Plutarch on the End of the Persian Empire1

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

Plutarch on the End of the Persian Empire1 GRAECO-LATINA BRUNENSIA 16, 2011, 2 ERAN ALMAGOR (BEN GURION UNIVERSITY) PLUTARCH ON THE END OF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE1 This paper focuses on two aspects of the moral, issues pertaining to the end of the Persian Empire as found in Plutarch’s works. One is the character of the monarchs who brought about the decline of the political framework – in particular Artaxerxes II (in his biography) and Artaxerxes III (in De Iside et Osiride); the other is the character of the social envi- ronment in which they acted, the ‘national’ character of Persia, as it were, and how it is portrayed by Plutarch as producing its own demise when encountering Alexander (in the biography of the latter). It might also be said that Plutarch’s depiction of Achaemenid Persia insinuates an attitude towards contemporary Rome. Key Words: Plutarch; Persia; Artaxerxes II Mnemon; Alexander the Great; Artaxerxes III Ochus; Succesion of Empires; Achaemenid Empire. A reader seeking the historical, political, institutional, social or military reasons for the fall of the Persian Achaemenid Empire in the pages of the works of the Greek author and biographer Plutarch, might be disappointed.2 It is not just the often quoted passage at the beginning of the biography of Alexander (1.2), with the claim of the narrator to write a biography and not history, which discloses a method remote from what we would deem historical research.3 It is also the frequent use of sophisticated symbolism, 1 Earlier versions of this paper were presented to audiences at Edinburgh and Brno, and I am thankful for all the comments that helped me improve it. I am grateful to Prof. C. Pelling for reading an earlier draft. All translations in the notes are from the LCL edition, unless stated otherwise. 2 Cf. BINDER, C. 2008. Plutarchs Vita des Artaxerxes. Berlin/New York: Walter de Gruyter, 12–16; STRONK, J. P. 2010. Ctesias’ Persian History. Part I: Introduction, Text, and Translation. Düsseldorf, 93. 3 οὔτε γὰρ ἱστορίας γράφομεν, ἀλλὰ βίους. See DUFF, T. 1999. Plutarch’s Lives: Exploring Virtue and vice. Oxford, 14–22; PELLING, C. 2002. Plutarch and History. Swansea: Classical Press of Wales, 259–260. In fact, the genre in which 4 ERAN ALMAGOR (BEN GURION UNIVERSITY) the employment of intricate narrative structures, the layers of significance lurking in the Lives, the allusions, the ironies and the allegories that ap- pear to necessitate a literary treatment and a literary interpretation from the reader of the biographies.4 Yet, Plutarch is certainly not a mere writer of fiction. The imagery he uses supports historical observations that cannot be divulged otherwise. Furthermore, even though he is at times not absolutely true to his sources (as can be judged by the extant ones), Plutarch does ar- rive at a greater truth than that conveyed by other texts.5 It would seem that the interest of Plutarch in the Achaemenid kingdom was first and foremost part of the nostalgic fascination of his age with the Greek heroic past.6 Like other contemporary second century AD Greek authors and orators, Plutarch’s attention was drawn to Persia and to the time when Hellenic identity was moulded in response to the eastern threat.7 One should also bear in mind the possibility that the growing appeal of the East of old following the preparations to the Parthian campaign of Trajan (114–117 AD) may well have influenced the biographer.8 Yet, regardless Plutarch writes is hard to pinpoint. In other places his work is presented as history; cf. Cim. 2.5; Demost. 2.1; Aem. Paul. 1.1; Thes. 1.2; Tib.-Gai. Gracch. 1.1. 4 See C. PELLING (2002: 171–195, 365–386). 5 See C. PELLING (2002: 143–170). 