, in the mountains to the southwest of the present city, provided a similar basis for ancient settlement as at the area of Damghan. On the edge of mountains with streams leading down to the central salt depressions of Iran, ancient man established himself. The large oasis of Isfahan, however, was watered by the Zayandeh River. All of the prineipal Settlements were and are about 1000 m. in altitude or higher, for the depressions where streams on the interior of the plateau debouched are salt marshes where life is not possible. The main settled part of the western Iranian plateau, comprising the area of Hamadan-Qazvin-Tehran-Isfahan, was frequently under a single political administration, since there were no great obstacles to communication between these cities. The southeastern part of Iran, however, is more difhcult of access, and is also more arid. The same pattern of settlement prevailed here as in the north; wherever streams descended from the mountains, or springs existed, settled human life was possible. The mountains of the center of the land, however, are not as high as the Elburz or Zagros ranges. The present city of Kerman lies 1860 m. above sea level and is separated from the Lut desert to the north by a ränge of mountains, while a former capital of the province, Sirjan, is 1650 m. high. Because of the altitude, summers are not so intolerable as one might expect in an area in the south. Because it is south, however, in the lowlands date palms, mango trees and other tropical plants may be found. East of present day Kerman city, however, the land slopes to 1000 m. at Bam and then much lower to the east of Bam in the desert sands. Historically, as well as geographically, the Lut desert and the sands to the east of Bam have divided the Iranian plateau into its western and eastern parts, the latter of which continues into present Afghanistan and Pakistan. The only parts of the eastern part of the modern country of Iran which sustained settled populations in the past are Seistan and the Bampur valley of Baluchistan in the south. Seistan is the large piain into which the Helmand River from the mountains of Afghanistan empties, and it lies under 1000 m. above sea level, and in parts even down to 300 m. The wind is especially strong here and a local summer wind of '120 days' shapes the sand and creates dunes. But the overflow of water from the Helmand in the spring creates large reed marshes or shallow lakes, called hamun or "piain." The number and size of these hamuns varies aecording to the season and also depending on the amount of water brought by the Farah and Helmand Rivers from the snow on the mountains. The Seistan depression is large in area, most of which lies within the borders of present Afghanistan. To the north of the Seistan depression, and east of Qaen, is a similar but considerably smaller depression called the Namaksar where salt marshes or lakes block Communications Geographica Survey 13 between east and west. Here, as usual on the plateau, Settlements are at high altitudes to the west of the depression, with Birjand 1490 m. and Turbat-e Haidariyeh 1370 m. It is clear that human habitation in antiquity as today flourished primarily on streams on the slopes of mountain ranges, for the drainage basins of small streams were saline. The large basin of Seistan, however, was an exception, since the water from rivers was ample enough to provide a source of livelihood in fish and fowl, as well as water for irrigation. Nonetheless, Seistan always must have fluctuated between years of plenty and years of scarcity, with salinity an ever present threat to overcome. A similar Situation may be found in Baluchistan where the drainage of several small rivers, such as the Bampur River, is into the salt lake of Jaz Muryan. In antiquity, as at present, Settlements were found along the rivers, the Halil River to the west, descending from the Kerman mountains, and the Bampur in the east. In neither, however, did any centers of population exist, since the land was too barren and unproductive to sustain many people. The Makran mountains down to the coast are about as unhospitable a landscape as may be found anywhere on earth, and not until the Indus River Valley in the east can any extensive land for cultivation be found. One may characterize all of Baluchistan, from the Kerman highlands to the Indus River, as a kind of refuge area where people retreated, either driven out of more favorable land, or simply fleeing to maintain a free and unattached life, albeit one of great hardships. The only trees to be found are palm trees in oases, together with mangroves, and occasionally tamarisk and other bushes elsewhere. The climate is exceedingly hot in the summer and is not conducive to any human activity. The coastal plains, varying in width from a few kilometers up to 100 at Bushire and a similar extent at Bandar 'Abbas and Minab, usually have had a minimum of contact with the interior, but rather communication has been across the sea. Fishing and date palms provide sustenance for the small population able to eke out a livelihood from the surroundings. The mountains and deserts which separate the coasts from the towns on the interior of the plateau are formidable barriers to commerce and Communications, and only at Bushire and at Bandar 'Abbas have seaports existed which served the hinterland as outlets for trading goods. Just as the southern ports have served as entrepöts for seaborn trade, so on the northeastern frontier of Khurasan towns on the edge of the desert have served as places of entry for nomads and merchants with caravans coming across the Kara Kum desert. The Valleys between the two ranges of mountains, the Turkmen or Kopet Dagh ränge in the north, forming the present boundary between Iran and Turkmenistan, and the southern Khurasan or Binalud ränge north of Nishapur, are relatively fertile and well watered by Underground canals from the mountains. Human settlement in this region is old, and locations of ancient towns are almost predictable, as for example, at Tus or Meshhed, or at Isfarain, a fertile valley in the mountains. The mountains of Khurasan are not high and passes through them are frequent. On the northern slopes of the Turkmen ränge lies the ancient Parthian city of Nisa, near present day Ashkabad, and seemingly from ancient times a settlement in this region (as at Anau) has served as a center of trade along an east-west axis. Southern Turkmenistan, both geographically as well as historically, is an extension of the Iranian plateau in the north, and the same features of aridity and Settlements where water is found apply here. 14 Chapter I The natural resources of Iran are many, but in antiquity few were exploited. In antiquity copper was mined, one might better say stripped from on, or just below, the surface, in the central deserts of Iran at Anarak and north of Kerman. Metallurgy developed in Iran early with alloys of copper, such as bronze, soon superceding copper. Tin was mined in Azerbaijan near Tabriz while lead, zinc, and iron were found in the mountains of Khurasan and Kerman. Gold and silver were also mined in antiquity, all of which made Iran a source of metals for craftsmen all over the Near East. Local craftsmen made Iran famous for its luxury arts and crafts throughout history, and textiles, rugs and ceramics were items of trade in the past as at present. Wood too was important for the crafts as well as for building, and one may assume that the mountain slopes were more covered with trees in antiquity than today, although no great changes in climate or water supply can be detected. The area of present day Iran is vast with many differences in climate and soil, from the jungles of Gilan to the lifeless mountains and deserts of Baluchistan. On the plateau the climate is Continental with cold winters and hot summers, and settled life flourished in sheltered Valleys where a water supply was available. Only on the edges of the plateau did this pattern vary. On the south Caspian coast and in Khuzistan ample rainfall enabled rice and other subtropical foodstuffs to grow. Yet the intense summer heat in Khuzistan makes any activity there virtually impossible for months of the year. The southern seacoast, extending to the Indus River, is too arid to produce anything except bare subsistence for a small population. On the plateau we find what one may describe as oasis Settlements, either a series of small oases, or villages or urban centers with surroundings, such as Isfahan or Shiraz. The urban center may be more or less stationary because the water supply is constant, such as in the city of Hamadan. Or the city may shift its location over centuries, such as Nishapur. Also the names of cities appear and disappear or change. Sometimes the name of a town vanished while the district retained the name of the town, such as Qumis (Komisene) in Khurasan. Identifications of archaeological sites thus present problems, although, as noted above, the possibilities of ancient settlement were little different from what they are today. Nonetheless the very number ofthose possibilities in each Valley or piain is not small, since present day villages were once large towns, and cities of today were once villages. Possibly nowhere on earth do we find evidence of the ebb and flow of history, the rise and fall of cities, with consequent deserted ruins, so prominent on the surface of the soil, as in Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia. When the soil becomes too saline or the water table sinks, people will abandon a town or village, and the mud walls and ruins of houses will remain visible for years or even centuries. Sometimes entire cities, like Bam east of Kerman, were abandoned, providing tourist sites at the present time. Nowhere does the phrase — vicissitudes of time and the changes of fortune - seem more apt in its visible evidences than in this part of the world. AFGHANISTAN The extension of the Iranian plateau to the east ends in a great mass of mountains, which like the Zagros ränge in the west, has been a refuge area for many peoples. The geography of what is today Afghanistan and the western borderlands of Pakistan, for our purposes can be best understood as the area of four drainage Systems where Geographica! Survey 15 agnculture and settled life for little more than a handful of people were possible. The mountains, from which all rivers take their sources, in the center of the country and in the east, have inhibited close contacts between the various parts of the country which, in any case, is a political creation of recent times. The Hari River with its principal city of Herat, loses its water in the sands now in the Turkmen SSR. Similar to the Khurasan province of Iran, historically Herat usually has been part of a western kingdom or empire, rather than of the east. On the other hand, Herat has served as a pivotal area for trade and invasion routes from the north to the southeast, to the plains of the Indian subcontinent, as much as a Station on east-west trade routes. The Valley of the Hari Rud is fertile, and it has been a source of wealth for the inhabitants enabling them to develop in the past a center of civilization in this region. The central mountains have been a barrier for Communications between Herat and the Kabul valley in the east, which is revealed in culture by the Persian orientation of the former and the Indian for the latter. To the south, the road to Qandahar and thence to India crosses barren plains and rivers, but there is no formidable barrier to contacts, either between Herat and Seistan, or Herat and Qandahar. To the northeast of Herat, over a low ränge of mountains, lies the district of Badghis with the Murghab River, also draining north, but into the Merv oasis. This district, at present called Qala-ye No after the main town, is primarily an excellent pastureland with some fertile Valleys, but which could never support a population comparable to the Hari Rud valley. If it were not for the summer wind of '120 days,' summers in Herat would be intolerable, since the low altitude of the city (c. 690 m.) would not provide relief from the hot sun. Other ancient places of settlement in the area included Fushang (today: Zendajan), some 45 km. to the west of Herat on the river, Aspozar or Isfizar (today: Shindand or Sabzevar) south of Herat, and Merv-e Rud (today: Bala Murghab) on the river of the same name. One may presume that ancient and modern centers of population differed little in their locations on this part of the Iranian plateau. The second system of drainage in Afghanistan empties the present Farah, Khash and Helmand Rivers, as well as smaller streams, into the perennial lakes or hamuns of Seistan. The Helmand is a 1300 km. long river, and in the spring it carries a large volume of water along its course. We have already mentioned Seistan in the discussion of Iranian provinces, and if the Afghan region is added, as it should be from an historical viewpoint, the entire area was very extensive and a center of civilization from ancient times. Seistan was larger than the comparable Merv and Bukhara oases in the north, and irrigation was widely practiced here in antiquity. The lower Helmand River basin was much more cultivated than it is today, but one must go up the river to the district of Qandahar and the confluences of the Arghandab, Tarnak and other rivers with the Helmand, to find comparable extensive cultivation and centers of population. On both sides of the lower course of the river are deserts, and there is no reason to suppose that in antiquity the cultivable land was much more extensive on either side of the river than it is today. The name Helmand, (Avestan: Haetumant) means 'rieh in dams,' an apt description of a river which even today is the source of irrigation for a large expanse of land. The Valleys of the many rivers and streams which descend southward from the central mountain massif are also fertile and produetive, and one may suppose that this area was the homeland of the Pashtun or Pathan tribes to be discussed in the next chapter. The district of Qandahar, 16 Chapter I however, not only maintained contacts with Seistan down the river, but also with Ghazna, 'the treasury' and Kabul. In antiquity the Qandahar-Ghazna route was on the border between Iranian- and Indian-speaking populations. Stnctly speaking, the third drainage System of Afghanistan, the Kabul River and its tributaries, in ancient times was part of the Indian sphere of influence rather than the Iranian, and the river ltself was part of the Indus River System. There are three large Valleys which have been centers of settlement according to archaeologists, the Panjsher with the Koh-e Daman Valley, the Kabul and the Logar Valleys. The first Valley is the highest in altitude (c. 2800 m.), and lt lies north of the Helmand watershed as the first valley of the Kabul River basin. The Kabul Valley (alt. c. 2200 m.) was important from ancient times as the crossroads of routes from north and south, and on the edge of the descent to the plains of India. The mountains to the^east of Kabul quickly give way to lower altitudes, and the piain of Nangrahar (or Jalalabad) averages about 600 m., very hot in summer. To the north of Kabul the valley of Koh-e Daman is lower than Kabul, and with an average altitude of 1600 m., protected by the high Hindukush mountains to the north, the climate is also milder. Other, narrower Valleys, such as the Ghorband and the high Bamiyan valley (c. 2800 m.), were less populous in antiquity than Koh-e Daman. The ethnic populations of these areas will be discussed in the next chapter, but suffice it to say that in all of them mixtures of Iranian and of Indian Speakers occurred in ancient times. The high mountains of the Hindukush and the narrow Valleys of Nuristan (formerly Kafinstan), have created many refuge areas where people have fled from invasion or persecution, a paradise for hnguists and anthropologists. Mining was practiced in the Hindukush mountains in antiquity, and the principal source of lapis lazuli was in Badakhshan on the northern slopes of the mountains. The northern slopes of the Hindukush, which is the watershed between the Kabul and Oxus River basins, have many fertile but narrow Valleys, through which streams descend to the Oxus or Amu Darya. But it is the plains of Turkestan which were covered with many Irrigation canals in older times, and which provided cultivation adequate to support a large population. The altitude of the piain of Turkestan varies from 350 to 400 m., a considerable drop from the mountains to the south, and it is in these plains that ancient cities existed where today their counterparts of Sheberghan, Aqcha, Mazar-e Sharif and Kunduz flourish. The largest city on the plains was Balkh, called 'mother of cities' by the invading Arabs, but today it has been replaced by Mazar-e Sharif. Many streams from the mountains do not reach the Oxus but are either used for irrigation or simply evaporate and vanish. The land on the southern banks of the Oxus on the whole is flat and sandy, while on the northern, present Soviet side, cliffs and mountains predominate. To the west, the plains of Turkestan become the Kara Kum desert, while to the east the mountains of Badakhshan lead to Wakhan and the Pamirs, where only hardy nomads can eke out an existence. The central mountains of Afghanistan, where the four river Systems take their rise, have never been centers of population, and only the Bamiyan valley has had sizable permanent Settlements in the past, for it was situated on a route leading from Balkh over the mountains to Kabul. In summary, one may conclude that settlement patterns in the area of present-day Afghanistan were concentrated in the hüls and plains Geographica Survey 11 around the central mountains, which were well watered, such as Seistan, Herat, Qandahar and the plains of Turkestan, except for the mountain Valleys around Kabul, which combined provided sustenance for a large population, hence a base for power for a kingdom. The mountains to the east are parallel to the Zagros mountain ränge on the western side of the plateau. In both many narrow Valleys and series of mountain ranges have provided regions of retreat or refuge for various peoples, and both are the farthest extent of Iranian-speaking peoples, to the lowlands of India in the east and to Mesopotamia in the west. Like the Zagros, the eastern mountains of Afghanistan were formerly more wooded, but the lack of rainfall and the extremes of temperature with a severe Continental climate all over the plateau, never permitted the growth of population similar to the Indus, or Tigris-Euphrates lowlands. The people of the lowlands were rarely tempted to venture far into the mountains, whereas the rieh, alluvial plains were always an attraction for the hardy inhabitants of the highlands. The relative inaccessibility of the sea coasts from the plateau did not induce the Iranian peoples to become seafarers, and neither the Caspian nor the Persian Gulf with the Arabian Sea played an important role in history for the peoples of the plateau, and Central Asia was even more isolated from the sea. CENTRAL ASIA A comparison of the altitudes of the prineipal cities at once reveals that Turkestan or Central Asia lies off the Iranian plateau. In the west the Caspian Sea depression extends across the Kara Kum and Kizil Kum deserts, which are really one desert separated by the Oxus River, to the mountains which descend from the Pamirs and the T'ien Shan ränge to the northeast. Ashkabad, capital of the Turkmen republic and near ancient Nisa, is 240 m.; Merv is slightly higher while Khiva in the delta of the Oxus is less than 1 00 m., and Bukhara is similar to Merv. To the east altitudes rise and Samarqand is almost 900 m. in some areas of the extended city, but Tashkent is only 455 m. An extension of lowlands to the east lies between mountains in the fertile Ferghana valley where Leninabad (former Khodjent) is 400 m., Kokand 396 m., Andijan c. 450 m., and Margilan 576 m. This valley provides the easiest access from the west over the mountains to Chinese Turkestan and the city of Kashgar. Just as the mountains to the south of the Oxus have many Valleys descending to the river, so do the mountains of present-day Tajikistan to the north. The Hissar-Alai mountain ränge has three main rivers which water narrow but fertile Valleys, the Surkhan Darya, the Kafirnigan and the Vakhsh. The last is the longest and takes its origin on the Alai plateau which provides a trade route to Chinese Turkestan, as well as excellent pasturage for the flocks and horses of nomads. In history the lands watered by the three rivers have been more closely tied to the plains of Afghan Turkestan than with Samarqand or Bukhara. The climate is also milder in winter here, protected by mountains to the north, than it is on the open areas to the west subjeet to winds blowing from Siberia. Dushanbe, the capital of Tajikistan, lies 824 m. high and has hot summers but mild winters. The great mountain complex of the Pamirs, with many glaciers, provides water for three great rivers, the Indus to the south, and the Oxus and Jaxartes (Syr Darya) to the west, not to mention streams flowing eastward into Chinese Turkestan. 18 Chapter I The delta of the Oxus River was an important center of culture in the past (Khwarazm), but not the delta of the Jaxartes. Khwarazm (present Khorezm) is the low-lying land south of the Aral Sea mostly on the west side of the Oxus River. The eastern bank is more hilly than the opposite bank, and water for irrigation is taken from the river predominantly on the western side. Archaeologists have found ancient remains here, and one may infer that an early center of civilization flourished in this fertile region. The question of the ancient course of the Oxus River has never been conclusively resolved. For there are those who still claim that it emptied into the Caspian Sea at times, flowing into a depression known as Sarikamysh and then down a Channel called the Uzboi, even though there is no evidence that the Oxus did flow into the Caspian Sea in ancient times. The Situation in prehistoric times is unknown, and accounts of the river changing its lower coutse in the Islamic period are uncertain. In any case, the center of Khwarazm was located on the river over a hundred kilometers from the Aral Sea, below any turning offto the Caspian Sea, which appears unlikely in the historical period with which we are concerned. The antiquity of settlement in Khwarazm is matched by the Merv oasis, with the added ad van tage of lying on the important trade route from Iran to Central Asia and China. Its location seems to have made this oasis on the Murghab River more important than the lower course of the Hari Rud (called the Tejend), which also lost its water in the desert, although the town of Sarakhs on the latter was similar to Merv on the Murghab. Water being the key to life in the deserts of Central Asia, river Valleys are natural places for Settlements, but the rise of towns on them is usually determined by their location on trade routes. Merv, situated in the Kara Kum desert, was the stopping place for caravans plying between the Iranian plateau and Bukhara and the Zarafshan valley. The oasis of Bukhara, like that of Merv, utilized the water of a river, here the Zarafshan, before it disappeared in the sands, and like Merv, the rise of Bukhara must have followed the development of trade. The prosperity of the Merv oasis, the Bukhara oasis, and many other sites in Central Asia, depended on the efficacy of the irrigation Systems. In fact, so important is this all over this area, as well as Iran and Afghanistan, that the ancient Iranians may be called the practitioners of an irrigation civilization par excellence. It was extensive development and expansion of irrigation Systems which brought prosperity and civilization to the Settlements such as Merv, Bukhara and Samarqand, although all three owed their rise to their locations on trade routes. One of the ancient centers of settlement in Central Asia was the Ferghana Valley, a rieh area enclosed by mountains to the north, east and south, some 300 km. long and 70 km. wide, watered by the Jaxartes. To the west is a narrow desert strip called the Hungry Steppe,' some 7 km. wide, which continues into the larger Kizil Kum desert; so the Ferghana valley is virtually an isolated Valley varying from 350 to 900 m. in altitude. The relatively low altitude, as well as the mountains, protect the valley from the cold north winds of winter to which Tashkent and Bukhara are subjeeted. The middle of the valley has much barren steppe land, but the foothills of the mountains are relatively rieh in verdure. Archaeologists have reavealed very early Settlements in the valley, and the existence of various minerals in the surrounding mountains Geographica Survey i9 undoubtedly further enhanced the attractions of the irrigated land as a good place to settle, for mining was also practiced at an early date. To the north of the Ferghana valley, and in the foothills to the east of the Kizil Kum desert was the oasis of Chach, today Tashkent, which was also settled in early times, although probably not as extensively as either the Ferghana valley or Samarqand. To the east of Chach the mountains hindered both Communications and settlement such that the main road to the east ran north skirting the mountains, and then turned east over low passes to the Talas River valley. Again skirting the Kara-tau and Ala-tau mountain ranges, the road continued eastward towards the Altai Mountains. The vast steppes of northern Central Asia and southern Siberia were traversed by Iranian nomads called by a generic term, Sakas, when we first hear of them in the sixth Century b.c. But here too, as in the south, the Valleys of the Chu and Ili Rivers had Settlements from early times. Not only did Iranian nomads reach the Altai mountains, but they also spilled into Chinese Turkestan, which, before the Turkic expansion, was in great measure Iranized. Today only some 20,000 Iranian Speakers survive in the Sarykol valley of the Chinese Pamirs with the principal town of Tashkurghan. The northern and southern sides of the Taklamakan desert in Chinese Turkestan were inhabitated by Iranians, as well as others, and traces of ancient Settlements have been found on dried-up stream beds far into the desert. The extreme aridity of the entire area makes any settlement entirely dependent on irrigation, and in the southern rim of the Tarim Basin, as it is called, the only oasis of importance is Khotan because of two rivers which bring water down from the Kunlun mountains to the south. The Kunlun mountains and the Tibetan plateau made Communications with the south almost impossible, and only two arduous routes to the west were important in history. The first, and most used, northern route we have briefly mentioned above. It followed the Surkhab (Turki: Kizilsu) River through the Alai plateau over the mountains to Kashgar. The southern route followed the Wakhan corridor in present Afghanistan through the eastern Pamirs to the valley of Sarykol. The easiest access to the Tarim basin of Chinese Turkestan was from the north over several passes of the Tien Shan mountains. The eastern part of the Tarim, on the borders of China, comprises a sah desert, called Lop Nor, once a prehistoric sea, stretching almost 300 km. in length. Human habitation was always at a minimum here. On the northern side of the Tarim, however, several oases have flourished in history, such as Aqsu, Kucha and Turfan, probably because water is more available from streams descending from mountains to the north, and there is more fertile ground, not as eroded as the characteristic loess earth of the south. The reason why Chinese Turkestan has been included in the geographical survey of ancient Iranian civilizations is that Iranian Sakas lived in the oasis of Khotan and vicinity for centuries before becoming absorbed by Turks, and the northern string of oases formed a trade route to China over which Sogdian merchants travelled and made Settlements. The oasis of Turfan has yielded valuable documents in the Sogdian, Parthian and Middle Persian languages, of inestimable value in many fields. We will return to this in the chapter on demography. This survey of the lands where Iranians lived in the past indicates the common features of terrain in Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia. We must repeat that 20 Chapter I mountains, deserts and oases, with Settlements based on irrigation, are the hallmarks of life in this part of the world. There was rarely any excess of agricultural produce, or rather foodstuffs, to trade; rather minerals and objects of craftsmanship, such as textiles and carpets, were the mainstay of trade from ancient times. Also the difference between the dweller in an oasis, and one on the bleak steppes, mountains or deserts, was always marked. The contrast also between the verdure of a well-watered oasis, which seemed a haven of security, and the forbidding land outside, was sharp, and this conditioned human attitudes about nature and the land in which the Iranian lived. Extremes of temperature and frequent earthquakes, flash floods, and other ra vages of nature, tested the endurance of humans, and left them ever ready to migrate to the more fertile and less harsh lowlands of India or Mesopotamia. If anything has conditioned the lives of Iranians, it is this sharp contrast in nature, between the, huge, arid, barren, forbidding mountains and deserts and the irrigated garden surrounded by mud walls to keep out the sand and the encroachments of a hostile outside world. The word 'paradise' is Iranian in origin, and it originally meant an enclosed garden where the ruler hunted his favorite game which had been introduced into the enclosure for that purpose. From this geographica! survey of Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia, it is clear that there could be neither unity nor large populations here like the Nile and Tigris- Euphrates River basins. Vast areas, for the most part, could only be ruled for a short time by either nomadic or tribal states, or by some kind of feudal alliances. The Problems of communication and holding allegiances were enormous, yet some sort of adherence or allegiance to Iranian culture permeated the entire area, at least until the expansion of the Turks changed much of the demography. The conflict between steppe and sown area also has been a thread running through the history of this part of the world. In general one may say that geography and natural conditions have always played an important role in this vast area, and nature has not been predictable or gentle. The earthquakes and other natural catastrophes are constant features of this entire area, so man has lived in the shadow of an unpredictable nature over millennia of years. For the history of culture and civilization, however, the means by which people overcame their isolation and traded with each other, exchanging ideas as well as articles of trade, was of primary importance. River Valleys, passes over mountains and watering places in the desert assumed a greater importance than in other regions of the globe. This is why an understanding of geography, which might not be so relevant to the study of the history of others, in the case of the lands occupied by Iranians is of paramount importance, and in the pages to follow constant reference will be made to the geography of the area. CHAPTER II DEMOGRAPHY Anthropologists have made many studies of towns and villages in Iran, Afghanistan and Soviet Central Asia. Linguists have investigated varieties of dialects, but ancient historians have been overwhelmingly concerned, on the whole, with events reported by chronicles or other written sources, perforce mainly concerned with the royal courts or more rarely with religious leaders or intellectuals including poets and men of letters. We should remember that few written records of the ancient past are concerned with the life of the common folk, and even among them, nomads or villagers are rarely mentioned, civilization and writing being bound to the urban environment. Nonetheless, populations did change with rather important conse- quences for the history of the entire area. One may divide people in the Iranian cultural area between settled people, nomads, and mountaineers, plus urban dwellers, although other patterns of Classification might be made. The modes of life of these four divisions have been constant throughout history although the people who followed the various ways of life have not remained static. To understand the past of the common folk we must consider the present and then frequently interpolate from know to unknown. That is why anthropological and even sociological studies, as well as linguistic research, must be heeded by anyone trying to recover the past of this part of the world. A survey of relevant bibliography shows many gaps. Lilerature : Iran, General: There is no comprehensive survey of the peoples of Iran except in general books on the country which include chapters on demography. Usually these accounts are brief and inadequate, but one should be mentioned, since it is more comprehensive than others: N. Y. Kislyakov, ed., Narody Perednei Azii (Moscow, 1957), 173-308, dealing with the non-Turkic population of Iran. Individual studies of both settled and nomadic peoples exist; two brief chapters, on the 'people' (318-55) and 'distribution of the population' (356-93) are relevant to our concern in Persia, Geographica! Handbook Series, Naval Intelligente Division (London, 1945). Few of them have any relevance to pre-Islamic times; some, however, do provide interesting Information which can be interpolated back to the past, for example the census. The Iranian Statistical Centre in Tehran is in charge of the results of the census; the first real census was made in 1956 and published in 1 10 parts in Tehran beginning in 1961, while the next census, of 1966, is still being printed. Several general studies on the population of Iran have appeared; F. Firoozi, "Demographie Review, Iranian Censuses," The Middle East Journal, 24 (Washington, 1970), 220- 28, and a populär discussion by H. Goblot, "La strueture de la population de i'Iran," L'Ethnographie, 57 (Paris, 1964), 33-54. Before the 1956 census most statistics on population were mere guesses. While reliable figures are lacking the present locations of Settlements and eulti vation can provide clues to past settlement and population patterns, for the land and availability of water have not changed much over the centuries. It is not germane to our task to list studies of physical types or races in Iran, since mixtures of cranial types and skeletons are found in the earliest excavations, and only extensive comparison of these with modern skulls might give us an idea of significant racial changes in Iran's history. Very roughly, one might say that today in the northern part of Iran brachycephals with curved 'Armenoid' noses are more common than in the south where narrow-faced dolichoeephalics may predominate, and this seems to have been true of the past as of the present. On the physical anthropology of Iran at present see H. Field, Conlributions to the Anthropology o/Iran, Field Museum of Natural History, vols. 29-30 (Chicago, 1939; reprinted 1968). Most publications of archaeological excavations in Iran have a section on skeletal 22 Chapter II material, and one general survey of ancient man, based on remains from Tepe Hissar is by W. M. Krogman, "The peoples of early Iran and their ethnic amliations ," American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 26 (Philadelphia 1940), 269-308. For earlier man see C. S. Coon, "Iran," in H. Vallois, Catalogue des hommes fossiles (Macon, 1953), 267-70 and M. Cappien, The Iranians ofthe CopperjBronze Ages, H Field Research Projects (Miami, 1973), 60 pp. The only discussion of peoples in western Iran in early historic times is the study by I. M. Dyakonov, "Narody drevnei prednei Azii." in Predneaziatskii Elnograficheskii Sbornik, 1, Trudy Institut Etnografii, 39 (Moscow, 1958), 18-39. Many publications exist on vanous tribes or small groups living in Iran, but the majority of settled population has received httle attention insofar as questions of ethnogeny are concerned. The main Iranian tribal people are the Kurds, and several books discuss their origins and early history, such as it is known, as B. Nikitine, Les Kurdes (Paris, 1956) and esp. O. Vilchevskii, Kurdy, Trudy Instituta Etnografii, 67 (Moscow, 1961), 165 pp., which is concerned with the origm ofthe Kurds. A special sect ofthe Kurds is the subject of S. S. Ahmed, The Yazidis, their life and beliefs, H. Field Research Projects, no. 97 (Miami, 1975), 485 pp. A large bibliography on the Kurds is useful also for ancient questions: S. van Rooy, International Society of Kurdistan Bibliography, 2 vols. (Amsterdam, 1968). See also N. A. Aleksanian, Bibliografiya Sovetskoi Kurdskoi Knigi 1921-1960 (Erevan, 1962). The Lurs to the south of the Kermanshah-Hamadan road, are not as well studied, as the Kurds, but we ha ve some information on them in Persian Publications: 'Ali Muh. Sakl, Luristän (Khurramabad, 1343/1969), and H. Izädparrah,/ir/j<}r-e bästänl ve tarlkhl Luristän, 2 vols. (Tehran, 1350/1972 and 1353/1975), concerned with the antiquities and history of Luristän as well as the present population. Anthropological articles and monographs exist on the Kurds and Lurs, which may be found in the bibhographies above. The peoples of the Caspian Sea coast, Talysh, Gilan and Mazandaran, had and have dialects and characteristics different from the rest of Iran. On the people of Mazandaran consult a series of monographs in Persian on villages and districts from east to west, beginning with Alasht by Hüshang Por KarTm, pubhshed by the Ministry of Culture and Art (n.d., c. 1 976), Yüsh by Situs Tshbäz (University of Tehran, 1342/1964), Öräzön byjalal Äl-Ahmad (Tehran, 1954), and Feshendak by H. Pur KarTm (University of Tehran, 1341/1971). All of these deal with anthropological, linguistic, folkloric and other matters. For material remains along the entire Caspian coast we have a series of volumes by ManOchehr SotDdeh, Az Astära tä Astäräbäd (Tehran, 1 349/1 971 , and foll.). Other references may be found in works on dialects of this region, on which see below. The Encyclopaedia of Islam (old and new editions) has information and bibliography on individuals, places and tribes. The southern tribes of Iran, which are not Turkic, have been studied by anthropologists presenting material of interest for an historian; cf. D. Ehmann, Balftiyaren (Wiesbaden, 1975), and V. V. Trubetskoi, "Bakhtiary," in M. S. Ivanov, ed., Etnicheskie protsessy i sostau naseleniyakh v stranakh Prednei Azii (Moscow, 1 963), 1 41 -72. Further see F. Barth, Nomads of South Persia, The Basseri Tribe (Oslo, 1 961 ) ; V. Monteil, Les tribus du Fars (Paris, 1966); and M. S. Ivanov, Plemena Farsa, Trudy Instituta Etnografii, 43 (Moscow, 1961); R. Löffler, "Die materielle Kultur von Boir Ahmad, Südiran," Archiv für Völkerkunde, 28 (Wien, 1974), 61-1 42; and in Persian, ManOchehr Lam a, Farhang-e 'ämyäneh-e 'ashatr Buyer Ahmedl ve Kohgilüyeh (Tehran, 1 349/1 971 ). On the primitive people of Bashakird, to the west of Baluchistan, see 1. Gershevitch, "Travels in Bashkardia,"JJMS, 46 (1959), 216-24. A mountain group in southwest Iran are Les Papis by C. G. Feilberg (Copenhagen, 1952). Other references may be found in the works listed. To the southeast, the chief group of Iranian nomads are the Baluch who extend to the Indus River. On them see M. G. Pikuhn, Beludzhi (Moscow, 1959), and on the northernmost group E. G. Gafferberg, Beludzhi Turkmenskoi SSR (Leningrad, 1 969). Many publications from Pakistan exist on the Baluch, such as Muh Sardar Khan Baluch, History ofthe Baluch Race and Baluchistan (Karachi, 1958), but most are of httle value for our purposes. A non-Iranian people, and possibly among their predecessors in Baluchistan, are the Brahuis, a Dravidian-speaking folk, a few villages of whom exist today in Iranian Seistan ; see G. H. Srasser, "Brahui in Persien," Bulletin of International Committee on urgent Anthropological and Ethnological Research, 2 (Vienna, 1959), 97-98. Perhaps the most important element for differentiating people, language, fortunately needs few references, since surveys and bibhographies exist on all ofthe Iranian languages; see "Iranistik, erster Abschnitt, Linguistik," ofthe Handbuch der Orientalistik ed. by B. Spuler (Leiden, 1 958) ; further T. Sebeok, ed , Current Trends in Linguistics, 6 (The Hague, 1 970), 1-135, and the useful handbook by I. M. Oranskii, Vvedenie v iranskuyu filologiyu (Moscow, 1960), trans. into French by J. Blau, Les langues iraniennes (Paris, 1977). Needless to say, much information on ancient languages can be found in modern dialects, not to mention relatively new fields such as glottochronology or areal linguistics. Finally, a bibliographical note on handicrafts and technology and plants may be useful. Fortunately a handbook by H. E. Wulff, The Traditional Crafts of Persia (M.I.T. Press, Cambridge, Mass., 1966), also has Demography 23 3 large bibliography of relevant literature. The first chapter is on metallurgy in ancient Persia, on which cf. T. Wertime, "Man's First Encounters with Metallurgy," Science, 146, no. 3649 (1964), 1257-67. The classic works by B. Laufer, Sino-lratiica, Field Museum of Natural History publication 201, vol. 15 (Chicago, 1919), discusses plant borrowings, and this is supplemented by E. H. Schaefer, The Golden Peaches of Samarkand (Berkeley, 1 962). Dictionaries of plants and trees, animals and minerals, in Persian or Arabic, contain archaic words and Information about them. The Kitäb al-jamählr (Hyderabad, 1355/ 1936) of al-BlrOnT, is perhaps the most famous book on minerals. While such works may seem to have little connection with ancient Iran, they are similar to Pliny's natural history, which contains items of historical significance. It must be remembered that unlike Greek or Roman history with a plethora of sources, we must use every piece of information in the little known east to attempt to reconstruct the scantiest of history. Literature: Afghanistan, general: Studies on the people of Afghanistan and north west Pakistan are mostly concerned with linguistic minorities such as the peoples of the Pamir or Hindukush mountains, especially the Kafirs or Nuristanis. Several bibliographies are of great aid to the researcher which have been listed already in the first chapter on geography. Several general handbooks, including detailed chapters on the population, languages, etc., are W. Kraus, ed., Afghanistan, Erdmann, Ländermonographien, 3 (Tübingen, 1 972) ; D. N. Wilber, ed., Afghanistan (New Haven, 1 962), and L. Dupree, Afghanistan (Princeton, 1 973) ; each of which has a different viewpoint. Old works such as H. W. Bellew, The Races' of Afghanistan (Calcutta, 1880), may contain interesting items, but on the whole they are out of date. A special bibliography exists on Nuristan by S.Jones, An Annotated Bibliography qf Nuristan (Kafiristan) and the Kalash Kafirs of Chilral (Copenhagen, 1966). On the Kafirs, see the work of P. Snoy, Die Kafiren (Universität Frankfurt M., 1962), and further his "Nuristan und Mungan," Tribus, Nr. 14 (Stuttgart, 1965), 101-48. In the same issue, pp. 11-99, consult F. Kussmaul, "Badaxsän und seine Tagiken." Studies of various languages in Afghanistan are listed in the same works, noted above, for the languages of Iran. Many scattered articles on various aspects of Afghanistan's ethnography , as well as history, numismatics, and others, are photographically reproduced in the Journal Afghanistan, published by the Historical Society in Kabul. On physical types see G. F. Debets, The Physical Anthropology of Afghanistan, trans. by E. Prostov (Peabody Museum, Cambridge, Mass., 1970). Since Afghanistan has not had a proper census much work remains to be done in demography, as well as ethnography, cf, however, L. Dupree, "Settlement and Migration Patterns in Afghanistan", Modern Asian Studies, 9 (1975), 397-413. On the nomads of Afghanistan see C. Jentsch, Das Nomadentum in Afghanistan, Afghanische Studien 9 (Meisenheim, 1973), also B. Glatzer, Nomaden von Charjistan, Beiträge zur Sudasienforschung, (Heidelberg, 1977). Other studies, on Turkic or Mongolian peoples of Afghanistan are not germane to our task here. Literature: Central Asia, general : Many Soviet publications have been devoted to the ethnogeny of the peoples of Central Asia and the Caucasus, and it is not possible to mention more than the most helpful general studies, many of which contain detailed bibliographies. Consult H. Field, Bibliography of Soviet Archaeology and Physical Anthropology (Miami, 1972). The series Narody mira, etnograficheskie ocherki, ed. by S. P. Tolstov, 2 vols. (Moscow, 1962-63) is especially useful for Central Asia and for the Caucasus, 2 vols. (Moscow, 1961-62). M. S. Andreev, N. S. Kislyakov and others were especially interested in the ethnography of the Tajiks and wrote several articles about them; cf. vol. 1 of Narody Srednei Azii (Moscow, 1 962), 701-3. On the mountaineers of Tajikstan see O. E. Agakhanyants, Bibliografiya Patnira, 1 (Dushanbe, 1968). Such works as Tafiki Karategina i Darvaza by N. Y. Kislyakov and A. K. Pisarchik (Dushanbe, 1976) contain much interesting material for historians. Consult also the various publications of the USSR Academy of Sciences such as Sovetskaya Etnografiya and Trudy Instituta Etnografii, especially the Sredneaziatskii Etnograficheskii Sbornik II, no. 47 (Moscow, 1959) where noteworthy is the article by L. F. Monogarova, "Materialy po etnografii Yazgulemstev," 3-94. Further see H. Field, Contributions to the anthropology ofthe Soviet Union (Smithsonian miscellaneous collections, vol. 1 10, no. 13, Washington, 1948), and his Contributions to the physical anthropology of Central Asia and the Caucasus (Peabody Museum, Cambridge, Mass., 1968). The areas now occupied by Turkic-speaking peoples, Turkmenistan, Uzbekistan, Kazakhastan, and Kirghizistan, were once peopled by Iranians, so we are more concerned with archaeological remains of the ancient inhabitants than the present population. The results of archaeological expeditions are especially valuable, and the Khwarazmian expedition led by S. P. Tolstov plus the Southern Turkmen complex expedition, begun by M. E. Masson, have been especially noteworthy. See, for example, T. A. Trofimova, Drevnee naseleniye Khorezma, po dannym paleoantropologü (Moscow, 1959). 24 Chapter II THE ENTIRE AREA All of the people of present Iran, Afghanistan and Central Asia can be simply divided into settled people and nomads, with various degrees of settlement and nomadism- pastoralism represented. Since the geographical features of this vast area, including the availability of water, have helped to determine in no small measure the population distribution in historical times as well as the present, the life-styles of the present people can throw light on the past. On the other hand, in any particular region it is frequently not possible to ascertain whether the population in the past was definitely nomadic or settled, or predominantly one or the other. The previously held supposition of some anthropologists that early man was first a hunter, then a herdsman and finally a settled farmer in a temporal progression, is not accepted today. The change from a pastoral to an agricultural use of land, or the reverse, can be observed in recent times, and must have been true in antiquity. The falling of a water table or salinization of farm land causes the abandonment of a village, while the persistence of a few years of drought in one area can change a flourishing oasis into a desert. Therefore, in regions which did not have a regulär and abundant supply of water, changes in ecology must have occurred many times in the past. Certainly one of the prime tasks of governments in this part of the world has been to organize, regulate and promote the use and distribution of water. Of the three requirements, land, water and manpower, necessary to insure any flourishing culture on the Iranian plateau, water has been the most diftlcult to supply, and this has been true from antiquity. Throughout history the stronger have displaced the weaker in possession of good, watered land, and the weaker people either coexisted with their masters, or they moved to less desirable 'refuge' areas in the mountains or deserts. Settled oases, which were and are the dominant places of settlement over most of the plateau, presumably were early mixed in population. From the dawn of history we find a differentiation of labor in Settlements, and one of the clearest groups, distinct or apart from the rest of the populace, were the smiths or metal workers. They had probably evolved from potters, who found that high temperature fires made glaze on pottery, and then experimented with other media. In any case, a caste of smiths seems to have developed in the Near East who were different from the local populations. Otherwise, specialization of functions or labor does not seem to have produced separate castes or the like. We may presume that people in the ancient Near East were separated by different languages or ways of life rather than by profession. Since nomads or mountaineers have not left records one must project backwards from known situations of later times. For example, much of the land on the plateau, other than barren deserts or mountains, is not fit for agriculture but only for grazing. So it was also in the past, and the conflict between the steppe and the sown area dates from the unrecorded past. Since not only history but writing itself is a product of settled life, the pastoralists remain on the dim fringes of Settlements, little recorded and hardly appreciated. Consequently, our picture of the past is one-sided in many respects, and one can only note the continued existence of nomads and pastoralists, who usually appear in records only when they mount massive raids on the Settlements which suffer from their depredations. Demography 25 The routes of trade or the movement of peoples have been exceedingly constant throughout the history of Iran because of the dictates of geography and water. Thus, the easiest route of access from the Mesopotamian lowlands to the plateau has been the present route of Khanaqin, Kermanshah, Hamadan to Tehran, and then east to Khurasan. There are other routes over the Zagros Mountains from the west, but they are more arduous and were much less used than the principal route through the Kermanshah area. The Assyrians and succeeding conquerors saw the need to control this route as a key to rule over any pretended empire. A map showing the routes, which have followed essentially the same passes through the mountains, shows the primacy of the Kermanshah route, which is also well watered. One may presume that along this route, as well as others, Settlements arose which began to trade with each other. At all times, of course, minor variations in Settlements, as in the routes themselves, have taken place, but the main lines of communication have remained constant. Another feature of the plateau, which should be mentioned, is the great variety of fruits and agricultural products which grow in relatively small geographical areas. Because of the altitude, it is possible in many places to find apples, pears, and other fruits of a temperate zone in the mountain Valleys, while a few kilometers distant, in an oasis protected from winds and cold, date palms and citrus fruits will flourish. This variety was always a feature of some mountain areas of Iran, and it in a sense parallels the people who may be very different from each other yet living only a short distance apart. Similar conditions obtain in Afghanistan and in Central Asia, but on the whole not so variegated as in Iran. Although local specialities of crafts as well as produce distinguish one area from another, the unity of the entire Iranian area in modes of life and responses to nature appears throughout history. Rather, the unity is one of similar diversity in response to the changes in landscape and availability of water and other natural phenomena. This is best observed in the different linguistic groups which exist later, especially before the expansion of Turkic Speakers, beginning in the tenth Century of our era. Even though many people did adopt new languages, the basic population continued to be the same though mixed with newcomers. There is no better way to distinguish people than by the languages they speak, but one must not neglect the settled-pastoral differentiation, and both are followed here in a survey of the entire Iranian area. IRAN Fars exemplifies the diversity of nomad and peasant, mountain and desert and other contrasts, perhaps better than any other province of Iran. From the present population of the province one must exclude Arabs who came after the Islamic conquest and the Turks, such as the Qashghai nomads. Today the Arab-speaking population along the shores of the Persian Gulf is sparse, and in antiquity the numbers must have been less. There has always been, it seems, contact across the Gulf, so some mixtures of populations would be expected. Since Elamitc clay tablets have been found in the region of present Bushire, it would be natural to assume the existence of early Elamite Settlements along the coast. Unfortunately, we know too little about the Elamite language to even speculate about borrowings or influences from Elamite on certain dialects of Fars as opposed to others. We may suggest that the population of the coast 26 Chapter II was engaged in fishing as well as transit trade and commerce with the interior, while the date palm, as across the Gulf, was the local staffof life for them. Since the coastal piain is narrow and the mountains behind it are barren and lacking in verdure and water, this area never enticed large nomadic tribes to spend winters here with their flocks. The coastal Settlements were usually dominated by governments on the plateau, and the poverty of the coastal people kept them from playing a significant role in history. There are many ancient remains on the next step up onto the plateau to Kazerun, evidence of a flourishing area as early as Elamite times. The Elamites probably occupied most of the Valleys and plains which extend from the northwest to the southeast, and it would be natural to assume that ancient pastoralists at times followed these Valleys down to the rieh alluvial plains of Mesopotamia for the winter. Much has been written on the far-flung ancient trade connections, which brought, for example, lapis lazuli from the mountains of Afghanistan as far as Egypt in early times. This has been adduced as evidence for very distant contacts between traders, but it is misleading. True, some hardy traders in antiquity may have traveled enormous distances like Marco Polo in later times, but they like he, were rare exceptions. Most trade was usually a process of exchange from one local group to another rather than a direct long distance contact between the consumer and producer. Wares usually were passed from one merchant to another, although sometimes they did travel long distances. Likewise, the presumed migrations of peoples over vast distances were probably even rarer than long voyages by merchants, and changes in material eulture on the plateau are much more likely the result of diffusionary influences or even internal stylistic development, rather than the intrusion of a new population. Great movements of peoples like the Arabs and Turks in more recent times or the Iranians onto the plateau were probably just as few in prehistoric as in historic times, and one must be careful about the attribution of a change in pottery designs to a mass invasion. Also the movements of people noted above were the migrations of nomads or pastoralists, who were rarely great originators of complex, new eultures as compared to the settled folk. The upper steps of the Zagros ränge, known today as the sardslr 'the cold zone' were eminently suited for pastoralists, and we may assume that much of Fars, such as the present areas of Pasargadae and Abadeh were very sparsely settled before the Coming of the Iranians. It is not the purpose of the present volume to discuss archaeology, which is covered in Barthel Hrouda's Vorderasien, Handbuch der Archäologie, (München, 1971), but since almost all of our evidence of pre-Archaemenian Iran is from archaeology, it cannot be ignored in presenting a background for the historical periods. The material remains in prehistoric southern Iran point to an Elamite oecupation of much of the area. It is, of course, impossible to determine whether the people of the mountainous areas of Fars were the same as those in the Valleys and plains, but the extensive survey of the Marvdasht piain, where Persepolis is located, by William Sumner shows a unity in the extensive oecupation of all parts of the plains from very early times. 1 From surveys, based primarily on surface potsherd finds, 1 W. Sumner, Cultural Development in the Kur the Persepolis Piain and Shiraz Area," Iran, 6 River Basin (Ann Arbor, Michigan 1972), Univer- (1968), 168-70. sity Microfilms. Also see P. Gotch, "A Survey of Demography 27 similar occupation periods have been found elsewhere in Fars, especially in those oases where one would expect a continuous occupation, such as Fasa and Darab. 2 Unfortunately some areas of Fars province archaeologically are virtually terra incognita, such as the districts of Lar-Khunj and Ivaz in the south, and the Farrashband-Kazerun valley west of Shiraz. There is no reason, however, to assume that the population of these areas was dirFerent from that of the large Marvdasht piain. One may suppose that some tracts of lands which are occupied today or were in the early Islamic period, in antiquity were either empty of people or sparsely settled. Further, since trade was an important factor in the development of civilization, it is not fool-hardy to conjecture that the people of Fars early traded foodstuffs and animal products between the inhabitants of the cool and warm zones of the province, with little need or even incentive to go beyond the provincial borders. The distribution of Iranian dialects today in Fars may provide an indication of settlement patterns in antiquity. The most obvious and distinctive dialects are those spoken in the mountainous area of southern Fars, the dialects of Laristan. It is significant that many of these dialect Speakers are today Sunni Muslims, separated from the Shiite majority of Persians. Religious difference surely contributed to the maintenance of these dialects as much as geographica! isolation, but whether the difference between the people of Laristan and others in Fars is a phenomenon of Islamic times, or has antecedents in the pre-Islamic past, cannot be determined. Perhaps all that can be said is that given the geographical isolation of Laristan, an ancient differentiation of population in this part of the province, compared to other areas, would not be unexpected. Here mixtures of peoples, including some negroid strains, especially along the coast, took place in antiquity as well as Islamic times. It should be noted that the existence of an Iranian dialect spoken in Oman today, Kumzari, indicates the two-way traffic of peoples moving across the Gulf in the past. 3 One would expect the Zagros mountain ränge to contain pockets of linguistic differences from Standard Persian, but by now most of these have been lost, although it must be admitted that little investigation has been made of possible survivals. One of these is the dialect of Davan, a village in the mountains northeast of Kazerun. 4 This is not the place to go into the peculiarities of dialects, but historically one may propose dirFerent strata or waves of Iranian dialects which spread over Fars province, absorbing pre-Iranian tongues completely. The north western part of Fars province has rugged mountains and here live today Luri-speaking tribes, the Boyer Ahmad and Kohgiluye. Strictly speaking they are mountaineers, even though transhumance is practiced by many of them. The way of life of these contemporary people can have differed little from that of the their ancestors. 5 It is significant to note that Islamic geographers of the tenth Century, writing in Arabic, mention the existence of the Khuzi language in these mountains, which has been interpreted as a continuation of an ancient Elamite dialect. 6 Today the 2 P. de Miroschedji, "Poteries Elamites du Fars H. Mahamedi, "Three Iranian Dialects of Fars, Oriental," Bastan Chenassl va Honar-e Iran, 7-8 Davani, Avazi and Koroshi," Iranian Studies, 14 (Tehran, 1971), 60-67. (1982). Note that the people of Davan are Shaikhis, B. Thomas, "The Kumzari Dialect of the a special sect of Shiite Islam. Shiluh tribe," JRAS (1930). 5 See Löffler, supra, Boir Ahmad, 62-141. G. Morgenstierne, "Stray Notes on Persian 6 References in Schwarz, op. eil. [eh. 1, n. 14], Dialects, "NTS, 19 (Oslo, 1960), 123-29, and 406. 28 Chapter II language of the Boyer Ahmad tribes can be called a Luri dialect, quite close to Persian, and thus this northern part of Fars province is really part of the mountainous area of Luristan. It is possible that the Lurs, like the people of Laristan in the south, and others in mountainous areas, represent the vestiges of the first wave of Iranians who invaded the plateau and whose dialects were replaced in the Valleys and on the plains by New Persian. An indication of this hypothesis, but no more than that, is the common vocabulary of Luri and Laristan dialects, where certain common words and usages are not found in Persian. 