459-440BC in Rome

Portrait of Velia Velcha from the Tomb of the Orcus
(or Tomb of Orcus) in Tarquinia

This blog post will look at the years 459-440BC in Roman history, touching briefly on other parts of Italian history where possible. The primary source for the period is Livy, in his monumental work Ab Urbe Condita, which means "From the Foundation of the City". He wrote this in the time of Augustus, so it is much later than the events described. Other sources for this time include tiny fragments from Diodorus Siculus, who wrote about this time period and Rome, but about a generation or two earlier than Livy. Dionysius of Halicarnassus and some other historians contain some information about the period also. There are also some lists of the consuls and triumphs of the various years preserved in ancient inscriptions, such as the Fasti Capitolini and the Fasti Triumphales.

The reader should take the dates and the events with a pinch of salt. Dating was an inexact science and there are disagreements on interregnums and other events. Every date in this blog may be incorrect. Most dates for the Roman Republic follow Livy's dates, which may make the dates somewhat earlier than what they may have actually been. One should also remember that the Roman years fluctuated compared to our own, so an event that I have mentioned as happening in one year may have happened at least partly in the following year. I have taken Livy's account as my primary source.

Also, many of Livy's sources were the personal histories of the wealthy families of Rome. These were immensely proud and their recollections of their ancestors may be highly fanciful. Some of these records, as we have seen with some of the stories of Tarquin, may in fact have been transposed from Greek history. I will call out these when I can.

Cincinnatus at his plough, painted by Cabanel in 1843 

In the year 459 Quintus Fabius Vibulanus and Lucius Cornelius Malugensis Uritinus were elected consuls in Rome. The plebeians were still furious with the patricians after the unrest of the previous year. However, it appeared that the state was being threatened by the Aequi and the Volscians once more. Fabius won a victory against the Volscians at Antium. However during this time the Aequi had taken the town of Tusculum, which was a close ally to Rome. The Romans fought back and defeated the Aequi near Algidus.

It is possible that this entire episode is invented. Livy often records Roman defeats or discomfitures, but he nearly always follows it with an account of how Rome then won a victory over those who had defeated them. This may have often happened, but it does seem to happen a lot on the pages of Livy. In the year previous, Livy records that the Tusculans had helped the Romans recover the Capitoline Hill, so it seems a little suspicious that the following year that the Romans would help the Tusculans recover their city.

The consuls returned to the city, where there was further tension between themselves and the tribunes. There was evidence that the ex-tribune who had testified against Caeso in previous years had committed perjury, which was seen as a great injustice by the patricians, as Caeso had died in exile. I am sceptical of whether this story happened at all. The tribunes certainly wanted to be re-elected themselves and the consuls certainly opposed this, so no gossip about a trial was needed for there to be tension between the orders. The Aequi also asked for and possibly obtained a treaty.

Cincinnatus at his plough, being approached by the elders
of Rome and informed that he is now dictator,
by Benouville 1843

In the year 458 Gaius Nautius Rutilus and Lucius Minucius Esquilinus Augurinus were elected consuls in Rome. There was a new war with the Aequi and the Sabines. Unexpectedly the army of Lucius Minucius was surrounded by the Aequi at Mount Algidus and placed under siege. Messengers managed to escape to Rome to give the news that one of the consuls and his army were surrounded.

The other consul and the Senate decided that the situation was serious enough that a dictator should be appointed. Lucius Quinctius Cincinnatus was appointed as dictator. Livy records that he was a patrician, but a poor farmer who had only a tiny plot of land, which he worked himself. Livy gives a dramatic account of the senators coming out of the city to Cincinnatus' farm to tell him that he was now the leader of the state.

There he was found by the deputation from the senate either digging out a ditch or ploughing, at all events, as is generally agreed, intent on his husbandry. After mutual salutations he was requested to put on his toga that he might hear the mandate of the senate, and they expressed the hope that it might turn out well for him and for the State. He asked them, in surprise, if all was well, and bade his wife, Racilia, bring him his toga quickly from the cottage. Wiping off the dust and perspiration, he put it on and came forward, on which the deputation saluted him as Dictator and congratulated him…
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, 3.26, written around 18BC

Cincinnatus moved quickly and ordered all who were eligible to bear arms to assemble and to bring twelve stakes instead of the customary two. These were duly brought and Cincinnatus marched to Mount Algidus, surrounding the besieging Aequi and using the stakes to construct a ready-made barricade. The besieged Romans were able to occupy their attackers long enough for Cincinnatus' troops to complete the circumvallation and the Aequi were forced to surrender. Their commander, Cloelius Gracchus, was handed over to the Romans, the town of Corbio was handed over to Rome and the army of the Aequi was forced to go under the yoke; a symbolic act of submission.

Statue of Cincinnatus handing back the fasces
(symbol of dictatorial/consular power) and returning to
his plough

Cincinnatus returned to Rome where he celebrated a triumph. He then prosecuted the ex-tribune who was said to have testified against his son Caeso and exiled the accuser. After this he resigned his dictatorship and returned to his farm.

In the year 457 Gaius Horatius Pulvillus and Quintus Minucius Esquilinus were elected consuls in Rome. The Aequi attacked the garrison at the town of Corbio, which had been handed over to the Romans the year before and then attacked Ortona. Their army was defeated once more at Mount Algidus by one of the consular armies of Rome. Corbio was razed to the ground in punishment for having betrayed the Roman garrison.

In the year 456 Marcus Valerius Maximus Lactuca and Spurius Verginius Tricostus Caeliomontanus were elected consuls in Rome. There were heavier rains than usual this year and there was a dearth of provisions, although it was not a full-scale famine. No campaigns of note occurred, but Livy noted that the Aventine Hill was opened for settlement at this time. This was under the law known as the Lex Icilia, which granted the plebeians land here and may have been seen as a very partial land reform.

In the year 455 Titus Romilius Rocus Vaticanus and Gaius Veturius Cicurinus were elected consuls in Rome. There was further war with the Aequi that year and another Roman victory on the slopes of Mount Algidus. I cannot help but wonder if Livy is not recording the same battle happening over and over in different years. The two consuls sold the loot and gave the money into the treasury, which caused a great deal of annoyance to the soldiers who had been on campaign and had expected a share of the spoils.

Portrait of Velia Velcha in the Tomb of the Orcus

Around this time, in the city of Tarquinia, a tomb known as the Tomb of Orcus was created. It was probably created for a wealthy Etruscan family known as the Murina family, who were an offshoot of the Spurinnae clan. The tomb is painted with vivid murals and contains a well preserved portrait of a lady known as Velia Velcha, who appears to be sneering in her portrait. A later annex was built onto the tomb about a century later, but this has never been properly excavated.

In the year 454 Spurius Tarpeius Montanus Capitolinus and Aulus Aternius Varus Fontinalis were elected consuls in Rome. The consuls of the previous year were put on trial by the tribunes of the plebs for illegally putting the loot into the state treasury rather than distributing it to the soldiers. The patricians were incensed at this, and the plebeians were annoyed that no matter what laws for reform were ever proposed by the tribunes, no substantive change ever happened. The ex-consuls were found guilty and fined heavy sums.

