• General bibliography. Briant 1984a has been repeated here only to a rather small degree and in a largely reworked and modified form to take into account more recent specialized articles, particularly Miioschedji 1985 and 1990a.
J. Why Cyrus?
• Discontinuous Documentation and the Longue Dure'e. "Scandal of history" of the disappearance of the Assyrian Empire - see the discussion by Garelli (Garelli and Nikiprowetzky 1974: 125-28 and 239-42), and the summary of the topic in a more closely argued form in Zawad. ski 1988a: 14-22; and the interpretive sugge. stions of Na'aman 1991. 'l ire problem of the beginnings of Persian history is very well stated by Harmatta 1971 (even if stressing Median influence exclusively is debatable; see below); .see also the reflections of Delaunay 1985: 71-81, on the reasons why Aramaic scrilres were used during the time of Gyrus.
• Persian History and Greek Representations. See Briant 1989a; on Median-Persian relations, see also SSb-7, pp. 21-27.
2. The Founder Legends
Version of Gtesias in Nicolaus of Damascus: FGrH 90 F66, version of Dinon in Athenaeus
XIV. 633d-e; Gyrus legend and Saigon legend: Drews 1984 and B. L. Lewis 1980; on the theme of the abandoned child, cf. also Widengren 1966 and Binder 1964: 17-28; on royal legends in Iranian literature, in particular in Firdawsi, see Ghristensen 1936 (who finds similar traits in the legends reported by Herodotus and Gtesias), Davidson 1985, Duleha 1987, Krasnowolska 1987; remembrance of Cyrus among the Persians: Xenophon, Cyr. 1.2.1; Herodotus III.160; Strabo
XV. 3.18; and Athenaeus XV.633d-e: cf chap. 8/3 on the education of young Persian aristocrats.
3. The Kings of Ansan
Inscriptions of Ariaramnes and Arsames: cf summary of the topic in Lecoq 1974a: 48-52, who concludes that “the inauthenticity [of these texts] has not been proved” (cf also Herrenschmidt 1979a); the rliscussion is directly connected to the interpretation given to Darius's dynastic claims, which arc extremely suspect (on the genealogy recorded by Darius, see the keen reflections of Miroschedji 1985: 280-83): we return to these problems at greater length in chapters 2/10 and 3/1; seal of Kuras of Ansan: Hallock 1977: 127, Miroschedji 1985: 285-87, Bollweg 1988; and most recently Garrison 1992: 3-7 (and n. 22).
L Ansan and Susa
Arrival of the Iranians in the Zagros: cf summary of the topic and bibliography in Briant 1984a: 79-83; add Sumner 1994, who prefers a higher dating (middle of the second millennium); on relations between the lowlands and the highlands, see Viillat 1980; Carter and Stolper 1984: 32ff.; Miroschedji 1990a; Tall-i Malyan tablets: Stolper 1984b; site of Malya n: Sumner 1988; coexistence of several Elamite “kings" at the beginning of the seventh century: cf Stolper 1986;
"io)'al cities”: Miroschedji 1986 and 1990a: 65-69; battles of Elamite kings against the Assyrians-Cartel and Stolper 1984: 44-55, as well as Gerardi 1987 and a brief presentation in Frame 1992255-56; assuming the title “king of Ansan”: Miroschedji 1985: 296-99; chronology and succession of the first kings: without denying that tliey are just hypotheses, 1 follow on this point the interpretations of Miroscliedji 1985: 280-285 (who refuses to recognize Cyrus in the Assurbanipal inscription published by Weidner 1950), but there remain uncertainties and discussion on absolute chronology: cf. Bollweg 1988: 56 (genealogical tree; explicitly denying the reconstruction of Miroschedji); the discrepancies explain why Cyrus the Great is sometimes numbered II, sometimes III (just as his father is sometimes designated Cambyses 1, sometimes Cambyses II), depending on the weight given to Herodotus VII. 11
5. Persian Society before the Conquests: Herodotus and Archaeology
• Herodotus and Persian Society. Text of Herodotus: Briant 1984a: 105-10, 1990a: 77-84; tribal organization: see also the reports of Xenophon (twelve tribes!) (Cyr. 1.2,5) and Strabo XV.5.1; cf. Von Gall 1972; Iranian terms: Dandamaev 1989a: 15; note that the term ”zantu does not occur in the Old Persian texts; according to Dandamaev and Livshits 1988: 459, it appears several times in the Elamite tablets from Persepolis as a constituent element in personal names, but see contra Schmitt 1990b; Greek (and Mesopotamian) view of the opposition nomads/farmers: Briant 1976 and 1982b: 9-56; kara in OPers. can designate the army as well as the people (whence the problems posed by DB )j 14: see below, chap. 2/10); the title karanos appears in Xenophon to describe a military head with exceptional powers: Haebler 1982, Petit 1985, Sekunda 1988: 74; military prestige of the king: Briant 1984a: 114-17.
