575-550BC in the Near East

Lion Statue from Babylon

This blog post will be looking at the years 575-550BC in the Near East, which for the purposes of this blog will include Kush and Lydia in the south and west, far over to the easternmost reaches of the Median Empire and to the Caucasus in the north. Occasionally there may be references to other regions, but the Greek world in particular will be dealt with in a separate post.

The sources for this blog will include as much primary sources as possible, particularly Neo-Babylonian chronicles and other cuneiform writings. The writings of the later Babylonian priest Berossus (contemporary with Alexander) have been lost to us, but survive in quotations from other authors such as Josephus, so these will be used where possible. Lydian, Median and Persian sources are so scant as to be almost non-existent, and those that do exist may in fact be forgeries. Ancient Persian religious writings are interesting, but provide no context and are difficult to date. Egyptian and Kushite inscriptions will be used where possible but there are not as many of these as we would like and not many are translated and available to the layman.

The Hebrew Tanakh or Old Testament will be used where possible, but this has a very narrow focus and is not contemporary with the events that it describes. Also, the writers of the Biblical books at this period are not writing history as such, and their writings have their own specific conventions that can be difficult to interpret. The majority of Hebrew writings are silent during this period anyway. The most prevalent source material for this period is later Greek writing, particularly the Histories of Herodotus. This is a great book, but quite problematic as a source. For better or for worse, shortly after the fall of Assyria we begin to have fewer and fewer writings directly from the Mesopotamians. This means that, like it or not, we must rely heavily on Herodotus.

Object inscribed with the cartouche
of Aramtle-qo

As always I feel it is important to note that I am not a professional historian. The facts and dates in this post should be treated with due caution and everything should be checked. There are certainly mistakes and errors in the sources and I may make mistakes in my interpretations of these sources. Mistakes are particularly likely to occur when dealing with years, as the Babylonian and Jewish years do not correspond exactly to our own. So, there is the possibility that I may have, for example, interpreted an event as happening in late 609 when it may in fact have been early 608. If the reader spots any errors such as this, please let me know in the comments and I will research it and correct it as soon as possible. Also, another thing that will affect dating for this period is whether the king counts the first year of their reign as the 1st year or the 0th year (counting from accession or from first full year). Even professional historians have differing opinions on the exact ordering of events at this time, so exact precision is not likely here.

It can be useful to give context to the period by describing what is happening elsewhere in the world at this time. In China, the Zhou Dynasty was continuing its long slow decline while the feudal states such as Jin and Chu grew ever more important and waged wars between them for influence. In India, there were a number of powerful kingdoms, particular in the north along the Gangetic Plain. These kingdoms were known as the Mahajanapadas and included states such as Kuru, Panchala, Kosala, Videha and Magadha. In India at this time a number of sects began to spring up that in certain cases had unusual interpretations of the accepted beliefs of the time and region, but this is a topic for another blog. To the west, in Greece, poets and tyrants flourished along with the beginnings of Greek science and philosophy. These will all be spoken of in later blogs but this should give a rough idea of the state of the world at this point.

Pyramids of the royal family of Kush in Nuri

At the beginning of this time period the region was dominated by four mighty kingdoms. Egypt was ruled by the Pharaoh Apries, Lydia was ruled by Alyattes II, Babylon was ruled by Nebuchadnezzar II and Media by Astyages. Some smaller kingdoms, such as Ammon, Elam, or Persia, existed at the peripheries of these states, but were not truly independent. Kush existed to the south of Egypt, but is less well known in this time period than in the earlier centuries. To the west the Phoenicians and Greeks traded in the Mediterranean Sea. To the north lay the Scythian tribes, to the south the Arabian Desert with the kingdom of Saba flourishing in present-day Yemen. To the east of the Kingdom of the Medes lay other Iranian tribes and the exact extent of the Median power is not known to historians.

In  the last post I said that there was not much that could be said exactly for the year 575, or for that matter for the years between 579-575, or for 574-573 either, so I will mention a few of the things that were mentioned in the last blog. Firstly, the house of Egibi. These were a family in Babylonia who became extremely wealthy from commercial activities. They bought land and slaves and financed certain aspects of the Neo-Babylonian military. They gave loans for people to buy and sell and facilitated trade. They gave their slaves considerable leeway to carry out their own businesses and were the dominant force in commercial activities at this time. They are sometimes referred to as bankers but this is an overstatement. While they did give loans at 20% interest they were not primarily a banking establishment, although they were the closest thing to it at that time. Some older scholarly literature refers to them as Jewish but it is almost certain that the Egibi family were Babylonian rather than Jewish. They would dominate trade for over a century, from about 600-480 and now seemed as good a time as any to mention them.

Painting "By the waters of Babylon"
by Arthur Hacker

Another thing that is worth talking about is the literature that was being created by the exiled Jews in Babylonia. Lament songs were created that kept alive Jewish culture and have inspired works up until the present day. While many of the Psalms predate this and many postdate it I thought that 137th Psalm was a good example of them and thought that I would mention it here.

By the rivers of Babylon we sat and wept when we remembered Zion. There on the poplars we hung our harps, for there our captors asked us for songs, our tormentors demanded songs of joy; they said,
“Sing us one of the songs of Zion!” How can we sing the songs of the Lord while in a foreign land? If I forget you, Jerusalem, may my right hand forget its skill. 
Psalm 137:1-5 

Lastly, around this time Nebuchadnezzar was doubtless expanding his empire and strengthening the frontiers, but we have no documentation of this. The Egyptian, Hebrew, Greek and Babylonian sources are all silent for these years, insofar as I can tell. However, we do know that Nebuchadnezzar embarked on a huge building program to make Babylon the strongest and most beautiful city in the world. To this end he surrounded Babylon with a vast system of walls, possibly the largest that had yet been built on earth and great ceremonial gates. The walls were listed in the first list of the wonders of the world. The greatest of the gates was the Ishtar Gate, which was connected to the processional way that the kings and statues of the gods would follow on state occasions.