The conflict between the orders had reached a stalemate. The plebeians had just enough power to make their voices heard and the patricians had sufficient power to keep the plebeians partially in check, but both sides were tired of the struggle. Livy records that the tribunes and patricians began to discuss reasonable compromises. The laws of Rome had never really been codified in the way other states had. Perhaps if an independent commission of plebeians and patricians could coordinate to write the laws, it could bring peace? The patricians agreed in principle, but wanted to have the committee be entirely composed of patricians.

While the compromise was being worked out, the people of Rome are said to have sent a delegation to Athens and to other Greek cities to investigate their laws and to bring back their findings. It is said by Livy that they went to Athens to copy the laws of Solon, which of course at this time would have been superseded by the more thoroughgoing democracy under the leadership of Pericles. Some scholars find this account anachronistic and argue that it was unlikely to have happened.

Mural of Odysseus slaying the Cyclops from the
Tomb of the Orcus

Elsewhere in Italy, the Greeks of Syracuse, operating from their base at Ischia on the bay of Naples, seem to have attacked and raided the Etruscan coastlines. This probably had little direct impact on the Romans, apart perhaps to make them appreciate the power of the Greek cities.

In the year 453 Sextus Quintilius Varus and Publius Curiatus Fistus Trigeminus were elected consuls in Rome. According to Livy, the delegation that had travelled abroad looking for laws, did not return that year, so there were no political dissensions.

There was said to have been a great famine and pestilence in that year. One of the consuls and four of the tribunes of the plebs died of the sickness at that time.

In the year 452 Caius Menenius and Publius Sestius Capitolinus were elected consuls in Rome. This year saw the return of the envoys from Athens, presumably bringing back something to justify their time away from Rome. The tribunes now were keen to actually act upon the compromise suggestion and create a fixed series of laws; something that we might refer to as akin to a constitution. The patricians were still not sure that they wished to embark on a project, which would necessarily see the powers of the consuls curtailed. However, pressure began to mount on them. One of the consuls, Sestius, argued before the Senate that something must be done and suggested that the commission be composed of ten men to revise the laws.

In the year 451 Appius Claudius Crassus Sabinus Regillensis and Titus Genucius Augurinus were elected consuls in Rome. The question of a commission to re-examine the laws was now becoming a necessity, so the patricians finally decided to allow this. The only point on which they would not budge was that they would not allow any of the ten commissioners to be plebeians. The plebeians eventually conceded the point on the understanding that the recent Lex Icilia and other laws concerning the plebeians would be left alone (e.g. that the commissioners would not remove the tribunes of the plebeians).

Once the two classes were agreed, the consuls and the tribunes of the plebs stepped down from their posts. There were ten people appointed, known as Decemvirs. They each held the power of supreme magistrate and there could be no appeal from them. Their position was probably meant to only be temporary, but it seems unclear if there were fixed limits placed upon them. The ten decemvirs were composed of the two consuls for that year, as well as the ex-consul Sestius from the previous year, as he had helped propose the idea in the Senate. Their rule is known as the First Decemvirate.

Mural and inscription from the Tomb of the Orcus

After deliberating for some months, and after extensive consultation with the people, the decemvirs displayed their proposed law codes on ten tablets in the Forum. The ten tablets, or tables, dealt with the rights of the people in courts and trials, debts, family law, property law, public law and sacred law. The exact text has not been preserved, but scholars have some knowledge of the contents of the tables. It is possible that the laws may have been written in a type of poetry, to make it easier for the plebeians to remember them, although this is not proven. The laws were approved by the assembly of the people and by the Senate.

As far as the wisdom and foresight of ten men admitted, they had established equal laws for all, for highest and lowest alike; there was, however, more weight in the intelligence and advice of many men.
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, 3.34, written around 18BC

The people, both plebeian and patricians had generally been quite happy under the rule of the decemvirs. There were also a number of additions and corrections that had to be made. It was decided that there would be an additional two tables added to the law. The decemvirs were elected for another year. One of the decemvirs, Appius Claudius, oversaw the election.

In the year 450 ten decemvirs, led by Appius Claudius, were elected to power in Rome, as the Second Decemvirate. They had been tasked with writing and approving the final two tablets of the laws. However, while they were working on these tables, the number of lictors (guards armed with sticks to beat people and axes to execute them) were increased to 120, a sizeable force in a city of that size, particularly as bearing arms within Rome was forbidden.

The decemvirs had previously been quite popular in the city, but now that they had assumed a more forbidding aspect and showed no signs of relinquishing power, they became feared. Appius Claudius was seen as being the ringleader and perhaps to have planned the entire decemvirate as a way of making himself a permanent dictator for life, or perhaps even a king.

Etruscan hoplite figurine

The Forum was filled with one hundred and twenty lictors, and they bore the axes tied up in the "fasces." The decemvirs explained it by saying that as they were invested with absolute power of life and death, there was no reason for the axes being removed. They presented the appearance of ten kings, and manifold fears were entertained not only by the lowest classes but even by the foremost of the senators.
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, 3.36, written around 18BC

The final two tables of the law were published and with these tables the justification for the decemvirs was gone. The laws themselves were generally held to be quite just. But those who had proposed them were seen as dangerous to both the plebeians and the patricians. The patricians in particular began to retreat from the city of Rome and go to their estates in the country rather than run the risk of antagonising the city's rulers.

In the year 449 the Second Decemvirate continued in power in Rome, despite their purpose being fulfilled and without standing for re-election. This was now seen as an attack on the state itself, but the plebeians and the patricians were too divided to really know how to combat it. Both groups feared and hated the decemviri, but also fear and hated each other.

The Sabines and the Aequi invaded Roman territory and the decemvirs tried to raise troops. There was opposition to this. Two patricians, Lucius Valerius Potitus and Marcus Horatius Barbatus denounced the decemvirs in the Senate. Eventually however, the decemvirs were able to gather soldiers enough to prosecute the war. In the event it turned out that the decemvirs themselves were not great military commanders and they experienced no successes in the field that would have justified their leadership.

Instead of meeting with success, the decemvirs were faced with near open revolt, as some of their plebeian soldiers spoke about restoring the tribunate. A suspicious death in ambush of one of the plebeian spokesmen infuriated the troops even further, as the decemvirs were strongly suspected of his murder.

Etruscan pseudo-red-figure pottery

What happened next is the subject of much debate. I will summarise it briefly here, but it is written in much greater detail in Livy. It is written that Appius Claudius conceived a lust for the daughter, Verginia, of one of the prominent plebeians, Verginius. She was betrothed to another prominent plebeian, named Icilius, who had probably proposed the agrarian law that saw the plebeians take some of the land on the Aventine some years earlier. To take possession of the girl, Appius had one of his friends declare publicly that the girl was actually his slave. When the matter went to court Appius was about to rule in the favour of his friend, but the trial was postponed while her father Verginius was summoned from the camp.