• The Findings of Archaeology. Absence of sedentary populations: Sumner 1972: 264-65, 1986; 4-7 (without enthusiasm: "unsatisfactory. . . a. ssumption... hypothetical explanation"}; conclusions repeated and strengthened by Miroschedji 1985: 288-94 ("radical sedentary depopulation”); see also Miroschedji 1990a; agricultural activities in Persian month names; cf. the analysis of Hiirz 1975: 64-70; maintenance of pastoral populatioirs in Achaeinenid Fars: Sumner 1986: 50-51; cf. Briant 1976. On the very incomplete character of explorations in Fars; cf the reinarb of Miroschedji 1990a: 54-55; Elamite influences: Briant 1984a: 92-95, Miroschedji 1982 and 1985: 296-505, Galmeyer 1988b (dress), Bollweg 1988 and Garrison 1992 (seals); archaeological results in Khuzistan: Garter 1994; tomb of Arjan: Vallat 1984, Alizadeh 1985 (criticism by Vallat, Ablran 10 [1987], no. 217); cf also Miroschedji 1990a: 55 and the article by Majizadeh 1992 (publication of a bowl with scenes of hunting, tribute-bearers, and banciuets: the author stresses Phoenician and Assyrian influences); according to Duchene (1986), Arjan is to be identified with Huhnur, halfway between the future site of Persepolis and Susa, by proposing a relationship with the place-name Hunair known from the Fortification tablets (cf Koch 1990: 198-200). The Susa tablets were published in 1907; their dating was and is uncertain: Hinz (1987) defends a high date (before 680); 600-540 is suggested by F. Vallat (1984: 11, n. 26); see also Miroschedji 1982 and 1990a: 79, and Steve 1986, from whom I take the term “Neo-Elamitc IlIB (ca 605-559)” (pp. 2021); quotation: Ghirshman 1976b: 160; Iranian metallurgical tradition; Moorey 1984; on the term irmatam, cf below, chap. 11/5, 11/9; Persians and Iraniairs in Babyloir: Zadok 1977: 66-67; Babylonian populations in Khuzistan: Stolper 1986; importance of intercultural contacts before Cyrus: cf Briant 1984a.
