 |
| Lions from the Processional Way in Babylon |
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 materials for this period are later Greek writings, 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.
 |
| Modern replica of a possible likeness of Cyrus II from Pasargadae (he probably didn't have wings though) |
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 539 when it may in fact have been early 538. 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 Qi and Chu grew ever more important and waged wars between them for influence. The Spring and Autumn Period was ending, as the wars between the little kingdoms became ever more violent. This flux of warfare would also stimulate the thinkers of China and much of Chinese philosophy is developed at this time.
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. The kingdom of Magadha became the strongest of these states and may have been ruled by a king called Bimbisara at this time. 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. The religions of Jainism and Buddhism emerged from this intellectual ferment and may have been already formed at this time, depending on the dates given. 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.
 |
| Sphinx of Amasis in the Captoline Museum |
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) written sometime after 538BC
Despite the looting of Ecbatana the 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.
The four kingdoms of Babylon, Media, Lydia and Egypt had coexisted for nearly half a century in relative peace and with some alliances between them. However, now the king of Media, Astyages, had been overthrown by a vassal named Cyrus II. As the other monarchs were personally linked through alliances to Astyages, this would have been a threat. In Egypt, the Pharaoh Amasis had conquered Cyprus and was engaged in building projects in Sais. In Lydia, King Croesus was famed for his wealth and had 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.
 |
| Tayma Stela dating to slightly after this period but mentioning Nabonidus' stay there |
The year 548 probably saw the Lydian kingdom led by Croesus attacking the new empire of Persia. The Lydians and Medes had previously fought in 585 and as Astyages kingdom had been taken over, Croesus of Lydia may have decided to try and annex some of the lands between the two kingdoms. The Lydian king, who was the conqueror of Ionia, but who still respected Greek culture, sent an embassy to the Oracle at Delphi to enquire if he would be successful. The Oracle answered that if he attacked Persia a great empire would fall. Croesus took this for a good omen and made war upon the Persians.
Now, this story is in fact suspicious. There is good reason to think that such an ambiguous oracle would not be acted upon. So, did the Oracle in fact promise victory to Croesus and did this failure of the prophecy have to be explained away by later Greek writers, who paint Croesus as missing such an obvious clue? I’m not sure as to its truth, but this may be the most famous story of the Oracle of Delphi and I find it quite implausible.
When the Lydians came to the places where they were sent, they presented the offerings, and inquired of the oracles, in these words: “Croesus, king of Lydia and other nations, believing that here are the only true places of divination among men, endows you with such gifts as your wisdom deserves. And now he asks you whether he is to send an army against the Persians, and whether he is to add an army of allies.” Such was their inquiry; and the judgment given to Croesus by each of the two oracles was the same: namely, that if he should send an army against the Persians he would destroy a great empire.
Herodotus Histories 1:53, written around 440BC
 |
| Gold coin of Croesus |
The fighting was fierce, many on both sides fell, and at nightfall they disengaged with neither side victorious. The two sides contended thus.
Herodotus Histories 1:76, written around 440BC
 |
| Inscription of Nabonidus |
From the time of Ashurbanipal, king of Assyria, until the ninth year of Nabonidus, king of Babylon, my son, my offspring, Sin, king of the gods, made me live one hundred and four good years in the awe which he set in my heart. I myself, the sight of my two eyes is sharp and my comprehension is excellent, my hands and feet are health and my words are well, chosen, food and drink agree with me, I am in good health and my heart is full. My descendants to the fourth generation, I have witnessed their existence and I am replete with extreme old age. Sin, king of the gods, you looked upon me with favour and you have made my days long, therefore let me entrust to you Nabonidus, king of Babylon, my son.
The “autobiography” of Adad-Guppi, probably written around 546BC
 |
| Later battle standard of the Persians It may have been adopted by Cyrus |
Such was his command. The reason for his posting the camels to face the cavalry was this: horses fear camels and can endure neither the sight nor the smell of them; this then was the intention of his manoeuver, that Croesus' cavalry, on which the Lydian relied to distinguish himself, might be of no use. So when battle was joined, as soon as the horses smelled and saw the camels they turned to flight, and all Croesus' hope was lost. Nevertheless the Lydians were no cowards; when they saw what was happening, they leaped from their horses and fought the Persians on foot. Many of both armies fell; at length the Lydians were routed and driven within their city wall, where they were besieged by the Persians.