When Verginius returned to Rome, Appius made the judgement that Verginia was a slave and was to be taken into custody. One of the powers held by the decemvirs was that their word was law and that from their judgements there was no appeal. Rather than see his daughter be taken as a slave to be used as the concubine of Appius, Verginius stabbed and killed his daughter Verginia.

…There, snatching up a butcher's knife, he plunged it into her breast, saying, "In this the only way in which I can, I vindicate, my child, thy freedom." Then, looking towards the tribunal, "By this blood, Appius, I devote thy head to the infernal gods."
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, 3.48, written around 18BC

Verginius fled the scene, while Icilius roused the people. Appius ordered Icilius arrested in the streets but the lictors were driven back by the people, supported by the two renegade senators who had opposed the decemviri in the Senate house. Appius mounted a podium to address the people, but Valerius and Horatius followed him and ordered the lictors to abandon Appius, who was no longer an elected magistrate, but merely a private citizen acting against the laws. Appius fled.

Valerius, assuming the tone of authority, ordered the lictors to cease attendance on one who held no official position, on which Appius, thoroughly cowed, and fearing for his life, muffled his head with his toga and retreated into a house near the Forum, without his adversaries perceiving his flight.
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, 3.49, written around 18BC

Verginius fled to the camp of the army that was fighting the Aequi, where he told the impassioned tale of injustice and crime. The army fighting the Aequi abandoned the war and marched to the Aventine Hill where they awaited the word of the Senate. The soldiers on the Aventine elected ten military tribunes.

Etruscan bronze figurine of horse and rider

Upon hearing of this, the army that was fighting the Sabines also elected ten military tribunes as well, possibly under the instigation of Icilius, who had been betrothed to Verginia. They marched through the city in full armour, which was highly illegal, to join the other soldiers on the Aventine Hill.

The Senate was unclear as to what to do. The people refused to deal with any patricians except Valerius and Horatius, who had stood by them against Appius. Valerius and Horatius refused to negotiate on behalf of the Senate unless the decemvirs first resigned. The decemvirs refused to resign until the last two law tables were made into laws.

To show that the plebeians were united and that their tribunes must be restored, the plebeians once more deserted the city to go to the Sacred Mount. This was effectively a general strike and is referred to as the Second Secession of the Plebs. The city was abandoned except for the patricians and their slaves wandering through the empty streets.

This forced the Senate into action and the decemvirs were finally persuaded to resign. Before doing so, they reminded the senators that the decemvirs were all patricians and that they should be protected as patricians. Valerius and Horatius were sent as patrician envoys to meet with Icilius, who represented the plebeians.

Icilius demanded the restoration of the tribunes of the plebs, the restoration of the right of appeal, an amnesty for any rebellion against the decemvirs and lastly, for the decemvirs to be handed over to the people to be executed. Valerius and Horatius agreed to all the points save the last one, saying that the decemvirs could be tried under the laws once order was restored to the state.

Apulo-Corinthian helmet, much wider than normal
Corinthian helmets and with smaller apertures

"Is our State never to enjoy any respite from punishments inflicted either by the patricians on the Roman plebs, or by the plebs on the patricians? You need the shield rather than the sword."
Valerius and Horatius addressing Icilius, Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, 3.53, written around 18BC

The senators took the proposals back to the Senate and the decemvirs, hearing that they were not to be immediately punished, accepted these terms. The people flocked back to Rome and assembled on the Aventine where they elected new tribunes, among whom were Verginius, Icilius and another noted plebeian named Duillius.

Valerius (Lucius Valerius Potitus) and Horatius (Marcus Horatius Barbatus) were elected as consuls in Rome and the reign of the decemvirs was over, never to be returned to in Rome. New laws were proposed, known as the Lex Valeria Horatia. These laws ensured a number of rights for the plebeians. The decisions of the plebeian council were binding upon all the people, not just plebeians. The right of appeal was made sacrosanct. Never again would a normal magistrate be able to deny a plaintiff the right to appeal. It is unclear if this applied to the temporary office of dictator however. Finally the tribunes of the plebs were restored to their previous position under the law.

The remaining laws proposed by the decemvirs were passed and the laws inscribed on Twelve Tables of Bronze (or possibly ivory, but more likely bronze) that were on display to all the public. It was said that three centuries later Roman schoolchildren still memorised these laws during their schooldays.

A later illustration showing the Twelve Tables on display

The consuls brought it to conclusion; that is, of the Twelve Tables, as they are called, ten had been drawn up, and the consuls wrote into law the two remaining. After the legislation they had undertaken had been concluded, the consuls engraved the laws on twelve bronze tablets and affixed them to the Rostra before the Senate-house. And the legislation as it was drawn up, since it is couched in such brief and pithy language, has continued to be admired by men down to our own day.
Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, written circa 40BC

Then began the prosecution of the decemvirs. The focus of the plebeian anger lay upon Appius Claudius Crassus Sabinus Regillensis (to give him his full name). He was accused and brought to trial by none other than Verginius; the man who had murdered his own daughter rather than have her handed over to Appius. Verginius launched a bitter tirade against Appius and Appius was condemned. Appius then, either in seriousness or in irony, appealed. Verginius was furious that Appius could appeal, as he had denied all right to appeal in his rule. Appius shouted that if he, who had been the mightiest in the state, could find no justice in the laws, what guarantees could they hold for the powerless?

Appius had nothing to hope for in the protection of the tribunes or the verdict of the people. Nevertheless he called upon the tribunes, and when none intervened to stay proceedings and he was seized by the apparitor, he said, "I appeal." This single word, the protection of liberty, uttered by those lips which had so lately judicially deprived a person of her freedom, produced a general silence.
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, 3.56, written around 18BC

The mood of the people would not suffer the insolence of Appius and appeal or no appeal, he was dragged away to prison. Rather than awaiting his punishment, it is said that Appius hanged himself in his cell. It is at least possible that he was murdered on the orders of the tribunes rather than risking any chance of an actual appeal. Appius' family was one of the wealthiest and most influential in Rome and even if a member of their house was hated by all, they were still duty-bound to defend him.

Another of the decemvirs, Spurius Oppius, was taken to prison after being accused of crimes, in this case an unjust flogging of one of the plebeians that had taken place under the rule of the decemvirs. He too conveniently committed suicide in prison before his trial. The other decemvirs went into exile and the patricians once more feared plebeian influence.

Etruscan bronze figurine of a hoplite

The consuls Valerius and Horatius raised armies to fight against the neighbours of Rome, the Aequi, the Sabines and the Volscians, all of whom had been ravaging the lands of Rome and their allies while Rome was in turmoil. The two consuls fought a cautious war, letting their enemies become overconfident, before catching their foes off guard and winning victories against them.

As the patricians were annoyed at Valerius and Horatius, the Senate denied them the honour of a triumph, despite both consular armies winning victories. This was because the consuls were held to be favouring the plebeians and risking the power and influence of the patrician class. The plebeian tribune Icilius then put the question to the people and forced the matter through, granting triumphs to the consuls. This led to renewed hatred between the two orders.