6. Ansan, Ecbatana, Babylon, and Susa
• The Consequences of the Fall of the Assyrian Empire. On the events that led to the demise of Assyria, see (besides Goossens 1952 and Garelli 1974: 125-28, 259-42) the recent analyses by Zawadski 1988a and Na’aman 1992. It will immediately be seen that the interpretations continue to difiFcr on very important points: but it would not be appropriate to review the debate here, in the course of a discussion devoted specifically to the kings of Ansan. It will have to suffice to put in a
Nutsliell sonic facts and analyses that, even indirectly, might contribute to the understanding of the Near Eastern world upon the arrival of Cyrus II; downfall of the Assyrian capitals: see Goos-seiis 1952: 90-93; Kuyper 1981; Scurlock 1990b; Dailey 1990, 1993; Kuhrt 1995 {now bringing into the discussion the tablets from Tall Sell Hamad [valley of the Khabui]), wliich prove that the political end of imperial power did not mean the instant annihilation of the language or more generally of Assyrian culture: cf. the articles collected in SAAB 7/2 [1993]); on the role of the Medes after 610, see Baltzer 1973 (and Joannes 1995b, with the subsequent remarks of Gasche 1995 on the name and dating of the "Median Wall”); Astyages/Alyattes treat)' of 585: the Labynelus of Herodotus cannot be Nabonidus (556-539) (to whom he gives the same name): cf. discussion in Beaulieu 1989a: 80-82; the Medes and Central Asia: Briant 1984b: 35-42, reconstruetion of an Elamite kingdom centered on Susa: Miroschedji 1982, Vallat 1984, Steve 1986; the notion of the submission of Susa to Ecbatana is defended by Zawadski 1988a: 138-43 (cf. also Lukonin 1989: 61 according to whom Astyages imposed his domination over Elam in 585); but the evidence is contradictory: some take the opposite view, that there are a number of links between Susa and Babylon (Lukonin 1989: 58-59; Wiseman 1956: 36; and Carter-Stolper 1984: 54); in any event, it is quite possible that Elam was itself not unified, with various princes, who were not necessarily strictly under the control of Susa, controlling local territory; Babylonian conquests in the west: Wiseman 1956; name of the last Elamite king (Ummanis): Miroschedji's hypothesis 1982: 62-63.
• Ansfiij on the World Stage. Classical texts on the fall of the Assyrian Empire, in the final analysis, all that can be agreed to are a few contemporary notes (cf Scurlock 1990b); wc may add that the version of Amyntas is already found in part in Xenophon (Ana/;. III.4.8-13), who identifies the ruins he viewed in Assyria with the cities captured by Cyrus from the Medes; on the "Arabs” of Mesopotamia, cf Briant 1982b: 120-22 and Donner 1986.
• Median Dominiori. The hypothesis that the Dream of Nabonidus (cited below, chap. 1/1, p. 881) identifies Cyrus as ardu (‘slave’) of Astyages (so Dandamaev 1984b. 82-86) derives from a faulty reading: cf Baltzer 1973; tribute under Median domination: cf Justin 1.7.2 (very general); on Herodotus’s Median dynastic chronology, see most recently Scurlock 1990a.
• Dynastic Marriages? Identification of Aryenis, daughter of Alyattes: Herodotus 1.74 and especially a scholion to Plato (Pedley 1972: no. 96); note also that one of the daughters of Darius was called Mandaiie, at least in a court novel recorded by Diodorus XI.57.1. Another marriage tradition is found in Diodorus (II.10.1) and Berossus (apud Josephus, Ag. A/; 1.19): a “Syrian” king land. scaped the Hanging Gardens of Babylon to please his wife "who was originally from Persia” (Diodorus) or Media (Berossus): cf also Quintus Curtins V.1.35. The diminution of foundation legends attests above all to the vigor of the oral traditions.
7. Eram the Medes to the Persians
• Borrowing and Inheritance. The theory of Medo-Persian linguistic inheritance is found already in Meilletand Benveniste 1931 (cf particularly p. 7: “For historical, geographic, and dialectal reasons, it can be nothing other than Median”); cf also R. Schmitt, RIA 7/7-8 (1990): 617-18 s. v. "Medische [Sprache]”; this is the basis on which Harmatta 1971 reconstructed Median state organization, which supposedly was copied by the Achaemenids; on this point, see the critique of Sancisi-Wcerdenburg 1988a: 208-10. The theory was strongly ehallenged by Skja;rv0 1983 (summarized here), as well as by Lecoq 1987, who elsewhere (1974b) sets forth the idea of a Perso-Median koine; on the name Mede applied to the Persians, cf Graf 1984, and Tuplin 1994.