6 See BOWIE, E. L. 1970. “The Greeks and their Past in the Second Sophistic.” Past and Present 46: 3–41 [7, 14, 27]; SWAIN, S. 1996. Hellenism and Empire. Oxford, 95–96; WHITMARSH, T. 2005. The Second Sophistic. Oxford, 68 n.43; cf. Philostratus, VS 519–520, 541, 595. For Plutarch’s interest in Persia see HOOD, D. C. 1967. Plutarch and the Persians. Diss. University of Southern California; PELLING, C. 2007. „De malignitate Plutarchi: Plutarch, Herodotus, and the Persian Wars.“ In BRIDGES, E. – HALL, E. – RHODES, P. J. [EDS.] Cultural Responses to the Persian Wars: Antiquity to the Third Millennium. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 145–164. 7 ����������������������������������������In addition, Plutarch’s interest in the ��������������������������������������������oroastrian religion, whose tenet of two op- posite principles at work in the universe was very close to his own brand of dualism (see De Iside et Osiride 369a–371c, De anim. proc. 1026b, Cf. also Proc. An. 1026b) may also have played a part. DILLON, J. 1977. The Middle Platonists. London, 191, is convinced that such Persian influence and knowledge about Persian religion came to Plutarch primarily from his teacher. This fact may also have prompted him to turn his attention to Persian civilization. On Plutarch’s understanding of �oroastrian religion, see DE JONG A. 1997. Traditions of the Magi: Zoroastrianism in Greek and Latin Literature. Leiden, 157–204. 8 On Roman appropriation of fifth century images of the Persian Wars see ROSIVACH, V.J. 1984. “The Romans‘ View of the Persians.“ Classical World, 78, 1–8; SPAW- FORTH, A. 1994. “Symbol of Unity? The Persian-Wars Tradition in the Roman Em- pire.“ In HORNBLOWER, S. [ED.] Greek Historiography. Oxford University Press, 1994, 233–247, especially 237–243; HARDIE, P. 1997. “Fifth-Century Athenian and Augustan Images of the Barbarian Other.“ Classics Ireland, 4, 46–56. Cf. ISAAC, PLUTARCH ON THE END OF THE PERSIAN EMPIRE 5 of specific political circumstances, a role was surely played by the general interest of men of letters in the theme of the succession of empires, from the Ancient Near Eastern kingdoms to Rome.9 Furthermore, while it may appear inappropriate or even too narrow an attitude in the eyes of historians today, Plutarch seems to have been par- ticularly interested in the demise of the Achaemenid kingdom as part of his treatment of virtue and vice and of his concern to trace the successes and failures of rulers and states to their moral excellence or failing, respective- ly.10 What is of importance to Plutarch in his descriptions is to explore the ability or inability of his heroes to let the rational part of their soul guide B. 2004, The Invention of Racism in Classical Antiquity. Princeton University Press, 375–380. Cf. Arrian’s Parthica (FGrH 156, F 30–53). The inspiration of Trajan’s expedition may be analogous to the influence of the campaigns of Verus (162–166 AD). See an anonymous treatise (FGrH 203), the attraction of anecdotes from the Great King’s court (e.g., in Polyaenus, who also planned to write on Parthian wars: Strat. 8. praef.), and the reference to Xenophon’s march (e.g., Lucian, Quom. hist. conscrib., dealing with historians of the Parthian wars, cites Anabasis 1.1.1 at 24). There are echoes of Greek action against ‘Asia’ in the Roman Lives (Cf. Plut. Comp. Arist.-Cat. Mai. 2.3; Comp. Crass-.Nic. 4.4). There may be a sardonic variation of this identification in Mark Antony’s comparison of his failed venture in the east with that of the Ten Thousand and in his admiration of Xenophon’s army (Ant. 45.12). Note that ironically, Plutarch begins the Parthian sequence in the biography by having Mark Antony equate himself with the Persian king Artaxerxes I (Ant. 37.1). Cf. PELLING, C. 1988. Plutarch: Life of Antony. Cambridge, 221–222. 9 The idea of a series of world empires (which would later assume the form of translatio imperii; See LE GOFF, J. 1964. La civilisation de l’Occident médiéval. Paris, Chapter VI) can already be seen in Herodotus (1,95; 1,130) and Ctesias (FGrH 688, F 1 and 5) as a model with three items (Assyria-Media-Persia). A scheme of four empires appears in the OT book of Daniel (2:1–40; cf. 7:2–3), variously interpreted, and one of five successive kingdoms is found in authors from the Roman period (e.g., Polyb. 