The tribunes finally decided that they would try to all be re-elected the following year, to make a stand against the enmity of the patricians. They also seem to have wanted the consuls to stand for election again. The tribunes had occasionally been re-elected before, although the patricians hated it, but consuls had never served on successive years.

Fortunately Duillius, one of the tribunes who realised that the re-election of the tribunes and consuls would only serve to inflame the situation, or possibly lead to another tyranny such as the decemvirate, used his position as director of the elections to ensure that the tribunes were not re-elected. He implored Valerius and Horatius to stand down, which they did willingly. Thus ended one of the most eventful years in Roman political history.

As a contention had arisen, Duillius sent for the consuls and asked them what they intended to do about the consular elections. They replied that they should elect fresh consuls.
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, 3.56, written around 18BC

It's honestly not clear how much of it to believe. The story of Verginius stabbing his daughter Verginia, in an honour-killing to protect her from a lustful tyrant, is particularly suspicious. It sounds far too similar to the death of Lucretia, who killed herself after being raped by Prince Tarquin, and which led to the collapse of the Roman monarchy some six decades previously. It would be a little too coincidental that Rome was unable to change governments without a woman dying over honour. The Twelve Tables certainly existed, but did the decemvirs act the way they did? Were the laws of Valerius and Horatius enacted at this time? There are later laws that seem very similar to these. If the laws were already in place, why were they rewritten into law?

Apulo-Corinthian helmet with boar decorations

There is a great deal in the story that does not make sense and it seems that it seems to be a strange story even for Livy. His account jumps around somewhat. It is likely that there was a popular tradition in Rome about this time, perhaps in the form of a ballad or a song; that had warped the remembering of the times. It is certain that many things happened in this year, but exactly what I cannot say. The story itself though is fascinating, with the scheming Appius, the tragic Verginia, the hate-filled Verginius, the sly Icilius, the honourable Valerius and Horatius, and the sensible Duillius. For the characters alone it is worth remembering. Livy tells it better than I do and I can only recommend reading his work.

In the year 448 Lars Herminius Aquilinus and Titus Verginius Tricostus Caeliomontanus were elected consuls in Rome. Thanks to the efforts of Duellius, only five tribunes were elected, as all of the other votes had gone to the tribunes of the year before, whom Duellius had disqualified. Duellius ordered that the five tribunes use their authority to appoint tribunes to make up the other five (there appear to have been ten tribunes of the plebs at this time). This was done, and to avoid conflicts with the patricians, very inoffensive candidates were chosen, including two patricians.

To have patricians defending the rights of plebeians seemed unfair to many and one tribune named Lucius Trebonius proposed a new law. This would stop any future co-opting or appointment of tribunes, rather the elections would continue as long as they had to, until the full number were appointed. The patricians quite liked the existing arrangement and tried to block Trebonius, but he was too canny a politician and the law passed, becoming known as the Lex Tribonia. For his skill and unpleasantness at defeating the patricians he became known as Lucius Trebonius Asper, meaning Lucius Trebonius the Prickly.

Early Aes Signatum

Around this time, in the mid-fifth the Roman state seems to have adopted a type of currency known as the aes signatum, meaning "Stamped Bronze". These were bronze ingots of fixed weight and carrying stamps, often of bulls. They may have been in circulation earlier, but this is not clear, and if they were, they were likely melted down and recycled. The crudity of this coinage compared to the Greek creations at the same time is a good reminder that Rome was still quite a small and insignificant city. Had it not later risen to greatness, none of the events that I have mentioned in the blog would be remembered. How many other cities had similar tales that have since been forgotten?

In the year 447 Marcus Geganius Macerinus and Gaius Julius Iulus were elected consuls in Rome. Their tenure seems to have been marked by peace both internally and externally. There was the possibility of war against the Aequi and the Volsci, but the consuls deemed that the threat was not serious and rather than take the plebeians away from their farms to risk their lives on campaign, that the people could rest from war for a year.

In the year 446 Titus Quinctius Capitolinus Barbatus and Agrippa Furius Fusus were elected consuls in Rome. The Aequi had returned to raid Roman lands once more, but the people were not eager to take up arms. Titus Quinctius, who had been consul three times previously, upbraided the people and taunted them that perhaps they only had courage in standing up to patricians instead of their enemies. Stung by the taunts, the people allowed the consuls to raise armies. The consuls marched against the foe and won a great victory at the Battle of Corbio. Upon returning to the city they refused to ask for a triumph. Livy suspects that this was because Valerius and Horatius had been refused a triumph by the Senate in previous years for a greater victory, but this is of course a guess.

In this year, the allied cities of Ardea and Aricia asked Rome to help them resolve a territory dispute between them. They would accept whatever decision Rome made about who owned the land. The Romans were about to give their decision when an old Roman, who claimed to have been at the conquest of Corioli many decades earlier, said that this land belonged to Corioli originally, meaning that the true owners of the land were the Romans. The people found this wonderfully convenient and voted to keep it themselves. The consuls were disgusted at the greed of the people (although the patrician class was excellent at grabbing public land whenever available) and the allied towns of Ardea and Aricia were angered and insulted at this injustice.

In the year 445 Marcus Genucius Augurinus and Gaius Curtius Philo were elected consuls in Rome. One of the tribunes of the plebs, Gaius Canuleius, proposed a law allowing for patricians and plebeians to marry. The patricians were annoyed at this and considered that it would pollute their bloodlines. The tribunes then discussed the possibility of plebeians being allowed to become consuls. The patricians were so horrified that they heard the news of impending war with happiness.

Etruscan gold earrings that had been exported to
what is now the lands of the Czech Republic
showing the high demand for Etruscan goods in Central
Europe

After the Roman land grab in the previous year, the people of Ardea had revolted against Rome. There were the usual border troubles with the Volscians and Aequi. The consuls tried to defer discussion of the laws by attempting to levy troops. Once the plebeians were under arms they were subject to the consular authority and could not engage in politics, which partly explains why the Romans were so often at war, as the patricians found war very useful in shutting people up.

Gaius Canuleius refused to be silenced however and made impassioned speeches, blocking the levying of troops. Eventually one of the consuls, when being baited by Canuleius as to why no intermarriage could take place, blurted out that the children of mixed marriages could not make the correct sacrifices to the gods. This was taken as a terrible insult to the plebeians and the law was pushed through, known as the Lex Canuleia, allowing marriages between the orders to take place.

This bitterly exasperated the plebeians, for they believed that they were held incompetent to take the auspices because they were hateful to the immortal gods. As they had got a most energetic leader in their tribune and were supporting him with the utmost determination, the controversy ended in the defeat of the patricians.
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, 4.6, written around 18BC

The people then pushed for plebeians to be allowed to the consulate, but on this the patricians stood firm and refused. Eventually a compromise was reached. The patricians would hold the consulate and no plebeian could be elected to it. However, the power of consuls could in theory be held by a military tribune. A new office was created known as the Military Tribune with Consular Power, or Consular Tribunes, as they were commonly referred to as. This new office, which held consular powers, but not the name of consul, could be held by either patricians or plebeians.

