DOCSLIB.ORG

Zechariah and the Bible

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Zechariah and the Bible Bible Study March 1 – Introduction March 8 – The Eight Night Visions March 15 – Zechariah 1:7–13 March 22 – Zechariah 2:1–5 March 29 – Zechariah 9–14 2 3 4 Introduction “When her people fell into enemy hands, there was no one to help her. Her enemies looked at her and laughed at her destruction.” (Lam 1:7) August 28, 587 BC was a dark day in Judah’s history. Nebuchadnezzar, the great Babylonian king, torched Jerusalem’s temple and destroyed the city’s walls. Everything—the monarchy, the priesthood, the storied history in the Promised Land—went up in a puff of smoke. So much seemed closed and controlled by hopeless Babylonian imperial policy. However, to the shock and surprise of everyone, Yahweh raised up his messiah, Cyrus (Is 45:1). Isaiah’s new thing exploded in the desert (Is 43:19). Uprooting and destroying yielded to building and planting (Jer 1:10). Dry bones came to life (Ezek 37:1–14). The Persians defeated Babylon on October 29, 539 BC and Cyrus, the Persian king, allowed exiles to return. He even supported the rebuilding of Jerusalem’s temple (Ezra 1:1–4). Work began in 537 BC. Returnees constructed an altar and laid the temple’s foundation (Ezra 3). Then came the problems. Enemies “hired counselors to work against them and frustrate their plans during the entire reign of Cyrus king of Persia and down to the reign of Darius king of Persia.” (Ezra 4:5) Work did not resume until 520 BC. For seventeen years people walked past the same pile of cut timber, cedars from Lebanon, and hand-carved stones. Nothing moved. Nothing happened. Nothing changed. Year after year, the despair and disappointment became more acute. When building finally got underway, the prophet Haggai tells us what people were saying. Compared to Solomon’s temple, in all its glory, this temple was nothing (Hag 2:3). Nothing! Who could blame them? The second temple did not have Solomon’s silver and gold or the Ark of the Covenant. Its altar was made of stone, not bronze, and it had one, just one lampstand. When compared to Solomon’s 5 architectural wonder, this one looked second-class—to say the least. Zechariah lived among people who “despised the day of small things” (Zech 4:10). “Who despises the day of small things?” Not Zechariah! The prophet calls people to repent (1:2–6). Inspires them with visions and oracles (1:7–6:15). Invites Yehudites to change from fasts to feasts (7:1–8:23). Then he gives them stunning revelations about a coming Messiah (9:9–10; 10:4). He will be sold for thirty pieces of silver (11:12–13), pierced and killed (12:10) and struck down so his sheep scatter (13:7). In the end, though, this Messiah will rise again and return to reign with Yahweh in the New Jerusalem forevermore (14:9, 16, 17). Zechariah’s sermons rekindled people’s faith and strengthened their resolve. Yehudites rebuilt the temple and dedicated it on March 12, 515 BC. Zechariah, like others before him, believed God does big things with small days and small people with their small stuff. All Moses had was a staff and he conquered a kingdom (e.g., Ex 14:16). Gideon defeated Midianite hoards with 300 Abiezerites who lapped water like dogs (Judges 7). Samson took a jawbone of an ass and was victorious over 1,000 Philistines (1 Sam 15:16). A sling and a stone were all David needed to kill Goliath (1 Sam 17:50). Jesus also found great pleasure in small things—five loaves of barley bread and two little fish (e.g., Jn 6:9). The Savior once said, “The kingdom of God is like a mustard seed, which is the smallest seed you plant in the ground” (Mt 13:31). Passing through Jericho, on the way to Jerusalem, Jesus picked out little Zacchaeus and said to him, “Today salvation has come to this house, because this man, too, is a son of Abraham” (Lk 19:9). Then these words for the ages, “Let the little children come to me and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these” (Mt 19:14). “Who despises the day of small things?” (Zech 4:10) Not Jesus. He embraced them, knowing that they foreshadowed the ultimate day of small things. On that day, to belittle and demean him, his enemies used a whip, a blindfold, a spear, their fists, and three nails. Zechariah knew about this small day as well. “On that day they will mourn for him, as one