The author by the gates of Babylon

The gate itself was a huge affair of blue glazed bricks, adorned with lions, bulls and dragons. Nebuchadnezzar had an inscription carved to highlight his great creation and the gate is the quintessential artefact of the Neo-Babylonian Empire. The gate survived relatively intact throughout the millennia and sections of it can be seen in the Louvre and in Istanbul. The majority of it however was shipped over to Berlin and a nearly full reconstruction can be seen in the Pergamon Museum in Berlin.

Nebuchadnezzar, King of Babylon, the faithful prince appointed by the will of Marduk, the highest of princely princes, beloved of Nabu, of prudent counsel, who has learned to embrace wisdom, who fathomed their divine being and reveres their majesty, the untiring governor, who always takes to heart the care of the cult of Esagila and Ezida and is constantly concerned with the well-being of Babylon and Borsippa, the wise, the humble, the caretaker of Esagila and Ezida, the firstborn son of Nabopolassar, the King of Babylon. Both gate entrances of Imgur-Ellil and Nemetti-Ellil —following the filling of the street from Babylon—had become increasingly lower. Therefore, I pulled down these gates and laid their foundations at the water-table with asphalt and bricks and had them made of bricks with blue stone on which wonderful bulls and dragons were depicted. I covered their roofs by laying majestic cedars length-wise over them. I hung doors of cedar adorned with bronze at all the gate openings. I placed wild bulls and ferocious dragons in the gateways and thus adorned them with luxurious splendor so that people might gaze on them in wonder. 
Ishtar Gate dedication 

Sphinx of Apries

There is not much that can be said for the year 574. During the year 573 I have come across some sources saying that the siege of Tyre ended. This is a confused episode that shows the state of the sources. It is clear that the Phoenicians had been involved with the revolts and wars in the region and that the Babylonians would try and curb this. A number of Greek authors recount that there was a thirteen year siege of Tyre by the Babylonians. This probably happened, but it’s unclear when and if the siege was continuous. As Tyre was at least partly on an island besieging it would seem very pointless, but this is what the sources say. The Babylonian chronicles might have shed light on it if there were any for this period, but there aren’t, so we have to rely on the Greek texts. I believe that the siege may have ended around this date ,but a lot of other dates are plausible. The siege ended with a negotiated surrender that saw the Tyrians submit to Nebuchadnezzar, but their city was not looted nor their king slain.

Diocles also, in the second book of his Accounts of Persia, mentions this king; as does Philostrates in his Accounts both of India and of Phoenicia, say, that this king besieged Tyre thirteen years, while at the same time Ethbaal reigned at Tyre. 
Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, 11.1 

In the year 572 there is not much that can be said, bar the final prophecies of Ezekiel according to Ezekiel’s own internal dating system. I may have mistaken the year and it may be 573, but it is around this time. The final vision is a vision of an idealised temple in Jerusalem and a land restored to the people of Judah (in a somewhat geometrical fashion). This means that, if this dating is correct, that there is no Hebrew record of the years of exile. There are some stories within the book of Daniel, but these are not historically verifiable with our current knowledge and do not affect the diaspora as a whole, but are more to do with the protagonists of the book of Daniel.

Medieval illustration of Ezekiel

In the twenty-fifth year of our exile, at the beginning of the year, on the tenth of the month, in the fourteenth year after the fall of the city—on that very day the hand of the Lord was on me and he took me there. In visions of God he took me to the land of Israel and set me on a very high mountain, on whose south side were some buildings that looked like a city. He took me there, and I saw a man whose appearance was like bronze; he was standing in the gateway with a linen cord and a measuring rod in his hand. The man said to me, “Son of man, look carefully and listen closely and pay attention to everything I am going to show you, for that is why you have been brought here. Tell the people of Israel everything you see.” 
Ezekiel 40:1-4

According to later Armenian legends the king Orontes Sakavakyats began to rule in Armenia around the year 570. This legend should be treated with considerable scepticism as the region was under the dominance of the Medes at the time but it is quite possible that a local ruler was allowed to act as a subordinate ruler of the province, particularly one so mountainous as the Armenian region. Whether or not Orontes Sakavakyats truly existed or was in fact a king, it is fair to say that there was a later dynasty, the Orontids, who ruled the region as governors over the next few centuries.

Stele of Apries mounted on
Bernini's elephant

Also around 570, Apries, the Pharaoh of Egypt, sent a large invasion force to try and crush the Greek kingdom of Cyrene, in present-day Libya. The invasion was a failure and seems to have failed badly. Perhaps the soldiers felt that they had been led into the desert to die at the hands of their foes or perhaps they feared punishment on returning to Egypt. Either way, they rose in rebellion against the Pharaoh.

The armies of the Pharaoh were composed of two sections. The native Egyptian forces, which was by far the larger part of the army, and some elite, heavy-armed mercenary forces, composed mainly of Greeks and Carians. Each section of the army had its own commander, so Apries sent the commander of the Egyptian forces, a general named Ahmose, to quell the rebellion. Ahmose went to the troops who promptly proclaimed him the new king. Ahmose returned to Memphis and a battle was fought against the mercenary troops who remained loyal to Apries. Apries possibly survived the battle and probably fled across the Sinai, where he tried to enlist Babylonian help in regaining his kingdom.

This entire episode is almost entirely taken from the writings of Herodotus. It is in some ways extremely annoying just how reliant we are on Herodotus. If we did not have his Histories we would lose a huge amount of information about this century.