38.22.1–3; Vell. Pat. 1.6.6 [Aemilius Sura]; Dion. Hal. Ant. Rom. 1.2.1–4; cf. Tac. Hist. 5.8; Appian, Praef. 9). See MENDELS, D. 1981. „The Five Empires. A Note on a Pro- pagandistic Topos.“ American Journal of Philology, 102, 330—37; ALONSO NÚÑEZ, J.M. 1983. „Die Abfolge der Weltreiche bei Polybios und Dionysios von Halikarnas- sos.“ Historia, 32, 411–426; IDEM. „Appian and the World Empires.“ Athenaeum, 62, 640–644; KATHERINE CLARKE, 1999. Between Geography and History: Hellenistic Constructions of the Roman World. Oxford University Press, 15–16, 226–228. This idea had subversive connotations and was used by groups opposed to the Imperial rule: SWAIN, J. S. 1940. „The Theory of the Four Monarchies: Opposition History Under the Roman Empire.“ Classical Philology, 35, 1–21; MOMIGLIANO, A. 1987. On Pagans, Jews and Christians. Middletown> Wesleyan University Press, CT, 31–57. See WIESEHÖFER, J. 2003. „ The Medes and the idea of the succession of empires in antiquity.“ In LANFRANCHI, G. B. – ROAF, M. – ROLLINGER, R. [EDS.] Continuity of Empire (?) Assyria, Media, Persia. Padova, 2003, 391–396. 10 For this approach see T. DUFF (1999: 135–141, 162, 189, 205, 245, 263). 6 ERAN ALMAGOR (BEN GURION UNIVERSITY) emotions and not let them get out of control. In his view, a bad character is formed by the habitual choice of the psyche to act in a certain manner which follows an excessive passion, or, in other words, in the incapability of the soul to find the right ‘mean’ between extremes.11 The moral concern of Plutarch was to provide his readers with a model of a person’s soul worth following and imitating.12 When applied to the great deeds and events of the past, this view spells an ethical reading of history, in which the moral lessons are the only significant interpretation that really matters.13 Plutarch’s reason for the fall of the Persian Empire is, thus, phrased in ethical terms.
Recommended publications
  • Artaxerxes II
    Artaxerxes II John Shannahan BAncHist (Hons) (Macquarie University) Thesis submitted for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Department of Ancient History, Macquarie University. May, 2015. ii Contents List of Illustrations v Abstract ix Declaration xi Acknowledgements xiii Abbreviations and Conventions xv Introduction 1 CHAPTER 1 THE EARLY REIGN OF ARTAXERXES II The Birth of Artaxerxes to Cyrus’ Challenge 15 The Revolt of Cyrus 41 Observations on the Egyptians at Cunaxa 53 Royal Tactics at Cunaxa 61 The Repercussions of the Revolt 78 CHAPTER 2 399-390: COMBATING THE GREEKS Responses to Thibron, Dercylidas, and Agesilaus 87 The Role of Athens and the Persian Fleet 116 Evagoras the Opportunist and Carian Commanders 135 Artaxerxes’ First Invasion of Egypt: 392/1-390/89? 144 CHAPTER 3 389-380: THE KING’S PEACE AND CYPRUS The King’s Peace (387/6): Purpose and Influence 161 The Chronology of the 380s 172 CHAPTER 4 NUMISMATIC EXPRESSIONS OF SOLIDARITY Coinage in the Reign of Artaxerxes 197 The Baal/Figure in the Winged Disc Staters of Tiribazus 202 Catalogue 203 Date 212 Interpretation 214 Significance 223 Numismatic Iconography and Egyptian Independence 225 Four Comments on Achaemenid Motifs in 227 Philistian Coins iii The Figure in the Winged Disc in Samaria 232 The Pertinence of the Political Situation 241 CHAPTER 5 379-370: EGYPT Planning for the Second Invasion of Egypt 245 Pharnabazus’ Invasion of Egypt and Aftermath 259 CHAPTER 6 THE END OF THE REIGN Destabilisation in the West 267 The Nature of the Evidence 267 Summary of Current Analyses 268 Reconciliation 269 Court Intrigue and the End of Artaxerxes’ Reign 295 Conclusion: Artaxerxes the Diplomat 301 Bibliography 309 Dies 333 Issus 333 Mallus 335 Soli 337 Tarsus 338 Unknown 339 Figures 341 iv List of Illustrations MAP Map 1 Map of the Persian Empire xviii-xix Brosius, The Persians, 54-55 DIES Issus O1 Künker 174 (2010) 403 333 O2 Lanz 125 (2005) 426 333 O3 CNG 200 (2008) 63 333 O4 Künker 143 (2008) 233 333 R1 Babelon, Traité 2, pl.