7 The fact that New Persian is a wedge between these outlying dialects is best explained by the wave hypothesis, that an earlier substratum of Iranian dialects was gradually replaced by a standardized New Persian dialect, but the time when this occurred is unknown. In any case, we may assume a parallel earlier process whereby the original Iranians in Fars province gave their tongue to the autochthonous inhabitants in the first millennium B.C., whereas the mountain areas retained their original language and customs longer than the plains. The plains of Khuzistan from the earliest times were bound to the neighboring mountains of Luristan in a symbiosis of peoples. Not all of the population practiced a yearly migration to the mountains in the summer and to the flatlands in the winter, however, but enough of them did to mix the population such that Khuzistan was different in this respect from the lands to the west, in the basin of the Tigris and Euphrates. Contact between the peoples of Mesopotamia and Khuzistan was much easier than between mountains and piain, and certainly much exchange of culture took place, but nonetheless the special relationship with the mountains from whence the Elamites probably originated, made Khuzistan quite different from Mesopotamia. The interchange of products between the cool mountains and the hot plains was ancient in origin and continued throughout millennia. Many fruits and flowers were given to their western neighbors by the people of the plateau, and just the later Iranian words in Semitic languages alone such as Aramaic warda, 'rose,' testify to the exchange. Likewise, the time of the introduction of the date palm to the warm oases of southern Iran is unknown, but it is generally agreed that the earliest cultivation is found in southern Mesopotamia. Thus the ancient exchanges, though undocumented, can be assumed as a continuing process. So the geographical unity of Khuzistan with Mesopotamia, at least from the economic point of view, made less sense than the connection between the lowlands of Khuzistan and highlands to the east, and the occupation of both areas by Elamites, or at least Elamite culture, is understandable. It is true that the mountain ranges are very rugged and difficult of access, but this did not deter either merchants, or peoplejust seeking to escape the heat of summer on the plains. Surely ideas and artifacts were exchanged in this area from ancient times. The location of the mountain ranges, generally in a north west— southeast direction, made descent from the plateau to the plains easier southward from Luristan than directly west to Babylonia. The inhabitants of Luristan were those mountain dwellers who had most continuous contact with Khuzistan. In the many Valleys of Luristan one may postulate an early Iranicization of the original inhabitants who were For example, the word for 'stone' is bard both others. Many words and expressions are not in Luri and Laristan dialects, also 'large' gap and pecuhar to these two groups of dialects, however, gapu respectively, 'egg' xa and xag, and many but they are not used in Persian. Demography 29 probably a mixture of Elamites, Quti or Guti, Kassites and others. The predominantly pastoral economy of the Lurs today must have been similar over millennia, and a multitude of small Settlements was the rule, rather than any large cities in the region we call Luristan. The Lurs years ago were usually divided into two groups, the large (buzurg) and the small (kuchek) Lurs, the former located roughly to the southeast and east of the Ab-e Diz and the latter to the northwest and west of the upper reaches ofthat river. The small Lurs were divided primarily into two geographical areas, Pish-e Kuh (before the mountain) and Pusht-e Kuh (behind the mountain), the ränge being the Kavar or Kabir mountains. The former region includes the chief city of Khurramabad, but today much of the population in the northern Valleys, up to Kermanshah speak Lakki dialects which are south Kurdish dialects. The Pusht-e Kuh population lives in wilder surroundings and has been less studied than their northern cousins. The Luri dialects generally spoken here merge with southern Luri of the Lur-e buzurg. The main tribes are the Mamasani, Kohgiluye, Boyer Ahmad and Bakhtiyari, the last formerly divided into the Haft Lang and the Chahar Lang. Whether the present divisions of the Lurs reflects an ancient ethnic differentiation is unknown, but it is not improbable, for the rugged geography of Luristan alone would make it an excellent divided refuge area. The present linguistic picture does not help us with reconstructing the past. As noted, Speakers of Lakki dialects in northern Luristan are probably relatively late intruders, as are the Kurds in their homeland to the north of the Kermanshah- Hamadan road. One may assume that the ancient population must have been as divided as the present, but there is some archaeological evidence that at least culturally the area did have a unity. Also the Iranicization of the ancient peoples of Luristan- Guti, Lullubi, Kassites and others seems to have been uniform, in that ancient difFerences do not appear in the modern dialectology or ethnography of Luristan. 8 In other words, Luristan as an entity, with a common culture and group of dialects, is an ethnographic as well as a geographic and historical reality. The origin of the word Lur is uncertain, but folk tradition claims it comes from the gypsies or Luris brought from India by the Sasanian king Bahram Gör, as reported in Firdosi's Shahname, to bring music to the common people of Iran. Usually these itinerant musicians are called Luli, but it is possible that the name is a transfer to the inhabitants of the mountains. In any case, the word is not an ancient designation for the land or its peoples. Whereas the Lurs and their dialects are closely related to the Persians of Fars province, and naturally belong to the southwestern branch of the Iranian peoples, the Kurds are more complicated and their relations are much in dispute. It is generally accepted that the Kurdish language in its two major divisions of Kurmanji (northern) and Sorani (southern) is related to eastern and central Iranian dialects, thus indicating an eastern origin in respect to the geographical position of Kurdish today. 9 The 8 On Luristan and Luri dialects see the works of Windfuhr, "Isoglosses: A sketch on Persians, Hamid Izadpanäh, esp. his Farhange Luri (Tehran, Parthians and Medes," AI, Hommages et Opera 1 343/1 965), and 'Ah ftasan, Gozäresh-e Govlshha- Minora Monumentum H. S. Nyberg, 2 (Leiden, ye Luri (Tehran, 1342/1964). 1975), esp. 470-71. 9 See the survey, with references of G. L. 30 Chapter II Median dialects which were absorbed or supplanted by Kurdish dialects may be considered as represented today by Zaza and Gorani, both of which, however, were heavily Kurdicized. The process of Kurdicization of both the Gorani Speakers (now living in the mountains north of the Kermanshah-Hamadan road) and of the Lakks (south of the road) must have slowly proceeded throughout the Islamic period. 1 ° The Zaza Speakers in Anatolia also have a tongue different from Kurmanji and Sorani, even though one cannot thereby connect closely Zaza with Gorani. The native designation of the Zaza language as Dimli has been interpreted as Coming from Dailami, a Caspian dialect spoken by the Dailamis, who expanded from the Elburz mountains to the upper Zagros mountains, in the eleventh Century. 1 i Whether this is true or not, the great dimculty in separating various Iranian dialects and languages from each other in the general area of Kurdistan is obvious, since many strata and overlays have occurred because of migrations or forced settlement of groups from elsewhere. Just as in the Hindukush mountains of the east, so here too we find an ethnographic and linguistic museum of various peoples, again both refuge areas. In Kurdistan, as in Luristan, it is hardly possible to draw ancient conclusions from the present distribution of dialects or religious sects, except to note that geography also here plays an important role in determining where different peoples live and lived. The land dictates either agriculture in the Valleys or pastoralism on the slopes of the mountains, and it is possible that the extensive spread of pastoralism is the result of the spread of Iranian-speaking tribesmen into those areas. Of course, we have r/o written or archaeological evidence for this supposition, but the Iranicization of the northern Zagros ränge may well have proceeded from occupation of pastoral meadows to the settled agricultural land. 12 Obviously the process of Iranicization took time, but the lack of any apparent ethnic or linguistic unity in ancient northwestern Iran, not to speak of a political empire, probably aided the spread of Iranian speech. Together with several presumed confederations of tribes, the Iranian dialects seem to have presented a greater unity among the invaders than was found among the aborigines. All indications from Assyrian sources, which teil of Assyrian forays upon the Iranian plateau from the beginning of the first millenium B.c., reveal a diverse linguistic, cultural and presumably ethnic, mosaic among the aboriginal population here. Also we may further presume that the Iranian dialects were spread over relatively large expanses of territory and were insofar mutually intelligible that one might conclude that Iranian easily became a kind of linguafranca not only for Iranian pastoralists, but also for the settled people on the plateau with whom the Iranians came in contact. As mentioned above, we may further infer that the Kurds are still in the process of expansion from the highlands into lowland villages of the piain of Urmia and elsewhere, whereas the Zaza and Goran are remnants of a settled 10 G. B. Akopov, "Kurdy-gurany," Strany i Persische Forschungen (Berlin, 1930), 14-17, and narody blizhnego i srednego vostoka 7, Kurdove- in the same series his Mundarten der Zizi (Berlin, denie, Akad. Nauk Armyanskoi SSR (Erevan, 1932), 2-6. 1975), 164-65. i^Cf. the discussion in Vilchevskii, op. cit. 1 ' On the Goran and Zaza see K. Hadank, supra, Kurdy, 25-39. Mundarten der Güran of O. Mann's Kurdisch- Demography 31 Iranian-speaking population which had settled in mountain villages before the Kurdish expansion. 13 Azerbaijan, strictly speaking, comprises the Valleys and plains between the mountains of Kurdistan in the west to the Elburz mountain ränge descending to the Caspian Sea in the east. Even today in the western highlands, where the towns of Sanandaj, Bijar, Sakkiz and Mahabad are located, the majority of the population is Kurdish-speaking, whereas just to the east, in the lower lands, between the towns of Takab and Miyandoab the population is Turkish-speaking. Does this present division correspond to an ancient one? On the basis of scanty source material it is not possible to say whether present divisions could reflect earlier ethnic or linguistic differentiation; the differentiation, generally speaking, would be between predomi- nant pastoralists in the mountains and agriculturists in the lowlands. In the Assyrian annals, the area comprising the present province of West Azerbaijan was divided between the Urartians in the north and Manneans to the south of Lake Urmia, while the area of Urmia itself was probably a place of mixture. No ancient information is available, however, on the mountain-lowland division, for possibly relevant names in the ancient geographers Strabo and Ptolemy cannot be localized. The lake was perhaps the best known landmark of Azerbaijan, called the lower sea of Nairi by the Assyrians and later the lake of the Mantiane (Manneans) or the "blue" lake (Kabodän) and also Chaechist by the Iranians. 14 Many scholars have tried to identify the place names and tribal names in Assyrian sources but most of the localizations are only guesswork. The general reconstruction of the historical geography of Azerbaijan by I. M. Dyakonov, Istoriya Midii (Moscow, 1956), 87-93, is accepted by most scholars with modifications made by L. Levine, "Geographical Studies in the Neo-Assyrian Zagros," Iran, 1 1 (1973), 1—28 and 12 (1974), 99-122. According to Dyakonov, the area called Sangibutu by the Assyrians was the contemporary fertile Khoi-Marand area, which was conquered by the Urartians in the ninth Century b.c. To the east of this region was the valley of the Kara-su, a southern tributary of the Araxes River which was later occupied by a people called by Classical authors the Cadusii. The identification of other localities or tribes in the Assyrian sources is fraught with many difficulties and reveals the complexity of the historical geography of the land. While there is no evidence of ethnic or linguistic unity among the pre-Iranian population of Azerbaijan, we may guess that some of them had relations with small groups of Caucasian peoples of today who in ancient times extended farther to the south. Thus, the ancient Albanians who lived in present day Soviet Azerbaijan, may have been the descendants of what might be called linguistically Caspian peoples living on the western and southern shores of the sea, whereas to the west was the 1 3 Cf. Hadank, loc. eil. [n. 1 1 ]. The Mukri Kurds Kurdish dialects are different from those to the who today oecupy the area of Mahabad and south in Sanandaj and Kermanshah, and this Sakkiz, may have migrated from Iraq in the 17th division may possibly represent an ancient division Century according to O. Mann, Die Mundart der of peoples. Mukri-Kurden, 1 (Berlin, 1906), xviii. The Mukri l4 Strabo XI, 523 and XI, 529. ^2 Chapter II Hurrian-Urartian and possibly Mannean linguistic group. 15 We do not know how far to the north Elamite dialects or related languages extended, nor indeed how many other tribes or peoples existed, speaking tongues different from the two main groups in western Iran. In any case, at the time of the expansion of the Iranians we may presume that western Iran was dominated by the Elamites in the south and Urartian- Hurrians in the north. To the east, however, we have no sources other than archaeology. Archaeology has revealed highly developed cultures in the south Caspian Sea regions, as early as the second millennium B.C., at sites such as Marlik and Kaluraz in Gilan. 16 Archaeological surveys have indicated that the Gilan piain probably was not settled before the Parthian period, and that all ancient sites are located in the foothills of the Elburz mountains, none of them of great size indicating a sparse population. 17 Since no early second millennium or earlier pottery or other ancient objects have been found in Gilan or western Mazandaran, we may conclude that the Iranians were the first people to settle in the south Caspian plains in any numbers. In the Talysh provinces, however, especially in the Soviet Union, ancient graves have been found dating from the second millennium B.c. Presumably the descendants of these people were the Cadusii, about whom we know little more than their name. Yet Strabo (XI, 508) associates them with the Anariaki or "non-Aryans," and we may suppose that the Cadusii were non-Iranians and related to the Albanians or people of Arran, as it was called in the Islamic period, who were then Iranicized. The plateau where today are located the cities of Tehran, Hamadan and Isfahan, was the center of Iranian settlement, but who were the aborigines here whom the Iranians conquered or absorbed ? We know from archaeological excavations at sites such as Tepes Giyan, Hissar and Siyalk that there existed cultures before the coming of the Iranians. The Iranicization of the central plateau seems to have been so complete that no conclusions may be drawn about the ethnic or linguistic nature of the autochthonous population. Pottery and other remains do not help in this regard, but we may suppose that the population on the plateau was sparse, for as mentioned previously, techniques of irrigation such as the Underground water Channels are not attested before the first millennium B.c., which enabled agriculturists to extend cultivation into the plains and deserts, thus opening virgin tracts of land to settlement. 18 On the other hand, some oases have lost their water supplies and have become desert, as at ancient sites such as the graves of Shahdad in the Lut desert to the northeast of Kerman where pre-Islamic remains have been found. 19 Who were these pre-Iranian people? We may suppose that the inhabitants of the areas to the south and The close relationship of Urartian and " Ibid., plus A. Hakemi, "Excavations in Hurrian has been established, but with no written Kaluraz, Gilan," Bulletin of the Asia Institute of remains of the Manneans, the nature of their Pahlavi University, 3 (Shiraz, 1973), 1-3. language is conjectural. See I. M. Dyakonov, ' 8 See eh. 1 , n. 37. Yazyki Drevnei Prednei Azii (Moscow, 1967), 19 Cf. M. A. Kaboli, "Shahdad in the Third 113-20. Millennium B.C." (in Persian), Proceedings of the Cf. Hrouda, op. cit., [p. 26] Vorderasien, 248. Und Annual Symposium on Archaeological Research Although the graves may extend into the first in Iran (Tehran, 1974), 1-9, and reports by A. millennium and the period of Iranian invaders, the Hakemi at the Vllth International Congress of art forms are autochthonous. Iranian Art and Archaeology at Munich in 1976. Demography 33 east of the Lut desert in Kerman, Seistan and Baluchistan may have been related to each other and possibly to others both to the north in present Turkmenistan or to the southeast in Pakistan. 20 Certainly trade existed from a very early period, even in luxury items such as lapis lazuli from Badakhshan in Afghanistan, for it has been found in early graves in Mesopotamia. 21 The urban Settlements, however, must have been small and few, first merely as suppliers both to peasants and to pastoralists, and then developing into Centers where craftsmen produced their wares as specialists. It is important to remember in the history of Iran that although agriculturalists and pastoralists represented two different and sometimes inimical ways of life, a third factor, urban dwellers, were important in their own right. Invaders or nomads usually tried to control the towns of a land, where they interacted with townspeople. On the whole they despised the villagers and did not intermarry with them. The towns were stages where events were enacted and records were compiled, so history is their story. Unfortunately we know very little about large Settlements on the Iranian plateau in ancient times, and even less about the composition of the population of those centers. There were many racial types as seen from wide, long and other types of skulls from burials, and one may presume that mixtures of populations had been occurring since palaeolithic times. One must constantly re-emphasize the vital importance of water to any life, settled or nomadic, especially in eastern and southeastern Iran, which were barren wastes, and archaeology reveals constant attempts at building dams or cisterns to preserve every drop of the precious fluid. 22 Under difficult physical conditions the transient nature of Settlements in eastern Iran and Baluchistan is not surprising, since settlement patterns followed the availability of water and the rise or fall of the water table. One should not expect many large towns in the east, and it would seem that pastoral and nomadic life was dominant here, except in the province of Seistan where the Helmand River provided water for extensive agriculture. Today the population is a mixture of Persians, Pashtuns, Baluch and even Brahui, and we may presume that the region was also mixed in antiquity. The Brahuis, who speak a Dravidian language, were either ofFshoots of a wandering Dravidian tribe from the Deccan, or they represent an ancient branch of Dravidians, who may have come from the sub-continent at the end of the fourth millennium B.c. The latter theory is generally accepted today, because of the archaic nature of Brahui among the Dravidian languages. 23 If this is the case, then the proto-Brahuis may have been the dominant people in Baluchistan and even Sind when the Aryans expanded. Whether they were the inhabitants of Mohenjo-Daro and carriers of the Indus civilization, probably destroyed by the Vedic invaders of India, is uncertain. Although the Iranian-speaking Baluchis came from the west in Islamic times, before their arrival other Iranians had mixed with the Brahuis, as can be seen from archaic 20 M. Tosi, "Shahr-i Sokhta: a charge and a Phases of its Trade," Iraq, 30 (London, 1968), 29- chance for urban archaeology," in F. Bagherzadeh 30. ed., Proceedings of the Ist Annual Symposium of 22 Cf. J. T. Maruchek, "A Survey of Seasonal Archaeological Research in Iran (Tehran, 1973), 1- Occupation Sites in Northern Baluchestan," in 5; also his "A Topographical and Stratigraphical Baqerzadeh ed., Proceedings of the IV th Annual Periplus of Shahr-e sukhte, "Proceedings ofthe IVth Symposium on Archaeology (Tehran, 1976), 272. Annual Symposium (Tehran, 1976), 43. 23 M. S. Andronov, Yazyk Braut (Moscow, 21 G. Herrmann, "Lapis Lazuli: The Early 1971), 12-13, with a bibliography. 34 Chapter II Iranian borrowings in the Brahui language. 24 Also the extent of Brahui Settlements in early times cannot be determined, but one reason they have not been absorbed by the Baluchis was the primarily nomadic-pastoral way of life of the latter as contrasted with the settled Brahui of Kalat and elsewhere. If much of the Iranian national epic, as preserved in Firdosi's Shahname, can be traced to Seistan, then the identification of the Brahuis as the Turanians of the Epic might be considered. It would seem, however, that other peoples also lived in this desolate part of Iran, and today's dialects may indicate also an earlier linguistic division. In the highlands of Bashakird (or Bashkard) to the northeast of Minab live primitive agriculturists speaking Iranian dialects, while to the east in the lowlands of Bampur and beyond live Baluchis, most of whom are nomads or semi-nomads. Along the coast are fishermen, a medley of races including Negritoes, and negroids, the former from Malaysia to the east and the latter from Africa. One cannot teil whether they are relatively recent arrivals brought as slaves, or whether they (especially the Negritoes) may represent an ancient strain in the population. 25 Classical authors teil of fish-eaters (Ichthyophagi) and other folk living along this coast, but their ethnic or linguistic identity, of course, cannot be determined. In early Islamic times the people of the interior of Bashakird and Makran were called Qufs and Balüs by Arabic authors, the former presumably mountaineers and the latter pastoralists. 26 Again the differentiation of peoples by their mode of livelihood is striking, and a possible ethnic differentiation in antiquity is possible. Today, of course, all of the population speak Iranian languages or dialects, and we may assume that the Iranicization of the earlier inhabitants was not a prolonged process. 27 Along the southern coast only the harbors at Bandar 'Abbas and Tiz-Chahbahar offered access to an interior which could export products, in the former case Sirjan and the province of Kerman, and in the latter Bampur and the Saravan regipn of Baluchistan. Finally, a few words about the population of the central deserts of Iran may aid us in placing these people in the history of Iran. Inasmuch as the domestication of the camel long preceded the arrival of the Iranians on the plateau, we may presume that the oases of the central deserts of Iran had been long occupied, at least as way stations on trade routes from east to west, and the archaeological finds at Shahdad in Kerman, mentioned above, would tend to substantiate this hypothesis. Unfortunately no excavations or even archaeological surveys have been carried out in any of the oases, but Ptolemy (VI, 5, 1) mentions a district of Parthia called Tabikene, which one supposes is the desert area of Tabbas. Also Stephan of Byzantium, in his Ethnika mentions the Tabenoi as a people living in the desert of Kerman, so we may assume that the oases were inhabited. The numbers of people living in such isolated places even today is small, and in antiquity it cannot have been more, so we may suppose that the early inhabitants, like today, made their living on date palms and as watering places for Caravans. It should be noted that ancient copper mines have been found in 24 A. V. Rossi, "Iranian Elements in Brahui," Bosworth, The Kufichis or Qufs in Persian AION, 31 (1971), 401. History," Iran, 14 (1976), 9-17. 25 Cf. Pikulin, supra, Beludzhi, 31. 21 Cf. the various articles of I. Gershevitch on 26 B. Spooner, "Kuch u Baloch and Ichthyo- the dialects of Bashakird (or Bashkardia) listed in phagi," Iran, 2 (London, 1964), 53-59, and E. Bosworth, op. cit. [n. 26], n. 20. Demography 35 the central desert near Anarak, and one may further suggest that this area was one of the sources for the metal in antiquity. 28 The population probably did not differ from the settled people in the Qom and Kashan areas to the west. Tepe Siyalk is not far from the copper mines. In summary, the population of Iran in antiquity seems to have followed much the same pattern as in the recent past. Where pastoralists roamed, conditions of geography and hence life have little altered, and where villages barely maintained an existence with scarce water supplies, conditions have remained much the same without great changes. The mountains were refuge areas with little contact from one Valley to another, and peasants were oppressed either from the towns or from the pastoralists (or nomads), and sometimes from both. There were three centers which could be unified and provide bases of power or expansion, Fars province in the south, Azerbaijan in the north, or the central plateau area of Hamadan-Tehran-Isfahan. Other parts of Iran were either dependent on one or more of these areas, or lived in relative isolation. But from very early times trade and commerce were important across Iran, as well as inside, and the age-old invasion route into Iran from Central Asia was used by nomads seeking better pasture lands. Since the pattern of migration seems to have been invariably from east to west, we should turn to the east and north to examine the inhabitants of those areas. AFGHANISTAN As an extension of the plateau to the east, conditions of life in Afghanistan are similar to those in western Iran, although in the east water is scarcer and the mountains are higher than in the west. The inhabitants of Herat, stretching to ancient Bactra (Balkh) on the east, were an extension of the population of the present-day Iranian province of Khurasan, and from the time of the Achaemenid Empire these 'upper provinces' had a unity, probably ethnic as well as cultural. As usual, it is in the mountains that one finds small groups of people the very existence of whom can perhaps teil us about the settlement or movement of peoples in the east. For a pre-Indo-Aryan population, we should consider the Burushaski people of Hunza, Pakistan, for they, like the Brahuis to the south, may be yestiges of an earlier population which was much more widespread than today. Unlike Mesopotamia, the vast subcontinent of India has very few ancient written records which can be used for historical purposes. Consequently there is no information about the past of the Burushaski Speakers whose language has no relation to its neighbors of the Iranian, Indian or Tibeto-Burman families. 29 The pre-Aryan past of the east is much darker than in the west, and just ns the proto- Brahui hypothesis is guesswork for the southern part, so that of proto-ßurushaski Speakers is hypothetical for the northern part of the Indo-Iranian borderlands. It must be remembered that nomadism and semi-nomadism are much more widespread in 28 'Wertime,op.cit.supra,Metallungy, 1257-67. 29 On the Burushaski language see D. L. R. Other mines, dating from the Bronze Age, have Lorimer, The Burushaski Language, 3 vols. (Oslo, been found near the city of Qom; cf. H. Holzer, 1935), and H. Berger, Das Yasin-Burushaski Ancient Copper Mines in the Veshnoveh Area, (Werchikwar), (Wiesbaden, 1974). Kuhestan-Qom," Archaeologica Austriaca, 59 (Vienna, 1971), 10-11. 36 Chapter II eastern than in western Iran, and the settled folk in the east have been more subject to domination by tribes than in the west. Whether proto-Burushaski Speakers were nomads who were pushed into the mountains by invading Indo-Aryans, or whether they were always settled mountaineers cannot be determined. In the east, unlike the west, traces of the first wave of Indo-Aryans, comparable to those in the Mitanni confederation in the west, still survive. These are the present Speakers of Dardic and Kafir (Nuristani) languages. The Dardic peoples today live in the mountainous northeastern part of Afghanistan and the northwestern part of Pakistan and India. The languages occupy a position between Indian and Iranian, and in spite of disagreements about the origin of these languages, all investigators agree that the Dardic languages can be considered a separate group of Indo-European tongues with features particular to that group. 30 In the old religion and folklore of the Dardic peoples one can find many features which support the thesis that these people were much more widespread in the past than today, and that they represent the remains of the earliest wave of Indo-European Speakers who entered the plains of India. 31 If we assume that linguistically this Suggestion makes sense, then these pre-Vedic Aryans may have carried a distinctive black pottery with them as proposed by R. Ghirshman. 32 We may assume then that these early Indo-Aryans were pushed into the mountains by the Vedic Aryans invading India from the north west about the twelfth Century B.C.; but did the Dardic Speakers constrain the aborigines to retreat even further, so that today we only have the Burusho, the Burushaski Speakers, as their remnants? If this is true, there seems to have been relatively less absorption of the previous inhabitants by newcomers than in the west. For we must remember that the final movement into the Indo-Iranian borderlands, in Islamic times, is the expansion of the Iranian Pathans or Pashtuns from their homeland in the mountains of Afghanistan onto the plains of the northwest subcontinent. The Pathans are organized tribally and rule present Afghanistan. They are the pastoralists par excellence of the Indo-Iranian borderlands, practicing an annual migration to the highlands of Afghanistan in the summerand to the lowlands in the winter. Herodotus (IV, 44 and VII, 67, 85) mentions the land of Paktyia and the Paktyes living near Kabul, which may be the ancestor of the name Pakhtun or Pashtun, used by the nomads. The Pathans expanded from their homeland in the Sulaiman mountain ränge onto the plains only in the aftermath of the Mongol invasions in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries of our era, and it would seem that the Pashtu language is today still expanding in Pakistan. Legends linking the Pashtuns to the Hephthalites or to the Khalaj Turks may reflect a northern origin, although nothing eise can be said about their ongins. 33 Pashtu, probably, has absorbed other 30 On the Dardic languages see D. I Edelman, also his Die Sprache von Sau in Ostafghanistan Dardskie Yazyki (Moscow, 1965) with an exten- (Munich, 1967), ll,andK.Jettmar,Di'eÄf%'o«e« sive bibhography, and on the inhabitants P Snoy, des Hindukusch (Stuttgart, 1975). Die Kafiren (Frankfurt, 1962), 10, and G. G. 3: R. Ghirshman, L'han et la Migration des Indo- Morgenstierne, "Die Stellung der Kafirsprachen," aryans et Iraniens (Leiden, 1977), 68-69. Irano-Dardica (Wiesbaden, 1973), 327-43 " G. Morgenstierne, in Iranistik, Handbuch der 31 G. Buddruss, "Zur Mythologie der Prasun Orientalistik, (Leiden, 1958) 169, also his Parachi Kafiren," Paideuma Festschrift für H. Lommel, and Ormuri [n. 35, infra], 8. (Wiesbaden, 1960), 207, with Vedic parallels. Cf. Demography 37 Iranian Speakers in Afghanistan as well as Indic and Dardic Speakers in Pakistan, and two survivors of older Iranian languages, now almost wholly engulfed by Pashtu, are Parachi and Ormuri, the former of which is still spoken in a few isolated villages of the Hindukush mountains north of Charikar, while the latter is still spoken by a few people in the Logar Valley south of Kabul and in a village in Wazirstan, Pakistan. It is fascinating that both of these languages show many features in common with Persian, and they have been designated as southeast Iranian relict languages. 34 Unfortunately it is not possible to determine when the ancestors of the Parachi and Ormuri Speakers arrived in the mountains of Afghanistan, and exactly what relationship they had to the Pashtuns. If the relations between their tongues and New Persian could be clarified, the proto-Parachi and Ormuri Speakers might have been an intrusion from the west in historic times. Or they might have been the original Iranian invaders into a Dardic-speaking area in very early times. A few concurrences in vocabulary between these languages and Brahui, Baluchi and Pashtu indicate little more than geographic proximity and complex borrowings which cannot be tied to historical events or even to the movements of peoples. 35 When we turn to the Pamir languages, their isolated geographic location, north of the Hindukush, has caused much inter-borrowing, making reconstructions of etymologies and family relationships difhcult. While some scholars have sought to derive one or more of the Pamir languages from the Middle Iranian Khotanese Saka, it seems better, from what little we know, to speak of an unknown proto-Pamir language as the ancestor of the present Pamir languages. 36 At least some difFerentiation has been made among the Pamir languages, and the Shughni group of languages (Roshani, Bartangi, Sarykoli, and Yazghulami) seems to constitute one family, while Munjani, Wakhi, Ishkashmi, and other little known languages, constitute other families or relationships. 37 When such words for 'sun,' as Ishkashmi remuz and Sanglechi ormözd (from ancient Ahura Mazda), and Munjani mlra from Mithra, occur in the Pamir languages, it readily will be seen that the folklore and beliefs of the Pamir peoples, as well as their languages, have interesting implications for reconstructing the past of the east-Iranian world. Whereas the Pamir languages cannot be considered as descendants of any known ancient Iranian language, the language of the Yaghnobis, today less than two thousand, living in an isolated mountain valley a hundred kilometers to the north of Dushanbe, Tajikistan, is descended from a Sogdian dialect. The Yaghnobis are the last remnants of a once populous folk who inhabited the valley of the Zarafshan River, where the cities of Bukhara and Samarqand are located. Until fragments of manuscripts from Chinese Turkestan written in the Sogdian language were deciphered and identified in the beginning of the twentieth Century, it was not known what kind of a language Yaghnobi was. 38 But Yaghnobi and the Yaghnobis 4 Morgenstierne, Iranistik, Loc. eil. on linguistic Shughni Group (Wiesbaden, 1974), with an grounds, suggests that Pashtu may have originally extensive bibliography. come from the north. 37 Cf. T. N. Pakhahna, Pamirskie Yazyki Morgenstierne. Indo-Iranian Fronlier I.an- (Moscow, 1969), 9-10. guages, 1, Parachi and Ormuri (Oslo, 1929), 13, 38 See A. Khromov, Yagnobskii Yazyk (Mos- 3 "- cow, 1972), with bibliography. Morgenstierne, Etymological Vocabulary oflhe 38 Chapter II are important not only from the point of view of linguistics but also for anthropology and folklore. 39 The Sogdian language first gave way to Persian, and then in many parts of Russian Turkestan Persian/Tajiki was supplanted by Turkic languages. In reconstructing the life of the common folk of Central Asia before the Arab conquests, the Yaghnobis can be helpful, especially in comparing words used today with Sogdian. It must be emphasized that Islam and the new Persian/Tajiki language have both greatly influenced the Pamir peoples and the Yaghnobis such that it is very difficult to unpeel the accumulation of centuries to try to recover the past. The Yaghnobis, of course, are not the only Iranian Speakers in Central Asia, for the vast majority are now Tajiki/Persian Speakers, who mostly live in Tajikistan, with its capital Dushanbe. In antiquity the people of Tajikistan were called Bactrians, and they extended also to the south of the Amu Darya into Afghanistan where their main city was located, the present-day ruins of Balkh. So the ethnographic, if not also linguistic, unity of the Bactrians living south of the Hissar mountain ränge, seems apparent from earliest times. To the north of the Hissar ränge lived the Sogdians, mostly in what is now Uzbekistan. Just before the Arab conquests, we infer that Buddhism was the dominant religion and culture of the Bactrians, while a local form of Mazdaism or Zoroastrianism seems to have been prevailing among the Sogdians. But the Sogdians, an active trading folk, had trading colonies as far to theeast as China and Mongolia, and many religions, including Christianity, Manichaeism and Buddhism, were populär with the Sogdians. The Sogdians also were very mixed ethnically because of their Strategie location, as were their cousins in Khwarazm, the land on the lower course of the Amu Darya south of the Aral Sea, who spoke a language different from Sogdian. Although the Tajiki dialects of today, unlike Yaghnobi, are descended from New Persian, nonetheless many Sogdian survivals may be found in them, distinguishing Tajiki from Persian spoken in western Iran. Many studies of Tajik folklore and anthropology, as well as dialectology, help us further to reconstruet the past of that part of the world, especially old forms of family relationship and social life. 40 The Turkic Speakers, Uzbeks, Turkmens and others, are of lesser aid in reconstructing the past, since they have added a layer of Turkic traditions >and practices to that of the Tajiks, and are thus further removed from the culture of the ancient inhabitants of the land. Only in Turkmenistan are, and were, nomadism and pastoralism dominant over the settled life, and so in antiquity the steppes of Dahistan, to the east of the Caspian Sea, also supported a nomadic population. According to Classical authors in antiquity here lived the Massagetae, an Iranian people who raided settled lands to the south as did the Turkmens in recent times. Again, here as in Iran, climatic conditions have not changed much since antiquity. Paleoanthropology teils us that the population of Central Asia in antiquity was much the same as the south of the Amu Darya with mixtures of long-heads and mesoeephalics; while possible connections with the south may be found in certain 39 M. S. Andreev, Malerialy po etnograßi Yag- works on the folklore of the peoples of the Pamirs noba (Dushanbe, 1 970). and much research has been done on various Tajiki 40 The Institute for the study of the Pamirs in dialects and folklores. Dushanbe has published a number of valuable Demography 39 cranial types similar to the Dravidians of India. 41 Man, of course, lived in very early times in Central Asia, for Neanderthal remains have been found there, including the skeleton of a boy of eight or nine years old. 42 It is unnecessary to go back into prehistory, however, since neither cranial types nor various prehistoric artifacts aid in the reconstruction of later history. Suffice it to say that archaeology is yearly revealing very early Settlements in Central Asia before the expansion of the Indo- European-speaking peoples from south Russia, and the pattern of life found there is much the same as in western Iran, with the settled population more numerous than the nomad-pastoralists, except in Turkmenistan. To the north of the present Tashkent area, however, the steppes were dominated by nomads. The Kara Tau and Kirghiz (formerly Alexandrovskii) ranges were the dividing line between the oases towns of Russian Turkestan (today the Soviet republics of Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan) and the vast steppe lands of present Kazakhastan and Kirghizia. The population of the steppes when we first learn about them, was naturally nomadic except in the southern forested Valleys of present Alma Ata and Frunze. To the far north were the forests and tundra of Siberia, the domain of hunters and fishermen. Mobility was the key to life on the steppes, and the almost paramilitary Organization of the tribes who roamed here, made them formidable opponents of any settled folk. Slowly archaeology is also uncovering the material civilization of nomads whose culture was more complex than hitherto supposed. We should pause to consider briefly the origins of pastoralism. When we think of pastoralists as horse-riding nomads, it refers to historic times, for even the early Indo-European migrants were chariot-riding invaders into India, as also the Myceneans into Greece. The use of horses primarily as riding animals rather than pullers of wagons cannot date much before the middle of the second millenium B.C., and it took a long time before riding displaced the use of horses as draught animals. On the other hand, true nomads could hardly exist without the use of horses primarily for riding, and this suggests that nomadism is a relatively late and sophisticated development of a pastoralism based on the use of wagons to follow the herds. 43 Wherever and whenever the domestication of the horse took place, possibly in the Near East, it was nonetheless the Indo-European-speaking peoples who later utilized the horse more than any others, and it surely contributed to the spread of those peoples. The Indo-Europeans in the course of their wanderings, with chariots and wagons, may have learned that riding was more efficient than chariots, especially in combat. 44 In any case, the first horse-riding nomads in history were the Iranian 41 T. A. Trafimova, Drevnee Naselenie Khor- Central and Eastern Europe," American Schools of ezma po dannyin paleoantropologii (Moscow, 1 959), Prehistoric Research Bulletin, 25, Peabody Museum 1- (Cambridge, Mass., 1968), 5-7. 42 For a bibhography of works on the Neander- 44 W. Brandenstein, "Das Pferd - eine Haupt- thal site of Teshik Tash in Uzbekistan by A. P. frage der indogermanischen Altertumskunde," Okladnikov, see Istoriya Vzbekskoi SSR, 1 (Tash- Mitteilungen der anthropologischen Gesellschaft in kern, 1955), 12-15 and 532 Wien, 92 (1962), 30-33; and J. F. Downs, "The 43 Cf. F. Hancar, Das Pferd in prähistorischer und Ongin and Spread of Riding in the Near East and frühhistorischer Zeit, Wiener Beiträge zur Kul- Central Asia," American Anthropologist, 63 (1961), turgeschichte und Linguistik, 1 1 , (Vienna, 1 956) ; 1 1 93-1 203. and S. Bökönyi, "Data on lron Age Horses of 40 Chapter II Scythians, or Sakas as the Persians called them, and they are found already into the first millennium b.c. The Scythians extended eastward to the forest lands of the Altai mountains and Mongolia, and it seems that the Turks and Mongols, who were originally forest dwellers, learned horse-riding from the Iranians. 45 The Scythians were carriers of a dynamic 'animal style' in their metalwork and on textiles, such as those preserved in the tombs of Pazyryk in Siberia. 46 In Siberia and the Altai mountains the Iranians mixed with Mongoloid peoples from the east, but the steppes were occupied by Iranian nomads throughout the first millennium b.c. Karl Jettmar has proposed, however, that horse-riding became dominant in Turkmenistan about 1200 b.c. and afterwards was carried first to India and then north ward to the steppes where previously agriculturalists had been dominant. 47 He further postulates a change from settled life to a half-nomadic pastoral existence and then suddenly to füll nomadism, with large flocks and groups of warrior nomads. A comparison with the change in life-style of the American Indians after the introduction of the horse to North America, from a settled existence to buffalo-hunting nomads in the füll light of history, can be instructive. 48 It would seem that the movement of peoples beginning about 1000 b.c. was the result, in large measure, of a great expansion in the use of the horse, first pulling carts and chariots and then as cavalry. We may conclude that from the period of earliest records in Iran, we find Iranian nomads in the steppes, and they were much later succeeded by Turks and Mongols. At the present time one small group of Iranian Speakers remains from the once widespread Iranian world of the steppes. These are the Ossetes who today live in the Caucasus north of Tiflis, with their center at Ordzhonikidze (formerly Vladikavkaz). The Ossetes whose language has two dialects, a more archaic Digor, and the majority speaking Iron, are a classic refugee people. Although greatly influenced by their Caucasian neighbors, in customs, costumes and even language, it is generally agreed that they are descendants of the Alans, one of the Sarmatian peoples who ruled the south Russian steppes before the expansion of the Turks. 49 Because the Ossetes are the only living representatives of the northern Iranians, their language, and especially their folklore, has been studied to find ancient Iranian, or even Indo-Eu^opean, features which survived in the refuge area of the north Caucasus. 50 The material culture of the Ossetes, however, is overwhelmingly Caucasian, since the Iranians settled down here so many centuries ago. 51 Although these northern Iranians were historically very important for the history of Eurasia, their impact on the Iranian plateau, the core area for this book, was only sporadic. Their history is only tangential to the history of the south, and we must omit any detailed discussion of them. 45 See O. Lattimore, "The Geographical Factor 48 Ibid, 217. in Mongol History," Geographical Journal, 91 49 On the origin of the Ossetes cf. the results of a (1938), 8. Conference on Proiskhozhdenie Osetinskogo Naroda 46 On the finds of Pazyryk, see S. I. Rudenko, (Ordzhonikidze, 1967), where all points of view Frozen Tombs of Siberia (London, 1970), and S. V. about the origins of the Ossetes were aired. Kiselev, Drevnyaya Utoriya Yuzhnoi Sibiri (Mos- 50 See, e.g., G. Dumezil, Legendes sur les Nartes cow, 1951). (Paris, 1930), 9; also his Le livre des heros (Paris, 47 Die frühen Steppenvölker (Baden-Baden, 1965), 11-12. 1964), 215. 5i 5^ B A Kaloev, Osetiny (Moscow, 1971). Demography 4\ CONCLUSIONS We may summarize recent work on the ethnology and anthropology of the Iranian areas briefly. In the realm of physical anthropology and the study of crania, the presence of Negrito elements in southern Iran and Bachichistan, as well as Dravidian types in Central Asia in ancient times leads to the supposition that the pre-Aryan inhabitants of the Iranian plateau did in fact leave clues to their identity, but work in this domain has only begun. For example, no synthesis has been made, as far as I know, of the copious skeletal material from archaeological excavations, to portray the physical characteristics of the population in any area over a time period. Whether we can have any meaningful analyses of racial types in the history of the Iranian world remains to be seen, but at least overall syntheses are first needed. Studies on the dynamics of pastoral-settled occupation of land, and on types of coexistence have clarified the relationships of peoples with different ways of life. 52 As part of this question, investigations on the domestication of the horse have been mentioned as an important development in the early history of the Iranian world. The domestication and use of the camel was presumably less important here than it was in Arabia and North Africa, but the camel, like the horse and donkey, enabled man to go longer distances and to cross hitherto impassable deserts. Whether the camel was the decisive factor in causing the inhabitants of the Iranian plateau to abandon wheeled vehicles, as a recent study claims, is perhaps exaggerated. 53 It would seem rather, that the wheel had lost its importance long before the Sasanian era, as suggested in the study, and that the horse and donkey participated with the camel in relegating the wheel to inemciency over the mountains and deserts of the Iranian world at least as early as the Achaemenids. One must always ask whether any contemporary model of ways of life can be projected profitably into an explanation of the past, ignoring changes in religion, culture, etc. For the vast majority of people throughout history the needs of survival, of economics, were far more important than intellectual activities, and continuity in nature, as well as way of life among the Iranians, suggests that contemporary studies of settlement and pastoral patterns do have great relevance to understanding the past; but in the part of the world we are discussing, the reverse is also true. Unfortunately we know very little about the instabilities of societies in the past which arose from failures to maintain subsistence levels. How many years of drought in a given area caused the inhabitants to move, or to change their way of life? It would seem that districts which could be characterized as frontier areas, on the margins of richer agricultural lands, were the prime centers of instability and were the scenes of transfers between settled and pastoral folk. Central Asia has been called the arena where tribal states ruled over vast distances, but only for relatively short periods of time, and this pattern overlaps as well into Iran and Afghanistan. On the whole, Cf. the works by F. Barth, such as his Indus 53 R. Bulliet, The Camel and the Wheel (Cam- «nd Swal Kohistan (Oslo, 1956), his Ethnic Groups bridge, Mass., 1975), 175. <">d Boundaries (London, 1969), and W. Irons and N - Dyson-Hudson, eds., Perspectives on Nomadism (Leiden, 1972). 42 Chapter 11 people who lived in fertile oases, or Valleys copiously watered by rivers, were stable and did not seek greener pastures elsewhere. Although history in this part of the world has been concerned with empires and kingdoms, many significant events, as for example the migration of the Baluchis, are tied to such matters as drought or plagues of locusts. Therefore, it behooves the historian to consider the contributions of the anthropologists and folklorists to our understanding of the past. In recent years the ancient and medieval city has caught the imagination of many scholars with the result that a plethora of studies and Conferences devoted to the city has appeared. The oasis character of the Iranian world insured an early development of town life, and Soviet scholars have contributed much to our understanding of the Central Asian city, as well as to settlement patterns on the Iranian plateau. 54 The archaeological work in Central Asia, and in eastern Iran, at sites such as Shahr-i Sukhte in Seistan and Tepe Yahya in Kerman, has revealed ancient and extensive trade connections hitherto unknown. ss Eastern Iran and Central Asia are now revealed as separate cultural areas and not provincial extensions of western Iran. Furthermore, the oases of the plateau and Central Asia can make a claim to having been early centers of civilization, parallel to the river Valleys of the Indus and Tigris-Euphrates, where the earliest written records have appeared. On the other hand, it must be emphasized that the oases could never vie with the great river plains in productivity, population, hence in historical importance, but they are also not to be compared with the primitive Settlements of northern Europe. Finally a word must be said about the achievements of linguistics in recent years, which have revolutionized our view of the Iranian peoples. Not only have documents in several eastern Middle Iranian languages, Khwarazmian, Sogdian, Khotanese-Saka, and Kushano-Bactrian, revealed a rieh, new east-Iranian world, but also studies of modern dialects have shown the complexity of the movement of tribes, the resettlement of villagers far from their homeland and a host of cultural problems in the development of the languages and dialects. As more and more data aecumulates, our guesses about the Solutions to problems become more educated, and lacunae of the past are gradually filled. Pioneering work in deeiphering Khwarazmian was made by W. B. Henning, and before him F. W. K. Müller for Sogdian. 56 Khotanese-Saka was elueidated by the early work of Leumann, Konow and Bailey. 57 The latest Middle Iranian language to come to light was Kushano-Bactrian, which was studied by Maricq, Henning and Benveniste. 58 We now know that Khwarazmian had a long 54 See especially the collection of articles in Müller, "Handschriften - Reste in Estrangelo- both Antkhnyi Corod (Moscow, 1963), and Schrift aus Turfan," Abh.PAW (Berlin, 1904). Drevnii Voslok, Goroda i torgoulya (3-2 mill. B.c.) 57 E. Leumann, Zur nordarischen Sprache und (Erevan, 1 973), for the Near East, N. Pigulevskaja, Literatur (Strasbourg, 1 91 2) ; S. Konow, in A. F. R. Les villes de l'itat Uanien aux tpoaues parthes et Hoernle, Manuscripl Remains of Buddhist Literature sassanides (Paris, 1963), for Iran, and A. M. found in Eastern Turkestan (Oxford, 1916); and Belenitskii, ed. Srendnevekovyi gorod Sredttei Azii H. W. Bailey in many articles in the BSOS and (Leningrad, 1973), for the Islamic period of books, beginning in 1935. Central Asia. 58 A. Maricq, "La grande inscription de Kan- 55 For Central Asian archaeology see G. Frum- lshka," JA, 246 (1958), 345-440; W. B. Henning, kin, Archaeology in Soviet Central Asia (Leiden, "The Bactrian Inscription," BSOAS, 23 (1960), 1970). 47-55; E. Benveniste, "Inscriptions de Bactriane," 56 See W. B. Henning, "Über die Sprache JA, 249 (1961), 113-52. der Chvarezmier," ZDMG, 90 (1936), *30-34; Demography 43 history, first written in a modified Aramaic aiphabet; then it was written in Arabic characters down to the Mongol conquests. Sogdian was written in its own aiphabet, derived from Aramaic, or in a special Manichaean aiphabet, or in a Syriac Script, resp. in texts of three religions: Buddhism, Manichaeism and Christianity. Kushano- Bactrian, written in a modifed Greek aiphabet, survived into the Islamic period, when it was replaced in writing by new Persian in Afghanistan or by Indian tongues to the east. All contemporary Iranian languages and dialects are either unwritten, or have recorded literatures only from the nineteenth Century, save Mazandarani which was recorded in the Arabic aiphabet just prior to the Mongol invasions, and Pashtu and Kurdish, both of which are later in being written. G. Morgenstierne classified the Indo-Iranian languages of the frontier areas, while many Soviet scholars, beginning with 1. 1. Zarubin brought the Pamir languages into an orderly Classification. In the investigation of Ossetic, pioneer scholarly work was done by V. Miller and many, especially V. Abaev, have continued his work. One may say that progress in understanding the Iranian world in all of its aspects has been remarkable in the past sixty years, and the most exciting discoveries have come in the east, in Afghanistan and Central Asia, revealing much hitherto unknown information, and the new developments are the result largely of field work. In the twentieth Century new technologies of recording, photography, transportation, etc., have opened areas to investigation which formerly had been difficult of access. The results of archaeology, anthropology and dialectology, all field work, have amply justified efforts, time and money put into them. Without the raw material from the field, cabinet scholars would not have data on which to base their studies. The combination of field and desk work is even more essential, in my opinion, than the study of both past and present in the understanding of the Iranian world, or any part of it. Because of both the unity and the continuity of this world, perhaps more than anywhere eise, a Renaissance approach to Iranian Studies still has a value for all who venture onto the manifold and specialized branches ofthat world. This is why, in my view, the study of the pre-Islamic past of the Iranian world must begin with an appreciation not only of the complexities ofthat study, but also with a survey of disciplines such as anthropology and linguistics, which in other areas are of less importance to the reconstruction of the picture of the past. In the Iranian area all of this, and more, does indeed have relevance to how we seek to understand the past, and also it does aid us to appreciate the present and the future. CHAPTER III PRE-IRANIAN HISTORY OF THE PLATEAU AND CENTRAL ASIA Liieralure: The history of the Near East in the pre-Median period is well covered by the Cambridge Ancienl History, especially vol. 2 (Cambridge, 1 973). On Iran see especially Chapter 7 by W. Hinz "Persia, c. 1 800-1 550 B.c.," Chapter 1 6 by R. Dyson "The Archaeological Evidence of the Second Millennium B.c. on the Persian Plateau," Chapter 29 by R. Labat, "Elam, c. 1600-1200 B.c.," and his Chapter 32 "Elam and Western Persia, c. 1 200-1 000 B.c.," plus R. A. Crossland "Immigrants from the North," Chapter 27 ; with bibliographies on the Hurrians. The book by I. J. Gelb, Hurrians and Subareans (Chicago, 1944) is useful as a general survey, but consult also D. O. Edzard "Hurriter" in Reallexikon der Assyriologie (Berlin, 1 975) sub Hurriter. The problem of the Ur-Heimal of the Indo-Europeans has a huge bibliography with much controversy , but a consensus has been reached that the homeland must have been in the vast steppes of South Russia and Siberia. Many linguists such as Brandenstein and archaeologists such as Gimbutas, believe the homeland can be further defined as the general lower Volga River region (cf. their articles in A. Scherer, ed., Die Urheimat der Indogermanett, Wege der Forschung, 166 (Darmstadt, 1968). Cf. also B. Schlerath, Die Indogermanen, das Problem der Expansion eines Volkes im Lichte seiner sozialen Struktur, Innsbrucker Beiträge zur Sprachwissenschaft, 8 (Innsbruck, 1973). Also of interest is P. Thieme, Die Heimat der indogermanischen Gemeinsprache, AAWM, no. 1 1 (Mainz, 1953). All of the scholars quoted, however, are cautious about defining a homeland. The main dispute, is between linguists and archaeologists, since the Identification of certain types of burial (kurgans) as Indo-European, is not accepted by everyone. See R. Schmitt, "Proto-Indo-European Culture and Archaeology : Some Critical Remarks," JIES, 2(1 974), 279- 88, and the reply by M. Gimbutas, 288-89. It is generally agreed, however, that the unseparated Indo-Iranians must have had close contacts with the early Finno-Ugrian peoples because of very old borrowings into the languages of the latter. Cf. A. J. Joki, Uralier und Indogermanen, Memoires de la Societi Finno-Ougrienne, 151 (Helsinki, 1973). Soviet archaeologists have come to the conclusion that the center of the Indo-Iranians should be sought near the southern Urals, and this is not contradicted by linguistic data. Cf. K. F. Smirnov and E. E. Kuzmina. Proiskhozhdenie Indoirantsev v svete noueishikh arkheologicheskikh otkrytii (Moscow, 1967), esp. 51-52. On the Andronova culture, the archaeological name for the presumed Indo-Iranian culture in Kazakhastan, cf. K. Jettmar, "Mittelasien and Sibirien in Vortürkischer Zeit," in Handbuch der Orientalistik, Altaistik, Geschichte Mittelasiens (Leiden, 1966), and G. Frumkin, Archaeology in Soviet Central Asia (Leiden, 1970), eh. 1. On the southern connections of this and other cultures see V. M. Masson, Srednyaya Aziya i Drevnii Vostok (Moscow, 1964), 184-85, and his Central Asia, Turkmenia before the Achaemenids, with V. I. Sarianidi (London, 1972), esp. 150-54. A survey of archaeological work to the west, in European Russia, may be found in M. Gimbutas, "Proto-Indo-European Culture: The Kurgan Culture during the Fifth, Fourth and Third Millennia B.c.," in C. Cardona and H. Hoenigswald, eds., Indo- European and Indo-Europeans (University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia, 1970), 155-98. Archaeological, primarily pottery, evidence for the Indians (or Indo-Aryans) on the Iranian plateau in the second millennium B.c. has been assembled by R. Ghirshman in L'Iran et la migration des Indo-aryens et des Iraniens (Leiden, 1977), who proposes an early migration of the former from Central Asia, but a later one from the north Caucasus for the Iranians. The Caucasian migration of Iranians is rejeeted in favor of a Central Asian path by T. C. Young.The Iranian Migration into the Zagros," Iran, 5 (London, 1967), 1 1- 34, and other archaeologists. No agreement seems possible, although the Central Asian route seems more plausible. With the Coming of the Indians to the subcontinent and the Iranians to the plateau, the Vedas, especially the Rigveda, and the Avesta, join archaeology as two written sources, but their historical Interpretation and attempts to find archaeological parallels to the texts are fraught with problems. An indispensable handbook to work on the Avesta is B. Schlerath's Awesta-Wörterbuch (Wiesbaden, 1968), while the old work of W. Geiger, Ostiranische Kultur im Altertum (Erlangen, 1882) is still useful as an attempt to relate the Avesta to history and geography. For bibliographies see my The Heritage of Persia, second edition 46 Chapter III (London, 1976), 303-05. Finally, a linguistic attempt to put the migration of the Indians into historical perspective is T. Burrow, "The Proto-Indoaryans," JRAS (1973), 121-40. RECONSTRUCTIONS A half a Century ago it would have been possible to begin the history of the Iranians with the cuneiform records of the ninth Century B.c. which give Iranian names for persons met by Assyrians in their campaigns to the east. It is clear that the Iranians, when they reached the plateau, came upon natives who were at various stages of culture and with different ways of life. In western Iran before the Coming of the Iranians, the Hurrians had descended to the plains in the north, while the Elamites were dominant in the south. Whatever other groups existed, we may speak of the Hurrian (and later Urartian and Mannean) sphere in the north, and the Elamite (together with Kassite) realm of the south. The former is more difficult to understand, but we must discuss both before turning to the Iranians. From the third millennium B.C. Akkadian cuneiform tablets mention the Hurrians, first in the highlands to the east and later in northern Mesopotamia, Syria, and even Anatolia. Just as the 'Fertile Crescent' of Mesopotamia and Syria was the goal of Semitic invaders from Arabia, so it was also the field of expansion for immigrants from the eastern highlands, throughout history. And just as various Semites such as the Akkadians and then the Arameans spread over Mesopotamia, especially in the south, so did the Hurrians, especially in the north. If we use the term Hurrian in its widest sense, as a generic term for all of the peoples in northwestern Iran speaking related languages, there are three states which are recorded in history, the Mitanni confederacy, which flourished in northern Mesopotamia in the middle of the second millennium b.c., and the states of Urartu and of the Manneans, both of which flourished in the first part of the first millennium B.C. Other peoples such as the Lullubi and the Guti or Quti, mentioned in earlier cuneiform records, surely continued to exist in Kurdistan of today, but they seemingly had little or no political influence. The Mitanni are important as the Hurrian kingdom in northern Mesopotamia where the first Indo-Iranian names appear in history. Much has been written about the undoubtedly small group of Indo-European Speakers who appeared from the east.just as other early Indo-European speaking peoples, the Hittites, Luvians, and others appear in Anatolia, probably at an earlier period. Much has been written also about the names of the deities in a treaty between a Hittite ruler Suppiluliumas I and a Mitanni king Kurtiwaza, which deities now everyone agrees are to be identified with Indian Indra, Mitra-Varuna and the Näsatyäs. Likewise the terms for the training of chariot horses by a Mitanni called Kikkuli, found in a manual written in cuneiform Hittite, point also to a language used by some of the Mitanni which can be called an archaic Indian dialect of the Indo-European family. la Other words in a Kassite glossary and Hurrian cuneiform texts from a site called Nuzi, attest to the presence of Indo- European Speakers in the Near East in this early period. It is not the intention here to discuss any of the words, whose etymologies are much disputed, but to draw u M. Mayrhofer, Die Indo-Arier im alten Vordera- Vorderen Orient - Ein Mythos?, SWAW, (Vienna, sie n (Wiesbaden, 1 966), and his sequel Die Arier im 1 974), 294. Pre-Iranian History ofthe Plateau and Central Asia 41 historical conclusions from the undeniable presence of Indo-European Speakers in Mesopotamia who came from the east. From the outset, it can be accepted now that those Indo-European Speakers were Indians, yroto-Indians, or Indo-Aryans (to be distinguished from Dravidians or other Indians), whatever one may wish to call them; they were neither Iranians nor unseparated Indo-Iranians. This general opinion is shared by scholars who hotly dispute the etymologies of various words such as Kammenhuber, Dyakonov, and Mayrhofer (cf. bibliographies of works in Mayrhofer, Die Arier, supra). The second point, that these Indians were not a group who came westward from India but rather an offshoot of probably the first migration of Indo-European Speakers from Central Asia into eastern Iran or Afghanistan, is also generally accepted by most scholars. Further conclusions are rarely drawn, except the obvious one that these Indians, even though they may have been a ruling class ofthe Mitanni, were soon absorbed into the local populations of Mesopotamia and Syria. Unfortunately, we do not have the data to come to any more conclusions, but the important question one would ask is, what is the story of these Indians in Iran? Either they were only a small spearhead of a tribe which wandered from the east across Iran to Mesopotamia, or they were only that group of Indians who moved away from other Indians on the Iranian plateau down to the plains of Mesopotamia. If the former were true, the Indians must have been an unusual military band with a superior technology of war chariots which enabled them to cut through other peoples in Iran to penetrate like a mobile army to the plains of Mesopotamia. If the Indians of Mitanni were only part of a much larger group of Indians on the Iranian plateau, one would expect some traces of them in Iran. Also, in either case, the split between the Indians and Iranians must have occurred much earlier than hitherto supposed, and presumably in Central Asia not in Iran or Afghanistan. These two questions are related to each other, and we must examine both of them. The latter problem has been much discussed by both archaeologists and linguists because it is part of the Indo-European problem about which there is an enormous literature. Here too there is now a consensus that the homeland ofthe Indo-European peoples was in south Russia, while the Indo-Iranian branch was located in the northeastern part ofthat general homeland. This is, of course, all hypothetical, but it is the most likely theory. Also, the Indo-Iranians probably were the last, or one ofthe last, of the Indo-European peoples to move from the homeland, and the movement was to the south and east. The difficulty of attaching archaeological finds to linguistic data plagues everyone seeking to reconstruct the movement ofthe Indo-Iranians, but a general acceptable hypothesis is that the Separation ofthe Indians from the Iranians took place in Central Asia, or even more to the north, and the Indians moved southward in the first half ofthe second millennium B.c. This admittedly is imprecise, but it is not possible to go into further details given the State of knowledge at present. At the same time one must account for the existence ofthe Dardic languages today and other facts, so an attempt at explanation should be made, always remembering that we are not dealing with factual data but surmises. Ghirshman reconstructs the movement ofthe Indians as follows 1 : the place from 1 Op. eil. [eh. 2, n. 32], 18. 