mourns for an only child, and weep bitterly over him, as 6 one weeps over a firstborn son.” (Zech 12:10) Three days later Jesus was alive, never to die again! What has been destroyed and torched in your life? What looks hopeless, lifeless and dead? Is it a relationship? Your health? Your family? Your future? Your finances? Your vocation? Your ministry? God’s gift to you is the book of Zechariah. This book is for everyone living in wreckage and ruin. God has called all of us to rebuild something. It might not be Fox News worthy or get the attention of Time Magazine—but raising children who trust Jesus, being an honest and hard-working employee, running a business with biblical integrity, studying God’s Word on a daily basis, being a loving grandparent, keeping the Sabbath Day holy—these may appear to be small things. In the kingdom of God, not so! Our labor in the Lord is never in vain (1 Cor 15:58). God is calling us—just as he called Zechariah—to roll up our sleeves and start rebuilding. It takes planning, prayers, endurance and great determination. It is not by might nor by power, but by God’s Holy Spirit that we rebuild the ruins (Zech 4:6). The wreckage can rise again! __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ __________________________________________________ 7 Zechariah and the Bible Zechariah is virtually unknown in the church today—and it is our great loss. Why is that? Zechariah stands at the end of the OT and functions as a capstone for many earlier texts. The prophet draws on earlier passages and traditions like no other book in the OT. The book functions like a lens that helps focus and fill out the major contours of the OT. Moreover, among the Book of the Twelve, Zechariah is the most quoted and alluded to in the NT. He was led by “the Spirit of Christ” as he “predicted the sufferings of the Messiah and his subsequent glories” (1 Pet 1:11; cf. Jn 5:39). We see Jesus in the prophet’s first vision (Zech 1:8–13) when he meets a Man riding on a red horse who is “Yahweh’s Messenger” (Zech 1:12). The Messenger is the pre-incarnate Christ, appearing as Zechariah’s Interpreter throughout the rest of the prophet’s visions (Zech 2:2 [EN 1:19]; 2:7 [EN 2:3]; 3:1; 4:1; 5:5; 6:4). Though the Shoot motif is present in earlier prophetic texts (e.g., Is 11:1; Jer 23:5–6; 33:15–16), Zechariah furthers the idea and expands upon it (Zech 3:8; 6:12–15). Next to Ezekiel, Zechariah had a greater impact on Revelation than any other book in the OT. His influence is evident in, for instance, the pierced Messiah (Zech 12:10; Rev 1:7), the vision of the seven lampstands (Zech 4:2, 10; Rev 1:12–13), the four horsemen (Zech 1:7–8; Rev 6:1–8), the two olive trees (Zech 4:3, 12–14; Revelation 11), and the vision of the New Jerusalem (Zechariah 14; Revelation 21–22). Most importantly, passages from Zechariah 9–14 form the template for Christ’s passion. Some even refer to him as the “Prophet of Holy Week.” The prophet writes, “Rejoice greatly, O Daughter of Zion! Shout, O Daughter of Jerusalem! See, your king comes to you, righteous and being saved, gentle and riding on a donkey, on a colt, the foal of a donkey” (Zech 9:9; e.g., Mt 21:5; Jn 12:15). Predicting Christ’s betrayal, Zechariah notes, “So I took the thirty pieces of silver and threw them into Yahweh’s house to the potter” (Zech 11:12; Mt 27:9). The money was returned to the temple leaders (Zech 11:13; Mt 27:3, 10). In Gethsemane this scripture was fulfilled, “Strike the Shepherd, and the sheep will be 8 scattered” (Zech 13:7; Mt 26:31; Mk 14:27). Foreseeing the events on Good Friday, the prophet writes, “They will look on me, the one they have pierced” (Zech 12:10; Jn 19:37). The Roman soldier’s spear thrust results in a sudden flow of blood and water (Zech 13:1; Jn 19:34–35) while a number of people lament over Christ’s death (Zech 12:10–14; Lk 23:27, 48). The Messiah did not appear unannounced. His cross and empty tomb are declared in advance. After rebuking Cleopas and his companion on the road to Emmaus for their slowness to learn, Jesus opened the scriptures for them (Lk 24:27). He will do the same for us. Outline Zechariah 1–8 consists of three parts: 1) an introduction and call to repent (1:1–6); 2) a series of eight visions peppered with interpretive oracles (1:7–6:15); and 3) the prophet’s response to the question of fasting (7:1–8:23).