    [Show full text]
  • The Outbreak of the Rebellion of Cyrus the Younger Jeffrey Rop
    The Outbreak of the Rebellion of Cyrus the Younger Jeffrey Rop N THE ANABASIS, Xenophon asserts that the Persian prince Cyrus the Younger was falsely accused of plotting a coup I d’état against King Artaxerxes II shortly after his accession to the throne in 404 BCE. Spared from execution by the Queen Mother Parysatis, Cyrus returned to Lydia determined to seize the throne for himself. He secretly prepared his rebellion by securing access to thousands of Greek hoplites, winning over Persian officials and most of the Greek cities of Ionia, and continuing to send tribute and assurances of his loyalty to the unsuspecting King (1.1).1 In Xenophon’s timeline, the rebellion was not official until sometime between the muster of his army at Sardis in spring 401, which spurred his rival Tissaphernes to warn Artaxerxes (1.2.4–5), and his arrival several months later at Thapsacus on the Euphrates, where Cyrus first openly an- nounced his true intentions (1.4.11). Questioning the “strange blindness” of Artaxerxes in light of Cyrus’ seemingly obvious preparations for revolt, Pierre Briant proposed an alternative timeline placing the outbreak of the rebellion almost immediately after Cyrus’ return to Sardis in late 404 or early 403.2 In his reconstruction, the King allowed Cyrus 1 See also Ctesias FGrHist 688 F 16.59, Diod. 14.19, Plut. Artax. 3–4. 2 Pierre Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander (Winona Lake 2002) 617–620. J. K. Anderson, Xenophon (New York 1974) 80, expresses a similar skepticism. Briant concludes his discussion by stating that the rebellion officially (Briant does not define “official,” but I take it to mean when either the King or Cyrus declared it publicly) began in 401 with the muster of Cyrus’ army at Sardis, but it is nonetheless appropriate to characterize Briant’s position as dating the official outbreak of the revolt to 404/3.
    [Show full text]
  • Kings & Events of the Babylonian, Persian and Greek Dynasties
    KINGS AND EVENTS OF THE BABYLONIAN, PERSIAN, AND GREEK DYNASTIES 612 B.C. Nineveh falls to neo-Babylonian army (Nebuchadnezzar) 608 Pharaoh Necho II marched to Carchemesh to halt expansion of neo-Babylonian power Josiah, King of Judah, tries to stop him Death of Josiah and assumption of throne by his son, Jehoahaz Jehoiakim, another son of Josiah, replaced Jehoahaz on the authority of Pharaoh Necho II within 3 months Palestine and Syria under Egyptian rule Josiah’s reforms dissipate 605 Nabopolassar sends troops to fight remaining Assyrian army and the Egyptians at Carchemesh Nebuchadnezzar chased them all the way to the plains of Palestine Nebuchadnezzar got word of the death of his father (Nabopolassar) so he returned to Babylon to receive the crown On the way back he takes Daniel and other members of the royal family into exile 605 - 538 Babylon in control of Palestine, 597; 10,000 exiled to Babylon 586 Jerusalem and the temple destroyed and large deportation 582 Because Jewish guerilla fighters killed Gedaliah another last large deportation occurred SUCCESSORS OF NEBUCHADNEZZAR 562 - 560 Evil-Merodach released Jehoiakim (true Messianic line) from custody 560 - 556 Neriglissar 556 Labaski-Marduk reigned 556 - 539 Nabonidus: Spent most of the time building a temple to the mood god, Sin. This earned enmity of the priests of Marduk. Spent the rest of his time trying to put down revolts and stabilize the kingdom. He moved to Tema and left the affairs of state to his son, Belshazzar Belshazzar: Spent most of his time trying to restore order. Babylonia’s great threat was Media.