Herodotus Histories 1:80, written around 440BC
Croesus’ situation was desperate but not hopeless, for the citadel of Sardis was strong and his allies many. If his allies could muster their troops and come to his aid, Croesus and his kingdom might yet be saved. However, apparently one section of the citadel was left almost unguarded due to the steep nature of the rock face. A Persian soldier saw a Lydian soldier drop his helmet and climb down what had been thought to have been an impregnable rock face. Later Persian soldiers climbed the rock face and took the citadel by surprise and by storm. According to Herodotus the siege had only last fourteen days, which was far too soon for any of his allies to have reached Croesus. It is not clear that they would have come anyway.
 |
| The rock of the citadel of Sardis |
Herodotus Histories 1:84, written around 440BC
Now Herodotus records that Croesus was captured by Cyrus’ army and was placed on a huge pyre to be burned alive. Herodotus records that Croesus was saved from the burning because Croesus wailed aloud about how Solon was right and that no man could be called happy until his life had been lived to its end. Cyrus then pardoned the defeated king and kept him as an advisor. But Herodotus is writing around the year 440BC, around a hundred years after the fall of Sardis. However Bacchylides, writing perhaps about 470BC, refers to Croesus as having tried to burn himself to death but the flames were extinguished by rain sent by Zeus. Croesus was then rescued and taken away to live in a mythical land to the far north by Apollo in recognition for his piety and devotion to the oracle at Delphi. The Greeks must have felt misgivings about the death of a king that was obviously pious. Perhaps they mitigated the downfall of the king by giving him a rescue from his fate? Herodotus in particular seems to have spent time at Delphi and received much of his knowledge from the priests of Delphi, who would have wished to exonerate their god and his Oracle. But it is hard to escape the conclusion that the Oracle of Delphi and the god Apollo had betrayed the king of Lydia.
 |
| Greek vase showing the pyre of Croesus |
Bacchylides Ode 3, written shortly after 468BC
In Assyrian and Babylonian history we hear of kings such as Shamash-shuma-ukin and Sinsharishkun who had probably burned themselves to death with their possessions when their cities fell. To fall captive into the hands of another king was a dreadful fate and one who had wielded supreme power would often prefer to taste death at their own hand than to face it from another. The Babylonian chronicle of Nabonidus has a tantalising entry for this year. It refers to the Persians crossing the Tigris in the land of Assyria and marching west to attack an unknown land and its king.
This is almost certainly the kingdom of Lydia but the document is damaged so we cannot know the name of the land. If this is not Lydia then perhaps it may mean that the fall of Lydia may have taken place later, perhaps a decade later. This lacuna has generated a scholarly debate, which is summarised here. It is good to remember that, even for the major events of the world, our understanding may be entirely mistaken and that we are reliant on the most fragmentary of sources. But for the purposes of this blog, it is probable that in 546 Sardis and the kingdom of Lydia had fallen and the last king of Lydia was probably dead. Also in the year 546 we should note that the Persians may have taken over the island of Cyprus. The fact that they were able to cross the Tigris below Arbela means that the Persians were able to march through what had once been Babylonian territory with near impunity.
In the month Nisanu, Cyrus, king of Parsu, mustered his army and crossed the Tigris below Arbela. In the month Ajaru, he marched to the land of [...] He killed its king, took his possessions, and stationed his own garrison there …
Nabonidus Chronicle ABC7, written sometime after 538BC
In the year 546, as soon as Cyrus had left Tabalus as governor of Sardis and returned to his kingdom. Here Cyrus probably ordered the construction of a new capital city at Pasargadae. The vast wealth of the Lydian treasury doubtless helped to finance the construction, which was done on a lavish scale in a hybrid style.
 |
| Inscription of Nabonidus |
Aside from the city of Miletus, which had made a treaty with Cyrus, the Ionian cities had taken part in the Lydian War and now were forced to submit to Persian rule as a consequence. The Persians first attacked Priene, Magnesia and then Phocaea. Phocaea was fortified with a large wall that had been paid for by their trade with Tartessos in Spain. However they dared not to face the Persian assault, but instead abandoned the city and set sail for the western Mediterranean where they had a variety of adventures that mainly involved piracy. The nearby city of Teos was also abandoned by the inhabitants, who fled to Abdera in Thrace.
The Chians, then, surrendered Pactyes, and afterwards Mazares led his army against those who had helped to besiege Tabalus, and he enslaved the people of Priene, and overran the plain of the Maeandrus, giving it to his army to pillage and Magnesia likewise. Immediately after this he died of an illness.
Herodotus Histories 1:161, written around 440BC
 |
| Pillar of Nabonidus |
Many of them were at this work; and seeing that the workers were injured when breaking stones more often and less naturally than usual, some in other ways, but most in the eyes, the Cnidians sent envoys to Delphi to inquire what it was that opposed them. Then, as they themselves say, the priestess gave them this answer in iambic verse: ““Do not wall or trench the isthmus: Zeus would have given you an island, if he had wanted to.” At this answer from the priestess, the Cnidians stopped their digging, and when Harpagus came against them with his army they surrendered to him without resistance.
Herodotus Histories 1:174, written around 440BC
According to Herodotus, during the Persian conquest of Lydia the Spartans had sent a penteconter (fifty-oared) ship to Cyrus to tell him that he should not harm any Greek states, “because the Spartans would not tolerate it”. This embassy prompted Cyrus to ask in return “Who are the Spartans?” While the story is an interesting one I doubt that the story happened.
 |
| Inscription of Nabonidus |
Herodotus Histories 1:152-153, written around 440BC
The conquest of Ionia probably continued over a number of year, but from around 545 onwards the Greek city-states on the western coast of Asia Minor were to be subject to the Persians, with many of the island states near the coast also submitting before the Persian power. However, while these cities were the most cultured and wealthy cities in the Greek world, they were not the main focus of Cyrus. His kingdom had now grown immensely and he set about curbing the Iranian tribes to the east. The next three or four years probably saw campaigns in the east with the possible founding of the city of Cyropolis (the City of Cyrus, as it was known in Greek), as early as 544. The site of Cyropolis is probably what is now the city of Khujand in northern Tajikistan, on the Jaxartes (Syr Darya) River.
