The Earliest Persians in Iran Toponyms and Persian Ethnicity

Home , Achaemenid Empire, Anshan (Persia), Assyrians in Iran, Cyrus Cylinder, History of Iran, King of the Lands

Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

www.dabirjournal.org

Digital Archive of Brief notes & Iran Review ISSN: 2470-4040

No.7.2020 Special Issue: Hellenism and Iran

1 xšnaoθrahe ahurahe mazdå Detail from above the entrance of Tehran’s fĳire temple, 1286š/1917–18. Photo by © Shervin Farridnejad The Digital Archive of Brief Notes & Iran Review (DABIR) ISSN: 2470-4040 www.dabirjournal.org

Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture University of California, Irvine 1st Floor Humanities Gateway Irvine, CA 92697-3370

Editor-in-Chief Touraj Daryaee (University of California, Irvine)

Editors Parsa Daneshmand (Oxford University) Shervin Farridnejad (Freie Universität Berlin/Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien) Judith A. Lerner (ISAW NYU)

Book Review Editor Shervin Farridnejad (Freie Universität Berlin/Österreichische Akademie der Wissenschaften, Wien)

Advisory Board Samra Azarnouche (École pratique des hautes études); Dominic P. Brookshaw (Oxford University); Matthew Canepa (University of Minnesota); Ashk Dahlén (Uppsala University); Peyvand Firouzeh (Cambridge Univer- sity); Leonardo Gregoratti (Durham University); Frantz Grenet (Collège de France); Wouter F.M. Henkel- man (École Pratique des Hautes Études); Rasoul Jafarian (Tehran University); Nasir al-Ka‘abi (University of Kufa); Andromache Karanika (UC Irvine); Agnes Korn (CNRS, UMR Mondes Iranien et Indien); Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones (University of Edinburgh); Jason Mokhtarain (University of Indiana); Ali Mousavi (UC Irvine); Mahmoud Omidsalar (CSU Los Angeles); Antonio Panaino (University of Bologna); Alka Patel (UC Irvine); Richard Payne (University of Chicago); Khodadad Rezakhani (History, UCLA); Vesta Sarkhosh Curtis (British Museum); M. Rahim Shayegan (UCLA); Rolf Strootman (Utrecht University); Giusto Traina (University of Paris-Sorbonne); Mohsen Zakeri (University of Göttingen)

Copy Editor: Philip Grant Logo design by Charles Li Layout and typesetting by Kourosh Beighpour Contents Articles 1 Domenico Agostini: On Jerusalem and Luhrāsp: A Closer Look 1 2 Daryoosh Akbarzadeh: Collapse of Sasanian Empire 7 3 Kiumars Alizadeh: The earliest Persians in Iran toponyms and Persian ethnicity 16 4 Elshad Bagirow: Sassanid toreutics discovered in Shemakha, Azerbaijan as artistic metalwork 54 in the art of Sasanian Iran 5 Majid Daneshgar: An Old Persian-Malay Anthology of Poems from Aceh 61 6 Morteza Djamali, Nicolas Faucherre: Sasanian architecture as viewed by the 19th century 91 French architect Pascal-Xavier Coste 7 Shervin Farridnejad: Cow Sacrifĳice and the Hataria’s Dedicatory Inscription at the Zoroastrian 101 Shrine of Bānū-Pārs 8 Hasmik C. Kirakosian: New Persian Pahlawān 112 9 Khodadad Rezakhani: Notes on the Pahlavi Archives I: Finding *Haspīn-raz and the Geography 119 of the Tabarestan Archive 10 Yusef Saadat: Contributions to Middle Persian lexicography 128 11 Diego M. Santos; Marcos Albino: Mittelpersisch rōzag ‘Fasten’ 149 12 Ehsan Shavarebi; Sajad Amiri Bavandpour: Temple of Anahid and Martyrdom of Barshebya 168 Special Issue: Hellenism and Iran 13 Jake Nabel: Exemplary History and Arsacid Genealogy 175 14 Marek Jan Olbrycht: Andragoras, a Seleukid Governor of Parthia-Hyrkania, and his Coinage 192 15 Rolf Strootman: Hellenism and Persianism in the East 201 Reviews 16 Chiara Barbati: Review of Benkato, Adam. Āzandnāmē. An Edition and Literary-Critical Study 229 of the Manichaean-Sogdian Parable-Book. Beiträge Zur Iranistik 42. Wiesbaden: Reichert Verlag, 2017. 216 p., 42 images, ISBN: 9783954902361. 17 Majid Daneshgar: Translation of Persian and Malay Literary Works in Malaysia and Iran 232 18 Yaser Malekzadeh: Review of Ghafouri, Farzin. Sanǧeš-e manābeʿ-e tārīḫī-ye šāhnāme dar 236 pādšāhī-ye ḫosrō anūšīravān [The Evaluation of Historical Sources of Shāhnāme in the Reign of Khusraw Anūshīravān]. Tehran, Mīrās̱-e Maktūb. 2018. 577+17 pp. ISBN 9786002031310. Digital Archive of Brief notes & Iran Review No.7.2020 ISSN: 2470 - 4040 © Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies & Culture University of California, Irvine

Special Issue: Hellenism and Iran 2020, No. 7 © Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture, University of California, Irvine ISSN: 2470 - 4040

The earliest Persians in Iran: toponyms and Persian ethnicity Kiumars Alizadeh (Freie Universität Berlin)

Abstract t is the aim of this paper to go into the localization of toponyms, including Parsua, Parsāya, Parsuaš, IParšua, and Parsumaš in Assyrian, Babylonian, and Urartian documentary sources.1 By analyzing the accounts found in Mesopotamian kings’ itineraries, annals, and administrative records, it is shown that from the 9th century BCE till the emergence of Achaemenid Empire in the mid-6th century BCE, two groups of toponyms can be identifĳied. Parsua, Parsuaš, Paršua (group A), and Parsumaš (group B) are mentioned at the same time, but in a very diffferent topographic context. It is evident that Babylonian and Assyrian (and Urartian) scribes applied a distinction between two toponyms: they generally reserved the spelling with -umaš for the southern entity and the spelling -ua for the northern. Furthermore, Parsua, Parsuaš and Parsāya always were used as a toponym and never marked by the determinative LÚ and there is no concrete proof to relate them with Persians. Also, a reference to Parsumaš in southwest marked by both KUR and LÚ, does not simply mean that Parsumaš is an exclusive mark of Persian ethnic in the pre-Achaemenid period. In other words, ‘Parsumašian’ refers to many tribes (including Persians) who dwelled in the Neo-Elamite eastern territories, and it would be better to diffferentiate Parsumašians from LÚParsāya (Persians→ Akk.) and Parsirra/ Parsip (Persians→ El.) in Achaemenid cuneiform sources.

1- The present paper, extract ed and a revised version from my Ph.D. thesis, is the outcome of a six-month research st ay at Freie Universität Berlin. I would like to express my deep gratitude to the Soudavar Memorial Foundation for its generous support during my st ay in Berlin. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Introduction From the 1st half of the 1st millennium BCE till the rise of Achaemenid Empire in the 6th century BCE, several toponyms and ethnonyms have been mentioned in Assyrian, Babylonian, Urartian, and Elamite sources: Parsua, Parsāya, Parsana, Parsuaš, Parsamaš, Parsumaš, Parsumašians, Parsu, Paršua, and Parsip. From the early eighteenth-century CE till now, scholars have tried to specify the location of these toponyms. In this case, several regions, including south of Lake Urmia, the central Zagros, and fĳinally Pārs in south western Iran have been suggested. As it will be shown, there is a consensus among scholars to localize most of these toponyms in the central Zagros region from the 9th century BCE to the reign of Sargon II. It is also believed that following the reign of Sennacherib, they should be localized in the southern Zagros area, specifĳically the Pārs region and not in the central Zagros. It seems that the central Zagros is a suitable location only for Parsua/Parsāya/Parsuaš/Paršua, but a meticulous examination of sources, especially from the period of Šamši-Adad V, Sargon II, and Ashurbanipal, will challenge many of these theories and shed new light on the subject. Šumurza A.0.102.5 Allabria dad Munna Tugliaš Zamua Parsua Ḫ Nergal Namri Ellipi Arbil B Ab- aban ī ā t- nu Abdad A.0.102.10 Allabria Munna Tugliaš Parsua Ḫ Namri Kullar aban ā nu A.0.102.12 Allabria dad Munna Tugliaš Parsua Ḫ Namri Kullar Ab- aban 17 ā nu Abdad A.0.102.13 Allabria Tugliaš Parsua Ḫ Namri Kullar Kullar aban ā nu Amad A.0.102.14 Hašimur Araziaš Lower Ḫ Parsua Namri M Z ar ē ā ḫ su b ā ar iia A.0.102.14 Mada Mannae- Mannaš Paddira Ḫ Parsua Ḫ Zirtu kaea ubuš- Z arna an ā b ḫ iš ā A.0.102.14 … Land of Urartian Šašag Mannae- Ḫ Mu Gilz Ḫ Parsua Andia Cities arr kaea ubuš- ans ṣ ā ā a ā nu nia ṣ nu ir A.0.102.16 Mada Mannae- Mannaš Paddira Ḫ Parsua Ḫ Zirtu kaea ubuš- Z arna an ā b ḫ iš ā A.0.102.16 Urartian Šašag Mannae- Ḫ Ḫ Mu Gilz Ḫ Parsua Namri Andia Cities arr kaea alman ubuš- ans ṣ ā ā a ā nu nia ṣ nu ir Abdad A.0.102.38 Tugliaš Parsua … … ā nu

Table 1: Parsua in documentary evidence during the reign of Shalmaneser III 2020, No. 7