    [Show full text]
  • Ctesias and His Eunuchs: a Challenge for Modern Historians 
    Histos () – CTESIAS AND HIS EUNUCHS: A CHALLENGE FOR MODERN HISTORIANS Abstract: The prominence of eunuchs in Ctesias’ account of Persia has given rise in the last decades to a paradoxical combination of scepticism about their historicity and realis- tic interpretation questioning whether they were in fact castrated. The present paper brings to light the difficulties of the assessment of them as historical figures. It first takes into account the fact that we know Ctesias’ eunuchs only through fragments, that is, through the filter of later authors who refer to him while possibly having a personal rela- tionship to eunuchs in their own society. It then describes the distinctive features of Cte- sias’ eunuchs within Greek literature on Persia and presents the main interpretative trends on them. It examines possible touchstones and shows how difficult it is to cross- check Ctesias’ account of eunuchs with Near Eastern evidence. It assesses the founda- tions of current prevailing positions, and shows that a hypothesis has become a— questionable—dogma on two sorts of historical referents for Ctesias’ εὐνοῦχοι . Last, it questions the pertinence of ‘orientalism’ as a label for the representation of eunuchs in Ctesias’ account, and even highlights its shortcomings. All in all, this issue is in fact a per- fect illustration of the methodological problems that modern historians often have to face when they try to study ancient Persia through the accounts of Greek historians. t is curious that a phenomenon which was so important in so many major civilizations has been virtually taboo in modern scholarship’: ‘I such were some of the concluding words of A.
    [Show full text]
  • Citations in Classics and Ancient History
    Citations in Classics and Ancient History The most common style in use in the field of Classical Studies is the author-date style, also known as Chicago 2, but MLA is also quite common and perfectly acceptable. Quick guides for each of MLA and Chicago 2 are readily available as PDF downloads. The Chicago Manual of Style Online offers a guide on their web-page: http://www.chicagomanualofstyle.org/tools_citationguide.html The Modern Language Association (MLA) does not, but many educational institutions post an MLA guide for free access. While a specific citation style should be followed carefully, none take into account the specific practices of Classical Studies. They are all (Chicago, MLA and others) perfectly suitable for citing most resources, but should not be followed for citing ancient Greek and Latin primary source material, including primary sources in translation. Citing Primary Sources: Every ancient text has its own unique system for locating content by numbers. For example, Homer's Iliad is divided into 24 Books (what we might now call chapters) and the lines of each Book are numbered from line 1. Herodotus' Histories is divided into nine Books and each of these Books is divided into Chapters and each chapter into line numbers. The purpose of such a system is that the Iliad, or any primary source, can be cited in any language and from any publication and always refer to the same passage. That is why we do not cite Herodotus page 66. Page 66 in what publication, in what edition? Very early in your textbook, Apodexis Historia, a passage from Herodotus is reproduced.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Old Persian Prods Oktor Skjærvø
    An Introduction to Old Persian Prods Oktor Skjærvø Copyright © 2016 by Prods Oktor Skjærvø Please do not cite in print without the author’s permission. This Introduction may be distributed freely as a service to teachers and students of Old Iranian. In my experience, it can be taught as a one-term full course at 4 hrs/w. My thanks to all of my students and colleagues, who have actively noted typos, inconsistencies of presentation, etc. TABLE OF CONTENTS Select bibliography ................................................................................................................................... 9 Sigla and Abbreviations ........................................................................................................................... 12 Lesson 1 ..................................................................................................................................................... 13 Old Persian and old Iranian. .................................................................................................................... 13 Script. Origin. .......................................................................................................................................... 14 Script. Writing system. ........................................................................................................................... 14 The syllabary. .......................................................................................................................................... 15 Logograms. ............................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Mercenaries, Poleis, and Empires in the Fourth Century Bce