Etruscan bronze figurine
of a maenad

Elsewhere in Italy, to the south, near the city of Croton, the Greek cities of Sparta, Athens and others founded a new city called Thurii. This had been founded at the request of the Sybarites who had been repeatedly expelled from their lands by the neighbouring city of Croton. It was felt that Croton would not dare risk the wrath of both Athens and Sparta. Many from all over the Greek lands came to Thurii in the next few years.

In the year 444 Aulus Sempronius Atratinus, Titus Cloelius Siculus and Lucius Atilius Luscus were elected as consular tribunes in Rome. Livy notes that despite the fact that these men were consular tribunes rather than consuls, they were all patricians. He then notes that perhaps the reason the consular tribunes were appointed was because the military threats were greater this year and that three generals were required. The three tribunes resigned their offices after three months and an interrex was appointed to oversee the election of Lucius Papirius Mugillanus and Lucius Sempronius Atratinus as consuls in Rome. If there had been a real military threat it had clearly faded and it seems that Ardea made peace with Rome once again without the need for war.

In the year 443 Marcus Geganius Macerinus and Titus Quinctius Capitolinus Barbatus were elected as consuls in Rome. In or around this time the office of censor was founded. This was originally a magistracy to oversee the taking of the census, but eventually morphed into a role of protector of public morals. The taking of the census was originally a function of the consuls, but the senators may have been unwilling to see this function fall into the hands of the plebeian magistrates at some point in the future.

In this year the people of Ardea had fallen into a bloody civil war between the aristocrats and the commoners. This is a salutary reminder to us that despite how awful Roman politics may sound to modern ears, that their political life was a lot more peaceful than that of other cities. Numerous Greek cities around this time have civil wars between oligarchic and democratic parties. In this case the common people had called in the Volscians to help destroy the wealthy. The wealthy appealed to Rome.

Marcus Geganius Macerinus led an army to defeat the Volscians and capture their leader. In the meantime Titus Quinctius Capitolinus Barbatus, who was holding his fifth consulship, maintained peace in Rome, being a highly respected figure by plebeian and patrician alike.

Around this time, in the city of Thurii in the south of Italy, the new Greek colonists expelled the people of Sybaris from the city. This was ironic, as the colonists had been called in to help preserve the freedom of the Sybarites from their neighbours. Clearly things just went badly from the Sybarites. They fled to found yet another city in Italy, known as Sybaris on the Traeis. It was only a small town though and never achieved greatness.

Etruscan bronze figure of a hoplite

In the year 442 Marcus Fabius Vibulanus and Postumus Aebutius Elva Cornicen were elected consuls in Rome. They made a decree to repopulate Ardea after the devastation of the civil war there and in doing so, gave priority to the Rutulian peoples, as Ardea was a Rutulian city. They also included the disputed land in the settlement, thus depriving the people of Rome from the possibility of taking the land. Land commissioners were appointed to distribute the land. These commissioners faced the anger of the plebeians, who had wanted the land and the patricians, who had expected the commissioners to give them some of the land as a favour. The commissioners gave the land to the Rutulians and then stayed in Ardea for fear of prosecution when they returned to Rome.

In the year 441 Gaius Furius Pacilus Fusus and Marcus Papirius Crassus were elected consuls in Rome. The year was peaceful, except for a short-lived attempt to pass an agrarian law in the Senate by a tribune named Poetilius. Games were held this year as well and the land seems to have had peace.

In the year 440 Proculus Geganius Macerinus and Menenius Lanatus were elected consuls in Rome. That year saw a great famine in the land and the tensions between the classes flared up once more. Finally a patrician named Lucius Minucius was named as a Controller of Supplies and attempted to purchase grain from the surrounding regions. These measures were not very successful however.

The misfortunes began with a famine, owing either to the year being unfavourable to the crops, or to the cultivation of the land being abandoned for the attractions of political meetings and city life; both causes are assigned. The senate blamed the idleness of the plebeians, the tribunes charged the consuls at one time with dishonesty, at another with negligence.
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, 4.12, written around 18BC

Another man, a wealthy plebeian named Spurius Maelius, spent much of his own money buying grain and distributing it to the people for a very low price. This measure saved a good many lives and bought Spurius Maelius a great deal of popularity. Many began to whisper that he had ambitions beyond that of a private citizen, but there was no proof of ill-intentions, and he had saved many lives.

Elsewhere in Italy the recently founded Greek city of Thurii made an alliance with the Messapian city state that would later be known as Brundisium. This was doubtless because the city of Thurii was soon embroiled in a war with the existing Greek city of Taras, and the Messapians were traditional enemies of the Tarantines.

And thus the period draws to a close. It had seen some political changes, but none more dramatic than the period of the First and Second Decemvirates. Rome continued to lurch from one political crisis to the next, but somehow without collapsing into civil war like so many other cities of the time. This cohesion and patriotism, the ability to face external foes in cooperation with your bitterest political enemies; this was a true strength of the early Roman Republic and one that is not yet I would argue, fully understood to this day.

Apulo-Corinthian helmet: I love how ridiculous these
helmets are

Primary Sources
Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, written circa 40BC
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, written around 18BC
Titus Livius, Ab Urbe Condita, written around 18BC (a different translation)
Fasti Triumphales, written circa 19BC
Fasti Capitolini, written circa AD13

Secondary Sources:
Tomb of the Orcus (in Italian)

Related Blog Posts:
479-460BC in Rome
459-440BC in the Near East
459-450BC in Greece
449-440BC in Greece
439-420BC in Rome

459-440BC in the Near East

Achaemenid golden cup from the 5th century BC

This blog will try and look at the Near East for the years 459-440BC, which during this period was mainly included in the Persian Empire. I will occasionally mention the affairs of Carthage as well. From the Persian period onwards, the historical sources become quite scant and we are quite heavily reliant on the writings of the Greeks, particularly Herodotus. This period sees the ending of Herodotus’ history and the sources become even sparser.

Other important sources will be Thucydides, Plutarch and Diodorus Siculus. Occasional snippets of information may come from the Hebrew biblical writings, or sacred traditions, but these will generally only concern affairs in Judea or those pertaining specifically to Jewish history. The story of Esther is an exception of sorts but even this event would not have been of major concern to other peoples of the empire. It is not that there is nothing to say for this period, but the history is now mainly written by the Greeks. So if most of what I have to say concerns the Greeks, we should remember it is because they are writing the history, not because nothing else was happening in the Persian Empire. For any events that deal with the Greeks, I will only write of them briefly as they are dealt with in greater detail in previous blogs, which will be listed at the end.

Palace in on platform in Persepolis

In the year 459 Persia ruled most of the world known to the people of the Near East. From Ionia to India, from the edges of Scythia to the borders of Egypt, the Persian Empire held sway, under the monarchy of Artaxerxes I. In the previous year the Athenians had joined the Egyptian rebels under Inaros II and Amyrtaeus and had won a major victory against the Persians. A large Greek force comprised of the Athenians and their allies were besieging the defeated Persians in a section of the city of Memphis. The siege was to drag on for years.