Not only is the localization of these toponyms difffĳicult, but their afffĳiliation with Persian tribes before the emergence of the Achaemenid Empire in the Elamite highlands has also produced a great deal of difffĳiculty.2 Many scholars have gone so far as to suggest that the toponym Parsua from the reign of Shalmaneser III can be interpreted as the ‘fĳirst real mention’ of the Persians after their arrival in western Iran.3 Knowing as we now do that there is no clear evidence to support this hypothesis, it seems it is a far from convincing one. If so, which one(s) of these toponyms and proper names can be our ‘early Persians’?4 In this paper, I try to go over the issue once again and clarify the links of such toponyms with early Persians. While attempting to achieve these aims, the following points must be kept in mind. The analysis of toponyms takes a reign-by-reign approach. Firstly, it tries to localize the toponyms, immediately followed by an attempt to determine their afffĳiliation with the Persians. It should be noticed that there are many obstacles in connecting toponyms to ethnonyms, and it can hardly be construed as a straight-forward approach. Also, one might expect to get some answers from archaeological surveys, but for the present, the archaeological evidence needed to fĳix a Persian ethnonym in pre-Achaemenid period in western Iran is very scanty: if one relies only on pottery, it would be very hazardous to come to any conclusion.5 Even if we had many archaeological surveys, that would only tell us about such things as settlement patterns and ceramic cultures, not about ethnic groups as such. What it could do, moreover, is to show the influx (and integration) of a new culture at certain times. For this, however, we need more surveys and excavations in non-palatial sites.6 Given that there is no direct evidence which ethnicities lived at these toponyms,

2- Our knowledge about the hist orical geography of the Neo-Assyrian east ern territories is exceptionally poor. There are many gaps and uncertainties in the topography presented by Mesopotamian and Urartian scribes. Here, it sufffĳices to note that there are not many fĳixed points in west ern Iran that can be of help to specify the toponyms in the itineraries. There was a time that Assyriologist s suggest ed diffferent locations for Parsua to the southwest of Lake Urmia. While one group localized it in region A, the other one preferred to search for it in region B, but st ill close to region A (cf. Smith 1951; Levine 1974). Furthermore, archaeological evidence is difffĳicult to use, since we are not on solid ground to prove the correlation between these toponyms and archaeological sites in west ern Iran (cf. Muscarella 1966: 135). So, caution will be needed at the outset as much of what is st ated about the hist orical geography of west ern Iran is without qualifĳication and by way of interpretation maybe more than usually hypothetical. Considering that Parsua and the other toponyms discussed here cannot be certainly located, it should be noticed that this paper is not aimed to suggest a certain location for them. Here, my approach is that of Levine 1974; Reade 1978 and Diakonofff 1985a, 1985b, which discussed the location of Parsua in the central Zagros region properly, and for now nothing more can be offfered. Inst ead, I try to specify these toponyms and their geographical afffĳiliations in general perspect ives. 3- For localization of these toponyms and links with a Persian ethnicity, see Olmst ead 1948; Cameron 1936; Wright 1943; Pecorella and Salvini 1982: 12; Salvini 2004; Frye 1983; Imanpour 1998; Smith 1951; Ghirshman 1951, 1977; Minorsky 1945, 1957; Young 1967, 1988, 2003; Levine 1974; Stronach 1974; Reade 1978, 1995; Diakonofff 1985a, 1985b; de Miroschedji 1985; Zimansky 1990; Vera Chamaza 1994; Sumner 1994; Waters 1999, 2011; Rollinger 1999; Zadok 2001, 2002; Fuchs 2003/2005; Basello 2005; Henkelman 2003, 2011. 4- In a recent article, Henkelman (2011) has tackled this problem in detail. Following de Miroschedji (1985) and Rollinger (1999), but at much greater length, he tried to overhaul the ‘ethnogenesis’ of the early Persians and Anšanite identity of Cyrus II (cf. Potts 2005 and Zournatzi 2011). But it should be mentioned that the greatest part of this paper is devoted to discuss the probable exist ence of two diffferent highland polities (Persian, Anšanite) in the early seventh and sixth centuries, while the rest of the toponyms including Parsua, Parsuaš, and Parsāya are untouched (Parsumaš passably const rued). 5- For a critical approach, see Kramer 1977. 6- Abdi and Atayi 2014; Boucharlat 2003, 2005; Burney 1994, 1999; Carter 1994; Curtis 2005; Ghirshman 1951, 1977; Haerinck and Overlaet 2003; Overlaet 1997; McCall 2009, 2013; Mousavi 2005, 2008; Muscarella 1966; Parpola 2012; Pecorella and Salvini 1982; Stronach 1963, 1974, 1997; Sumner 1972, 1994; Young 1967, 1988, 2003; de Miroschedji 1985. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

caution is required when discussing the correlation between toponyms and a possible Persian ethnicity in cuneiform sources. One also should note that it is still possible to infer the Persians by analyzing the context of texts. It may explain how they have been referred. In other words, it should be specifĳied that are we just dealing with toponyms that can be considered as a ‘defĳinite mark’ of Persians in scholarship or of which the cuneiform sources give indication of distinct ethnic groups in western Iran by referring to these toponyms? This brings us to two issues: 1) with what type of determinative they are marked? In cuneiform sources, toponyms are preceded by diffferent determinatives. Among them, KUR is used to designate mountainous lands and countries while URU is used to designate towns and cities (table 2). Also, mention should be made of LÚ (Assyrian and Babylonian) and BE (Elamite), as an animate determinative which is very crucial to us. 2) Can the prosopography of 1st millennium BCE western Iran be helpful for determining to what extent these toponyms are bound to Iranian or more specifĳically ethnic Persians?7

Neo-Assyrian sources Shalmaneser III (858-824 BCE) The Assyrian king in his sixteenth regnal year moved out from Arbail, crossed Mount Kullar8 and established a fortress in the interior of the land Zamua.9 He conquered the lands of Zamua, Munna, Allabria,10 the city Paddira, the fortifĳied city of Ianziburiaš, the Allabriaean. Then he set ablaze the countryside/cities from the city Allabria to the city Parsua, from the city Parsua to the city Abdadānu11 and from the city 19 Abdadānu to the city Ḫaban.12 Furthermore, in three other campaigns conducted by Shalmaneser III and his fĳield marshal, Daiiān-Aššur, Parsua is mentioned along several toponyms in the central Zagros region and its eastern frontiers. In his twenty-fourth regnal year, Shalmaneser III crossed the Lower Zāb, traversed Mount Hašimur13 and then went down to the land Namri.14 Moving on from the land Namri he received tribute from twenty-seven kings of the land Parsua. Then, moving on from the land Parsua, he went down

7- Undoubtedly, suggest ing etymologies for these toponyms has generated most discussions over the years. For more discussion, see Pirart 1994; Skalmowski 1995; Hofffmann 1940; Eilers 1954; Widmer 2012. Also, for Parśu, Paraśu, Párśavaḥ in Vedic, see Aust in and Smith 1937; Witzel 1987: 33-34 fn. 99-100; 1995: 143 fn. 60. Baudhāyana-Śrauta-sutra (BŚS) gives indication of two group of Aryans (Āyava, Amavāsu). Arāṭṭa, Parśu, and Gāndhāri belong to Aryans (Amavāsu) who migrated to the west , whereas Kuru- Pañcālāḥ and Kāśi-Videhā from Aryans (Āyava) migrated to the east (Witzel 1989: 126-127 fn. 327, 339). Further, for a possible connect ion between Parsua and Paraḫše/Marḫaši, see Albright 1921: 80 fn. 1 and Herzfeld 1968: 185-186. 8- Levine (1973: 17-18) suggest ed that mount Kullar corresponds to Bāziyān range to the south of the Lower Zāb, specifĳically between Kirkuk and Solaimāniya. 9- Three diffferent terms are used to refer to it: Zamua, Mazamua, Zamua ša bītāni. Levine (1973: 21-22) put his efffort to defĳining the boundaries of Zamua, and fĳinally suggest ed that to the west , north, south and east , it was confĳined to Qara Dāgh, Lower Zāb, Diyāla, and Avrāmān Dagh respect ively. But Reade (1995: 38) identifĳied Zamua with Solaimāniya. 10- East of Sardašt (Wright 1943: 176-177; Kinner-Wilson 1962: 112), between Manna and Parsua (Fuchs 1994: 481), north of the Parsua and upper reaches of the Qizil Uzun River, between Zanjān and Bijār (Reade 1978: 140). 11- Bijār and not far from Zanjān and Sultāniyeh in the west (Herzfeld 1968: 25, 241-243), Hamedān (Reade 1978: 140). 12- For the inscription, see Grayson 1996: 40. As it was referred to alongside Namri, Levine (1972-75a: 71) considered it as a clue that Ḫaban can be found in the vicinity of modern Sar-e Pol-e Zohāb or Islām Ābād-e Gharb (cf. Zadok 1985: 145; Herzfeld 1968: 157, 160). 13- “A mountain near or at the point where the Diyāla breaks through the Ğebel-e Ḥamrīn” (Levine 1972-75b: 134). 14- Nāvar-Kerend or Māhidašt in the central Zagros area (Herzfeld 1968: 203, 241), šahābād/ Islām Ābād (Reade 1978: 137), or between Harsīn and Qara Dāgh (Levine 1973: 22-24). 2020, No. 7

to the lands Mēsu,15 Media (Amadāiia), Araziaš,16 and Ḫarḫar.17 The campaigns of the thirtieth and thirty-fĳirst regnal years of Shalmaneser III were held under the command of Daiiān-Aššur, while the Assyrian king remained residing in Calah. Daiiān-Aššur crossed the River Zāb and approached the land Ḫubuškia.18 Moving on from the cities of the land Madaḫišā,19 he went to the land of the Mannaeans. Udaku the Mannaean20 abandoned Zirtu, his royal city, and fled to save his life. Daiiān-Aššur moved on from the land Mannaš and approached the city Paddira and received tribute from Artasari, the Paddiraean. Next, he went down to the land Parsua and received tribute from the kings of the land Parsua. He conquered the cities of the rest of the land Parsua, which was ‘insubmissive’ to Aššur, and brought their captives and property to Assyria.21 Also in the thirty-fĳirst regnal year, Daiiān-Aššur sent out and approached the land of Ḫubuškia. Next, he marched to Zapparia, the fortifĳied city of the land Muṣaṣir.22 Then, he went down to the land Gilzānu23 and received tribute from the Gilzāneans, the Mannaeans, and