    The Pennsylvania State University The Graduate School College of the Liberal Arts ALL THE KING’S GREEKS: MERCENARIES, POLEIS, AND EMPIRES IN THE FOURTH CENTURY BCE A Dissertation in History and Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies by Jeffrey Rop © 2013 Jeffrey Rop Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy May 2013 ii The dissertation of Jeffrey Rop was reviewed and approved* by the following: Mark Munn Professor of Ancient Greek History and Greek Archaeology, Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies Dissertation Advisor Chair of Committee Gary N. Knoppers Edwin Erle Sparks Professor of Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies, Religious Studies, and Jewish Studies Garrett G. Fagan Professor of Ancient History and Classics and Ancient Mediterranean Studies Kenneth Hirth Professor of Anthropology Carol Reardon George Winfree Professor of American History David Atwill Associate Professor of History and Asian Studies Graduate Program Director for the Department of History *Signatures are on file in the Graduate School iii ABSTRACT This dissertation examines Greek mercenary service in the Near East from 401- 330 BCE. Traditionally, the employment of Greek soldiers by the Persian Achaemenid Empire and the Kingdom of Egypt during this period has been understood to indicate the military weakness of these polities and the superiority of Greek hoplites over their Near Eastern counterparts. I demonstrate that the purported superiority of Greek heavy infantry has been exaggerated by Greco-Roman authors. Furthermore, close examination of Greek mercenary service reveals that the recruitment of Greek soldiers was not the purpose of Achaemenid foreign policy in Greece and the Aegean, but was instead an indication of the political subordination of prominent Greek citizens and poleis, conducted through the social institution of xenia, to Persian satraps and kings.
    [Show full text]
  • Intertestamental Period Dynasties
    Intertestamental Chronologies* Year Egypt Asia Judea Texts Persian rule Persian-appointed 360 Artaxerxes II 404–358 governors Job, Jonah Artaxerxes III post-exilic 358–338 350 340 Arses 338–336 Darius III 336–331 330 Macedonian rule Alexander the Great 333–323 Greek control Wars for Succession Ptolemaic–Seleucid 320 Ptolemaic rule control (disputed) Ptolemy I Soter Zadokite High Priests 323–285 Onias I c. 320–280 310 Seleucid rule Esther Seleucus I fourth–third cent. 312–280 (Palestine) 300 Ptolemaic rule (300?) Ecclesiastes early third cent. - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - (Palestine) 290 (Zadokites) 1 Enoch third to first cent. Ptolemy II 280 Philadelphus 285–246 Antiochus I Soter Simon I 280–261 c. 280–260 270 260 Antiochus II Theus Eleazar 261–246 c. 260–245 Septuagint 250 ca. 250 (Alexandria) Ptolemy III Evegetes Seleucus II Callinicus Manasseh c. 245–240 240 246–221 246–226 Onias II c. 240–218 230 Tobit late third cent. Seleucus III Ceraunus 226–223 (Palestine) 220 Ptolemy IV Philopator Antiochus III the Great 221–203 223–187 Simeon II 210 c. 218–185 200 Ptolemy V Epiphanes 203–181 Seleucid rule (200) (Simon II) Jubilees 190 third–second cent. (Palestine) Seleucus IV Philopator 187–175 Onias III Sirach 180 185–175 early second cent. Ptolemy VI (Palestine) Philometor Antiochus IV Epiphanes Jason 175–172 181–145 170 175–163 Menelaus Ptolemy VIII 172–162 169–164 Daniel Cleopatra II 160 Antiochus V 163–162 Alcimus 162–159 mid-second cent. 163–127 (Palestine) Demetrius I (unknown) 162–150 150 Hasmoneans Alexander Balas 150–145 Jonathan Apphus 152–143 Ptolemy VIII 145–131 Demetrius II Nicator 145–139 140 Cleopatra III 142–131 Antiochus VI Dionysus145–142 Simeon Tassi Diodotus Tryphon 142–139 142–134 Antiochus VII Sidetes 138–129 John Hyrcanus I 130 134–104 Demetrius II Nicator 129–126 Alexander II Zabinas 129–123 Ptolemy VIII 120 127–116 Cleopatra Thea 125–121 2 Maccabees Antiochus VIII Grypus late second cent.