In the year 543 Nabonidus probably returned from Tayma to Babylon. The Persian Empire had now conquered his allies, the Lydians, and his own nobility and priesthood seem to have been angry at him for neglecting the city and omitting its rituals. War with Persia must have been inevitable and perhaps he planned to coordinate the war from Babylon.
 |
| Pyramids at Nuri in the royal burial grounds of Kush |
In the year 540 war was declared between Persia and Babylon, if indeed the two states had not already been at war for some years previous. In the west, around this time, Harpagus the Mede, one of the generals of Cyrus, was fighting the Lycians, on the southwest coast of what is now Turkey. He had already brought the Ionians and Carians under Persian rule and expected an easy victory against the Lycians. But the Lycians of the city of Xanthos rallied out of their city to attack the Persians, and when they were beaten, they destroyed their city and committed mass suicide rather than submit to conquest. With this tragic victory the western seaboard of Asia Minor was brought nearly entirely under Persian rule.
 |
| Nabonidus |
Herodotus Histories 1:176, written around 440BC
Around this time the Carthaginians allied with the Etruscans to fight the exiled Phocean Greeks near Alalia. The result was a Pyrrhic victory for the Greeks, but a strategic victory for Carthage and her allies, as the Greeks retreated shortly after and Carthage's hold on Sardinia was secured.
In 539 Nabonidus prepared for the coming invasion by gathering the cult-statues of most of the gods of Babylonia to the city of Babylon itself. This may have been intended as a protective measure, to stop the Persians from capturing the statues and bringing them away as booty. Alternatively it may have just been as part of a festival that he wanted to celebrate. However, it may have showed defeatism, in that it assumed that the Persians would capture the outer cities of the empire and the priesthood seems to have interpreted this as yet another act of impiety.
An account known as the Verse Account of Nabonidus recounts tales of a king who was nearly mad, inscribing stelas with imaginary victories over Cyrus, with fawning courtiers such as Zeriya and Rimut crouching around Nabonidus and confirming his every word, as the illiterate king misunderstood oracles and signs. According to this account the impious king even attempted to turn the shrine of Marduk into a shrine for the god Sin. But this is a piece of pro-Persian propaganda written after Nabonidus was defeated.
 |
| The author by the Ishtar Gate in the Pergamon Museum Berlin |
Verse Account of Nabonidus, written sometime after 538BC
The invasion came from the direction of Media, from the north and east. The Babylonian armies, possibly under the command of Belshazzar, son of King Nabonidus, met the Persians and Medes at the city of Upu (Opis) on the River Tigris. It was here that the great Median Wall had been built by Nebuchadnezzar against the Medes. The huge defensive work failed in its intent, possibly because the Persians changed the watercourses to allow them to bypass the wall. While Cyrus may have conquered Lydia later, I believe the more usual interpretation that Lydia fell first. This would have meant that Cyrus would have been able to use the treasury of Croesus to fund his war and could have afforded to field a vast army. Outnumbered the Babylonian army was slaughtered in a great battle and the Persians passed the Median Wall. A governor named Ugbaru, who controlled the region bordering the Medes, may have defected to the Persian cause and thus the victorious Persian army may now have included a large Babylonian contingent.
 |
| Ruins of Babylon |
When Cyrus did battle at Opis on the bank of the Tigris against the army of Akkad, the people of Akkad retreated. He carried off the plunder and slaughtered the people. On the fourteenth day Sippar was captured without a battle. Nabonidus fled.
Nabonidus Chronicle ABC7, written sometime after 538BC
The Persian army proceeded to Babylon and laid siege to the city, the largest in the world. The walls that had been built by Nebuchadnezzar were nearly impregnable and the city had been stocked with food supplies enough to last for years. The city should have been invincible. However, Herodotus reports that the Persians diverted the River Euphrates and made it so that the water levels flowing into the city dropped low enough for their troops to march along the river bed and into the city.
 |
| Partially reconstructed walls of Babylon |
Cyrus dealt with it and with the river just as had the Babylonian queen: drawing off the river by a canal into the lake, which was a marsh, he made the stream sink until its former channel could be forded. When this happened, the Persians who were posted with this objective made their way into Babylon by the channel of the Euphrates, which had now sunk to a depth of about the middle of a man's thigh. Now if the Babylonians had known beforehand or learned what Cyrus was up to, they would have let the Persians enter the city and have destroyed them utterly; for then they would have shut all the gates that opened on the river and mounted the walls that ran along the river banks, and so caught their enemies in a trap. But as it was, the Persians took them unawares, and because of the great size of the city (those who dwell there say) those in the outer parts of it were overcome, but the inhabitants of the middle part knew nothing of it; all this time they were dancing and celebrating a holiday which happened to fall then, until they learned the truth only too well.