15- It is suggest ed that Mēsu corresponds to Mešta in Urartian sources (Diakonofff and Kashkai 1981: 57). According to the Dāš Tape inscription, it can be found somewhere to the west -northwest of Miyānduāb and south of Lake Urmia and corresponds 20 to Mešta (Herzfeld 1968: 187; cf. Zadok 2002: 94). While Levine made no diffference between Mēsu and Missi, the other did (cf. Fuchs 1994: 451). To Levine, both Mēsu and Missi referred to the same place in the central Zagros region and not the south of Lake Urmia. He made no diffferentiation because of his localization of Parsua in Northern Māhidašt (Levine 1974: 114 fn. 114; Zadok 2002: 94). But Fuchs (1994: 451) st ated that they must be diffferentiated and Mēsu corresponds to a city (?) between Aziru and Simaki in west ern Zamua. 16- To the south, north, and east it was bordered by Parsua- Šurgadia, Bīt-Barrūa- Ellipi, and Bīt-Ḫamban- Ḫarḫar respect ively (Reade 1978: 138). In the south of Nahāvand or somewhere not far from Sonqhor and Kangāvar (Herzfeld 1968: 191; cf. Streck 1900: 344). 17- For the inscription, see Grayson 1996: 67-68. A place in central and east ern Māhidašt is suggest ed (Levine 1972-75c: 120-121; 1974: 116; Vallat 1993: 83). While Herzfeld (1968: 32) found Nahāvand and Malāyer as a reasonable location for Ḫarḫar, Reade (1978: 140) took a st ep further and spoke of Tape Giyān in Nahāvand (cf. Fuchs 1994: 437; Zadok 2002: 124). 18- To the north of Ḫalman, between the headwaters of the Little Zāb and Paitāq pass (Herzfeld 1968: 24, 175), the region of Hakāri or Yüksekova (Salvini 1982: 386; 1995: 45; cf. Vera Chamaza 1995/1996: 248; Liebig 1996: 210), south of Muṣaṣir, in the region of Ruwānduz (Russell 1984: 197-198). Reade (1979: 178) tried to pin down the location of Ḫubuškia and fĳinally suggest ed that it can be localized in the quadrilateral region of Ošnu, Ruwānduz, Pizhder, Mahābād (cf. Liebig 1991: 33-34; Kinner-Wilson 1962: 110; Fuchs 1994: 185-188). Finally, by examining all available sources, Lanfranchi (1995: 136) brought up that Ḫubuškia was located somewhere in the “upper valley of the Lower Zāb, that long and narrow st rip of land which extends north-south from its springs, around Khaneh, to Sardašt.” 19- At the moment, a place cannot be suggest ed on the map for Madaḫišā. 20- It corresponds to Urartian KURma-a-na-a-i-de/Mānā (Munna is the older form), and Izirtu (URUI-zir/zi-ir-ti/tu) has frequently been referred to as its capital (Diakonofff and Kashkai 1981: 53; Zadok 2002: 92). It was located to the south of Lake Urmia, near Bokān (Herzfeld 1968: 187; Reade 1995: 41), or in the vicinity of Saqez (Zadok 2000: 92-94). But Levine suggest ed a wider region that bordered Parsua in the south and Urartian frontiers in the north. 21- Grayson 1996: 70. 22- The religious centre of Ardina was there, and it seems that Muṣaṣir was at the neighborhood of Ḫubuškia, to the southwest of Lake Urmia and not far from Ruwānduz (Diakonofff and Kashkai 1981: 9; Gœtze 1952: 158-159; Reade 1976: 98). 23- Reade 1979: 175-179 once again took a st ep further and suggest ed that it corresponds to Hasanlu in the triangle of Ošnu, Mahābād, Marāgheh (cf. Lanfranchi 1995: 127; Salvini 1995: 43). Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

the people of the city Gaburisu and of the lands of Ḫarrānia,24 Šašagānu,25 and Andia.26 Next, he went down to the land Namri. Finally, he went down through the pass of Simesi before the land Ḫalman.27 Also a lengthy annal narrates that during the campaign of the sixteenth regnal year, Shalmaneser III crossed Mount Kullar and conquered the lands of Munna, Allabria, Parsua, Abdadānu, Ḫaban, Namri, and Tugliš.28 Finally, during an illegal archaeological excavation at Tall ʾAğāğa, ancient Šadikanni in Syria, a human-shaped statue with a cuneiform inscription was discovered. Despite the poor condition of the text, its publisher, Eckhart Frahm, believes that it refers to Daiiān-Aššur’s constructional and military activities in 826 BCE. More important, the fĳirst column numerates several toponyms that could be useful for our discussion. According to the text, Daiiān-Aššur made a campaign against diffferent lands, extending from the north-east to the central Zagros regions. Diffferent from the previous inscriptions, the variant form(?) of Parsua is mentioned in this text. After mentioning the land Gilzānu, both the land Parsāya (KURPa-ár-sa-a-a/ KURParsāya) and the land Mannāya are referred to. Here, the inscription is damaged, and it does not give us more information.29

1 Shalmaneser III URUPar-su-a 12 Sennacherib KURPar-su-aš 2 Shalmaneser III KURPar-su-a 13 Esarhaddon KURPar-su-maš 3 Shalmaneser III KURPa-ár-sa-a-a 14 Esarhaddon, Ashurbanipal URUPar-su-a 4 Šamši-Adad V KURPar-su-a 15 Ashurbanipal KURPar-su-maš 21 5 Šamši-Adad V URUPa]r-sa-maš…] 16 Ashurbanipal KURPar-su-a 6 Adad-Nārārī III KURPar-su-a 17 Išpuini KURPár-š-a-i 7 Tiglath-Pileser III KURPar-su-a 18 Minua KURPár-š-a-i 8 Sargon II KURPar-su-a 19 Argišti I KURPár-š-a-i 9 Sargon II KURPar-su-aš 20 Nebuchadnezzar II KURPar-su-maš-a-a 10 Sargon II URUPar-su-a 21 Nabonidus KURPar-su 11 Sargon II KURPar-su-ma-áš 22

Table 2: Toponyms and their determinatives in cuneiform sources

24- In the Helsinki Atlas of Ancient Near East , Ḫarrānia is located to the south of Muṣaṣir and Ḫubuškia, east of Arbail, north of Kāni Raš (black spring) (north of Az Zibār and west of Ušnaviyeh) (Parpola and Porter 2001: pl. 4). 25- For now, a precise location for Šašagānu cannot be offfered, but it seems that it was located in west and southwest of Lake Urmia and not far from Andia. 26- Tārum region and the lower Qizil Uzun valley (Herzfeld 1968: 243), part of Manna and in the vicinity of Zikirtu (cf. Zadok 2002: 94; Reade 1978: 140; Fuchs 1994: 421). 27- For the inscription, see Grayson 1996: 70-71. In the vicinity of modern Sar-e Pol-e Zohāb (Frayne 1992: 64). 28- See Grayson 1996: 54. Herzfeld (1968: 42) suggest ed that it indicates to the east of Tigris and south of Diyāla which includes Dēr, Jamutbal, Khafājeh, Mandali and Ešnuna (cf. Medvedskaya 1999: 61). 29- Frahm 2015: 77-81 fn. 5. 2020, No. 7

As discussed, the toponyms of Parsua and Parsāya have been referred to several times during the reign of Shalmaneser III. For the moment, it cannot be contended whether we must diffferentiate them or not. It should be borne in mind that the form of Parsāya is only mentioned during this period and never occurs in other pre-Achaemenid texts. If one collects all references to Parsua in this time, as we did, a clear image emerges. To a certain extent, the localization of all of the toponyms accompanying Parsua and Parsāya indicate that both of them can be found somewhere in the central Zagros region. Clearly enough, as it has been suggested before, considering that Parsua cannot be certainly located, it probably corresponds to the northern part of the Māhidašt plain,30 Sanandij,31 or between Sanandij and Avrāmān.32 With regard to ethnic Persians, it is evident that all references to Parsua and Parsāya during Shalmaneser III’s reign are toponyms, and they are never preceded by an animate determinative. Shalmaneser III claims that he received tribute from twenty-seven kings of the land Parsua.33 During this period Parsua and Parsāya are only referred to as toponyms, preceded by two determinatives (KUR, URU). Although we do not have all the details, it is clear that Parsua covered a large territory wherein many kings had their own ruling realms, including fortifĳied cities.34 Puštu, šalaḫamānu, Kiniḫamānu and 23 other cities in the central Zagros region are indicated as cities of the land Parsua, but nothing more can be said about the heterogeneity of the population of the land of Parsua.