Apries sent a great expedition against Cyrene which suffered a great defeat. The Egyptians blamed him for this and rebelled against him; for they thought that Apries had knowingly sent his men to their doom, so that after their death his rule over the rest of the Egyptians would be strengthened. Bitterly angered by this, those who returned home and the friends of the slain rose against him. Apries sent Amasis to dissuade them, when he heard of this. Amasis met the Egyptians and he exhorted them to desist; but as he spoke an Egyptian put a helmet on his head from behind, saying it was the token of royalty. 
Herodotus Histories 2,161 ff 

Salvador Dali painting showing the Stele of
Apries mounted on Bernini's elephant

There is a strange little postscript to the reign of Apries. During his reign he had commissioned a small obelisk, which I believe was placed in Sais. This obelisk was later taken to Rome and eventually abandoned as Rome fell into disrepair. The obelisk was recovered during excavations in the 1600’s and was incorporated into a sculpture by Bernini called Elephant and Obelisk, where a Renaissance statue of an elephant acts as a base for the obelisk, which seems to grow from its back. It is exhibited in Rome to this day, sitting near the Pantheon, and has been featured in a number of Salvador Dali’s artworks. I have always found this combination of history, sculpture and art to be quite fascinating and any travellers to Rome should take a little time to see it if they can.

For the year 569 not much happened to my knowledge. In the year 568 or 567 it seems that the Babylonians attacked Egypt. Possibly this was done at the behest of the ousted Pharaoh Apries. The invasion probably reached the edges of Egypt, but probably did not get much further and Apries seems to have been captured and probably killed.

Broken head of a statue of Amasis

The sources for this are very confused. The Babylonian sources are not extant for this time. The Greek sources are much later and are dependent on the Egyptian priests who may have not wished to speak of defeats. The Hebrew sources themselves are silent. However, there are Hebrew prophecies from Jeremiah and Ezekiel that speak of Nebuchadnezzar conquering Egypt. It is not clear when these were written, but if these prophecies were entirely inaccurate it is likely that the Hebrews would have abandoned the books of Jeremiah and Ezekiel.  So, the existence of these prophecies is not a proof that the Babylonians conquered Egypt, but it should make us suspect that something happened which was viewed as fulfilling this. However, the language used by Ezekiel in particular should not be viewed as being exactly literal. Ezekiel refers to the land of Egypt lying desolate for 40 years. This did not happen and is just poetic imagery for a great destruction. But the sources are too scant to really tell us much here. Babylon could have invaded Egypt ten times and we would have no real data on it.

Then say to them, ‘This is what the LORD Almighty, the God of Israel, says: I will send for my servant Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon, and I will set his throne over these stones I have buried here (in the city of Tahpanhes); he will spread his royal canopy above them. He will come and attack Egypt, bringing death to those destined for death, captivity to those destined for captivity, and the sword to those destined for the sword. He will set fire to the temples of the gods of Egypt; he will burn their temples and take their gods captive.
Jeremiah 43:10-12

I suspect there is a solution to the problem. Our main source for the period is Herodotus, whose main sources were the Egyptian priests. Herodotus records a later invasion by Cambyses, a Persian monarch, whose reason for invading was because he had married a daughter of Apries. Now the explanation that Herodotus gives for the marriage alliance is a rather silly one, so a marriage alliance with the Babylonians under Nebuchadnezzar makes more sense. Herodotus also refers to Cambyses slaying the Apis bull, (a bull that was sacred to the Egyptians). However, inscriptions from this time show that Herodotus is wrong about this. I suspect that Herodotus is confusing parts of the accounts of an earlier invasion by Nebuchadnezzar with the later invasion of Cambyses. But this is all speculation on my part.

Sculpture of the goddess Neith

Also around this time, Aramatle-qo of Kush may have come to the throne. The dates are confused here, as I have also seen dates suggesting that Aramatle-qo came to the throne in 580, but these are the dates that I have seen. Not enough research has been done on the kingdom of Kush I fear.

For the years 566-563 it is hard to find sources of anything that happened. So I will mention some general developments around this time. Firstly, in Egypt, in the city of Sais that was the capital of the Twenty-Sixth Dynasty, there had been a revival in the cult of the goddess Neith. She was a creator goddess who also was a sky goddess of battle, hunting and wisdom. She also was associated with many of the Egyptian rites of the dead. She was an ancient goddess, whose cult had been very important in the early dynastic periods in Lower Egypt but whose worship had been obscured by the primacy of the cult of Amun based in Thebes. The Saite rulers were based in Lower Egypt and promoted her worship, building large temples in Sais. This was partly a revival of ancient traditions, but also shows that religion in the ancient world was not static. The Greek travellers and mercenaries associated Neith with Athena.

First in Sais he (Amasis) built and completed for Athene a temple-gateway which is a great marvel, and he far surpassed herein all who had done the like before, both in regard to height and greatness, so large are the stones and of such quality.
Herodotus, Histories 2,176

Also around this time the outer walls of Babylon were completed. Not content with building giant fortifications for his capital city, which was the largest city in the world at the time, Nebuchadnezzar had constructed a series of fortifications that encircled his kingdom to the north and east. The northern wall stretched from Opis to Sippar, from the Tigris to the Euphrates. Later Greek writers spoke of these as being 20 feet wide and 100 feet high.

The modern restoration of the Processional Way
in Babylon

After travelling three stages they reached the so called wall of Media, and passed within it. It was built of baked bricks, laid in asphalt, and was twenty feet wide and a hundred feet high; its length was said to be twenty parasangs (slightly over 100km), and it is not far distant from Babylon.
Xenophon Anabasis 2.4.12

There are some indications from the Babylonian inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar that these walls were built, but the sheer scale of the walls meant that these were probably not completed until very late in the reign of the king. It is these walls, as well of the walls of the city of Babylon itself, which were viewed as wonders of the world by the later Greeks. The reason for building the walls must have been fear of invasion by the Medes. There is no evidence for the Babylonians and the Medes going to war at this time, but the fragmentary nature of the sources means that there could have been hostility and even war between the two empires around this time and we would be unaware of it.