Herodotus Histories 1:176, written around 440BC
 |
| Feast of Belshazzar by John Martin AD1820 |
Suddenly the fingers of a human hand appeared and wrote on the plaster of the wall, near the lampstand in the royal palace. The king watched the hand as it wrote. His face turned pale and he was so frightened that his legs became weak and his knees were knocking. “This is the inscription that was written: Mene, mene, tekel, parsin “Here is what these words mean:
Mene: God has numbered the days of your reign and brought it to an end.
Tekel: You have been weighed on the scales and found wanting.
Peres: Your kingdom is divided and given to the Medes and Persians.”
Then at Belshazzar’s command, Daniel was clothed in purple, a gold chain was placed around his neck, and he was proclaimed the third highest ruler in the kingdom. That very night Belshazzar, king of the Babylonians, was slain, and Darius the Mede took over the kingdom, at the age of sixty-two.
Daniel 5:5-6, 25-30, written later, at some point between 500-150BC
 |
| Feast of Belshazzar by Gustave Dore AD1866 |
On the sixteenth day, Ugbaru, governor of Gutium, and the army of Cyrus, without battle, they entered Babylon. Afterwards, after Nabonidus retreated, he was captured in Babylon.
Nabonidus Chronicle ABC7, written sometime after 538BC
Cyrus entered the city in triumph, presumably through the great Ishtar Gate and was welcomed by the people and the priests. Cyrus carefully listened to the grievances of the elites and took great care to restore rites and rituals to what they had been before Nabonidus. Assiduous propaganda was begun to ruin the reputation of the fallen king and to paint Cyrus as the generous liberator. To his credit Cyrus does seem to have prevented his troops from looting and the conquest was an easier one than previous conquests. The fallen monarch Nabonidus may even have been allowed to live out his life in exile in the far eastern province of Carmania, but I suspect that he was probably executed. Regardless he was an old and broken man, and his (possible) son and heir Belshazzar was certainly dead.
 |
| Feast of Belshazzar, still from Arthur Griffith's film Intolerance AD1916 (the details here are rather fanciful, though the scale of the set would have appealed to the ancient Babylonians |
Berossus, Babyloniaca, written around 280BC, quoted by Josephus, writing around AD90 (hence the possible mention of Darius here)
The wife of Cyrus, Cassandane, died shortly after the fall of Babylon and the newly conquered city mourned her for six days in an act that must have greatly helped relations between the conquered and the conquerors. To further cement the conquest Cyrus’ son Cambyses was tasked with fulfilling some of the rituals of the priesthood of Marduk, although there was some consternation when the young prince accidentally committed sacrilege by allowing his guards to come armed and by approaching the Babylonian temple in Elamite dress. But this was soon rectified and the rites restored.
 |
| Remains of the ziggurat in Borsippa |
Nabonidus Chronicle ABC7, written sometime after 538BC
Cyrus himself does not appear to have stayed in the city and it is not clear if Cambyses stayed either. This leads to some rather confused reporting. The Hebrew book of Daniel, possibly written rather later, records that Darius the Mede became king of Babylon, at an advanced age of 62. Some suspect this is another name for Cambyses, prince of Persia, but he is unlikely to have been 62 at this time. A Greek writer Xenophon, writing in the mid-300’s BC records a king of Media called Cyaxares II who seems to have existed as a co-king of the Persian Empire before disappearing from history. Others suspect that Gubaru (Gobryas in Greek), who had organised the city upon its immediate capture, was appointed “king” of Babylon. Gubaru may have been the same as Ugbaru, the defecting governor. So we have a prince, two kings and two governors, two of which may never have existed and two of which may have been the same person.
In the course of time Astyages died in Media, and Cyaxares, the son of Astyages and brother of Cyrus's mother, succeeded to the Median throne.
Xenophon, Cyropaedia, written around 370BC (Xenophon is known as a sometimes unreliable historian)
Kings often changed their names upon taking the throne so either Cyaxares or Gubaru might have changed their names. Also sub-kings were often placed on the throne of Babylon by the Assyrians, as the Babylonians would often rebel otherwise. Kandalanu was sub-king under Ashurbanipal and Bel-ibni was sub-king under Sennacherib. There is no good contemporary source to clear up the confusion. The Babylonian documents are not helpful here either. These would date their transactions by the year of the king, but seeing as there was a later king Darius, whose reign lasted a long time, an earlier king Darius might go unnoticed.
 |
| Upper sections of the ruined ziggurat of Borsippa |
Daniel 6:30, written considerably later, at some point between 500-150BC
The writer Aeschylus, who writes around the 470’s BC, slightly earlier than Herodotus, paints a different picture of the Persian Empire. Rather than conquering the Medes, the Persians formed a partnership with them, that may have seen the royal families of Media and Persia coexist until the Median royal line died out and the Persians became more dominant. There are indications that the behaviour of Medes and Persians was somewhat of a partnership and that this continued until about the year 521. The Hebrew writings lend some credence to this view. But even about such a crucial matter we do not have enough sources to say for sure. For Darius the Mede, there is no certain evidence that he existed, but there are some indications that he, or someone like him, did sit on the Babylonian throne after Cyrus had taken the city.