Šamši-Adad V (811-823 BCE) On his third campaign, Šamši-Adad V crossed the river Zāb, traversed Mount Kullar and went up to 22 the land Nairi. He received tribute from Dadī the Ḫubuškaean, the people of Sunbu, Mannaea, Parsua, Taurla,35 and Mēsu. Then, he marched to the land Gizilbunda36 and conquered the city Kinaki. Departing from Gizilbunda, he marched to the land of the Medes, but they fled and abandoned their cities. Finally, on his return, Šamši-Adad crossed the mountain of mūṣu-stone and destroyed the cities of Araziaš.37 For our current purpose, it sufffĳices to note that Parsua is still mentioned alongside toponyms that with diffferent degrees of certainty can be localized in the northeast and central Zagros. If that is so, then we can infer that during this period the Assyrian sources still continued to refer to Parsua in relation to the central Zagros region. But let us continue with the rest of Šamši-Adad V’s inscriptions. In a fragment text (A letter from a god), the city of Parsamaš appears with toponyms positioning it in southwest Iran and in relation with the Elamite state. Due to the wealth of details it offfers, it will be quoted at length:38

30- Levine 1974: 106-112. 31- Reade 1978: 119. 32- Diakonofff 1985a: 63- 64, 78; 1985b: 18-20. 33- Grayson 1996: 68. 34- Cf. Zadok 2001: 31. 35- There is no consensus among scholars for the localization of Taurla. But it seems it was not far away from Manna and Mēsu. 36- It is referred to somewhere between Manna and Missi, and a localization near Zanjān-Čāi and Sultāniyeh has been suggest ed (Fuchs 1994: 435; Reade 1979: 134; Parpola 1970: 134; Streck 1900: 298f; Herzfeld 1968: 11, 243). 37- Grayson 1996: 184-186. 38- Grayson 1996: 193; Livingst one 1989: no. 41. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Transliteration Translation

13’) ina pi-i DINGIR-ti-ia GAL-ti it-tuq-ta [...] 13ˊ20-ˊ) By the command of my great divinity it came about that: [You marched to Dēr]. Dēr, 14’) [UR]U de-e-ru ma-ḫa-zu GAL-a ša ki-ma k[i-ṣir ...] the great city whose [foundations are as fĳirm] as 15’) [URU] šú-a-tum ta-al-⸢i-me ta⸣-ak-t[a-šad ...] bedrock, [...] you surrounded (and) captured that [city. You carried offf ... together with] their [great] 16’) [adi] ⸢NÍG⸣.GA-šú-nu [...] property, [the property of the palace, ...], his royal 17’) [GI]Š né-mat-ti MAN-ti-šu ni-ṣi[r-ti ekallīšu ...] couch, the treasury [of his palace, his palace women, ...], his daughters, 30,000 captives, [oxen, 18’) [DU]MU.MUNUS.MEŠ-šú 30 LIM šal-la-sun[u ...] sheep, ...]. You razed, destroyed, (and) [burned 19’) ⸢4⸣ ME 76 URU.MES-ni [...] 4]76 cities [in its environs]. 20’) ta-ta-pal ta-ta-qar [...] 21ˊ-28ˊ) With regard to what you wrote to me, as follows: “The people of [...] took fright in the face 21´) ša taš-pu-ra-an-ni ma-a UN.MEŠ [...] of Aššur the radiance of Aššur [] and [abandoned] 22´) ma-a TA pa-an na-mur-rat aš-šur [...] their cities. [To save] their lives [they set] out for 23´) ip-la-ḫu-ma ma-a URU.MEŠ-ni-š ú -nu ˹ú˺- Elam. They massacred people [from the city Pa] [mašširūma ...] rsamaš to the city Bīt-Bunaki, which is on the 24´) ZI.MEŠ-šú-nu ma a-na KUR.ELAM.MA.KI pa- border of [...]. They carried offf hostages, [...], oxen, 23 nì-šú-n[u ištu TA URU par-sa-maš] (and) sheep [...] They razed, destroyed, (and) 25´) ma-a a-di URU É-bu-na-ki ša mi-ṣi[r ...] burned [...].” 26´) ma-a GAZ.MEŠ-šú-nu i-du-ku ma-a šal-la- s[unu ...] 29ˊ-34ˊ) [By the] command of my great divinity it

27´) GU4.MEŠ- šú-nu ṣe-ni-šú-nu ú-te-˹ru˺-ni ma-˹a˺ [...] came about that: “[The people of ...] took fright [in 28´) [i]p-˹pu˺-lu iq-qu-ru ina IZI [...] the face of] the radiance of Assur [and abandoned 29´) [ina pi]-˹i˺ DINGIR-ti-a GAL-ti it-tuq-˹ta˺ [...] their cities. To save] their lives [they set out for 30´) [TA pa-an n]a-mur-rat aš-šur ip-la-ḫ[u-ma ...] Elam]. They massacred people [from the city 31´) [ana šūzub] ZI.MEŠ-šú-nu a-na [...] Pa]rsamaš to [the city Bīt-Bunakki, which is on 32´) [ištu URU pa]r(?)-sa-maš a-di x [...] the border of ...]. They carried offf hostages, [..., 33´) [GAZ.MEŠ-šu-n]u i-du-ku ša[l-lassunu ...] oxen, (and) sheep ... They razed, destroyed, (and) 34´) [...-nu]u ˹ú˺-te-r[u-...] burn[ed ...].”

First to be named are the toponyms of Dēr, Bīt-Bunaki, and Elam and their relations to each other. As it can be seen, the text describes the military activity of the Assyrian king in southwest Iran. The people of the land (x) abandoned their cities and took refuge in Elam. Then, it is stated that the Assyrian troops massacred people from the land Parsamaš to Bīt-Bunaki. Bīt-Bunaki corresponds to a region in the neighborhood of Elam and Raši.39 The name of Parsamaš is not fully preserved in the text, but Frame

39- Zadok 1981/1982: 136-137 fn. 5; 1985: 99; König 1938: 38. It refers to a mountainous region at the east of Dēr and probably corresponds to Mehrān in Ilām province (de Miroschedji 1985: 61; 1986: 212; cf. Zadok 1985: 259-260). 2020, No. 7

restored [Pa]rsamaš in the text.40 There is enough information in the text, to let us make it clear that we must diffferentiate between Parsua (central Zagros) and Parsamaš (bordering on Elamite territory) during the reign of Šamši-Adad V. But one may doubt, as Zadok did, whether the restoration of ‘Parsamaš’ is well supported. He rejected Frame’s suggestion and stated that the existence of Parsamaš in the 9th century BCE in the vicinity of Elam “is geographically and historically implausible”.41 Contradicting Zadok, there is one datum that it is neglected in this topographical discussion. Somewhat clearer, a passage from a text dating to the reign of Sargon II (CT 53 110+) also address the issue of Parsamaš in the vicinity of Elam and Bīt-Bunaki. It would, however, be better for the moment to leave aside further discussion here and discuss it more fully in the following pages.42 As mentioned earlier, Šamši-Adad V claims that he “received tribute from the people of Sunbu, Mannaea, Parsua, and Taurla”.43 It may be understood as ‘people from the land of Parsua’, but the inscription adds nothing more. In another text, they massacred people from the city [Pa]rsamaš to the city Bīt-Bunaki.44 As the text continues, the depredation of property (sheep, oxen) and carrying offf of the hostages are mentioned, but pursuing this line of analysis will show again that the inscriptions from this period offfer nothing else about ethnic Persians in this period.

Adad-Nārārī III (810-783 BCE) In a broken stone slab found in 1854 CE, the Assyrian king is titled as conqueror from Mount Siluna in the east, the lands Namri, Ellipi, Ḫarḫar, Araziaš, Mēsu, Media, Gizilbunda, Munna, Parsua, Allabria, 45 24 Abdadānu, Nairi, Andia, Mount BADḫu as far as the shore of the Great Sea in the east. At least in this case we happen to know that the list of topographic names suggests that Parsua should be sought for somewhere in the central Zagros region.

Tiglath-Pileser III (744-727 BCE) Tiglath-Pileser III stated that he annexed to Assyria the lands Namri, Bīt-Sangibuti,46 Bīt-Ḫamban, Bīt-Sumurzu, Bīt-Barrūa,47 Bīt-Zualzaš,48 Bīt-Matti, the city of Niqu of land Tupliaš, the lands Bīt-Taranzāya,

40- Apud Grayson 1996: 193. 41- Zadok 2002: 142 fn. 23. 42- Šamši-Adad V also claimed that during his third campaign “at that time, by the command of the gods Aššur, Šamaš, (and) Adad, the gods who support me, I imposed tribute and tax of teams of horses forever upon Sirašme of the land Babarura, Amaḫar of the city Ḫarmišanda, Zarišu of the land Parsania, Zarišu of the city Ḫundura” (Grayson 1996: 186). Here, Parsania appears with toponyms in the land of Medes and can be found somewhere close to Araziaš in central Zagros (cf. Herzfeld 1996: 191; Streck 1900: 344). According to Zadok (2004: 103) “Pa-ar-sa-ni-A+A is a gentilic of a form ending in -a/āna-, which may be based on either pārsa- or *parša- (‘ear of grain’) or *Parša-.” For the moment, nothing more can be offfered about the location of Parsania and its association with Parsua and Persian tribes. 43- Grayson 1996: 184. 44- Ibid., 193. 45- Grayson 1996: 212-213. Parsua (KURPar-su-a) was st ill referred to as a toponym during the reign of Adad-Nārārī III. The same is true for cuneiform sources from the reign of Tiglath-Pileser III (Tadmor and Yamada 2011: 52). 46- East of Urartu and south of Godar-Čāi (Salvini 1982: 387), Khuy plain (Zimansky 1985: 40fff; 1990: 15), Sihand (Herzfeld 1968: 17, 25). 47- It is referred to as Baruātā/ KURba-ru-a-ta-i-de in Urartian sources. A localization in the central Zagros region and as part of Ellipi has been suggest ed (Diakonofff and Kashkai 1981: 18-19; Luckenbill 1924: 28, 59; Levine 1974: 117; Frahm and Schmitt 1999: 273). 48-East of Kermānšāh (Herzfeld 1968: 57, 163-164). Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Parsua, Bīt-Zatti,49 Bīt-Abdadāni, Bīt-Kapsi,50 Bīt-Sangi,51 Bīt-Urzakki, the cities Bīt-Ištar, and Zakruti52 which belong to the mighty Medes.53 Later, in his second palû, Tiglath-Pileser III marched to the land Namri and Bīt-Sangibūti. He placed two eunuchs as provincial governors over the lands of Parsua and Bīt-Ḫamban and annexed those lands to Assyria.54 Although there is much one can say about these passages, I will limit myself to one point: Parsua still appears alongside toponyms to be located in the central Zagros rgion.55