48 Chapter III which they dispersed was Gurgan and Turkmenistan where they had settled in the third millennium b.c. Coming from the north. He bases the settlement of Indians on the presence of grey or black pottery which replaces earlier painted pottery, accompanied by clay idols, highly stylized "violin-shaped" female figurines. Together with these two features, chariots drawn by horses and small trumpets in gold or silver complete the list of components identifying the Indians (or Indo-Aryans). Where these features occur in excavations, according to the author, we should expect to find Indians. These criteria force the author to bring the Indians to the southeast corner of the Caspian Sea already at the end of the fourth millennium b.c. Such an early date is surprising though not impossible. The first criterion for the presence of Indians is the grey or black pottery. But this pottery is also associated later with Iranians at sites such as Hasanlu south of Lake Urmia in Azerbaijan, presumably with a Mannean (Mannai) population. 2 The distribution over time and Space of grey or black wäre obviously precludes the incorrect syllogism that where this wäre occurs we must have Indians. To turn to the "violin-shaped" female figurines, a special style centered on Turkmenistan can be argued, but the existence of similar figurines from the Indus valley to Mesopotamia from ages long before the Indo-Iranians appeared also cannot be denied, and an extensive survey of such figurines does not support Ghirshman's hypothesis. 3 Horses and chariots also do not inspire confidence in his theory, since at Uruk from the end of the fourth millennium, the character for a four-wheeled vehicle is recorded in cuneiform and the domestication of the horse is also early there. 4 This leaves the trumpet, and the evidence brought by Ghirshman for the Indo-Aryan origin of this is the borrowing of it by the Egyptians, possibly from the Mitanni. In other words, none of Ghirshman's arguments are convincing; on the other hand all of them conceivably may be attributed to Indo-Aryans if this term is stretched beyond the usual conception of these people. All of this brings us back to philology and how the Indians came to the Near East. What happened to the Indians who did not descend to the plains of Mesopotamia as a component of the Mitanni? As mentioned, either the Mitanni Indians were an isolated band who wandered far to the west leaving no remnants behind them in Iran, or they were only a small part of a larger group in Iran, and if the latter where are their traces? If traces are to be found, they should exist in the mountain refuge areas where the remnants of the Indians survived while the rest were absorbed by their cousins, the Iranians, who came later. T. Burrow, who adheres to this view, even suggests that the name Urmia (for town and lake) goes back to a Sanskrit word ürmi "wave." 5 This is unlikely, however, since in the Urartian language a number of place 2 See E. Porada, The Art of Andern Iran (New Reports of the USSR delegation to the 8th York, 1965), 108, and R. H. Dyson, "Problems of international congress of pre- and proto-historic Protohistoric Iran as seen from Hasanlu," JNES, 24 sciences in Beigrade, 8-9. More detailed and with a (1965), 211. large bibliography is her article "Rasprostranenie V. M. Masson and V. I. Sarianidi, Sredneasiats- konevodstva i kulta konya v iranoyazychnykh kaya Terrakota epokhi bronzy (Moscow, 1973), plemen Srednei Azii," in Srednyaya Aziya, ed. by especially eh. 4 B. G. Gafurov and B. A. Litvinskii (Moscow, 4 E. E. Kuzmina, Earliesl Evidence of Horse 1 977), 28-52. Domestication and Spread of Wheeled Vehicles in 5 T. Burrow, "The Indoaryans," JRAS (1973), Connection with Problem of time and place of the 139 formalion of Indo-European Unity (Moscow, 1971) Pre-Iranian History of the Plateau and Central Asia 49 names begin with ur-, and Urmia, being in Mannean territory, is more likely a word from their language than from Sanskrit. Likewise the etymology of Mazandaran as containing the name Indra, a Vedic deity, proposed by Burrow, does not inspire confidence. 6 What is needed are some names which are indisputably Indian, such as the Mitanni deities. Unfortunately, etymologies of names are subject to as much dispute among linguists as the historical significance of pottery types among archaeologists, and none of the names suggested as being of Indian origin, Bagdatti and Artasari, Bagbartu, etc. can be definitely assigned an exclusively Indian etymology. 7 So in the realm of linguistics we depend on impressions, which suggest an Indian presence on the plateau or in the mountains of Iran, but there is no data available to confirm these impressions. If we follow Burrow in his discussion of devs in Mazandaran, again we are in the realm of conjecture, for the use of the term dev, in a favorable sense, does not assure us that Indians were present, in Opposition to the Iranian or Zoroastrian condemnation of the devs, and their worshippers. The devs could, of course, refer to non-Aryan deities and names found in the Caspian region later, such as Devsalär 'leader ofdevs,' Devdäd Theodore,' etc., do not necessarily point to Indians or even to Iranians who did not follow the condemnation of the daevas and daiva worship. On the other hand, the Indians of the Mitanni people must have existed, so the theory of a first wave of Aryans as manifested in these Indians or proto- Indians, before the coming of the Iranians, is not at all far-fetched. The existence of the Dardic languages in the northeast of the Iranian area would also point to an early wave of Indo-European Speakers into this area. The extreme dimculties of comparing contemporary languages with an ancient language of over three millennia ago (the Indic of the Mitanni) is obvious, and further comparison with the religion of some of the Dardic people (the deity Imra as Indra, and the like) with the Vedic deities of Varuna, Miträ, etc. can lead to no certain conclusions, but rather little more than a subjective intuition that the remote ancestors of the Dardic peoples had some relations with the Indians of the Mitanni. There is, it seems, no objection to the proposition that when the Iranians came upon the plateau they were not the first Indo-European Speakers that the autochthonous population had encountered. Surely the Indian layer on the substratum, however, was not very numerous, and in places it must have been absorbed early by the natives. The only traces of the Indians which may have survived could be the daiva worship (not devil worship), primarily in the Caspian provinces, which withstood the Zoroastrian reform of the ancient religion of the Indo-Iranians. As we shall see, a Zoroastrian reform is the easiest way to explain most of the divergences between the Iranians and the Indians in religion. THE NEAR EAST AT THE TURN OF THE MILLENNIUM Whatever the role and importance of the Indians in the Near East had been, by the year 1000 b.c. the autochthonous people were organized into small states or tribes in western Iran, according to cuneiform sources. Elam was in decline, since it had S. Kiyä, Shähnäme ve Mäzandärän (Tehran "Weiteres zur Urgeschichte der Inder," KZ, 55 1353/1975), 32 (1927), 75-103, especially 100. 7 Burrow.op. dt. [n. 5], 140; and P. Kretschmer, 50 Chapter III suffered greatly at the hands of the Babylonians over a Century previously. The Kassites long before 1000 b.c. had been absorbed in Mesopotamia, although in the Zagros mountains, present southern Luristan, they continued to live, and many of the 'Luristan' bronzes were found in graves here. Known to the Greeks as KoaaaToi, to the Latin authors as Cossaeans (both with variants) and in cuneiform sources as Kassa, this Zagros people are mentioned as late as Alexander's conquests. To the south of them, also in the mountains lived the Uxii or Ov£ioi (with variants), hwz' in the Talmud (but applied to the plains as well as mountains), Hüzäye in Syriac, and Khuzistan of today with its capital Ahwäz (Arabic pl. oihwz). These tribal peoples owed no allegiance, or only temporary, nominal fealty to Elam or other later states. In Persis to the south were primarily Elamites with their principal city Anshan Qiodie Tepe Malyan), and to the north of the Kassites apparently were various peoples who are not clearly identifiable in the cuneiform sources. Whether the ancient, Quti/Guti, or other peoples still lived in the Zagros mountains at the beginning of the first millennium B.c. is uncertain, but surely their descendants were there. It is clear, however, that no states or tribes were either dominant or expanding in this area at this time, but this was to change greatly with a series of events which seems to have occurred in the first centuries of the millennium - the expansion of Assyria and Urartu, and, of course, the Iranians over the plateau. If we only had information from the first Century of the millennium, some of the later changes in states and peoples might be explicable, but one can only guess at the forces at work which changed this part of the ancient world. Assyria had expanded, especially to the west, under Tiglath-Pileser I (c. 1116-1090 B.C.) but after his reign had soon returned to the size of its homeland in northern Mesopotamia. Babylon likewise was in a State of decline, and the apparent reason for the decline of both powers was the spread of the Arameans into Mesopotamia. Many small states of these invaders from the desert were created, but they never united into a strong kingdom. Instead they gradually gave their language to the settled folk and fused with them. The spread of the Arameans and their language Aramaic was paralleled by the expansion of the Iranians, and incidentally also of a much more widespread use of iron and steel. 8 Whether the Iranians were carriers of this expanded metallurgy is doubtful, but they could have utilized it well in their expansion. We return to the question of the Iranians who spread from their homeland much later than their cousins, the Indians. The Iranians, we have mentioned, remained in Central Asia and continued the tradition of the Andronovo culture after the Indians had moved south. It is interesting to note that ancient Iranians in Central Asia, and presumably extending into European Russia, did have contacts with the Finno- Ugrian peoples, but not apparently with the Baltic Speakers. 9 These observations, based on linguistic data, coincide with archaeological finds of the Andronovo culture in Kazakhastan. Since the widespread (over both space and time) black or grey pottery is no useful index of the presence of either Aryans or Iranians, what were some other See C. A. Singer, A History of Technology, obugrischen Sprachen (Budapest, 1972), esp. 33-34; 5 vols. (Oxford, 1954-58); and R. J. Forbes, and P. Arumaa, "Baltes et iranicns," Sludi Linguis- Sludies in Ancient Technology (Leiden, 1955- tici in onore di Vitlore Pisani (Brescia, Paideia, 58). 1969), 73-90, esp. 89-90. E. Korenchy, hanische Lehnwörter in den Pre-Iranian History of the Plateau and Central Asia 51 features of the culture of the early Iranians? Just as with pottery one must be careful in attributing types of burial and features of material culture exclusively to Iranians, for they too could be borrowed or adapted by other peoples. Burials in kurgans, a large mound with a room for the body and burial objects, and interment of horses with the dead chieftain or warrior, are two features of the culture of the Andronovo people. 10 Can one maintain that wherever these two features are found Iranians are present, or that they are exclusive to the Iranians? In any one of these two cases, the migration of Iranians through the Caucasus to northwestern Iran can be proposed, since kurgan burials have been found in Soviet Azerbaijan near sites such as Mingechaur and Kirovabad. 1 ' The use ofkurgans persisted into historic times and the dating of graves without inscriptions is particularly difFicult, since presumably the early Iranians were nomads or semi-nomads who both adopted and gave ideas, making difficulties in entangling origins. There is no reason why Iranian bands should not have gone down the western shores of the Caspian Sea, as well as through Central Asia. And, whereas the possible traces of an Iranian migration from the north to Azerbaijan and south are difFicult to find, in Central Asia archaeological indications for a migration are more promising. In Central Asia the archaeological trail of Iranian migrations, as of any migrations of tribes, has not left clear traces. Soviet archaeologists, however, have opened new vistas on ancient Central Asia, and although excavations at Kyuzeli-Gyr in Khwarazm, Afrasiyab I in Sogdia, Elken tepe in Turkmenia, Yaz II in the Merv oasis and Kobadian I on the north bank of the Oxus River in southern Tajikistan have revealed similar pottery from the immediate pre-Achaemenid period, the earlier centuries are not at all uniform. 1 2 All attempts to establish the material culture of the ancient Aryans on the basis of archaeological finds, including types of burial, metal objects and the like, have failed to establish an overall accepted reconstruction of the expansion of the ancient Iranians. One feature which may confuse archaeologists is that cultural objects may go the opposite direction from a nomadic invasion or a movement of peoples. Indeed, it is likely that many aspects of early Iranian settled civilization, including city or town structures, came from Mesopotamia or at least from south to north rather than the reverse. 13 The direction of influence is always difFicult to discern especially in early periods of history. It is not possible here to discuss the many ramifications of Central Asian archaeology, the comparative stratigraphies of such key sites as Anau and Namazga tepe in Turkmenistan, and the many other excavations which have given us a picture of Central Asia difFerent from the old view of the area as a wide expanse of steppe lands sparsely inhabited by nomads. Although deserts do occupy much of Central Asia, elsewhere the fertility is great, as Quintus Curtius, historian of Alexander the Great, noted, "the land of the Bactriani is of a manifold and varied nature. In one part Smirnov and Kuzmina, supra, Protskhozh- Drevnezemledelcheskaya kullura Margiany, MIA 73 •k"'«. 6. (Moscow, 1959), 218 pp. A French summary of For a bibliography see K. V. Trevor, Ocherki the book by Ghirshman may be found in IA, 4 Po isiorii i Kulture Kavkazskoi Albami (Moscow, (1964), 69-84. 1959), 36. iJCf. V. M. Masson, "Problema drevnego A good survey of the pottery of the various goroda i arkheologicheskie pamyatniki severnoi sites with historical notes is in V. M. Masson, Baktrii," Dreunyaya Baktriya (Leningrad, 1974), 8. 52 Chapter III many trees and vines produce plentiful and mellow fruits, frequent streams irrigate the rieh soil, the milder parts of which they sow with grain, the rest they leave for pasture for the flocks." 14 There is no evidence of any large political entity in Central Asia before or at the time of the expansion of the Iranians, and one would not be expected so early. From excavations and from the Avesta, as well as the parallel Vedas, however, a tentative coneeption of the life of the early Iranian tribes may be reconstrueted. The picture of early Iranian life by Geiger still retains interest for the Student even though some of his nineteenth Century romantic coneeptions or ideas about race seem misplaced today. 15 The ancient Iranians were both conversant with agriculture and, of course, with pastoralism; at least the vocabulary indicates both forms of life. Likewise the tribal nature of Iranian society is implied by the aecounts of Herodotus and other Classical writers which conform to all we know about it. There are no indications of a developed town life among the early Iranians, and we may assume that they encountered relatively undeveloped urban societies, and only in some of the oases of Central Asia and on the Iranian plateau. 16 For a long period of time the Iranians probably remained in Central Asia and eastern Iran with little contact to the west where settled eultures did flourish. We infer this since the Avesta shows no evidence of any contact with the states or civilizations which existed in western Iran or Mesopotamia. Although the 'urban revolution,' to use an expression of Gordon Childe, had not oecurred in the areas where the early Iranians first lived before spreading over the plateau, some Settlements even previous to the Coming of the Iranians did exist in Central Asia. 17 Trade and commerce, as noted above, had been active for many centuries if not millennia before the Coming of the Iranians, but Settlements for the produetion of objeets were few and small.' 8 In oases such as Herat and in Seistan small centers probably existed, but we need more archaeological work to give us a clear picture of their extent and nature. Anthropologists and sociologists have proposed many criteria for the development of urbanism, or for the distinetion between an urban and an agricultural civilization, and modeis have been created to apply everywhere. One or more of the modeis may fit the case of the Iranians, but from the only sources we have, archaeology and the ancient religious writings, again the dominant pastoral society of the early Iranians is what strikes one's attention. It was an heroie, tribal society probably similar to the life of the Pathans or Pashtuns today on the Afghan-Pakistan borderlands. The exploits of warriors and sacrifices to the gods were two important activities we infer from the Avesta. Controversy has not subsided over the theories of Georges Dumezil regarding Indo- 14 Hisforyo/Vl/e.vWer(VII,4,26),ed.andtrans. Evolution of Urban Society (Chicago, 1966); R. by John C. Rolfe, 2 (London, 1962), 159. Tringham.ed., Urban Settlements (Warner Modu- 15 W. Geiger, Ostiranische Kultur im Altertum lar Publications, Andover, Mass., 1973); R. (Erlangen, 1882). Braidwood and G. Willey, eds., Courses Toward 16 See V. M. Masson, Srednyaya Aziya i Drevnii Urban Life (Chicago, 1962), and R. M. Adams, Vostok (Moscow, 1964), 454-56. 'The Origins of Cities," in C. C. Lamberg- 17 V. G. Childe, "The Urban Revolution," in Karlovsky, ed., Old World Archaeology (San The Rise and Fall of Civilizations, ed. by C. C. Francisco, 1972), 137-43. Lamberg-Karlovsky (Menlo Park, California, ,8 Cf. J. A. Sabloff and C C. Lamberg- 1974), 6-14. An immense literature exists on the Karlovsky, eds., Civilization and Trade (Albuquer- beginnings of urbanism; cf. R. M. Adams, The que, N. M., 1975). Pre-Iranian History of the Plateau and Central Asia 53 European, and, of course, early Iranian society and religion. Indeed in the Iranian field scholars are sharply divided on the theory or on its relevance to an understanding of ancient Iranian society. Briefly Dumezil claims that Indo-European society had a tripartite division based on a conscious ideology found nowhere eise in the world. Although the division of people into priests, warriors and common folk may have existed elsewhere, only the Indo-Europeans developed this ideology as a fundamental basis of both their religion and their society. 19 In this division of society, which reflects the division of the gods, there is a further subdivision of magical and juridical aspects of the three functions. Thus, among the Indians, the gods Mitra and Varuna were the deities of the priests, the highest function of sovereignty, and this corresponded to Vohu Manah and Asa in Iran, two of the AmSsa Spentas "holy immortals" or archangels in the Zoroastrian religion. Although the Zoroastrian reform of the ancient religion of the Iranians changed the roles of the ancient Indo- Iranian deities, Dumezil nonetheless finds a continuation of the ancient Indo- European ideology in Zoroastrianism with a Substitution of characters for the original roles. Almost everyone concedes that a tripartite division of society is almost a natural differentiation in ancient societies everywhere, the only argument concerning Dumezil's theory is the conscious, overwhelming importance of this ideology and its ramifications for the Indo-Europeans. It would fit in well with the caste system of India or the division of society into three classes in Iran, but the significant ramifications of this are difficult to find. To say that one important result of the division of society was the Männerbund or group of young warriors, upholders of the second function of force or military power, does not single out Indo-European society as greatly different from other societies. If the young men of the Indo- Europeans had better weapons or horses than the young men of another group, one can only say that in a conflict the former would win. Just how far one can use the later Turkification of Azerbaijan or Anatolia as a model for the earlier expansion of the Iranians is subject to dispute, but the process by which local people adopted the language of their conquerors must have had some analogies in both cases. If there had been a clear tripartite ideology among the Indo-Europeans including the early Iranians, it is nowhere proclaimed or spelled out in the sources. It may well have been understood by everyone thus obviating any need to explain or propound it, but it is surely not found in unequivocal fashion in any sources. 20 To return to the Iranians, regardless of how profound a meaning the tripartite divisions of the cosmos and society had for these people, the rites and incantations used to propitiate or implore the deities for aid must have survived from the hoary Indo- European past, with possible additions or changes according to new circumstances of life or contact with other peoples. On the other hand, in religion conservatism is the rule, and an examination of the text of the Avesta does not reveal any autochthonous elements. This suggests that the ancient Iranian beliefs were perhaps closer to the The Output of Dumezil is prodigious, but The New Comparative Mythology (Berkeley, 1973), smce he insists that one read only his latest works, and in G. J. Larson, ed., Myth in Indo-European see hh Mythe et epopk, 3 vols. (Paris, 1968-73), and Antiquity (Berkeley, 1974). his earlier L'idMogie tripartite des Indo-Europlens 20 Most divisions of any kind can only be dual (Bruxelles, 1958). An analysis of his work, or tripartite, or multiples thereof, so the peculiarity including critics, may be found in C. S. üttleton, of such Classification is not apparent. 54 Chapter III general Indo-European religious milieu than the religions of many other daughter linguistic groups. By the time the Iranians spread over the plateau, however, we may say that the social and moral aspects of the deities in their pantheon were paramount, and the functions of the gods were more important than identifications with forces of nature. Thus Mithra (Vedic Mitra), while associated with or even identified as the sun, was more the god of respect for contracts and oaths among the Iranians, which was part of the responsibility of humans to follow or to have fta (Skt.) or ala (Avestan). This important concept in the religion of the Indians and the Iranians which has been well elucidated by Mary Boyce as the concept of order in its widest sense - cosmic, social - and the order of sacrifice, plus truth among men, was the basis of the philosophy of life of the ancient Indians and Iranians. 2 1 The pantheon of the Iranians presents a problem with the name of the highest god Ahura Mazda 'Lord Widsom,' seemingly an epithet. Although much controversy exists about the origin and identification of Ahura Mazda, it is generally accepted that this deity is somehow related to the Indic Varuna. Just how the Iranian Varuna lost his position and Ahura Mazda assumed the role of chief god for the Iranians is an enigma, but Boyce proposed that Varuna was tied to another deity of the waters Apäm Napät, and whereas in ancient India the figure of Apäm Napät receded and Varuna remained important, in Iran the reverse happened. Further, in Iran Ahura Mazda assumed the role of Varuna, while Mithra/Mitra remained important for both Iranians and Indians. 22 There is much discussion among scholars about the various roles of the deities in the pantheon of the ancient Iranians, and here is not the place to investigate such details, but rather the role of religion in the life of people and related problems concern the historian. In both India and Iran hymns were sung to the deities as part of the ritual or sacrifice, and the hymns were passed on from priest to priest from hoary antiquity. If anything, the Iranians were more universal than the Indians in their objects of praise or worship, for in the Avesta we find praise for plants, animals, mountains, rivers, the days of the year, and in fact much of creation is revered (e.g., Yasna 17, 17). We do not find the transposition of identities of one deity to another in the Avesta as in the Rigveda of India. Thus in RV I, 94, 13 Agni is identified with Mitra and in RV II, 1 , 3 with Indra and Visnu, but in Iran we do not find this in the hymns. It is difficult to know what has been changed or added in later times to the text of the Avesta, but such additions seem to conform to the spirit and continuity of the ancient religion. In fact, the "long tradition" daraya upayanä is mentioned several times in the Avesta as something to be revered (Y. 17, 13, etc.). Repetition of formulae is also a constant feature of the Avesta, and the only important changes or additions to the ancient religion probably were made by Zoroaster. Before turning to the prophet, however, one may mention several features of the religion which seem to have been in Operation before Zoroaster. One was surely ancestor worship, found all over the world of the Indo-Europeans, and in the Avesta a special Yast 13 is devoted to the spirits of the departed including animals, birds, etc. (verse 74). Prayers to mountains, rivers, the elements (fire, wind, water, etc.) have been mentioned, and we shall meet this feature again below in considering the 21 Boyce, A History ofZoroastrianism.l (Leiden, 22 Ibid., 48-52. 1975), 27. Pre-Iranian History of che Plateau and Central Asia 55 cuneiform tablets in Elamite from Persepolis. Ritual punfication and ablutions were probably also a part of the religion of the ancient Iranians, and in later times fire occupied a special place in the worship of Zoroastrians. The eclipse or rise of certain deities, the dropping of names for epithets, and the changes in functions of certain spirits, in both India and Iran, all have provided scholars with much material for speculation. Fortunately, the detailed account of the gods of pagan Iran by Boyce obviates the need to comment on these religious and etymological questions. 23 It should be noted that the demons and evil forces in the world were as innumerable as the good spirits, and it seems that at times propitiation of demons in many forms was as much a part of some rituals as were the hymns and ofFerings to the benevolent spirits. Also noteworthy is that legends in the Avesta about ancient heroes blend with those of the gods. Obviously all things in life, health and sickness, poverty and wealth, and many more, were bound to religion in words and deeds, hymns and sacrifices. Belief in an afterlife also was a feature of ancient Iranian religion, but burial customs as recovered by archaeologists are notoriously dimcult to interpret as reflecting theological or eschatological beliefs ofthose who practiced them. Whether the rulers or aristocracy espoused different means of disposal of a corpse than those of common folk is not easy to determine, but archaeology indicates that many of the early Iranians buried their dead in the ground. 24 In this connection the ancient rite of the horse sacrifice (RV I, 162) the aivamedha, the skeletons of which have been found by archaeologists in graves in south Russia in later Scythian times, indicates the importance of burial for at least kings and warriors. For both Indians and Iranians horses and chariots were important, as.we find in the Vedas and Avesta (Druäspä Ya$t I, 2; Mithra Yak, 10-11, etc.). Furthermore, the horse was a symbol or incarnation (avatar) of various deities, including Tistriya, the star Sirius (Yast, 8, 46). It was a feature of both Indian and Iranian religious belief that epithets and symbols were interchangeable among the deities, and thus a picture of a universal or even syncretistic pantheon of deities, overlapping each other's functions and domain, is revealed. This should have enabled the Iranians to integrate local spirits or deities of other peoples, such as those of the Elamites, into the vast Iranian pantheon. Probably only later did real syncretism become fashionable, when the gods of the Greeks were identified with Iranian deities. Obviously what we have preserved of the ancient Iranian and Indian religions is the priestly traditions, what one might call scholastic traditions, reflecting the beliefs, rituals and legalities of one group over the millennia. The mythology of the Avesta may well have been understood differently by priests than by the common folk, who were surely more inclined to magical interpretations of hymns, special incantations to ward off evil, and less formal interpretations of the meanings of sacrifices and litanies than those of the priests. The cult of haoma (Skt. soma) which produced ecstasy in the participants who drank the draught prepared from the plant, whatever it was, necromancy, divination and other populär manifestations of the supernatural, were probably more important for the common folk than the elaborate hymns to the gods and the rituals which were the specialty of Ibid., 22-84. of graves in those places and times when Iranians It is difficult to assign certain graves to were living indicates that some Iranians buried Iranians, and to distinguish between nomadic and their dead. settled burial customs. Nonetheless, the existence 56 Chapter III priests. The Avesta, as we have it, in general shows the result of much priestly preoccupation with the text, and rather than devote more space to continued discussion of the religious beliefs of the ancient Iranians, which have exercised generations of scholars in Iranian matters, let us turn to the society and perhaps political order indicated by the religious texts. From the absence of words and expressions for city or even State in the Avesta, one may conclude that early Iranians lived in a tribal society based on the extended family. In both the RV (e.g., I, 96, 3) and the Avesta (Yast 8, 56; Yast 13, 10) the Aryan tribes or Aryan lands are mentioned, indicating a strong sense of solidarity and difference from the subjugated peoples. The family (Av. nmäna) and clan or extended family (vis) were the basis of authority in ancient Iranian society with the pater familias (nmänöpaitt) under the vtspaiti, the clan leader. The zantupaiti, the tribal chief, on the other hand, seems to have represented more than just a larger unit of people, but was also a chief of a district or the land where the tribe had its home. It is difficult, of course, to distinguish between territorial and human units, but the next higher division of society, the dahyu, is apparently a geographical more than a social division, although if one translated this word as 'people' rather than more correct 'country,' the hierarchy in society would be maintained. Beyond this stratification an even higher confederacy of 'peoples' is implied in some parts of the Avesta, notably in Yast 10 dedicated to Mithra, where a chief of some such confederacy is mentioned (verse 18: fratemaöät, and verse 115). Although some scholars have claimed that this means the existence of an empire, I. Gershevitch has convincingly argued that we should rather understand a confederation of Iranian peoples, perhaps headed by a Council with a chief ofthat Council. 25 Perhaps the easiest way to indicate the old Iranian hierarchy of groups is to look at the Old Persian cuneiform inscriptions where the family or taumä (Av. nmäna) is the narrow family of Darius, and the clan, or extended family, would be viO, here Achaemenid (Hakhämanishya) ; the tribe (unattested in OP) would be the Pasargadae, and finally the people or nation (OP dahyu), in the case of Darius, were the Pärsa or Persians inhabiting Persis or Fars. Above this in the case of the Achaemenids was an empire instead of a confederacy as previously in eastern Iran. The Avestan words sästar, hamö-xfadra, xlaya, and others, seem to be epithets of the ruler of the dahyu, or possibly of a chief of the rulers in a confederacy. Later, in western Iran, of course, different concepts of rule developed with the Achaemenid Empire, which will be discussed below. In addition to the political hierarchy above, there existed the social division already mentioned, between priests, warriors and common folk (Yasna 40, 3). Caste divisions, as known in India (Skt. värna), are not found in Iran, and the special position of the priests later, an exclusive and hereditary Situation, was surely the end result of priestly endeavors to exalt their own standing. As in most tribal societies, presumably also among the ancient Iranians, the young warriors of the tribe were of prime importance. Much has been written about the Old Persian word marlka, usually translated as 'menial' or 'servant,' although the Interpretation of this as the young 25 1. Gershevitch, The Avestan Hymn to Mithra synonym, cannot be discussed here, but the picture (Cambridge, 1959), 296-99. The relation of the of the hierarchy is unchanged. Gathic term SoiOra (Skt. ksltra) to zantu, possibly a Pre-Iranian History of the Plateau and Central Asia 51 warrior of a tribe makes more sense. 26 Whether the young Iranian warriors followed special cults apart from the rest of the people, as suggested by Wikander, is possible, but any definite Information about them is lacking. 27 Priests, on the other hand, dominate the scene in the religious writings which have survived, again probably a distortion of their real Status in the society of the time. There are many words denoting priests but one of special concern to us is kavi, a word with a long tradition in Iranian languages, but which originally probably meant a seer or wise man as in India. 28 Somehow and somewhere in eastern Iran the kavis seem to have attained temporal power and started dynasties of rulers in small areas. At least this is the easiest interpretation of the title at the time of the prophet Zoroaster, to whom we must now turn. The figure of Zoroaster is at the core of the Avesta but his life and times are anything but historical, since legends have accumulated about him throughout the ages. Most scholars now agree that the place of Zoroaster is in eastern Iran because of the language of the Avesta and the geographical knowledge found there, both of which refer to the east. To narrow the geographical limits further is difficult, but the view of Henning that Herat and Merv was the most likely candidate for the area of activity of the patron of the prophet Kavi Vishtaspa has much to commend it. 29 Because of the shifting of place names by the movement of people any geographical identifications must be subject to great scrutiny, and no real determination of the place of Zoroaster's activity is possible. The closeness of the Khwarazmian language of later times with the two dialects of the Avesta, Gathic and the dialect of the rest of the Avesta, was shown by Henning, although he cautioned that Khwarazmian cannot be considered a descendant of Avestan. 30 The movement of the Iranian Sakas in the first centuries b.c. to Seistan probably contributed to legends about Zoroaster's activities in their new home, while those traditions assigning the prophet to Azerbaijan are even later in origin. Thus we can only say that somewhere near the Herat area would be a likely place for the area where Kavi Vishtaspa flourished. The date of Zoroaster has produced much controversy, some scholars such as Herzfeld assigning the prophet to the time of Cyrus with the assumption that Vishtaspa is to be identified with the father of Darius who bore the same name. 31 Others adopted the tradition of some later Zoroastrian writings that the prophet lived 258 years before Alexander," a tradition whose reliability was ably defended by Henning. 32 His principal argument was the likelihood that any fabricated number would have some magical or other, perhaps historical, overtones, whereas 258 had none and therefore should be considered reliable. This date was accepted as genuine in Sasanian times and was reported in the later Arabic writings of al-BifünT, Mas 'üdland others, even though the interpretation of "before Alexander" was much disputed. 33 Cf. Frye, supra, The Heritage of Persia, 55. of articles, ed. by B. Schlerath, Zarathustra 27 S. Wikander, Der Arische Mannerbund (Lund, (Darmstadt, 1 970). 19 ^8). 30 Henning, op. eil., 44-45. On the term see Boyce, op. eil. [n. 21 ], 1 1 , and 3 ' E. Herzfeld, Zoroaster and his World (Prince- ^«shevitch, op. eil. [n. 25], 185. ton, 1947), esp. 161 and 204. W - B - Henning, Zoroaster (Oxford, 1951), " Op. eil. [n. 29], 40-42. 43. His name probably means 'one who can handle "See S. Shahbazi, "The 'traditional date of cameis well', an appropriate name for eastern Iran. Zoroaster' explained," BSOAS, 40 (1977), 29- On the prophet and his message, see the collection 30. 58 Chapter III Among some scholars, however, the origin or significance of the number which was passed to posterity was disputed, and Shahbazi suggested that the date "258 years before Alexander" was taken by Zoroastrian priests from Babylonian sources, which would have played down the reigns of the early Achaemenid kings, Cyrus, Darius and Xerxes, who conquered or suppressed uprisings in Babylonia, whereas Artaxerxes I, who had several Babylonian wives, does appear in the Zoroastrian tradition. 34 On the basis of a Babylonian origin for the year 258, Shahbazi finds that 539 B.c., the date of Cyrus' conquest of Babylon, is 228 years before the Seleucid era, plus 30 years for the prophet's life before he received a call to propagate the good religion. The Babylonian origin for the dates of early Zoroastrian tradition is an interesting Suggestion which at the least Supports an older date for Zoroaster. To go further and date Zoroaster at 1080 b.c., on the basis of a Statement of Xanthos of Lydia and the Khwarazmian calendar is perhaps overly bold, but the traditional date has now been seriously challenged. 35 Inasmuch as centuries are but as a day for prehistoric times, it is hardly possible to assign even a Century for Zoroaster's activity, and Boyce's "about 1 500 b.c., or even earlier," places perhaps too much weight on the hoary antiquity of both the Gathic dialect and on archaic rites and the contents of the hymns. 36 To give a date to Zoroaster, even in a certain Century, is hazardous. Since Zoroaster is probably to be dated in prehistoric times and placed in eastern Iran, the continuity of his teachings, the basis of the religion we call Zoroastrianism, throughout so many centuries to the present is most striking. This is not to deny changes in the religion, but his personality and teachings must have made a powerful impact on his contemporaries to have survived. Many scholars have suggested that Zoroaster was a traditional priest who broke with the ancient religion and became a monotheist. There is nothing, however, to suggest that the prophet did more than inject his own moral and ethical ideas into the ancient religion of the Iranians seeking thus to reform it. At most he could be characterized as advocating monolatry, since in the Gathas he appeals to Ahura Mazda, although other deities are assumed to be helpers of the great god, while followers of the evil spirit Angra Mainyu (MP Ahriman) are not denied existence by the prophet. This is not the place to discuss the doctrine of the six AmSsa Spentas, helpers of the creator Ahura Mazda, or of the ethical dualism and the choice of man, but we must seek to recover the historical significance of the Zoroastrian reform of the old religion. From the Avesta it is clear that Zoroaster had no easy time propagating his ideas. The turning point came when Kavi Vishtaspa accepted his teachings, but this led to many conflicts which are indicated in the Yasts. Possibly one reason for the slow propagation of the faith was that Vishtaspa seems to have been the last of his dynasty. Perhaps the initial establishment of the faith by the sword was followed by a more pacific spread by priests, since Yasna 42, 6 honors "the return of the priests (äthrauan), who go (to those) afar who seek asa (truth, nghteousness) in (other) lands." The FarvardTn Yast 13, 94 speaks of the spread of the Mazdayasnian (Mazdä-worshipping) religion all over the u Ibid., 32 Jf M. Boyce, A Persian Slrotighold of Zoroas- 35 Ibid. 34 See also Boyce, op eil. |n 21], 17, irianism (Oxford, 1977), 17 189-91, with other arguments for a very early date. Pre-Iranian History of the Plateau and Central Asia 59 world, and the many personal names, as well as place names, must have been real, although they cannot be identified. Verse 143 speaks of the jravahs or spirits of asa believing men and women of the Aryan, Tüira, Sairima, Säinu, Dänu and other lands which are honored in prayer. The persons mentioned as belonging to these groups or lands have Iranian names yet there must have been something to separate them, since only the first are particularly mentioned as the Aryans. In the Iranian epic tradition the Tüira, Sairima, and Säinu were identified as descendants of three brothers Erech, Salm and Tue, Iranian counterparts of Biblical Shem, Harn and Japheth. The Sairima have been identified as Sauromatae in South Russia by Marquart, while the Dänu with the Dahae of Classical sources to the east of the Caspian Sea. 37 The Säini are enigmatic while the Tüira or Türa present many problems, since they became known as the enemies of the Iranians par excellence in the epic tradition, and with the advent of the Turks in this part of the world they were identified with the ancient Tür people, who may have been originally an Iranian tribe which actively combated Zoroaster's teachings. The district of Turan (Kalat in present day Baluchistan) may reflect a movement of the Türa to the south, but it is of interest that it is today oecupied by Dravidian-speaking Brahuis, who seem to have fallen into the same category as the Turks to the north, both enemies of the Iranians. All attempts to relate the Avesta, or the ancient Iranian epic tradition as found in the Shahname of Firdosi, to historical events in eastern Iran have failed, since there is nothing other than the Avesta itself as a source. Poetic fiction and tales are so mixed with what might have been fact in the Avesta that it is not possible to distinguish them from each other, but Mary Boyce is probably correct in saying that "both secular and priestly traditions transmitted by minstrel poets as well as by religious schools," mixed with superstition and tales are found, and this mixture has been transmitted down to the present. 38 We cannot dwell on the basic features of Zoroastrianism, perhaps easily characterized as a threefold division of ethics (speaking, thinking and doing good), the correct Performance of acts of sacrifice, and the keeping of the laws of purity, all of which will help the individual to secure salvation in the world to come. The cosmic history, or the "world year" of the Zoroastrians, however, should be mentioned since it does figure in problems of chronology connected with the Zoroastrian sources. The origins of the "world year" divided into periods of a millennium each are uncertain, but Babylonian preoecupation with astronomy, mathematics and chronology suggest the lowlands as a possible place of origin. 39 Some Iranian sources give the number of millennia as nine, others as twelve, but there are further disagreements on the significance of the various periods of three thousand years each. The first period is said to be creation in the spiritual (menög) State, followed by the second period of creation of the physical universe (gitig), and in the third period Ahriman launches an attack and brings sickness and death, but at the end of this period of strife Zoroaster is born, and he reeeives his revelation at the very beginning of the 31 J 38 [ 39 - J. Marquart, EranSahr (Berlin, 1901), 155. late development in time speculation, but such [n- 36], 108. ideas were prevalent. Cf. "Berossos," by C. F. The exaet form of the Zoroastrian 'world Lehmann-Haupt, Reallexikon der Assyriologie, 2 year' is not attested in Babylonia and it may be a (Berlin 1932-), 9-11. 60 Chapter III fourth period. 40 Again it is not possible to follow the variations in prophecies about the last period of existence, but it had a cyclic character with good and evil times. The idea of one savior and then another, one every millennium, also developed in Zoroastrianism, together with apocalyptic ideas and the final judgment when good conquers evil. Beliefs in the world periods not only influenced ideas of chronology, but later prophets of doom or salvation appeared throughout the history of Iran exercising mfluences on the common folk. It should be remembered that we are talking about prehistory when history is only latent, or a history to be induced from few traces left by peoples, and those often of an enigmatic interpretation. Our reconstructions are based on surmises, and it is thus necessanly an impressionistic view which is presented. Any kind of quantitative history or 'manifest' history based on specific historical sources is impossible and probably always will remain so. The added accumulation of potsherds or other objects of material culture can only go so far in aiding our reconstruction of the past, and to reconstruct history from the Avesta is more like using the Book of Psalms rather than the historical books of the Old Testament as a source for recreating a history of the Israelites. Even the threefold division of society for that ancient period must be inferred, since there is no explicit Statement of this. We can make some guesses about the early history of Zoroastrianism, but they remain only surmises. Although the Gathas of Zoroaster usually speak in generalities about good and evil, Yasna 46 is more specific about the prophet himself : 'To what land to flee, where to flee shall I go? They keep (me) away from my own (family) and my friends. Neither the Community has satisfied me nor the deceitful rulers of the land." He continues to mention those who helped him in his need, Fryäna the Türa and Kavi Vishtaspa. This information has been amplified by later traditions which teil of the tribulations of the prophet and struggles to establish acceptance of his teachings. Just how much can be read into the early struggles of the faith, a conflict between settled herders and agriculturists who followed Zoroaster, and nomads who rejected him, is impossible to determine, but conflict there was. On an ideological or religious basis, it was probably primarily between the Zoroastrians who worshipped Ahura Mazda with his Amasa Spentas and the old daeva (Indian deva) worshippers, for whether it was Zoroaster who initiated the Opposition between good ahuras and evil daevas, or that he only emphasized what already existed, this Opposition has been a fundamental difFerence between the Indians and Iranians. Surely some Iranians did not follow Zoroaster's reform but rather opposed him, since daeva worshippers are mentioned in later sources, including the Old Persian inscriptions. Since the history of Zoro- astrianism has been recounted in great detail by Boyce, it is unnecessary to repeat controversies over interpretations of details of the religion. Suffice it to say that for centuries the Zoroastrian faith had to combat Opposition and in the process it codified lts own rites, rituals and beliefs into a way of life which held the Zoroastrians together down to the present. 40 The MP texts about the world era are translated in and discussed by R. Zaehner, Zurvan (Oxford, 1955), 95-100. Pre-Iranian History of the Plateau and Central Asia 61 ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND EXTRA-AVESTAN EVIDENCE A passage in Herodotus (III, 117) says that a certain piain in Asia surrounded by a ring of hüls in which five passes may be found, used to belong to the Khwarazmians, but now to the Achaemenids. Further, that piain was located on the boundaries of the Khwarazmians, Hyrcanians, Parthians, Sarangians and Thamanians. The last but one may be identified with the people of Drangiana (medieval Zranka) and the last with people living to the east of Seistan. From the words "used to belong to the Khwarazmians," scholars beginning with Marquart have deduced the existence of a large Khwarazmian State. 41 There is no tangible evidence, however, for the greater Khwarazmian empire, and the further supposition that Herodotus refers to an extensive irrigation System in the piain, thus requiring the existence of a centralized State, is unwarranted. It is true that archaeologists have uncovered ancient Settlements on the Murghab and Tejend Rivers, but again no evidence for a large State is available. 42 The results of archaeological investigations show rather the absence of urban centers, which would not suggest an ancient centralized State in the east. In Khwarazm itself archaeological work has revealed the existence of fortified living quarters or even villages from very early periods, but they teil us nothing of the political Situation in that area. 43 On the other hand, many scholars believe that the ancient homeland of the Iranians, called Airyandm vaejah (Iranian region), is to be identified with Khwarazm, which is in accord with lists of place names in the Vendidad 1, 2 (see also Yast 5, 17, etc.). 44 While this may be true, as the natural geographical halting place of tribes moving from the north, the place of Khwarazm in the Zoroastrian tradition is unclear, for we cannot determine later changes made by priests in the tradition. The various Iranian tribes must have dispersed from the land north of the Oxus River to the lands where we hear of them later, not all, however, moving at the same time. To the east went the Bactrians, probably the easternmost group of Iranians at this time. They may have displaced older Indo-Iranian or Dardic peoples living on the plains of modern Afghan Turkestan, such that remnants of these earlier peoples are today found only in the mountains. The legends associating Zoroaster with Balkh (ancient Bäxtri-) seem to be late in appearance and have no discernible historical basis. The name is derived from the river Bactrus (from Pliny, Nat. hist. VI, 48, 52) which means 'the bestower, distributer' according to Marquart. 45 Both the origin and the etymology of the name, however, are open to question, since it is uncertain whether the name is parallel to other Old Iranian tribal names such as Mäda or Pärsa, or if it is an autochthonous geographical name. If it is in fact originally a river name, it would parallel Harahuvati or Arachosia and Haraiva or Herat. The existence of a large 41 J. Markwart, Wehrot und Arang (Leiden, 44 Marquart, Eranlahr [n. 37], 118, 155, and E. 1 938), 8-1 2, and in other writings. Also Henning, Benveniste, "L'Erän-Vel et l'origine legendaire des »pat. [n. 29], 42. Iraniens," BSOS, 7 (1934), 265-74, and A. V. I. Sarianidi, "Pechati-Amuleti Murgabs- Christensen, Le premier chapitre du Vendidad et kogo stilya," SA, 1 (1976), 42-68, with further l'histoire primitive des tribus iraniennes (Copen- bibliographical references. hagen, 1943), 66-67. 43 S. P. Tolstov, Auf den Spuren der altchoresmi- 45 J. Markwart, A Catalogue of the Provincial sehen Kultur (Berlin, 1953), esp. 103-12. Capitals of Eränshahr (Rome, 1931), 34. 62 Chapter III Bactrian State before the Achaemenids also has been surmised by many scholars, but this assumption is even more tenuous than that of a Khwarazmian empire. Whatever the political realities in eastern Iran and Central Asia, we may conclude that the various oases must each have had a political Organization based on the clan or tribal structure of the Iranians, but beyond a possible confederation of such oasis states we are not justified to go, at least on the basis of the scant source material which exists. If we assume the existence of one or more confederations of oases with princelings, another question to ask is whether there was a solidarity on inner tribal lines only, or whether supra-tribal groups existed. That is, were the Bactrians only united among themselves in some kind of a Bactrian kingdom, or did the Bactrians and Sogdians, or others, have a large confederation of several tribes? Again, there is no evidence which can provide a satisfactory answer. If we remember, however, that the confederation of the Medes first came into being only at the end of the seventh Century B.C., most likely because of the threat of Assyrian conquest, the existence of a parallel eastern confederation seems unlikely. The later satrapy lists of the Achaemenids cannot be used profitably for a reconstruction of past combinations of lands or peoples. In short, we cannot find evidence for the existence of any large State or even confederacy in eastern Iran or Central Asia before the Median and Achaemenid empires. We have mentioned that Harahuvati (Skt. SärasvatT), the name of a river probably the present Arghandäb and/or the Helmand, gave its name to the district of Arachosia, present Qandahar. In the early first millennium B.C. Iranians probably were mixing with Indians and pre-Indo-European peoples in this border area with India. Around the lake where the Helmand River empties, Iranians also must have mixed with a settled autochthonous population which had been engaged in trade and agriculture long before the Coming of the Iranians. Archaeological excavations at Shahr-e Sukhte, and other sites in Seistan, confirm the antiquity of Settlements and of extensive trade relations at an early period. 46 We can only speculate on the process whereby Iranians spread over Seistan, which, we remember, had the name Zranka in Old Persian, possibly the name given to the unusual mountain plateau in the middle of the lake today called Kuh-e Khwaja. 47 It should be noted that the names of Iranian peoples found in the Old Persian inscriptions are a mixture of tribal and geographical names, and do not represent a catalogue of various Iranian tribes who settled down after their migrations. Also it is difficult to determine whether names of peoples found in Classical sources from this part of the Middle East are Iranian in origin, or non-Iranian, and many explanations of names such as Derbikes, a tribe east of the Caspian Sea, the Tapuri, in the Elburz mts., and others, do not inspire confidence. Historically one would expect Iranian and autochthonous peoples to co-exist for long periods of time in any area until the Iranians eventually became dominant, at least in giving their language to others. Archaeology is slowly Alling gaps in the picture of the material culture of the ancient Iranians, but problems of connecting the discovered material culture with Iranian-speaking peoples are many and complex. There is as yet no consensus on those 46 M. Tosi, "Excavations at Shahr-i Sokhta," 47 G. Morgenstierne, "Notes on Balochi Ety- Iran, 10 (1972), 174-75; 11 (1973), 204, and mology," NTS, 5 (1933), 43. succeeding numbers. Pre-Iranian History of the Plateau and Central Asia 63 aspects of life which can be called distinctively Iranian. Whether the future will soon see a breakthrough in this regard remains to be seen. In conclusion, the exceedingly scant source materials from eastern Iran and Central Asia, with a consequent general reconstruction based primarily on archaeology and stories in the Avesta and later Zoroastrian traditions, plus the epic, give us a hazy and very impressionistic picture of the pre-Achaemenid history of the entire area. It is only with the formation of the Median State that we can say that pre-history passes to history. CHAPTER IV MEDES, SCYTHIANS AND EASTERN RULERS Literalure: Linie archaeological work has been done on Median sites, and the written sources are most scanty. The literary sources have been assembled by I. M. Dyakonov in Istoriya Midii (Moscow- Leningrad, 1956), 485 pp. while I. Aliev in his Istoriya Midii (Baku, 1960), 360 pp. concentrates on archaeology, and especially the ethnogenesis of the Medes. Since the appearance of these two works, both of which have ample bibliographies of former publications, work on the Medes has been conspicuous by its absence. The populär work by W. Cullican, The Medes and Persians (London, 1965), 190 pp. adds nothing and emphasizes art and architecture. Archaeology is still all-important for the early history of the Medes and several sites are presumably Median, notably Tepe Nosh-e-Jän near the modern town of Malayer south of Hamadan. For a series of reports on succeeding yearly excavations headed by D. Stronach, see Iran, 16 (1978), 1, note 2, for a bibliography; the date when the fort and temple complex flourished was established from about 700 to 600 B.c. Unfortunately no inscriptions have been found which would give us information about the settlement, and we must rely on the material temains to reconstruct a picture of this Median settlement. Two other sites with Median strata are Bäbäjän Tepe near Harsin to the west of Nüsh-e Jan in Luristan and Godin Tepe near Kangavar. For the former see C. Goffin Iran, 16 (1978), 29, note 1 , where a bibliography of former articles on the site is given, and for the latter see T. C. Young and L. D. Levine, The Godin Project: Second Progress Report, Royal Ontario Museum of Art and Archaeology, Occasional Papers No. 27 (Toronto, 1974). The discovery in 1967 of a large palace with a columned hall at Godin Tepe, together with the fort at Nüsh-e Jan, indicated both the monumental tastes of Median rulers of this period and their quest for security from enemies. Comparisons of architectural features such as the narrow Windows or 'arrowhead' slots in the wall show the widespread use of common motifs in western Iran, and the central position of the Medes in the give-and-take of such features. It is, of course, in the present State of knowledge, and before excavations at Hamadan, not possible to assign to the Medes any role of innovation in such features. Suffice it to say that the Medes participated in the general cultural milieu of the eighth Century B.c. which seems to have been dominated not only by the political power of Assyria but by Mesopotamian culture. Assyrian cuneiform sources do not give much direct information about the Medes, for only in the campaigns of the Assyrian kings to the east do we find mention of the Medes, first in the time of Shalmaneser III (Salmanasar) about 835 B.c., on which see Die Welt des Orients, 2 (1955), 156. The geography of Media in ancient times has been studied by L. Levine, "Geographical Studies in the Neo- Assyrian Zagros," Iran, 11 (1973), 1-27 and 12 (1974), 99-124, and he convincingly argues that the horizons of Assyrian conquests must be greatly limited, since they did not at any time cross the Alvand mountain ränge west of Hamadan. References to texts and translations of Assyrian texts relevant to the Medes may be found in the footnotes to Levine's article, especially pp. 1 06-1 1 9. To the publications of the Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, texts and translations by D. D. Luckenbill (Chicago, 1926-27), and the Prisms of Esarhaddon and of Ashurbanipal by R. Campbell Thompson (London, 1931), add the articles of E. Michel on "Die Assur-Texte Salmanassars III." in Die Welt des Orients, 1 (1947), 67 foll., and D. J. Wiseman, "The Vassal-Treaties of Esarhaddon," Iraq, 20 (1 958), 1-99. Other references may be found in Levine. In addition to the Assyrian sources one should mention Herodotus and Ctesias, Xenophon in his Cyropaedia, as well as the Anabasis (e.g., III, 4, 1 1 ) and stray remarks in his Hellenica (as 1, 2, 19). Later texts, such as Eusebius, who gives a list of Median kings, copy the earlier sources and add little to our knowledge, while II Kings 17,6 and 1 8, 1 1 merely teil us that after the conquest of Samaria in Palestine by the king of Assyria (Sargon II), about 721 b.c., he deported the inhabitants to the 'cities' of the Medes. The Medes, curiously, are not mentioned in Urartian inscriptions. This is all of the literary evidence we have now, about the Medes, and it seems that only archaeology can provide additional information to reconstruct more of their history. What follows is a survey of our State of knowledge. (Other references may be found in the footnotes.) 66 Chapter IV THE FORMATION OF THE MEDIAN EMPIRE The expansion of the Medes, indeed of all of the Iranian peoples in western Iran might be compared in analogy with the expansion of the Turks in Azerbaijan in the eleventh and twelfth centuries A.D. Probably, just as in the case of the Turks, so in this early period other Iranians migrated into the northwestern part of the plateau, together with the Medes. This would account for the early appearance of the Parsua in this area. In the Urartian inscriptions, the same land is mentioned as Barsua, devastated by King Menua and later by Argishti, son of Menua, from the first part of the eighth Century b.c. 1 The location of Parsua on the southern shores of Lake Urmia had been generally accepted by scholars, but already in 1 962 1 had suggested rather "a district of imprecise location north of modern Kermanshah" as the location of Parsua (Akkadian: Parsuas). 2 In 1974 L. Levine reviewed the literature on the subject and came to the same conclusion, but he narrowed the area of Parsua to the Mahidasht, or the piain to the northwest of Kermanshah. 3 The question of the identity of the inhabitants of Parsua, however, remains. Were they the ancestors of the same Persians who moved south to the present province of Fars, which bears their name, or were they a splinter group of Persians who wandered westward from the main body moving south? Ghirshman in many writings supported the view that the Iranians came to Iran over the Caucasus route from south Russia and the Parsua of cuneiform inscriptions represents a stage of the march of the Persians to the south. Dyakonov, on the other hand, suggested that the words Parsa, Parsua and Parthia were three forms of an Old Iranian parsava 'rib, side, frontier,' and all three were on the frontiers of Media, hence, it was a common name to those peoples who settled on the frontiers of the central Medes. 