For Medus was first to be the leader of its host; and another, his son, completed his work since wisdom ruled his spirit. Third, after him, Cyrus, blessed in good fortune, came to the throne and established peace for all his people.
Aeschylus, Persians, 765-770, written 472BC, seeming to suggest a peaceful transfer of power between Medes and Persians
The fall of Babylon seems to have been mostly peaceful and the inhabitants of Babylonia were probably content with their change of ruler. But this masked a far deeper change. Mesopotamia would never again dominate the ancient world. The culture of the Mesopotamians would continue and still be influential for centuries to come, but their political power would never return. Around this time the Elamites also begin to fade from history. Even the name of their last king is barely known and I am unsure of who actually should be said to hold this title. The kingdom of the Persians was now the largest kingdom on earth; the largest kingdom that had ever existed to that date. While it might suit the Persians to temporarily leave a ritual king in Babylon at this time, they probably began to take away all power from the sub-kings of Elam, Babylon and their other tributary states and to replace these with governors.
 |
| Nabonidus Chronicle |
Verse Account of Nabonidus, written sometime after 538BC
Immediately after the fall of Nabonidus and his son, the restive priesthood began writing documents to discredit the fallen ruler. The Nabonidus Chronicle and the Verse Account of Nabonidus are works of propaganda against the previous king. Some of the Hebrew writings later, canonical and non-canonical, may reflect some of these works. The most significant of these propaganda efforts is a proclamation by the new king Cyrus, known today as the Cyrus Cylinder. Here Cyrus proclaims that he is a righteous monarch, similar to previous great monarchs, and that he had been chosen by the great god Marduk to rule Babylon instead of the impious Nabonidus. Cyrus then confirmed that he would respect previous arrangements and concludes with typical formulae similar to other Mesopotamian inscriptions, about how the king restored and increased sacrifices and reconstruction of temples.
 |
| Cyrus Cylinder |
Cyrus Cylinder, written sometime around 538BC
A modern, forged translation of the Cyrus Cylinder has been propagated, primarily by the deposed 20th century Pahlavi Dynasty in Iran. This mistranslation completely diverges from the original and has almost nothing in common with the actual text. It supposedly tells how Cyrus abolished slavery and only ruled over those who wished it. The real inscription references the Babylonian god Marduk. The false translation usually refers to the Persian god Ahura Mazda, so that is a good way of spotting it. This travesty was referred to as the First Charter of Human Rights and a bronze reproduction of the cylinder, complete with false translation was gifted to the UN headquarters, where it sits to this day. It is an abject forgery and is completely false but I have seen this misinformation scattered around the Internet so I wanted to mention it here, as it is false and should be called out as false.
 |
| Model of the Cyrus Cylinder with false translation beneath it |
False translation of the Cyrus Cylinder that is sometimes promulgated throughout the Internet, written sometime in the 1950’s AD. I cannot stress enough how false this translation is
Cyrus did generally govern kindly. His conquests were still conquests and many died in his battles, but we read of no peoples being deported and no accounts of state-sponsored torture and terror exist from his reign. It is quite possible that both of these occurred but, like the Neo-Babylonian kings, he did not boast of this. There are no accounts of rebellions against his rule either. But the main reason he is remembered so fondly is that he allowed the exiles to return. Many peoples had been conquered and deported by the Assyrians and Babylonians. These people were generally treated well but they were transplanted hundreds of miles from their homelands and were forced to live in new lands. Many adapted to the new life, but others longed to return. Cyrus seems to have allowed this. This was probably practical, as such a vast empire as Cyrus now ruled could not afford to fight constant rebellions. Regardless of the motives, the exiled peoples of the Near East could now return to their homes.
 |
| Partially reconstructed ruins of Babylon |
This whole country will become a desolate wasteland, and these nations will serve the king of Babylon seventy years. “But when the seventy years are fulfilled, I will punish the king of Babylon and his nation, the land of the Babylonians, for their guilt,” declares the Lord, “and will make it desolate forever. I will bring on that land all the things I have spoken against it, all that are written in this book and prophesied by Jeremiah against all the nations. They themselves will be enslaved by many nations and great kings; I will repay them according to their deeds and the work of their hands.”
Jeremiah 25:11-14, dates unclear but committed to writing perhaps as early as 560BC, possibly significantly later
When Cyrus allowed the exiles to return it is probable that not many did, certainly not immediately. But those who had been taken were able to now take hope that they, or their children would be able to return to Zion. They remembered the words of the prophets, such as Jeremiah, that the rule of Babylon would only last seventy years. It is hard to match the seventy years exactly to the exile. The proclamation of return was probably made in 539 or 538, shortly after the fall of Babylon. But the city of Jerusalem had fallen in around 587/586. This is not seventy years but the Hebrew writers seem to have used 70 as a shorthand for “around the span of a lifetime”. Possibly it refers to the length of time that Babylon ruled, which was around seventy years depending on how this is counted. The idea of a god’s anger lasting for seventy years is also known elsewhere in ancient literature, from Esarhaddon’s restoration of Babylon, where he mentioned that the god Marduk had originally been angry with his people for seventy years.
 |
| Cyrus restores the vessels of the Temple Gustave Dore AD1866 |
2 Chronicles 36:20-23, written probably around 400BC
Regardless of the exact accuracy of the times, the Jews viewed this as a divine deliverance and saw Cyrus as a saviour sent by God. Babylon was remembered as the city of destruction and in later Jewish, and subsequent Christian literature, Babylon became known as the embodiment of all the evil in the world.