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Satrap of Western Anatolia and the Greeks
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 2017 The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks Eyal Meyer University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Ancient History, Greek and Roman through Late Antiquity Commons Recommended Citation Meyer, Eyal, "The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks" (2017). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 2473. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2473 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/2473 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The aS trap Of Western Anatolia And The Greeks Abstract This dissertation explores the extent to which Persian policies in the western satrapies originated from the provincial capitals in the Anatolian periphery rather than from the royal centers in the Persian heartland in the fifth ec ntury BC. I begin by establishing that the Persian administrative apparatus was a product of a grand reform initiated by Darius I, which was aimed at producing a more uniform and centralized administrative infrastructure. In the following chapter I show that the provincial administration was embedded with chancellors, scribes, secretaries and military personnel of royal status and that the satrapies were periodically inspected by the Persian King or his loyal agents, which allowed to central authorities to monitory the provinces. In chapter three I delineate the extent of satrapal authority, responsibility and resources, and conclude that the satraps were supplied with considerable resources which enabled to fulfill the duties of their office. After the power dynamic between the Great Persian King and his provincial governors and the nature of the office of satrap has been analyzed, I begin a diachronic scrutiny of Greco-Persian interactions in the fifth century BC.
    [Show full text]
  • 2 the Assyrian Empire, the Conquest of Israel, and the Colonization of Judah 37 I
    ISRAEL AND EMPIRE ii ISRAEL AND EMPIRE A Postcolonial History of Israel and Early Judaism Leo G. Perdue and Warren Carter Edited by Coleman A. Baker LONDON • NEW DELHI • NEW YORK • SYDNEY 1 Bloomsbury T&T Clark An imprint of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc Imprint previously known as T&T Clark 50 Bedford Square 1385 Broadway London New York WC1B 3DP NY 10018 UK USA www.bloomsbury.com Bloomsbury, T&T Clark and the Diana logo are trademarks of Bloomsbury Publishing Plc First published 2015 © Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker, 2015 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without prior permission in writing from the publishers. Leo G. Perdue, Warren Carter and Coleman A. Baker have asserted their rights under the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act, 1988, to be identified as Authors of this work. No responsibility for loss caused to any individual or organization acting on or refraining from action as a result of the material in this publication can be accepted by Bloomsbury or the authors. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. ISBN: HB: 978-0-56705-409-8 PB: 978-0-56724-328-7 ePDF: 978-0-56728-051-0 Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. Typeset by Forthcoming Publications (www.forthpub.com) 1 Contents Abbreviations vii Preface ix Introduction: Empires, Colonies, and Postcolonial Interpretation 1 I.
    [Show full text]
  • The Achaemenid Legacy in the Arsakid Period
    Studia Litteraria Universitatis Iagellonicae Cracoviensis 2019, special issue, pp. 175–186 Volume in Honour of Professor Anna Krasnowolska doi:10.4467/20843933ST.19.032.10975 www.ejournals.eu/Studia-Litteraria HTTP://ORCID.ORG/0000-0001-6709-752X MAREK JAN OLBRYCHT University of Rzeszów, Poland e-mail: [email protected] The Memory of the Past: the Achaemenid Legacy in the Arsakid Period Abstract The Achaemenid Empire, established by Cyrus the Great, provided a model looked up to by subsequent empires on the territory of Iran and the Middle East, including the empires ruled by Alexander of Macedonia, the Seleukids, and the Arsakids. Achaemenid patterns were eagerly imitated by minor rulers of Western Asia, including Media Atropatene, Armenia, Pontos, Kappadokia and Kommagene. The Arsakids harked back to Achaemenids, but their claims to the Achaemenid descendance were sporadic. Besides, there were no genealogical links between the Arsakids and Achaemenid satraps contrary to the dynastic patterns com- mon in the Hellenistic Middle East. Keywords: Iran, Cyrus the Great, Achaemenids, Arsakids, Achaemenid legacy In this article I shall try to explain why some rulers of the Arsakid period associa- ted their dynasty with the Achaemenids and what the context was of such declara- tions. The focus of this study is on the kings of Parthia from Arsakes I (248–211 B.C.) to Phraates IV (37–3/2 B.C.). The Achaemenids established the world’s first universal empire, spanning ter- ritories on three continents – Asia, Africa, and (temporary) Europe. The power of the Persians was founded by Cyrus the Great (559–530 B.C.), eulogised by the Iranians, Jews, Babylonian priests, and Greeks as well, who managed to make a not very numerous people inhabiting the lands along the Persian Gulf masters of an empire stretching from Afghanistan to the Aegean Sea, giving rise to the largest state of those times.