4 Other etymologies have been proposed but none help us with the identification of the Parsua. Since this northern Parsua is different geographically from the southern Parsa (Parsu in the Akkadian versions of the OP inscriptions), one would normally surmise they were two groups of the same people, were it not for the temporal as well as geographical Separation of the two. The first mention of the Parsua in Assyrian records is also from the time of Shalmaneser III (858-824 b.c.), when in his twenty-fourth year of rule he received tribute from twenty-seven kings of the land of Parsua. 5 Notices of this Parsua continue until the time of Sargon II (722-705 b.c.) when they cease. As far as I know, there is no reference to the northern Parsua after his reign. From the time of Sennacherib (705-681 b.c.) until the rise of the Achaemenids we find reference to the Par-su-ma-as or Parsu (both presumably for Parsua) only in the south. The name is mentioned together with Anshan or Anzan and other allies of the Elamites, in the eighth campaign of the Assyrian king against Elam. 6 Obviously, if the name 1 G. A. Melikisvili, Uranskie klinoobrazny and Babylonia, l (Chicago, 1926) 206 The use of nadpisi (Moscow, 1960), 138-40 and 218-20. For the word 'king' for these local chiefs is normal for a discussion of the historical implications see N. V. the ancient cuneiform records. Arutyunyan, Biainili (Urarlu) (Erevan, 1970), 6 Luckenbill, The Annais of Sennacherib (Chi- 134-35 cago, 1924), I, 143. A discussion of the different - Op. eil. [ch 3, n. 26], 47. forms of the name in cuneiform, and an etymol- 1 L Levine in Iran, 12 (1974), 112 ogy, are found in Herzfeld, op eil 2 [ch. 3, n. 31], Dyakonov, Isloriya Midii (Moscow-Lenin- 727-29, but one must be cautious in using grad, 1956), 69. Herzfeld's works since they mix brilliance and 5 D. D. Luckenbill, Ancienl Records of Assyria nonsense. Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 61 disappears from the north and then reappears a few years later in the south the natural conclusion is that the inhabitants moved from the north to the south, but this is not necessarily true. We might also suppose, for example, that some, perhaps only a few, of the Persians in the north left to go south, or as the number of Persians in the south swelled, the name was transferred even though no great movement of peoples took place. In any case, Parsua in the north disappears from history at the end of the eighth Century b.c., and the name is ever afterwards applied to the province today called Fars. For a lengthy discussion on the Parsua question see Grantovskii. 6 * Here all occurrences of the name are mentioned, even possible references in Classical sources to them on the southwest shores of the Caspian Sea, as well as Indian sources referring to them to the west of the Indus River. Without investigating all possible references, many of which are ambiguous, it would seem that members of the Parsa tribe of Iranians were widely scattered, whether before the Achaemenid period or during it is not possible to determine. The Medes, although first mentioned c. 836 B.c., later than the Parsua, soon became more important for the Assyrians. Herodotus (I, 101) mentions six tribes of the Medes, the Bousai, Paretakenoi, Strouxates, Arizantoi, Boudioi and Magoi. Of the six, the Paretakenoi are mentioned elsewhere (Polybius 31,11; Arrian 3, 1 9 ; Curtius 5,13; Strabo, 1 5, 732), and it seems they lived around modern Isfahan and to the south of it. An Iranian etymology could be reconstructed from this name, but etymologies are always hypothetical, and unless they give information in a larger context little can be derived from them. 7 The name Arizantoi has an obvious Iranian etymology 'Aryan clan' but again it teils us nothing. The Magi, on the other hand, present a problem since it is the same name as the later priestly caste, and we cannot determine whether originally they were a tribe of Medes who performed priestly duties, as the Levites among the Israelites, or that Herodotus is mistaken. Whether the Magi were centered around Rhages, modern Tehran, because of the religious epithets given to it in the Avesta, implying a special place in Zoroastrian tradition, again is pure conjecture. How much the Medes mingled with the local population as compared with the Persians in the south, is also open to speculation. In any case, we may assume that the people called the Medes had a number of tribes and they settled in various parts of western Iran. From Assyrian annals it is clear that these early Iranians on the plateau were not united, but lived under minor chieftains, whom the Assyrians called kings ($ar). We have already mentioned that in the reign of Shalmaneser III (c. 834 b.c.) he received tribute from the kings of Parsua and in his thirtieth and thirty-first years he marched against them and punished them. It was not long after this time that Urartu became a major power and rival of Assyria under King Menua (c. 810-786 b.c.) and Assyria was put on the defensive in the east until the revival of Assyrian power under Tiglath- Pileser III ( c . 745-727 b.c.). This monarch penetrated deeper onto the Iranian plateau than his predecessors, and he received gifts from the chiefs of the Medes as far as Mt. Bikni. 8 Much has been written about this mountain which has been identified as Mt. Demavend, but an identification with Mt. Alvand near Hamadan, or another peak of ' E. A. Grantovskü, Ranyaya Isloriya Iranskykh kanu, etc., cf. Sumer, 7 (1956), 1-2. On the lernen (Moscow, 1970), 133-83. * etymologies of the names of the Median tribes see There were several Assyrian forms which Herzfeld, op. eil. [eh. 3, n. 31], 724-26. probably represented this name Pariakku, Parila- 8 Luckenbill, Records [n. 5], 281. 68 Chapter IV the Zagros chain, seems more likely. 9 The Assyrian contacts with the plateau were at first raids for booty, but then they developed into overlordships through tributaries. There is no evidence that in the many Valleys and plains of western Iran the Assyrians sought direct rule through Assyrian governors and permanent garrisons. Local rulers instead were made Assyrian vassals. Epithets given to the Medes in Assyrian inscriptions such as 'mighty Medes' or 'distant Medes' do not imply any political or ethnic differentiation among the Medes, although it is clear that the Assyrians regarded the Medes as powerful adversaries even before they united to form a State. But the Assyrians had other problems in the east. An old enemy again measured strength with the Assyrians, and the annals of the Assyrian kings are now filled with accounts of expeditions against Urartu. Already in the thirteenth Century B.C. Assyrian sources mentioned the Urartians as strong opponents of Shalmaneser I. (c. 1272-1243 b.c.). 10 First a union of tribes, in the land between the three lakes, modern Van, Urmia and Sevan, this area became the center of a powerful kingdom, the Ararat of the Bible. The various forms of this name, as well as other designations of Urartu, are discussed by Melikisvili 13—22, and Piotrovskii 33, but, contrary to several scholars, there is no connection between the names Urartu and the word 'Hurrian.' The early expeditions of the Assyrians against the Urartians in the succeeding reigns ofTiglath-Pileser I (c. 1114-1076 B.C.) Assur- bel-kala (c. 1073-1056 b.c.), Adad-nerari II (c. 911-890 b.c.), Tukulti-ninurta II (c. 889-884 b.c.) are somewhat monotonous in their formulae of victories and booty secured. Both the early Assyrian and Urartian states had periods of alternate flourishing and decay in this time, but we cannot follow the histories of these peoples. Under Assur-nasirapal II (c. 883-859 B.c.) Assyria revived its imperial ambitions, and it is under his successor, Shalmaneser III, as we have noted, that both Parsua and the Medes first appear in Assyrian annals. At the same time Urartu experienced a revival and soon disputed control over lands on the Iranian plateau with Assyria. Unfortunately, it is not possible to determine the succession and length of reigns of the Urartian kings from Assyrian sources, but the names Aram and Sarduri are mentioned as royal opponents of Shalmaneser III. The Assyrians seem to have had the upper hand until the reign of the Urartian king Menua (c. 810-786 B.c.) who built many fortresses to defend his land against the raids of Adad-nerari III (810-783 b.c.). The small states and towns between the two powers, however, suffered most, for they were the objects of conquest and domination by both sides, and it is very difFicult to determine the extent of either Assyrian and Urartian rule on the plateau at any time. Much has been written about the geography of place names on the plateau conquered by, or merely reached by, Assyrian armies. The mother of Adad-nerari III may be identified as the famous Semiramis (Shammuramat), who for a time acted as a regent for her son, but the legends about her in Ctesias, Moses of Chorene and elsewhere unfortunately cannot be used for any historical reconstructions. 1 ' Under her and her son, Assyrian armies raided the plateau many times, but afterwards the power of 9 Levine. |n 3j, 1 1 9. ' ' On the ramifications of the legend see W. 10 For the history of Urartu see G. A. Mehkis- Eilers, Semiramis, SWAW, 274 (Vienna, 1971). vili, Nairi-Urartu (Tbilisi, 1954); B. B. Piotrovskii, Vanskoe Tsarswo (Moscow, 1959); and Arutyun- yan, op eil. [n. 1] Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 69 Assyria seems to have suffered a setback for we do not hear of any other expeditions to the east. The next revival of Assyrian expansion to the east under Tiglath-Pileser III (745-727 b.c.) appears to coincide with a movement of peoples on the Iranian plateau and a resurgence of the Elamites, under a series of rulers such as Shutruk-Nakhunte II (c. 717-699 B.c.). Inner conflicts, however, kept the Elamites weak, and their main arena of activity, as far as the sources reveal, was in Babylonia. As mentioned, in the north the Urartians under King Menua had begun to expand to the south and west, and under Argishti I, son of Menua (c. 786-764), they conquered a confederation of towns in the vicinity of modern Erzurum and exacted tribute. 1 2 In the inscriptions of the Urartian kings, copying Assyrian prototypes, booty and tribute are described in detail, while the burning of cities and taking captives was recorded by both Assyrians and Urartians. The early period of the expansion of Assyria onto the Iranian plateau, from c. 900- 825 b.c. has been characterized by Levine as an attempt to control or even monopolize trade and trade routes to the east, while the next period to 744 B.C. saw the rise of a competitor, Urartu, also interested in Controlling trade especially in the northern part of the plateau. 1 3 Certainly trade, or perhaps also the amassing of booty, an important source of gain in the ancient world, must have played an important role in the foreign policies of both Assyria and Urartu, but other factors including a quest for fame, may have spurred the rulers to conquest. Whereas Tiglath-Pileser III directed his armies along the Khurasan road through modern Kermanshah and many times overran Parsua and received tribute from the Medes, Sargon (722-705 B.c.), turned to the north. Both rulers, however, departed from the ancient custom of turning local rulers into vassals and instead put Assyrian governors in control of newly conquered areas. 14 The policy of the Assyrians seems to have shifted from nominal control through vassals to direct rule over the trade routes to the east. Horses were important items of trade but also cattle, sheep, lapis lazuli and other semi- precious stones, and other wares, were sought by the Assyrians. In 715 b.c. Sargon captured a local Median chief called Dahyuka, together with his family, and deported them to Hamath in Syria. This is the first mention of the name which appears in Herodotus as Deiokes, who presumably was intriguing with Manna or Urartu against the Assyrians. 15 Much has been written about the identity of the Dahyuka of Sargon's annals, but most scholars agree that he cannot be the founder of Median unity as stated by Herodotus. 16 Herodotus (1, 102) says he ruled for fifty-three years and was succeeded by Phraortes, who ruled for twenty-two years, followed by Cyaxargs, forty years, and then Astyages, thirty-five years. If one figures backward from the date of the rise of Cyrus, then Deiokes should have ruled c. 728-675 B.C., but Problems arise in the chronology. Several scholars have investigated the rise of the 1 2 Melikisvili, op cit. [n. 10], 234-35. Arutyun- ,4 Luckenbill, Records 1 [n. 5], 281 ; 2, 29. yan, op. cit. [n. 1], 186. This is the beginning of ,5 Ibid., 2, 28. For a discussion of the name, cf. R. Urartian expansion. Schmitt, "Deiokes," Anzeiger der phil.-hist. Klasse L. Levine, "East-West Trade in the Late Iron der Österreichischen Akademie der Wiss. 110 Age : a view from the Zagros," Le plateau iranien et 1 973), 1 37-47. lAsie centrale des origines ä la conquite islamique, l6 Acc. to Grantovskii, op. cit. [n. 6a] 251, the colloques internationaux du CNRS, no. 567 (Paris, Dahyuka captured by Sargon was ruler of Misi, a ''), 171-79. province of Manna. 70 Chapter IV State of the Medes, but no one has reached a satisfactory conclusion ; one Suggestion has it that Phraortes should change places with Deiokes. 17 The Cimmerian and Scythian invasion of northwestern Iran, however, further complicates the picture. CIMMERIANS AND SCYTHIANS The Cimmerians lived north of the Caucasus mountains in south Russia and probably were related to the Thracians, but they surely were a mixed group by the time they appeared south of the mountains, and we hear of them first in the year 714 b.c. after they presumably had defeated the Urartians. 18 Rusa, son of Sarduri, who ruled c. 735-713 B.C., was the Urartian ruler who sufFered at the hands of the Cimmerians, and then from Sargon H's famous campaign of the eighth year of his rule when the Assyrians marched through Parsua, the Mannai country and defeated the Urartian army with its allies of local rulers around lake Urmia. 19 The following march of the Assyrian army through Urartian territory, plundering and burning, Struck a significant blow at the expanding Urartian kingdom, which caused a temporary decline in its power. It was mainly the loss of allies and territory in what is today Iranian Azerbaijan, however, which proved more damaging to Urartian power. The decline and fall of Urartu, however, was gradual. Under Sennacherib (Sinaherib), 705-681 b.c., tribute from the far-away Medes, "whose name no one among the kings, my fathers, had (ever) heard" was received, and they were made tributary. 20 This king, however, had to turn his attention from the north to the south, for the Babylonians and Elamites had united against the Assyrians. Elam had the support of Parsua (now in the south) as well as Anzan (Anshan), perhaps used as Synonyms, one Iranian and the other Elamite, for the same area, but they lost to the Assyrians. 21 The Urartians under Argishti II (713-685 b.c.) then took advantage of Assyrian preoccupation in the south to extend their influence, if not outright conquests, to the Caspian Sea. 22 They never regained their earlier influence south of Lake Urmia, however, and the next ruler Rusa II (685-645 b.c.) turned his attention to the west in Asia Minor. The position of the Cimmerians in the great power struggle between Assyria and Urartu is not easy to determine, but it seems that they moved westward against Phrygia and into Cappadocia, from whence probably the name Gomer came into the Bible and Gamirk ' in Armenian. After the Cimmerians, however, came the Scythians. Herodotus (1, 103-04) says that the Scythians had driven the Cimmerians out of Europe and then followed them, but more to the east they encountered the Medes, whose nascent kingdom they destroyed, and then they ruled for twenty-eight years (106). One problem in the Assyrian sources is the term Ummän-manda used, apparently , for any barbarians in the north and east in Assyrian eyes ; so it is difficult to R. Labat, "KaStariti, Phraorte et les debuts de Royal Correspondenee of the Assyrian Empire, 1 l'histoire Mede," JA, 249 (1961), 3. In the same (Ann Arbor, 1930), no. 12. The form of the name issue of the JA E. Cavaignac writes "A propos du in Assyrian is Gi-mir-ri. debut de l'histoire des Medes," 153-62. 19 Cf. Arutyunyan, op. eil. [n. 1], 300 foll. 18 Pinches in JRAS (1913), 609, and I. M. 20 Luckenbill, Annais [n. 6], 29, 68. Dyakonov, "Assiro-Vavilonskie Istocniki po istorii 21 Ibid., 88, 91. Urartu," VD1, 2 (1951), 339, also L. Waterman, 22 Arutyunyan, op. eil. [n. 1], 322. Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 71 teil whether Medes, Cimmerians or Scythians are meant. The movements of various peoples to the north and east of the Assyrians at this time are impossible to trace, but the entire period can be characterized as one of change and displacement of ethnic eroups, mostly nomads moving into settled lands together with the rise and fall of alliances and allegiances. Already under Sargon we hear of a Median chief called in Akkadian Uksatar who sent tribute to the Assyrians. His name could be an apocopated form of *Huvaxstra in Iranian, or Cyaxares in Herodotus, but he was probably not related to the dynasty which later united the Medes, since the name must have been fairly common among them. 23 During the reign of Sennacherib Median chiefs, however, were undoubtedly extending both Median rule and Median Settlements on the plateau. The Mannai were brought under Assyrian control by Sennacherib, but they were soon to pass under Median suzerainty in the time of Asarhaddon (681-669 b.c.), successor to Sennacherib. We can dimly discern the process of consolidation of Median power on the plateau, for soon old names would vanish to be replaced by Median names. In this process undoubtedly much of ancient traditions and practices would be preserved but integrated into a new Median society and culture. The movement of peoples to the north and east of Assyria continued under Asarhaddon, who was worried about them. The name Kastariti is mentioned in oracle texts of Asarhaddon together with Cimmerian and Mannai troops. 24 The Scythians also appear in the texts, called IskuzajUquza, or in the annals of Asarhaddon Aikuza, and a Scythian chief Ispaka, ally of the Mannai, is mentioned later in the sources. 25 In Herodotus (1, 103) Madyes, son of Protothygs, a Scythian king, is said to have invaded Media, and it is interesting that we find in an Assyrian source the name Bartatua (or P-) who sought the hand of the Assyrian king's daughter in marriage. 26 Although it is unrecorded, he was probably successful, since the Scythians seem to have become allies of the Assyrians for a period of time. The further history of Scythians and Cimmerians in Anatolia is outside the scope of this book, but in Iran we hear no more of the latter while Scythians, called Saka in Iranian, were probably soon absorbed by their kinfolk, the Medes. The presence of the Scythians on the northwestern part of the Iranian plateau, however, has been traced in material remains from archaeological excavations, especially in the hoard from Sakkiz and in Hasanlu. 27 One feature of material culture peculiar to the Scythians, and the Cimmerians, in this period is a three-lobed arrowhead, which has been found in many excavations and graves from south Russia to Media. This type of arrowhead has been studied by many scholars, the most recent summary of the evidence appearing in 1977. 28 This, together with 23 Grantovskii, op. cit. [n. 6a], 316. literature, see A. Godard, Le trisor de Ziwiyi 24 G. A. Knudtzon, Assyrische Cebele an den (Haarlem, 1950) esp. 125, and R. Ghirshman, The Sonnengott, 2 (Leipzig, 1893) no. 1. Trans, in I. M. Arts of Ancient Iran (N.Y., 1964), 98-125; R. D. Dyakonov, "Assiro-va vilonskie istoeniki po Istorii Barnett, "The Treasure of Ziwiye," Iraa, 18(1 956), Urartu," VDI (1951), no. 2, 3, 4. 111-16. For Hasanlu see the bibliography in 25 Dyakonov op. cit. [n. 24], no. 35. For a Porada, op. cit. [eh. 3, n. 2], 264. discussionofthe names Scyth-Saka-Ashkuz and the 28 S. Cleuziou, "Les pointes de fleches 'scythi- miswriting Ashkenaz see I. M. Dyakonov, Istoriya ques' au proche et moyen Orient," Le plateau iranien MM" [n. 4], 243. et l'Asie centrale, CNRS (Paris, 1977), 187-99, 6 Dyakonov, VDI (1951), [n. 24], no. 29. with an ample bibliography. See also B. B. Pio- The treasure of Sakkiz has produced a large trovskii, Vanskoe Tsarstvo (Moscow, 1959), 240. 12 Chapter IV horse burials in kurgans, seems to identify the presence of nomads among the population, whereas the question of the originators of the notorious animal style' in bronze and other metals is more controversial. As evidence accumulates it is clear that the nomads had a great influence on the artistic tastes of the settled people of Iran, even though the actual presence of the nomads in any one area may be uncertain. It seems clear that Transcaucasia and Iran had much in common as far as iron weapons, horse trappings, horse burials, and even pottery, are concerned in the first half of the first millennium B.C. This is not unexpected, for obviously the rise of iron must have replaced bronze prototypes all over the area but hardly before the ninth - eighth centuries B.c. Whether nomads for the most part caused this homogeneity of culture in Transcaucasia and in Iran is uncertain, but they obviously contributed to it. 29 The question whether the Scythians, in their invasion of Iran from the north followed the same path as the Medes and Persians earlier, cannot be answered, but the Scythians, we can surmise, according to archaeological evidence, did follow the western shore of the Caspian Sea to the south. An earlier influx of Iranians by the same route has not been found. Herodotus (1, 106, also IV, 12) writes that the Scythians ruled over Asia for twenty- eight years until Cyaxares and the Medes killed (their chiefs) at a banquet and recovered their independence. There is no evidence elsewhere for this Statement, but at the same time there is no reason to doubt the power and rule of the Scythians, since material traces of them are plentiful, while the Assyrians under Assurbanipal (668- 632 or 626 b.c.), son and successor of Asarhaddon, did not rule the country of the Mannai or much eise on the northern part of the plateau. By the end of the reign of Asarhaddon much of Assyrian authority may have been eroded, but at least many chieftains concluded vassal treaties with him, promising to continue to support his son and successor. 30 The treaties mattered little, for it was during Assurbanipal's reign that Assyrian power drastically declined and the Medes became the real heirs of the Assyrian position first on the Iranian plateau and then elsewhere. The powerful northern enemies of the Assyrians, however, were to suffer first from the changes. THE END OF URARTU Enough inscriptions now have been recovered to reconstruct the succession of the last kings of Urartu after Rusa II. Urartu was on the defensive and hardly able to maintain a semblance of past glory under Sarduri III, son of Rusa, who was in turn followed by another Sarduri IV then Erimena, whose relationship to the former kings is unknown. Erimena was succeeded by his son Rusa III, after whom a final ruler either called Rusa IV or Sarduri IV appears in texts. 31 In spite of many uncertainties about the succession of rulers, it seems that the kingdom of Urartu feil to the Medes probably in the time of Cyaxares about the turn of the seventh Century b.c. The 29 Well documented in M. H. Pogrebova, Iran i ■>' N. V. Aroutiounian, "La derniere periode de Zakavkaz'e v rannem zheleznom veke (Moscow, l'histoire d'Urartu," ^4/4H, 22 (1974), 428, wherea 1977), esp. 168-73. bibliography is given including the differences in D. J Wiseman, "The Vassal-Treaties of views between the author and I. M. Dyakonov. Esarhaddon," Iraq, 20 (London, 1958), 13 (also Here we follow Aroutiounian. separate publication). Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 73 capital city Tuspa, (modern Van) was captured about 609 b.c. probably by the Medes, according to Dyakonov. 32 Archaeology fortunately has not only recovered Urartian inscriptions, but also has given us a good picture of Urartian architecture, town planning and defenses. The prominence of Urartian massive stonework had an influence on later Achaemenid as well as on Armenian architecture. 33 It was not only the Medes, however, who dealt a blow to Urartu in the south, but also the Scythians and other invaders from the north, who destroyed many towns of northern Urartu, including Teishebaini, present Erevan, about 590 B.c. 34 The real heirs of the Urartians, however, were neither the Scythians nor Medes but the Armenians. Much has been written about the origin of the Armenians, but an attractive attempt to identify the Armenians, who today call themselves Hayk ' , as descendants of people living in the territory of Hayasa, north of Assyria, has not been generally accepted. 35 The Indo-European Armenian language does seem to be related to the Thraco-Phrygian group of languages, which implies a movement of people from west to east through eastern Anatolia, although the ethnic composition and dates of movement are unknown. Dyakonov has suggested that the word Hay- was used by the Urartians for westerners who had belonged to the Hittite empire (khattini) and the country west of the Euphrates was Khate, which the Arameans to the south called *Armina, which term then was later borrowed by the Persians. 36 He concludes that the Armenians were the result of a mixture of the inhabitants of the Urartian kingdom, which included Hurrians and Luvians as well as Urartians, together with Indo-European speaking proto-Armenians who may have been a mixture of people called Mushki and others who belonged to the Thraco-Phrygian linguistic family, plus some Scythians and others as well. 37 We may conclude that the Armenians expanded to much the same geographical extent as the Urartians, and the Armenian language eventually was adopted by the old Urartian population. When Darius in the Old Persian version of his Behistun inscription mentions Armenia, the Elamite version has the same, whereas the Akkadian has the older Urastu, an acknowledgment of continuity and conservatism in Babylonia. Much controversy has existed over the role of Urartu in the development of Achaemenid culture, together with the debate on the route followed by Medes and/ or Persians onto the Iranian plateau. Obviously, if one or both of the great Iranian tribes had come over the Caucasus, the Urartian influence on the later customs, 2 I. M. Dyakonov, "Poslednie gody Urartsogo 34 V. V. Piotrovskii, Karmir Blur (Leningrad, Gosudarstva," VDI, no. 2 (1951), 29-39. This is 1970), and Arutyunyan (Harut'eunean), op. cit. [n. also the opinion of W. Kleiss, "Zur Ausbreitung 1], 334. Urartus nach Osten" Istanbuler Mitteilungen, 19/20 35 G. B. Djaukyan in Istoriya Armyanskogo (1969-70), 135. Naroda (Erevan, 1951), 25, and his "The Hayasa Cf. W. Kleiss, ed., Bastam (Berlin, 1979), and Language and its Relation to the Indoeuropean his Topographische Karte von Urartu (Berlin, 1976). Languages," AO, 29 (1961), 353-405, esp. 398. The excavations of Karmir Blur (Red Hill) at 36 I. M. Dyakonov, Predistoriya Armyanskogo Erevan by B. B. Piotrovskii and K. L. Ogenesiyan Naroda (Erevan, 1969), 231-36. His surmises go u V ^ Erevan ' l 95 °-55) have produced much on farther than others and may be accepted until the material culture of the Urartians. See also the shown to be in error. results of excavations in the picture album of K. 37 Ibid., 243. On the whole, this work by Hovhannisean, Erebunii Orsnankarnera, The Wall- Dyakonov is the most acceptable study of the Pamtings of Erebooni (Erevan, 1973). origins of the Armenians. 74 Chapter IV institutions and culture of the Iranians would have been overwhelming. W. Kleiss, the expert on Urartian architecture and archaeology in Iran, has shown the Urartian influences on Achaemenid stone structures such as the Zendan at Pasargadae and the Ka 'bah of Zoroaster at Naqsh-e Rustam. 38 He described specific details of architecture in a convincing attribution of Urartian influence, whereas previously R. Ghirshman in a more impressionistic manner had claimed an Urartian origin for the cyclopean architecture and platforms of Masjid-e Sulaiman in Khuzistan and at Pasargadae. 39 Given the architectural connections, and perhaps the borrowing of the title 'king of kings' by the Achaemenids from Urartu via the Medes, does this justify what Ghirshman called an Irano-Urartian 'koine' implying a fusion at least of the cultures of the two peoples, if not more? 40 The answer to this question lies with future archaeological finds to determine the path of the Iranians onto the plateau and their spread over it. Since the Medes were the first to form a centralized State in northwestern Iran, however, borrowing from their northern neighbors the Urartians would not be unexpected. Specific points of influence, however, are very difficult to establish, and one must be content at present with the probability of borrowings, which by no means 'prove' that the Iranians came over the Caucasus to the plateau. THE FALL OF ASSYRIA We have already mentioned the chronological problems which arise with the early Median kings. The chronology of their rule proposed by Labat, combining Herodotus and meagre Akkadian sources, on the whole has been accepted by most scholars with the first ruler after an uncertain Deiokes being Phraortes (OP Fravartis, Akk. Parumartis, Elamite Pirrumartis), who ruled c. 647-625 or 623 b.c. during the Scythian domination 41 This ruler probably is the same as the Kastariti of the annals of Asarhaddon, and the difference in names can best be explained as the former being his personal name and the latter his 'throne' name, meaning 'possessing a kingdom,' Iranian *Xsa9rita. The name Kastariti, however, appears only in the omen texts of Asarhaddon, and this has caused some scholars, such as Dyakonov, to postulate an earlier rule for Phraortes from c. 675-653 B.C. followed by the Scythian Interregnum of 653-625 42 It is, of course, possible that Phraortes did have a very long rule from c. 675-625 B.C., including the Scythian domination of northwestern Iran, but it may be another person according to Labat, and without new sources it is 38 W. Kleiss, "Zur Rekonstruktion des urartäi- 41 Labat, op. cit. [n. 17], 3. The lengths of rule of sehen Tempels," Istanbuler Mitteilungen, 13/14 the Median kings are derived from Herodotus and (Berlin 1963-4), 12-14. The false Windows and the absolute chronology from euneiform records the crenated stone tops to the massive, Square interpolated with Herodotus. On the unreliability temples are the chief points of resemblance. of Herodotus on the Median kings see R. R. Helm, 39 Ghirshman, op. cit. |n. 27], 296. "Herodotus' Medikos Logos and Median History," 40 The title 'king of kings' had existed all over Iran, 19 (1981), 85, 90. the ancient Near East, but in the seventh Century 42 1. M. Dyakonov, Istoriya MUH [n. 4], 266, B.c. it seems to have been in vogue only in Urartu, 282. according to written records; cf. Frye, "The Charisma of Kingship in Ancient Iran," IA, 6 (1964), 111-15. Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 75 not possible to reconstruct a satisfactory chronology of the early Median kings. We can only surmise that the Median State came into formation during the time of Phraortes in the middle of the seventh Century b.c. although Dyakonov would date the declaration of independence of Phraortes from Assyrian rule to the year 673 b.c. 43 With the next ruler we are on firmer ground, for Phraortes may have been killed by the Assyrians according to Cavaignac, but in any case he was succeeded by Cyaxargs (OP *Huvaxstra, Akk. Umakistar). 44 Herodotus (1, 106) said that he ruled forty years, but this was most hkely after the Scythian domination, and not before it as the historian thought. According to Herodotus (1, 103) Cyaxares was the first ruler to divide an army according to weapons used, separating lance bearers from bowmen and the like. This information cannot be correct as stated, and one should ask what the historical reality behind it is. As Dyakonov persuasively argued, it is probably the change from a force of tribal levies to a regulär army which led to the remark of Herodotus. 45 Assyrian sources, unfortunately, do not help in elucidating the rise of the Median State, for during the reign of Assurbanipal Assyria fought many times against Egypt, Babylonia, Arab tribes, and Elam, not giving much attention to the Iranian plateau. Elam was destroyed as an independent power under Assurbanipal, and so too was the kingdom of the Mannai. 46 One may conjecture that the destruction of both Elam and the kingdom of the Mannai by the Assyrians, together with the fall of Urartu gave the Iranians a chance to assert their power, which was soon feit by their neighbors after the death of Assurbanipal. A strong ruler, Nabopolassar, became king of Babylon about 626 B.c., so Assyria was in danger from the south as well as from the Medes to the east. Unfortunately, we have no information, literary or archaeological, about events on the Iranian plateau in this period and cuneiform records also teil us little about Mesopotamia, so we are reduced to conjecture. 47 Just as we may assume that with the destruction of the power of Elam, Persian leaders took their place in Fars, if not also elsewhere, so we may conclude that the Medes Consolidated their State at the expense of the Mannai, and of course of various Iranian tribes. It is quite possible that Cyaxargs subjected the Persians in the south to Median rule in the period around 625 b.c. as Herodotus (I, 102) suggests. We must stress again that all is conjecture and must be fitted into a time scale which does not clash with earlier and later data. 48 Luckily for the years just before and after the fall of Nineveh we do have important cuneiform sources in the British Museum which give a summary of principal events relating to Assyria in the period Ibid., 266. Such precise dating on the basis of ment of the army of the Achaemenids was ascribed oracle texts, however, is not convincing. to Medus, presumably a Median king in the mind E. Cavaignac, "Sur un passage de la tablette of the poet. B.M.25 127," Revue d'Assyriologie, 51 (1957), 28- 46 Luckenbill, Records, 2 [n. 5], 328-29. The "• The tablet is füll of lacunae, and relevant to the Mannai were made subject to the Assyrians and Medes it only has, "he turned his face towards thus lost their independence. Nineveh," followed by uncertain accounts of 47 Apparently Nabopolassar began hostilities skirmishes. Nowhere is a proper name mentioned, against Assyria shortly after his accession and there and Cavaignac assumes that 'he' refers to the was constant fighting; cf. S. Smith, Babylonian Assyrian king, and the skirmishes refer to Phraor- Historical Texts (London 1924), 23. «s, following Herodotus. 48 D. Stronach, "Exca vations at Tepe Nash-i Jan 45 Dyakonov, lstoriya Midii [n. 4], 295. In 1967," Iran, 7 (1969), 6, reviews several opinions Aeschylus, The Persians, verse 765, the establish- of events during this period. 16 Charter IV of its fall. 49 It is not possible here to give an account of the rise of Babylonian military might and the decline of the Assyrian forces, but the steady advance of the Babylonians year by year against Assyria is well chronicled. In 61 5 B.c. the old capital of Assyria, the city of Aisur, was besieged but not taken by the Babylonians, and in October of the same year the Medes raided the province of Arraphu (modern Kirkuk). 50 The following year the Medes after marching to Nineveh turned south and captured Assur which they plundered. Then, in the translation of Wiseman, "[The king of Ak]kad and Cy[axar]5s met one another by the city. They established (an alliance) of mutual friendship and peace. [Cyaxarjes and his army returned to his land." 51 Although the text is poorly preserved for the events of the year 612, it is clear that in the summer the capital Nineveh feil to the Babylonians and Medes and the Assyrian king was killed, while his city was plundered, after which the Medes departed. Another Assyrian king proclaimed his rule in the town of Harran and with Egyptian aid maintained his independence until the summer of 610, when the Babylonian and Median allies captured the city. Skirmishes continued between the Egyptians and Babylonians until the Egyptians were defeated at a battle of Carchemish in 605 and peace was established for a time; thus the long domination of Assyria in the Near East came to an end. REMAINS OF THE MEDES Very little has survived which can be confidently attributed to the Medes, and excavations of Median sites are few. Until the present site of Hamadan, ancient Ecbatana, is excavated we must rely on the small fortress-site of NOsh-e Jan, and a series of rock-cut tombs or other sites with possible Median layers or influences such as Godin Tepe and Bäbä Jan Tepe. Fortunately the 'Median' rock-cut tombs have been discussed in detail and only a few remarks may be of interest here. 52 The live principal tombs which have been dated to Median times, and are said to be tombs of Median princes, are Kizkapan in Iraqi Kurdistan, Ferhäd ö SirTn at the village of $ahna near Kangavar, Fahräqäh (or FakhrTqah some 10 km. northeast of Mahabad) near the village of Andarqäsh, Dukkän-e Däüd, 3 km. south of Sar-e Pul 2ohab, and Sakawand or Ishaqvand, 3 km. north of Deh-e Nö, which village is 18 km. southwest of HarsTn. 53 Because of the poor stone carving on all of these, relative to the impressive Achaemenid tombs at Persepolis and Naqsh-e Rustam, it was generally thought that the above tombs were Median in date. Von Gall, however, convincingly argued that all of them are rather attempts to copy royal Achaemenid tombs and are to be dated to the late Achaemenid period, although they may well be the tombs of local Median 49 Cf. D. J. Wiseman, Chronicks of Chaldaean storming of Nineveh to Manda tribes led by Kings 626-556 b.c. (London, 1956). Arbakes rather than to Medes, is unacceptable. 50 Ibid., 13 and 57. The Mannai fought for the 52 H. von Gall, "Zu den 'Medischen' Felsgrä'bern Assyrians. On the Mannai prisoners of the in Nordwestiran und Iraqi Kurdistan," Archäolo- Babylonians see p. 55. Dyakonov, Istoriya Midii [n. gischer Anzeiger, 81 (1966), 19 foll. 4], 304, thinks this defeat of Mannai forces gave 53 I give official and local names and geographi- Cyaxares the opportunity of incorporating their cal locations of several of the sites since many who land in his domains. have written about them are either vague or 51 Wiseman, op. cit. [n. 49], 59. The attempt of erroneous in these matters. König in op. cit. [eh. 1, n. 34], 42, to ascribe the Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 77 chiefs. 54 With the tombs unable to serve as evidence for Median work, we turn to the Zendän-e Sulaimän, the remarkable crater at Takht-e Sulaiman in Azerbaijan, which was undoubtedly a holy site, for around the conical mountain, which was filled with water at this early period, houses, or rooms for piligrims or priests had been built. The high terrace on one side seems to confirm Herodotus (1, 131) when he said that the Persians do not erect statues to the gods, temples or altars, and they offer worship to Zeus and other deities on the tops of mountains. The pottery found here, however, mostly dates from the eighth Century b.c., and the excavator believes the Zendän was a Mannai site which was destroyed by the Medes. 55 After a survey of a small site northeast of Maku near a village called Pul-e Dast, Kleiss remarked that "der Bau in Corbulaq[ist] bis heute das einzige Gebäude im Nordteil von Iranisch-Azerbaidjan, das von den Medern errichtet worden ist." 56 In a building there he was able to find an early prototype of the court-ayvan plan of later Iranian buildings. When we turn to the artistic finds from Hasanlu and Ziwiye, it seems that again they are remains of the Mannai, with possible Scythian (or Median?) influences on the style. 57 In the art it is clear that the two primary strains are influences from the ancient Near East, from Assyria in particular, and the nomadic or 'Scythian' style. What we are unable to discover is the relation of Median art to this "Scythian' style, and one may tentatively conjecture that the Medes, in their early spreading over central and northwestern han, hardly could be distinguished from Scythians by the local, settled population. The Median tribes undoubtedly absorbed much from the settled cultures of the Mannai, Urartians, Caspians, and other peoples, and in culture as well as political supremacy, they were the heirs of these peoples as the Persians were of the Elamites in the south. Unfortunately we know very little about the composition of the population on the Iranian plateau at the time of the fall of Nineveh. Presumably the population had been mixed to a great extent, for one reason by the policy of the Assyrian kings to deport rebellious peoples and settle them in widely scattered parts of the Assyrian domains. From the Bible (Kings II, 17, 6 and 18, 1 1) we have noted that Sargon II, and presumably Sennacherib, both deported Israelites to the 'cities' of the Medes. Others must have feit the wrath of the Assyrians in a similar manner, and the brisk trade quite likely also brought about a small movement of peoples. The spread of qanat irrigation technology must have opened new areas to cultivation on the plateau, and one may assume an increase in the population. Dyakonov is probably correct in denying the existence in Media in this period of great latifundia where large numbers of slaves were needed, and although the Medes may have brought captives home from the Assyrian wars, there is no evidence of any large-scale displacement of peoples. 58 That various peoples maintained their identities after the fall of Nineveh is suggested by the book of Jeremiah 51, 27-28, where the prophet speaks of the kingdoms of Ararat (Urartu), Minni (Mannai) and Ashkenaz 54 von Gall, op. cit. [n. 52], 38. R. M. Boehmer, "Volkstum und Städte der 55 W. Kleiss, Zendan-i Sulaiman, die Bauwerke Mannäer," Mitteilungen des Deutschen Archäotogi- (Wiesbaden, 1971), 68. Urartian temples and sehen Instituts, Abteilung Baghdad, 3 (Berlin, others were also placed on heights. 1964), 11 foll. 56 Kleiss, "Zwei Plätze des 6. Jh.s v. Chr. in 58 Dyakonov, Istoriya Midii [n. 4], 312. The Azerbaidjan," AMI, 9 (1976), 116. Medes did not follow the Assyrians in this regard. 57 Porada, op. cit. [eh. 3, n. 2], 108-36. See also 78 Chapter IV (Scythians) with the kings of the Medes, opposing Babylon. Presumably this passage refers to the time after 597 b.c. when the Babylonians took Jerusalem. If any credence is to be given this Statement, we may suppose that the Median State was really more of a confederacy of various rulers than a centralized monarchy. From the excavations at Nush-e Jan Tepe, and from Assyrian representations of Median towns on reliefs, it is clear that Settlements were highly fortified, a necessary precaution during the long period of Assyrian raids on the plateau and tribal warfare. Archaeology suggests that fortified areas were abandoned or allowed to decay after the fall of Assyria. 59 For any picture of Median State or Society in this period, however, we are obliged to interpolate from later sources, such as the inscriptions of the Achaemenid kings, and read back into Median times certain inferences. For example, the Greeks borrowed the word 'paradise,' or royal park, from the Medes and not from the Persians, since the form of the last word is with a -z, *daiza instead of Persian *daida (in Ehmite /par-te-taf). This implies that the Medes had created the enclosed royal hunting park before the rise of the Achaemenids. Probably the group of Iranian tribal warriors had given place to a professional army, or at least a royal guard. Dyakonov would see in the Behistun inscription of Darius (II, 16), speaking of the Median army kära Mäda haya vidäpatiy äha, "the Median people which was in its domain(s)," a reference to the landed nobility on its lands, while the kära haya upä mäm äha "the people which remained with me (Darius)" was the professional army and court nobility. 60 Whether this presupposes a division of the Median nobility under Cyaxargs, or his successor, into landed nobility and court nobility is questionable. It is perhaps better to admit the lack of information about the Medes and reserve discussion of later sources for later history. EXPANSION OF THE EMPIRE Herodotus (1, 134) said that the Medes ruled over their neighbors, who in turn ruled over those farther away, which has been interpreted as meaning that the subject peoples ruled themselves, sending tribute to the Medes, whereas under the Achaemenids the system of satraps (usually Persians) was introduced. 61 As Dyakonov aptly observed, the references to 'kings' under the Median king in both Jeremiah (25, 25 and 51,11 and 28) and in a cuneiform text, implies a system of vassal rulers rather than a centralized State. 62 Since the OP title xläyaßiya xHäyadiyänäm 'king of kings' is probably Median in origin, though the Urartians and others used the title long before the Medes, obviously the king of the Medes was the overlord of other rulers. 63 What areas did the Medes rule? To the east we have no sources to answer this question but 59 See D. Stronach, "Excavations at Tepe Nush-i 62 Dyakonov, op. eil. [n. 4], 336. Jan," Iran, 16 (1978), 9-10. On Bäbä-Jän Tepe see " Cf. R. Schmitt, "Königtum im Alten Iran," the same issue, 41^12. Saeculum, 28 (1977), 386 and for the etymology, 60 Dyakonov, Istoriya Midii [n. 4], 332-34. It is O. Szemerenyi, "Iranica V," AI, 5, Monumentum also dubious to assign the OP word spada 'army' to H. S. Nyberg, 2 (1975), 313-23. Szemerenyi is the Medes and kära 'people, horde,' to the Persians, wrong, however, in asserting that the title 'king of cf. Handbuch, 144, lahma for reference to kings' was used by the late Assyrian kings. It is etymologies. really found in the titulary of the early Assyrian 61 W. W. How and J. Wells, A Commentary on kings, not those against whom the Medes fought. Herodotus, 2 (Oxford, 1964), 115. Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 79 otily surmises. The tribes of the Medes already have been mentioned, and the Paretakeni were those whose center was present Isfähan, apparently extending into the desert on the east of Tabbas (Curtius V, 13, 2). Whether the Orthokorybanti, mentioned by Herodotus as one of the contingents in the army of the tenth satrapy of the Achaemenids (III, 92), were the 'high hat' Scythians who maintained a separate identity in Media, is unknown, but a reasonable surmise. 64 Did they have a king who eave fealty to CyaxarSs or did they merely send tribute as more distant peoples? We can only conjecture that the tribes of the Medes were directly under CyaxarSs whereas others were more independent, such as the Persians. The Persians, we are told by Herodotus, the Old Persian inscriptions, and a passage from a prism of ASurbanipal, had kings going back to an eponymous ancestor Achaemenes (OP Haxlmanis). 65 Whether there were two kings in Fars is unknown but not improbable in light of the genealogy of the early Achaemenid kings following two lines after Teispes (OP CispiS). 66 One may further speculate that the line of Cyrus had its center in Pasargadae, his later capital, white his brother Ariaramnes (OP Ariyärämna) had his center to the southwest. We do not know when these local kings submitted to Median overlordship, before or after the fall of Nineveh, but probably under the rule of Cyaxares. Other Iranian tribes to the east are more problematical. In Kerman lived a Persian tribe, the Germanioi or Kermanioi (Herodotus 1, 125), which name some scholars have connected with the word 'German', while others have proposed various etymologies for it. 67 Presumably when Fars submitted to the Medes so did Kerman. In Seistan, ancient Zranka or Drangiana, one may guess a Median control, but again there is no evidence, and the same is true for various tribes which lived in the southeastern part of the Iranian plateau and which cannot be identified, such as the Outioi, whom Herzfeld confidently identifies with OP Yautiyä, NPjut orjut and Arabic Zutf 'gypsies.' 68 Whoever the inhabitants of the desolate Stretches of the southeastern Iranian plateau were, any central control from western Iran must have been weak, as it has been throughout history. Much has been made of a passage in Herodotus (III, 1 17), speaking of the area of the present lower Harl Rüd which has been identified as the Akes River of the historian. 69 The Khwarazmians ruled this piain which was on the borders of the lands 64 Dyakonov, op. cit. [n. 4], 338. His etymology, 66 V. I. Abaev, "Iz Iranskoi Onomastiki," meaning 'fairy' or supernatural beings is less Istoriya Iranskogo Gosudarstva i Kullury, ed. by likely than 'mountaineers,' proposed by Eilers, B. G. Gafurov (Moscow, 1971), 269, Supports the "Demawend," [eh. l,n. 19], 348, since the name is reading Cispis, while W. Hinz, Neue Wege im also applied to people in Central Asia. Allpersischen (Wiesbaden, 1973), 25, upholds the 65 In the fragment of prism from Babylon of the reading CaispiS. More weight aecrues to Abaev in year 639 b.c., line 7 says that Cyrus, king of (the this controversy. land) Parsumas, heard of the great victory of 67 Cf. C. Bartholomae, "Iranisches," ZU, 4 Assurbanipal over Elam and sent his eldest son (1926), 185, who thinks of a foreign word, Arukku to Nineveh with tribute. This Cyrus whereas Eilers, "Demawend" [eh. 1, n. 19], 184, should be the grandfather of Cyrus II, the founder gives a bibliography of discussions of the name of the Achaemenid dynasty. Cf. E. F. Weidner, which he considers Iranian. "Die älteste Nachricht über das persische Königs- 68 Herzfeld, Zoroasler, 2 [eh. 3, n. 31], 733. haus," Archiv für Orientforschung, 7 (1931), 4 and 69 W. B. Henning, Zoroasler, Politician or Witch- 6. Dyakonov, op. eil. [n. 4], 349, explains the name Doctor? (Oxford, 1951), 42, where reference is Arukku as Iranian *Ar(ya)uka. given to Markwart. ov Chapter IV of the Khwarazmians, the Hyrcanians, the Parthians, the Sarangians (in Seistan) and the Thamanians (in Arachosia?). From this sentence W. B. Henning concluded, "We can thus be fairly certain that there was a State in eastern Iran which centered around Marv and Herat and coexisted with the Median Empire; which was led by the Khwarazmians and abolished by Cyrus, who deprived them of their southern provinces, whereupon they gradually retired to their northern possessions along the River Oxus." 70 He further puts Vishtaspa, the patron of Zoroaster, as the last ruler of this State, thus giving the prophet a fixed time and place. This implies no Median overlordship in this part of the east, a position opposed by Dyakonov and others. 7 * These are interesting surmises, but they remain no more, and only new found inscriptions can resolve the question. The likelihood of some kind of Median hegemony exists, but how far it extended or its nature is unknown. Just as with the eastern Iranians, so in the Caspian area, the extent of Median rule is impossible to determine. Since Median armies went far into Anatolia and, as we have mentioned, probably put an end to Urartu, then most likely areas of easier access, such as Khurasan, submitted earlier to Median rule. Only by interpolating between earlier Assyrian and later Persian rule can we come to some appreciation of the Medes where we have virtually no sources. For example, as Dyakonov points out, Achaemenid satrapies were both larger and more independent than Assyrian provinces, so he proposes that the Median satrapies (for the form of the word 'satrap' is Median and not Persian) were between the two in size and independence. 72 Such impressionistic views of the Medes, unfortunately, at present are all we have in reconstructing the past of the Medes. ART AND MATERIAL CULTURE From the domain of art and archaeology we gain some impressions of the Medes and, as mentioned, their dependence on the culture of the Urartians, Elamites, and others of the ancient Near East is great. From representations on Assyrian reliefs some scholars have concluded that early Persian soldiers wore feather headdresses, or that Medes invariably wore tall, round feit hats and trousers. Again, unluckily, there are no identifying inscriptions so the designations are speculative. If we could be sure that certain figures were Medes, then something could be said about the costumes, but since styles change, it is not easy to assign decorative features to the Medes and to no one eise. There is little point in repeating such Statements as, "Just as the Medes probably handed down to the Persians the elements of Scythian art which they had absorbed or obtained independently through eastern connections, so they must also have been the middlemen for the continuation in Achaemenid art of other stylistic traditions which prevailed in Iran in Median times;" 73 or, "we know next to nothing about Median architecture." 74 It is clear that without extensive excavations in Hamadan, on the site of the Median capital of Ecbatana, there is little hope of progress in our knowledge of the material culture of the Medes. 70 Ibid., 42-43. Dyakonov, htoriya Midii [n. 4), 403-12, with the 71 Isloriya Midii [n. 4], 357-58. Suggestion that the 'animal style' in bronzes was Ibid., 361 . Median by origin. "Porada, op. eil. [eh. 3, n. 2], 140. Cf. 74 Ghirshman, op. eil. [n. 27], 87. Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 81 RELIGION The Zendän-e Sulaiman, probably a site of the Mannai, has been mentioned, and presumably a fire altar has been found in a room with high walls in the fortified site of Nüsh-e Jan, but this is all the material evidence we have for the religion of the Medes. A fire cult was no monopoly of the Medes, so the presence of an altar in excavations does little in explaining the uses and beliefs connected with it; even the Hittites had a fire cult. 75 Since the discovery of a fire altar in an excavation gives few details about the religion practiced at the site, we turn as usual to Herodotus, who says (1, 131) that the Persians (and presumably also the Medes) have no images, temples or altars (sie) ; they worship in the open air on mountain tops and kill their sacrifices in a place free from pollution, but one of the Magi must be present and chant a hymn. Further (I, 140), the Magi expose the bodies of the dead to birds of prey, and they kill crawling creatures, as snakes and scorpions. Much has been written about this Information of Herodotus, and the question of the religion or religions of the various Iranian peoples is always bound to a comparison of Classical sources with the Avesta and more recent Zoroastrian practices. Herodotus, of course, lived long after the fall of the Median kingdom, so, as usual, one must interpolate backwards. The three forms of disposal of the dead, cremation, exposure or burial have been found in excavations in various parts of the Iranian world, although cremation, unlike among Hindus and Vikings, is rare in Central Asia and unattested on the plateau. 76 Since exposure of the dead body has been a feature of the Zoroastrian religion for almost two millennia, there is no reason to rejeet Herodotus' assertion that this is a practice especially of the Magi. The desire not to pollute the earth with decaying matter seems to be the prineipal reason why a priesthood would enjoin their followers to adopt exposure in place of former burial in the earth. Since in a passage of Xanthos (FHG 1, 42 and Frg. Hist. III c. 2), the prohibition against cremation is attributed to Zoroaster by the Persians, one may aeeept this as an early Zoroastrian practice, however, frequently breached. No matter when the Magi adopted the reforms of the prophet, they were priests from early times, perhaps a tribe of the Medes as Herodotus says, or a priestly caste just among the Medes and then among other Iranians. In any case, we can safely assume that the Magi held a prominent place among the Medes as Interpreters of dreams and auguries, as well as fulfilling their priestly funetions, for the word 'magic' comes from their name. 77 The process by which the Magi became the Zoroastrian priests is much disputed and the early periods of their activity remain dark. 78 THE LYDIAN WAR AND FALL OF THE MEDES The marriage of a Median princess to Nebuchadnezzar, son of the Babylonian king, before the fall of Nineveh was part of the Joint strategy of the two allies against the 75 V. V. Ivanov, "Kult Ognya u Khettov," (Moscow, 1963) 127-33, and the following article Drevnii Mir, Festschrift for V. V. Struve, ed. by N. by G. P. Snesarov, 134-40. Pigulevskaya (Moscow, 1962), 271-72. Fire is 77 For anetymology of magMj as 'powerful, etc.' used in Hindu ntuals and elsewhere. see J. Pokorny, Indogermanisches Etymologisches 76 For the discovery of funeral urns in ancient Wörterbuch, 1 (Bern, 1959), 695. This is not Central Asia see Y. A. Rapoport, "Some Aspects of aeeepted by E. Benveniste, Les Mages dans fanden the Evolution of Zoroastrian Funeral Rites," Trudy Iran (Paris, 1938), 20. 25 Mezhdunarodnogo Kongressa Vostokovedov, 3 78 Cf. Boyce, op. cit. 1 [eh. 3, n. 21], 10-11. 82 Chapter IV common Assyrian foe. 79 Afterwards, however, one cannot speak of an alliance of the two for tensions developed over the boundaries and spheres of influence. While the Babylonians were conquering Syria and Palestine, driving out Egyptians, the Medes extended their rule in eastern Anatolia, where they came into conflict with the Lydian kingdom with its capital at Sardis. We do not know the circumstances leading to the war between the Lydians and the Medes which Herodotus (I, 74) teils us lasted five years until the famous battle of the eclipse of the sun on 28 May 585 b.c. after which peace was made through intermediaries, the ruler of Cilicia, called Syennesis, and the Babylonians. The Halys River or present Kizil Irmak formed the boundary between the two states and Aryenis daughter of Alyattes of Lydia (ruled c. 617-561 B.c.) was married to Astyages, son of Cyaxares, as a sign of alliance. 80 The Babylonians, however, cannot have regarded the growing power of the Medes with anything but dismay and led to the construction of a defensive wall north of Babylon, and predictions on the fall of Babylon by Isaiah and Jeremiah. Herodotus (1, 106) assigns forty years to the rule of Cyaxares while, Eusebius (Frg. Hist. IIB, Nr. 250) gives thirty-eight, but such numbers, in these and other ancient sources, cannot be substantiated and can only be reported as fitting the general framework of chronology. He was followed by his son Astyages, about whom we find much folklore and fable, relating primarily to the rise of Cyrus. 8 ' We have conflicting information about the family of Astyages in various sources. Herodotus (I, 107 foll.) says that Astyages had a daughter called Mandane about whom he had a dream that she urinated and flooded all of Asia. Astyages became fearful and instead of giving her in marriage to a Mede, gave her to Cambyses of Persis, from which union Cyrus was born. But Astyages later had another dream, that from the womb of his daughter a vine grew which overshadowed Asia. Then he ordered one of his nobles Harpagos to kill the boy, but Harpagos instead gave him to a shepherd called Mitradates and his wife Spako, which is the Median name for dog. 82 The woman substituted her dead child for Cyrus and raised the baby as her own. Years later the royal blood of Cyrus became manifest and Astyages found out about him, then received him into his household, but he punished Harpagos by killing his son and serving him to his father at a banquet. Then the king sent Cyrus to Persis to his real father and mother who received him and, after hearing his story, let it be known generally that he had been saved by a dog. To shorten the story, Harpagos, bent on revenge, later persuaded Cyrus to revolt against Astyages, and during a battle he led the Medes to desert and support Cyrus which gave the victory to the Persians. 79 See Wiseman, op. cit. [n. 49], 15. for -w-. The aecount of Ctesias as found in 80 The Lydian character of the names of the Diodorus Siculus (II, 32, 6) is fantasy. king and his daughter are asserted by L. Zgusta, 8 - The name Mitradates is given as Atradates by Kleinasiatische Personemiamen (Prague, 1964), 55, Ctesias in Nicholas of Damascus (Frg. Hist. II, teil 103 but no etymologies are given. The war A, 361), and in Strabo (729) the name of Cyrus between the two may have been started by Median himself is given as Agradates, probably a mistake claims to rule over the Scythians in Cappadocia. for the same name as that found in Ctesias. Cyrus 1 On the etymology of his name *fiti-vaiga was a noble and not the son of a shepherd. The "brandishing a lance," see Herzfeld, op. cit. [eh. 3, n word for 'dog' is correct and much has been 31], 1, 90, and E. A. Grantovskii, op. cit [n. 6a], wntten about it. 330. In Akkadian he is called Istumegu with -m- Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 83 This is the Cyrus saga, with parts of the myths of the Indo-European peoples inteerated into it. It is not necessary to discuss the variants of the myth by Ctesias and the account of Justin's epitome of Pompeius Trogus, which follows Herodotus, or other more apocopated parts of the story of the rise of Cyrus, since the saga has been discussed in much detail elsewhere. 83 Binder has convincingly indicated that the various elements in the saga such as the abandonment of a royal child and its nourishment by an animal (dog, wolf, eagle or cow) are very widespread motifs relevant to the founder of a new dynasty, and probably bound to ancient rites of nomadic young warrior fraternities {Männerbünde) on the steppes of Central Asia. 84 To go further, however, and draw cosmogonic and far-reaching conclusions on the religious significance of the myths is hazardous, even though one may accept the premise that the stories are much more than just tales or literature but do have cultic and ritualistic origins. The saga of Cyrus must have been attached to his birth and ancestory soon after his death, for the life of Cyrus became an almost mystic symbol for later rulers of Iran. The testimony of Plutarch (Life of Artaxerxes, 3) that a new Persian king had to be initiated into his new position at Pasargadae by following a ritual of wearing Cyrus' robe and eating the simple food which Cyrus ate, indicates the great respect for tradition of the Iranians and the value of the saga as more than a tale. Since a later writer, Aelian (hist. anim. 12, 21) says that Achaemenes, ancestor of Cyrus, as a child was nourished by an eagle, we can see the extension of the variants of the myth backwards in time, as well as forward to the Arsacid and Sasanian founder legends. The Shähname, of course, has many variants of the story of the abandonment of a child and its rearing by an animal. I have called the elements of the motif of the founder of a new dynasty in Iran part of the charisma of Persian royalty which has the following components: royal blood in descent from the previous dynasty, upbringing with common folk undergoing hardships, recognition of the charismatic 'royal fortune,' called xvarsnah in Avestan or later farn or farr, in the youth, and his overthrow of the ruling tyrant to usher in a new age. To use the saga for a reconstruction of history, however, is an uncertain and difficult undertaking, even though it obviously contains much of value. The sifting of fact from fiction in the saga requires external sources, which unfortunately give us little more than a sequence of a few events. 