A second angel followed and said, “‘Fallen! Fallen is Babylon the Great,’ which made all the nations drink the maddening wine of her adulteries.”
Revelation 14:8, written around 100AD
 |
| Ruins of Pasargadae |
Around the year 537 any king who ruled Babylon as a ceremonial king under Cyrus, was probably dead. This might have been the mysterious Darius the Mede mentioned by the Hebrew book of Daniel or the mysterious Cyaxares II the Mede mentioned by Xenophon. The book of Daniel records that Darius issued an edict that none save he should be worshipped for the space of a month, that the courtier Daniel broke this edict, was thrown in the lions’ den and survived. It has been noted that the religious behaviour ascribed to Darius in this passage does not accord with the known behaviour of Zoroastrianism. But it is also fair to note that there is as of yet no notice that Zoroastrianism was widespread among the Medes or Persians. Cyrus leaves no real proof that he was a follower of Zoroaster. Whatever the case, if there was a sub-king of Babylon, they fade from history in or around this point, leaving the real power in the hands of Gubaru (or Gobryas) as satrap of Babylonia and the Trans-Euphrates.
 |
| Daniel in the Lion's Den, by Gustave Dore AD1866 |
Daniel 6:6-9, written later, at some point between 500-150BC
Around this time a number of the exiled Jews were gathered under the leadership of Sheshbazzar and Zerubbabel (who were possibly the same person). They returned to the city of Jerusalem, which was abandoned, although the land around it was not. The book of Ezra records that over forty thousand people returned but this may have been over a number of years and not necessarily all at once. The people moved into settlements in an area probably around 30 km around Jerusalem and within their first year of moving back they created an altar that they could use to sacrifice on.
 |
| The rebuilding of the temple Gustave Dore AD1866 |
Ezra 3:1-2, probably written no earlier than 420BC
Around the year 536, the dates are approximate because we do not know exactly when the exiles returned from Babylon, the Jewish exiles went further than building an altar and attempted to rebuild the temple itself. Under the auspices of Zerubbabel, the leader of the returned people and related to the previous royal line of David, and the High Priest Jeshua, they began the work with great ceremony. Those who had been born in Babylon were joyful to see the symbol of their belief rising from the foundations once more. But those who were old enough to remember the great temple that had been destroyed and compare it to the paltry rebuilding effort were moved to tears.
And all the people gave a great shout of praise to the Lord, because the foundation of the house of the Lord was laid. But many of the older priests and Levites and family heads, who had seen the former temple, wept aloud when they saw the foundation of this temple being laid, while many others shouted for joy. No one could distinguish the sound of the shouts of joy from the sound of weeping, because the people made so much noise. And the sound was heard far away.
Ezra 3:11-13, probably written no earlier than 420BC
 |
| Ruins of Pasargadae |
But Zerubbabel, Joshua and the rest of the heads of the families of Israel answered, “You have no part with us in building a temple to our God. We alone will build it for the LORD, the God of Israel, as King Cyrus, the king of Persia, commanded us.”
Ezra 4:3, probably written no earlier than 420BC
 |
| Figure from a facade of a temple in Uruk |
To this end, they sent Gimillu to act as a kind of auditor of the Eanna Temple in Uruk, particularly in monitoring their flocks. The priests seem to have resented this and blocked handing over any information to officials as much as they could. Soon a series of feuds seem to have developed between Gimillu and the temple officials. Gimillu was accused by the temple officials of stealing sheep, which to be fair the temple officials, even Gimillu admitted. When I first came across the story I thought of Gimillu as a charming rogue, but instead came across this excellent article which suggests that Gimillu wanted to preserve his own position and kept his stealing to a minimum.
When the temple officials realised that it was a choice between being audited and keeping Gimillu around, they handed over all the records to Gimillu to give to the Persian rulers in Babylon. Gimillu however refused to hand over the records to his superiors. So there is the ludicrous situation of the temple officials handing over all their documents for audit to the auditor and the auditor refusing to do anything with them and in fact hiding from those he is meant to be auditing. Gimillu was also convicted of stealing sheep from the sacred herds, after copious testimony and a few confessions from Gimillu and his brother, and financed his appeal by stealing some more. It really is a bizarre tale, but also serves as an excellent object lesson in the wealth of Babylon and the very real interest that the Persians were beginning to take in taxing the wealthy provinces.