    [Show full text]
  • The University of Chicago Oriental Institute Seminars Number 2
    oi.uchicago.edu i THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ORIENTAL INSTITUTE SEMINARS NUMBER 2 Series Editors Leslie Schramer and Thomas G. Urban oi.uchicago.edu ii oi.uchicago.edu iii MARGINS OF WRITING, ORIGINS OF CULTURES edited by SETH L. SANDERS with contributions by Seth L. Sanders, John Kelly, Gonzalo Rubio, Jacco Dieleman, Jerrold Cooper, Christopher Woods, Annick Payne, William Schniedewind, Michael Silverstein, Piotr Michalowski, Paul-Alain Beaulieu, Theo van den Hout, Paul Zimansky, Sheldon Pollock, and Peter Machinist THE ORIENTAL INSTITUTE OF THE UNIVERSITY OF CHICAGO ORIENTAL INSTITUTE SEMINARS • NUMBER 2 CHICAGO • ILLINOIS oi.uchicago.edu iv Library of Congress Control Number: 2005938897 ISBN: 1-885923-39-2 ©2006 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved. Published 2006. Printed in the United States of America. The Oriental Institute, Chicago Co-managing Editors Thomas A. Holland and Thomas G. Urban Series Editors’ Acknowledgments The assistance of Katie L. Johnson is acknowledged in the production of this volume. Front Cover Illustration A teacher holding class in a village on the Island of Argo, Sudan. January 1907. Photograph by James Henry Breasted. Oriental Institute photograph P B924 Printed by McNaughton & Gunn, Saline, Michigan The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of American National Standard for Infor- mation Services — Permanence of Paper for Printed Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984. oi.uchicago.edu v TABLE OF CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS .................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Places and Peoples in Central Asia Graeco-Roman
    PLACES AND PEOPLES IN CENTRAL ASIA AND IN THE GRAECO-ROMAN NEAR EAST ¥]-^µ A MULTILINGUAL GAZETTEER COMPILED FOR THE SERICA PROJECT FROM SELECT PRE-ISLAMIC SOURCES BY PROF. SAMUEL N.C. LIEU FRAS, FRHISTS, FSA, FAHA Visiting Fellow, Wolfson College, Cambridge and Inaugural Distinguished Professor in Ancient History, Macquarie University, Sydney ¥]-^µ ANCIENT INDIA AND IRAN TRUST (AIIT) CAMBRIDGE, UK AND ANCIENT CULTURES RESEARCH CENTRE (ACRC) MACQUARIE UNIVERSITY, NSW, AUSTRALIA (JULY, 2012) ABBREVIATIONS Acta Mari = The Acts of Mār Mārī the CPD = A Concise Pahlavi Dictionary, ed. Apostle, ed. and trans. A. Harrak D. MacKenzie (Oxford, 1971). (Atlanta, 2005). Ctes. = Ctesias. AI = Acta Iranica (Leiden – Téhéran- DCBT = W.E. Soothill and L. Hodous Liège 1974f.) (eds.) A Dictionary of Chinese Akk. = Akkadian (language). Buddhist Terms (London, 1934). Amm. = Ammianus Marcellinus. DB = Inscription of Darius at Behistan, cf. Anc. Lett. = Sogdian Ancient Letters, ed. OP 116-135. H. Reichelt, Die soghdischen DB (Akk.) = The Bisitun Inscription of Handschriften-reste des Britischen Darius the Great- Babylonian Version, Museums, 2 vols. (Heidelberg 1928- ed. E.N. von Voigtlander, CII, Pt. I, 1931), ii, 1-42. Vol. 2 (London, 1978). A?P = Inscription of Artaxerxes II or III at DB (Aram.) = The Bisitun Inscription of Persepolis, cf. OP 15-56. Darius the Great- Aramaic Version, Aram. = Aramaic (language). eds. J.C. Greenfield and B. Porten, CII, Arm. = Armenian (language). Pt. I, Vol. 5 (London, 1982). Arr. = Flavius Arrianus. Déd. = J.T. Milik, Dédicaces faites par Athan. Hist. Arian. = Athanasius, Historia des dieux (Palmyra, Hatra, Tyr et des Arianorum ad Monachos, PG 25.691- thiases sémitiques à l'époque romaine 796.