85 So even when source material is available, it is often so mixed with fable and fantasy as to be suspect. The terse Akkadian account of the defeat of Astyages goes as follows, "[Sixth year • . . King Ishtumegu] called up his troops and marched against Cyrus, king of Anshan, in order to me[et him in battle]. The army of Ishtumegu revolted against him and in fetters they de[livered him] to Cyrus. Cyrus (marched) against the country Agamtanu; the royal residence (he seized); silver, gold, (other) valuables . . . of the 83 Cf. A. Bauer, Die Kyros-Sage und Verwandtes Si Binder, op. eil. [n. 83], esp. 29, 45, 58. See also (Vienna, 1882), 86 pp.; G. Hüsing, "Beiträge zur R. Frye, The Charisma of Kingship in Ancient Kyros-Sage" OLZ, 1903-06 (reprinted as a book- Iran," [n. 40], 40-46. •et, Berlin, 1 906), 1 59 pp. ; and finally with ample 85 The Greek didactic treatise by Xenophon, the bibliography, G. Binder, Die Aussetzung der Cyrcpaedia, is likewise difficult to use as a source of Königskinder Kyros und Romulus, Beiträge zur history, although he, like Herodotus, says that klassischen Philologie, 10 (Meisenheim, 1964), esp many stories circulated about the life of Cyrus. 17-28, 175-82. 84 Chapter IV country Agamtanu he took as booty and brought (them) to Anshan." 86 Another Akkadian source simply says that Cyrus "made the Guti country and all the Manda- hordes bow in Submission to his feet," while a text describing Nabonidus' desire to repair the temple of Sin the Moon deity at Harran mentions how Cyrus, king of Anshan, vassal of the king of the Manda-hordes, with a small army will overthrow the far-flung Medes and take Astyaggs to his land as a prisoner. 87 From these sources we may conclude that Cyrus defeated Astyaggs in battle, and the Median army revolted against Astyaggs delivering him to Cyrus who plundered Ecbatana and took Astyaggs as a prisoner to Persis. If this battle took place in the sixth year of the reign of Nabonidus, as one text says, then we may date it 550-549 b.c. It is much better to follow contemporary Akkadian sources, sparse though they may be, than the embellished tales of Herodotus, Ctesias and their successors, who collected their stories from various sources, including tellers of tales. Their general accounts, however, do not contradict the cuneiform sources and this much we accept. The theory that the royal house of Media was related to Zoroaster's family has been proposed and elaborated by several scholars. 88 The reason for this assertion is found in Ctesias, who gave the name of the first husband of the daughter of Astyaggs as Spitamas, and later the name of the magus whom Darius killed, not Gaumata or Bardiya, but Sphendadatgs, both of which names belong in the family of Zoroaster. Herzfeld (p. 51) concludes that Zoroaster is to be identified as Spitakgs, son of Spitamas and Amytis, daughter of Astyaggs. If the Median royal houses were in any way connected with Zoroaster, however, we would have heard of this directly in the sources and not in certain names which modern scholars use to support their theories and reject others as fantasy. Ancient authors have suffered from modern interpreters who praise and use them when it fits their fancies, and then condemn and reject those same authors when their information conflicts with modern hypotheses. The name Spitäma does appear in various sources, including probably a cuneiform tablet (Herzfeld, 48), but this in no way allows us to infer the connection of Zoroaster with all or any of the names, if they are historical. Furthermore, whereas no one should ignore the long continuity of families as well as traditions in Iranian history, to base far-reaching theories on the basis of names or etymologies alone is fraught with misconceptions. It is quite possible that Astyages had no son to succeed him, but it is also possible that the ancient Iranian kingly saga demanded a blood link between Cyrus and the daughter of the last king of the Medes. 89 Although the next empire of the Achaemenids came to be called one of the Medes and the Persians, at the beginning of the rule of the Achaemenids, the Persians were 86 Trans by A. Leo Oppenheim, with the Pyankov, "Borba Kira II s Astiagom," VDl, no. 3 lacunae in the Akkadian text shown by brackets (1971), 16-37. Some of his conclusions, e.g., p. 23 and additions of the translator in parentheses, in that Astyages came from Susa to Pasargadae to J. B. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texls fight Cyrus, are hardly acceptable. He also makes (Princeton, 1955), 305. httle reference to the cuneiform sources. 81 Ibid., 315. The archaic reference to Guti and 88 Herzfeld, op. eil. 1 [eh. 3, n. 31], 48; Manda-hordes (Ummänmanää) is characteristic of Dyakonov, Istoriya Midii [n. 4], 415-16. Babylonian sources. On the Harran text see S. 89 The fact that the Median rebel against Darius, Smith, Babylonian Historical Texts (London, 1924), in his Behistun inscription (II, 13, or par. 24) 44. The best survey of Classical sources on the claimed to be of the family of Cyaxares and not of battle between Cyrus and AstyagSs is by I. V. Astyages is interesting in this regard. Medes, Scythians and Eastern Rulers 85 exempt from taxes while the Medes paid as other subjects did (Herodotus III, 89, 97). Medes raised several revolts under Achaemenid rule, as we shall see, but the revolts may be attributed to the general oppression of the people by their rulers rather than to an ethnic antagonism. Gradually the Medes and Persians, as well as other Iranians, became mixed, which was in part a result of the world empire of the Achaemenids. CHAPTER V ACHAEMENIDS Literature: Our sources for the early Achaemenids are more abundant than for any period of the early history of Iran until the Sasanian period. In the last four decades the results of the excavations at Persepolis have enormously enriched our knowledge of the Achaemenid court. The monumental three volumes by E. Schmidt, Persepolis (Chicago, 1 953, 1 957, 1970) are the basic handbook for the site, but the epigraphical finds of Elamite tablets and Aramaic inscriptions have produced three books, G. Cameron, Persepolis Treasury Tablets (Chicago, 1948), R. T. Hallock, Persepolis Fortification Tablets (Chicago, 1969), and R. A. Bowman, Aramaic Ritual Textsfrom Persepolis (Chicago, 1970). The articles which these works have engendered, plus new Elamite tablets, would require an enormous bibliography. To select those especially noteworthy we may mention the articles, "Persepolis Treasury Tablets Old and New," and "New Tablets from the Persepolis Treasury," by Cameron in JNES, 17 (1958), 161-76 and JNES, 24 (1965), 167-92, and especially Hallock's The Evidence of the Persepolis Tablets," The Cambridge History of Iran, 2 (Cambridge University, Middle East Centre separate publication, 1971), 31 pp. Many articles have been written elucidating various details of the tablets. For a bibliography of articles up to 1970 see W. Hinz, 'Die Quellen,' in G. Walser, ed., "Beiträge zur Achämenidengeschichte," in Historia, 1 8 (1 972), 5-1 4. Since this publication, the following can be added for the Elamite tablets: I. Gershevitch, "Iranian Nouns and Names in Elamite Garb," TPS (1969-70), 165-99,, his "Amber at Persepolis," in Studia Classica et Orientalia Oblata, 2 (Rome, 1969), 167-251, "Island-Bay and the Lion," BSOAS, 33 (1970), 82-91, and "The Alloglottography of Old Persian," TPS (1979), 114-90. The many publications of M. Mayrhofer, especially in the realm of onomastica, fortunately are listed in his Ausgewählte Kleine Schriften (Vienna, 1978), and all Iranian names will be treated in the various fascicules of his forthcoming Iranisches Personennamenbuch, but until then see his Onomastica Persepolitana (Vienna, 1973), 358 pp. For a bibliography of Old Persian see Mayrhofer's, "Das Altpersische seit 1964," in W. B. Henning Memorial Volume, ed. by M. Boyce and I. Gershevitch (London, 1970), 276-98, and succeeding notices in the list of his own publications above. Further Hinz's Wege [eh. 4, n. 66], 174 pp. deals with the Elamite tablets as does his article, "Achämenidische Hofverwaltung," ZA, 61 (1971), 260-311, and "Die elamischen Buchungstä'fekhen der Darius-Zeit," Orientalia, 39 (1970), 421-40, and finally his Altiranisches Sprachgut der Nebenüberlieferungen (Wiesbaden, 1975), 303 pp. A series of articles by R. Schmitt mostly regarding Iranian terms and names in the Elamite tablets have appeared; for a bibliography of his articles and others relating to philological questions, for the most part, see the bibliography in M. A. Dandamaev, Persien unter den ersten Achämeniden (Wiesbaden, 1976), 257- 62. For the Aramaic inscriptions on the green chert mortars, pestles and plates from Persepolis a large literature exists, among which we may mention P. Bernard, "Les mortiers et pilons inscrits de Persepolis," Sl, 1 (1972), 165-76; B. A. Levine, "Aramaic Texts from Persepolis," JAOS, 92 (1972), 70-79; J. Naveh and S. Shaked, "Ritual Texts or Treasury Documents," Orientalia, 42 (1 973), 445-57; j. A. Delaunay, "A propos des Aramaic Ritual Texts," AI, 2 (1974), 193-21 7, and K. Kamioka, "Philological Observation on the Aramaic texts from Persepolis," Orient, 1 1 (Tokyo, 1975), 45-66. Most scholars now agree that the texts on the objeets are not ritual texts but are records of the manufacture of the objeets and their presentation to Achaemenid officials; further they were made in Arachosia (modern Qandahar area). The purpose of the mortars and pestles was hardly just to press grapes or grind spices, but was probably for the haoma ritual, part of the ancient Indo-Iranian religion, and apparently practiced by some Iranians in the Persepolis area. One of the most important new inscriptional sources for early Achaemenid history was the discovery of the quadri-lingual (OP, Akkadian, Elamite and hieroglyphic Egyptian) inscription on the statue of Darius I in Susa in 1973, and an entire issue of the Cahiers de la dükgation archeologique francaise en Iran, 4 (Paris, 1974) is devoted to the statue, as well as articles in JA (1 972). Other discoveries of new inscriptions were merely copies of inscriptions already known; cf. B. Gharib, "A Newly Found Old Persion Inscription," IA, 8 (1968), 54-69, and W. Hinz, "Eine neue Xerxes-Inschrift aus Persepolis," in his book Altiranische Funde und Forschungen (Berlin, 1969), 45-51. 88 Chapter V Perhaps the most important epigraphical material for Achaemenid history, however, comes from inscriptions in Aramaic and in Greek found outside of Iran, but giving valuable Information about the administration of the empire. It is, of course, impossible to list the numerous publications on Aramaic, but a bibliography by J. Teixidor appears regularly in the Journal Syria called "Bulletin depigraphie Semitique." The ongoing Neue Ephemeris für Semitische Epigraphik by R. Degen (Wiesbaden, 1972-) is a handbook of Aramaic inscriptions to be consulted for all Aramaic inscriptions. Of special importance are the Aramaic papyri from Egypt of the satrap Arsames under Artaxerxes I and Darms II published by G. R. Driver, Aramaic Documenls of the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford, 1957), and E. G. Kraeling, The Brooklyn Museum Aramaic Papyri (New Haven, 1953), which Supplement the old collection by A. Cowley, Aramaic Papyri qfthe Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford, 1923) ; cf. B. Porten, Archiuesfrom Elephantine (University of California Press, 1968) and J. Naveh and S. Shaked, "A Recently Published Aramaic Papyrus (from Berlin)," JAOS, 91 (1971), 379-82, as well as P. Grelot, Öocuments aramtens d'Egypte (Paris, 1972). The Aramaic sources give us Achaemenid titles and names as well as other information. Excavations in Anatolia, notably at Xanthos in Lycia and at Sardis, have given us new Greek epigraphical remains from the Achaemenid period. Especially interesting is the trilingual inscription of Pixodaros, satrap of Lycia, in Greek, Lycian and Aramaic; see the CRAI (1974), 82-93, "Le st£le trilingue recemment Ai couverte au Letoon de Xanthos," by H. Metzger, to be published in füll in vol. 6 ofFouilles de Xanthos. For Sardis see L. Robert, Nouvelles inscriptions de Sardis (Paris, 1964). The fragmentary Greek inscriptions from Persepolis unfortunately add little to Achaemenid history; cf. G. P. Carratelli, "Greek Inscriptions of the Middle East, Persepolis," EW, 16 (1966), 31-34. They are probably marks by masons. Numismatics and inscribed seals enter the repertoire of sources on the Achaemenids. A survey of the coinage may be found in D. Schlumberger, L'argent grec dans l'empire achimenide, in MDAFA, 14 (1953), 55-57. Since that time we have S. P. Noe, Two Hoards qfPersian Sigloi, NNM, 1 36 (1956). Further articles on satrapal issues may be found in the excellent yearly bibliography Numismatic Literature published by the ANS in New York. The far-flung circulation of coinage with Greek legends in the Achaemenid Empire is now assured. Achaemenid seals and sealings are also a source for history, and the continuity of earlier commercial practices into the Achaemenid period is revealed by the clay sealings. On them see my "The Use of Clay Sealings in Sasanian Iran," AI, Varia 1976, 5 (Leiden, 1977), 117-24, for general remarks on earlier sealings. The article by C. J. Gadd, "Achaemenid Seals," SPA, 1 , 383-88, is still valuable as are the articles by G. M. A. Richter and H. Seyrig in Archaeologica Orientalia in Memoriam Ernst Herzfeld, ed. by G. Miles (New York, 1952). The seals and sealings, especially those from Persepolis, provide material for reconstructing the material culture of the Achaemenids as well as their artistic achievements. Archaeology, of course, provides the basis for the dating and attribution of most aspects of material culture, and in addition to the volumes of Schmidt on the excavations at Persepolis mentioned above, the two volumes of Ann Britt Tilia, Studies and Restorations at Persepolis and Other Sites of Fars, ISMEO (Roma, 1 972 and 1 978), and the book by D. Stronach, Pasargadae (Oxford, 1 978), 312 pp., are significant. Work at Susa, the winter capital of the Achaemenid kings, continues, and results are published in the Cahiers of the French delegation in Iran and elsewhere. Fortunately, a classified and detailed yearly bibliography of the archaeology of Iran appears in AML Journals which contain articles on the Achaemenids or related Iranian subjects are lran,JNES, IA, SI, VDI, Persica, EW and Orientalia, while the various general Oriental Journals published in different countries, all must be surveyed for articles relating to the Achaemenids. In addition, Archaeology, Archeologia Viva, Iraq, Syria, Sumer, Afghanistan, Anatolia, Mesopotamia, and Sovetskaya Arkheologiya from time to time have articles relating to the Achaemenids. Especially noteworthy was the series Acta Iranica (AI), published in Leiden, and the yearly reports on excavations in Iran, published in Tehran, plus the proceedings of the International Congress of Iranian Art and Archaeology. The Classical sources for the Achaemenids are well known: Herodotus, Xenophon, especially his Anabasis, Ctesias, the Alexander historians, especially Arrian, Curtius, Diodorus Siculus, together with Plutarch's life of Artaxerxes, Aeschylus, The Persians, Ptolemy for historical geography, and, of course, later authors such as Strabo, Pliny, as well as fragments of minor Greek writers. The Old Testament (esp. Esther, Ezra and Nehemiah) also provides some information about the Achaemenids, as do late fourth Century Aramaic papyri and coins from Palestine; see P. W. Läpp, Discoveries in the Wädt ed-Däliyeh, Annual of the American Schools of Oriental Research (Cambridge, Mass., 1974), 17-30. At any time the spades of archaeologists may uncover material which will greatly change our views of Achaemenid history, although on the whole we may expect confirmation of what the literary sources we now have teil us. (Additional bibliography will be found in the footnotes.) Achaemenids 89 CYRUS AND THE FOUNDATION OF THE EMPIRE We have already discussed briefly the Cyrus legend and the Parsua, but a few additional remarks about Fars before Cyrus may help elucidate the circumstances of the founding of his empire. The question of whether after the Landaufnahme by the Persian tribes in Fars, rule was divided into two collateral families of children of Achaemenes has been proposed by many scholars on the basis of the split genealogy of the Achaemenids after Teispes. It is more likely, however, given the nature of tribal societies and the broken mountains and Valleys of Fars, that even after Teispes not just two but many tribal chiefs or 'kings' existed in Fars, and it was probably only under Cyrus the Great that they were all united under him as head of the Achaemenid clan of the Pasargadae tribe. Whether the process of unification followed much the same pattern as later under Ardashir, founder of the Sasanian dynasty, is, of course, unknown but not improbable. Although Xenophon (Cyropaedia, I, 2, 5) says the Persians were divided into twelve tribes, which number appears for other purposes in Xenophon, one should rather follow Herodotus (1, 1 25), who says there were many tribes, but he only names ten, including the Pasargadae, Maraphi, and Maspi. The first presumably lived around the capital of Cyrus and we may presume that the site took its name from the tribe. 1 The second had several prominent representatives mentioned by Herodotus (IV, 167; see also Aeschylus, The Persians, 778) attesting the reality of the tribe, while the third, according to Herzfeld, is preserved in a tribal name of the Lurs at the present time. 2 The name is also conceivably to be found in the province of Massabatike or Messabate between Khuzistan and Fars. 3 The other tribes mentioned by Herodotus are more problematic, for of those he calls settled and agriculturists, the Panthialai, Derousiai and Germani, only the last can be located in present Kerman. Herzfeld suggests that the first have their name preserved in the modern town of Fahliyan, but his etymology is unconvincing, even though the area must have been settled by one of the Persian tribes. 4 The Derousiai are not mentioned elsewhere, and it is not possible to locate them. For want of anyone in the present Fasa-Darab-Jahrum area of today, this tribe might be consigned to somewhere in that expanse, but this is mere surmise. The rest of the tribes Herodotus calls nomadic Dahi, Mardi, Dropiki and Sagarti, all of whom are found elsewhere on the plateau, or rather they are primarily elsewhere rather than solely in Fars. This argues for the correctness of the historian's assertion that they were nomadic, and also for the possible Persian-Central Asian (Sogdian) linguistic connections. The first are mentioned by many Classical authors (see PW) as living primarily east of the Caspian Sea, and the Dropiki or Derbikes are 1 Many etymologies of the name, both ancient 2 E. Herzfeld, Zoroaster, 2 [eh. 3, n. 31], 729. and modern, have been proposed, most of them 3 For references see Mannen, op. cit. 2 [supra, eh. reviewed by Stronach, Pasargadae (Oxford, 1978), 1 , p. 1 ], 356. 280-82. Perhaps the most plausible is by Bailey: 4 Herzfeld, Zoroaster, 2 [eh. 3, n. 31], 731. The 'the Persian settlement.' (in D. Stronach, op.cit. 281, etymologies proposed by him in The Persian footnote 17) W. Hinz, Darius und die Perser Empire, ed. by G. Walser (Wiesbaden, 1968), 298, (Baden-Baden, 1976), 58, says the word was are interesting but unconvincing. Median in origin *Pätragadä, meaning "robbers' nest," not a likely name for a tribe. 90 Chapter V located there as well. The Sagartians, who probably lived on the edges of the central desert near Yazd, were said by Herodotus (VII, 85) to be Persian in speech. The name is found in the Behistun inscription (II, 79), and a revolting Sagartian claimed to be descended from the Median kings. The Mardi present problems since they are found in so many places (see PW) in Armenia, Hyrcania and Media as well as in Fars. There is no compelling reason to call them a clan instead of a tribe and equate the name with the Maraphi as Herzfeld does. 5 Another presumably tribal name rather than a geographical designation, which Strabo (XV, 727) mentions, is Patishuvari(i) on the tomb of Darius, showing a spear bearer called Gobryas, as being a Pateisxoreis. Nothing eise is known about them except the speculation among modern scholars that they were not a tribe but a clan, or that the name is the same as Pasargadae. 6 One may count the various tribes as part of the Persian folk or people, a branch of the Iranians, who settled in the south and who gradually assimilated with the pre-Iranian settled population. As usual, the tribes lost their importance in the course of settlement and the extended family, or clan, and the large unit of the 'people,' now identified with the land they occupied, became important. This is not to deny the existence of tribal areas unsuited for other than a pastoral life, but history was made primarily by the settled folk, without whom the pastoralists hardly could have existed. It was in such a Situation, the settling of the Persian tribes and their mixing with the original population, that Cyrus was able to unite his people and lead them to victory over the Medes. 7 We have already mentioned the Nabonidus chronicle which teils of the defeat and capture of Astyages by Cyrus. Whatever the facts about the desertion of the Median army to Cyrus, the latter must have been in a strong position to challenge his lord. One question which arises is the extent and power of vassal rulers in the Median Empire and in Fars before Cyrus. Cyrus in an Akkadian inscription says, "I am Cyrus, king of the world, great king, legitimate king, king of Babylon, king of Sumer and Akkad, king of the four rims (of the earth), son of Cambyses, great king, king of Anshan, grandson of Cyrus, great king, king of Anshan, descendant of Teispes, great king, king of Anshan, of a family (which) always (exercised) kingship." 8 If we compare this with the Statement of Darius (Behistun I, 6-11) that from long ago his family had been kings; eight had been kings before him, then obviously we can accept two lines of kings in Fars. Probably the Achaemenids ruled the most productive parts of the province — the two plains where Persepolis and Pasargadae were located. Did other 'kings' rule in the smaller oases of present Darab, Fasa, Shiraz and others? Presumably the chiefs of the various Persian tribes in their expansion over the 5 Herzfeld, op. cit. 1 [eh. 3, n. 31], 70. Hinz, op. Arlaxerxes I, 2), an Elamite name, or Kuru, an eil. [n. 1], 104, claims that the Kurds are ancient Indian name meaning 'blind.' Cf. in detail descendants of the Sagartians, which is purely W. Eilers, "Kyros, eine namenkundliche Studie," guesswork. BZN, 1 5 (1 964), 1 80-236. J. Harmatta, "The Rise 6 Cf. R. H. von Gall, "Persische und Medische of the Old Persian Empire," AA, 19 (1971), 7-8, Stämme," Proceedings of the Ist Annual Symposium eritieized the various theories and convincingly ofArchaeological Research in Iran (Tehran, 1972), 2. claimed all early Achaemenid royal names could 7 The name of Cyrus has reeeived many be explained as Iranian. His further assertion that etymologies from 'son' as Luri kur proposed by they are eastern (not western) Iranian names, V. I. Abaev, "K etymologii drevnepersidskikh however, makes little sense for that early period. imen," Etimologiya, 1965 (Moscow, 1967), 289- 8 L. Oppenheim's translation on p. 316 of 91, to 'fire' or 'the sun' (Ctesias in Plutarch's Pritchard, op. eil. [eh. 4, n. 86]. Achaemenids 91 province did maintain separate domains until Teispes divided the age old center of Pars, Anshan, between his sons Cyrus and Ariaramnes. The Achaemenid kings apparently were long-lived as well as capable since they brought all Persians under their banner, just how or when is impossible to say. 9 Possibly the Median system of rule favored a pyramidical structure of the allegiance of small rulers through a provincial king to the central court in Ecbatana, a nascent satrapal and feudal System. Harmatta, on the basis of presumed Median titles and bureaucratic offices in the Old Persian inscriptions, plus the passage in Behistun (1, 64—5) where Darius restored what Gaumata supposedly destroyed, concluded that the Median state was a more centralized State than the Achaemenid empire. 10 He further asserts that the Achaemenid kings established military fiefs in royal domains and gave them as payment for military Services to the generals of their armies, whereas the Median kings had direct bureaucratic control over their royal lands. This is a plausible theory if by no means stated in any source, but in any case one might expect the Medes to have developed a more imperial government structure than the Persians at this time. We will examine briefly the question of military fiefs below. Suffice it to say that the Persian tribes rallied around Cyrus, whereas some of the Medes deserted their king. Whether those who deserted to Cyrus were disgruntled aristocrats who opposed the centralizing of power in the hands of Astyages is pure speculation. The length of time of hostilities between Medes and Persians is difficult to determine since Herodotus (I, 127-28) implies two battles in the last of which Astyages was captured. The sequence of events may be constructed as follows: about 559-558 b.c. Cyrus became king. Dandamaev claims he at once rebelled against the Medes, but this is unlikely. 11 Rather his early years probably were spent in consolidating his power in Fars. Two Akkadian sources contradict each other on the chronology. One, the 'Sippar' cylinder, about the repair of the temple to Sin the moon god in Harran by Nabonidus, said, "When the third year came to pass, he (Marduk, god of Babylon) made rise against them (Ummän-manda or Medes), Cyrus king of Anshan, his young servant, and he (Cyrus) scattered the numerous Ummän-manda with his small army and captured Astyages, king of the Ummän-manda and brought him in fetters into his (Cyrus') land." 12 The 'Nabonidus' chronicle, however, claimed this took place in the sixth year of Nabonidus. Tadmor has convincingly demonstrated that one should accept the date given by the Nabonidus chronicle and not the 'dream' text of Sippar, since such 'dream' texts, as well as poetry, had different objectives than a chronicle. 13 So we may date the overthrow and capture of Astyages 9 If Cyrus I is the ruler who sent his son as a ' 2 Translation in S. Smith, Babylonian Historical hostage to the Assyrians c. 639 B.c. then Cambyses Texts, 44, rev. by L. Oppenheim in H. Tadmor, Imust have had a long life, given the datesof Cyrus "The Inscriptions of Nabunaid: Historical Ar- H. Furthermore, Xerxes (XPf, 15-27) says that rangement," Assyriobgical Studies, 16 (Chicago, both his grandfather Hystaspes and his greatgrand- 1965), 351. father Arsames were alive when his father Darius l3 Tadmor, op. eil. [n. 12], 352-54. The verse became king! It is by no means impossible for aecount of the same time period, with many several generations to span a large extent of time, lacunae, trans. by S. Smith, Babylonian Historical but his Statement is nonetheless remarkable. Texts, 86-91 , and in Pritchard, op. cit. [eh. 4, n. 86], 10 J. Harmatta, "The Rise of the Old Persian 312-15, cannot be used for chronology. Empire", AA, 19 (1971), 14-15. M. Dandamaev, "Politische und wirtschaft- liche Geschichte," Historia, 18 (1972), 16. 92 Chapter V at 550/549 b.c., but we still do not know when hostilities began or how long they lasted. Although frequently asserted, there is no evidence that Cyrus made an alliance with Nabonidus, ruler of Babylonia, against Astyages. If an alliance were made by Cyrus with anyone against Astyages, it would have been more likely with other Iranian peoples or tribes than with the Babylonians, although the accounts of Classical authors are not reliable in this matter. 14 What is certain is that Cyrus plundered the treasury of Ecbatana and took the spoils to Fars, perhaps to his new capital at Pasargadae. The fate of Astyages according to Herodotus (I, 130) was to live with. Cyrus until he died, or he was banished and accidentally killed later (Ctesias, para 5). Neither the Cyrus saga, Xenophon's Cyropaedia, nor any source, says that Astyages was executed by Cyrus, so we may suppose he was treated well. After this conquest Cyrus had to insure fealty of his new Median subjects to himself and the Persians (Justin 1, 7, 2). Whether at this time Cyrus undertook expeditions to the east beyond the borders of former Median control is unknown but not improbable. What we do know, however, is the outcome of the war with Lydia in the west. According to the 'Nabonidus Chronicle' in the ninth year of his reign (547 b.c.), "in Nisan (April-May) Cyrus, king of Persis, called up his army and crossed the Tigris below the town Arbela. In the month Ayar (May-June) he marched against the country Lu . . . killed its king, took his possessions, put (there) a garrison of his own. Afterwards, his garrison as well as the king remained there." Much controversy has raged about the identity of the country name beginning with Lu-, many scholars suggesting Lydia, in spite of the testimony of Classical authors that the king of Lydia was not killed by Cyrus. 15 Hinz proposed to read Su- and reconstruct Suhi, a district on the middle Euphrates, but this emendation is not generally accepted. 16 Another Suggestion, that the word for 'kill' (col. II, 17-idük) can also mean 'beat' or 'crush' militarily, would bring the Akkadian source in line with the other sources. Again, we have only Herodotus (I, 75-91), among the Classical writers, who gives a detailed account of the fall of Lydia to Cyrus. According to the historian, hostilities were opened by Croesus, the Lydian king, by crossing the Halys River which had been the boundary with the Median State to the east. Cyrus marched to meet the Lydians, but in a hard fought battle neither side was victorious. Croesus went into winter quarters at his capital Sardis with the intention of renewing the war in the spring with the aid of the Egyptians and Ionians. Cyrus, however, did not wait but came to Sardis and after a skirmish besieged Croesus in his capital and after fourteen days captured it. At first Cyrus prepared a pyre for the defeated monarch but after lighting it he changed his mind; the fire was extinguished and Croesus was taken as a prisoner into Iran. 14 See the discussion in I. V. Pyankov, "Borba Chronicle and the Fall of Lydia," AJAH, 2 Kira s Astiagom," VDI (1971), part 3, 16-36 and (1978), 97-116, with no definite conclusion. 83-93. ' 6 Hinz, op. cit. [n. 1 ], 97. The exact location of 15 According to Dandamaev, supra, Persien, 95, Suhi is uncertain, but presumably it was in some "Laut babylonischen Quellen sei Kroisos mit dem way either tributary to or under the rule of Tode bestraft worden." His plural is unwarranted, Babylonia. Cyrus would have crossed the Tigris to for the only Babylonian text which is relevant is the go west in any case, whether against Suhi or Lydia, one under discussion. The Greek texts are Hero- so neither that sentence nor the date (usually dotus, Ctesias and their successors. On the reading interpreted as 547 or 546 B.c.) helps us to decide of the chronicle see J. Cargill, "The Nabonidus exactly where Cyrus went. Achaemeniäs 93 Greek vases showing Croesus on the pyre do not contradict the account of Herodotus, as implied by some scholars. 17 Much has been written about the first contacts of the Persians with the Ionian Greeks, but Cyrus clearly did not put much weight on their importance after the fall of Sardis, for there is no reason to doubt Herodotus (1, 153) who says that Cyrus left the conquest of the coastal Ionian cities to a general, while he himself, with Croesus, went to Ecbatana, to prepare for the conquest of Babylonia, the Bactrians, Sakas, and Egypt, which problems were more on his mind. The Ionian cities, as well as Caria, Lycia and Phrygia, were conquered by two Median generals, first Mazares and, after his death, Harpagos, according to Herodotus. The Greco-Persian wars, and relations between the two, were long regarded as a conflict between democracy and autocracy, but this simplistic view has long been abandoned. It is not the purpose of this work to repeat what H. Bengtson has already described, but some of the events seen from the Persian rather than the Greek side may change our traditional views of history based on both sources and prejudices from one side alone. 18 First, changes in the administration of the far west of the Achaemenid Empire were not made overnight, but were developed over much time; most of them, as we shall see, were initiated by Darius and his successors. Second, Anatolia was not Greek territory, and the Ionians themselves were invaders and colonizers, not always a boon and blessing to the natives as frequently has been proclaimed. Third, the vacillations and changes, alliances and policies of the Ionian coastal cities, frequently the result of extensive bribery, do not present an edifying picture of the Greeks. Just as all Greeks did not follow Athens, so not all Achaemenid governors or satraps did what the court at Persepolis ordered. This does not mean that Greeks were satisfied under Persian rule, any more than were the Egyptians or others, but the relative loyalty of the Ionian Greeks compared, for example, to the Egyptians, to Achaemenid rule bears inves- tigation, which we will attempt to explain after a survey of the later fortunes of the empire. Cyrus probably turned his attention to the east after the conquest of Lydia, in the years 546-539 b.c. Herodotus (I, 177-78) says that while Harpagos ravaged the 'lower' parts of Asia, Cyrus conquered 'upper' Asia, all of its peoples and not except- ing any, after which Cyrus turned his attention to the Assyrians (meaning the Babylonians). This usually has been interpreted to mean that Cyrus conquered the eastern regions before his advance on Babylon, but Khlopin has argued that the words of Herodotus only refer to Asia Minor and not to the east. 19 On the basis of the 17 Xenophon, Cyropaedia, VII, 2, 3, has nothing 18 H. Bengtson, Griechische Geschichtes (Mu- about the pyre nor does Ctesias, 4. All agree that nich, 1977), 130-31. The Interpretation of Greek Croesus was well treated by Cyrus. The scenes on actions as part of a great power struggle between the amphorae, however, show Croesus immolat- Carthaginians in the west and Persians in the east ing himself, probably merely following a canon of with the Greeks defending liberty between the art. Cf. J. D. Beazley, Altic Red-Figure Vase-Painters two is an example of imposing modern concepts (Oxford, 1963), 238; on a poem regarding this on the past thereby distorting our understanding. scene see S. Smith, "Illustrations to Bacchylides," ,9 I. N. Khlopin, "Baktriiskü pokhod Kira II," Joi/rna/o/"He;/e«iV:SfM</iei,18(1898) > 267,andJ.G. AF, 1 (1974), 208. Pedley, Ancient Literary Sources on Sardis (Cam- bridge, Mass., 1972), 41. y« Chapter V revolts against Darius mentioned in the Behistun inscription, he further claims that only Parthia and Hyrcania had been under Median rule, since both areas supported the Median rebel against Darius while Bactria, Arachosia, Sogdia, and other areas in the east remained true to Darius, evidence of their prior Submission to Cyrus as part of a Bactrian kingdom conquered by Cyrus. Again, the truth cannot be determined and other sources, such as Xenophon, Berossus, or Justin do not help in this regard. 20 No one disputes the conquests of Cyrus in the east and in Central Asia, because of the town of Kureskhata (Latin: Cyreschata), medieval Kurkath, and the story of the Arimaspi in Central Asia as supporters of Cyrus, but the question is when did he conquer them? 21 Since the conquest of Babylon took place in October 539 B.c. it is not easy to believe that Cyrus spent several years without any activity simply resting in palaces on the Iranian plateau. Just how much territory he conquered in the east before Babylon and how much just before his death unfortunately cannot be determined. The fall of Babylon was an important event in world history. Many inscriptions of Nabonidus, last king of Babylonia, are known and a fairly detailed account of his stay in the north Arabian oasis of Taima, until about 540 b.c., his building activities, and reconstruction of the temple to the deity Sin in Harran, can now be reconstructed. The Babylonians were unhappy with their ruler and in the famous cuneiform 'Nabonidus' chronicle we hear the story: "In the month Tashritu when Cyrus attacked the army of Akad in Opis on the Tigris, the inhabitants of Akkad revolted, but he (Nabonidus) massacred the confused inhabitants. The fourteenth day, Sippar was seized, without battle. Nabonidus fled. The sixteenth day, Ugbaru governor of Gutium (hodie west Kurdistan) and the army of Cyrus entered Babylon without battle. Afterwards Nabonidus was arrested in Babylon when he returned (there) In the month of Arahsammu, the third day (29 October 539 b.c.) Cyrus entered Babylon ; green twigs were spread in front of him — the State of 'peace' was imposed on the city." 22 Akkadian sources teil us how Nabonidus did not come to Babylon for the new year's festival in honor of Marduk until the year before the fall of the city. The great 'Median wall' between the two rivers at Sippar did not halt the invaders, and many captive peoples in Babylon looked upon Cyrus as a deliverer. Certainly Isaiah (eh. 35, 40-55) and Ezra (eh. 1) testify to the high regard held for the Persian conqueror by some of his new subjeets. Cyrus regarded himself as a legitimate ruler of Babylonia and performed ritual acts in a temple of Marduk to conciliate the citizenry, and if we are to believe the cuneiform sources he did just that. These sources, however, 20 Contrary to Dandamaev, supra, Persien, 96. (1947), 163-66 (also Strabo, 517) and for the The use of the word kotoo 'lower' or 'seaward' Arimaspi seeDiod, XVII, 81, also in Aman VI, 24, Asia, isambiguous;inHerodotusit wouldseem to Curtius (VII, 3), etc., although their location is refer to the coastal areas of Asia Minor, while the uncertain. Accounts of the meeting between Cyrus rest of Asia would be the east, and not just the and Zoroaster in eastern Iran, as several scholars mountainous areas of Anatolia as opposed to the have proposed, is only fascinating fantasy. coast. Earlier.thehorizonsoftheGreeksmay have 22 Pntchard, op. cit. [eh. 4, n. 86], 306. The been limited such that Asia meant only Anatolia, Cyrus cylinder (ibid., 315-16) has much the same, but by the time of Herodotus (e.g., I, 4) Asia with many praises for Cyrus and his close represented much more. relationship with Marduk the god of Babylon. On the city (today Ura-tyube) cf. references The new inscriptions of Nabonidus from Taima in E. Benveniste, "La ville de Cyreschata," JA relate to his stay there. Achaemenids 95 m ay be propaganda documents for Cyrus; the account in Herodotus (1, 189-191) teils how Cyrus after a long siege changed the course of the river (Euphrates, sie) and entered the city by a trick, a good story but unacceptable as history. After the conquest of Babylon, "all the kings of the entire world from the Upper (Mediterranean) to the lower (Persian Gulf) Sea, those who are seated in throne rooms, (those who) live in [other types of building as well as] all the kings of the West land living in tents, brought their heavy tributes and kissed my feet in Babylon." 23 Thus, Cyrus became the heir of the Babylonian kings in the allegiance of the peoples of the 'Fertile Crescent' to the borders of Egypt. From Akkadian business documents it is clear that Cyrus introduced no great changes in the economy or the practices of his new subjeet peoples, and no aecounts of rebellions or resistance to Cyrus have been found, rather local officials, prices, etc. continued much as before Cyrus. 24 From Akkadian sources Dandamaev has concluded that Cambyses, son of Cyrus, was made king of Babylon shortly after the conquest, but then was removed and finally reinstated about 530 b.c. shortly before the last campaign and death of Cyrus in the east. 25 Undoubtedly in the years after the fall of Babylon, Cyrus was involved in the consolidation of the 'Fertile Crescent,' as well as other parts of the empire before an attack on Egypt. Because of the raids of nomads against the Settlements in the northeast of his empire Cyrus had to undertake an expedition against the Massagetai, who roamed east of the Caspian Sea. In a battle against them he lost his life in the summer of 530 b.c. 26 The 'Cyrus Saga,' of course, relates the events leading to his death, but doubtless many versions of his end existed. According to Herodotus (I, 205-15) Cyrus crossed the Araxes River to fight the queen of his opponents. Much has been written about this river, some claiming it to be the river of the same name in Transcaucasia, but Pyankov in a series of articles convincingly identified it as the lower Oxus by the Aral Sea, and he has elueidated the various versions of the war. 27 First victorious, Cyrus was subsequently defeated and slain, but his body presumably was secured by the Persians and brought to Pasargadae for burial. If we aeeept Herodotus (1, 214) that Cyrus had reigned twenty-nine years, he was about sixty-nine when he died, and Cambyses sueeeeded him, with no Opposition that has been recorded, at the end of August 530 b.c. according to Akkadian documents. Cyrus has an excellent reputation in history, apparently well deserved. 28 It is generally agreed that Pasargadae was his capital, for this is the only site which has inscriptions with his name. The inscriptions there have raised many problems about Ibid., 316. several scholars have proposed ; see W. B. Henning, 24 Cf. Dandamaev, supra, Persien, 99. Zoroasler [eh. 3, n. 29], 23, n. 2. The name might be Ibid., 102, and note 406 with sources. It is interpreted as 'great Getae'. quite probable that Ugbaru, Commander of the 27 I. V. Pyankov, "K Voprosu o marshrute army that entered Babylon, held the title 'king of pokhoda Kira II na Massagetov," VDI (1964), part Babylon' under Cyrus until his death a short time 3, 115-30; "Khorasmii Gekateya Miletskogo," after the conquest. Cf. W. H. Shea, "An unrecog- VDI (1972), part 2, 2-21, and "Massagety nized vassal king of Babylon in the early Gerodota," VDI (1975), part 2, 46-70. Less likely Achaemenid period," Andrews University Seminary is an identification of the river as the Jaxartes as Series, 9 (Berrien Sorings, Michigan, 1971), 113 does Hinz, op. cit. [n. 1], 118. foll. 28 Herodotus (III, 89) writes the Persians say arius was a huckster, Can /rus a father," while Xenopl getai is not related to 'fish eaters,' or 'great Sakas,' as continuous eulogy of Cyrus. The date is from Akkadian documents; see "Darius was a huckster, Cambyses a despot but Dandamaev, supra, Persien, 103. The name Massa- Cyrus a father," while Xenophon's Cyropaedia is a 96 Chapter V the origins of the Old Persian cuneiform writing System which has a large literature and many partisans of the view that the Old Persian System of writing existed long before Darius. 29 The linguistic, artistic, archaeological and historical arguments advanced by those scholars who support the antiquity of the System of writing would require volumes to elucidate, but the inscriptions of Cyrus at Pasargadae using the first person Singular pronoun provide the primary textual basis for the position that the Old Persian cuneiform writing existed before Darius. Others are just as vehement in defending the thesis that Darius invented the System of writing, based primarily on a famous 'letter' of Themistocles and paragraph 70 of the Behistun inscription. 30 The 'letter' mentions gold and silver vessels in Greece inscribed "with the old Assyrian letters, not those which Darius, father of Xerxes, recently wrote for the Persians." 31 Without going into further discussion, a compromise between the two camps may be reached in proposing that Cyrus, or someone even earlier than he, may have ordered work begun on a System of writing for Iranian comparable to Akkadian and Elamite, but it came to fruition only under Darius who surely had more inscriptions written in it than anyone eise, and he let this be known throughout the ancient world. To return to Pasargadae, archaeologists have determined that Cyrus did build an acropolis with massive stonework, and the basic ideas for the masonry probably came from Lydia and Ionia since masons' marks here are duplicates of those found at Sardis. 32 This would indicate a date for the building activity at Pasargadae after the conquest of Lydia. Cyrus' tomb and his palaces show similar influences from the west, although the end result is a unique blend, the beginning of Achaemenid art and architecture so often characterized as syncretic. While the remains at Pasargadae are at present not as impressive as those of Persepolis, with their original gardens and water courses Pasargadae bespeaks the character of Cyrus as reported in Classical sources, whereas Persepolis is ostentatious and more in character with Darius and his successors. CAMBYSES AND THE 'USURPATION' OF GAUMATA Cambyses is known in the sources for his conquest of Egypt, already planned during the lifetime of his father. 33 It already has been mentioned that, according to Akkadian 29 More recent discussion on the pre-Darius writing System was introduced by Darius is W. origin of the System of writing are: I. M. Hinz; cf. especially his "Die Entstehung der Dyakonov, "The Origin of the 'Old Persian' altpersischen Schrift," AMI (1968), 95-98; also J. Writing System," in Boyce and Gershevitch, eds., Harmatta, "The Bisutun Inscription and the supra, Henning Volume, 98-124, who argues for a Introduction of the Old Persian Cuneiform Median origin of the writing System. In this he is Script," AAH, 14 (1966), 255-83; C. Nylander, followed by R. Ghirshman, "A propos de lecriture "Who Wrote the Inscriptions at Pasargadae," cuneiforme vieux-perse," JNES, 24 (1965) 244- Orienlalia Seucana, 16 (1967), 135-80, and others. 50,J. Kurylowicz, "Zur altpersischen Keilschrift," 3I C. Nylander, "AZEYPIA FPAMMATA, in his Esquisses Linguistiques (Cracow, 1960), 274- Opuscula Atheniensia VIII," Ada Institut) Athen- 79 and with a detailed summary and bibliography iensis Regni Sueciae, 14 (Lund, 1968), 1 19-36. The by P. Le Coq, "Le probleme de lecriture Greek text is «p'ols iiriye/pairTat tö 'Aoovpta cuneiforme vieux-perse," AI, 3 (1974), 25-107, ra n-aAaid ypap.pM.ra, oi>x ä AapeTos 6 Trar-qp and esp. R. Schmitt, "I. Forschungsbericht, Altper- Eip£ov flepoais evayxos eypatl>c. sische Forschung in den Siebzigerjahren," Kratylos, 32 Stronach, Pasargadae [supra, n. 1], 20-21. 25 (1981), 1-66. "The name in OP, Kambujiya, has been 30 The main partisan of the position that the explained as borrowed from a people on the Indian Achaemenids 91 sources, it seems that Cambyses was made king of Babylonia by his father then removed and finally reinstated. His mother Kassandane, according to Herodotus (II, 1), was the daughter of Pharnaspes, an Achaemenid (III, 2), and he had a brother Bardiya, whom the Greeks called Smerdis, plus several sisters, Atossa and Roxane, who died in Egypt (according to Ctesias, 12). Cambyses is supposed to have married his sisters, as well as Phaidyme daughter of Otanes, son of Pharnaspes (Herodotus III, 68). Two remarks may be made, first that succession under the Achaemenids did not follow the law of primogeniture but the ruler designated whomsoever of his sons he wanted to succeed him, and second, this is the first account among the Persians of next-of-kin or brother-sister marriage, which has aroused much controversy in Zoroastrian circles. 34 Next-of-kin marriage was fostered by later Zoroastrian priests but, according to Herodotus (III, 31) Cambyses' desire to marry his sister was against the law, but the royal judges told him another law permitted the king to do what he wished, so he married his sisters. Since the Greeks regarded next-of-kin marriage as disgraceful and against the law, and since Herodotus gives a most hostile Greco- Egyptian, and perhaps a special Persian account of Cambyses, it is not unexpected that this sin should be laid upon the Achaemenid ruler. 35 Incest did and does occur, but among the Persians it is asserted that the practice was recommended as part of their religion. We shall examine this later under the Sasanians, but must be careful in ascribing a later religious injunction to the Achaemenid period. In any case, at that time the practice is not attested elsewhere. Early in 525 b.c. Cambyses invaded Egypt, several years after mounting the throne and after establishing his authority over the empire. We have Egyptian sources which do not corroborate the long and critical account of Herodotus (III, 1—38), rather it seems clear that Cambyses was accepted as a new pharaoh of the twenty-seventh dynasty, and he respected local traditions and honored the Egyptian religion. Like his father in Babylon, so Cambyses in Memphis kept the previous administration intact, only bringing Achaemenid garrisons into the land. 36 Foreign mercenaries such as the Jews of Elephantine Island in the Upper Nile continued to serve now new masters. frontier, the Kambojas, in the same way as later trans. A. S. Way, 2 (London, 1965), 428-29, in a Roman appellatives such as 'Germanicus,' by J. speech of the Spartan Hermione to Andromache, Charpentier, "Der Name Kambyses," ZU, 2 an Oriental slave. The special Persian account (1923), 140-52, and followed by V. Abaev in about the misdeeds of the king is traced to the Elimologiya 1965 (Moscow, 1967), 291-92. See tribal Persian aristocracy, inimical to the central- also K. Hoffmann, "Vedische Namen," Wörter und ized despotism of Cambyses, acc. to Dandamaev, Sachen, 21 (1940), 146. This explanation, how- supra, Persien, 156. ever, ignores the fact that there were at least two 36 The best account of this period is by G. P. rulers called Cambyses, and both are hardly Posener, La premiire domination perse en Egypte derived from the same source, while the activities (Cairo, 1936), followed faithfully by F. K. Kienitz, of Cambyses I in the east are both unattested and Die politische Geschichte Ägyptens vom 7. bis zum 4. unlikely. Jh. vor der Zeitwende (Berlin, 1953). On the 34 The practice of appointing the first son born Elephantine garrison see B. Porten, Archivesfrom after his father became ruler did occur, but not as Elephantine, 421 pp. with bibliography. That an iron-clad rule. For next-of-kin marriages Cambyses dated his regnal years by the Egyptian among the rulers, the Elamite matriarchate may method and from the beginning of his reign, not have provided a model. his invasion of Egypt, has been shown by K. M. T. 35 See H. Diels/W. Kranz, Fragmente der Vor- Atkinson, The Legitimacy of Cambyses and sokratiker, 2 (Berlin, 1951-52), 408, the Dissoi Danusas Kings of Egypt," JAOS, 76 (1956), 167- Logoi or Dialexis. See also Euripides, text and 70. 98 Chapter V Expeditions up the Nile into Ethiopia and westward to the oasis of Amon were not successful according to Classical authors. The reasons for the later Egyptian denigration of Cambyses probably can best be explained by the reduction in revenues and land imposed on the temples of Egypt by Cambyses, and this action may have been provoked by an uprising in Egypt following his return from Ethiopia. 37 Cambyses was also disparaged by the Greeks for his fratricide, and even in Plato's Laws (III, 694) the decline of the empire under Cambyses was attributed to the lack of discipline and pampering of princes when young. Further, according to Plato, Cambyses killed his brother through envy that his brother was equal to himself, and then through drunkenness and debauchery he lost his throne to the Medes, led by a eunuch who despised the stupidity of Cambyses. Plato probably gives a Version current in Greece at the time, but this does not conflict with the account of Darius in his inscription on Behistun (I, 26-27). The account of Herodotus also does not conflict with the story given by the Behistun inscription, and to paraphrase the two, this is the combined account. Cambyses had a brother called Bardiya (Smerdis in Greek), both of the same mother. After he became king Cambyses murdered his brother but kept it a secret. When Cambyses was in Egypt a Magian called Gaumata (Herodotus says he had the same name as Bardiya) revolted and proclaimed himself Bardiya the true brother of Cambyses. The heart of the empire, Persis and Media, as well as other lands, supported the rebellion against Cambyses, but the latter died from a wound on the way back to Persis from Egypt. 38 According to Herodotus the new king was very populär since he instituted reforms, remitted taxes for three years, and in general was liked. He continues that only a few noble Persians suspected that the new king was in truth an imposter and he teils several stories about this discovery and the plot to overthrow him. The Behistun inscription is more laconic and simply relates that Darius with a few men attacked Gaumata and killed him with his chief followers. He then says that he restored property which had been confiscated and reestablished the people in their positions and over their property as it had been before the Usurpation. 39 Afterwards he goes into great detail in the Behistun inscription about the various uprisings all over the eastern part of the empire which he had to suppress. Curiously nothing is said about rebellions in Egypt, Palestine or Anatolia in the inscription although they can hardly have remained completely loyal to Darius from the outset. In any case, such is the famous story of Darius' rise to power and the overthrow of pseudo-Bardiya, for both Herodotus and the Behistun inscription proclaim the Usurpation of the Magian. Just how far one can interpret the struggle which brought Darius to power as a conflict of different interests or classes, or even ethnic differences 37 Posener, op. cit. [n. 36], 170, n. 6, and Kienitz, 39 The translation in appendix 2 is mainly based op. cit. [n. 36], 59, with references. on R. Kent, Old Persian (New Haven, 1953), 119- 38 Much has been written about this, but most 20. Paisiyähuväda has been identified as the present scholars agree it means he died a natural death district of Fasa in Fars by J. Hansman, "An (from an accident acc. to most Classical sources), Achaemenian Stronghold," AI, 6 (Monumentum and not suicide, or other. Dandamaev, supra, H. S. Nyberg 3) (1975), 304, while Herzfeld, Persien, 146-51, devotes a long, detailed discussion Zoroaster [eh. 3, n. 31], 1,205, identifies Sikayau- to this and concludes it meant Cambyses reeeived vati with Sikawand near Kermanshah, which is his just dues' (accidental death) for his bad probably Sagvand in Luristan, an unlikely behavior. identification. Achaemenids 99 rather than as a purely personal clash, is difficult to determine. Plato and others speak of the episode of the pseudo-Bardiya as an attempt to reassert Median preponderance over the Persians in the empire. It is curious in the history of Iran that when we have a primary source such as the Behistun inscription, many scholars do not believe the account of Darius but consider him a rebel against the true Bardiya. 40 The truth is that again we do not know and can prove nothing one way or the other. It would be impossible to even merely enumerate the pros and cons of both sides, but the partisans of Darius' mendacity cite the following arguments against him: (1) The accounts of Ctesias, Herodotus, Behistun and others have too many inconsistencies to be plausible and the story is too contrived to be believed; no one like the 'false' Bardiya could live for five or more years without being 'discovered.' The last argument is unconvincing, however, since no one claims that the Magian proclaimed himself to be Bardiya as soon as the latter was murdered. If he fooled people, it was only from the time of his revolt to his death, which as we know from Akkadian documents was from March to 29 September 522 B.c. (2) Aeschylus (774-77) consideres Mardis/Mardos (Bardiya) the rifth legitimate king of the Achaemenids. (3) Herodotus (III, 72) claims Darius approved of lying, and in the Behistun inscription Darius speaks so much of 'the lie' that one is hard pressed to believe his integrity. Many more persuasive arguments have been advanced, none of which, however, 'proves' the position. The proponents of Darius' veracity assert that (1) The main sources should be believed unless proved to be false. (2) The second false-Bardiya in Persis after the death of Gaumata (Behistun III, 21-52), a certain Vahyazdäta, caused much trouble, and he hardly would have also proclaimed himself Bardiya if something had not been wrong about the fate of the true Bardiya. (3) Comparisons with other false claimants in Iran's history such as the Safavid Isma'li II, are made by proponents of Darius' veracity, and there are also other arguments. 41 As remarked, not one of the arguments clinches the case one way or the other, but some details command more agreement than others. For example, the role of the Median Magi as opposed to Persians, or the slaughter of the Magi commemorated in a festival after the death of Gaumata, cannot be taken seriously or productive of any policy, or as enlightenment of the historical record. 42 Religious questions will be discussed below. More interesting is the Suggestion of Dandamaev that Cambyses was disliked by the Persian aristocracy for his tendency to centralize power in his hands at the expense of the nobility, and that Gaumata/Bardiya sought the support of the people against the nobility which led to his overthrow and the "support of the nobility was for Darius." 43 The revolts against Darius then were 'populär' revolts against the 40 It is not possible to list those for and against convinced many, otherwise he would not have the veracity of Darius in his inscription. Danda- been successful against many odds, and it would be maev, supra, Persien, 120; A. T. Olmstead, History difficult to prove that he lied. of the Persian Empire (Chicago, 1948), 93, and 42 Dandamaev, supra, Persien, 143-45, has con- others are contra. Hinz, op. cit. [n. 1], 132-33; S. vincingly downplayed these facets of the story, Shahbazi, Darius the Great (Shiraz, 1971); 7-11, though the anniversary of the killing of Gaumata Herzfeld, op. cit. [eh. 3, n. 31], 2, 205-09, and or Bardiya apparently was celebrated as somehow others support the veracity of Darius. connected with the Magi, and Dandamaev's 41 E.g., the difficulty of uniting six noble dismissal (138-39) ofthisasa mere eoineidence of Persians against a legitimate Achaemenid king, the killing of Gaumata/Bardiya with the festival of Bardiya brother of Cambyses. All arguments, bagayaiii is unconvincing. unfortunately, are subjeetive. Obviously Darius 43 Ibid., 157-67. 100 Chapter V aristocracy headed by Darius, and Dandamaev translates an OP word vi&äpatiy as simply 'house' in the Behistun inscription (II, 16 and III, 26), thus "the Median people, which were in (their) houses," and the "Persian people, which were in their houses," revolted against Darius, while the professional army and the aristocracy supported him. Note that this proposition is based primarily on the interpretation of one word, which is by no means universally accepted. 44 On the other hand the reasoning of Dandamaev is attractive; in effect it goes somewhat as follows: the centralized army of Cambyses returned to Iran to suppress a Usurpation either by Bardiya or Gaumata, who was populär among most of the subjects of the empire, especially since a moratorium of three years on the payment of taxes had been declared (Herod., III, 67). 45 Then Bardiya/Gaumata seized the property of the Persian nobility, who presumably were in the army of Cambyses, and destroyed the sanctuaries of these nobles, whatever they were. So Darius and the other Persian nobles, who supported him, killed and overthrew the usurper, and then restored the privileges and sanctuaries of the nobility. This explanation of the conflict between the central government (of Cambyses and the usurper) on the one side and Darius and the landed nobility on the other, does make a consistent sense, but it is again only a conjecture, but perhaps better than other surmises. This further implies that Darius was more the head of an oligarchy rather than an all-powerful potentate, and the correctness of Dandamaev's proposal can be measured only by the consequences or aftermath of the accession to the throne to which we must now turn. The rebels whom Darius had to suppress were mostly those who sought to reestablish their local independence, and only one Vahyazdäta in Persis, by proclaiming he was Bardiya son of Cyrus, made pretensions to the Achaemenid throne. One was a local chieftain in Merv whom Darius, in order to increase his importance, raised to the rank of 'king' in Margiana (DB IV, 24). Two, Phraortes and Cissantakhma, claimed descent from the Median ruling house; further two, Nidintu- Bel and Arakha, each claimed to be the son of Nabonidus, last king of Babylon, while the Elamites were more rebellious than any other people mentioned in the inscription, their third rebellion occurring in 520 b.c. Several remarks come to mind; first, all the revolts take place in the heartland of the empire, on the plateau or the Mesopotamian piain. None of the revolts in the western possessions are mentioned in the Behistun inscription, although (II, 7) Egypt is recorded as a rebellious land. It may be that the inscription was intended primarily for the Iranians, who seem to have been the principal and most dangerous rebels, such that Darius' first year could be called 44 The Akkadian Version of the above passage, rebel, which implies a struggle for power rather not fully known to Dandamaev when he wrote, than a people vs. aristocracy struggle. says. "all the Persian troops who had previously 45 If Bardiya revolted against his brother, some come to me to the palace of Babylon from Anshan reason must have induced him to this action, and revolted from me and went over to Vahyazdäta." furthermore the main army was with Cambyses. Cf. E. von Voigtlander, The Bisulun Inscription of Herzfeld, Zoroaster [eh. 3, n. 31], 1, 208, gives Darius the Great Babylonian Version (London, different motives for dirferent revolts, including 1978), 59. The text also could be translated "the the east Iranian revolts directed against the strict Persian troops as many as had been collected in the centralization of the Achaemenids. As noted, the house of Babylon from Anshan." This means that revolt of Vahyazdäta in Persis, claiming to be the Persian troops who had come to join Darius at Bardiya, at least indicates great uncertainty in the Babylon instead returned to Persis and joined the minds of the people about Bardiya. Achaemeniäs 101 one of civil war. Second, the rebels claimed legitimacy by family connections with dead rulers; whether they actually did have legitimacy or were liars according to Darius, they surely were all taking advantage of the end of the family of Cyrus and the Usurpation of Darius (in their eyes). So, whether Bardiya was really himself or Gaumata using his name, many people thought a legitimate ruler had been killed by Darius, a usurper, and the Behistun inscription is Darius' greatest Propaganda device against this position. The civil war then appears to have been more a struggle for local autonomy or personal competition with Darius for power rather than a series of battles embodying social classes or interests, as Dandamaev perceives. It was a time of confusion and one can well imagine that Persian troops on the way from Fars to Babylon, when they heard that someone calling himself Bardiya was raising a force in the homeland, would return to their homes to support one known for his remission of taxes and his benevolence, rather than to support a relatively unknown Darius. 46 Again, there are so many possibilities of interpretation of motives that it becomes an exercise in futility to seek to divine the true intentions of the actors in the drama. Two other passages in the inscription relevant to the motivation for revolt, however, have been much discussed. After the overthrow of Bardiya/Gaumata, Darius says he rebuilt destroyed sanctuaries and returned to the people the fields, herds, slaves and houses which had been taken from them. 47 Why would Bardiya/ Gaumata destroy sanctuaries and confiscate property, and whose property? Since Darius restored everything as it had previously existed, it would seem that Bardiya/ Gaumata indeed had sought to change the Status quo, which was then restored by Darius. Were the sanctuaries those dedicated to many minor or local deities, whom Bardiya/Gaumata sought to replace by a more restricted devotion to one deity? If Bardiya/Gaumata revolted from Cambyses, the revolt was also against the army generals with Cambyses, who had received fief lands from Cambyses. 