 |
| Ruins of Uruk |
Inscription of Cyrus in Babylon
Around the year 530 Cyrus II, Cyrus the Great, who had created the largest kingdom the world had yet seen, died. It is not clear exactly how he died. Xenophon, the later unreliable Greek historian who writes in the mid-300’s BC records that he died peacefully, whereas Herodotus records that he was engaged in a war with a Scythian tribe called the Massagetae far to the north. Here he fought the armies of a queen known in Greek as Tomyris. His armies defeated hers, partly using an ambush after falsely retreating from their camp. Her son was killed in the defeat and the Massagetae counterattacked and defeated the Persians, slaying their king in the process. Herodotus says that the queen of the Massagetae put the decapitated head of Cyrus into a container of blood, so that in death his thirst for shed blood could finally be quenched. This shows us just how reliant we are on the Greek historians for this period. No Hebrew sacred text, no Persian inscription, no Babylonian cuneiform, tells us how Cyrus the Great died and the truth is that we just do not know.
 |
| Later European painting of Tomyris dipping the head of Cyrus in blood Mattia Preti AD1670 |
Herodotus Histories 1:214, written around 440BC
His son Cambyses II succeeded him as king of the Persian Empire. Cyrus was buried in an imposing yet simple tomb. Interestingly, current Zoroastrian belief does not allow for tombs, lest the earth be polluted, but while Cyrus may have been a follower of Zoroaster, it is likely that his beliefs were different than the Zoroastrianism that we know. His tomb was described by later Greek writers such as Arrian and Strabo and it is from their description that we believe we can know his tomb near Pasargadae.
There was an inscription on the tomb in Persian which read, “Mortal! I am Cyrus son of Cambyses, who founded the Persian Empire, and was ruled over Asia. Do not grudge me my monument.”
Arrian, Anabasis 6:29
 |
| Tomb of Cyrus II near Pasargadae |
As soon as the copy of the letter of King Artaxerxes (probably meaning Cambyses II) was read to Rehum and Shimshai the secretary and their associates, they went immediately to the Jews in Jerusalem and compelled them by force to stop.
Ezra 4:23, probably written no earlier than 420BC
For the year 529 I cannot tell for certain what occurred this year, nor for the year 528 or 527. However I can make some guesses that Cambyses II of Persia was looking for an excuse to attack the kingdom of Egypt. The Egyptians were the last major kingdom in the Near East not under Persian control and conflict between the two was inevitable.
 |
| Persian Empire at the death of Cyrus |
But after a time, as he embraced her addressing her as the daughter of Amasis, the girl said to him, “O King, you do not understand how you have been made a fool of by Amasis, who dressed me in finery and sent me to you as his own daughter, when I am in fact the daughter of Apries, the ruler Amasis revolted from with the Egyptians and killed.” This speech and this crime that occurred turned Cyrus' son Cambyses, furiously angry, against Egypt.
Herodotus Histories 3:1, written around 440BC
This is a weird story and one that is unbelievable for a number of reasons. Surely it is a bad idea to send the child of a slain foe to be your emissary in the court of a powerful enemy? Apries had been dead since 567, perhaps earlier, meaning that any daughter of Apries would have been around forty at the youngest. It is strange, but it is possible that Herodotus has confused this with an earlier episode that may have seen a daughter of Apries already married to Nebuchadnezzar, who invades Egypt as a result. The timelines fit better with a Babylonian king rather than a Persian one.
 |
| Statue of Amasis |
This Phanes had some grudge against Amasis, and fled from Egypt aboard ship, hoping to talk to Cambyses. Since he was a man much admired among the mercenaries and had an exact knowledge of all Egyptian matters, Amasis was anxious to catch him, and sent a trireme with his most trusted eunuch to pursue him. This eunuch caught him in Lycia but never brought him back to Egypt, for Phanes was too clever for him. He made his guards drunk and so escaped to Persia. There he found Cambyses prepared to set out against Egypt, but in doubt as to his march, how he should cross the waterless desert; so Phanes showed him
Herodotus Histories 3:4, written around 440BC
So, at the beginning of 526 the stage was set for war between the Persian Empire and kingdom of Egypt, possibly because of marriage alliances gone wrong, or because of defecting Greeks, but probably simply because the Egyptian kingdom was the last major threat to the Persian Empire and Cambyses wanted to take it.
 |
| Statue of Ankhnesneferibre God's Wife of Amun in Thebes |
While Amasis was now dead, there was another royal death that may or may not have happened around this time. Another son of Cyrus, named Bardiya but sometimes referred to by the Greeks as Smerdis, may have been killed on the orders of King Cambyses around this point. If the murder did happen it would have been secret but whether or not this murder did happen would affect the next decade of history dramatically.
Amasis’ son, Psammetichus III took the throne in his stead. He mustered the armies of Egypt in the north, where the invasion would surely come. However his preparations were overshadowed by what was seen to be an omen; rain in the city of Thebes. The city almost never saw rain and this unusual phenomenon was seen as an evil omen.