Sargon II (721-705 BCE) With the reign of Sargon, we have, for the fĳirst time, administrative records (rather than itineraries) relevant to our question (table 3). It should, though, be mentioned that these sources give an ambiguous outcome regarding the locality of Parsua. According to ABL 0165, Nabû-remānni, the steward of Sargon II, was informed by the Zalipaeans that the Mannaeans expropriated 100 horses. At that time, Nabû-remānni was residing in Nikur (the capital of Parsua).56 Finally, he sent a letter to the king and asked for investigation.57 ABL 311 refers to consultation between Šarru-emuranni and Sargon II. Šarru-emuranni reported that the road was very slow for the governor of Arrapḫa and it took him three days to get to city (x), while he “made a round-trip to Parsua going this way”.58 CT 53 859 indicates a ruler of city (x), who was fleeing to šaparda. Next, the son of Dalta, king of Ellipi, and Parsua are mentioned, but the letter is almost fully broken and nothing more can be said.59 Another letter, dated to 717 BCE, concerns the governor of Parsua, who recruited fĳifty cavalrymen.60 A further, and more serious, complication regarding localization of Parsumaš during the reign of Sargon II is introduced by a text placing it close to the border of Elam and far from the central Zagros region. In CT 25 53 110+, reporting to the governor of Dēr, Nabû-duru-uṣur, an offfĳicial active in Babylon, stated that:61

49- There is no hope to identify the neat location of Bīt-Matti, Bīt-Zatti, and Bīt-Taranzāya on the map (cf. Zadok 2001: 34; 2002: 111-112, 128). 50- East of Lake Urmia and corresponds with Qazvin (Reade 1979: 180). 51- For Bīt-Sangi and Bīt-Sangibuti see Zadok 2002: 123. 52- East of Māhidašt, Bīsotūn territory (Levine 1974: 118), or north of Ḫarḫar and east of Parsua (Vallat 1993: 306; Vera Chamaza 1994: 108). 53- Tadmor and Yamada 2011: 52. 54- Ibid., 84. 55- For a full discussion see, Lanfranchi 2003: 100-104. 56- Parpola and Porter 2001: 14 identifĳied it with Ruwānsar. 57- Fuchs and Parpola 2001: no. 53. 58- Lanfranchi and Parpola 1990: no. 199. 59- Fuchs and Parpola 2001: no. 102. 60- Kwasman and Parpola 1991: no. 25. For Ilu- taklak as governor of Parsua and an account narrating about ‘Parsua sheep’ (UDU par-su-a) see Fales and Post gate 1992: no 128, 134. 61- Fuchs and Parpola 2001: no. 129. It is probably connect ed to the military conflict s between Šutruk-Nahhunte II and Sargon II in the land of Ellipi (Waters 2000: 21; cf. Fuchs and Parpola 2001: xxxiii-xxxv). 2020, No. 7

Transliteration Translation

1) [a-na LÚ*.EN.NAM be-lí-ia ARA]D-ka md[PA- [To the governor, my lord]: your [serva]nt BÀD-PAB] [Nabû-duru-uṣur. Good health to my lord]! The 2) [lu DI-mu a-na be-lí-ia D]I-mu a-na UR[U.de-ri] ci[ty of the Der and the fort] are we[ll]. News 3) [DI-mu a-na URU.HAL.Ṣ]U ṭé-mu š[a LUGAL] o[f the king] of E[lam]: M[y messenger] whom 4) K[UR.NIM.MA.KI LÚ* .A-KIN-i]a ša ina KUR. I s[ent] to El[am] we[nt] to the town Bur]ati. NI[M.MA.KI] [On the xth day] h[e retur]ned (with this report): 5) áš-[pur-an-ni ina URU.bu-ra]- ˹a˺-ti it-t[a-lak] the king of E[la]m has set o[ut]. He has sen[t 6) šu-[tu UD-x-KÁM is-su-hu]r ma-a LUGAL KUR. his messenger t]o Parsumaš, saying: ‘Will […] [NIM.MA.K]I yâ mobilize? […] against [...].’ Umman-minâ the 7) ˹ú˺-t[am-mi-iš LÚ*.A-KIN-šu a]-na KUR. par-su- herald [... and Bu]r-Silâ [are rai]sing pro[visions ma-áš for the expedition] in Bit-Bunakka. [They have 8) ˹i˺-sa[p-ra ma-a x x x]- ˹i˺a-a i-da-ak-ki-i written] to the son of Dal[tâ]: ‘The king of Elam 9) ina UGU x[x x x x x x]x ma-a mum-man-mi-na-a is coming, he is go[ing forth to] Bit-Bunakka.’ The 10) LÚ*.NIGÍR [x x x TA mbu]r-si-la-a ina URU.É- spearhead of [his] ch[ariotry has] gone [with] bu-[na]k-ka the king to Bit-[Bunakka]. 11) re-eš ZÍD.[DA.KASKAL.2 i-na-dá]š-ši-iu maa ina 26 UG[U] 12) DUMU mdal-[ta-a x x x ma]-˹a˺ LUGAL KUR. NIM.MA.KI 13) il-la-k[a a-na URU]. ˹É˺ -bu-nak-ka ú-[ṣa-a] 14) re-eš GIŠ.[GIGIR.MEŠ-šú TA] LUGAL! ina URU. ˹É˺-[bu-nak-ka]

There are many uncertainties in the text, it is very broken and contains several gaps. But we must, in efffect, consider the fact that the letter deals with the activities of the Elamite king in the land of Ellipi. In his analysis of the text, Parpola stated that the king of Elam left Burati and sent a messenger to the land of Parsumaš, and then the return of the Elamite king to the city Bīt-Bunaki is mentioned.62 If we check the letter again, despite its poor condition, it appears that it was actually Nabû-duru-uṣur’s messenger who (together with Bur-Silâ) went to Burati and came back with a report on an unknown date. According to his report, the king of Elam had set out and sent a messenger to the land of Parsumaš to convince its habitants to mobilize against an unknown enemy (most probably Assyria). Next, Umman-minâ, a brother of the Elamite king, is mentioned, who was raising provisions for a military campaign to support the son of Daltâ in Bīt-Bunaki. He wrote to the son of Daltâ that the king of Elam was going to Bīt-Bunaki, probably to inspect the provisions. Notwithstanding the numerous incongruencies in the letter CT 53 110+, one can maintain that the lines 1-14 shed light on two important aspects: once again the names of Elam,

62- Parpola 2002: 574. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Bīt-Bunaki, and Parsumaš appear alongside each other. Secondly, despite a slight variance with the earlier attested Parsamaš during the reign of Šamši-Adad V, the name of Parsumaš is mentioned in relation with the Elamite border.63

Text Written form Details 1 ABL 165 KURPar-su-a messenger and horses from Parsua, Nikur 2 ABL 311 KURPar-su-a a round-trip to Parsua 3 CT 53 895 KURPar-su-a from Parsua, city-lord runs away from šaparda 4 ADD 695 KURPar-su-a the Governor of Parsua Borrows 50 Cavalrymen 5 ADD 992 KURPar-su-a Ilu-taklak governor of Parsua 6 ADD 1057 Par-su-a (UDU Par-su-a (10 Parsua sheep 10 7 CT 53 110+ KURPar-su-ma-áš Elamite king sent a messenger to land Parsumaš 8 Sargon’s II annals KURPar-su-aš Assyrian province Parsuaš 9 Nimrud Prism KURPar-su-a Sargon II conquered Parsua

Table 3: Parsua and Parsumaš in cuneiform sources (Sargon II)

Here, we can go further, investigating the rest of the inscriptions from the reign of Sargon II. According 27 to a text referring to a military campaign in the central Zagros area, Sargon II stated “(91-92) The cities Bīt-Kilamzaḫ, [...]-lama, Ganunguḫtu, […, (in total) six cities of the] region Niksama, I conquered. (92-93) Šēpī-šarri, the lord of the city Šurgadia, I captured. (93) These cities I joined with the province Parsuaš”.64 Sargon II conquered 6 cities of the land Niksama and annexed them to the province of Parsuaš. Fuchs identifĳied the location of Bīt-Kilamzaḫ on the way to Niksama, but he did not offfer a precise location and limit himself to localizing it somewhere in the central Zagros region.65 Herzfeld put forward that šurgadia could be found in Ardalān and in the vicinity of the Assyrian province of Parsuaš.66 As far as the content is concerned, it looks plausible that we are dealing with two groups of sources which are distinguished by certain variations. One group refers to Parsua and Parsuaš in the central Zagros region and both are identifĳied as being part of the Assyrian governmental system. The other group speaks of Parsumaš in southern Iran and most probably in the neighborhood of Elamite lands.67 Detailed examination of all the evidence in table 3 to identify an ethnic Persian reference shows that during the reign of Sargon II, in 8 out of 9 references, Parsua/ Parsuaš used as a toponym clearly bounded to Assyria. In two cases, governors of Parsua are mentioned. ADD 992 refers to Ilu-taklak as the governor of Parsua, while the name is not preserved on ADD 695. ADD 1057 speaks of ‘UDU Parsua’, and it has