    [Show full text]
  • In Order to Understand the Final Kings and Kingdoms in the Book of Revelation One Must Follow the Progression Presented in Daniel
    In order to understand the final kings and kingdoms in the book of Revelation one must follow the progression presented in Daniel. Daniel begins with the Kingdom of Babylon, learns of the coming of the Medo‐Persian Empire and is given visions of Greece and Rome. The final kingdoms to come are sealed up for another day; to be revealed to John in the Revelation of Jesus Christ. The timing of events are revealed in Daniel 9. “Seventy weeks are determined upon thy people and upon thy holy city, to finish the transgression, and to make an end of sins, and to make reconciliation for iniquity, and to bring in everlasting righteousness, and to seal up the vision and prophecy, and to anoint the most Holy. Know therefore and understand, that from the going forth of the commandment to restore and to build Jerusalem unto the Messiah the Prince shall be seven weeks, and threescore and two weeks: the street shall be built again, and the wall, even in troublous times. And after threescore and two weeks shall Messiah be cut off, but not for himself: and the people of the prince that shall come shall destroy the city and the sanctuary; and the end thereof shall be with a flood, and unto the end of the war desolations are determined. And he shall confirm the covenant with many for one week: and in the midst of the week he shall cause the sacrifice and the oblation to cease, and for the overspreading of abominations he shall make it desolate, even until the consummation, and that determined shall be poured upon the desolate” There is a purpose to the time determined upon Israel; to make reconciliation for iniquity; to bring in everlasting righteousness; and to seal up and anoint.
    [Show full text]
  • Bibliotheca Sacra
    758 <n'ESIA8 01' CRJDUB. Samajes are found at Bombay, at Ahmedabad. at Poooa,. Bangalore, at Madras, at Mangalore, aud possibly at other cities too in the west and south. These all have felt more or less of the influence of Keshab Chandra Sen, though they , are not all, at the present time, directly connected with the Brahma Samaj of India, as his own society is caIIecl. I Since the formation by secession of tbe Sadharan BraIuDa Samaj, after the Kuch Bihar marriage in 1878, 1DUI1 m the country branches have united with it, and others ani independent of either, though holding in the main similar news. ARTICLE VII. I CTESIAS OF CNIDUS. BY PBOI'. B. A. ICBOIlP, BIlOBY COLLBGB, OXWOJlD, osoaou. J PERHAPS no period in history is of more real interest to the historian, antiquarian, or biblical student than the fey centuries immediately preceding 400 B.C., when the Greeks made their first invasion of Upper Asia. Precious must be I all the knowledge of the East which even the fragmenwy records of history and monumental inscriptions have left to us. Most of our knowledge of Upper Asia at thi8 period, at least in so far as profane history is concerned, we owe to Herodotus and Ctesias of Cnidus; both Asiatic Greeks by birth and living almost as contemporaries. The works of Xenophon, it is true, have some value bere; but cbiefty 18 the observations of a judicious traveller, and not as the laborious researches of the industrious historian. In bis Anabasis he holds closely to his theme - the march of the Greeks; and in the Cyropaedia he portrays a character too unreal to be historical.