    [Show full text]
  • The Achaemenid Empire in South Asia and Recent Excavations in Akra in Northwest Pakistan Peter Magee Bryn Mawr College, [email protected]
    Bryn Mawr College Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology Faculty Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology Research and Scholarship 2005 The Achaemenid Empire in South Asia and Recent Excavations in Akra in Northwest Pakistan Peter Magee Bryn Mawr College, [email protected] Cameron Petrie Robert Knox Farid Khan Ken Thomas Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.brynmawr.edu/arch_pubs Part of the Classical Archaeology and Art History Commons, and the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Custom Citation Magee, Peter, Cameron Petrie, Richard Knox, Farid Khan, and Ken Thomas. 2005. The Achaemenid Empire in South Asia and Recent Excavations in Akra in Northwest Pakistan. American Journal of Archaeology 109:711-741. This paper is posted at Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College. http://repository.brynmawr.edu/arch_pubs/82 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Achaemenid Empire in South Asia and Recent Excavations in Akra in Northwest Pakistan PETER MAGEE, CAMERON PETRIE, ROBERT KNOX, FARID KHAN, AND KEN THOMAS Abstract subject peoples. A significant proportion of this The impact of the Achaemenid annexation of north- research has been carried out on the regions that westernPakistan has remained a focus for archaeological border the classical world, in particular Anatolia,1 researchfor more than a century.A lack of well-stratified the Levant,2and Egypt.3In contrast, the far eastern settlementsand a focus on artifactsthat are not necessar- extent of the which is the for the effects of control empire, encompassed by ily appropriate assessing imperial borders of Pakistan and haveuntil now obfuscatedour understandingof this issue.
    [Show full text]
  • Map 6 Asia Orientalis Compiled by M.U
    Map 6 Asia Orientalis Compiled by M.U. Erdosy, 1997 Introduction Map 6 embraces four distinct regions: central Asia and the Indus valley, which had lengthy contacts with the Greeks and Romans; and Tibet and Chinese Turkestan, which had practically none. The first two entered Western consciousness through the eastward expansion of the Achaemenid empire, which brought them into the orbit of Greek geographical knowledge, and won them prominence as the theaters of Alexander the Great’s eastern campaigns. Although colonization in the wake of Macedonian conquests was short-lived, classical influence on the arts and crafts of the area, if not its religious and political institutions, remained prominent for centuries. Moreover, even though the Parthians and Sasanians effectively severed overland links between central Asia and the Mediterranean world, the Alexander legend helped preserve geographical information for posterity (albeit frequently in a distorted form), even if little in the way of fresh data was added until Late Roman times. By contrast, areas to the north and east of the Himalayas remained in effect terra incognita until the nineteenth century, when the heart of Asia first received serious exploration by westerners, mostly as a by-product of the “Great Game.” Despite the impressive lists of toponyms and ethnonyms found in Ptolemy’s Geography and Ammianus Marcellinus, few cities and tribes can be localized with any certitude, since ancient geographers not only lacked first-hand knowledge of the area, but were also hampered by a defective image of the world, which was sure to produce serious distortions in peripheral regions. As a result, the eastern half of Map 6 is largely devoid of identifiable sites (although it contributes extensively to the list of unlocated toponyms and ethnonyms), while the western half is densely populated.