Around the year 459 BC, Archeptolis, son of Themistocles, was granted the right to rule the province of Magnesia after his father’s death. The Persian Empire would be quite a welcoming place for Greek exiles and many Greeks made the fame and fortune serving the Persian king. Archeptolis would go on to mint coins in his own name. Some of these had what may well be his portrait upon them. This practice, inherited from his father, eventually became influential and other satraps would begin to mint their own coins in the years to come.

Probably in this year, Ezra the priest set out from Babylon to return to Jerusalem. Some Jews had previously returned to Jerusalem under the reign of Cyrus, however the majority of the Jews in Babylon had stayed in Babylonia, where they had settled and achieved some measure of prosperity. Gathering together gifts from this community and a number of those who wished to return. They gathered at the Ahava Canal in Babylonia before making the journey.

Gustave Dore drawing of Artaxerxes sending
Ezra to Jerusalem

This second, smaller group of exiles seem to have carried letters from Artaxerxes, King of Persia, and it is likely that Ezra was sent out to act as governor of the small sub-province Yehud Medinata, which was the area centred on Jerusalem. It is nowhere stated in the book of Ezra, but it is possible that the Persians were concerned about the danger of the revolt in Egypt and wanted to ensure the loyalty of the surrounding regions. Dispatching Ezra with gifts and royal blessing might have been a means to this end, but this is speculation.

On the twelfth day of the first month we set out from the Ahava Canal to go to Jerusalem. The hand of our God was on us, and he protected us from enemies and bandits along the way. So we arrived in Jerusalem, where we rested three days.
Ezra 8:31-32, probably written no earlier than 420BC

There is some uncertainty around the date of Ezra’s expedition. The book of Ezra gives the date of the arrival in Jerusalem as the 7th year of Artaxerxes, but does not specify which Artaxerxes. It was most likely Artaxerxes I, but there were three Persian named Artaxerxes and it is theoretically possible that it was one of the others. However, it is most probable that the journey of Ezra happened at this time.

A slightly papyrus from
Elephantine, documenting
a property transfer

Also around this time the Elephantine Papyri begin. These are a number of papyrus documents from a Jewish community in Upper Egypt. They seem to have been a semi-polytheistic community, probably descended from Jewish refugees who fled to Egypt before or shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar over a century previously.

The Jews at Elephantine had a small temple to YHWH at Elephantine, similar to the small temples of the late divided kingdom era of Israelite history. The papyri record the administration of their lives; the selling of houses, the manumission from slavery, marriage and other matters. There are some letters sent to the Jewish community in Judah, but they also had contact with the Samaritan community centred around their temple on Mount Gerizim, which seems to have had some tension with the returned exiles in Jerusalem.

On the 21st of Chislev, that is the 1st of Mesore, year 6 of King Artaxerxes, Mahseiah son of Yedoniah, a Jew of Elephantine, of the detachment of Haumadata, said to Jezaniah son of Uriah of the said detachment as follows: There is the site of a house belonging to me, west of the house belonging to you, which I have given to your wife, my daughter Mibtahiah, and in respect of which I have written her a deed.
Elephantine Papyri, written between circa 459-402BC

In the year 458 it seems that Ezra arrived in Jerusalem. Here he handed over the gifts that he had brought with him from Babylonia to the keepers of the Temple. He also sent letters to the local governors of the larger provinces (the sub-province of Yehud seems to have been under the overall jurisdiction of the governors of the Trans-Euphrates province).

After this Ezra called the leaders of the people together and told them that they had been unfaithful and guilty of intermarriage with the people surrounding them. This would seem fairly trivial in our eyes, but the returned exiles believed firmly that the old Kingdom of Judah had been destroyed for its failure to worship YHWH alone. Thus to marry people who were not committed to this ideal risked corrupting their beliefs and for judgement to once again come upon them.

On the basis of these beliefs, the exiles decided to wait for a certain time and then to divorce their wives who were not of the same faith. This move probably strengthened the cohesion of the community surrounding Jerusalem, but also probably antagonised their neighbours. After this reform Ezra seems to have been the governor of Yehud for some time.

Persepolis Fortification Archive cuneiform
tablets

Around the year 457 the Persepolis Fortification Archives come to an end. These are a large collection of cuneiform texts from Persepolis, mostly written in Elamite but with a large number of Aramaic records and some scattered records in other languages. They provide an insight into the administration of the Persian Empire, but they are perhaps underused because their primary language (Elamite) is not as well understood as some other languages of the ancient Near East.

Not much can be said to my knowledge for the year 456. Presumably things happened, but sadly I am not aware of them.

In the year 455 the long siege of Memphis in Egypt had been broken. The Athenians and rebel Egyptians under Inaros II and Amyrtaeus, had been besieging the Persians and loyalist Egyptians in a fortified area of Memphis known as White Castle. The siege had dragged on for years, and the Athenians had probably been unable to fully capture the Nile waterway and stop the resupply of the Persian garrison. While the siege had dragged on, the Persians had been mustering a counterattack.

The Persian general Megabyzus had been put in charge of the campaign by Artaxerxes I. He had spent time retraining his army and preparing it for the campaign. He attacked the Egyptians and Greeks and raised the siege of Memphis. The Egyptians were defeated and possibly their armies were broken at this point. The Athenians retreated in good order to the island of Prosopitis in the Nile where their ships were moored. However they were unable or unwilling to abandon the campaign and reach the sea. Megabyzus then began to besiege the island and began drainage works to drain that section of the Nile itself.

Statue of the goddess Neith from the
city of Sais, one of the centres of
the rebellion

In the year 454 in Egypt, the Athenian forces had been under siege on an island in the Nile. They had been defeated by the Persians in the previous year and their Egyptian allies were scattered. However, secure on their island, the Athenians were able to fend off the attacking Persians. However, the Persian commander Megabyzus had ordered the Nile to be diverted away from that area. Once the river drained away, the Persians could march over and attack the Greek forces by land. Also, the two hundred ships of the Athenians were now useless. Some Athenians tried to escape and some made it out, eventually marching along the coast and making it to Cyrene. Most did not. The Persians inflicted a terrible defeat on the Athenians, capturing or destroying the entire expeditionary navy and killing or capturing nearly all of the rowers and marines.

To further compound the disaster, the relief force that the Athenians had sent approached Egypt, unaware of the disaster. They had 50 ships with them; a sizeable force but not a huge one. They Persian navy caught the Athenian reinforcements and utterly defeated them. The Athenians and their Greek allies had grown used to easily defeating the Persians and their overconfidence made them pay a terrible price. The defeat of the Egyptian expedition was nearly as serious as the defeat of the Persians at the Eurymedon River. The Athenians and their allies lost 250 ships and perhaps 50,000 men.

The Egyptians were similarly impacted. Their rebellion against Persia was nearly ended by the defeat. The Libyan chieftain, Inaros II, who had been the main leader of the revolt, was captured by the Persians, having fled to a place called Byblos (presumably a place near Memphis rather than the more famous Byblos in Phoenicia). He was afterwards crucified or impaled on the orders of Artaxerxes I, possibly the urging of his mother Amestris. Another leader of the rebellion, Amyrtaeus of Sais, who was an Egyptian, seems to have had more success and carried out a low-level guerrilla war against the triumphant Persians. Amyrtaeus and his remaining troops escaped the Persian retaliations by hiding in the marshes of the Nile Delta.