    [Show full text]
  • A BRIEF HISTORICAL SURVEY of the POWERS of MESOPOTAMIA (Using Dates Based Primarily on John Bright’S a History of Israel, P
    A BRIEF HISTORICAL SURVEY OF THE POWERS OF MESOPOTAMIA (using dates based primarily on John Bright’s A History of Israel, p. 462ff.) I. Assyrian Empire (Gen.10:11) A. Religion and culture were greatly influenced by the Sumerian/Babylonian Empire. B. Tentative list of rulers and approximate dates: 1. 1354-1318 - Asshur-Uballit I: (a) conquered the Hittite city of Carchemish (b) began to remove Hittite influence and allowed Assyria to develop 2. 1297-1266 - Adad-Nirari I (powerful king) 3. 1265-1235 - Shalmaneser I (powerful king) 4. 1234-1197 - Tukulti-Ninurta I - first conquest of Babylonian empire to the south 5. 1118-1078 - Tiglath-Pileser I - Assyria becomes a major power in Mesopotamia 6. 1012- 972 Ashur-Rabi II 7. 972- 967 - Ashur-Resh-Isui II 8. 966- 934 - Tiglath-Pileser II 9. 934- 912 - Ashur-Dan II 10. 912- 890 - Adad-Nirari II 11. 890- 884 - Tukulti-Ninurta II 12. 883- 859 - Asshur-Nasir-Apal II 13. 859- 824 - Shalmaneser III - Battle of Qarqar in 853 14. 824-811 - Shamashi-Adad V 15. 811-783 - Adad-Nirari III 16. 781-772 - Shalmaneser IV 17. 772-754 - Ashur-Dan III 18. 754-745 - Ashur-Nirari V 19. 745-727 - Tiglath-Pileser III: a. called by his Babylonian throne name, Pul, in II Kings 15:19 b. very powerful king c. started the policy of deporting conquered peoples d. In 735 B.C.. there was the formation of the “Syro-Ephramatic League” which was an attempt to unify all the available military resources of the transjordan nations from the head waters of the Euphrates to Egypt for the purpose of neutralizing the rising military power of Assyria.
    [Show full text]
  • The Court of Cyrus the Younger in Anatolia: Some Remarks
    STUDIES IN ANCIENT ART AND CIVILIZATION, VOL. 23 (2019) pp. 95-111, https://doi.org/10.12797/SAAC.23.2019.23.05 Michał Podrazik University of Rzeszów THE COURT OF CYRUS THE YOUNGER IN ANATOLIA: SOME REMARKS Abstract: Cyrus the Younger (born in 424/423 BC, died in 401 BC), son of the Great King Darius II (424/423-404 BC) and Queen Parysatis, is well known from his activity in Anatolia. In 408 BC he took power there as a karanos (Old Persian *kārana-, Greek κάρανος), a governor of high rank with extensive military and political competence reporting directly to the Great King. Holding his power in Anatolia, Cyrus had his own court there, in many respects modeled after the Great King’s court. The aim of this article is to show some aspects of functioning and organization of Cyrus the Younger’s court in Anatolia. Keywords: Cyrus the Younger; court; court’s staff and protocol In 4081, Cyrus, commonly known as the Younger (424/423-401), son of the Great King Darius II (424/423-404), was appointed by his father to rule over an important part of the Achaemenid Empire, Anatolia. Cyrus wielded his power there as karanos (Old Persian *kārana-, Greek κάρανος), a high- ranking governor with extensive military and political competence, reporting directly to the Great King (see Podrazik 2018, 69-83; cf. Barkworth 1993, 150-151; Debord 1999, 122-123; Briant 2002, 19, 321, 340, 600, 625-626, 878, 1002; Hyland 2013, 2-5). Cyrus held his own court while in Anatolia. The court was organized along the lines of the King’s court, but was certainly no match for it 1 All dates in the article pertain to the events before the birth of Christ except where otherwise stated.
    [Show full text]