I made a strong earth dam over a distance of 5 beru above Upu as far as Sippar, from the bank of the Tigris to the bank of the Euphrates, and I surrounded the city with mighty waters for a distance of 20 beru like the expanse of the sea. In order that the strong earth dam should not be carried away by the battering of a flood of furious waters, I constructed its banks with bitumen and baked brick. I built on their neck a strong wall as high as a mountain. I turned Babylon into a life-preserving mountain refuge for the people…
Brisa Inscriptions of Nebuchadnezzar II

Illustration by William Blake of the madness
of Nebuchadnezzar

Around the year 562 Nebuchadnezzar II of Babylon died. He was in many ways the most powerful king of his age. His father had helped destroy Assyria and he himself had beaten the Egyptian armies and established his kingdom as the wealthiest and possibly the most powerful in the world at the time. His building works have nearly all crumbled into dust, but the few that remain are wondrous. I myself have seen the Ishtar Gate that was transported to Berlin and it is a magnificent piece. But his most lasting cultural legacy is as the stereotypically evil monarch who destroyed Jerusalem and deported the Jews to Babylon. It is for this that Babylon is referred to in Judeo-Christian writings and songs as the embodiment of all of the evil in the world. He is referenced in the Biblical writings of Kings, Chronicles, Jeremiah, Ezekiel and Daniel.

In the book of Daniel, Nebuchadnezzar is portrayed as a benevolent tyrant, whose whimsy would turn to anger without warning, and who was much given to the interpretation of dreams. The last reference to Nebuchadnezzar in this book is of an episode of seven years madness, where the king refused to honour the God of Heaven and was driven out to live as a beast in the wilderness for seven years. Now, some have interpreted this as a reference to the later king Nabonidus. This is quite plausible as there were other writings about a seven year period of madness of Nabonidus in the Jewish tradition. However, some have interpreted a cuneiform document that opens with the fragmentary words that Nebuchadnezzar “considered his life appeared of no value to him” to refer to a period of madness where his son Amel-Marduk became a temporary regent. Without more and better sources it is impossible to know if this tradition is reliable.

Medieval illustration of
the dream of Nebuchadnezzar

Apart from the Biblical cultural legacy of Nebuchadnezzar, he is best remembered for building the Hanging Gardens of Babylon. No traces of these have ever been found, nor are they mentioned by any extant Babylonian inscription, nor are they mentioned by Herodotus. It is possible that they were a misplaced memory of the gardens of Nineveh that had been built by Sennacherib. But all of this is not well known.

Now in this palace he erected very high walks, supported by stone pillars: and by planting what was called a pensile paradise; and replenishing it with all sorts of trees, he rendered the prospect an exact resemblance of a mountainous country. This he did to please his Queen: because she had been brought up in Media, and was fond of a mountainous situation.
Berossus’ Babyloniaca, quoted by Josephus in Contra Apion, Book I

With the mighty Nebuchadnezzar dead, his son Amel-Marduk took the throne. We have some small inscriptions from his reign, but we know very little about this king. We do know that he seems to have considered restoring the exiles of Judah, or at least changing their status. He restored the exiled king Jehoachin to favour and allowed him to sit at the royal table and receive allowances. This is mentioned in the Biblical books of Jeremiah and Kings and in both cases is thought to be so important that it is the last note in both books. Interestingly we have found Babylonian rations tablets that confirm that this detail and speak of the King of Judah being given rations.

One of the Jehoiachin Tablets

In the thirty-seventh year of the exile of Jehoiachin king of Judah, in the year Amel-Marduk became king of Babylon, on the twenty-fifth day of the twelfth month, he released Jehoiachin king of Judah and freed him from prison. He spoke kindly to him and gave him a seat of honour higher than those of the other kings who were with him in Babylon. So Jehoiachin put aside his prison clothes and for the rest of his life ate regularly at the king’s table. Day by day the king of Babylon gave Jehoiachin a regular allowance as long as he lived, till the day of his death.
Jeremiah 52:31-34

1.5 sila (oil) for three carpenters from Arvad, 1/2 apiece,
11.5 sila for eight woodworkers from Byblos, . . .
3.5 sila for seven Greek craftsman, 1/2 sila apiece,
0.5 sila to the carpenter, Nabuetir,
10 sila to Ia-ku-u-ki-nu (Jehoachin), the king of Judah’s son,
2.5 sila for the five sons of the Judean king.
One of the Ration Tablets of Jehoiachin

Around the year 561, but possibly considerably earlier, the Egyptian Pharaoh Amasis conquered Cyprus, which was an important source of copper for the entire region. If Amasis was able to project power across the sea, he must have had a considerable navy, either of his own or through mercenaries or allies.

The vast remains of the tomb of Alyattes

Around the year 560 Alyattes of Lydia died. He had made Lydia stronger than ever before and his armies and wealth were famous. Like Nebuchadnezzar however we know far less than we would like about him and apart from a few Greek tales preserved in Herodotus, we can say very little about him.
One thing that can be said however, is that Alyattes built one of the largest tombs in history for himself. The Lydian kings and nobility were buried in tumuli outside their capital city of Sardis. Even today these mounds can be seen like little hills dotting the plain, silhouetted against the sky and distant mountains. Alyattes’ funeral mound is by far the largest.

Its base was originally 360 metres in diameter and 61 metres in height. By comparison the sides of the Great Pyramid are 230 metres and it is 147 metres in height. Thus the tomb of Alyattes was not the largest building in the world, but it was certainly one of the largest buildings. It has since been excavated but it had been looted in antiquity. The wealth of the Lydian monarchs, the possible inventors of currency, was legendary and it is hard to imagine what his tomb furnishings must have been. The tomb was topped with stone phalli, which may have had a religious significance. Herodotus characteristically tells a tale that says that the tomb was built mainly by prostitutes and that they left their sign atop it as a marker. This is unlikely. If one is in western Turkey it might be interesting to visit the forgotten marvel; the greatest tomb of a half-remembered kingdom.