63- Cf. Waters 2011: 286. 64- Fuchs 1994: 317, 346. 65- Ibid., 435. 66- Herzfeld 1968: 175. The rest of the toponyms cannot be identifĳied on a map. 67- In Nimrud’s prism from the reign of Sargon II, Parsua st ill appears with Media, Namri, Ellipi, Bīt-Ḫamban, and Manna. Translating the text, Gadd (1954: 199) wrote written form Parsumaš, while Lyon (1883: 32) and a century later, Fuchs (1994: 396) st ill found Parsua not Parsumaš in this text. 2020, No. 7

been translated as ‘Persian Sheep’.68 Whereas Parsua is preceded by no determinative in ADD 1057, it is interpreted as ‘Persian’, but any documentary evidence for this is lacking, and it would be better to translate it as ‘10 Parsua sheep’. CT 53 110+ sheds light on the Elamite king’s entanglement with Sargon II in Ellipi. It is stated that the king of Elam was about to get additional troops before declaring war against Assyria. So, he started to negotiate with the ‘ruler’ of Parsumaš, and this is the fĳirst reference to a ruler of what later became the heartland of Pārsa.69 It is quite clear that the Elamite king sent his messenger to the land of Parsumaš asking for its mobilization, but there is no sign of the word ‘ruler’ in the text. Certainly, however, the context suggests the presence of many groups who were insurgent towards Assyrian rule in the southwest of modern Iran.70

Sennacherib (704-681 BCE) The name of Parsuaš is only mentioned one time during the reign of Sennacherib. Narrating the battle of Ḫalule in 691 BCE, Sennacherib claimed that the king of Elam, Umman-menanu (Huban-menanu) formed a confederation of lands including Parsuaš, Anšan, Pašeru, and Ellipi, the people of Yasil, Lakab(e) ra, Ḫarzunu, Dummuqu, Sulāya, and Samẚuna, who was a son of Marduk-apla-iddini, the lands Bīt-Adini, Bīt-Amukāni, Bīt-Šilāni, Bīt-Sāla (Bīt-Sẚalli), Larak, the city Laḫīru, the people (of the tribes of the) Puqudu, Gambulu, Ḫalatu, Ruʾuʾa, Ubulu, Malaḫu, Rapiqu, Ḫindaru, and Damunu against him.71 First to be mentioned are the names of Parsuaš and Anšan in the same text. Referring to this text, many scholars have interpreted it to mean that Parsuaš corresponds with southwest Iran, modern Pārsa. 28 For many years this view was close to unanimously shared, and it still remains widely shared. First of all, it must be made clear how we should treat the text. Here, it will be dealt as a non-geographic text. Considering that it is not an itinerary inscription, this means that the order of the names simply does not imply that the adjacent names bordered each other. As has already noted, Parsuaš is located in the central Zagros, but, if we accept for a moment here, that it corresponds to the southwest, then one might expect that the following names follow the same order. Although Parsuaš is followed by Anšan, such logic does not apply for the rest of the names. It is fully established that Anšan corresponds to Tall-e Malyān in Marvdašt,72 while Pašeru is localized to the northeast of Babylon.73 Next, Ellipi in the central Zagros area is mentioned, followed by diffferent Aramean tribes in Babylonia. Most of these toponyms and tribes have been identifĳied with varying degrees of certainty, but for the present purpose it is less important to specify their location than to understand their place in this text. Although the author cannot agree with those scholars- Waters included- who suggest that during the reign of Sennacherib Parsuaš was located in the southwest,74 he finds himself in agreement with Waters’ comments on the battle of Ḫalule, stating that it “suggests Huban-menanu’s ability to command contingents from that region -particularly in the light of the Babylonian chronicle’s implication that Huban-menanu initiated the attack. This demonstrates some

68- Fales and Post gate 1992: no. 134. 69- Fuchs and Parpola 2001: xxxiii, fn. 102. 70- Cf. Waters 1999. 71- See Grayson and Novotny 2012: 182. In contrast , Babylonian chronicles do not mention Parsuaš (Glassner 2004: 207). 72- Reiner 1973: 57-62. 73- Zadok 1985: 249. 74- Cf. de Miroschedji 1985; Young 2003. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

levels of Elamite political influence in the Fars in the early seventh century”.75 Be that as it may, it would be better to search for Parsuaš still in the central Zagros region and not necessarily in the south and at the border of Anšan.76 Finally, mention should be made that Parsuaš (KURPar-su-áš) is only referred as toponym and nothing more can be said about an ethnic Persian presence during the reign of Sennacherib.77

Esarhaddon (680-669 BCE) During a turbulent period of Esarhaddon’s reign, the land of Parsumaš appeared in combination with Bīt-Ḫamban in several texts. Assyrian king asked Šamaš “will the troops of the Scythians and the troops of the Cimmerians emerge from the pass of … and go to Bīt-Ḫamban and Parsumaš, will they make a dangerous incursion into the district of … and the district of Šamaš-naṣir, will they loot …?”.78 Here, three regions are mentioned: Bīt-Ḫamban, Parsumaš, and Šamaš-naṣir. As noted before, Bīt-Ḫamban can be localized in the central Zagros area and in the vicinity of modern Sar-e Pol-e Zohāb and Islām Ābād-e Gharb.79 Šamaš-naṣir is mentioned alongside Arrapḫa/ Kirkuk, and it was located in the present- day region of Diyāla.80 Although it is not an itinerary and it does not mean Bīt-Ḫamban and Parsumaš are close to each other, the author nevertheless tends to favor the view that suggests a localization for Parsumaš in the central Zagros during the reign of Esarhaddon. Nowhere else do Assyrian sources made mention of Parsumaš and Bīt-Ḫamban together, the author still believes that this ‘odd and unique Parsumaš!’ can be found in the central Zagros. The confusion seems to be underlined by the question why an Assyrian king should be perturbed by the attack of Scythian and Cimmerian troops in the land of Parsumaš near the borders of Elam. It can be answered in two ways. Firstly, it is possible that it is caused by a scribal error that 29 is quite common. Secondly, it can be argued that there is no necessary diffference between these variant forms of toponyms and they appear randomly in the texts to specify various areas.81 Personally, I fĳind the fĳirst view more plausible, however, I cannot claim to have succeeded to ascertain my view as fully as I would have liked. Needless to say, that Parsumaš is still referred to as a toponym and is preceded by the KUR determinative.

Ashurbanipal (668-631 BCE) It seems quite acceptable to presume that the Parsumaš in Assyrian sources is the same as the Parsumaš in Babylonian evidence.82 So, for the sake of convenience, they all will be treated together here (table 4). According to edition H of the Ashurbanipal Annals, Kuraš king of Parsumaš and Pislumē king of Ḫudimiri sent tribute to Assyria.83 Kuraš is referred to as king (lugal) of the land Parsumaš two times (H 2 ii´ 7´- 13´, IIT 115- 118). To the current author, the data stemming from these passages is of decisive help to determine the location of Parsumaš, if we compare them with an inscription from the Ištar Temple (IIT) and administrative records (ABL) from this period.

75- Waters 2000: 35. 76- Contra: Vera Chamaza 1994: 100-101. 77- Grayson and Novotny 2012: 182. 78- Starr 1990: nos. 37, 39-40. 79- Levine 1972-75a: 71. 80- Zadok 1985: 29-30. 81- Cf. Levine 1974: 107-108 fn. 35; Waters 2011: 286. 82- See Alizadeh 2017: 94-95. 83- Borger 1996: 191f to cf. Weidner 1931: 1-7. 2020, No. 7

In IIT it is stated that Kuraš, king of Parsumaš, is “on the far side of Elam” which means it can be localized in Pārsa.84 Also, ABL 1311+, in an obscure context, refers to Parsumašians and Šallukka together. Šallukka has been localized in south-eastern Khuzestān.85 Apart from ABL 1311+, Šallukka is mentioned in ABL 281 and 789. In ABL 281, Šallukka is accompanied by Taḫḫašar which in its turn could be identifĳied with Dašer in the Persepolis Fortifĳication Archive.86 In the Persepolis Archive Šallukka appears as Šullaggi (PF 17, 465, 1215) and in an inscription from Hutuluduš-Inšušinak as Šal-u-lik-ki.87 Steve and Zadok tried to locate this šal-u-lik-ki around the Hedyphon/Jarāhi River and equated it with early Islamic Surraq or Dauraq.88 To Cameron it refers to the Šalulikki wherein Hutuluduš-Inšušinak restored a temple for Upurkupak.89 Recently, Henkelman discussed the case again and adopted the idea of a location near modern Rāmšir.90 Furthermore, ABL 961 refers to Parsumašians (LÚPar-su-maš/LÚPar-su-maš-u-a), Elam, Tammaritu and Hidalu in the same context. According to ABL 1309, Ummanigaš, king of Elam, his son and the people of Parsumaš entered the city of Hidalu.91

Ashurbanipal Nebuchadnezzar II 1 ´H 2 ii´ 7´- 13 Ku-ra-áš lugal KURPar-su-ma-áš= 1 Ian-ši-ia LÚPar-su-maš-a-a= Parsu- Kuraš king of land Parsumaš92 mašian (A obv. 12)93 2 IIT 115- 118 Ku-ra-áš MAN KURPar-su-ú-ma- 2 Iba-gi-in-du-u KURPar-su-maš-a-a= from áš= Kuraš king of land Parsumaš94 Parsumaš (A rev. 15)95 3 ABL 961 LÚPar-su-maš= Parsumašians96 3 I]ba-gi-in-du-ú] KI.MIN (A rev. 17)= ambas- 30 sador of the land Parsumaš (A rev. 18)97 4 ABL 1309 people from KURPar-su-maš98 4 di-bi-ia-ᵓ-[ ] LÚEDIN-u šá KURPar- su-maš-[a-a]= ambassador of the land Parsumaš (A rev. 17)99 5 ABL 1311+ LÚPar-su-maš, KURPar-su-maš= Parsumašians, land of Parsumaš100 Table 4: Parsumaš during the reign of Ashurbanipal and Nebuchadnezzar II