Cartouche of Artaxerxes I from Egypt

Arriving by land he defeated the Egyptians and their allies in a battle, and drove the Hellenes out of Memphis, and at length shut them up in the island of Prosopitis, where he besieged them for a year and six months. At last, draining the canal of its waters, which he diverted into another channel, he left their ships high and dry and joined most of the island to the mainland, and then marched over on foot and captured it. Thus the enterprise of the Hellenes came to ruin after six years of war. Of all that large host a few travelling through Libya reached Cyrene in safety, but most of them perished. And thus Egypt returned to its subjection to the King, except Amyrtaeus, the king in the marshes, whom they were unable to capture from the extent of the marsh;
Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, Book I, written circa 400BC

Not much can be said to my knowledge for the years 453, 452 and 451. Presumably things happened, but sadly I am not aware of them.

In the year 450 Cimon had raised a great fleet of 200 triremes to send against the Persians. He attacked Cyprus with his main force, but split off a fleet of 60 triremes to sail southwards to Egypt to support the faltering revolt of Amyrtaeus. The Athenians and their allies laid siege to Kition, but were unable to take the city, as siege warfare was not well developed in those days. The Persians were mustering a response to Cimon's attack and were preparing their own navy and land army, under the command of Megabyzus, who had defeated the Athenians in Egypt.

While the siege of Kition dragged on, Cimon died, either of a wound or sickness, or just old age, as he cannot have been a young man. A large Persian army and navy arrived on Cyprus and the Greeks abandoned the siege of Kition, retreating towards Salamis. This was not the more famous Salamis where Persia had been defeated under Xerxes, but a city named Salamis-in-Cyprus.

The Athenians were not informed of Cimon's death and were told that he was still in command and drawing up the plans of battle. The Athenian general Anaxicrates was actually in command however. The Athenians defeated the Persians on land and sea at Salamis-in-Cyprus, giving Cimon the honour of being one of the few generals to win a posthumous victory. However, the victory was a hollow one, as the Athenians had not enough men or ships to exploit their victory. Taking the body of Cimon, the expeditionary force returned to Athens, joined by the ships that had been sent to Egypt, which had also achieved very little.

Also around this time, a large fire devoured much of the Persian city of Susa. The city was of course rebuilt, as it was an important centre of Persian administration, but many records must have been lost at this time.

Excavated houses and ziggurat at Ur

Another city that suffered in and around this time was the ancient city of Ur. This was one of the oldest centres of Mesopotamian civilisation. But by now the coastlines had changed so much and the land had become so ravaged with salt damage from over-irrigation that it could no longer sustain a population. Ur was abandoned and its tombs, houses and ziggurat were left to be covered with the dust of ages until it was rediscovered and excavated in the 19th and 20th centuries. Excavations are still ongoing there in the nearby site of Abu Tbeirah and I have included their recent archaeological report in the secondary literature section of the blog.

In the year 449 it was said that there was a peace treaty signed between the Athenians and the Persians, often called the Peace of Callias, named after one of the Athenian negotiators. The terms of the peace were said to be that the Athenians would cease to support the enemies of Persia, particularly in Egypt and Cyprus. In return the Persians would acknowledge the liberation of the Ionian cities and would not allow them to be interfered with. The Persian navy would also be bound not to sail into the Aegean Sea.

Relief decoration from Susa,
currently in Louvre

There is some academic debate as to whether or not this treaty actually existed and, if it did exist, exactly what its terms were. However, it does seem to be the case that the Persians and Athenians ceased fighting for some time, and that the Athenians ceased their support for Amyrtaeus’ continuing small-scale revolt in Egypt.

It is possible that Inaros II and some captured Greeks had been executed in or around this time, but this detail comes from Ctesias, who is generally quite an unreliable source. It would be unusual to execute the Athenian prisoners at the same time as signing a treaty with them, but as I have mentioned, any detail from Ctesias should probably be treated with some level of suspicion.

Not much can be said to my knowledge for the years 448, 447 and 446. Presumably things happened, but sadly I am not aware of them.

In the year 445 it seems that the prominent Persian noble Megabyzus, who had crushed the Egyptian rebellion and been prominent in both the murder of Xerxes and the accession of Artaxerxes I, rebelled against the king. His base appears to have been Syria and he is said by Ctesias to have defeated two armies sent against him by the king. However, the Queen Mother Amestris and Megabyzus’ wife Amytis appealed to Artaxerxes and Megabyzus was pardoned and the revolt ended.

Sogdian tribute bearers relief in Persepolis

Ctesias relates that Megabyzus later violated court protocol while on a hunting expedition and was sentenced to death. He was once more pardoned but was banished, before returning in disguise dressed as a leper and being pardoned fully once more. If this sounds like a fairy tale it is because it probably is. Ctesias is a most untrustworthy source.

In or around this year, Nehemiah seems to have made his journey to Jerusalem. The same chronological issues surrounding the date of Ezra also surround the dating of Nehemiah. It seems likely that the two were contemporaries, thus if Artaxerxes I is the king that they both serve, then Nehemiah’s journey must be dated to around this year. If not, then the journey of Nehemiah should probably be dated to around 384.

Nehemiah was the cupbearer of Artaxerxes and after requesting permission to return to his ancestral homeland, he was sent back as governor to Yehud, possibly replacing Ezra. He was sent with a contingent of Persian soldiers for protection, possibly because the revolt of Megabyzus was ongoing at the time. However, the dating of this revolt is very speculative, so it is possible that the soldiers were simply provided because the roads were dangerous. Nehemiah seems to have only travelled with a small party, rather than the group of returnees who had travelled with Ezra over a decade earlier.

Gustave Dore drawing of Nehemiah inspecting
the broken walls of Jerusalem by night

In the year 444 Nehemiah surveyed the broken down wall of Jerusalem, which had never been restored when the exiles returned, due to opposition from their neighbours; who feared Jerusalem becoming a prominent city in the region again. Nehemiah organised the people into groups, each responsible for a particular area of the wall and the work began swiftly.

By night I went out through the Valley Gate toward the Jackal Well and the Dung Gate, examining the walls of Jerusalem, which had been broken down, and its gates, which had been destroyed by fire. Then I moved on toward the Fountain Gate and the King’s Pool, but there was not enough room for my mount to get through; so I went up the valley by night, examining the wall.
Nehemiah 2:13-15, probably written no earlier than 420BC

There was opposition from the neighbouring areas and Sanballat the Horonite, Tobiah the Ammonite and Geshem the Arab seem to have led the opposition to the wall. Sanballat was based at Samaria and seems to have been the local governor of that area. It was not uncommon for satraps and governors to actively quarrel with each other and the central government in Persia tended not to care as long as neither side rebelled against the king.