Coin of Alyattes of Lydia

In Lydia is the tomb of Alyattes, the father of Croesus, the base of which is made of great stones and the rest of it of mounded earth. It was built by the men of the market and the craftsmen and the prostitutes. There survived until my time five corner-stones set on the top of the tomb, and in these was cut the record of the work done by each group: and measurement showed that the prostitutes' share of the work was the greatest.
Herodotus, Histories 1:93

Coin of Croesus of Lydia

Alyattes’ son Croesus succeeded him and seems to have gone to war with Ephesus and with the Greek cities of Ionia. Croesus would become famous for his vast wealth and in English the phrase “Rich as Croesus” was used to describe those who had huge fortunes.

In the year 560 Amel-Marduk, son of Nebuchadnezzar and king of Babylon, was killed by Nergal-Sharezer, who was a high-ranking official who had married into the royal family. Berossus records that Amel-Marduk was unpopular. If Amel-Marduk had ever truly planned to restore the Jews to Judah, he did not reign long enough to accomplish this, or much of anything else for that matter.

His son Eveilmaradouchos (Amel-Marduk) became master of the kingdom. Because he managed affairs in a lawless and outrageous fashion he was plotted against and killed by Neriglisaros (Nergal-Sharezer), his sister's husband. He was king for two years.
Berossus’ Babyloniaca, 

Possible tomb of Cambyses I (possibly not)

Probably around the year 559 Cambyses I, a minor king who ruled the Persian tribes, died. The Persian tribes were culturally and politically linked to the more powerful Medes and the daughter of the Median King, Mandane, daughter of Astyages, had been married to Cambyses I. Their son, Cyrus II became king of Persia. There are some sources however that suggest that Cambyses I died later, around 551.

I have no sources for any events happening in 558. In 557 however the sources very briefly flare to life. The Babylonian chronicles have been silent since 593. This is not because they are not recording anything, but merely because we have found no documents. A fragment of a much larger chronicle was found that spoke of a military campaign by Neriglissar (Nergal-Sharezer) King of Babylon. This chronicle is referred to as the Chronicle of Neriglissar and is much more detailed than Babylonian chronicles normally are. This chronicle speaks of a campaign by the Babylonian king against Appuashu, a king of Cilicia. Appuashu is possibly the same king Synennesis mentioned by Herodotus, who had helped negotiate peace between the Lydians and Medes in 585, but it is more likely to have been a descendent. This shows that the Babylonians were still powerful and that their kings were engaging in campaigns at the outer reaches of their empire.

The third year (557/556): on the Nth day of the month [...], Appuashu, the king of Pirindu, mustered a large army and set out to plunder and sack Syria. Neriglissar mustered his army and marched to Hume [Cilicia] to oppose him. Before his arrival Appuashu placed the army and cavalry which he had organized in a mountain valley ambush. When Neriglissar reached them he inflicted a defeat upon them and conquered the large army. The army and numerous horses he captured.
Neriglissar Chronicle (ABC6) 

It is probable that around the year 557 the Ionian Greek cities, on the west coast of what is now Turkey, became subject to the Lydian King Croesus. Croesus in turn became a great patron of Greek culture and regularly enquired of, and sent gifts to, the Oracle at Delphi, as his father Alyattes had done before him. The Greek city states were still mostly independent and still continued to flourish at this time.

In 556 Nergal-Sharezer, King of Babylon, died. He had been a high official of the Babylonian court for many years, partaking in the siege of Jerusalem and marrying the daughter of Nebuchadnezzar before he usurped the throne from Amel-Marduk. He had campaigned in Cilicia the year before and had undertaken great building projects, in emulation of Nebuchadnezzar. He left behind a young son, Labashi-Marduk who reigned for only nine months (perhaps less) before being assassinated in a palace conspiracy. The conspirators placed one of their number, Nabonidus, on the throne of Babylon. The entire episode sounds strangely like Herodotus’ account of the accession of Darius, which again leads me to suspect that some details of the Neo-Babylonian and the Persian empires have got mixed up in Herodotus’ work.

Stele of Nabonidus

Laborosoarchodos (Labashi-Marduk), the son of Neriglisaros (Neriglissar), who was only a child, was master of the kingdom for nine months. Because his wickedness became apparent in many ways he was plotted against and brutally killed by his friends. After he had been killed, the plotters met and jointly conferred the kingdom on Nabonnedos (Nabonidus), a Babylonian and a member of the conspiracy
Berossus, Babyloniaca 

Nabonidus was not from an important family and may not even have been Babylonian. His mother was from Harran, the city sacred to the moon god Sin in northern Syria. His mother, Adad-Guppi, was probably connected with the temple establishment and thus may have been Assyrian. Nabonidus writes in a later inscription that he was insignificant and not of royal blood. His accession to the throne must have seemed like divine destiny. Thus he came to believe that the Moon-God Sin had chosen him.

Sin, lord of the gods and goddesses, dwellers of the heavens, came from the heavens in front of me, Nabonidus king of Babylon. I, Nabonidus, the lonely one, who have not the honour of being somebody, and kingship is not within me, but the gods and goddesses prayed for me, and Sin called me to the kingship.
The Harran Inscription of Nabonidus

Pillar inscribed with
Nabonidus' proclamations

In the year 556 another Babylonian chronicle, referred to as the Nabonidus Chronicle, begins and gives some fragmentary details about the doings of the king and country over the next 17-18 years. The chronicle suggests that there was a military campaign fought that year, but the tablet is damaged and it is not clear against whom the campaign was fought.