84- Henkelman 2003: 601 fn. 68. Cf. Rollinger 1999: 119-121. 85- Steve 1987: 43-45; Henkelman 2008: 18 fn. 31, 43 fn. 111, 426 fn. 981. 86- Henkelman 2008: 44 fn. 112, 59 and especially 112 fn. 245. 87- Scheil 1911: 75. 88- Steve 1987: 43-45; Zadok 1981/1982: 136 fn. 20; 1985: 285. 89- Cameron 1936: 130, 204. 90- Henkelman 2008: 43. Cf. Gorris 2014: 259. 91- Waterman 1930: 410-413. 92- Borger 1996: 191f. 93- Zadok 1976: 66; Weidner 1939: 930; Tammuz and Rosen 2016: 50. 94- Borger 1996: 280f. 95- Zadok 1976: 66; Weidner 1939: 930; Tammuz and Rosen 2016: 50. 96- Waterman 1930: 166-167. 97- Zadok 1976: 66; Weidner 1939: 930; Tammuz and Rosen 2016: 50. 98- Waterman 1930: 410-413. 99- Zadok 1976: 66; Weidner 1939: 930; Tammuz and Rosen 2016: 50. 100- Waterman 1930: 166-167; de Vaan 1995: 313-315. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Finally, mention should be made of ABL 1128. It concerns a letter sent to Ashurbanipal by Nabû-šum- lišir. According to Waterman’s translation, a “stone threshold from the land of Parsua” was sent.101 But, thanks to a recent edition by Reynolds, Waterman’s reference to Parsua should be discounted. To Reynolds, the collation of the British Museum tablet rules out a reading [x x pa]r-su-u--a, but permits [LU.Ša-p]a-zu- u-a, and the text can be translated as follows:102

(1) [To the king of the lands], my [l]ord: [your servant, Nabû-šu]mu-lišir. [May Nabû and Marduk g]ive the king of the lands, [my lord], long [d]ays, [ev]erlasting [years, a jus]t [sceptre], and an [everlasting] throne. (7) A messenger [of the son of] Ya[t]a’-ilu, from [šap]azzu, has come [to] Birati, the city of the king, my lord. Having prepared him for the journey, I am herewith sending him to the king, my lord. (r 2) And now I am keeping the watch of the king, my lord.103

In a document from the 22nd year of Nebuchadnezzar’s reign (i.e 604/3 BCE) a Parsumašian is referred to.104 Also, three Parsumašians are mentioned in a ration list dated between 595-569 BCE (table. 4).105 Furthermore, according to the Nabonidus chronicle, in the month Nisanu, Cyrus, king of Parsu, crossed the Tigris and conquered the land lu… (x).106 Interestingly, Cyrus is also referred to as king of Anšan in that text. According to VAS 4, 87/88 from Babylonia (521 BCE), Iddin-Nabû sent one of his slaves to the house of a Persian (Bīt LUPar-sa-a-a) and in another text a ‘town of the Persians’ is mentioned.107 Considering that Parsumaš in Neo-Assyrian sources can be identifĳied on the border of Elam in the southwest, it would be safe to assume that the same applies for Parsumaš in Babylonian sources. 31

101- Ibid., 286-287. 102- In a paper by Zarrinkoob and the current author, it was claimed that during the reign of Ashurbanipal Parsua and Parsumaš are mentioned in relation with the central Zagros region and on the borders of later Achaemenid Pārsa respect ively (Zarrinkoob and Alizadeh 2018/1396: 45-47, 50). At that time, we were not aware of Reynolds’ edition of ABL 1128 (the same oversight is also present in Vera Chamaza 1994: 101 note 126). So, the discussion was completely based on Waterman’s translation of ABL 1128, which, however, should be discarded. Furthermore, in a text, list ing Neo-Assyrian provinces, the names of Kuš and Media are mentioned, while preceding to Parsua (Fales and Post gate 1995: no. 001). It is generally assumed that “this text dates to Ashurbanipal’s reign, and that it records most of the lands and cities subject to the last great Assyrian ruler, but both these st atements are a matter of inference” (ibid., xiii-xiv). Without wishing to add too much to what has already been said about this letter, it should be noted that there are further difffĳiculties in accepting and ascribing this administ rative letter to a specifĳic period, and for now there is no concrete evidence to confĳidently suggest a date for it. Be that as it may, it can be concluded that Parsumaš is the only written form in documentary sources during Ashurbanipal’s reign. 103- Reynolds 2003: no. 150. 104- Apud Henkelman 2011: 598-599 VIII. 105- Zadok 1976: 66; Weidner 1939: 930; Tammuz and Rosen 2016: 50. 106- Cf. Rollinger 2008: 56-57. 107- Dandamaev 1992: 157. 2020, No. 7

All in all, although these sources do not tell us anything about the precise location of Parsumaš, they, at least, make it sufffĳiciently clear that Parsumaš and Parsumašians in these sources are connected with the Elamite borders, not the central Zagros area, as some scholars claimed. On the basis of this interpretation, and without trying to portray the land of Parsumaš as ‘Achaemenid Pārsa’, it becomes clear that our sources are contradictory to de Miroschedji and Young’s interpretations of the localization of Parsumaš in the 7th century BCE. According to de Miroschedji and Young, both Parsuaš and Parsumaš have nothing to do with Anšan and later Pārsa in the reign of Sennacherib and Assurbanipal. In other words, considering the geographical and political circumstances, they suggested that both Parsuaš and Parsumaš should be located in the central Zagros region.108 Of course, by now, we are not on solid ground to describe the land of Parsumaš (not Parsuaš) as Achaemenid Pārsa, but it does not mean that Parsumaš during the reign of Assurbanipal refers to the central Zagros region. Over the whole period, Parsumaš and Parsua/Parsuaš are mentioned at the same time, but in a very diffferent topographic context.109 All these texts have been much discussed and hold many nuances and complexities. In most cases nothing concrete can be established for the individual names, and their identifĳication is the subject of much speculation. In view of this uncertain situation, the author refrains from the delicate question of identifying Kuraš king of Parsumaš with Cyrus I, the grandfather of Cyrus II.110 Instead, we restrict ourselves to these toponyms, the types of determinatives they are preceded by, and the context. As table 4 shows, of the 9 times the word Parsumaš (as toponym and ethnonym) occurs, 3 refer to an ethnic group and are preceeded by the determinative LÚ. ABL 961 was sent to Ashurbanipal. Here, Parsumašians are referred to 32 two times and the name appears in context with Elam, Hidalu, and Tammaritu. The letter is in a very poor condition and contains several gaps. But, even though in a vague context, it is mentioned that “the people of Parsumaš (Parsumašians) do not advance”.111 ABL 1311+ is very badly damaged as well and contain many uncertainties. Despite its elusive details, it states that “we … to the city of Hidalu … and the Parsumaš .... verily when … he sent, rest I did not take, the journey … I sent them. His messengers … the land of Parsumaš they captured. The people of Parsumaš … regarding the cities among the Shallukea tribe, their booty they plundered.”112 Whatever it might indicates, it is interesting that in ABL 1311+ Parsumaš is marked by either

108- De Miroschedji 1985: 268-272, 276; Young 2003: 245-246. 109- In contrast , it is suggest ed that Parsua is located in the central Zagros area, and that Parsuaš/Parsumaš bordered on Anšan (Diakonofff 1985a: 63- 64, 78; 1985b: 18-20). Following Reade 1978: 139 and Potts 2016: 282, Rubio 2006: 33 fn. 2 suggest ed that “one should dist inguish between Parsua in the Neo-Assyrian sources and Parsumaš (although the latter is not Pārsa/ Persis, pace Potts). However, these and similar toponyms may have been less specifĳic in sources …. In fact , there are clearly two Parsuas: The Parsua in the Zagros and the Parsua associated with Anšan, which eventually become Fārs” (cf. Levine 1974: 107-108 fn. 35; Waters 2011: 286). 110- Cf. de Miroschedji 1985; Young 2003”; contra: Weidner 1931. 111- Waterman 1930: 166-167. 112- Ibid., 415. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

of two determinatives, KUR and LÚ.113 Summarizing: documentary evidence from this period sheds new light on two aspects: a) a land Parsumaš/ KURPar-su-maš is referred to in close association with Neo-Elamite policy in the north and south, b) Parsumaš is mentioned, too, as an ethnic group (LÚPar-su-maš). The same picture also emerges from the Neo-Babylonian evidence. It is for the fĳirst time that Parsumaš is preceded by an animate determinative in Neo-Assyrian (Ashurbanipal) and Neo-Babylonian (Nebuchadnezzar II) sources.114