    [Show full text]
  • Cyrus and the Achaemenids*
    CYRUS AND THE ACHAEMENIDS* By Matt Waters University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire Understanding of early Achaemenid history has him through four generations: “Darius the king undergone significant changes in recent scholarship. proclaims: My father is Hystaspes, the father of Recent research has emphasised the familial distinction Hystaspes is Arsames, the father of Arsames was between Cyrus the Great and Darius I, and it has Ariaramnes, the father of Ariaramnes was Teispes, the become difficult to give credence to the traditional, father of Teispes was Achaemenes. Darius the king modern reconstruction of Darius’ kinship claims that proclaims: For this reason we are called implies a dual descent from Achaemenes via Teispes: ‘Achaemenids’.”2 This lineal descent, in subsequent one line to Cyrus and the other to Darius. With Cyrus’ inscriptions, became simply “Achaemenid” (i.e., minus inscriptions at Pasargadae demonstrated as spurious, the full genealogical progression), used as a dynastic and the “Achaemenid dynasty” demonstrated as marker. This Achaemenid emphasis is consistently Darius’ creation ex nihilo, the relationship between reflected in Darius’ titulary, for example, “I am Darius Darius and his predecessors requires a new assessment. the Great King, King of Kings, King of many countries, Darius has been viewed as an unabashed liar, son of Hystaspes, an Achaemenid” (DPe §1 — with despite the consistent antipathy toward the Lie (Old minor variations in several other inscriptions).3 Persian drauga) emphasised in his royal inscriptions. The name Achaemenes or title “Achaemenid” does As typical of the genre of royal apologia, the truth not occur in Cyrus’ inscriptions (notwithstanding the therein reflects the truth as the sovereign portrayed it, Pasargadae inscriptions, in fact commissioned and with historical accuracy, as we would define it, not a placed by Darius).4 Cyrus traced his lineage to his priority.
    [Show full text]
  • Michael Witzel, Harvarduniversity the HOME of the ARYANS § 1. Homelands the Search for an Indo-European Homeland Has Taken Us S
    1 Michael Witzel, HarvardUniversity THE HOME OF THE ARYANS § 1. Homelands The search for an Indo-European homeland has taken us some two hundred years by now. The discussion can easily be summarized, if somewhat facetiously, by: the homeland is at, or close to the homeland of the author of the book in question... The same applies, mutatis mutandis, to the homeland of the Indo-Iranians, or Arya/Ārya, as they call themselves. For this, we will have to look a little bit further afield, first of all, to the Urals. The main part of this paper, however, will be concerned with the supposed "mythical homeland" of the Iranians, Airiianəm Vaẽjah. § 2 Ural Aryans? For, it is on the W. Siberian plains just east of the Ural mountains, on the rivers Išim and Tobol, that Russian archaeologists have found already some 20 years ago what might amount to some of the earliest attested traces of Aryan material culture -- and even of Aryan belief. This is not altogether unknown in the west but as it has found so little resonance in Indo-Iranian studies, that some of the evidence may be repeated briefly. The Sintashta-Arkaim culture is found in the Chelyabinsk region east of the Urals with some 30 sites, all situated at a strategically chosen location at the bend of a river. It is part of the Andronovo cultural horizon of the steppe and forested steppe of Kazakhstan and surroundings, reaching up to the Yenessei and the high valleys of the Pamir and Tian Shan. This now includes some 250 sites (KUZ'MINA 1994).