In 555 Nabonidus announced his intention to rebuild the sanctuaries of the land. This was phrased as a holy duty endorsed by Marduk. Numerous temples had been ruined when the Assyrian Empire was destroyed, such as the temple at Uruk, but Nabonidus was primarily interested in the Ehulhul Temple of Sin in Harran. It is possible that the Babylonians may not have controlled Harran at this time, but if they did not, Nabonidus certainly reconquered that region for them. In that year the king and the army campaigned against Cilicia and the route to Cilicia would have taken the Babylonian troops near to Harran.

Around this time Aramatle-qo, king of Kush, died and was succeeded by Malonaqen. Not much is known about the doings of the kings of Kush at this period.

I am unsure what was happening in the world in the year 554, save that the Babylonian army may have been near Hamath in Syria. Now is as good a time as any to speak of the unusual inscriptions of Nabonidus about archaeology. I had said that Nabonidus had wished to restore the temples of the gods. As these temples were being restored, artefacts were brought to light from previous kings. These artefacts were evaluated by the new king and restored to their supposed original position. Nabonidus has sometimes been referred to as the first archaeologist because of this. But it’s more likely that this was part of a Mesopotamian royal tradition of restoring items to their original places; that Nabonidus was establishing his connections to previous kings, despite being a usurper. There are parallels to Nabonidus’ inscriptions in the writings of Ashurbanipal. But it is certainly an interesting window into how the people of this time viewed their past.

Nabonidus was helped in the study of antiquity by his daughter, Bel-Shalti-Nanna, also known as Ennigaldi-Nanna. His daughter had been placed in charge of a school for priestesses, but also assisted with the creation of a museum in Ur. Later, around the year 547, she was made High Priestess in Ur. This paralleled in certain ways the career of the famed priestess Enheduanna, the daughter of Sargon of Akkad. Nabonidus must have been aware of this and may have placed his daughter in this position for this reason.

I removed (the debris of) that temple, sought out its original foundation, and dug down eighteen cubits deep, and the foundation of Narām-Sîn, the son of Sargon (of Akkad), which for 3,200 years no king who came before me had seen
Inscription of Nabonidus

In the year 553 Nabonidus seems to have made an expedition to attack Cilicia. Later in the year he set off on an expedition from Babylon to attack the kingdom of Edom and then to visit or attack the city of Tayma in northern Arabia. It is really unclear why. There seems to have been some form of suffering in Babylonia at the time, probably a plague. There is a section from the Nabonidus chronicle that refers to fruit being brought to Babylon from the Amanus Mountains and someone being ill, but recovering. Perhaps Nabonidus had caught, but recovered from, a plague, took it as an omen and left the city?

Inscription of Nabonidus

Nabonidus was also a usurper, so he may have feared a palace conspiracy or an uprising. But he was also obsessed with dreams and with the fact that the Moon-God Sin had raised him to the kingship. Perhaps there was a religious imperative to visit the oasis city of Tayma? Previously Assyrian kings had fought campaigns against the Arab tribes who lived in the deserts between the Babylon and the Levant. Perhaps Nabonidus wanted to expand his power into these deserts and control the trade routes that went from Saba (present-day Yemen) into Syria? It is impossible to know what all motivations Nabonidus had.

The Babylonian elites must have been furious. Not only was their new king proclaiming himself the champion of a different god than Marduk, he was abandoning the royal city for an expedition into the remote wastes. With the king gone, the New Year Akitu Festival could not be celebrated. The largest city in the world had been spurned in favour of an oasis in the desert. The priests must have thought that he was insane or impious or both. A later Hebrew tradition preserved in the Dead Sea Scrolls tells that Nabonidus went insane and was in Tayma for seven years and some have supposed that that the madness of Nebuchadnezzar in Daniel is telling of the same tale. We have so few documents from this period that it is possible but with a decision this strange, almost any hypothesis might be true.

Well at Tayma, supposedly originally dug by Nabonidus

Words of the prayer, said by Nabonidus, king of Babylonia, [the great] king, [when afflicted] with an ulcer on command of the most high God in Tayma: ["I, Nabonidus,] was afflicted [with an evil ulcer] for seven years, and far from [men] I [was driven, until I prayed to the most high God.] And an exorcist pardoned my sins. He was a Jew from [among the children of the exile of Judah, and said:] "Recount this in writing to glorify and exalt the name of [the most high God."Then I wrote this:] "When I was afflicted for seven years [by the most high God] with an evil ulcer during my stay at Tayma,...
Opening lines of the Prayer of Nabonidus, from the writings in the Dead Sea Scrolls

Nabonidus stayed in Tayma for the next ten years. Tayma was a relatively large city anyway and Nabonidus may have tried to extend it. It is not proven however that he was trying to build a rival city to Babylon, as is sometimes stated. He also visited a number of cities in the region, including Dedan and going as far as Yatribu, (later known as Yathrib, the name of which would eventually be changed to Medina). If this was a military conquest, Nabonidus had pushed further to the southwest than any recorded Mesopotamian monarch before him, but the land he was conquering was all desert.
If this was a pilgrimage it is hard to know what he was searching for.

There was a temple in Tayma to an obscure Aramean god called Salm and it seems that this was patronised by Nabonidus. Interestingly this temple had hereditary priests who seem to have had connections to Egypt, but it is hard to know what, if anything, this had to do with the religious beliefs of Nabonidus. A large well and some palace buildings may date from this time or may have been made by later rulers of the region.

Stela of Salmshezub
from Tayma

Neither gods nor men shall remove Ṣalmšēzeb, the son of Petosiris, from this house nor his descendants or his name as priests in this house forever
Slightly later inscription of Salmshezeb, priest of Salm in Tayma

While Nabonidus pursued his goals in the desert lands, his son Belshazzar ruled Babylon as his regent. All the while the hatred and resentment of the priests of Marduk grew against him.