The builders in Jerusalem feared attack while rebuilding the walls and thus worked while armed, while others who were not working were stationed as additional guards. Once these precautions were put in place, Sanballat and Tobiah attempted to lure Nehemiah outside the city so that he could be attacked, but Nehemiah refused to meet them. Sanballat and/or his descendants, also named Sanballat, are known from the Elephantine Papyri.

Babylonian tribute bearers relief in Persepolis

While the building was ongoing the common people accused certain wealthy individuals of charging interest (presumably excessive interest) on loans. The people were going into debt, unable to meet the interest repayments and then being sold into slavery to pay the debt. This outcry reached Nehemiah and the practice seems to have been stopped by his intervention. His government also tried to purchase freedom for those Jews who had already been sold into slavery. While Nehemiah’s reforms may have provided some relief, it does seem that the province of Yehud was quite impoverished throughout the Persian period, probably as a result of Persian tax policies.

The wall surrounding the city of Jerusalem was completed that year, after only 52 days in the building. The city was now surrounded by a wall, but up until that point the people had been living in the nearby villages. Nehemiah made it so that one in every ten people from the villages would now live in Jerusalem instead, to help build up the population and make it a proper urban centre once more.

After the completion of the wall, Nehemiah and Ezra supervised a gathering of the people. Ezra read aloud from the Hebrew sacred writings, some of which would have been familiar to the people and some of which may have been forgotten. After this festival of reading, which went on for some days, the people swore to renew the covenant of the law contained in these writings.

Gustave Dore drawing of Ezra reading the
book of the Law in Jerusalem

Ezra ascended from Babylonia and re-established the forgotten laws.
Sukkah 20a, written perhaps circa AD230

It is sometimes hypothesised that Ezra wrote the majority of what is now referred to as the Old Testament. This is unlikely, as there are historical details contained in these books that would be unlikely to be remembered in the Persian era. It is I think certain that at least some portions of the Pentateuch and other parts of the Old Testament are much older than the time of Ezra. But it also seems to be the case that much of these writings were not compiled into a single text. It is possible that the arrangement of the material may have taken place at this time, whether this was done by Ezra or by others.

The wall was then dedicated by the priests and Levites. The people of Jerusalem were also sworn once more to not mingle with the people of the neighbouring lands. The tensions between Sanballat and Nehemiah must have been quite high. Certain sections of the book of Nehemiah may be the personal memoirs of Nehemiah and there are a number of times when Nehemiah calls upon God to witness the persecution he has undergone from the neighbouring governors.

Not much can be said to my knowledge for the years 443, 442 and 441. Presumably things happened, but sadly I am not aware of them.

Gateway in Persepolis

In the year 440BC in Cyrene in North Africa, the people had finally had enough of the tyrannical rule of their king Arcesilaus IV. He had exiled many of the nobles and had kept himself in power by hiring mercenaries. He and his son fled the city to go to what is now the Benghazi region in Libya. Here he was caught and killed and his corpse desecrated. His son was beheaded and his head cast into the sea. The land of Cyrene was subsequently made into a republic, while remaining under Persian rule.

In the Aegean Sea, the island of Samos revolted from the Athenian Empire with the aid of the nearby Persian governor Pissuthnes. The Athenian garrison on the island was captured and sent inland to Sardis. Meanwhile the Persians seem to have mustered a fleet to perhaps try and challenge the Athenians once more along the Ionian coast of Asia Minor. Or perhaps they did not, but it does seem that the Athenians thought that a fleet was dispatched against them.

It seems that the Persian general Megabyzus died around this time. He would have been quite old at this point, having been present during Xerxes’ invasion. He had had an eventful life and was survived by his wife Amytis. One of his sons, Zopyrus II, is said by Ctesias to have defected from Persia and to have joined Athens. He eventually died fighting on the side of the Athenians while in Caria. It is interesting that both Greeks and Persians would occasionally defect quite happily from one camp to the other.

Mosque at the site of Al-'Uzair near Basra in Iraq, where
Ezra is said to be buried

Ezra, also known as Ezra the Scribe, or Ezra the Priest, probably died around this time as well. There is no later tradition of his dying in Jerusalem and he may have died elsewhere. There are traditions of his being buried near Tedef, in present-day Syria, and in Al-‘Uzair near Basra in present-day Iraq.

He is remembered as one of the restorers of Judaism, one who gave new spirit to the returned exiles. There are a lot of books named after him. There is the book known as Ezra, which is a Hebrew and Aramaic text and is accepted by all sects of Judaism and Christianity. This is sometimes called Ezra 1 (or alternatively Esdras 1, Esdras is just another word for Ezra). There is the book of Nehemiah, which was treated as part of the same scroll for many centuries. This is sometimes called Esdras 2. There is a Greek text that is sometimes referred to as Esdras 1 or 3. This text is nearly identical to the standard book of Ezra, but contains an additional, probably later, episode about Zerubbabel answering a riddle of Darius.

Bowl bearing the name of Artaxerxes I

Finally, there is a text called Esdras 2 or 4, which is a combination of three different texts, some of them written up to six hundred years after Ezra. I have included a link to an explanation page of all the books called Ezra/Esdras to hopefully shed some light on the matter. Suffice it to say that Ezra was influential enough that many books bear his name, whether he had anything to do with them or not.

Thus the period draws to a close. Artaxerxes I had reigned throughout the entire period, which saw the Egyptian rebellion and the Athenians defeated, further setbacks on Cyprus for the Persians, before the establishment of a fragile peace. The remarkable career of Megabyzus came to an end, after triumph and rebellion. Probably the most influential happenings, from the context of later history, were the events happening in the small and insignificant sub-province of Yehud. Here the return of Ezra and Nehemiah, the rebuilding of the wall and the reading of the Torah, galvanise the small community and help preserve the unique identity which survives and has had such influence to this very day.

Bull column from Persepolis

Primary Sources
Elephantine Papyri, written between circa 459-402BC
Book of Esther, written possibly as early as 420BC
Ezra, probably written no earlier than 420BC
Nehemiah, probably written no earlier than 420BC
Thucydides, History of the Peloponnesian War, written circa 400BC
Ctesias, Persica, written circa 398BC
The Parian Chronicle, written circa 216BC
Apocrypha 1 Esdras (2 Esdras in Slavonic, 3 Esdras in Appendix to Vulgate), written circa 170BC
2 Esdras (3 Esdras in Slavonic, 4 Esdras in Appendix to Vulgate: Composite work comprising 5 Ezra [chs 1-2], 4 Ezra [3-14], 6 Ezra [chs 15-16]). All three works were composed by circa AD250, but may only have been combined as late as AD800
Diodorus Siculus, Library of History, written circa 40BC
Josephus, Antiquities of the Jews, written circa AD93
Plutarch, Themistocles, written circa AD100
Sukkah, written perhaps circa AD230

Secondary Sources:
Persepolis Fortification Archives:
Abu Tbeirah Excavations Volume I
Clarification page on books called Ezra/Esdras

Related Blog Posts:
479-460BC in the Near East
459-450BC in Greece
449-440BC in Greece
459-440BC in Rome
439-420BC in the Near East