While his son Psammenitus was king of Egypt, the people saw an extraordinary thing, namely, rain at Thebes of Egypt, where, as the Thebans themselves say, there had never been rain before, nor since to my lifetime; for indeed there is no rain at all in the upper parts of Egypt; but at that time a drizzle of rain fell at Thebes
Herodotus Histories 3:10, written around 440BC
 |
| Relief of Psammetichus III from Karnak |
When, then, the Arabian had made the pledge to the messengers who had come from Cambyses, he devised the following expedient: he filled camel-skins with water and loaded all his camels with these; then he drove them into the waterless land and there awaited Cambyses' army. This is the most credible of the stories told;
Herodotus Histories 3:9, written around 440BC
The armies clashed outside Pelusium and there was a hard-fought battle. The Persians were victorious and Psammetichus III fled to Memphis. Herodotus tells stories of how the Greek mercenaries murdered Phanes’ children in the space between the two armies before battle joined. He also mentions how he himself had seen the site of the battle and could see the differences in the skulls between the Egyptians and the Persians (how could he tell which were Egyptian?) But the most spectacular story of the battle of Pelusium was told by an ever later Greek writer, who wrote that the Persians knew the Egyptians held cats to be sacred, so they placed cats in the front line to stop the Egyptians from shooting. Thus the Battle of Pelusium is sometimes known as the Battle of the Cats.
 |
| A fantastically over the top painting of the Battle of Pelusium, showing the story of the Persians using cats. Paul-Marie Lenoir AD1872 |
Polyaenus Stratagems 7:9, written around AD163
The Egyptians had fled to Memphis. An offer to surrender was rebuffed by the Egyptians, who may have slain the heralds, and so Memphis was taken by storm. Psammetichus III was captured but not executed immediately. However, later he was accused of stirring up rebellion against the Persians and was executed by them.
 |
| Statue of Udjahorresnet |
Another Egyptian who fared rather better under the new rule was Udjahorresne. He had been a commander of the Egyptian fleet under the Saite Dynasty and put his services at the disposal of the new Persian rulers. He had a variety of other titles and may have also been a physician. He now acted as a collaborator for the new regime and even devised proper Egyptian royal titles for Cambyses II.
…Commander of the royal navy under the King of Upper and Lower Egypt, Khenemibre, (Amasis)…
When the great King of all lands, Cambyses, came to Egypt, the people of all (foreign) lands were with him. He exercised sovereignty in the land in its entire extent; they settled down in it, he being the great King of Egypt, the mighty sovereign of this country. His Majesty conferred upon me the dignity of Chief San, and granted that I should be by him as Smer and Provost of the temple.
Inscription of Udjahorresnet (written perhaps around 519BC?)
The Libyan tribes and the Greek city kingdom of Cyrene, on the north coast of Africa, seem to have sent tribute to Cambyses II as a sign of submission. No one wished to be the next target of the seemingly invincible Persians.
 |
| Rather fanciful interpretation by a modern painter of the aftermath of the Battle of Pelusium: |
Herodotus Histories 3:13, written around 440BC
Around this time, while the work on the Temple in Jerusalem was stalled or stopped, the Hebrew book of Kings may have been written. It may have undergone some editorial work later and it almost certainly drew from earlier sources but the book itself probably reached a recognisable form around this time.
 |
| Chapel of the Divine Adoratrice Nitocris II in Karnak |
2 Kings 25:27-30 (probably written around 525BC, as the final sections are a recollection of how Jehoiachin/Jeconiah was restored to favour by Amel-Marduk. Jeconiah was a direct ancestor of Zerubbabel)
Thus the period draws to a close. It began with a disturbed international stage, with a power struggle within the kingdom of the Medes seeing the Persians become dominant. The period closes with the kingdoms of Lydia, Babylon and Egypt all conquered by the Persian Empire. 25 years sees the Persian Empire becoming the largest empire that the world had ever seen. This has been a very long blog and I will let the text speak for itself rather than summarising. I will continue the story in the next blog.
 |
| Ruins of Pasargadae |
Jeremiah, dates unclear but committed to writing perhaps as early as 560BC, possibly significantly later
The “autobiography” of Adad-Guppi, probably written around 546BC
Verse Account of Nabonidus, written sometime after 538BC
Nabonidus Chronicle (ABC7) written sometime after 538BC
Cyrus Cylinder, written sometime around 538BC
Inscription of Cyrus in Babylon, no later than 530
Inscription of Udjahorresnet (written perhaps around 519BC?)
Daniel, written later, at some point between 500-150BC
Aeschylus, Persians, written 472BC, seeming to suggest a peaceful transfer of power between Medes and Persians
Bacchylides Ode 3, written shortly after 468BC
Herodotus Histories, written around 440BC
Xenophon, Cyropaedia, written around 370BC (Xenophon is known as a sometimes unreliable historian)
Berossus, Babyloniaca, written around 280BC, quoted by Josephus, writing around AD90 (hence the possible mention of Darius here)
2 Chronicles, written probably around 400BC
Ezra, probably written no earlier than 420BC
Revelation, written around 100AD
Polyaenus Stratagems, written around AD163
Secondary Sources:
False translation of the Cyrus Cylinder that is sometimes promulgated throughout the Internet, written sometime in the 1950’s AD. I cannot stress enough how false this translation is
Scholarly work on the Babylonian Auditor/Thief Gimillu
Article about the debate on the dating of the fall of Sardis
Related Blog Posts:
575-550BC in the Near East
550-525BC in Greece
525-500BC in the Near East