    [Show full text]
  • The Indo-Greeks the Greek in Bactria Greek Settlers Were Present in India
    The Indo-Greeks The Greek in Bactria Greek settlers were present in India, even at the time of Alexander’s invasion of India. An example is the Greek colony at Nysa. On the death of Alexander, Asian territories, to the east of Asia Minor, which had been conquered by him, fell into the share of Seleukos. Parthia and Bactrian formed two easternmost provinces of the Seleukid empire. Around the middle of the third century BC, Bactria revolted under its satrap, Diodotos I. About the same time, Parthia revolted under Arsakes I, a man of unknown antecedents. These revolts occurred during the reign of Antiochos II (261-246 BC). Neither Seleukos II (246-226 BC), nor Seleukos III (226-222 BC) was able to re- establish Seleukid authority over these provinces. Antiochos III (222-187 BC) marched against Parthia and Bactria. By that time, the reign of Diodotos I, and also of his son and successor, Diodotos II, had come to an end in Bactria. The Family of Euthydemos I When Antiochos III besieged Bactria, it was being ruled by Euthydemos, who was, perhaps, responsible for the end of the reign of Diodotos II. Antiochos III laid siege to Bactria, which continued for a long time, but produced no result. Polybios : Euthydemos sent a proposal for peace, through his son, Demetrios. Antiochos III was informed that Euthydemos had obtained kingship, not by revolting against the Seleukids, but by putting to death, the descendant (Diodotos II) of the original rebel (Diodotos I). Antiochos III was so impressed by Demetrios, that he decided to marry his daughter to the prince.
    [Show full text]
  • Map 3 Asia Occidentalis Compiled by M
    Map 3 Asia Occidentalis Compiled by M. Roaf and the Project Office, 1998 Introduction Most of the territory shown only on this map consists of the deserts of Arabia, inland Iran and central Asia. Note that the areas marked with the “dry lake, wadi” symbol in inland Iran are treacherous “kavir,” a thin dry crust covering liquid mud beneath; many travelers have perished when the crust gave way beneath their feet. The only regions with significant settlement are in southern Iran (eastern Persis and Carmania) and Sistan (Drangiane). Very little archaeological fieldwork has been carried out in south-east Iran and western Afghanistan, and there are many outstanding problems concerning the historical geography of these regions between the beginning of the Achaemenid period and the end of the Sasanian. The standard works on Islamic historical geography (Schwarz 1896; Le Strange 1905) are based on written sources, and do not take into consideration any twentieth-century archaeological investigations; the same general point applies to entries in RE. The suggestions made by these scholars for the identification of ancient place names are often based on the similarity of modern and ancient ones; they are sometimes plausible, but seldom certain. In several cases it is certain that names have moved from one settlement to another. Sometimes the distances are not great: for example, Sasanian and early Islamic Darabgird is little more than four miles from modern Darab, and Sasanian and early Islamic Sirjan is about ten miles from the modern town of the same name. But in other cases the distances are greater: [Bardasir], for example, is about forty miles from modern Kerman.
    [Show full text]
  • BACTRIA BEFORE ALEXANDER Ancient Bactria1 and The
    PART TWO BACTRIA BEFORE ALEXANDER Land and People Ancient Bactria1 and the surrounding regions of Sogdiana, Margiana, Aria, Drangiana, Arachosia, and 'India' lay within the heartland of con­ tinental Eurasia in an area which now extends across the disputed borders of six modern nations. 2 The entire region is part of the vast and varied geological system identified with Central Asia. Although best known for its open steppe, the principal feature of this system is the wide range of mountains descending in a diagonal line from Lake Baykal in the northeast to the Hindu Kush in the southwest. Historically, this great divide has defined the cultural limits of three very important civilizations: the Chinese, Iranian, and Indian. 3 But, like the Alps, this formidable 'barrier' is breached in numerous places and thus allows access along certain routes from one cultural center to the next, as the existence of the famous Silk Road attests. 4 The central loca­ tion of ancient Bactria within the larger system of Central Asia explains its special significance as a cultural and commercial crossroads. The geologic history of the mountains dominating this region has not been fully investigated, but their development is part of the same tectonic process which produced the massive belt beginning in the Pyrenees and stretching by way of the Pamirs to the Himalayas. 5 From the so-called 1 'Bactria' is used in most books to denote the combined region of Bactria-Sogdiana, but I shall endeavor ( except where style dictates otherwise) to distinguish between Bactria proper and Sogdiana. While it is true that the Persian satrapy of 'Bactria' included Sog­ diana, it is shown below that the two regions often had quite different histories.
    [Show full text]