48 The easiest explanation of the actions of Bardiya/Gaumata is that he gathered supporters and confiscated the property of the supporters of Cambyses, most of whom would be military officers. Then he destroyed their sanctuaries, but this action is unclear. Were many of the officers devotees of a cult to Mithra or to a Männerbund fraternity? Was this action primarily religiously or politically motivated? We do not know, but we may believe Darius when he claims to have restored everything as it was previously; but was the second passage of the inscription a return or something new, the elevation of his accomplices to a special standing? The privileges of the Persian nobility existed before Darius, but it is possible that the seven great families of Iran, which we often meet in later sources, began with 46 As a matter of methodology, one should von Voigtlander, op. eil. [n. 44], 55, has "I gave aeeept any additional Information in one of the back to the army the herds, the flocks, the fields, linguistic versions of the Behistun inscription, (and) the hired workers, (comprising) the 'bow' since it adds information which easily could have estates which that Gaumata, the Magian, had taken been omitted from the other two languages since it from them." The qaSti 'bow' estates were fief lands was considered insignificant. Thus, the fact that the given to military officers in lieu of Service. Persian troops from Anshan (Fars) were on the 48 Attested in Babylonia already in the first year way to Babylon, only in the Akkadian Version, of Cambyses, 529 B.c. Cf. Dandamaev, "Die would likely only interest the Babylonians; Lehnsbeziehungen in Babylonien unter den ersten therefore it should be believed since it only adds Achameniden," Fesischriß für Wilhelm Eilers,ed. by and does not contradict. G. Wiessner (Wiesbaden, 1967), 36. The Akkadian Version, in the translation of 102 Chapter V him. 49 His six helpers are listed in the inscription, in Herodotus and by Ctesias. In Behistun IV, 80-88 we have: O.P. Vindafarna son of Väyaspära Akk. Vintaparna son of Visparu Utäna son of Thukhra Vittana son of Sukhra Gaubaruva son of Marduniya Gubaru son of Marduniya Vidarna son of Bagäbigna Vidarna son of Bagabigna Bagabukhsa son of Dätuvahya Bagabukshu son of ZätOa Ardumanis son of Vahuaka Ardimanis son of Vakhku The Elamite Version is either illegible or it copies the OP. Herodotus (III, 70) has 'IvTaxplpvqs, OrävrjS, Fwßpv-qs, 'Y86pvr)s, Meyaßv^os and ^Aoirad-ivrjS, while Ctesias (14) has ^AraxpdpvTjs, , Ov6<pas, Map86vios, ^Ihipvqs, No{p)ov8aßärr)s, Bapiaar/s, and he adds two more later conspirators 'Apraovpas and BayaTTÖ.Ti}s. S0 We may take the Behistun inscription as the most reliable, but the Substitution of the name Aspathines for OP Ardumanis is noteworthy, since Aspacina is depicted and named as the bowbearer, but holding a battle-axe beside the tomb of Darius at Naqsh- e Rustam. We may suppose that Aspacina was not one of the conspirators but later became powerful, and when Intaphernes was executed and his family feil from honor (Herod, III, 118-19), then Aspacina either took his place, or Herodotus thought he did. In any case, we hear of these families many times, that they owned land in various parts of the empire, that they held special privileges in court and the like. They may have provided the basis for the 'seven great families' of Iran in Parthian and Sasanian times with origins in Achaemenid times. It is not possible to discuss details of the Behistun inscription such as the chronology, for Darius gives month dates, and when he says he did so much in one and the same year (IV, 42-43), this has brought forth much controversy. 5 1 The entire veracity of Darius has been based on this assertion, but many are the possible explanations, and Darius would hardly put on stone and parchment, and send throughout the empire Statements which obviously could be proved false, such as the adding up of dates. Whatever the dispute about the truth of his Statements in the inscription, Darius won, and then he did so much it is difficult to even list his accomplishments. 52 Here we shall briefly speak of his further conquests, his reorganization of the empire centrally and the satrapal System, and finally religious questions and his buildings at Persepolis. 49 The seven great Persian families became a SHAW, 3 Abh. (1977) 5-40, summarizes the tradition well known to Outsiders. Cf Aeschylus, sources but does not add anything. 956-60; in the Bible, Esther 1, 14, Ezra VII, 14, 51 E.g., from A. Poebel, "The Reign of Smerdis Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, XI, 3, 1, and others. and Others," AJSL, 56 (1939), 121-45, to A. S. so On the reading and etymologies of these Shahbazi, The 'one year' of Darius re-examined," names see R. Schmitt, "Medisches und persisches BSOAS.iS (1972), 609-14. Darius obviously was Sprachgut bei Herodot," ZDMG, 117 (1967), in a hurry to carve his inscription, since the 120-22; Kent.op. eil. [n. 39], in the vocabulary, as Scythian campaign was added later in the fifth well as Brandenstein und Mayrhofer, Handbuch, column of the inscription, and the Egyptian and especially R. Schmitt, "Nachlese zur achai- reconquest is not even mentioned. menidischen Anthroponomastik," BZN, 6 (1971), 52 Attempts to prove that the inseiption was 1 -1 6. He argues for the reading Ardimanis for the written in verse, or to analyze all OP inscriptions as Artasyras of Ctesias. The study by F. Gschrutzler, following some scheme of Organization are inter- "Die sieben Perser und das Königtum des Dareios," esting, but do not throw light on the history of the Achaemenids 103 FURTHER CONQUESTS After the civil wars were over, Darius in 519 B.c. says in the fifth column (20-30) to the Behistun inscription, which was clearly added later than the first four columns, that after suppressing the third Elamite revolt, "I went with an army against the Scythians (Saka). Then the Scythians who wear the pointed cap, these Scythians went away from me. (When) I came to the draya ('sea' or 'river'), I crossed it with all my army. Then I smote the Scythians mightily and another I took prisoner; this one was led bound to me and I slew him. The chief of them, by name Sku(n)kha, him they seized and led to me. Then I made another their leader, as was my desire." 53 One new theory proposes that this passage refers to the famous expedition of Darius against the Scythians of south Russia which then took place in 519 (Herod. IV, 1) and not in 513 B.c. as usually supposed. 54 Without going into an exegesis of the fascinating information in Herodotus about that campaign and the description of the Scythians, suffice it to say that the Persians were not successful in holding these Scythians as subjects, but still a problem of identification of those Scythians remains. For Darius teils us (II, 8) that Egypt and Scythia (Saka) were among the lands which revolted against him after he had suppressed the first revolt in Babylon in 519 B.c. This implies that the Sakas had been part of the Achaemenid Empire under Cambyses, and probably under Cyrus, but which Sakas had Cyrus subdued - those in south Russia? Or did Darius lead an expedition against the Scythians of south Russia, supposing them to be the same people who had submitted to Cyrus in Central Asia ? Also Darius' inscription at Persepolis (DPe) includes Hindus" (India) in the lands of the empire but not Thrace (Skudra), which, however, does appear in the inscription on his tomb at Naqsh-e Rustam, presumably engraved late in his reign. This suggests that the campaign against Skunkha mentioned in the fifth column of Behistun was not the expedition against the Scythians of south Russia, rather it was an earlier campaign directed against the Scythians of Central Asia. 55 times. See C. Hauri, Das pentathematische Schema (Saka) Campaign," AI, 4, Monumentum H. S. der Altpersischen Inschriften (Wiesbaden, 1973), and Nyberg 1 (1975), 77-88. See also the OP Cl. Herrenschmidt, "Designation de l'empire et inscription on a clay brick from Gherla, Rumania, concepts politiques de Darius 1 d'aprds ses inscrip- which might have some relevance to the presence tions en vieux-perse," Sl, 6 (1976), 33-65. Her of Achaemenids in the Balkans, J. Harmatta, "A assertion that the word bümi means 'empire' for Recently Discovered Old Persian Inscription," Darius is hardly acceptable. AAH, 2 (1954), 1-14. 53 (V, 21-30). There is no Akkadian or Elamite 5S It is not possible here to discuss the various Version of column V, and the OP text is poorly Scythians (Saka) mentioned in the inscriptions, or preserved, so the translation is based on a number seek to locate them precisely. The Naqsh-e Rustam of hypothetical restorations. The section beginning inscription of Darius distinguishes between Scyth- "another I took prisoner" is unclear, but the uns with pointed hats, Amyrgian Scythians meaning seems to be that the Persians caught one (haumavarga) and Scythians across the sea (tayaiy Scythian chief and executed him, whereas paradraya). In spiteof many other theories, the first Sku(n)kha, the primary ( ?) chief was captured but t wo Scythians are to be located in Central Asia, and not killed. Also many scholars have taken the word the last probably in the Balkans or south Russia. draya as meaning 'river' and have put the action in The Egyptian expressions on the Suez stele and the Central Asia. Others claim the river was the Susa statue, 'Sakas of the marshes' and 'Sakas of the Danube. plains,' seem to be an Egyptian manner of 5i Cf. J. M. Baker, "The Date of Herodotus IV, expression and do not aid us in locating them. Cf. 1 , Darius Scythian Expedition," Harvard Sludies in Kervran, "Une Statue de Darius decouverte ä Classical Philology, 76 (1972), 99-132, and G. C. Suse," JA (1972), 258. Cameron, "Darius the Great and his Scythian 104 Chapter V Egypt was brought back into the empire probably in the winter of 519— 518 B.c. by Darius himself, seemingly after he had issued a decree permitting the Jews to finish building the temple at Jerusalem (Ezra VI, 1). Probably at the end of 518 B.C., after he had left Egypt, Darius gave Orders for the codification of Egyptian laws, which was followed elsewhere such that Darius was called a great lawgiver. 56 To return to his conquests, the Indian campaign meant a great extension of the empire. The date of the Indian campaign can be determined by a comparison of the Behistun inscription where Hindus is not mentioned as one of the countries which 'came to' Darius, whereas in Persepolis (DPe) and in Naqsh-e Rustam Hindus is added to the list of countries. Therefore, in the first part of his reign Hindus was at some time added to the other eastern possession, Gandhara (where the Akkadian version of Behistun 1, 16haspa-ar-ü-pa-ra-e-sa-an-na or Avestan upäirisalna above the eagle^ and Arachosia. As Herzfeld noted, since the voyage of Skylax, the Carian admiral of Darius who was sent down the Indus River and back to the Red Sea on a voyage of exploration, probably took place after the conquest, because a 'royal garrison' is mentioned in a fragment of Hekataios' account of the journey as preserved in Stephan of Byzantium, 175, the date of the conquest would be between 518 and 515 b.c. 57 The limits of Hindus, however, are by no means clear and most scholars have considered it only the Indus valley south of Multan to the sea. More likely, however, the name came from the river, the Sindhu, and would include the people living in the entire valley including the Punjab, and the border with Gandhara would be the lowlands of the present NW frontier province extending to the mountains. 58 The voyage of Skylax opened sea Communications between India and Egypt and probably induced Darius to build a canal in Egypt. The idea for this canal was an incomplete project started by a pharaoh Necho (c. 610-595 b.c.), but Darius finished a canal from the Nile to the Red Sea and erected a number of steles in commemoration of the opening of the canal, probably in the year 498 B.C. 59 Statues of Darius were also erected in various temples in Egypt and Darius took his place as a legitimate pharaoh of Egypt in the eyes of the people. The last expedition, recorded by the sources, is the famous invasion of Greece which ended at Marathon in defeat presumably at the end of August 490 B.c., although the exact date is uncertain. It was the aftermath of the long Ionian revolt on the coasts and islands of Asia Minor, which lasted c. 499 to 493 b.c. and was suppressed only after much fighting by the Persians. Some scholars have regarded the Ionian revolt and the battle of Marathon as insignificant in the eyes of the great king, proposing this as a kind of balance to the obviously biased Greek sources, but the 56 For the Egyptian sources see R. A. Parker, 5S Many scholars consider that the entire Punjab "Darius and his Egyptian Campaign," AJSL, 58 was included in Gandhara, e.g., Breloer, op. dl. [n. (1'941), 373-77, esp. note 1. The Persian governor 57], 27, but it is more likely that Gandhara only of Egypt Aryandes was executed by Darius acc. to extended to the modern boundaries of the Punjab, Herod. (IV, 1 66), who gives several reasons for this but including Taxila. Cf. Tarn, op. dt. [eh. 1 , n. 23], action. 135, and V. Agrawala, India as known to Pänini 57 Herzfeld, op. dt. 2 [eh. 3, n. 31], 662, and a (Lucknow, 1953). 50. discussion in detail with the same remark in B. 59 M. Kervran, op. dt. [n. 55], 266; and W. Breloer, Alexanders Bund mit Porös (Leipzig, 1 941 ), Hinz, "Darius und der Suezkanal," AMI, 8 (1 975), 5-17. Presumably by a 'royal garrison' Hekataios 1 15-21. meant Achaemenid, although this is not certain. Achaemenids 105 pendulum should not swing to extremes. The Achaemenids found Greeks in Egypt and in Cyprus, and cannot have regarded them as insignificant, since the Greeks dominated the seas perhaps even more than did the Phoenicians, who were more loyal subjects of the Persians. Furthermore, the cultural and technical achievements of the Ionians were also known and appreciated by the Persians as testified by the many Ionians in trusted positions under the Achaemenids. 60 The Ionian revolt, which it must be remembered included Greeks in Cyprus and Carians on the Anatolian mainland, as well as the Ionians, culminated in the capture and burning of Sardis in 498 B.c.; and this must have persuaded the Achaemenids that the Greeks were much more than a mere thorn in their far western side. Much has been written about the Persian support of the Greek tyrants in the Ionian cities, who were overthrown and driven out by the people, as well as economic reasons for the revolt in Ionia - fears that the Persians would manage trade by their control of the Bosphorus and the grain trade of south Russia, as well as Egyptian trade. 61 It was inevitable that the mainland Greeks would also become involved thus leading to Marathon. But before the expedition to Greece, Thrace and Macedonia had to be reconquered after the Ionian revolt, an undertaking headed by Mardonius, son-in-law of Darius which cost many lives and hardships (Herod. VI, 44). 62 Thus the expedition to Greece headed by Datis, a Mede, was not simply an expedition of revenge on mainland Greece for support of the Ionian revolt, but was a continuation of Persian policy to secure a position as master of the seas, while the Greek building of a fleet and reconquest of some of the islands of the Aegean Sea after Marathon indicates that the conflict was perceived as serious and continuous by both sides. Two warnings about the Classical sources should be kept in mind. First, the tendency to assign personal motives for all events is dominant in Herodotus and other authors, and the stories told to explain why something happened, although entertaining, and in many cases even important for our understanding, nonetheless must be regarded with great circumspection. Names of generals, governors and others abound as actors in a drama, but in a survey of the history of Iran even accounts ofthose important Iranians, such as harem figures and governors of provinces, cannot be elaborated or even discussed. Second, the tendency to use fixed figures and Standard plots in describing events does not persuade one to have confidence in the information given. For example, the number six hundred is the Standard for ships in the Achaemenid fleet in Herodotus (IV, 87 on the Scythian campaign, VI, 9 by Lade and VI, 95 for Marathon), while numbers like 700,000 soldiers on the Scythian campaign (IV, 87) are absurd. That the Greeks were better armed and better protected with armor than the majority of the Achaemenid army is generally accepted, and as time 60 See A. R. Burns, Persia and the Greeks 62 The expedition to the north has been (London, 1962), 241, and n. 10. considered a first attack on Greece which failed 61 See J. M. Cook, The Greeks in Ionia and the because of storms orTMt. Athos which destroyed East (London, 1962), 98-120, 132-33; and C. much of the Achaemenid fleet, and because of Nylander, Ionians in Pasargadae (Uppsala, 1970). fierce resistance in Macedonia. More likely was the The 'royal road' from Susa to Sardis indicates the need to first secure the northern areas which had •mportance of western Asia Minor and the islands broken away from Persian rule before dealing >n the minds of the Achaemenids. See discussion directly with mainland Greece. and bibliography in H. Bengtson, op. cit. [n. 18], 156—61. 106 Chapter V progressed the Greek mercenaries became the professional core fighting force of the Achaemenid army, while Persians lost both their ability and their will to fight. 63 But in Darius' time they were still good soldiers, though poor sailors. Darius, even in his old age, was determined to counter-attack Greece by land, and began preparations for a long campaign, but Egypt rebelled in 486 and in the same year in November Darius died, according to Akkadian documents. 64 REORGANIZATION OF THE EMPIRE Darius seems to have been the first of the Achaemenid great kings to take a 'throne- name' since his meant 'possessing good(-ness),' and his successors also selected throne- names. 65 Whether his own name was Spentadäta, which Ctesias (frg. 10) claims was the real name of Gaumata, is impossible to determine. 66 If we consider the etymology of Xerxes (OP KhSayärsari) as 'ruling over heroes' and Artaxerxes (OP Artakhssasa) 'having just rule,' the religious nature of them is apparent, but it is interestirig that only the names Darius and Artaxerxes were taken by the later kings of the dynasty. 67 The names were a proclamation of the right to rule, but by their own qualities, as well as by divine Intervention, as found in the inscriptions, where we see that it was by the will of Ahura Mazda that rule was bestowed on the kings. The king was the supreme arbiter, above all men, and his exalted position was proclaimed by court ceremonies, especially by proskynesis, which meant kissing the king's feet for servants, to a cheek kiss for the nobility. 68 The title 'kings of kings,' as already noted, was probably used by the Medes, although only its phonetic form suggests this, since no inscriptions of the Medes have been found. 69 The crown prince was obviously next in court, but some scholars have confidently postulated the existence of an Institution of double kingship under the Achaemenids. 70 Why one should confuse the 'Institution' of 63 By far thegreatest number of Greeks serving feld, op. cit., 1 [eh. 3,n. 31],97,'whocommandsthe the Achaemenids named in the sources were in right will,' and Kent, op. cit. [n. 39], 182, 'hero military Service. Cf. J. Hofstetter, Die Griechen in among kings' (unlikely). The name 'Xerxes' was Persien (Berlin, 1978), 216 pp. only used once. Cf. K. Hoffmann, "Altpers. 64 R. A. Parker and W. Dubberstein, Babylonian afuuäyä," Corolla Linguistica, Festschrift F. Sommer Chronology (Providence, 1956), 17. (Wiesbaden, 1955), 85, n. 15. 65 It is interesting that in Aramaic documents, 68 Cf. J. Hofstetter, "Zu den griechischen dated c. 480 B.c., the name is drwi, later became Gesandschaften nach Persien," Historia, Einzelschr- dryws" (also in the Bible), and for Darius II we have iften 18 (Wiesbaden, 1972), 106, with further dryhwS or drywhwS, thus the later the time the bibliography. The kings were not divinised, as longer the name, contrary to what one would some have thought. On proskynesis see F. Altheim, expect. On throne-names see R. Schmitt, "Thron- Geschichte der Hunnen, 2 (Berlin, 1960), 125-52. namen bei den Achaimeniden," BZN, 4 (1977), 69 Szemerenyi, op. cit. [eh. 4, n. 63], 321, claims 422-25, who convincingly suggests that Darius that the Medes did not use the title since they were innovated the practice of throne-names as part of under the suzerainty of the Assyrians and could not his overall policy to raise the place of kingship in use such a proud title. After 612 B.c., in any case, the eyes of his subjeets. Herzfeld, op. cit., 1 [eh. 3, n. this Statement is nonsense, if not previously as well. 31], 1, 89-99, first proposed the idea of 'throne Although the title Sar-sarräni i'king of kings' is well names.' attested among the Old Assyrian kings, we do not 66 Herzfeld, op. cit., 1 [eh. 3, n. 31 ], 95, identifies find it attested for the neo-Babylonian kings. Cf. Darius with the son of the Vishtaspa who was a M.-J. Seux, Epithhs royales akkadiennes et sumer- patron of Zoroaster, the Isfandiyär of Firdosi, iennes (Paris, 1967), 318. which is unlikely. 70 Ibid., 365, and from the artistic side see H. von 67 On other etymologies for Xerxes, see Herz- Call, "Die Kopfbedeckung des persischen Ornats," Achaemeniäs 107 crown-prince with the idea of a dual kingship I do not understand, for neither a crown-prince nor an 'advisor' to the king, or chief minister, or whatever he may be called, can be designated a 'double king' as we find among later Turkish kingdoms of Central Asia, or in ancient Sparta. If there was no institution of a 'double king' in ancient Iran, then did the crown prince have a special title? In Akkadian we have the term for 'crown prince* mär larri used of Asarhaddon and Assurbanipal, but whether this was also used of other sons of the king as well as (or only) the crown prince is unknown. 71 Many scholars have mistakenly assumed that the co-regency of king and crown prince at the end of the king's reign is proof of the institution of 'double kingship,' but this practice of associating one's successor in rule as a kind of apprentice is found throughout the history of Iran, and elsewhere in the world, and should not be confused with an institution of 'double kingship.' 72 Likewise the office of 'second to the king,' a major-domo or top minister of court, is normal throughout history, and again does not mean co-king. Was there a 'second' or assistant to the king under the Achaemenids? Again no title is attested, but in later Parthian and Sasanian times, we do find a title bidakhsh which may go back to an Old Iranian *dvitiya-khfaya - 'ruling as second,' with an extensive literature about it. 73 It is uncertain, however, whether the notices about a 'second' after the king refer to a title in the governmental Organization or in the court, or to an honorary appellation given to a favorite of the ruler. In either case it does not refer to the crown-prince, who was surely the real 'second' after the ruler, and there is no title attested in the sources. Greek authors, however, imply that a title ^tAiap^os, 'a thousand leader,' meant 'second* (after the king), although this is probably by origin a military title, the equivalent of Iranian *hazärapati-, attested in languages other than Old Persian. From researches of Marquart and Junge it seems that the chiliarch, as Commander of the royal guard and probably also of the 'immortals' (royal guard), did act as an usher of persons who wished to speak with the ruler and consequently could be regarded as a kind of minister of court or prime minister by the end of the Achaemenid dynasty. 74 Thus the power of the chiliarch grew as time progressed with both executive orders and AMI, 7 (1974), 157-59 and especially P. Cal- (Vienna, 1938), 114-15. Akkadian documents meyer, "Synarchie," AMI, 9 (1977), 63-68, who confirm the association of the king's son as writes, "Das persische Doppelkönigtum ist also von successor, but never as co-king with the same titles Dareios I/Xerxes I bis zu Artaxerxes II/Dareios as his father. When Xerxes says (XPf) that Darius belegt." And not afterwards? had other sons but made him 'greatest' madiita after 71 Seux, op. cit. [n. 69], 160. It was also used in himself, this is hardly a title. In India the crown late Akkadian documents for Cambyses and in the prince was called yuvaräja 'young king,' but again time of Darius II, so it continued in use, but, of no 'double' kingship. course, we still do not know whether it was used 73 W. Hinz, Altiranische Funde und Forschungen exclusiuely for the crown prince or for other (Berlin, 1969), 153, note 22, where further princes as well. For the designation of Cambyses as bibliography may be found. The expression 'after 'king's son' as recognition that he was his father's seif also implying second authority, is a later successor, see W. Dubberstein, "The Chronology development. of Cyrus and Cambyses," AJSL, 55 (1938), 417- 74 For references see J. Marquart, Untersuchun- 19 - gen zur Geschichte von Eran (Göttingen, 1896), 57- 72 The co-regency of Cambyses with Cyrus, 63; E. Benveniste, Titres et noms propres in Iranien before the latter lefton his eastern campaign which ancien (Paris, 1966), 67-70; and J. Junge, "Zur led to his death, has been taken wrongly by many Stellung des Chiliarchen der kgl. Leibgarde im as proof of the existence of an institution of 'double Achä'menidenstaat," Klio, 33 (1940), 13-38. kingship'; cf. F. W. König, Der Falsche Bardija 108 Chapter V control of finance under him, as well as control over the court and protection of the person of the ruler. If we may assume, as Junge argues, that the chiliarch did become 'second' after the king, then we may conclude that any expressions denoting 'second' were not official titles in the government but rather appellations, either bestowed by the ruler or current among the people as a matter of designation of the great power of an official, second only to the ruler. 75 We cannot clearly discern whether there was a bipartite or even a tripartite division of authority in the Achaemenid Empire, as appeared later in the history of Iran. The three parties wielding power were the court, the bureaucracy (perhaps including priests) and the army. Inasmuch as the chiliarch combined military and administrative functions, as did the satraps, we may assume such a mixture in other high offices. At the court of the great king, several positions of influence stand out from the time of Darius. One was the 'bow carrier' uassabara and the other the 'spear bearer' arstibara of Darius, both 'honorary' appellatives given to close friends of the ruler, who might be considered as his bodyguards and confidants. 76 At the court royal princes, of course, had great influence simply as members of the royal family (Aramaic BR BYT, O. Iran. *visapu\}ra) and other nobles (ämäta), both Iranian and non-Iranian, gave advice to the king. We do not know whether a Council of advisors, perhaps the six helpers of Darius in his time, existed as a kind of cabinet under later Achaemenids, for there is again no evidence. Perhaps there was an informal, indefinite group of advisors, the 'drgzry' or *handarzakara?. of Daniel III, 3, who may have been part of a hierarchy of friends around the king. Greek sources have much Information about confidants of the king but the Greek words may apply to Greek interpretations rather than Persian realities, especially when the Persian words for the Greek terms do not appear anywhere. The Greeks, for example, speak of institutions called 'the king's friends' (piXot and 'the king's benefactor' £vtpyirt)s, these latter according to Herodotus (VIII, 85) called in Persian opooäyyai. 11 There may have been divisions in the category of 'friends,' some greater (Diodorus XV, 10, 3), others lesser, as well as different degrees of closeness to the king among the kinsmen of the ruler. The eunuchs, harem ladies, princesses (duxsi), made of the court a large collection of people using their influence on the ruler. 78 Also probably connected directly with the court were the famous 'eyes and ears' of the king (Xenophon, Cyrop. VIII, 2, 10-12) which have produced a large literature. 79 It seems we are dealing with a chief overseer, the 'eye,' and many spies of the king, the 'ears,' who reported to him about affairs in the 75 W.Hinz, "Achämenidische Hofverwaltung," ZDMC, 117 (1967), 131. The identification of ZA, 61 (1971), 303 proposes a title *vi$a-palis (piXos in Iranian as Gathic rvaBa- by Herzfeld, op. 'Hofmarschall,' for the second in authority, as a eil., 1 |ch. 3, n. 31], 155-56, is unconvincing. More continuation of Akkadian rabekalli 'palace chief.' hkely is dauilar, or another word. His theory in Alliranische Funde und Forschungen 78 Cf. Benveniste, op. eil. [n. 74], 49-50. One [n. 73], 63-68, that this officer was always a Mede should not forget the education of young nobles is unacceptable. It is possible that the chiliarch later and princes at the court (Xenophon, Cyrop. VIII, 6, took over the duties of an earher majordomo, but 10 and Plato, Alcibiades, 121-22) since the strict again there is no evidence. Persian rules of raising the young impressed the Hinz, Wege, [ch 4, n 66], 57-59, interprets Greeks. Unfortunately, sources are lacking on the first as 'clothes carrier' who carries the bow and details of the education. arrow for Darius at DNd. 7 » On the ocp^aX/xös ßaaiXevs see Herodotus I, For an etymology of this word possibly 114, Plutarch, Arlaxerxes 12, 1, Aeschylus, 979, mcaning 'widely known,' see R. Schmitt, "Me- etc. Among the possible Iranian words proposed disches und persisches Sprachgut bei Herodot," for the 'eye,' are the following: *spasaka, äxSa, Achaemenids 109 empire, especially in the provinces, independently of the governors and military Commanders, in other words a secret Service of spies reporting directly to the court. Every official, courtier, indeed theoretically everyone, was a bandaka or 'slave' of the king, but the word was used probably more as a form of address than anything eise. 80 There is another word anusiya 'follower,' which seems to have been mis- understood by the Greeks who translated it as dtMvaro? 'immortal,' for the royal guard, which was theoretically maintained at the same size at all times. 81 Information was brought to the king by the famous postal System, which was not new but was reorganized by Darius, with the main artery of Communications the 'royal road' from Sardis to Susa (Herod. V, 52). Other roads also existed, especially a continuation of the 'royal road' from Susa to Persepolis and Pasargadae, traces of which have been found by archaeologists. 82 According to Herodotus these roads were measured in parasangs (c. 6 km.), and he describes the stations and System of couriers on the royal road (VIII, 98). 83 The Achaemenids were also active in the construction of bridges over rivers, in the use of boats for commerce and Communications, as well as fire signals for the latter. 84 Although all of this activity was not solely for the benefit of the king, his Orders played a dominant role in the creation of the system of transportation and communication. The Elamite tablets from Persepolis have not only given an enormous increase in Old Iranian onomastica but also new Information about the chancellory, the Organization of work, and religious practices in the homeland of the Achaemenids. The chiefof court or major domo at Persepolis under Darius was a certain Farnaka until 497 B.C., followed by Abisvanta to 484 b.c., then Dargäyus to 482, Rtatakhma to 466 followed by Rtasura. 85 The picture of a complex bureaucracy with many ofhcials is clear from the tablets, but it is not possible to put them in a hierarchy or order. The *kasaka, *didlka or *dltaka, *patyaxla-\ cf. A. pecially in regard to the mythological and Pagliaro, "Riflessi di etimologie iraniche," Rendi- religious ramifications. conti della classe di scienze morali, Accademia 81 Cf. Pagliaro, op. eil. [n. 79], 151. Nazionale dei Lincei, Serie 8, vol. 9 (Rome, 1954), 82 Stronach, Pasargadae [supra, n. 1], 166-67, 133-53, with references; also H. Lommel, "Die and M. T. Mostafavi, "The Achaemenid Royal Späher Varuna und Mitra," Oriens, 6 (1953), 323, Road," A Survey ofPersian Art, 14 (Oxford, 1967), who proposed *spadaka. Further W. Hinz, Altira- 3008-10, who traces the road through modern niscltes Sprachgut der Nebenüberlieferungen (Wies- Firuzabad, ignoring the Anshan-Pasargadae part of baden, 1975), 105. Another title in the Elamite the road, which is far to the north and thus con- tablets from Persepolis has been reconstrueted as tradicts the southern path proposed by Mostafavi. *apiy-äxüa-pä Controller of the overseers'! by M. 83 On the etymology of parasang see H. H. Mayrhofer, "Die Nebenüberlieferung des Altwest- Schaeder, Ungarische Jahrbücher, 15 (Berlin, 1935), iranischen," Archiv für Orientforschung, 25 (1974- 563, and for the word ayyapos 'postal Courier' see 77), 182. The 'eye' may well have been a 'chief R. Schmitt in Glotta, 49 (1971), 97-100. inspector' for the king. 84 Acc. to S. Mazzarino, "Le vie di communica- The ears cora or gaulaka are found in an zione fra impero Achemenide e mondo Greco, La Aramaic papyrus as gw!ky\ A. Cowley, Aramaic Persia e il mondo Greco-Romano, Acc. Naz. dei Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C. (Oxford, 1923), Lincei (Rome, 1966), 75-83; the Greeks learned 99-102, and may be spies. Cf. H. H. Schaeder, much from the Persians in matters of Iranica, AGWG, 1 (1 934), 3-24. It is also possible communication. that these terms are Greek misunderstandings of 85 See Hinz in ZA, 61 (1971), 308. There were Offices which did not exist. many scribes and assistants busy in the chancellory For a discussion of bandaka see Geo Widen- with a complex procedure of dietating, engraving 8ren,"Lesymbolismedelaceinture,"M,8(1968), and registering clay tablets in Akkadian and 133-46. The remarks on marlka 'member of a Elamite, as well as scribes writing Aramaic on Männerbund' should be read with caution, es- parchment. HO Chapter V divän (Olr. *dipi-päna) or chancellory of later times surely goes back to an Achaemenid prototype, and in Persepolis many titles have been found for persons in the bureaucracy, the treasurer *ganzabara (attested in Aramaic and Elamite), his assistant the upaganzabara, then the jramätar and theframäna-kara both in charge of, or directors of, work, the bäji-kara 'tribute collector,* the *hamära-kara 'tax collector,' the *gjdapaü 'foreman' over workers, the raucapäna overseer of daily rations,' and many other omcials. 86 It is difficult to separate from each other the functions of many of these omcials and to determine who controlled what, for example, who could use the king's seal, for there were many copies of the seal used by various omcials. Another question is how much the Organization of omcials at Persepolis was common to other sites such as Susa, or Babylon, and how much was duplicated in the provincial Organization. On the whole, it seems that the provincial courts tried to copy the imperial court, but there were obviously differences in various parts of the empire, but we have no direct Information about this and subjective impressions may give false ideas if used as proven fact. When we turn to the provincial Organization, in spite of copying from a central model, the variety rather than uniformity of institutions is striking. Two questions which may be elucidated are the role of local dynasts in the provincial Organization of the empire and the subdivisions of the satrapy. A few local rulers like the Syennesis of Cilicia, probably the personal name of the ruler in the time of Cyrus which then became a hereditary appellation, the ruler of Paphlagonia (Xenophon, Cyrop. VIII, 6, 7-10) and others held special positions in the empire because of their aid to Cyrus, or otherwise. In the revolt of Cyrus the younger against his brother Artaxerxes II, however, the Syennesis lost his throne for support of the younger Cyrus and his place was taken by a Persian. 87 Many local princes such as those of the Phoenician cities, Tyre, Sidon, Byblos, etc., tyrants of the Ionian cities, as well as the kings of Caria, Cyprus and other areas in the north and east where we have no information, were on the whole hereditary or at least in some tributary or vassal relationship with the Persians. What Darius did was to create twenty great satrapies over many of the local rulers, according to Herodotus, but this was not an innovation, rather a reorganization of the multifaceted parts of the empire which had existed under Cyrus and Cambyses. The former had divided Lydia into two satrapies with capitals at Sardis and Daskylion, and other changes had occurred until Darius' reform of the satrapies which we find in most detail in Herodotus (III, 89-94). The word 'satrap' was frequently used in Classical sources both for the governor and sub-governor as well. 88 86 See the books of Bowman, Cameron, Hai- See also the references in R. Schmitt's survey, lock as well as the bibliographies of articles about "Forschungsbericht" [n. 29]. The fluctuation of the Elamite and Aramaic sources in M.Mayrhofer, titles and Offices is revealed in the Persepolis "Neuere Forschungen zum Altpersischen," in Elamite tablets; see R. Hailock, "The Evidence of Douum Indogermanicum, Festgabe für Anton the Persepolis Tablets," CHI, 2. Scherer (Heidelberg, 1971), 41-66. There were.of 87 Cf. W. Judeich, Kleinasiatische Studien (Mar- course, other officials as well as various designa- bürg, 1892), 209, and the detailed article on tions of them. One official the *padpabaga 'Satrap' by F. C. Lehmann-Haupt in PW. provided provisions for the road for other officials, 88 On the etymology of the word 'protector of while various inspectors undoubtedly existed, but the kingdom,' see the detailed exposition of R. one must not confuse Synonyms, or public as Schmitt, "Der Titel 'Satrap'," Studies in Greek, opposedto official usage, asdoesj. Harmatta, "The Italic, and Indo-European Linguistics offered to L. Rise oftheOld Persian Empire," AAH, 19(1971). Palmer, ed. by A. M. Davies and W. Meid Achaemenids 111 Much has been written about the lists of lands or people in the OP inscriptions, the reliefs of tribute bearers at Persepolis, and the names of satrapies in Classical sources, many authors seeking to reconcile the three. 89 It is clear that the inscriptions speak of lands or peoples of the empire rather than satrapies (the word 'satrapy' is not mentioned), whereas the tax-list of Herodotus is defective; but it is possible to secure a measure of agreement of the various sources for the satrapies of the empire from the time of Darius to the end of the empire. Persis (Pärsa) was the homeland, especially supplying soldiers and bureaucrats, and it extended to the ocean on the south and included Kerman in the east. Although uncertainty exists about the eastern borders of the satrapy, it would seem that thoughout most of the period it included most of modern Kerman, although Alexander found a satrap of Kerman which implies a Separation of the eastern part of Persis before the fall of the Achaemenids. Pasargadae (*pärsa-argada 'settlement of Persians') and Persepolis (OP Pärsa) were the two capitals, the older and the younger. 90 Media (Mäda) was not free from taxation but nonetheless held a special position, since the Medes and Persians were associated together in the minds of other peoples of the empire (e.g., Esther 1, 19, Daniel VI, 8, 15). The satrapy of Media extended to the upper Tigris in the west and in the east to the 'Caspian Gates,' located east of modern Tehran, to Persis to the south and Armenia to the north, for it seems that Darius instituted a satrapy of Armenia, separating it from older and 'greater' Media. The Armenians are mentioned in the various lists of peoples in OP inscriptions, and they are represented on reliefs at Persepolis, but the northern extent of the Armenian satrapy cannot be determined, for the Georgians, Albanians and other peoples of the Caucasus Mts. apparently were never integrated into the empire although some of the Caucasian tribes were according to Herodotus (III, 94). The peoples of the south Caspian Sea coast were at some time separated from Media and made into a satrapy, probably after Xerxes, but at all times central authority was difficult to maintain in this area. Another important satrapy was Elam or Khuzistan (OP Huza) with its capital Susa, probably absorbed by Cyrus after his conquest of Babylon, which maintained its old boundaries of lowlands and mountainous regions to the time of Alexander. The eastern Iranian provinces and India present problems of geographical (Innsbruck, 1976), 373-90. The Persian rather Cameron, "The Persian Satrapies and Related than Median form of the word is found in OP Matters," JNES, 32 (1973), 47-56. For the khshassa-pävan which implies an Achaemenid Classical sources see the detailed article on 'Satrap' origin rather than a Median origin of the word. In by Lehmann-Haupt in PW, and for a synthesis E. the OP inscriptions we find dahyu- 'land' and not Herzfeld, The Persian Empire (Wiesbaden, 1968), the word 'satrapy.' Darius' attempt to separate the 288-365, comparing lists of Hekataios, Herodotus, military from the civil functions of the satrap was the OP inscriptions, etc. G. Walser follows unsuccessful later, while the number of satrapies Herzfeld in his "Missing Peoples in the Persepolis increased as time went on. Diodorus (XVIII, 5-6 Procession," Proceedings of the Fiflh International and 39) gives the satrapies at the end of the empire, Congress of Iranian Art and Archaeology, 1 (Tehran, but this list must be used with caution. 1972), 372. 89 On the reliefs see G. Walser, Die Völkerschaf- 90 Of the many etymologies proposed for len auf den Reliefs von Persepolis (Berlin, 1966), and Pasargadae, that of H. W. Bailey mentioned here is W. Hinz, "Die Völkerschaften der Persepolis- the most convincing; cf. Stronach, Pasargadae Reliefs," Altiranische Funde und Forschungen [n. 73], [supra, n. 1 ], 280-81 . 9 5-l 13. On the OP inscriptions see G. C. 112 Chapter V identification. Parthia, to the east of Media, included Hyrcania (OP Varkana) modern Gurgan ; thus it comprised the modern provinces of Khurasan and Gurgan with a capital at Zadrakarta near the southeastern shore of the Caspian (Arrian, III, 25) and possibly a second capital in the east, although Herzfeld's assertion that *Tausa (Tös) was that capital finds no echo in any Classical source. 91 The Suggestion of Pyankov that Parthia was ruled by a hereditary dynast instead of an appointed ruler on the basis of Ctesias, is not at all convincing. 92 Hyrcania was probably made into a separate satrapy under Xerxes (Herod. VII, 62), possibly because of its importance as a border province against nomads, but at the end of the empire it and Parthia were reunited (Arrian III, 8, 4). The Gils and Cadusians may have been united with Hyrcania at times, but we do not know. The Khwarazmians are placed in the same satrapy as Parthia by Herodotus (III, 93), presumably reflecting the time of Darius, whereas later they are separate, and by the end of the empire they were independent. This may well reflect their movement from the region of the Murghab River north to the Aral Sea, and for a time they seem to have comprised a separate satrapy. The belief that the Oxus River once flowed into the Caspian instead of the Aral Sea is not attested for historical times by archaeologists, so the Kharazmians are not to be placed on the eastern shores of the Caspian. The Sogdians most of the time were joined to the satrapy of Bactria, as was also Margiane or Merv, in the time of Darius, although later Margiane was joined to Aria (Herat). The satrapal capital was at Bactra, modern Balkh, with another center at Marakanda (Samarqand). 93 The independence of local lords in Sogdiana is attested by the fighting which Alexander did there; unfortunately we cannot say when Sogdiana was a separate satrapy and when combined during the Achaemenid period. Aria (OP Haraiva), although included in the large east Iranian satrapy of Parthia and Khwarazm by Herodotus (III, 93), was thereafter made into a separate satrapy with its capital Artacoana (with many variants) probably near the site of modern Herat. 94 Drangiane (OP Zranka) apparently was joined with Aria for tax purposes (Strabo X, 516), although Herodotus (III, 93) puts the Zarangians (also with S-) together with inhabitants of the central deserts of Iran through Baluchistan to the ocean. At the end of the empire Drangiane was together with Arachosia under one satrap acc. to Arrian (III, 2, 1), while the name of the principal city is Greek Prophthasia in Strabo (514 and 91 Herzfeld, op. cit., 318. His corrections of wards in time by Ctesias is to be regarded with Arrian and Ptolemy may be correct, but Tüs was great suspicion. not an important center. Although some sources 9i The etymology of Samarqand proposed by imply that Hyrcania was detached from Parthia A. Pagliaro, "Cyrus et l'empire Perse," AI, 2 and attached to Media it is impossible to trace (1974), 6, zamar kanta 'dug in the earth' is changes in the boundaries of satrapies which lasted unconvincing since the latter part really meant short times. On Jews deported to Hyrcania see J. 'town,' to be sure from the root 'to dig,' but the Marquart, Fundamente israelitischer und judischer former part was a proper name or appellation Geschichte (Göttingen, 1896), 30. rather than a common noun. See also 1. V. 92 1. V. Pyankov, "Istoriya Persii Ktesiya T Pyankov, Drevnyi Samarkand v izvestiyakh antich- Sredneaziatskie Satrapi Akhemenidov," VDI, 2 nikh avtorov (Dushanbe, 1972), 59 pp. (1965), 43. Ctesias gives no list of satrapies but 94 W. Tomaschek in PW etymologizes the rather peoples ruled by the Achaemenids from the name as arta-käuano 'righteous kavi-iike' or 'royal,' time of Artaxerxes II, and any projection back- which also does not inspire confidence. Achaemenids 113 723) which teils us nothing. 95 Arachosia (OP Harahuvati) was an important satrapy which probably had an Achaemenid garrison town for guarding the southeastern frontier of the empire, at least in the later period of the empire when India had fallen away from Achaemenid rule. Stephan of Byzantium and other Classical sources knew that the land was named after the river, but the capital before Alexander is not known, although the fortress of Arshada is mentioned in the Behistun inscription. Northeast of Arachosia the hilly region of Sattagydia (OP ©atagu-) and the lowlands of Gandhara (OP Gandara) may have been joined to Paropamisos, the center and eastern part of modern Afghanistan extending into Pakistan, which was a satrapy under the early Achaemenids. 96 It later broke or drifted away from Achaemenid rule, and when Alexander came there was no Achaemenid satrap to oppose him. When the satrapy of India dropped from Achaemenid rule is impossible to determine but probably towards the end of their rule. Gedrosia (OP Maka), or present Baluchistan, extending to the west, possibly extending over the water to Oman, was never firmly under Achaemenid rule, and it is doubtful whether it ever was a separate satrapy, although for Herodotus (III, 94) it is his seventeenth satrapy. 97 In the west of the empire the satrapies are much better known. The 'Fertile Crescent' was at first united under one governor and comprised Babylonia and Assyria (which once had extended from northern Iraq to Egypt), and the Arabs of the north Syrian desert were included (OP Arbaya). This lasted throughout the reigns of Cyrus and Cambyses, and the neo-Babylonian kingdom was retained as a unit with two parts officially - Babylonia, and the west or Ebirnari (or Aramaic: Abr Nahara) over the river.' 98 The name 'Assyria' and its derivative 'Syria' have caused much dimculty because of changing geographical designations throughout history, but when Darius or Xerxes divided the 'Fertile Crescent' into two satrapies the old usage of 'Assyria' for the western part, as well as the homeland of Assyria, was retained, as we see from the OP lists of Darius and Xerxes; this western part the Greeks and others called Syria. Boundaries were adjusted from time to time but the division between Mesopotamia and Syria remained to the end of the empire, and even on the relief of 95 Two etymologies have been proposed for 97 Many attempts to interpret the lists of lands Zranka, one 'sea-land' by W. Tomascheck sub and peoples in the OP inscriptions are misleading, Drangiane in PW, followed by Herzfeld, and such as G. S. Akhvlediani, "Drevne persidskoe another by G. Morgenstierne, comparing Baluchi Maciya-i Gruzinskoe mesx-," Trudy 25 Mezhdun- drang 'precipice,' referring to the island mt. of arodnogo Kongresse! Vostokovedov, 2 (Moskow, Kühe Khwäja in the Hamun lake, NTS, 5 (1932), 1963), 373, where the author identifies Maka as 43. 'Georgians' in the Caucasus! 96 Herzteld, op. cit.. 342, identified Sattagydia 98 Cf. O. Leuze, Die Satrapieneinteilung in with the Punjab, 'land of seven rivers.' Since the Syrien und im Zweistromlande von 520-320 (Halle, figures of the Gandharan, the Sattagydian and the 1935), 1 17-43; H. Bengtson, Kleine Schriften zur Indian are almost the same on the reliefs at Alten Geschichte (München, 1974), 83-100. For a Persepolis, showing persons from hot lands (see comparison with the names of satraps at the end of Walser, op. cit. [n. 59], 53-55), one would infer the empire, see H. Berve, Das Alexanderreich that all inhabited the plains of the subcontinent, (München, 1926),pa«im. Marquart.op. «r. [n. 91], and probably parts of both the Gandharans and 75, asserted that 'Abr Nahara was called Arbaya Sattagydians did, but one must be careful in by the Achaemenids, but the OP lists were of drawing conclusions from the reliefs alone. To peoples and not satrapies. identify Sattagydia solely with the Punjab is unwarranted. The hill country to the west is more likely, since it is hot in summer. 114 Chapter V thronebearers on the tomb of Artaxerxes II or III the OP text only speaks of the Babylonian and Assyrian, the latter surely for what moderns would call Syrian. One capital of the satrapy across the river' was probably near Aleppo as we may infer from Xenophon, Anabasis (1, 4, 10), or at Tripolis on the sea, although there seem to have been several seats of authority for the huge region, Damascus being one of them at least for a time." Egypt's boundaries were always fixed by geography, although the southern extent of Achaemenid rule up the Nile varied throughout the period of the empire. Memphis was the capital, and the Achaemenids were integrated into Egyptian culture as pharaohs of a new dynasty. Fortunately we have more documents from Egypt (and Babylonia) than elsewhere in the empire, but we cannot transpose the Egyptian Organization to other parts of the empire. Under the satrap was the head of a notne with the Iranian title frataraka, the equivalent of Greek v-napxos, although, as mentioned, the latter word was also used for the satrap. Under thefrataraka was the chiefof a district, the hpthpC (*haftaxupätä) in Aramaic, which has been etymologized as the head or protector of one of seven districts, and both of these titles were found in Persis after the fall of the Achaemenids. 100 In Egypt perhaps the hptfypt ' was head of a topos or toparchy 'county,' although sometimes it seems that thefrataraka was more like a toparch. Just as Babylon had revolted in the early years of Xerxes' reign and had been brutally suppressed, also Egypt revolted already before Darius died, but Xerxes put down the Egyptians and changed the tolerant policy of his father into one of control with severity, as Herodotus (VII, 7) says, with Achaemenes, brother of Xerxes, as satrap. On the reliefs of tribute bearers at Persepolis and in the OP inscriptions appear the Ethiopians (OP Küsha) and the Libyans (OP Putäya), but it is uncertain whether they were part of the satrapy of Egypt, or more likelyjust tributaries as Herodotus (III, 13) says. In any case, both were on the fringes of the empire and at times did not even send tribute to the great king. The people of the north Syrian desert have been mentioned, but there is no evidence that the Arabs of Arabia were under Achaemenid rule. The Hebrews in Palestine, on the contrary, were usually loyal supporters of the Achaemenids even in times of trouble when Egypt or Syria was in revolt, and the Old Testament books of Esther, Ezra and Nehemiah, though not to be treated as history, indicate a closeness of the two. The diaspora of Jews throughout the empire, from a military garrison in Elephantine, an island on the Upper Nile, to exiles in Hyrcania, probably aided their standing with the Persian overlords. 101 Samaria was a hyparchy under the satrapy, and the names of the sub-governors of Samaria from c. 460 to the 99 Cf. K. Galling, Studien zur Geschichte Israels Egypt under Cambyses was Aryandes, under im persischen Zeitalter (Tübingen, 1964), 192, Darius it was Pherendates, for Xerxes his brother argues against Aleppo and Damascus as capitals, Achaemenes, then followed the Egyptian revolt and for sites on the coast. In Phoencia, the cities of put down by Megabyzes. Under Artaxerxes I we Tyre.Sidon, Byblos and Arados were four separate find Arsames as satrap after which a new revolt principalities in a special relationshipto the empire. broke out in 404 B.c. which led to independence 100 W. B. Henning, "Ein persischer Titel im until 343 B.c. when Artaxerxes III retook Egypt Altaramaischen," In Memoriam Paul Kahle (Berlin, and installed another Pherendates as satrap fol- 1968), 138—45, and M. N. Bogolyubov, "Titre lowed by Sabakes and Mazakes. honorifique d'un chef militaire Achemenide en l0 ' Galling, op. cit. |n. 99], 165-84 on Ezra and haute-Egypte," AI, 2 (1 974), 1 09-1 4. The satrap of the Achaemenid governors. Achaemenids 115 end of the empire can be reconstructed thanks to new Aramaic documents. 102 The satraps of the land 'across the river' (Syria and Palestine) cannot be determined as in the case of Egypt, but some names do appear in the sources such as Tattenai in Ezra (V, 3) under Darius and part of the reign of Xerxes, Megabyzes under Artaxerxes I, Belesys I under Darius II, Abrocomas under Artaxerxes II, acc. to the Anabasis of Xenophon 1, 3, 20 (see also Diodorus XIV, 20), although he may have been only the sub-governor of Phoenicia, Belesys II under Artaxerxes III (Diodorus XVI, 42) and Mazaios, first satrap of Cilicia then of all Syria, under Darius III. 103 For Asia Minor the list of satraps of Lydia and 'on the sea' (Daskylion) is difficult to reconstruct, for here, more than anywhere, the joining and separating of territories, plus the uncertainty in the use of the term 'satrap' for large provinces and for rulers of subdivisions of provinces as well, greatly complicates the picture. After the revolt of Cyrus the younger against Artaxerxes II, the province of Cilicia was taken away from the ruler Syennesis, and given to a satrap, although provincial coins Struck later indicate a certain continuation of independent tendencies under the Iranian satraps Datames and Mazaios. 104 Noeldeke gave a tentative reconstruction of the hereditary post of satrap of Daskylion beginning with Pharnakes followed by Artabazos then Pharnabazos, but Mitrobates and Otanes should be added to the list, and the list cannot be checked for authenticity. 105 It was different in the important satrapy of Lydia, with its capital at Sardis, for Sardis was really the Achaemenid center for Asia Minor, and we find a succession of satraps, frequently the same persons as the commander-in-chiefs of Achaemenid armies in the west (Greek Kapavos). Beginning with Harpagos under Cyrus, Oroites (Herod. III, 126) under Cambyses, we find an Artaphernes under Darius, perhaps for a time Mardonius under Xerxes, and under Artaxerxes I, Pissuthnes, followed by Tissaphernes, Cyrus the younger, then a certain Droaphernes who left an inscription probably dating from 367-366 b.c. 106 Then we find Tithraustes, Tiribazos, Struthas, Tiribazos again, Autophradates, and under Darius III Spithridates, with dates and sequences, as usual, uncertain. In Asia Minor there were many local dynasts in Cappadocia, Paphlagonia, Lycia and elsewhere, either under satraps or in direct relations with the central government. The boundaries of such areas, as well as those of the satrapies themselves, varied throughout the history of the empire. From the names of the satraps mentioned above, it is clear that Persians, and especially nobles related to the king, were the great majority. Indeed, by the end of the empire, the domination of Persians had become l02 ftiU,210:Mithradates,Rechum,SanballatI, legend tdnmw?); cf. G. F. Hill, Calalogue of the his son Delaia, Sanballat II, Hananiah, and Sanbal- Greek Coins in the British Museum, Arabia, lat III, to use Galling's transcriptions. Mesopotamia and Persia (London, 1922), cxli; J. There are uncertainties of time and extent of de Morgan's reading, op. cit. [n. 103], 50, is wrong. rule; cf. Leuze, op. cit. [n. 98], 1 53-63. The identity 105 Article in PW 'Daskyleion by Rugge. The ofthe coins of Vfemic, supposedly Struck atSinope, names of the satraps of Daskylion and Sardis, as and the Abrocomas of Syria is disputed; see J. de well as the Commander of Achaemenid forces in Morgan, Manuel de Numismatique Orientale, 1 the west, are offen confused in the sources. M " S ' 1923 ~ 26 )- 53 - ° n the name Tattenai see ' 06 Cf. L. Robert in CRAI (Paris, April 1975), io1 Uart ' 0p ' " L f n - 91 1- 52 - 308 - The name *druva-farnah would mean collo- For the coins of Mazaios (Aramaic legends quially 'solid luck,' but it might be an appellative '* Y) and his predecessor Datames (Aramaic instead of a personal name. 116 Chapter V well established everywhere. One may guess that noble families proliferated and intermarried, with family members holding high positions throughout the empire, and genealogies of some of the noble families reveal the interconnections. 107 This nobility held the real power in the empire, but the bureaucracy was also important, especially in regard to financial matters. The later Seleucid administrative division of satrapy, hyparchy and toparchy probably was inherited from the Achaemenids, and the main function of the subdivisions of the province was to collect taxes. 108 Taxes were mostly in kind, even after the introduction of coinage in the empire by Darius about 490 B.c. as we learn from the Elamite texts of Persepolis. 109 The Situation at Persepolis may have been unique, since there we find a hierarchy of treasurers, sub-treasurers, those who apportioned salaries, others who authorized travel rations, foremen (Elamite kurdabattis, OP *grdapati-) and many others. The impact of the introduction of a money economy into the empire must have had far-reaching consequences for the growth of trade as well as the stability of the empire, and the reduction of all goods to a common money denominator by royal edict was an event in world history of great significance. 1 10 Only the great king Struck gold coins, called stater by the Greeks, for the Iranian word daric (c. 8.4 gm. in weight) was probably named after Darius, rather than from a word for 'gold.' Silver was also Struck by satraps or by generals for use in war, to recruit mercenaries or for rewards, or bribery. If a satrap Struck gold coins, as in the satraps' rebellion in the time of Artaxerxes II, it was a sign of revolt. Herodotus (III, 90 foll.) teils us that taxes were reckoned in talents, a Greek unit of weight, but the Iranian System is difficult to reconstruct exactly. A *dänaka was 1/8 of a silver shekel or aiyXos (c. 5.6 gm.) a word the Greeks borrowed from a Semitic language as did the Persians; twenty of them equaled a gold daric, and ten shekels in weight made one weight of a karsha, an OP word. 1 1 1 The relation of gold to silver was about 13j :1, but it varied as did indeed the weights and measures in various parts of the empire. In spite of the introduction of coinage by Darius, it did not develop and receive wide acceptance any more than the Old Persian cuneiform writing, for the coins usually were accepted only for their metal content and not for any nominal value given to them. Later in the empire Greek coinage became populär, even more than the local satrapal coins of Cilica, Phoenicia or Asia Minor, such that the Attic coinage became 107 Cf. F. W. König, "Altpersische Adelsge- Dandamaev,"Forced Labourin Achaemenid Iran, schlechter," WZKM, 31 (1934), 309; 33 (1936), AF, 5 (1975), 74 55; 35 (1938), 35; also see F. Justi, Iranisches "° Cameron, supra, Treasury Tablets, 1—4. The Namenbuch (Marburg, 1895), 398-99. word *ganza, usually translated as 'treasury,' 1 ° 8 Usually the OP *hamärakara collected the ob viously means 'storeroom' where wine, oil and taxes and dehvered them to an OP *ganzabara other commodities were stored and not just 'accountant,' and the *dipi-bara 'scribe' recorded the precious metals or objects. transactions. Other words denoting similar func- "' On therelationshipof*rfdfidfe<Jtoa j/ieiWsee tions occur in various sources, nsgnzsr 'treasurer' in Cameron, op. eil., 37, 1 32. On the value of a karsha Aramaic documents. See the various books on see Brandenstein und Mayrhofer, Handbuch, 129, Elamite and Aramaic sources noted in the bibh- but especially Driver, supra, Aramaic, 97. On all ography at the beginning of the chapter. On the these wts. and denominations see W. Eilers, whole the satrapal bureaucratic administration "Akkad. kaspum, Silber, Geld, und Sinnver- copied the central one wandtes," Die Welt des Orients, 2 (1957), 326-67, 109 See Hinz in ZA, 61 (1971), 274; M. also E. Schwyzer in IF, 49 (1931), 8-28. Achaemenids 111 almost an international tender, while the eastern part of the empire had little to do with coins until Alexander. 112 Taxes were many and varied, on markets, livestock roads, etc., and, of course, on land. In Greek sources we find that the revenues of the great king consisted o((popoc 'tribute' and Scopa 'gifts,' or perhaps better 'taxes' and 'tribute,' which probably would correspond to OP *bäj- and *häraka, whereas a 'gift' would be *dä$na. 113 Whatever the terms used, State income could be classified as from regulär taxes plus tribute, and from expected gifts, most of which were in kind rather than specie. As far as the central government was concerned, State property and the king's private property were intertwined, although details of accountancy are lacking. After the conquest of Babylonia, and presumably Egypt, Asia Minor and elsewhere, State lands in the conquered territories passed into possession of the Achaemenid king, who then gave this land to relatives and friends. Under Darius this process was accelerated and not only the royal family but the nobility held hereditary estates all over the empire. Much of the land was administered by agents such as the banking firm of Murashu in Babylonia, although other lands were given in fief (OP bäga) as a reward or payment for military service. 114 In Babylonia traditional feudal lands were called after the form of service 'bow' land, 'wagon land, or 'horse' land, and the relation of military service to the land tax was complicated, but in any case, land came to be continually divided among the heirs of an owner until by the end of the empire military colonists no longer supplied any military service and the Achaemenids had to rely on mercenaries to fight for them. 1 • 5 In land holding as well as high offices, the Persians acquired more and more as time progressed, which cannot have endeared them to their subjects, and revolts were more frequent towards the end of the empire. Land, of course, was measured, registered and taxed extensively. The lot of the ordinary person was very hard in antiquity, also in the Achaemenid empire, and in Akkadian documents we hear of parents selling their children into slavery to pay debts. 