But the sons of Babylon, Borsippa, Nippur, Ur, Uruk, Larsa, the administrators and inhabitants of the Babylonian cities, acted wickedly and offended his divinity, they knew not the terrible wrath of the Moon-god, king of the gods. They disregarded his rituals and dedicated themselves to impious and disloyal discourses. Like dogs, they devoured one another, they brought fever and famine in the midst of them. He (Sin) decimated the people in the land, he made me leave my city of Babylon, and led me to Tayma, Dadanu, Padakku, Hibra, Yadihu, as far as Yatribu. Ten years I went about amongst them, and did not enter my city Babylon.
Harran Inscription of Nabonidus

Nabonidus

The exact dates are not clear but around 553/552 the Persians under their king Cyrus II, revolted against the Median Empire. King Astyages of the Medes sent a force, probably under his general Harpagus, to quell the rebellion. Astyages was unpopular with his nobility and troops and the army of the Medes defected to join the rebellion of Cyrus. Cyrus of course was not a foreign foe of the Medes. He was directly related to the royal family, as his mother had been a princess of the Medes, making Cyrus a grandson of Astyages, and giving him a claim to the throne.

The Persians had long been discontent that the Medes ruled them, and now having got a champion they were glad to win their freedom. But when Astyages heard that Cyrus was about this business, he sent a messenger to summon him; Cyrus told the messenger to take back word that Astyages would see him sooner than he liked. Hearing this, Astyages armed all his Medes, and was distracted by Providence so that he forgot what he had done to Harpagus, and appointed him to command the army. So when the Medes marched out and engaged with the Persians, those who were not in on the plan fought, while others deserted to the enemy, and most were deliberate cowards and ran.
Herodotus, Histories, 1:128

Renaissance painting depicting Astyages
decreeing that the infant Cyrus should be slain

It is worth mentioning some of the legends about the birth of Cyrus. Supposedly the princess Mandane was given in marriage to a minor king of an allied tribe because Astyages had two dreams about his daughter. Firstly that a she urinated until all of Asia flooded and secondly that a plant grew from her womb to cover his empire. This was supposedly interpreted that Mandane would bear a child who would dominate the known world, so when she gave birth, her child, Cyrus, was given to a trusted minister called Harpagus who was to kill him. Harpagus instead gave the child to some shepherds. Eventually the child was found and recognised and Astyages accepted him, but then killed the children of Harpagus and secretly fed them to Harpagus. Harpagus then, understandably, bore Astyages a grudge and when Cyrus eventually revolted Harpagus joined him and orchestrated the downfall of Astyages.

Harpagus told the story straight, while Astyages, hiding the anger that he felt against him for what had been done, first repeated the story again to Harpagus exactly as he had heard it from the cowherd, then, after repeating it, ended by saying that the boy was alive and that the matter had turned out well.
Herodotus, Histories, 1:119

Sphinx with the head of Amasis

This story is all very nice and rather interesting but it is probably not true. It is too close to the stories of the childhood of other remarkable leaders, such as Sargon of Akkad or Moses. It was probably felt that Cyrus’ career was so extraordinary that his early life should have been extraordinary as well. There were other stories that Cyrus had been raised by dogs, similar to the legendary suckling of Romulus and Remus by a wolf. The truth of the matter is that we do not know, but we do not have to accept the stories of Herodotus or Xenophon uncritically. Even Herodotus is keen to note that he had heard other versions of this story.

I mean then to be guided in what I write by some of the Persians who desire not to magnify the story of Cyrus but to tell the truth, though there are no less than three other accounts of Cyrus which I could give.
Herodotus, Histories, 1:95

In the year 551 there were probably further battles between the Medes and Persians. One such battle is what is referred to as the Battle of the Persian Border, referring to a battle where the Medes won a somewhat Pyrrhic victory against the Persians and forced them to retreat to their capital. Supposedly during this battle, Cyrus’ father was captured by the Medes and died almost immediately from his wounds. I am somewhat sceptical of this, as this entire battle is only known from the writings of Nicolaus of Damascus, who was writing over five centuries later. It’s quite probable that some battles occurred, but they probably didn’t resemble Nicolaus’ account.

Apis bull pendant from the time of Amasis

In the year 550 Astyages had invaded Persian territory hoping to crush the rebellion of Cyrus once and for all. Herodotus had earlier recounted that the Median general Harpagus had gone over to the Persians and now recounts that the Persians defeated the Medes. However the Babylonian chronicle of Nabonidus recounts that the Medes deserted Astyages and handed over their unpopular king to Cyrus. It’s unclear if Herodotus and the Babylonian writers are referring to the same event, but it would be better to trust the Babylonians here, as their account is written much closer to the events, although not without its own issues. The chronicle then recounts that Cyrus marched on the Median capital Ecbatana and looted it.

The sixth year: Astyages mustered his army and marched against Cyrus, king of Anshan, for conquest … The army rebelled against Astyages and he was taken prisoner. They handed him over to Cyrus. … Cyrus marched to Ecbatana, the royal city.
Nabonidus Chronicle (ABC7)

Despite the looting of Ecbatana the defeated Medes seem to have been treated well. Many Median aristocrats must have deserted to him, on the evidence of both Herodotus and the Babylonians, and these must have been rewarded. Cyrus had taken control of a much larger empire than his previous kingdom and had done so because he had been more popular than the previous monarch. To maintain his rule he would have to tread lightly and carefully. Cyrus goes down in history as a tolerant and just monarch who allowed his subjects every possible advantage and freedom. This was probably why he was so popular with the nobility of his enemies, but also was a wise policy considering the circumstances of his rule. Perhaps I am too cynical, but I cannot help but feel that Cyrus had no choice but to be tolerant.

There is a matter that I have wanted to write about for some time but have never found the right place for it. It must however be written about now, as this is the last period where it might be. This is the matter of the religion of the Persians. The Persian religion as it is known to us from antiquity is Zoroastrianism. However Zoroastrianism, like Christianity, Buddhism, or Judaism, has looked different at different times. Much of what we know of Zoroastrianism comes from the Sassanid Persian period, over seven centuries later and their sacred book, the Avesta, was compiled in Sassanid times.