• The Structure of the Median Kingdom: Medikos logos of Herodotus. Cf Helm 1981 (oral traditions and Persian propaganda); Brown 1988: 78-84, Sancisi-Weerdenburg 1993a, also Scurlock 1990a (on the Median chronology of Herodotus, judged perfectly acceptable); note that Ctesias also devoted part of his Persica to Median history: cf Diodorus 11.32-34; cf also IX.20.4, where he mixes information from Ctesias with some attributed explicitly to Herodotus, but which he cites in a faulty way; on the problems posed by the “Scythian interregnum,” see now the detailed analysis of Lanfranclii 1990 and the interpretations of Vogelsang 1992; 181-90, 310-12; Medes and Assyrians: cf. chronological table drawn up by Brown, RIA lH-?i (1990): 620; role of Cyaxares: Brown 1988; 81-86, also Sancisi-Weerdenburg 1988a: 202-3, 211. Note that Ctesias calls Cyaxares “founder of Median hegemony"; but given that Diodorus (11.32.3) cites Herodotus, this is obviously a confusion with Deioces; the same author claims (11.34.6) that Astyages is the name the Greeks gave to a certain Aspandas; finally, note in passing that Diodorus (11.34.1) cites a certain Astibaras among the Median sovereigns: this involves the evidence of a personal name copied from an Achaemenid title (arstibam = Gk. doryphoros ‘lance-bearer’) familiar from an inscription of Naqs-i Rustam (DNc) and from Babylonian tablets (Stolper 1985a; 55 n. 12). Scarcity of Median archaeological remains: see several articles of Muscarella (1987, 1994) and the refinement of Genito (1986), with the criticism of Vogelsang (1992; 177; but the use of country lists leaves me methodologically unconvinced) and especially Medvedskaya 1992, who concludes on the basis of observations of ceramics and geography that Baba Jan can no longer be considered a Median site. On “Median art,” see the convenient presentations of R Calmeyer in RIA (1990): 618-19and Enclr II (1988) 565-69 and D. Stronach, 1977: 688-98, 1981 and Enclr II (1988) 288-90. The the-' ory of very limited spread of Median power is supported especially by Sancisi-Weerdenburg (1988a, 1993a); Brown (1986, 1988) considers the impact of Assyrian levies on the passage from a tribal society to a state society, beginning with the eighth century. The theory of the rewriting of history by the Babylonians in an anti-Median direction is very strongly supported by Zawadski 1988a: 132-48, dated by the author to exactly 576 (p. 148); the interpretation seems attractive but does suffer from a significant weakness; it postulates that the compo, sers of the Nahopolassar Chronicle systematically designated the Medes with the name Umman-Manda (cf. pp. 127-29); however, this interpretation appears very doubtful (cf Baltzer 1973); under these circumstances, the reas-.sessment of the role of the Medes in the anti-Assyrian coalition does not carry much conviction.
• Appraisal of the Discussion. The importance of the Elamite legacy to the Persians has been stressed by numerous authors (P. Ainiet, F. Vallat, M.-J. Steve, M. Garrison); cf also Stolper 1984b: 4, regarding the tablets from Tall-i Malyan (“Tbey supply a distant historical antecedent for Elamite administrative recording in Pars under the Achaemenids”), and Miroschedji 1982 and 1985. Miroschedji concludes that the Persian administration in Pars “was probably set up by Cyrus II in the middle of the sixth century, when the Empire was established” (1985: 301; see below, chap. 2/9, p. 895, on the organization of the sacrifices around the tomb of Cyrus); perhaps we should even consider that it was set up before the first conquests (cf Briant 1984a: 118)? Note in this regard that Kvo high officials in Persia at the time of Darius continued to use seals engraved with an Elamite name, Humban-abpi (cf Hinz 1972b; 281), and that the seal of Kuras of An5an himself is applied to six tablets (cf on this seal most recently Garrison 1992; 3-10); on the other hand, the Median borrowings (arms, clothing) are usually reconstructed on the basis of later documents, in particular the Greek authors and the representations of Persepolis (cf, for example, Triimpelmann 1988; also Calmeyer, RIA 7/7-8 [1990] 615-17). On all these problems, see now also the interesting treatment by ‘I'uplin 1994: 251-56.
8. Conclusion
It must be stressed that many of the hypotheses of the (supposed) relations between Nabonidiis and Cyrus (cf summary of the topic in Baltzer 1973: 87-88) are implicitly based on the assumption of the recognition of Ansan as a nrilitary power by the other kingdoms (specifically NeoBabylonian and Median).
Chapter 1
World History