116 Much has been written about slavery in the empire and " 2 See the interesting discussion in R. Curiel et Dandamaev, "The Domain-Lands of Achaemenes D. Schlumberger, Tresors monltaires d' Afghanistan, in Babylonia," AF, 1 (1974), 123-27, also in 2 MDAFA, 1 4 (Paris, 1 953), 1 6-30. M. Dandamaev, (1 975), 71-78. On bäga- see Driver, op. cit. [n. 1 1 1 ], Hisloria, 18 (1972), 45, distinguishes between (1) 40, and Hinz, Alliranisches Sprachgui [n. 79], 53. royal gold coins, (2) satrapal silver coins, (3) ' ' 5 For the Akkadian names see Cardascia, op. provincial silver coins with the same features as (1 ), cit. [n. 1 1 4], 7, and Dandamaev, "Lehnsbeziehun- and (4) local coinage of people conquered by the gen" [n. 48], 41 . The land holders in OP probably Achaemenids. were called *dahu-pati-, see Hinz, Alliranisches 1 n Cf. W. B. Henning, AI. 14 (1977), "Ära- Sprachgut [n. 79], 80, the later dehkans of Sasanian bisch haräg," 355-57. On *häj- (attested in times. O. Klima, "Zur Problematik der Sklaverei Elamite), perhaps originally meaning a 'pot,' see im alten Iran," AF, 5 (1977), 91, considers the Hinz, [eh. 4, n. 66], 1 01 , 1 29. On *dahia see Driver, *dahu-pali- a title of one over a subdivision of a op. cit. [supra, n. 1 1 1 ], 43, where another word for province, which is unconvincing. tax' OP *bära is also discussed on p. 97. Gifts were " 6 Dandamaev, "Kontrakt o sdache vnaem usually additions to taxes for special occasions and skota, prinadlezhavshego Satrapu Arshamu," Prob- land taxes were assessed on the produetivity of the lemy sotsiahto-ekonomicheskoi Istorii drevnego mira, land, availability of water and other factors. Sbornik pamyati A. I. Tyumenev (Moscow, 114 The literature on banking in Mesopotamia 1963), 146, also in detail Dandamaev, "Politische 's large; see G. Cardascia, Les archives des MuraSü und wirtschaftliche Geschichte," Historia, Ein- (Paris, 1951); M. W. Stolper, "The Genealogy of zelschnften, 18 (Wiesbaden, 1972), 33-45. the Muralu Family ?JCS, 28 (1976), 189-200; M 118 Chapter V especially about the meaning of the frequent word in the Elamite documents from Persepolis kuttal (OP *gfda-), although originally meaning 'house servant,' in Achaemenid times it meant 'worker,' usually subject to corvee labor, but it seems the word was also applied to slaves, free men, war prisoners and others, hence a general designation. 117 Slave labor was used, especially on the latifundia in Babylonia and especially in Egypt, and after the suppression of revolts there was always an increase in the number of slaves who were deported to various parts of the empire, a continuation of ancient Assyrian practices. Slavery on the Iranian plateau, however, does not seem to have been as profitable as in the lowlands. Cuneiform documents, in Akkadian or Elamite, teil us about the different wages paid to various workers or craftsmen which sometimes varied according to season, demand or geographical location. Groups of workers on large projects, such as building Persepolis, were organized into tens, hundreds or more, under foremen, with scribes and accountants to keep records, evidence of an organized economy. Trade, of course, flourished under the empire and luxury objects were carried over long distances, with import-export firms such as the house of Egibi in Babylonia financing international trade. 1 18 Temples, from ancient times, had been large holders of land with slaves, and it seems the temples in Babylonia received a tenth of the produce of all who paid taxes before the time of the Achaemenids. 119 Under the Achaemenids, however, both in Babylonia, Egypt, and undoubtedly elsewhere, although ample sources are lacking, the temples lost their privileged positions, and they had to pay taxes and send their slaves on corvee labor or royal projects. Although the Achaemenids were tolerant in their regard for all religions in the empire, this did not prevent them from levying taxes and other obligations on temples, although there were exceptions and certain temples received privileged treatments. 120 Even though vast sums of gold and silver poured into the royal treasuries, the advantages of living in one large empire for merchants and craftsmen caused a flourishing of trade and industry. Craft guilds also developed in the towns, much more than in the pre-Achaemenid period, and the guilds became centers of security and power for their members. Possibly the guilds followed the same Organization as the associations of feudal tenants called hatrü in Akkadian, but not enough evidence is at hand to determine guild relationships even though information does exist on their Workshops, apprentices, patron deities and the like. 1 21 The huge empire did last more than two centuries so many people must have supported the government, and we may guess that military force was not the main reason for the stability, but perhaps one factor in holding the allegiance of the inhabitants of the empire was the legal System. It is generally recognized that the Achaemenids preserved the past legal heritage in 117 For various meanings and references see lonien während des 6.-4. Jh. v.u Z.," Fesischriß für Dandamaev, op. eil. [n. 1 1 6], 39-43, and his Persien F. Altheim, ed. by R. Stiehl, 1 (Berlin, 1 969), 82- [supra, n. 20], 189-94, for references. 89. 118 Dandamaev, Historia [n 116], 50-51. On 12 ° For references see Dandamaev, Historia [n. the house of Egibi, whose activities are not attested 1 1 6], 54. after Darius I, see S. Weingort, Das Haus Egibi in ' 2 ' D. B. Weisberg, Guild Slruclure and Political neubabylonischeti Rechtsurkunden (Berlin, 1939). Allegiance in Early Achaemenid Babylonia (New "' Dandamaev, "Der Tempelzehnte in Baby- Haven, 1967), 96-104. Achaemenids 119 the countries they conquered, especially in Babylonia, while the law ofthat land, just as the Aramaic language, spread elsewhere in the empire. The new 'laws of the king' (OP data) introduced by Darius made a great impression on his contemporaries, in the Bible (Daniel VI, 8, etc., Esther 1, 19), in Plato (Epistles VII, 332 B , Laws, III, Alcibiades, etc.). and of course the numerous borrowings of legal terms in Armenian and Syriac further attest the great influence of the Achaemenid laws in the Near East. 122 Royal judges served in courts to pass on the king's law, according to Herodotus (III, 31 ; V, 25). The severity of the king's law engendered many stories about punishments, but one must be careful in accepting tales as history. There was a dual System of laws in the empire, the 'king's law' applicable every where, and local laws which were codified by order of the king. Akkadian texts speak of the dlnu or the data of the king synonymously, one a Semitic, the other an Iranian word, but originally the former would be used primarily for local law, and the latter for imperial law, almost a distinction between local, religious and secular, and imperial law. 123 Unfortunately nothing of an imperial law code has survived and only inferences can be drawn from cases which appear in Akkadian or Aramaic sources. Nonetheless the laws of the Achaemenid Empire made a profound influence on the ancient world, and the Romans, famous for their laws, were building on the precedent of the Achaemenids and Alexander. 124 To turn to the power behind enforcement, the army, one can discern a change from the collection of warriors of the Persian people (OP kära) at the beginning of the empire to a professional force (späda in Avestan), the core of which were the merceneries, at the end of the empire. As with the satraps, Persians came to occupy commanding positions in the army, and the officers over Jewish garrison troops in Elephantine, Upper Egypt and elsewhere were Iranians. Local troops, of course, were mobilized in time of war in various centers (Xenophon, Anabasis, 1,9,7; Oecon. 4, 6). The army comprised cavalry (asabära 'horseman') and infantry (pasti- 'footsoldier'), and a special part of the foot-soldiers were the archers (OP ©anuvaniya). 1 2S The army was divided into units of ten thousand (OP *baivara-), a thousand, a hundred, ten and five (*pasta-dadapati- in Elamite transcription). 1 26 In the Greek sources we hear from time to time of a supreme military Commander above the satraps, who frequently 1 22 Plato (Epist. VII, 332B) considers Darius the many others. Cf. Hinz, Altiranisches Sprachgui [n. lawgiver whose laws preserved the empire. 79], 86, 97, also R. Schmitt, in Die Sprache, 13 123 For a bibliography on law see J. Wolski, (1967), 208. For Armenian borrowings, see E. Introduction bibliographique a l'histoire du droit et ä Benveniste, "Mots d'emprunt iraniens en armen- l'ethnologie juridiaue, ed. by J. Gilissen, A/5 ien," BSL, 53 (1957-58), 61-62. (Brüssels, 1965), 15-17, 23-26. For Akkadian 125 The spearmen were aritika or arStibära, and usage see Dandamaev, "Bagasarü ganzabara," in other words appear for short sword and perhaps Studien zur Sprachwissenschaft und Kulturkunde, 'battle axe carriers' (vassabära). Cf. G. Widengren, Gedenkschrift für W. Brandenstein, ed. by M. "Über einige Probleme in der altpersischen Ge- Mayrhofer (Innsbruck, 1968), 237. For royal cases schichte," Festschrift für Leo Brandt (Cologne, in the sources see M. Ehtecham, L'lran sous les 1968), 524-27. Achhninides (Fribourg, 1946), 82-84. 126 On the words see E. Benveniste, "Interßr- The Iranian words which entered other ences lexicales entre le gothique et l'iranien," BSL, languages relating to law are many, especially in 58 (1963), 41-57. See also Aeschylus, 303-05. The Armenian. In addition to data we have *dätabara OP word madiSta 'greatest' used as 'Commander' judge, frapädaka 'tribunal,' *patifräsa and frasaka does not imply a military title, «ate's attorney' or 'accuser,' framatar 'judge,' and 120 Chapter V commanded their satrapal troops, and it is uncertain whether this was a Standing post, or only appointed in time of war. Herodotus (VII, 82—83) names six army Commanders plus the head of the imperial bodyguard 'the immortals,' as the top officers who led the forces assembled by Xerxes into Greece. Whether this meant that the empire was divided into that number of permanent military districts or not, we cannot determine although it is not impossible. On the other hand, in the army of Artaxerxes II against Cyrus the Younger, only four Commanders are mentioned (Xenophon, Anabasis, 1, 7, 12), which may reflect only those areas subservient to the king and not to Cyrus. The first thousand of the 'immortals' were noble Persians who served as the imperial bodyguard, who according to Herodotus (VII, 41, also 83) carried golden pomegranates on the points of their spears. Their leader was a Xihiapxos whose position rose very much after Darius and they are portrayed in stone at Persepolis. The archers and cavalry were important for Achaemenid tactics, and in open fields they were very effective, but in hilly areas and narrow Valleys, the Greeks, who wore better armor, usually had the upper hand. The garrisons in unruly provinces such as Egypt or Ionia were composed of soldiers from all over the empire, to judge from the Information from the Aramaic papyri from Elephantine, and these troops were settled on land given them as military fiefs. 1 27 This practice of settling troops in places other than their homelands, gave to the Achaemenids support against local revolts and was a factor in the long life of the empire. As time went on, however, the military fiefs were divided and sold and the system broke down. As noted, sometimes Commanders of armies outranked satraps with their provincial troops, but towards the end of the empire the Separation of civil and military authority was rare and the satraps were more powerful than in the time of Darius or Xerxes and even hired their own mercenaries. The fleets were managed by the Phoenicians (and Cypriots), Egyptians and coastal peoples of Asia Minor, such as the Cilicians and Carians. Soldiers, however, fought on the ships as marines, but in naval tactics the Achaemenids were not experienced. In time it became more profitable to hire professional mercenaries, mostly Greeks, than to rely on local levies whose enthusiasm to serve the Persians declined with economic problems on the land which impoverished many, not the least cause of which was the greediness of Persian officials and landowners. The armies of the Achaemenids at the end of the empire had declined in both spirit and training compared to earlier forces, and devices such as the scythed chariots at the battle of Gaugamela did nothing to restore confidence in victory, and surely the leadership had faltered in its duty. RELIGION The question whether the Achaemenids were Zoroastrians or not has brought forth much discussion and controversy, but this presupposes the existence of a modern concept of a 'Zoroastrian religion' in those days, which is erroneous. 128 Both the 127 See the interesting remarks in Kraeling, op. Einzelschriften 18 (Wiesbaden, 1972), 59-82. Cf. cit. [supra, Brooklyn], 32^t8. M. Boyce, Zoroastrians (London, 1979), 48-77, a ,28 J. Duchesne-Guillemin, "Die Religion der summary of her forthcoming, History of Zoroas- Achämeniden," AA, 19 (1971), 35, surveys the trianism, 2, and the article by G. Gnoli, "Politique literature pro and con for this question, and again religieuse et conception de la royaute sous les in his "La Religion des Achemenides," in Hisloria, Achemenides," AI, 2 (1974), 118-90. Achaemenids 121 followers of Zoroaster and the Achaemenids concentrated their worship on the great god Ahura Mazda and both did not deny the existence of other deities. Both abhorred 'the lie' and extolled 'the truth,' as we find in the Gathas and in the OP inscriptions. This should be sumcient to indicate that both followed the same religious system, although surely with some differences in beliefs if not so much in cult or practices. Three general factors can be singled out as the background for discussion about the religion of the Achaemenids, first the general Iranian beliefs and practices inherited from Indo-Iranian ancestors, second the message of Zoroaster grafted onto, or mixed with, the former, and finally ancient Near Eastern religions with temples, priests and ancient practices. In time, under the empire the third factor obviously grew in importance, the most striking example of which is the remark by Berossos (Frg. Hist. III, C, 391) that Artaxerxes (presumably II because of his inscriptions) was the first Persian king who erected statues of Aphrodite (or Anahita in Iran) in Babylon, Susa and Ecbatana. This development under the Achaemenids parallels what we know of the religious tradition in the Avesta, and further what one would expect from the policy of tolerance towards religions in the empire by the rulers, although religious policy was always subordinate to economic and political policy. The best example of the dominance of political and economic considerations over others was the harsh behavior of Xerxes in Babylonia and Egypt in contrast to his predecessors. The destruction of temples by Gaumata and their restoration by Darius possibly refers to certain cult centers of the Elamites and other non-Iranian peoples on the Iranian plateau, although the details of these actions are unclear. 129 Whether the Magi were originally followers of Zoroaster or not is unknown, but they came to be the priesthood of the Iranians and at any rate later the preservers of the Zoroastrian tradition. Only Xerxes among the Achaemenid kings showed strong feelings about religion, for not only his destruction of the temple and statue of Marduk in Babylon and his actions in Egypt betray this, but his znti-daevic inscription as well. 130 In this he says (XPh, 35-41) "among these lands was (one?) where previously daivas were worshipped. Afterwards by the will of Ahura Mazda I destroyed that daiva place, and I proclaimed 'let the daivas not be worshipped.' Where previously the daivas had been worshipped, there I worshipped Ahura Mazda in proper ritual." 1 3 J The identity of the daivas has been much disputed, from the gods of Babylonia, presumably proscribed after suppression of the revolt, to the Indo-Iranian deities not accepted by A. T. Olmstead, History ofthe Persian Empire Elamites became disillusioned and turned against (Chicago, 1948), 93, followed in more detail by the ruler, whereas the Perstans at first supported Dandamaev, Persien [supra, n. 201. 234-37, claim Bardiya and then the pseudo-Bardiya Vahyazdäta. that Gaumata destroyed the temples ofthe Persian 130 For a description of his actions and the nobility, even though there is no evidence that the sources, See Olmstead, op. eil. [n. 1 29], 235-37, and Persian nobility had temples or cult buildings Dandamav, Persien [supra, n. 20], 240, n. 1088. whereas the Persian people did not. An indication l31 The last two words artäcä-brazmaniy have that both in Persis and in Elam the Elamites first had many interpretations; cf. J. Duchesne-Guille- supported Darius and then turned against him in min in BSOAS, 25 (1962), 336-37, who suggests the Behistun inscription are the revolts of Assina 'facing artd or 'arfa-wards.' Whatever the interpre- and Martiya, both of whom were deserted by'the tation, it means 'in proper ritual and attitude.' I had Elamites, although later they supported Atamaita. proposed 'properly with the law (arla)' in my en though Darius restored their temples, some Heritage [supra, eh. 3, n. 26], 127. 122 Chapter V Zoroastrians. 132 Xerxes was acting in a more aggressively religious manner than his predecessors which does not, however, prove that he was in any way more orthodox' Zoroastrian than other rulers. No matter what the beliefs of the rulers, from the Elamite documents at Persepolis, we see that thoughout the reigns of Darius and Xerxes the deities worshipped in the area were Iranian, Elamite and even Babylonian, as well as rivers and mountains, offerings to all of which were subsidized by the State. We find a priest called Marduniya (Mardonius, a good Iranian name) who sacrifices to the Elamite god Humban (PFT 348), while a magus with the un-Iranian sounding name of Ukpis received rations for a ceremony dedicated to Mithra, a mountain and a river. ' 33 The ceremony called lan in the texts, according to some, was reserved for the god Ahura Mazda but this is refuted by the texts themselves where syncretism and multi-faceted worship is found. 1 34 It is not possible to draw general conclusions from the presence or absence of designations of persons in the tablets; for example, of the nine persons called magus two have names which are difficult to identify as Iranian, viz. PFT 1798 Limepirde and 1955 Ukpis, while 757 and 2036 Kurka, also seems difficult to claim that he was Iranian. Among those designated as 'priest' (Elamite Satin), too we find names obviously Iranian, such as Mardonius (PFT 348), sacrificing to Humban, the chief Elamite deity. So what conclusions can one draw from the Elamite texts about religions in Fars province? The king, and presumably much of the court, worshipped Ahura Mazda at least in word if not in deed. But the rulers also not only tolerated, but had rations given for ceremonies and libations to many deities, including rivers and mountains, honored by the local inhabitants or foreign workers at Persepolis. Two words appear in the texts for priests, one Iranian magus and the other Elamite Satin, but their functions seem to have been very similar, and it is clear there were many religious libations and ceremonies in the daily life of the people, Elamites and Persians, with no great conflicts between them. One may suppose, 132 For the Babylonian thesis see Duchesne- ' 34 The meaning of the lan ceremony is Guillemin in Histotia, Einzelschriften, Heft 18,66, unknown, but it seems to have been a general and for the Stammesgottheiten of the Iramans see religious ceremony with offerings in which all Dandamaev, Persien [supra, n. 20], 239, who calls participated.although it may have been Elamite in Xerxes a follower of Bardiya in this regard origin. Cf. H. Koch, Die religiösen Verhältnisse der Incidentally the old Babylonian triad of gods - Dareioszeit (Wiesbaden, 1977), 181. Unfortunate- Anu, Nabo and Istar - mentioned by Gnoli (in ly, Koch is mistaken in various details, e.g. p. 178 Duchesne-Guillemin, op. cit , 68, and in AA, 19 that Mithra does not appear in the tablets (sie), and [ 1 97 1 ], 29) as a parallel with Iran is highly dubious 1 58, n. 200, where she implies that Persian Magi as any speciahst m Mesopotamian religions knows. only worshipped Ahura Mazdi, but in PFT 1957, The best explanation of the daiva worshippers is Irdazana a Persian magus conduets a religious either aberrant Indo-Iraman eults to the east of ceremony for the Elamite deityTurma and Mithra Persis, or the Elamites in Khuzistan (and Persis), not for the lan ceremony, while another magus but not Babyloma which revolted and would have (PFT 1955) received rations for Mithra and for a been described in the mscription in the usual mountain and a river. Furthermore to say (p. 138) fashion. that no lan ceremony was performed for Elamite 133 References are to Hallock, Persepolis Forlifi- deities is incorrect, e.g., see tablet no. 773. Thus cation Tablets, [supra, Lit.], (PFT). See also my offerings are made to many spints, which is article on "Religion in Fars at the time of the characteristic of folk religions. Achaememds" (in Persian) in Chahäromln kongreye lahqlqat-e Irani, ed. by M. H. IskandarT (Shiraz, 1353/1975) 2, 218-21. Achaemenids 123 however, that gradually the Iranian deities, with the great Ahura Mazda above all, replaced the others and Iranian rites and rituals became dominant. Burial customs always have been an index of religion, although interpretations based solely on archaeological finds must be supported by other evidence. All dead bodies decay, and the disposal of them is incumbent on all societies. Cremation, mummification, exposure or burial were the usual methods of disposal, all of which removed decaying matter from the living, thus avoiding pollution. Gradually the practice of exposure of the dead, which Herodotus (1, 140) says was practiced mainly by the Magi, came to be the accepted way of disposal, although others (presumably royalty and nobility) were covered with wax before being buried. Some scholars suggest that the rite of exposure and the collection of the bones in an astodan or ossuary was native to eastern Iran and Central Asia and then was gradually adopted in western Iran, although even in Asia Minor of the Achaemenid period archaeological evidence of this practice is found. 135 In any case, even the embalming of bodies and placing them in stone receptacles was considered adherence to a belief not to pollute the earth with decaying matter, and the mode of disposal of the dead should not be used to prove or disprove the Zoroastrian belief of the defunct. We know where the Achaemenid kings were interred at Naqsh-e Rustam and at Persepolis in rock-cut tombs, with rock-cut places for family members covered with stone Covers. When we turn to the Aramaic inscriptions on the mortars and pestles and plates of green chert found at Persepolis we find a picture different from the Elamite tablets, for the names seem to be all Iranian, and a certain fondness for the theophoric names in "Mithra", at least much more relatively than in the Elamite tablets, indicates at least that Mithra was not proscribed at Persepolis. The inscriptions, however, are merely records of registration of the objects, possibly cut or fashioned in different rooms of the 'treasury' at Persepolis. 136 What is clear, however, is that these objects in green stone were made for cultic purposes rather than for culinary aims since the numerous mortars and pestles were hardly used just for crushing seeds or nuts. On the other hand, they do not seem to have been used much, if at all, and the Aramaic inscriptions written in ink were placed mostly on the heads of pestles, an unlikely place for an inscription on an object to be used. 137 In other words, the stone which came from Arachosia in eastern Iran may have been made into mortars, pestles, plates and trays by Arachosians as presents or tribute for the Achaemenid king who had them registered and deposited in the 'treasury' of Persepolis, but never used them. So the promise of any new material on the religious picture at Persepolis in the inscriptions on these objects seems to have evaporated. Fire probably was an important feature of religious ceremonies for the Iranians as well as for the Elamites who had special priests for the fire ceremonies. 138 Since at S. Shahbazi, The Irano-Lycian Monuments Ritual Texts from Persepolis' de R. A. Bowman," (Tehran, 1975), 125-27 and 154-56. Xanthus in AI, 2 (1974), 193-217. (FHG I, 42; Frg. Hisl.) says that Persians claim l37 Bowman, op. cit. [supra, Aramaic], 1-5, 16, they learned from Zoroaster the rule against 44-52. burning dead bodies or defiling fire, which may be ' 38 On the Elamite 'fire' eult see F. W. König, cor I r 3 e 6 ct - Die elamischen Königsinschriften, Archiv für Cf. the book by Bowman [supra, Aramaic], Orientforschung, 16 (Graz, 1965), 58, and the and the convincing interpretation of the inscrip- 'fire watcher' of the Persepolis treasury tablet, tions by J. Delaunay, "A propos des 'Aramaic Cameron, PTT [supra], 7, no. Fort, 3126. 124 Chapter V Persepolis, no temple or altars have been found, we may conclude that on the whole the court did not pay much attention to religion, and that royal religious ceremonies were performed on smoothed platforms in the stone in the open on the heights above the platform, as Herodotus (I, 131) said of the Persian sacrifices. The answer to the question regarding the religion of the Achaemenids is that it was in the general Mazda worshipping framework of which Zoroaster himself was a part, but towards the end of the empire many influences, especially Babylonian, possibly because of the Babylonian mothers and concubines of later kings, came into Achaemenid beliefs and practices. But certain priests maintained what they thought were proper rites and rituals, and there may have been a school of Avesta learning at Persepolis which both resisted and compromised with other beliefs and practices. How much influence priests who called themselves followers of Zoroaster had upon royal pupils is unknown. 139 One may speculate that by the time of Alexander the Great the Magi had become the 'Zoroastrian priests' for many if not most Iranians in the empire, and had begun the amalgamation process which was to result in the fixed text of the Avesta and the rites and rituals as we know them in Sasanian times. THE CAPITALS The first capital of the Achaemenids was Pasargadae where Cyrus lived in palaces surrounded by parks and gardens with a citadel or platformed area about which we know much, thanks to excavations. 140 Much has been written about the palaces, the tomb of Cyrus and the enigmatic ruined building called the Zendan which has a copy at Naqsh-e Rustam near Persepolis. These two structures have been designated as fire temples, tombs, or archives where copies of the Avesta or royal paraphernalia, perhaps for coronation ceremonies, were kept, but no conclusive evidence about their function has been found. 141 The theory that they were both fire temples has been almost abandoned, since no fire temple of a similar structure can be found for comparison, and the stone doors and lack of Windows make any internal fire altar most dubious. Since deep traces of much usage of the doors on both are evident, the theory of a tomb does not appear likely, so we are left with a structure either where a dead body was prepared for last rites or it was a kind of safe for objects. In either case it was reserved for royalty, and since the Zendan is said to be older in date than its counterpart the Ka'bah of Zoroaster at Naqsh-e Rustam because of the use of tooth chisels on the latter, but not on the former, one may suggest that the structure at Naqsh-e Rustam was erected by Darius after moving his 'capital' from Pasargadae to Persepolis. 142 139 Plato in Alcibiades I, 122, says a future king C. Nylander, Ionians at Pasargadae (Uppsala, was taught Magian lore by Zoroaster son of 1970); and A. Sami, Pasargadae (in English), Öromaz. On the 'Avestan' school in Persis see K. (Shiraz, 1971). Hoflfmann, "Das Awestainder Persis," Pro/ego/tif/ia m On the various theories see E. Schmidt, to the Sources on the History of Pre-Islamic Central Persepolis, 3 (Chicago, 1970), 34-49, and Stronach, Asia, ed. by J. Harmatta (Budapest, 1979), 89-93; op. cit. [n. 1], 132-36. also my "Religion in Fars under the Achaemenids", l42 On the chisel marks see C. Nylander, "The in Mi langes pour J. Duchesne-Guilletnin, ed. by P. Toothed Chisel in Pasargadae," AJA, 70 (1966), Lecoq (Louvain, 1984) 373-76, and Stronach, op. cit. [n. 1], 99-100. 1 40 See Stronach, Pasargadae, op. cit., n. 1 , passim ; Achaemeniäs 125 Following archaeological discoveries there is good reason to believe that on the piain of Marvdasht, a number of palaces had been built with gardens and parks similar to Pasargadae before Darius conceived Persepolis. 143 Having seen the architectural splendors of Babylonia and especially Egypt, Darius apparently resolved to build a magnificant complex of palaces on a large platform as a summer capital, but also as a royal symbol of the power and glory of the Persians in their homeland. Darius started building on the platform c. 520 b.c. and work continued on it until the end of the dynasty, although the first three rulers did the most. 144 The platform was called a fortress (in the Elamite tablets birta, OP dlda), but it was more a ceremonial area than a military center, for the king and his courtiers probably lived most of the time in the palaces at the foot of the acropolis when they stayed in Persis. The ruins of Persepolis have provided material for innumerable books and articles on the art, architecture, royal ideology and much more. The whole area was surely occupied and on the platform embassies were received and all who came were impressed, for such was the intention of the builders, the Achaemenid kings. We cannot discuss the many theories that Persepolis was constructed according to certain astronomical orientations, or that it was solely a ritual city, for these sometimes fascinating observations have little bearing on history. 14S Likewise the implications of OP words relating to buildings at Persepolis (and Susa) such as talara 'summer palace,' hadii 'royal residence, or seat' apadäna 'courtyard,' and others have produced voluminous writings which have enriched our knowledge of Achaemenid times but again cannot be discussed here. 146 The false idea that the Greeks knew nothing about Persepolis before Alexander is refuted by Ctesias who uses the name Persis for both the site and the province, and by the notices of Strabo 727-28, Diodorus XVII, 68-71, and many others who, though later writers, quote earlier sources. Susa has been excavated by French archaeologists for almost a Century and much has been learned about the winter capital of the Achaemenids, which rieh city was probably so designated first by Darius. 147 The uncovering of new palaces and the first Achaemenid sculpture in the round, of Darius, has provided much new material for reconstrueting our picture of this winter capital. At both Susa and Persepolis many artisans and workmen from all over the empire constructed and decorated the buildings; perhaps never since the ancient pharaohs of Egypt had so many workers labored on the construetion and embellishment of royal struetures, and an inscription gives details about the precious stones, cedar from Lebanon, and other materials used in construetion and which people worked on the various projeets (Darius, Sf). Babylon was another place of residence in the winter and Ecbatana in the summer, 43 A. B. Tilia, Studies and Restorations at and S. Shahbazi's observations on the number of Persepolis and Other Sites of Fars, 2 (Rome, 1 978) Steps in the great staircase and other measurements. 73-91 • 146 On these terms see W. Eilers, "Die Ausgra- 144 Cf. A. S. Shahbazi, "New Aspects of bungen in Persepolis," ZA, N. F., 19 (53) (Berlin, Persepolitan Studies," Gymnasium, 85 (Heidelberg, 1959), 248-60; G. Ito, "On the Function of Darius' 1978), 487-500, and his "From Parsa to Taxt-e Palace (talara) at Persepolis," Memoirs qfthe Faculty Jamsld," AMI, 10 (1977), 197-207. of Letters, Kyoto University, 13 (1971), 1-23. 145 W.Lentz und W.Schlosser, "Persepolis -ein 147 Arrian III, 16, 7, and Curtius V, 2, 10-12, Beitrag zur Funktionsbestimmung," ZDMG, 121 and the many volumes of the Delegation archeolo- (1971), 254-68, also talksbyA.U. Pope, J. George, gique Francaise en Iran, as well as the Cahiers. 126 Chapter V but neither one had money lavished on them as did Persepolis and Susa, both of which were particularly symbolic of Achaemenid power and majesty. XERXES AND STAGNATION The reign of Xerxes was a period of consolidation of the foundations built by his father, but it was also a change of direction in both the religious and ruling policies of his predecessors, and the beginning of a Stagnation and decline in various features of the Achaemenid Empire. In an inscription at Persepolis (XPf) Xerxes, whose throne name seems to mean 'ruling over heroes,' says that Darius had other sons, but his father made him greatest after the king, and in this and other inscriptions it is clear that Xerxes was very much in the shadow of, and under the influence of, his father. 148 According to Herodotus (VII, 2) and Aeschylus (753), Xerxes was the son of Atossa, the daughter of Cyrus, whom Darius married after Coming to power. It is idle to speculate on harem intrigues which may have induced Darius to select Xerxes as his successor, but it is significant that he made Xerxes his crown prince, and presumably his representative in Babylon, although cuneiform documents do not reveal this. They do teil us that Darius probably died in November, 486, b.c., and Xerxes succeeded him, but a few months earlier Egypt had revolted from Achaemenid rule and Xerxes had to re-establish control over that rebellious satrapy before he embarked against Greece. 149 Xerxes was successful in Egypt and changed the policy of his father, who had subsidized and built temples and had employed Egyptians in high positions. Xerxes apparently stopped all of these, and Herodotus (VII, 7) says he laid a heavier yoke on the Egyptians than his predecessors. Babylonia followed Egypt in revolt, the reasons for which are unclear. Cuneiform tablets in Akkadian indicate two rebels were recognized as rulers in Babylon in the fourth year of Xerxes, one called Bel-shimanni and the other Shamash-eriba. 150 Xerxes was able to suppress these revolts, and he changed the traditional titles on documents there: 'king of Babylon, king of lands,' to an additional 'king of Persis and Media,' an indication that the Achaemenid ruler had changed his attitude towards Babylonia, and although some modern scholars describe Xerxes' destruction of Babylon in vivid detail the sources are silent about this. In any case, Xerxes is most remembered for his invasion of Greece, which began in the spring of 480 b.c. The battles of Thermopylae, Salamis, and Plataea are well known, and much has been written about them based on Classical sources. There is nothing to add from the Persian side, except to caution against the inflated numbers of the Achaemenid forces given in Greek sources. The military discipline and better armament of the Greeks were important factors in their victories. The later invasion of Asia Minor in the late summer of 479 and the decisive defeat of Achaemenid forces at Mykale ended the first 148 We do not know the personal name of Kienitz, op. cit. [n. 36], 67. An analysis of the Xerxes. For an assessment of his character see M. reaction of Greeks to Xerxes' invasion of Greece in Mayrhofer, "Xerxes, König der Könige," Almanach their literary writings is given by W. Kierdorf, der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften, Erlebnis und Darstellung der Perserkrieg, Hypomne- 119 (Vienna, 1969), 158-70. mata 16 (Göttingen, 1966), 130 pp. 149 For dates of rule of the kings see Parker and lso Parker, op. cit. [n. 56], 17. Dubberstein, op. cit. [n. 64], 17-19. On Egypt see Achaemenids 127 phase of Greek-Persian hostilities, and the Persians, now on the defensive, turned to intrigue and bribery to repair their blunders in the field. We hear no more of Xerxes either in the field, as on the expedition against Greece, or in new endeavors. The book of Esther in the Bible and Aeschylus' Persians give an unflattering portrayal of Xerxes, who is said to have retired to his harem after the defeat of the Persians at the hands of the Greeks. The politics of Themistocles, Pausanius and others, accused of being pro-Persian, is part of Greek history and need not detain us here. The steadily growing Greek cultural influence in the western part of the Achaemenid Empire, especially in Anatolia, can be seen in monuments, in inscriptions and art objects, while Greek craftsmen were active at Persepolis, where Xerxes did so much construction, and elsewhere. 151 Xerxes was probably in Persepolis when he was murdered in the summer of 465 B.C. Ctesias (29-30) gives an account of the murder of Xerxes by a certain Artabanus and a eunuch, Spamitres, who then told one son Artaxerxes (whose personal name was Cyrus according to Josephus (Jewish Antiquities, XI, 6, 1) that Xerxes had been killed by his brother Darius, the crown prince. Artaxerxes then had his brother killed and assumed the throne, apparently after dispatching both Artabanus and Spamitres. 152 Probably an uprising broke out at the death of Xerxes, reported by various Classical sources as that of a son of Xerxes in Bactria, but which was quickly suppressed. 153 The earliest cuneiform tablets dating from the reign of Artaxerxes (throne name meaning 'rule by rectitude') begin in June 464 and end in December 424, a long reign. Since Herodotus does not extend into the reign of Artaxerxes we are left with only a few scattered fragments. Artaxerxes, unlike his father, left few remains in Persepolis, and apparently he spent more time in Susa and possibly elsewhere on the plateau. Egypt revolted again in 460 and a certain Inarus, who had been in control of Libya, soon became ruler of most of the country of Egypt, and for the account of events we rely on Ctesias (32-35), who unfortunately is hardly a reliable source. 154 The Athenians aided Inarus, but Megabyzus, a noble Persian, with the aid of some 151 Cf. Nylander, op. cit. [n. 140]; J. Hofstetter, Treasury in Achaemenid times, I perhaps too Die Griechen in Persien (Berlin, 1978). boldly had suggested that Darius had been 152 S. Shahbazi, "The Persepolis Treasury Re- involved in the murder of his father because of Hefs Once More," AMI, 9 (1976), 151, claimed to Herodotus (IX, 108) explained by Olmstead, op. have first proposed that the bas-relief of a seated eil. [n. 129], 289. Shahbazi rejeets all of this, king and his crown prince seated behind him in the presumably as Greek calumny. It is dimcult to treasury of Persepolis represented Xerxes and his know which source is telling the truth and rather crown-prince Darius, rather than Darius and than dogmatically assert my own views as right, Xerxes as had been hitherto assumed. In reality, it would be better to reserve judgment since we first, both myself and H. von Gall independently do not know. Shahbazi's confident assertion that came to this conclusion before Shahbazi, and Artaxerxes had no part in the murder of his second, his further reconstruetions and identifica- brother is based on the assumption that Iranian tions in the article above are subjeet to doubt. For rulers would not stoop to fratrieide. For a later example, Diodorus (XI, 69) says Artaxerxes slew dating of the transfer of the relics see P. Calmeyer, his brother Darius, although here Shahbazi rejeets AMI, 9 (1975), 78-79. Diodorus while aeeepting him elsewhere. In my ' " References in Olmstead, op. eil. [n. 129], 290, article, "Persepolis Again," JNES, 4 (1974), 383- n. 3. »6, submittedto the Journal in J 972, shortly after IS4 J. Jvl. Bigwood, "Ctesias' Account of the the discovery by G. Tilia that the two reliefs had Revolt of Inarus," Phoenix, 30 (Toronto, 1976), 19. been removed from the Apadana and put in the 128 Chapter V Egyptians who had not supported the revolt according to Thucydides (I, 104, 2), reconquered Egypt. The new satrap of Egypt Arsames (O. P. Arsäma) helped to defeat the Athenian fleet which had come to the assistance of the Egyptians, and by 454 b.c. Egypt was again in Persian hands, but not completely or firmly, and it was only by the peace of Kallias between Athens and the Persians that Greek interference in Egypt was ended. Nonetheless in Libya and the western delta some Egyptians still maintained independent rule not under Persian Jurisdiction, as we learn from Herodotus (II, 30 and III, 15) who visited Egypt at this time. Egypt was a center of unrest throughout Achaemenid rule, and since it was located far from Persis, opportunities for independent actions of the Egyptians were many, but information is very sparse throughout the fifth Century B.c. Nonetheless, throughout the rule of Artaxerxes I it seems that Egypt on the whole remained loyal to the Achaemenids and not until 404 b.c. in the time of Artaxerxes II did Egypt successfully revolt and maintain independence for some sixty years. The peace of Kallias, named after the Athenian ambassador to the Persians, has been mentioned, and this was an important event in the reign of Artaxerxes I, which established a modus vivendi between the Ionian cities under the Delian league, which was really an Athenian empire, and those under Persian rule. This peace in 448 b.c. gave a certain prosperity to both sides, with an agreed non-interference by each in the affairs of the other. 155 Also during the reign of Artaxerxes I may be placed the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem by Nehemiah, but one must be careful in accepting much of the information in the Bible as fact, especially when it refers to the royal court and the roles of various people in it even though certain details, as in the book of Esther, betray more than a casual acquaintance with affairs of court. There is no point here in examining the stories of court intrigue reported by Ctesias, for even though interesting they only reveal the decadence and greed of the royal family. Records from Babylonia show the increasing control of land by the Persian nobility, a Situation undoubtedly matched elsewhere in the empire. As long as tribute and gifts came to the Achaemenid court, however, the satraps were allowed to rule practically with free hands. Anatolia, on the other hand, was especially important for the Achaemenids, since the Greeks were enemies and when Tissaphernes was made Commander of all forces on the Aegean Sea coast, he was above the satraps in rank. In 408 b.c. he concluded a truce with Athens indicating his position over that of the satraps, a Situation, however, applicable only to Ionia, or perhaps to other frontiers of the empire where a supreme military command was necessary. It should be borne in mind that our sources are Greek and they naturally place great emphasis on matters of interest to the Greeks, and it is only by chance that a remark is made that throws light upon internal affairs of the empire. We know about frequent revolts in Anatolia, Cyprus and Egypt, but the corresponding picture of a quiet and monolithic Iran is hardly true. A revolt of the Medes occurred at the beginning of the reign of Darius II according to Xenophon (Heltenica 1, 2, 19), while the Cadusians on the Caspian Sea revolted about 405 b.c. (II, 8, 13), and we may surmise that many 1 55 The terms of the treaty are discussed in detail Heichelheim, "Geschichte Kleinasiens" in HO, 2, by Olmstead, op. cit. [n. 1 29], 311. The date of the Keilschriftforschung und alte Geschichte Vordera- treaty, 448 or 449 B.c., is in dispute; cf. M siens (1966), 35-36. Achaemenids 129 other internal revolts took place about which we hear nothing. From Babylonian cuneiform tablets we can infer the general and steady economic decline and the erowing impoverishment of the people. With high interest rates of 40 or 50 percent on loans, usury was rampant, and many were the victims of both the ruinous taxation and the special levies for the suppression of revolts, or gifts to the royal court. The Babylonian and Egyptian (mostly Aramaic) documents teil us of ordinary life, whereas the Greek historical sources on the Persians are primarily about court intrigues or details of battles, with little concern for the ordinary subjects of the empire. Consequently it is very dimcult to construct a picture of ancient Iran on the basis of two kinds of foreign sources. Furthermore we can never determine whether conditions in Babylonia and Egypt also obtained in the heartland of the Achaemenid empire, and it would be dangerous to infer that the conditions of land tenure, taxation and the like, in Mesopotamia also applied to Persis, the Achaemenid homeland, thus we are reduced to conjecture and surmise. We may be certain that taxes such as tolls on roads, market taxes on animals, and many others were manifold and oppressive everywhere. The work of M. Dandamaev on Babylonian cuneiform documents of the Achaemenid period indeed has given us a picture of economic and social conditions in Mesopotamia, especially in regard to slavery and forced labor under the Achaemenids. 156 The result of this research is that various kinds of slavery and forced labor existed in different parts of the empire, and the Elamite word kurtai in the cuneiform documents meant 'workers' in general but under different conditions, many serving a term of forced labor on royal estates, others enslaved prisoners of war, and even free workers earning wages. It is interesting that at Persepolis under Xerxes the kurtaH received payment according to the work done irrespective of their legal Status, and the rewards here were higher than elsewhere. 157 Land ownership under the later Achaemenids also underwent a change from the earlier periods. The granting of 'feudal' lands to officers and soldiers, mentioned in the sources as 'bow land,' 'horse land' and 'wagon land,' began soon after the Achaemenid occupation of Babylonia, but the constant division of those lands among heirs impoverished the descendants of the military fief holders. By the end of the fifth Century the military obligations of these settlers had fallen in abeyance, and mercenaries had taken over much of the military needs of the Achaemenid empire. 1 58 Obviously there are many details which cannot be discussed in a general book, but the picture we have of impoverishment of land holders in Babylonia probably is true of most of the empire in the last Century of its existence. The involved System of tax collecting in Babylonia, where feudal obligations and other taxes were managed by banking firms, such as Murashu and sons at Nippur, the Egibi family in Babylon and others, is fascinating in revealing an economic life based on credit and loans with modern features. When we remember that the introduction 1 56 See especially a series of his articles in AF, 1 Sklaverei im alten Iran," AF, 5 (Berlin, 1977), 91- (1974), "The Domainlands of Achaemenes in 96. Babylonia," 123-27, and "Forced Labour in 157 Dandamaev, AF, 2 (1975), 78. Achaemenid Iran," 2 (1975), 71-78, and his book 158 Dandamaev, „Lehnsbeziehungen" [n. 48], Rabstvo v Vavilonii VII-IV vv. do n.e. (Moscow, 37-42. 1974), Cf. also O. Klima, "Zur Problematik der 130 Chapter V of payments in money, indeed coinage itself, is an Achaemenid phenomenon, then the significance of greatly expanded commercial and banking activities can be appreciated. It is not too much to suggest that the spread of a money economy played an important role in the stability of the Achaemenid empire and continuing allegiance to it. The traditional explanation of the fall of the empire as the result of abuses of their positions by those in power, the decadence and corruption at court and among the aristocracy, combined with a fall in the Standards of living of the common folk, can be further documented by Babylonian tablets. 159 The ever growing taxation and the greed of Achaemenid omcials.just to mention two factors, helped to undermine the expansion of agriculture and irrigation, trade and commerce and handicraft production, which had characterized the early pax Achaemenica, which had provided prosperity for many subjects. DECLINE OF THE ACHAEMENIDS The first half of the fourth Century b.c. is almost a complete blank in our history of Iran, and of the entire empire. Inscriptions are rare and Classical sources also reflect little of the internal affairs of the empire, while the Babylonian documents cease. This latter Situation represents a change in recording from clay tablets to papyri, leather, or ostraca with Aramaic writing instead of cuneiform, which came to be restricted to temples and the activity of priests who copied and recopied ancient spells and charms or religious texts. Scholarly articles dealing with Babylonia in the late Achaemenid period are characteristically scant in the information they provide and without sources one is reduced to conjecture. 160 Likewise Egyptian, Aramaic and Anatolian (primarily Lydian and Lycian) inscriptions give us little new information which can be used for historical purposes. One development of Achaemenid weakness, though nowhere expressly stated in sources, was the increasingly independent actions of satraps, especially those in Anatolia. One has the impression that they negotiated with Greeks much as they pleased, with or without royal sanction, which was sought only when needed. The varying fortunes of Athens and Sparta and the activities of the satraps of Sardis following Tissaphernes - Tithraustes, Tiribazos, and Autophradates - again are part of Greek or Anatolian history and shed little light on inner-Iranian history. Egypt became independent from the Persians about the time of the revolt of Cyrus the younger, and it remained so until 343-342 B.C. when Artaxerxes III reconquered it. Even though another 'King's peace,' the peace of Antalkidas (the Spartan envoy to Artaxerxes II) in 387 b.c. had left the Ionian cities of Anatolia and Cyprus to the Achaemenids, the cultural and economic influence of Greece greatly increased throughout Anatolia, and the political control of the Achaemenids was greatly weakened compared to the previous Century. The shifting of policy from friendship with Sparta to Athens under Konon meant neither a strengthening nor a weakening of Persian power but rather a füll participation in the ever-shifting fortunes of Greek 159 Dandamaev, Rabslvo [n. 156], esp. 28-44. 1965), 330-55. Even the cuneiform sources of the 160 For example, M. Meuleau, "Mesopotamien house of Murashu cease after Artaxerxes II, and in in der Perserzeit," in H. Bengtson, ed., Griechen und general we have very little from Babylonia in the Perser, Fischer Weltgeschichte, 5 (Frankfurt/M, later Achaemenid period. Achaemenids 131 politics, as another 'King's peace' of 371 indicates. The real weakening of Achaemenid power, however, came from the independent actions of the satraps in Anatolia. 161 About 368-367 b.c. the satrap of Cappadocia, Datames, openly proclaimed his independence from central authority, but the Classical sources do not give a clear picture of the causes and the course of the rebellion. The time-honored practice of the court, setting one satrap against another, after initial success in the end failed, and Ariobarzanes, satrap in Daskylion, joined Datames in revolt, and still another revolt broke out when Aroandas (Orontes), satrap of Armenia, was ordered to go to Mysia. Autophradates, satrap at Sardis, kept his loyalty to Artaxerxes II, but the success of the rebels led him too to change sides, and he was joined by local dynasts such as Mausolos of Caria. Diodorus (XV, 90) claims that the coalition included all of Anatolia, the Spartans, Egyptians, Phoenicians, and others. Aroandas became the leader of the rebels, but then he betrayed his colleagues to the king and the revolt collapsed. Even the Egyptian rebel ruler Takhos was overthrown by the Egyptians and made his way to the Achaemenid court where he was forgiven (XV, 92). In the fighting between satraps Greek mercenaries were the main forces, an indication of the decline of local military power. By 362 b.c. peace had been restored and both Datames and Ariobarzanes were killed, although the son of Datames, Sysinas, received his father's satrapy to rule while Aroandas received much of the Aegean coast. Mausolos and others were forgiven. The Achaemenid Empire had not collapsed thanks to the inability of the rebels to work together. Artaxerxes II was murdered in 359 and succeeded by Ochus, one of his sons, who succeeded in killing most of his near relatives and taking the throne name Artaxerxes III. The new king was a cruel but strong ruler, and he resolved to curb the power of the satraps, one of which, Artabazos, an Achaemenid prince, had been satrap at Daskylion in Phrygia. He and Aroandas in Mysia refused to disband their Greek mercenaries at the order of the king and revolted. The newly appointed satrap in Phrygia, Tithraustes, together with Autophradates of Sardis and Mausolos were ordered by the king to crush the rebels, but Athens supported the rebels who initially were successful against the royal forces. Then Artaxerxes threatened Athens with war, and Athens withdrew support of the rebels. Thebes took the place of Athens in support of Artabazos, but after a few successful encounters this coalition disintegrated and Artabazos fled to Philip of Macedonia about 353 b.c., while Aroandas remained a rebel. Nonetheless, most of Anatolia returned to obedience to the Achaemenids, enabling Artaxerxes to turn his attention to Egypt. It seems that he earlier had successfully suppressed a revolt by the Cadusians and possibly other Iranian peoples, since they are found later in his army (Diodorus XVII, 6, 1). On the way to Egypt the royal army had to reconquer Phoenicia which had been free from Achaemenid rule, but the campaign in Egypt was more dimcult than foreseen. The chronology is uncertain, but after much fighting the Persians had to The Standard account of the Anatolian "Kleinasien zwischen Agonie des Perserreiches und revolts by W. Judeich, Kleinasiatische Studien hellenistischem Frühling," Anzeiger der OAW, (Marburg, 1892), 190-297, is still the most 112 (1975), 274-82, who discusses a trilingual etailed account, to be corrected by Heichelheim, inscnption from Xanthos. °P- dt- [n. 155], 35^t0. See also M. Mayrhofer, 132 Chapter V retreat from Egypt about 350 b.c. which led to a new revolt in Phoenicia. By 345 Phoenicia was reconquered and placed under the satrap governing Cilicia Mazaios or Mazdai, as he is called on his coins with Aramaic legends. 162 The reconquest of Egypt was led by the king himself, and his army had many Greek mercenaries from cities other than Athens and Sparta, and they fought against other Greek mercenaries on the Egyptian side. The Achaemenid mercenaries won in 343 B.c., and the Egyptian leaders fled to the south to Upper Egypt. Egypt had returned to Persian rule, but it was not entirely subdued, while the quick capitulation of the land to Alexander the Great indicates the attitude of the Egyptians towards Achaemenid rule. In Greece, many had preached urging Greek unity against the Persians, the most famous of whom was the Athenian Isocrates (between 436-338 b.c.). In his panegyrics (esp. 161-62) he urged the Greeks to unite in a pan-Hellenic union, but many preferred Persian friendship and gold to Cooperation with their neighbors, and it was left to the Macedonians to enforce the unity. The Achaemenid Empire was ripe for the plucking in many respects, political, economic, social and even religious, to which questions we may briefly turn. It must be emphasized again that the Iranian satrapies of the empire cannot be compared with Babylonia and Egypt, for Achaemenid attempts to make a unified System of weights and measures, roads and postal System, currency, taxation, etc. were not successful everywhere, and each satrapy had an independence in these matters. A unified coinage, for example, did not exist, as we see from the proliferation of satrapal issues in the fourth Century, all in the western part of the empire. The east, it seems, had no coinage, and we may suppose that the pastoral and agricultural societies continued to exist much as ever, with little connection with events on the Aegean and eastern Mediterranean coasts. Revolts were surely frequent even in the east, but there is no evidence of risings to regain liberty by an Iranian ethnic group or nation, such as the movements for independence of Egyptians, Phoenicians or Ionians in the west. From the booty secured by Alexander, it seems clear that the Achaemenid courts became ever growing treasury houses of precious metals and luxuries from all over the empire. The gold coins or darics of the royal house were used to hire mercenaries, or for bribery. Unfortunately, we have no sources to report the effects of the hoarding of gold and precious objects by the rulers on the economy of the empire, but it hardly can have been propitious. The loss of tax revenues from Anatolia, the Syrian coast and Egypt, as well as India, must have hurt the royal treasury and caused a heavier load on the provinces still loyal to the Achaemenids. 163 In Babylonia, the only province where only sparse Information about prices of goods, slaves, etc. can be found, one can venture a surmise that the existing gap between the Achaemenid aristocracy and the subject population grew more and more in the fourth Century as 162 On the Phoenician resistance see J W. from the Hindukush region to the east had no Betlyon, "A New Chronology for the Pre- Achaemenid satraps, and no evidence exists that Alexandrine Coinage of Sidon," ANSMN, 21 they had been part of the empire for years before (1976), 28-35, with references. his Invasion. Cf. F. Altheim and R. Stiehl, Die 163 The date of the loss of the satrapies of the far Aramäische Sprache unter den Achaimeniden (Frank- east (India, Sattagydia, Gedrosia) cannot be deter- furt/M, 1963), 127. mined, but by the time of Alexander all of the areas Achaemenids 133 compared with the earlier years of the empire. 164 Just how far the 'feudal' lands of the great Achaemenid aristocracy grew in the various parts of the empire is impossible to determine, but scattered notices in Classical sources give the impression that such land holdings increased rather than decreased. With rebellions and losses in wars in the fourth Century the economy of the empire was hardly prosperous. On the other hand, the growing number of Iranian names in high positions all over the empire, and in lower positions, too, imply a spread of control everywhere of Iranians over the local populations. 165 Yet this bureaucratic domination does not seem to have greatly influenced the life of the subject peoples, since after Alexander vestiges of Persian culture and influence in non-Iranian areas do not appear in sharp relief. What seems certain is that already before the Coming of Alexander, Greek influence was much stronger than Iranian in the western part of the empire, while Greek coins apparently were accepted even in the easternmost provinces. 166 In religions, the oft mentioned change in the religion of the Achaemenids from the time of Darius to Artaxerxes II, on the basis of the appearance of Mithra and Anahita in the royal inscriptions, may be more apparent than real. On the other hand, to suppose that there was no change in the religion of the Persians throughout the life of the empire is also exaggerated, for the religious outlooks of the Greeks, Hebrews, Babylonians and others changed, hence no development on the part of the Achaemenids is most unlikely. The Zeitgeist of the fourth Century b.c., one would imagine, favored syncretism, or at least mutual influences between religions, and we may postulate a greater reciprocity of influences in the Near East at that time than earlier. The influence which Zoroastrianism had on Judaism cannot be proved in detail, but the parallels are so striking in the conception of angels, dualistic ideas and eschatology that an independent development is most unlikely. 167 Likewise the erection of statues to Anahita is surely an Iranian borrowing from the religions of the ancient Near East. Questioning of the authority of ancient deities was in the air everywhere in the fourth Century and probably the divinely sanctioned power and authority of the great king were likewise in doubt, while the background for the flourishing of mystery and savior cults of the Hellenistic age was already prepared by the end of the Achaemenid period. Much has been written about a 'Zoroastrian' calendar which many scholars believe was introduced into Iran by Artaxerxes I in 441 b.c. based on an Egyptian model, but this date rests on conjecture. Aramaic documents from various parts of the empire indicate that the Babylonian calendar was used throughout the existence of the empire and the use of different names for the months does not prove the introduction of a new calendar. 168 The use of the calendar to prove a change in the religion of the Achaemenid under Artaxerxes I is not valid l6 * Cf. the summary in J. Oelsner, "Krisener- l66 See Schlumberger, op. cit. [n. 112], 6-30. scheinungen im Achaimenidenreich im 5. und 4. l67 Cf. R. Frye, "Qumran and Iran," in J. Jahrhundert v.u.Z.," in E. C. Welskopf, Hellenische Neusner, ed., Christianityjudaism and Other Greco- lis 2 (Berlin - 1974 ). 