Much later depiction of Zoroaster

Thus spake Ahura Mazda):
"The one who alone has hearkened to my precepts 
        is known as Zarathushtra Spitama; 
For his Creator and for Truth he wishes to announce 
        the Holy Message, 
Wherefore shall I bestow on him the gift of eloquent speech."
Avesta: Ahunuvaiti Gatha: Yasna 29

Even the date of their prophet Zoroaster is in great doubt. The Greeks believed that he lived at an absurdly early date, perhaps about 6000BC. This is definitely incorrect. Zoroaster is supposed to have composed some religious writings, called the Gathas. The language of the Gathas is similar to that of the Rig Veda, but linguistic analysis would suggest that it is slightly later. So, if the assumption that the Rig Veda is mostly composed before 1200BC is correct and the assumption that Zoroaster wrote the Gathas is correct, it would seem likely that Zoroaster would have lived around maybe 1000BC. Later Zoroastrian sources give a date in the mid 500’s BC, which is the latest possible date that it could be.

Ruins of Babylon

The issue is complicated by the fact that there is no concrete evidence of definite Zoroastrian practices evident before around the 520’s BC. Nor are there historical figures mentioned in the Zoroastrian texts who can be linked to known personages. The patron of Zoroaster is Vishtaspa, a tribal chieftain or king, who adopts the new religion. Some people have associated this person with a relative of Cyrus, who was better known in Greek as Hystaspes. Hystaspes was a close relative of Cyrus and, before Cyrus’ revolt, seems to have been an independent ruler of a small state under the suzerainty of the Medes. We know that the son of Hystaspes was a Zoroastrian, but we cannot tell if this Hystaspes is indeed the Vishtaspa of Zoroastrian belief.

Let them advance in thought, word, and deed 
Toward the satisfaction of Mazda with reverential worship, 
King Vishtaspa, Frashaoshtra, and the successors of 
        Zarathushtra Spitama.
May they teach all to keep to the established straight path, 
Announced by the spiritual preceptors, and ordained by Ahura,
Avesta: Vahishto-Ishti Gatha: Yasna 53

Ruins of Babylon

What we can say is that Zoroaster was born into an Iranian tribal world, one that had not been transformed into a large empire under the Persians. He probably lived to the east, possibly in Bactria or Sogdia (perhaps in present-day Tajikstan, Uzbekistan or Afghanistan). The religious beliefs of his contemporaries were probably similar to the beliefs described in the Vedas and probably with similar gods, although we cannot be entirely sure of this. The god Mithra and Mitra were pretty much the same god in both Iranian and Indian religions, but we cannot speak with certainty for the others.

Zoroaster came to believe that there was a single good god, who was called Ahura Mazda, meaning Wise Spirit. This god was opposed by an evil spirit, Angra Mainyu (Hostile Spirit). Ahura Mazda symbolised Truth and Angra Mainyu symbolised the Lie. This has sometimes been referred to as the first monotheism or the first dualism, but the actual system is not really either monotheist or dualist.

The Ishtar Gate in the Pergamon Museum Berlin

There were a great many other actions that Zoroaster approved of, such as being kind to dogs, or slaying certain animals, like snakes, that were said to be followers of the Lie. There was a belief in an afterlife, where a follower of Ahura Mazda would cross the Chinvat Bridge (the rainbow, or possibly the Milky Way) and reach Paradise (which is itself a Persian word meaning “garden”).

There are many other beliefs that the Zoroastrians have, such as the towers of silence and the purity of fire. But these beliefs are not immediately evidence in the earliest Zoroastrian texts, so they will be dealt with at a later time.

So, in summary, Zoroaster probably founded the Zoroastrian religion at some point between 1000-550BC but there is no definite material evidence for it. Either he or someone else composed the oldest hymns in the Avesta, known as the Gathas. By linguistic evidence, another set of hymns, known as the Yashts, were composed between 600-500BC, so I am fairly sure that Zoroaster probably predates this period. But because I am not sure of any of this, I am giving the reader all of my uncertainty.

Dragon detail from the Ishtar Gate in the
Pergamon Museum Berlin

May Ahura Mazda be rejoiced! May Angra Mainyu be destroyed by those who do truly what is the foremost wish (of God).
I praise well-thought, well-spoken, and well-done thoughts, words, and deeds. I embrace all good thoughts, good words, and good deeds; I reject all evil thoughts, evil words, and evil deeds.
Avesta: Ohrmazd Yasht

And so the period draws to a close. In Egypt the Pharaoh Amasis has conquered Cyprus and is engaged in building projects in Sais. In Lydia King Croesus is famed for his wealth and has subdued the Greek states on the western coast of Asia Minor. In Babylon King Nabonidus has abandoned his capital to pursue religious reform and campaign in the south-western deserts. And in the largest change, Cyrus the king of the Persians has taken over the kingdom of the Medes. I will continue the story in the next few blogs.

Later illustration of the
Hanging Gardens of Babylon

Primary SourcesNeo-Babylonian Royal Inscriptions
Egyptians Texts
Ezekiel
Berossus’ Babyloniaca
Neriglissar Chronicle
The Harran Inscription of Nabonidus
Herodotus: The Histories
Prayer of Nabonidus
Verse Account of Nabonidus
Zoroastrian Texts
Avesta

Secondary Sources
Sardis Expedition
The Enemy Within: Internecine Conflict in the Second Kingdom of Kush
The Babylonian Walls
Nabonidus the Archaeologist?
The Pantheon of Tayma
Aramaic in Tayma

Related Blog Posts:
600-575BC in the Near East
575-550BC in Greece
550-525BC in the Near East