1049-63. Roman Cults, part 3 (Leiden, 1975), 167-73, with See the names in W. Eilers, Iranische further references. Beamtennamen in der keilschriftlichen Überlieferung 168 E. J. Bickerman, "The Zoroastrian Calen- (Leipzig, 1940), and for Asia Minor A. Goetze, dar," AO, 35 (1967), 204-05, with further Kulturgeschichte des Alten Orients: Kleinasien references. (München, 1957), 210-12 134 Chapter V and should be discarded. The development of cults and various practices, including syncretistic beliefs under the later Achaemenids, on the other hand, is plausible even though the evidence so far is lacking. Probably the Zoroastrianism which we know from the Sasanian and later periods was the religion of the majority of Iranians even at that time, though not necessarily the faith of the members of the Achaemenid royal family, nor the populär religion of many villagers in different parts of Iran. The supposition of abrupt or contradictory changes in Zoroastrianism of Achaemenid times, based on an enigmatic word or reference here and there, is hardly warranted, and it is easier to assume continuity, albeit with modifications and adoption of new rituals and practices, than fundamental changes. Obviously the spread of practices, such as the exposure of the dead to vultures, took much time before it became a religious ordinance, the breaking of which was a grave sin. To brand a burial from Achaemenid times as non-Zoroastrian involves an error of imposing 'orthodox' practices of later Zoroastrianism on earlier periods, and should not be- assumed automatically. The converse, however, evidence for the exposure of bodies, would lead an archaeologist to declare that the deceased were Zoroastrians, since we have no evidence that non-Zoroastrians practiced this in the Iranian world. Tied somewhat to religion is the question whether allegiance to the house of the Achaemenids weakened towards the end of the empire. We have seen the growth of serious revolts against central authority, the spread of Greek culture and ideas, and the excesses of both the court and the Persian aristocracy. All must have combined to reduce the influence or even legitimacy of the great kings in the eyes of many of their subjects, including Iranians, witness the many revolts of the Cadusians. Possibly of great significance was the Usurpation of power by a eunuch Bagoas who had his master Artaxerxes III Ochus poisoned, and then placed one of his sons Arses on the throne in 338 b.c. But Arses tried to wrest control of affairs from Bagoas and lost his life to the poison of the eunuch after less than two years of rule. So in 336 b.c. the last Achaemenid prince in direct line had perished without leaving a son. Bagoas, unable to become king himself, looked around for an Achaemenid whom he might easily control, and he selected a grandson of Ostanes, brother of Artaxerxes II, known in Greek sources as Codomannus or Darius III. Shortly afterwards Bagoas was killed by Darius, but the härm to royal prestige already had been carried out by Bagoas; and even though the last Darius at first showed himself to be capable, when Alexander appeared on the scene, the fame and glory of the Achaemenids could not be restored. Darius did reconquer Egypt, however, which had broken away again from Achaemenid rule after the death of Artaxerxes III, but its Submission to Alexander by the satrap Mazakes without resistance indicates the tenuous hold the Persians had over Egypt. Meanwhile in Greece, Philip of Macedonia had defeated the Greek city states at Chaeronea, the same year that Artaxerxes III was murdered, and he took over the leadership of a united Greek Crusade against Persia. The intrigues of Philip, Athens, Achaemenid satraps and the great king are part of Greek history. The murder of Philip in 336 B.c. before the re-conquest of Egypt by Achaemenid forces brought a lull in diplomatic activities, and undoubtedly Darius at first did not consider Alexander a serious threat, since he did not actively support Athens in her search for aid in an uprising against the Macedonians. Demosthenes tried to persuade the Achaemenids 135 Athenians that Alexander represented a greater threat to Greek liberties than Persia, but he failed, especially after Alexander crushed the Greek revolt and destroyed the city of Thebes. The Macedonians crossed the Hellespont and invaded Asia and the end of the empire was in sight. Perhaps here one may speak briefly of the legacy of the Achaemenids in the lands which they occupied for such a long period. From the Elamite documents and Aramaic papyri from Egypt we gain some insights into a huge empire which did try to unite all the peoples in it with some common features, one of which was law. The concept of a universal 'king's law' over the local 'laws' of subject peoples was a legacy which the Romans followed and which, as far as we know, was an innovative feature of Achaemenid rule. 169 It is obvious, of course, that the Achaemenids borrowed heavily from the ancient Near East, especially Babylonia, in constructing their institutions and bureaucracy ; for example, in the domain of law the parallels between the Babylonian ardu 'slave' or 'meniai' and Old Persian bandaka, both juridical persons who could own property and occupy high posts, is striking. The 'empire' and the 'great king' impressed the Greeks even though they were enemies. This did not change the Greek esteem for themselves as opposed to the 'barbarians,' and the Persian continuation of earlier despotism could not have found favor in Greek eyes. The Jews, on the other hand, fared well under the Achaemenids, which speaks for some cultural or religious affinity of the two peoples. 170 The lack of sources is especially frustrating for the dark period of the last Century of Achaemenid rule, and there is little hope of new discoveries of source materials. In art, too, the clues to the meaning of Achaemenid creations must be sought in Symbols, many undoubtedly age-old Near Eastern Symbols which had lost their meaning by Achaemenid times. In any case, the art was never personal; it was not so much a certain king who is portrayed on stone but 'kingship.' The anthropocentrism of Western art is not found here. Likewise there is an absence of religious art in Iran, where decoration is more important than function. So form and symbolism are characteristics of Achaemenid art, and by the time of the Sasanians, the heirs of the Achaemenids, the symbolism for the most part had been reduced to forms, the forerunner of Islamic art. It is perhaps in the memory of the great oecumene - the one world of the Achaemenids - that the greatest legacy is found, for Alexander, who usurped the role of 'world hero' from Cyrus and his successors, nonetheless was following in their footsteps, and that conception was passed to posterity by Alexander, perhaps the real heir of the Achaemenids. ,69 Josephus in his Contra Apion (II, 270-71) tion in Juda zur Achämenidenzeit (Berlin, 1973) and says that Apollonius had a high regard for the laws P. P. Backroyd, Israel under Babylon and Persia of the Persians. (Oxford, 1970). See H. Kreissig, Die sozialökonomische Situa- CHAPTER VI ALEXANDER THE GREAT AND THE SELEUCIDS Literature: The literary sources are all Greek or Latin, since this period of the history of Iran would be almost a total blank if we depended on other sources. Discussion of the lost histories of Alexander by Ptolemy, Aristobulus and Clitarchus is important but that is the task of a Classicist, while the surviving works of Arrian, Quintus Curtius, Plutarch, Diodorus and Justin-Trogus may be combed for occasional details about Iranian afTairs. The coinage of Alexander is well summarized by A. R. Bellinger, Essays on the Coinage of Alexander the Great (New York, 1963). Other than this literature, for Iran we have the 'folk literature' of the Alexander Romance in the Shähnäme and in many Arabic, Armenian, Syriac and Persian works from the Islamic period. These show the change in the view of Alexander by Iranians from a hated conqueror to an Iranian hero who was a scion of the Achaemenid family by a secret marriage between Philip of Macedonia and an Achaemenid princess. There is a vast literature on the Alexander romance, but for its Oriental versions consult the old but still useful F. Spiegel, Die Alexandersage bei den Orientalen (Leipzig, 1851), 72 pp., and J. A. Boyle, "The Alexander Legend in Central Asia," Folklore, 85 (1974), 21 7-28, for further references. The change in Alexander from a negative, enemy figure to an Iranian hero is discussed by A. Abel in "La figure d'Alexandre en Iran," La Persia e il mondo Greco-Romano, Acad. dei Lincei, Quaderno 76 (Rome, 1966), 119-36. Whether the Sasanians were those responsible for again changing the figure of Alexander from a positive to a negative personality is difficult to determine, but more likely it was a gradual change over centuries. The Romance is of significance here only to show the Iranian attitudes towards Alexander, and has little or no historical value. The geographica! literature in Greek and Latin, which gives more than mere geography, is especially important for this period of history, not only Strabo, Pliny, and Ptolemy (for the last of which see I. Ronca, Ptolemaeus Geographia, 6, 9-21, Ostiran und Zentralasien [Rome, 1971]), but also fragments of geographers found first in C. Müller, Geographi Graeci Minores, 2 vols. (Paris, 1855), then in Frg. Hist., and A. Riese, Geographi Latini Minores (Heilbronn, 1878). The Lexicon of Hesychius in the edition of K. Latte in 3 vols. (Copenhagen, 1953-79) is useful for names, as is the Ethnika of Stephan of Byzantium, ed. by A. Meineke (Berlin, 1879). For the geography of the Iranian plateau or Central Asia there is nothing comparable to the study on northern Iraq by L. Dillemann, Haute Mtsopotamie Orientale etpays adjacents (Paris, 1962), or even H. Hübschmann, Die altarmenischen Ortsnamen (Strasbourg, 1904). The Tabula Peutingeriana, a medieval map, ed. K. Miller, Itineraria Romana (Stuttgart, 1916) and the Ravenna cosmography, ed. J. Schnetz, Itineraria Romana (Leipzig, 1940), with his translation (Uppsala, 1951), both give geographica! names from an earlier period of history, although identifications of place names are frequently most difficult. The work of J. Marquart (Markwart) is found in his bibliography by H. H. Schaeder in Markwart, Wehrot und Arang (Leiden, 1938), *53-61, while the older study by W. Tomaschek, "Zur historischen Topographie von Persien," Sb WAW, 102 (1883) is still very useful for geographica! identifications in Iran and Central Asia. Greek inscriptions from the Iranian plateau are collected in the Suppletnentum Epigraphicum Graecum, ed - b yJJ- E. Hondius and A. G. Woodhead (Leiden, 1 923-) ; in the Revue des Etudes Grecques and Hellenica both by L. Robert, adding to the old Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae, by W. Dittenberger (Leipzig, 1903). The few Aramaic or heterographic inscriptions may be found in R. Degen und W. Müller, Neue Ephemerisßr Semitische Epigraphik (Wiesbaden, 1972-) with extensive bibliographies. Art and archaeology titles may be found in L. Vanden Berghe, ed., Bibliographie analytique de larchhiogie de l'lran ancien (Leiden, 1979), 256-70. The two extensive archaeological excavations of interest for this period are Ay Khanum in northern Afghanistan and Seleucia on the Tigris. For the former we have P. Bernard, Fouilles d'Ai Khanoum, MDAFA, 21, 2 vols. (Paris, 1973), and many articles on the progress of the excavations in yearly reports of CR AI. Seleucia was excavated before World War II by L. Waterman, and we have a series of reports in the University of Michigan Studies, Humanistic Series, vol. 32 by N. Debevoise on Parthian Pottery, vol. 36, on Stamped and Inscribed Objects by R. H. McDowell, vol. 37, on Coins by McDowell, and vol. 45 Clay Figurines, by W. van Ingen (Ann Arbor, 1939). More recemly we have Clark Hopkins, ed., Topography and Architecture of Seleucia on the Tigris (Ann Arbor, 973). The excavations of Dura Europos on the Euphrates are mostly concerned with the Parthian period ä^u i^hapter VI and do not help us much for earlier times. General works are L'Orient HelUnisi by D. Schlumberger (Paris, 1970) for art, and E. Will, Hisloire politique du monde hellinistique, 2 vols. (Nancy, 1967) which supersedes the older works of E. R. Bevan, The House qf Seleucus, 2 vols. (London, 1902) and A. Bouche- Leclercq, Hisloire des Seleucides, 2 vols. (Paris, 1914). Will speaks of the technical problem of ruling the vast domain of the Seleucids with relatively few Greeks and Macedonians, and a 'human' problem of the co-existence of the newcomers with the established population, and what one might call two groups wielding local authority sometimes in Cooperation, at other times in Opposition. The book by S. K. Eddy, The King is Dead (Lincoln, Neb., 1 961 ) mvestigates evidence for local Opposition to Hellenic imperialism and concludes it was almost wholly a religious resistance, though this oversimplification is dubious. The classic work of E Bikerman, Institution* des Seleucides (Paris, 1938), is still the best on the subject, but internal affairs in the east are hardly mentioned in it. The two syllabi, one for the Sorbonne by A. Aymard, Lesgrandes monarchies hellenistiques en Asie apres la mort de Seleucos 7 er (Paris, 1 965), 21 2 pp., and the other for Yale by C. Bradford Welles, The Hellenistic World, A Hislory (New Haven, 1961), 142 pp., are both interesting for students to read but are little more than summaries. Since only archaeology provides any new material for this time period, the book of D. Schlumberger is especially important for new vistas in material culture. The excavation of Ay Khanum has revealed the strength of Greek institutions, language and culture, in the far-flung city foundations of Alexander and the Seleucids, and Schlumberger rightly underlines the strong persistence of Hellenism in the distant Orient long after the disappearance of Greek rule. The small seaport of Failaka, or ancient Ikaros, in the Persian Gulf off the coast of Kuwait, also provides evidence of the extensive Greek influence on architecture in Seleucid times. Cf. K. Jeppesen, "A Royal Message to Ikaros" in Kund, 9 (Aarhus, 1960), 153-98. The site of Khalchayan, on the right bank of the Surkhan Darya near present Denau in the Uzbek SSR, although extending into later periods, also gives some architectural Information, supplementing Ay Khanum, on Seleucid rule in Central Asia. Cf. G. A. Pugachenkova, Khalchayan (Tashkent, 1966) and her Skulptura Khalchayana (Moscow, 1971). The erratic writings of Franz Altheim, while containing many vignettes of interest and value, must be used with extreme caution. See his bibliography, ed. by E. Merkel (Frankfurt/M, 1958), and with additions in his Festschrift, Beiträge zur Alten Geschichte und deren Nachleben, ed. by R. Stiehl, 1 (Berlin, 1969). Obviously, vanous articles on the results of excavations, on coinage, or other special subjects provide additions to our knowledge of the Seleucids in Iran and Central Asia, but little change need be made in the scheme of coinage made by E. T. Newell, The Coinage ofthe Eastern Seleucid Mints (New York, 1938). An Inventory qf Greek Coin Hoards (New York, 1973) by M. Thompson, O Morkholm and C. Kraay, is not as valuable for Seleucid history as for other Hellenistic kingdoms, but one should note that the concentration of Greek Settlements on major trade routes is clear from the hoard finds. On the eitles founded by the Seleucids, the work by V. Tscherikower, "Die hellenistischen Städtegründungen von Alexander dem Großen bis auf die Römerzeit," Philologus, Supplementband XIX, Heft 1 (Leipzig, 1927) is still the classic work, but add the extensive discussion on cities in eastern Iran and Central Asia by G. A. Koshelenko, Grecheskii Polis na ellinisticheskom Vostoke (Moscow, 1971), 113-60, with texts of inscriptions found in the east. In the sources, much confusion exists about the identifications ofthe various Alexandrias, not all of which were founded by Alexander the Great, for some later rulers used his name just as in the case of coinage. For Alexander's policy towards the Persians, the articles by H. Berve, "Die Verschmelzungspolitik Alexanders des Großen," Klio, 31 (1938), 135-68, supplemented by E. Badian's "The Administration ofthe Empire," Greece and Rome, 12 (Oxford, 1965), 166-82, provide the best analysis. ALEXANDER IN IRAN AND CENTRAL ASIA The conquests of Alexander are the best known campaigns of ancient history and the enormous literature about him and his deeds makes any account of his actions redundant here. 1 We shall be concerned here only with the impact of Alexander on 1 An excellent and detailed survey of both (Darmstadt, 1972) [a survey of literature about sources and secondary works on Alexander is Alexander]; see also H. Berve, Das Alexanderreich provided by E. Badian in "Alexander the Great, auf prosopographischer Grundlage, 1 (Munich, 1948-67," The Classical World, 65 (1971), 37-83, 1926), 253-76, a most convenient reference work plus his "Some Recent Interpretations of Alex- on the Greco-Macedonians and Iranians active in ander," Entretiens sur l'antiquite classique, 22 (Gene- the time of Alexander, va, 1976), 279-303; J Seibert, Alexander d. Gr. Alexander the Great and the Seleucids 139 Iran and Central Asia, and at the onset we may ask two questions : how did Alexander treat the Iranians who comprised the satraps and upper ruling group of the Achaemenid Empire and how did the Iranians regard Alexander and his successors? The last may be viewed through the sparse and scattered bits of evidence we find in our sources, or in the eastern versions of the 'Alexander Romance.' 2 Obviously no analysis of the Classical sources, nor of Alexander 's campaigns, of his character or dreams, can be made here and only the Iranian views need be considered for this volume. When we remember that Iranian, and especially Persian, nobles dominated the government of the Achaemenid empire, we may ask what happened to them ? In Asia Minor all of the Iranian satraps were replaced by Macedonians, or by native dynasts such as the princess Ada in Caria, and the same policy was followed in Syria and Egypt. When Alexander came to the east after the battle of Gaugamela, however, his policy changed, and he re-appointed Mazaios, the important Satrap of Syria and Mesopotamia under Darius III, over Babylonia. A number of questions arise, however, which are not easy to answer: first whether Mazaios was really the Achaemenid satrap of the 'Fertile Crescent,' or most of it, at the time of Alexander's conquest, and a second question, why Alexander appointed him satrap of Babylonia. Mazaios was the ruler of Syria and northern Mesopotamia at the time of Alexander's invasion, whereas his earlier post as satrap of Cilicia under Artaxerxes III had already established his authority to issue silver coins in his own name. We may conjecture that Mazaios took ad van tage of the weakness of the empire under the last Darius to consolidate and expand his own power and influence. In any case, Mazaios as the satrap of the northern part of the 'Fertile Crescent' had to bear the brunt of fighting against Alexander between the battles of Issus and Gaugamela, and at the latter battle he commanded the right wing and almost defeated Alexander. 3 Mazaios was certainly an important Persian noble, but it was probably his ability and bravery, as well as the believable report in Curtius (IV, 16) that Mazaios after the battle fled to Babylon with his troops and took charge of the city, which enhanced his position. When Alexander came, Mazaios surrendered to him and was named satrap of Babylonia (Arrian III, 16, 4; Curtius V, 1, 44). That he was allowed to issue similar coinage to the series he had Struck while governor of Cilicia and later Syria has been proposed, with the reason for this unusual procedure being an agreement between Mazaios and Alexander involving the surrender of Babylon to the latter. 4 This Suggestion seems a more likely reason for Mazaios' right to continue his striking of satrapal coins than Alexander's respect for a brave enemy or any other sentimental reason. The numismatic evidence for these coins having been Struck in Babylonia after Gaugamela, however, is most uncertain and until numismatists uncover hoards Some Iranian sources are specific in their anti- trian tradition may be overly tendentious in this Alexander Statements, that he burned the Avesta, regard. Killed some of the priests and learned men of Iran, 3 E. W. Marsden, The Campaign of Gaugamela extinguished fires, and was a great destroyer. For (Liverpool, 1964) is a military analysis with little * e references see M. Boyce, Zoroastrians [eh. 5, n. concern for politics or anything eise. 128], 78, (where the 'Frataraka' temple at Persepo- 4 Cf. A. R. Bellinger, Essays on the Coinage of "s was built after Alexander, not before his Alexander the Great, ANS, Numismatic Studies, 1 1 invasion). Whether 'mass slaughters' of priests took (N.Y., 1963), 61-64, where other literature is P'ace, however, is highly dubious and the Zoroas- given. 140 Chapter VI and more firm evidence the coinage should not be used to substantiate a presumed policy of Alexander in granting such a right of striking coins to subordinates. In any case, Mazaios was the first noble Persian to be appointed by Alexander to an important post. His power was circumscribed, however, by the appointment of two Macedonians, one in charge of the army and the other to collect taxes (Arrian III, 16, 4; Curtius V, 1, 43; Diodorus XVII, 64, 5). Nonetheless, with this move Alexander had appointed a prominent omcial of the old government to a high post, and whether the conqueror acted out of a sense of desire for conciliation or the need to have an experienced local person, whose wife may have been a Babylonian to judge by the names of his two sons, in charge of local government cannot be determined. We also cannot decide the identity of the person who may have Struck coins in the time of Alexander somewhere east of the Euphrates with Aramaic legends bearing his name mzdk, identified by some as the Achaemenid satrap of Egypt who surrendered to Alexander and then joined his court. 5 These coins, with the Attic owl on the reverse, are so enigmatic, however, that they cannot be used in any historical identifications. These coins may be indications, however, of Alexander's pragmatism in not instituting quick and momentous changes in the coinage of the lands he conquered. Since the rulers of the satrapies for generations had been Persians, Alexander perforce had to turn to Persians with experience in rule rather than to Babylonians or others. Furthermore, since Babylonia was regarded by the Achaemenids as a place of winter residence while their homeland, the Iranian plateau, was more suited for summer, Alexander may have considered the battle of Gaugamela the key to the whole east, of which Babylonia was the most populated and richest part of the 'Iranian pari' of the empire, and therefore his policy towards the conquered may have been revised. This point of view brings us to the oft-disputed theory that Alexander preached the idea of the 'unity of mankind,' in his conquests, a kind ofleitmotiffor his Crusade.' In spite of the writings of W. W. Tarn and others, there is more evidence for a proposed Iranian-Macedonian partnership in rule than for any universal 'equality' or policy of 'conciliation' directed towards all conquered peoples. 6 It is hardly possible, of course, to enter the mind of Alexander, but he probably realized that some sort of Cooperation with the Iranians was needed to secure and maintain his rule in the east. A survey of the satraps appointed by Alexander supports this contention. After Babylon, Alexander confirmed the satrap of Susa, Aboulites, in his post, since he had surrendered the treasures of the city to Alexander, but here too he left several of his own officers as Commander of the garrison, collector of taxes, and others (Curtius V, 2, 16). The ruler of the land of the Uxii (read: Huzi) was a relative of Darius called Madates (Diod. XVII, 67, 4; Curtius V, 3, 4) who resisted Alexander in the mountains and presumably was either killed or at least removed from his rule of the province. The satrap of Persis, Ariobarzanes, also offered strong resistance to the Macedonians, but after defeat he fled to the north and eventually with his father Artabazos and his brothers surrendered to Alexander, who, however, did not reward him with another position. In Persis, after the burning of Persepolis, Alexander 5 Ibid., 66, with further references. Alexander set the stage for the later ideas of world 6 W.W. Tarn, Alexander, \ (Cambridge, 1948), brotherhood or unity supposedly preached by 146 foll. Few scholars today would maintain that Zeno and the Stoics. Alexander the Great and the Seleucids 141 aopointed a Persian Phrasaortes as satrap apparently with the usual controls and checks of Macedonian or Greek officers at his side to collect taxes and insure order. Thus the pattern is repeated, of keeping the Iranian governor as a figurehead with the real power in the hands of the conquerors. At Persepolis, the Persian in command of the site, Tiridates, was also reinstated in his position with a Macedonian garrison (Curtius V, 6, 11). According to Arrian (III, 19, 2), Oxathres, son of Aboulites, was made satrap of Paraitakene, the land north of Persis, the chief city of which was Gabai or Isfahan. In Media Alexander appointed a certain Oxydates as satrap under the same conditions as other satraps, and in Parthia and Hyrcania (hodie Gurgan) he named Amminapes, a Parthian who had accompanied Alexander on his expedition from an exile in Macedonia. Shortly after the former satrap of Parthia and Hyrcania, Phrataphernes, surrendered to Alexander, after the death of his king Darius III, Alexander reinstated him in his old post and removed Amminapes. Another satrap, Autophradates, was also confirmed in his rule of the Caspian Sea province of the Tapuri (medieval Tabaristan). Satibarzanes, satrap of Aria (Herat) had assisted Bassos, the satrap of Bactria and Sogdiana in the murder of Darius III, but had then surrendered to Alexander who confirmed him in his satrapy. But this satrap revolted and after much fighting was killed. This was the beginning of a resistance to Alexander by the satraps of the east who did not submit but opposed the conqueror, and since Darius was dead and Alexander had taken his place, the satraps who did not submit probably were considered by many as rebels to their rightful ruler. Alexander's policy of placing an Iranian as satrap over a conquered province with Greco-Macedonian generals and troops beside him was continued, on the whole, also in the farther east, although we find a Macedonian Menön made satrap of Arachosia after the Iranian satrap Barzaentgs, one of the murderers of Darius III, had fled to India. In the Hindukush region to the north, an Iranian called Proexes by Arrian (III, 28, 4) was made the satrap and in Bactria another, Artabazos, in place of Bessos, who had proclaimed himself Artaxerxes IV, successor of Darius, and had become the leader of the Opposition to Alexander in the east. In the border areas of Sogdiana in the north and India to the east Alexander did not find satraps but rather principalities which may have owed some allegiance to the Achaemenids, but which were really independent. In these areas Alexander had to fight more than elsewhere, not because of an Iranian 'national revival' as has been claimed but because of Virtual independence from Achaemenid rule, the local rulers unwilling to submit to a new centralized authority. Both on the Central Asian and the Indian borderlands of the Achaemenid Empire little more than a nominal allegiance had been given the Achaemenids. This is indicated by the earlier incorporation of Sogdiana, which was virtually independent, into the satrapy of Bactria, and by the difficult fighting which Alexander had to do in this part of the world. The subsequent revolts of the Sogdians and Bactrians after they had been subdued by Alexander put a severe strain on the Macedonian army (Arrian IV, 1, 5; Curtius VII, 1, 14). It was in Bactria and Sogdiana that Alexander had to establish strong garrisons to maintain his rule, but strangely he did not make a Macedonian governor, rather granting the combined satrapy to Artabazos in 330. At the latter's request, because of old age, Alexander in the winter of 328 did replace him with a Macedonian Amyntas, and large contingents of troops had to be left under Amyntas to maintain Macedonian rule, while Alexander marched to India (Arrian 142 Chapter VI IV, 22-3). It is highly probable that more recruits, or mercenaries as Curtius (VII, 10, 11) calls them, had to be brought from the west to replace losses and to provide needed garrison troops. Some of the replacements came unwillingly, if we are to believe the report that the garrison of Bactra revolted on hearing a rumor of the death of Alexander in India and unsuccessfully sought to return to their European homelands (Curtius IX, 7, 2). Thus, a new pattern emerges of relying on Iranian officials to run the provinces of the Achaemenid Empire which were secure under central authority, whereas the frontier areas in the east, he soon discovered, needed a strong new administration of Macedonian officers and troops to insure continued allegiance to Alexander. Only a strong presence of Greco-Macedonians could guard those frontiers against nomadic enemies, as well as hold down the local population who had held little or no loyalty to the old Achaemenid government, and consequently showed the same attitude towards the heirs of the Achaemenids. For only military force could create a new allegiance among the settled folk to the new rulers against the nomads of the steppes. The growing 'Orientalization' of Alexander, well described by Arrian (VII, 6, 2), was really a 'Persianization, or an Achaemenidization,' at least in regard to matters such as clothes, customs and various practices, such as the oft-disputed proskynesis. The latter, it is now recognized, had nothing to do with the divinization of Alexander which was a Greco-Macedonian problem and not an Iranian one. 7 The prostration of menials, or the raising of the hand to the mouth on the part of nobility before the ruler was customary among the Achaemenids and elsewhere, and the Greco- Macedonians did not change this practice among the Iranians no matter how much disputed it may have been for the Westerners. Alexander's attempts at conciliation with the ruling Persians undoubtedly met a favorable response among many who retained their positions, but the majority of Iranians, we may suppose, regarded Alexander as a usurper. The policy of intermarriage between Greco-Macedonian officers and Iranian noblewomen culminating in a great banquet at Susa (Plutarch, Alex., 70; Arrian VII, 4, 4) may have been part of the hope of Alexander that a mixture between Greco-Macedonians and Iranians would produce a progeny able to rule the vast empire. From the sources, it seems that Alexander went out of his way in favoring the Iranians so as to bring them to partnership in rule. The selection of many noble Iranians as his ovyyevels 'kinsmen' angered his Macedonian generals and companions, who resented the advancement of the Iranian nobles to equality with them (Arrian VII, 11,6), while several Iranian contingents in the army received a Status equal to the eralpoi or 'companions' of the king (Arrian VII, 6, 4) at least in the eyes of some Macedonians. 8 Much has been written about the intentions of Alexander, and the eventual mixture mentioned above seems to have been his Intention, but during his lifetime a dual Status of two ruling peoples appears more likely, for obviously he needed the existing bureaucracy to run the empire, and the seeds of a kind of 'double rule' of the Seleucids, best exemplified in the double us? of 1 On proskynesis see J. P. V. D. Baisdon, "The 8 On the resentment and mutiny of the 'Divinity' of Alexander," Hisloria, 1 (1950), 380- Macedonians against the advancement of Iranians 82, and Feodora von Sachsen-Meiningen, "Pros- in Alexander's Service, see E. Badian, "Alexander kynesis in Iran," in Altheim, Hunnen, 2 [eh. 5, n. the Great and the Unity of Mankind," Historia, 7 68], 126-27, and 152-54. (1958), 428. Alexander the Great and the Seleucids 143 the Greek and Aramaic languages, were laid by Alexander. Iranian satraps were reinstated as heads of the provincial bureaucracies while the military power was in the hands of Alexander's officers. The conquered eventually had to be integrated into the army formations with Macedonian weapons, while the practices and customs of the conquered had to be respected by the foreign, Greco-Macedonian soldiery. Thus, we hear of the adoption of Iranian dress and practices by the conquerors, but it was the other way in military matters such as the adoption of Macedonian spears by units of Iranian soldiers in Alexander's army, as well as young Iranians organized into a special bodyguard on a Macedonian model (Arrian VII, 6, 1). Berve has discussed the mutual adoption of practices by Macedonians and Iranians in some detail to which little need be added. 9 To conclude that Alexander was deliberately seeking to counter the power and influence of his Macedonian officers in favor of Iranians is hardly correct, for the conqueror was equally capable of removing those whom he came to mistrust. It is most likely that Alexander trusted only those who were fully beholden to him for their positions. The incorporation of local troops into the Macedonian army, of course, was a necessity, especially after the severe fighting in Central Asia and before the campaign in India, since losses, and the need to settle troops in garrison towns, called for more and more reinforcements. So the policies of Alexander were based on expediency and a desire for stability to be achieved by placing in military and administrative positions only those who were personally loyal to the conqueror, and who quite naturally adopted many trappings of the Achaemenid rule Alexander had displaced. Yet Alexander did not have to copy the past, for he must have considered himself greater than the Achaemenid kings, since he had not only defeated Darius but had conquered more territory than they had held. At the end of Alexander's life many of the satraps he had confirmed in office had been changed. 10 In Babylonia Mazaios had died and for a time Stamenes had followed him to be succeeded about 324 b.c. by Arkhön, a Macedonian. At that time also the Persian satrap of Susiane was executed because of failure to come to the aid of Alexander on his march back from India, and was replaced by Argaios, then by Koinos, a Macedonian. In Persis, Phrasaortes had been succeeded by Orxines who was executed by Alexander on his return from India for his mismanagement of the province and again a noble Macedonian, Peukestas, was appointed. In Media, Oxydates had been made satrap by Alexander but was replaced c. 328 B.c. by Atropates, who made such an impression by his length of rule that the northern part of his realm took his name, today Azerbaijan. 11 Parthia-Hyrcania remained in the hands of Phrataphernes throughout the life of Alexander and only after the death of the former H. Berve, "Die Verschmelzungspolitik Alex- the Great, the main problems (Cambridge, 1966). anders des Grossen," Klio, 31 (1938), 135-68. His 10 For the following, the reference work by Statement on p. 1 47 "Neu dagegen ist, daß an der Berve, Das Alexanderreich [n. 1 ] is used and no page teile lokal-einheimischer Elemente Männer aus references are given since they are easy to find. em Paschen Adel herangezogen werden," is ' ' Z. I. Yampolskii, "Ob Atropate-sovremen- not apparent, since the distinction between 'Per- nike Aleksandra Makedonskogo," VDI, 2 (1974), Ti\ a *!f Iranian nobil "y had more or less 176-77, suggests that Atropates had not been a co apsed by the end of the Achaemenid Empire. satrap of Media under Darius III but an indepen- »ee al S o the studies by F. Hampl, W. W. Tarn and dent ruler, which may be correct. scn achermeyr in G. T. Griffith, ed., Alexander 144 Chapter VI (c 321 b.c.) did a non-Iranian Philippos take his post, and apparently the Caspian areas of the Amard and Tapur people were joined to Parthia-Hyrcania. About 328 b.c. Stasanor was satrap of Aria or the Herat area plus Seistan, while Sibyrtios, former governor of Kerman, was given the combined satrapy of Gedrosia and Arachosia while Tlepolemus took over Kerman. The satrapy of the Parapomisos or Hindukush had been under Greco-Macedonian control as had been India. Thus we find a drastic change from the beginning of Alexander's conquests in the east, but we do not know why. Was Alexander following the advice of his Macedonian officers? This is unlikely since he continued until the end of his life to favor Iranians, including their clothing and customs. Did the change mean that he could no longer find Iranians whom he could trust in high positions, or did he realize that a division of authority in the provinces between Greco-Macedonian military and Iranian secular leaders would not work? The order, early in 324, to the satraps and Commanders to disband all their mercenary forces indicates that Alexander was fearful of possible revolts against his authority. In any case, the result of Alexander's actions was to pave the way for the retention of power by the Macedonians after his death such that the Hellenistic age brooked no competition from Iranian dynasts trying to exert their influences on the main course of history. Likewise the release of many mercenaries only made the Hellenistic age one of competing generals hiring mercenaries to fight their battles. For the conquests of Alexander had shown the success of well-organized professional armies against any populär, conscript armies. The masses of different local levies could not stand before a small, tightly knit army, and Alexander had put the seal on that development. Some scholars have supposed that the satrapy of Persis continued to pay no taxes, as under the early Achaemenids, but there is no evidence that this privilege was either in force at the end of the Achaemenid empire, or existent under Alexander. The satrap of Persis, Peukestas, was infamous among Macedonians for his adoption of Persian customs and learning the Persian language (Arrian VI, 30, 3 and VII, 22, 3). THE AFTERMATH OF ALEXANDER'S DEATH The great conqueror died in early June 323 at the age of thirty-two at Babylon, and the question of continuity was pertinent. The administration of the empire had continued the Achaemenid model with satrap, military Commander, and tax collector as the three important divisions of provincial authority, and at the time of Alexander's death from the sources we infer that non-Iranians had replaced Iranians in these offices in most of the provinces. Whether this represented a new policy change is uncertain, but most people were reconciled to this State of affairs, and Iranians had been integrated into the army as well as into the bureaucracy. There was neither any pretender to the Achaemenid throne nor any great center of resistance to the orct- which Alexander had imposed. For the Classical scholar inner-Greek and Macedonian conflicts are of prime importance, but for Iranians both were their rulers, and in the context of Iranian history they are combined as the Greco-Macedonian conquerors. Some scholars have suggested that Alexander's close friend Hephaestion was a prime minister or vizier of the empire on the basis of Arrian's description of him as X^iapxos im rrj lttttu» rrj eraipiKfj (VII, 14, 10), but the title 'Commander of the Alexander the Great and the Seleucids 145 Companion cavalry' as well as what we know of Hephaestion's activities do not show him exercising wide administrative functions which one would expect in a vizier. 12 On the other hand, we do have the express Statement of Diodorus (XVIII, 48, 4) that the title chiliarch (Old Iranian *hazärapati-) meant second in authority in the Achaemenid Empire, but it seems more likely that the military position of the chiliarch or 'chiefof the royal guard' became second in importance after the king at the end of the empire, rather than to suppose that an administrative position equivalent to the vizier of Islamic times always existed under the Achaemenids. It has been argued in great detail that Xerxes, when he said of his father in his Persepolis inscription (XPf, line 31) pasä tanüm mäm madiftam akunaul 'after himself made me the greatest,' was in fact referring to the position known from later times as the 'second after the king.' 13 Since Xerxes was the crown prince, and the inscription does not imply an existing title, it would be stretching the Information provided by the Statement of the inscription into an established position equivalent to the later vizier. It is more likely that Diodorus is referring to the great importance of the chiliarch under the later Achaemenids rather than to an established administrative position. Such, it seems, was the case of Hephaestion, who was Alexander 's alter ego, but not his vizier. 14 The personal seal of Alexander, on his deathbed was given to Perdikkas (Arrian XVII, 117,4; Curtius X, 5, 4) which, however, did not indicate that the close relationship which Hephaestion had with Alexander was transferred to Perdikkas. It also did not mean that the latter succeeded Alexander, as we well know from following events. Under the eyes of Eumenes of Kardia, the secretary of King Philip and then of Alexander, we may assume that the Achaemenid bureaucracy continued, with, however, two new features, the introduction of the Greek language and the military colonies and towns founded by Alexander. The process of 'Hellenization' many times has been compared with the 'Westernization' of the Orient in modern times. How much one should push this analogy is open to question, but the position of the Greek language in the successor states of Alexanders empire does bear a resemblance to English in the latter part of the twentieth Century. Just as today knowledge of English has been adopted by a new 'middle' class of Iranians, so at that time Greek served a similar function, and language, rather than religion, race or any other criterion, was the key to distinctions. Greek had started already in Achaemenid times as a kind oilinguafranca in the western part of the empire, and Alexander's conquests spread the use of the language to India and Central Asia. To be sure, as a written language the use of Aramaic continued on the Iranian plateau, but clearly Greek was more widespread as the imperial language of Alexander and his successors. ,2 Cf. E. Badian, "The Administration of the 14 \fo\lowBetve, Das Alexanderreich [n. 1], 112, Empire," Creece and Rome, 12 (Oxford, 1965), 176. 320, when he says that the 'chiliarch,' especially 1 3 E. Benveniste, op. cit. [eh. 5, n.74], 64-65. The Hephaestion under Alexander, "scheint durchaus assertion of J. Junge, "Hazarapatis," Klio, 33 als ein Hofamt, nicht als Verwaltungsorgan (1940), 29, that the chiliarch under the Achaemen- gedacht gewesen zu sein." This did not mean that ids was the chief of the treasury and of records is the influence or authority of the 'chiliarch' was not supported by Elamite documents from diminished, rather the opposite since it was not a Persepolis. limited or fixed office. 146 Chapter VI The founding of garrisons and cities (poleis) has been much discussed. 15 Certainly military garrisons were established by Alexander in many parts of the Iranian plateau but whether he also founded any Greek cities (polis) is debated, for the evidence seems to be only in their names - all Alexandria. Many scholars have argued that any city in the east with the name Alexandria must have been a full-fledged polis, but several questions arise; did Alexander found each one or has his name subsequently been added? Did Alexander establish a polis, or was it in each case a military garrison which later became a polis'? When Tarn, following Tscherikower, asserts that Alexandria in Aria, which he equates with Herat, without doubt was founded by Alexander because Strabo and Pliny both say so, this is hardly decisive proof of its founding by Alexander. 16 The historians of Alexander do not mention the founding of a city there, but they do teil us that Alexander had to suppress a revolt of the people of the area under Satibarzanes. Perhaps this revolt induced Alexander to establish a garrison which later developed into a city. Why Tarn says that neither Seleucus nor "any Successor ever used the Alexander-name" escapes me, since in Appian's Roman History (Syriake, 57) the author specifically says that Seleucus founded two cities in honor of Alexander. 17 According to Arrian (e.g., VI, 15, 2; 15, 4) Alexander did build or order to be built certain cities; why he does not mention Herat and Prophthasia in Seistan is unknown, but when Plutarch (Moralia, De Alexandra fortuna, 328F) says there were five Greek cities which would not have existed save for Alexander's conquests, this does not mean that Alexander founded them, as Tarn supposes, for Seleucia on the Tigris, one of the cities mentioned, we know was not established by the conqueror. 18 It is not here proposed that Alexander founded no cities in the east, but rather that the Alexander historians must give us clues, rather than later authors who give information from various sources each of which must be checked, and the Alexander legend was already in vogue. The city called Alexandria ad Caucasum is attested by all of the historians and may be accepted as an authentic foundation of Alexander, who settled both natives and his soldiers in it (Arrian III, 28, 4; Curtius VII, 3, 23). Tarn further declares that an Alexandria in Arachosia, mentioned by later authors (Isidore of Charax, Ptolemy, etc.) must be present Ghazna, but this is questionable in view of recent excavations at old Qandahar where an Achaemenid settlement and a Hellenistic town have been partially excavated. 19 From the lack of early coins found at Begram by French excavators, it would seem that this site, which was identified as Kapisa, was not the same as Alexander's foundation, but it must have been nearby, since the Valley to the north of Kabul, today called Koh Daman, 'the skirt of the mountain,' though not 15 V. Tscherikower, "Die hellenistischen Städte- implications about the city although possible are gründungen von Alexander dem Großen bis auf by no means proven as Tarn implies. die Römerzeit," Philologus, Supplementband XIX, ,8 Tarn, Greeks (eh. 1, n. 23], 14, 347, 482. Heft 1 (Leipzig, 1927), esp. 96-106, and W. W. 19 Ibid., 470; D. Whitehouse, "Excavations at Tarn, "Alexander's Foundations," in Alexander the Kandahar, 1974," Afghan Studies, 1 (London, Great, 2 (Cambridge, 1 948), 232-49, and the first 1 978), 9-11, 33-34 ; also A. McNicoll in ibid., 41- chapter of his Greeks (eh. 1, n. 23]. 44. In Ptolemy VI, 18, 4, the town of Gazaka or 16 Tarn, Alexander, 2 [n. 6], 234 ; Tscherikower, Gauzaka (Ganzaka) is likely to be the site of later op. cit. [n. 15], 102. Ghazna. "Tarn, op. eil. [n. 6], 238. His further Alexander the Great and the Seleucids 147 extensive is large enough to hold several towns. 20 Other cities were founded in the t jj Ut attempts to identify them have been erudite but not convincing. 21 Another c ity is Alexandria in Bactria identified as modern Termez, while Alexandria on the Tanais (Eskhate = on the Jaxartes) is attested in Arrian, but the certain identification of this city as Khodjent (Leninabad) is not supported by excavations which have not revealed strata as early as Alexander. 22 Nonetheless, the foundation of certain cities and garrisons by Alexander can be taken as highly probable, and the aim of most of them obviously was to insure control of Strategie routes and commerce, and to hold together the empire. The question arises whether each of the cities founded by Alexander in the east was really a Greek polis with all that this implied, and therefore that the conqueror was consciously striving to bring "Hellenism" to the east by establishing Greek cities throughout his conquests. This point of view has been contested on the grounds that Alexander did not seek to establish any exclusively Greek polis, but rather only towns or military colonies where Greeks, Macedonians and natives would be settled. 23 The realization of the garrison nature of their Settlements may have come to Greek colonists only when Alexander had founded such Settlements in the east and had started on his way from India back to Babylon, and this may have been a prime reason for the revolt of the Greek colonists in Bactria in 325 and in 323 B.c., recorded in Diodorus (XVII, 99, 5-6; XVIII, 4, 8; 7, 1-5) and Curtius (IX, 7). From the sources, it is difficult to determine whether there was one uprising before Alexander's death or a series extending into the post- Alexander era; in any case, some Greek colonists revolted and wanted to return home, but they were put down by Macedonian troops. Whether Koshelenko (pp. 71-74) is correct in attributing their discontent to a failure of Alexander to create Greek cities (poleis), where Greek Citizens would completely dominate the government, thus causing them to revolt, cannot be determined, but it could have been a factor in the revolt. It would seem then that Alexander himself did not establish any polis in the east but later rulers did, and this will be discussed below. There is no evidence that Alexander intended to found independent towns which were not under the local satraps, and there is no reason to attribute this policy to him. The revolt of the Greek colonists, however, does show that many Settlements in the east at least were made by Alexander to safeguard the empire. The analogy with military garrisons established by the Arabs in their conquests so many centuries later is striking, and one may assume parallel concerns about the safety of the empire and the caliphate. Another matter of concern to Iranians was the fiscal policy of Alexander, and it is clear that at some time during his rule he deeided to issue silver coins on the Attic See J. Hackin, Nouvelles recherches archiologi- " G. A. Koshelenko, "Vosstanie Grekov v quesäBegram.MDAFA, 11 (Paris, 1954), 309, and Baktrii i Sogdiane," VDI, 1 (1972), 59-78. The R^ Ghirshman, Begram, MDAFA, 12 (Cairo, author analyzes the Greek theories of city founding ,9 J 6 ). 85. The site ofSaray Khwaja, called by the of Aristotle and Isocrates, and comes to the inhabitants Iskandariya, may possibly reflect a conclusion that Alexander had no intention of settlement of the conqueror. following these ideas in his Settlements. An 22 Jf rn ' °P- "'■ l ch - !• n 23 1- 525 - expansion of this article appears in his book See B. Gafurov, Tadzhiki (Moscow, 1972), Grecheskii Polis na ellin isticheskom Vostoke (Mos- , • note 13 - The identification of Alexandria on cow, 1979), 181-221. the Oxus with Termez is still disputed. 148 Chapter VI Standard for the empire, while at the same time to allow local coinage to continue. He even Struck gold darics and issued double darics, and he foüowed his father in maintaining a value of 10 to 1 instead of the Achaemenid 13-J to 1 ratio of silver to gold. 24 Alexander did not mint coins in Iran or Central Asia, because there had been no mints there under the Achaemenids, and Babylon and perhaps Susa are the easternmost mint places. It is dubious whether Alexander himself had coins Struck with his own portrait with the legend 'Alexander king,' and even at Susa, which may have been an Achaemenid mint town, the first such coins seem to be post-Alexander in date. 2S The introduction of an imperial coinage to the east must have had great influence in areas where formerly barter and bullion had prevailed, but we can only infer this from coin hoards and the profusion of coinage in the east after Alexander. There is no evidence that Alexander the Great had the time to initiate great changes in the east, and we may assume that his successors were those who laid the foundations of Hellenism in the East. Undoubtedly Alexander did initiate military Settlements which later developed into cities, but his task was to hold the empire he had formed and at the least he seems to have conciliated most of the Iranian aristocracy who accepted him as their ruler. His Macedonian satraps, especially Peukestas of Persis, on the whole were accepted and obeyed by the local population, and for the most part Macedonian rule proceeded without significant revolts against it. 26 The sources teil us of political events and about the quarreis between the Macedonian generals, but not about the process of Hellenization in the east which must be reconstructed from rare, scattered notices in the sources and from archaeology. The wars of the Diadochi, as the successors of Alexander are called, had no great effect on the mass of the population of the Iranian plateau, but a survey of the succession insofar as it did influence Iran should be made. The first assignment of satrapies was made by Perdikkas in 323 b.c. after the death of Alexander, and he left all the satraps of the east intact but appointed Peithon son of Krateuas, a noble Macedonian, satrap of Media while Atropates continued to rule in Azerbaijan. One of the first tasks of the new satrap was to command an army sent to suppress a revolt of Greeks settled in Bactria which he did according to Diodorus (XVIII, 7, 5). Whether this revolt was a continuation of the previous one or not we cannot determine, but according to the sources, the Greeks had wished to return home against the wishes of Perdikkas and were suppressed. Apparently a Macedonian called Philip became satrap of Bactria and Sogdiana at this time. Oxyartes, father-in-law of Alexander had been made satrap of the Hindukush region by Alexander, succeeding several short-lived satraps, and he continued in his post as did several vassal kings in India. Eumenes was made satrap of Cappadocia and Paphlagonia in Asia Minor where he had to fight against native dynasts. Plutarch (Life of Eumenes, 4) adds that Perdikkas sent Eumenes against a certain Neoptolemos, satrap of Armenia whom he defeated, but no more information exists about Armenia at that time. 24 Bellinger, op. eil. [n. 4], 30-31 , mints 1 14-27; 26 There is a curious report that Stasanor, satrap G. K. Jenkins, Ancient Greek Coins (N.Y., 1972), of Herat and Seistan, attacked the customs of the 211-16; G. Kleiner, "Alexanders ReichsmUnzen," local inhabitants who then revolted against him Abh. der deutschen Akad. der Wiss. zu Berlin, Jhg. (Porphyrios, De Abstinentia, IV, 21). 1947 (Berlin, 1949), 9-23. 5 G. Le Rider, Suse sous les Sileucides et les Parthes, MMAI, 38 (Paris, 1965), 45. Alexander the Great and the Seleucids 149 Shortly after the assassination of Perdikkas in 321 B.c., at a Conference at Triparadeisos in north Syria, Antipater assumed the role of regent or representative of Philip Arrhidaeus, half-brother of Alexander, and Alexander's posthumous son, both of whom had been recognized as Joint rulers of the empire even though few of the eenerals paid any heed to one or the other. Few changes in eastern satrapies were made by Antipater except that Philip was transferred from Bactria, and he replaced the perhaps dead Phrataphernes in Parthia and Hyrcania, while Stasanor of Soli on Cyprus, former satrap of Herat and Seistan, became Satrap of Bactria and Sogdiana, while another Cypriote called Stasander became satrap of Herat and Seistan (Diod. XVIII, 39, 6). The capable general in charge of Antipater's army was Antigonos, the 'one-eyed.' The entire Situation changed, however, with the death of Antipater in 319 when he bequeathed his office to Polyperchon, who was friendly to Eumenes and who had been attacked by Antigonos in Asia Minor. This turn of events enabled Peithon, satrap of Media, to attack Parthia and replace Philip with his brother Eudamos (Diod. XIX, 13, 7). 27 Peithon was defeated in turn by a coalition of eastern satraps, and then Peithon went to Babylon which had been allotted to Seleucus at Triparadeisos. Seleucus, however, did not join Peithon, who was now faced with the coalition which followed Eumenes (and Polyperchon in Europe) and wintered in Susiane in 317 b.c. Since the members of the coalition quarrelled about the leadership, Eumenes advised that all of them should participate in military decisions, which proved to be his undoing. Meanwhile Antigonos was gathering forces in Mesopotamia to attack the coalition, and he hoped to do this with the support of Peithon and Seleucus. He advanced to Susa, and Seleucus on behalf of Antigonos besieged the citadel. From the sources we learn that Iranians fought on both sides, one of Antigonos and the other of Eumenes, which latter might be called the 'royalist' camp, since they ostensibly upheld the unity of the empire under the son of Alexander, for his half-brother Philip Arrhidaeus had been executed in 317 at the order of Olympias, mother of the dead conqueror. At first Eumenes seemed to have the upper hand; at a battle on the Iranian plateau near Gabai (Isfahan) against Antigonos he prevailed, but Antigonos held a unified command while the coalition was disunited (Diod. XIX, 26-7), and in a second battle Antigonos captured the baggage of Eumenes together with the wives and children of many of his troops. The satraps thereupon wished to retire to their satrapies and did so, while the Macedonian mercenaries seized Eumenes and turned him over to Antigonos in return for their baggage and families (Diod. XIX, 42). Whether the account of Diodorus is accurate or not cannot be determined, but in any case Eumenes was executed and Antigonos now became lord of Asia. 28 In the account of the forces of Eumenes, Diodorus (XIX, 27) has an interesting The text says he put to death Philotas, the troops and elephants from India. Oxyartes, satrap general (<TTpaT7jyös) of Parthia and replaced him of the Hindukush region, sent a general Androba- with his brother, but we have seen that Philip was zos with troops, and Peukestas of Persis was t e satrap. Whatever the confusion in names, recognized as the leader of the coalition. Peithon secured Parthia to his support. The satraps 28 On the title 'king of Asia,' probably assumed who sent troops for the coalition against Peithon by Antigonos after removing Peithon, satrap of wereTlepolemosofKerman.SibyrtiosofAracho- Media, see H. W. Ritter, Diadem und Königs- s'a, Stasander of Herat and Seistan, with extra herrschaß, Vestigia (München, 1965), 102. troops from Bactria, while Eudamos brought 150 Chapter VI remark, that five hundred soldiers from the Hindukush area joined the coalition of Eumenes against Antigonos and an "equal number of Thracian colonists from the upper colonies (satrapies)" ujoi Spanes ix tcov ovo) koltoikiöjv. The indication that Thracians were also settled in the eastern 'upper' satrapies (medieval Khurasan), as well as Greeks and Macedonians, is a welcome item, helping to explain the large numbers of colonists who came from Europe and Asia Minor to the east. One wonders whether special inducements of payments in money or kind, as well as land, were not offered to settlers to come to the east to Supplement the veterans and forced settlement of military cadres in garrisons. For the numbers of colonists sent to the east must have severely depleted the populations of both the towns and countrysides in the west. The Hellenistic expansion to the east at this time may be compared to the earlier Greek Settlements in the Mediterranean and Black Sea areas. 29 Antigonos, after the death of Eumenes, began to consolidate his position in the east, and his erstwhile ally Peithon was suspected of rebellion and executed, whereupon his other ally Seleucus, fearing a similar fate, fled to Ptolemy in Egypt in 316 b.c. An Iranian, Orontobates, was appointed satrap of Media by Antigonos in place of Peithon. The satraps of the farther east were in too strong positions to be removed, so Antigonos retained Stasanor in Bactria, but Stasander in Herat and Seistan was replaced by Evitus, who died shortly thereafter and was followed by Evagoras. Sibyrtios retained Arachosia, and according to Diodorus (XIX, 48, 4) Antigonos sent to him many of the Macedonian veterans who had turned over Eumenes to Antigonos, with Orders to send them on difhcult missions where they would be killed, since he did not trust them. Peukestas, the populär satrap of Persis was removed and Asklepidoros put in his place, and another Peithon, former satrap of India, was now made satrap of Babylonia, while in Susiane a certain Aspeisas was installed. 30 Thus, Antigonos secured control of the east, but he remained suspicious of the fickle satraps who would only support him if it were to their respective advantages. Then Antigonos turned to the west, but a defeat of his son Demetrius by Ptolemy at Gaza, Palestine, in 31 2 persuaded Seleucus to try his luck again in the east, and Ptolemy gave him a small force of soldiers to assist him. Seleucus had been well liked by the Babylonians when he previously had been their satrap, so many welcomed him back, and in honor of his entry into Babylon in the late summer of 312, although according to Babylonian reckoning the first of the month Nisan or the 3rd of April 31 1 b.c., this date was the beginning of the Seleucid era. 31 Dating in this era in Babylonian clay tablets is attested, however, only from the year 304/3 B.C. Seleucus devoted himself to consolidating his position in the east, but Nikanor, the !, The problem of the colonists will be i\ htruzione Chssica nuova serie 10, (1932), discussed in more detail below. From the sources it 462-66. is clear that Iranians fought on both sides. Cf. infra, 3I J Oelsner, "Kellschriftliche Beiträge zur n - '5. politischen Geschichte Babyloniens in den ersten The coin with the name Aspeisos may well Jahrzehnten der griechischen Herrschaft (331-305 refer to this satrap, but it is unusual; cf. Bellinger, v.u.Z.)," AF, 1 (1974), 135. The Seleucid era was op. eil. [n. 4], 88-89. On the struggle between commonlycalled the 'era of Alexander .'Cf. Chroti. Antigonos and Seleucus, see G. Furlani, "La cronaca Maroniticum, CSCO, Script. Syr. ser. III, IV, pt. 1 , babilonese sui diadochi," Rivista ii Filologia e 43. Alexander the Great and the Seleucids 151 eneral in charge of Antigonos' forces in Iran prepared to attack Seleucus, while Demetrius, son of Antigonos, invaded Babylonia and recovered some of the places Seleucus had taken, but he could not assure control of the satrapy for Antigonos, since he had to return to the west and to the affairs of mainland Greece. In 310 the widow of Alexander the Great, Roxane, and her son Alexander were murdered by Kassander, and any possible succession to the empire of the conqueror was ended. Demetrius, son of Antigonos, was only partially successful in Greece, but in 306 he destroyed the navy of Ptolemy near Cyprus and captured the island, and after that both Antigonos and his son assumed the title of 'king' and both wore diadems. In 304 B.c. Ptolemy, Seleucus, Kassander and other Diadochi also took the title 'king,' and any pretence of a united empire was now ended, and the heritage of Alexander was permanently divided. Meanwhile Seleucus had in effect replaced Antigonos as ruler of the east, especially after defeating Nikanor in a battle in which other followers of Antigonos lost their lives (Diod., XIX, 92, 5). Appian (Roman History, Syriake, 55) says Seleucus killed Nikanor in battle, but he does not say when or where. Seleucus must have either conciliated the satraps in the east or defeated them, but the only item of information we have is that Seleucus made peace with the new Indian power headed by Chandragupta (SavSpoKÖrros) and obtained from him five hundred elephants in exchange for recognition of Mauryan supremacy at least over the Indus basin if not more (Strabo XV, 724). Before this time, according to Will, Seleucus had defeated the forces of Antigonos in a great battle, probably in 309/8 b.c., which resulted in a treaty by which Antigonos renounced rule over Iran. 32 This, however, may be the battle against Nikanor in Babylonia, but the existence of a treaty between Antigonos and Seleucus is an assumption of Will based on the absence of records of further conflict between the two. In any case, we are left to conjecture just how Seleucus won the east and what were his relations with Antigonos. The end of Antigonos came in the summer of 301 b.c. at the battle of Ipsos in north Syria, when a coalition of forces under Kassander from Greece, Lysimachos and Seleucus, with his newly acquired Indian elephants, crushed Antigonos, who died on the field of battle, while Demetrius, his son, fled with other forces. 33 The three victors divided the domains of Antigonos between them, and Seleucus received all of the east and Syria. Southern Syria or Palestine had been occupied by Ptolemy, who had not taken part in the battle of Ipsos, but Seleucus for the time acquiesced in the occupation, although he did not renounce his claims to the south. Lysimachos took most of Asia Minor. The intrigues and problems of the west do not concern us, but inasmuch as it took the attention of Seleucus away from the east, in this manner Iran was influenced by events in the west. What do we know about Iran and Central Asia at the beginning of Seleucid rule? Will, supra, Histoire politique, 58. This view is 33 O. Müller, Antigonos Monophthalmos und "das contested by C. Wehrli, Antigone et Demetrios Jahr der Könige," Saarbrücker Beiträge zur Alter- (Geneva, 1969), 130, who denies that there was a tumskunde. 1 1 (Bonn, 1973), 140 pp., discusses «tle or treaty, but merely that Antigonos questions of legitimacy and kingship in the career rehnquished rule in the east to concentrate on the of Antigonos. west. 152 Chapter VI THE CONSOLIDATION OF THE SELEUCID KINGDOM If we accept a Statement of Diodorus (XX, 53, 4) that Seleucus took the title of 'king' shortly after he had taken over the 'upper provinces,' the date of this conquest would be c. 307-306 b.c. or later. As mentioned, we hear nothing of Seleucus in the east save his ceding of territory to the founder of the Maurya dynasty Chandragupta, but the extent ofthat ceded land is uncertain. A chance remark of Justin (XV) that Seleucus subdued the Bactrians may indicate some fighting before obtaining