113- In 2013, Kazem Mollazadeh tried to go into the localization of these toponyms and their possible afffĳiliations with Persian tribes in west ern Iran. Since it is one of the few contributions in Iranian academic journals which tries to dissect the subject , more comments are needed by necessity (Mollazadeh 2013/1391: 107-123; see also Imanpour 2003/1381: 29-50). Sufffĳice it to say that, despite the exist ence of rich body of literature and new editions of Mesopotamian inscriptions at our disposal, the issue was not analyzed in detail, and several mist akes have been pointed out. Following Levine (1974), Mollazadeh believes that Paršua in Urartian sources should be located in the central Zagros region not to the south of Lake Urmia (Mollazadeh 2013/1391: 109-110). The rest of the toponyms, Parsua, Parsuaš and Parsumaš, all refer to a territory in the central Zagros area, identifĳied as west ern Parsua (ibid., 119-120). According to the author, Parsua is referred to a toponym in the central Zagros region for the fĳirst time during the reign of Shalmaneser III in 844 BCE. From that time till the 2nd half of the 7th century BCE, Parsua (and its variant forms) always can be identifĳied in the central Zagros (ibid., 119). It is also st ated that documentary data from the reign of Sargon II used other forms of Parsua (Parsuaš and Parsumaš), which st ill can be localized in the 33 central Zagros region. Finally, this Assyrian province came under the power of Medes somewhere in the 2nd half of the 7th century BCE (ibid., 120). Also, what we need to bear in mind is that in the view of Mollazadeh, the sources from the reign of Ashurbanipal speak of a Parsumaš in Pārs, not the central Zagros area and this one should be diffferentiated from Parsumaš in Sargon’s II inscriptions (ibid., 113). Leaving aside those parts dealing with the ethnic afffĳiliations of these toponyms with Persians, several points should be mentioned here. Signifĳicantly, it seems that the author does not know that, during the reign of Šamaši-Adad V, Parsua and Parsamaš/Parsumaš can be identifĳied in two diffferent areas (Grayson 1996: 184-186, 193; Livingst one 1989: no. 41). More interest ingly, it is st ated that all forms of Parsua, Parsuaš, and Parsumaš in Sargon’s II reign can be found in the central Zagros region (Mollazadeh 2013/1391: 112). Several interest ing remarks can be made about this part. As we saw in preceding pages, Parsua and Parsuaš are the only forms that appear in the inscriptions from this period, and contrary to Mollazadeh’s st atement, the sources do not speak of any Parsumaš in the central Zagros region (cf. Gadd 1954: 199-200; Lyon 1883: 32 ; Fuchs 1994: 396; Luckenbill 1924: 61). Inst ead, mention should be made of the letter CT 53 110+, which refers to Parsumaš on the Elamite borders and far from the central Zagros region (Fuchs and Parpola 2001: no. 129). Furthermore, the administ rative letters from Sargon II’s reign which refer to Parsua, Parsuaš, and Parsumaš are not included in Mollazadeh’s paper. Discussing the battle of Ḫalule in 691 BCE, Mollazadeh identifĳied ‘Parsumaš’ as the only form in Sennacherib’s inscriptions. Here, he referred to Luckenbill (1924: 126, 155, 158). It should be noted that all three examples about the battle of Ḫalule in Luckenbill’s book mention ‘Parsuash’ not ‘Parsumash’, as Mollazadeh claims (Mollazadeh 2013/1391: 113). In a simplist ic approach, he also claimed that the fĳirst attest ation of Parsumaš can be found in Sennacherib’s inscriptions. Documentary evidence does not speak of Parsumaš for about forty years, and, fĳinally in 650s BCE Ashurbanipal’s administ rative letters and annals shed new light on Parsumaš (ibid., 113). Once again, the author made several mist akes. First of all, we have several references to Parsua and Parsumaš during the reign of Esarhaddon (Starr 1990: nos. 37, 39-40; Cole & Machinist 1998: no. 104) and, contrary to Mollazadeh’s claim, the sources continue to refer to Parsumaš during the Neo-Babylonian period, which are completely missing in Mollazadeh’s paper (Zadok 1976: 66; Weidner 1939: 930; Tammuz and Rosen 2016: 50). All these issues lead me to conclude that Mollazadeh’s paper should be treated with caution. 114- Also mention should be made of ABL 61. The letter, sent by Nabū-šumu-iddina, deals with the arrival of 30 Kušite horses from the city of Parsua (Cole and Machinist 1998: no. 104). Nabū-šumu-iddina was the “mayor (or inspect or) of the Nabū Temple of Kalhu (reign of Esarhaddon, probably also reign of Assurbanipal)” (Baker 2001a: 885). If we were to insist on a northern location of Parsua, at least in this case we happen to know that Parsua and Parsumaš are mentioned in the administ rative records, but in diffferent geographical contexts. 2020, No. 7

Urartian sources The name of Paršua (KURPár-šú-a-i) is mentioned during the reigns of Išpuini (825-810 BCE), Minua (810- 785 BCE), and Argišti I (785-763 BCE). In the Karagündüz inscription, Išpuini claimed that he conquered Paršua, Mešta, Qua, Šaritu, and Nigibi.115 Mešta corresponds to a city in the northwest of Miyānduāb and not far from the southeast of Lake Urmia (and probably can be identifĳied with Missi in Neo-Assyrian inscriptions)116 and Nigibi probably can be Mount Nikipa, mentioned in the report on the eighth campaign of Sargon II, directed against Urartu.117 In a lengthy inscription, the military campaigns of Argišti I against the lands of Manna, Aššur, Babiluni, and Paršua (two times) are described. In the third column, Paršua appears with Qilašini, Menabšuni, Duduma, šurḫarara, Buštu, Babiluni, and Baruātā. Of particular interest to us is the nearness of Paršua to Babiluni. After conquering Babiluni, Argišti I took the road to the city of Baruātā and then moved to the land Paršua. Next, the inscription describes his campaigns in the lands of Aššur and Manna. Argišti I claimed that, by the help of Ḫāldi, the great god, he defeated Assur and then entered the land Manna and conquered Ijani and Buštu.118 Qilašini can be found in the east of Muṣaṣir, south of Mešta, north of Ḫubuškia and east of Qalatgah.119 At present, Menabšuni and šurḫarara cannot be identifĳied on a map. Puštu corresponds to the area between Namri and the upper reaches of Diyāla in the north.120 Baruātā refers to south of Lake Urmia and one usually identifĳies it with Bīt-Barrūa and Bīt-Bāri in Neo-Assyrian sources.121 Finally, mention should be made of Babiluni. It was located south of Lake Urmia and can be identifĳied with Namri in the Diyāla 34 region.122 In summary, the abovementioned discussion makes it sufffĳiciently clear that, just like Neo-Assyrian inscriptions, the Urartian sources tell us that Paršua still can be localized in the central Zagros region. Before proceeding, a synthesis of the discussion about the localization of toponyms is needed, and then the fĳinal analysis about links between toponyms and Persian ethnicnity will follow. In summary, the main points here are:

1. From Shalmaneser III to Ashurbanipal, Parsua is always mentioned in close association with the central Zagros region. Throughout the whole period, Parsua appears with Allabria, Manna, Abdadānu, Namri, Missi, Gizilbunda, and Bīt-Ḫamban. There is, however, not sufffĳicient evidence to determine whether Parsāya during the reign of Shalmaneser III is identical with Parsua or not. 2. During the reigns of Šamši-Adad V, Sargon II, and Ashurbanipal, Parsamaš/ Parsumaš is mentioned as situated on the Elamite borders in the south. The cuneiform sources cannot be of decisive help for localizing the toponym Parsumaš in Pārs. The author does not identify the land Parsumaš with Achaemenid Pārsa. Instead, an identifĳication of the Neo-Elamite eastern

115- Salvini 2008: 139-140 A 3-9. 116- The inscription identifĳies Qua, šaritu, and Nigibi as parts of the land of Paršua (cf. Diakonofff and Kashkai 1981: 60, 67, 79). 117- Diakonofff and Kashkai 1981: 57, 60. 118- Salvini 2008: 338-339 A 8-3 III. 119- Parpola and Porter 2001: pl. 4. 120- Diakonofff and Kashkai 1981: 23. 121- Ibid., 18-19. 122- Ibid., 17-18; cf. Lanfranchi 2003: 101-102 fn. 97. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

territories as Parsumaš and the dwelling of Parsumašians is suggested. Given that all cases referring to Parsumaš and Parsumašians do not speak of a defĳinable territory in western Iran, it is quite hazardous to consider them as identical (Parsumaš≠Achaemenid Pārsa). 3. Urartian sources (Išpuini, Minua, Argišti I) locate Paršua in the central Zagros area. As we have seen, Paršua is referred to together with Nikipa, Puštu, Babiluni/ Namri, and Baruātā, which all can be localized in the central Zagros region and northeast. 4. Considering that Parsumaš is mentioned in isolated texts, Babylonian sources cannot be of great help. But, based on Assyrian sources, it would be safe to localize Parsumaš on the Elamite border and the southwest. 5. To make it stand out even more, the claim can be made that we are dealing with two groups of toponyms. In the fĳirst place, it is evident that Parsua/ Parsāya/ Parsuaš always refers to the central Zagros region, while the other one, Parsamaš/ Parsumaš can be localized in the southwest. Despite the dearth of solid evidence, we may freely concede that scribes at the Neo-Assyrian, Urartian and Babylonian courts diffferentiated clearly between these two groups and used them at the same time. Needless to say, that the variant forms of Parsua/ Parsāya/ Parsuaš were never used to refer to a location in relation with the southwest and Elamite territory which bordered on Anšan, later Pārsa. In other words, Babylonian and Assyrian (and Urartian) scribes operated with a distinction between two toponyms: they generally reserved the spelling with -umaš (which was pronounced -waš by the way) for the southern entity and the spelling -ua for the northern. 35

Persian ethnonyms in Western Iran Before analyzing the Neo-Elamite and Achaemenid documentary evidence, it is quite necessary to discuss how ‘KUR’, ‘URU’, and ‘LÚ’ in the cuneiform sources should be translated. Writing on Umman- manda, Zawadzki stated that “what I wished to express was the belief that a diffferent translation is possible depending on the kind of determinative: KUR.umman-manda, ‘the barbarian country’, Ummān- manda (without determinative), ‘the barbarians’ and “LÚ.Umman-manda, ‘the barbarian people’ in the Nabonidus inscriptions.”123 If nothing else, this statement indicates that all non-geographical name (NG) and geographical name (GN) can be regarded as a toponym-ethnonym. In my view this statement is less defensible, if we check the other Neo-Assyrian usages.124 Diffferent formulas can be identifĳied in documentary sources. In most cases, the formula ‘NG+KUR/URU+GN’, is translated as ‘from Asû the Gilzānian’ (šá ma-su-a KUR gíl-za-na-a-a),125 ‘Ianziburiaš the Allabriaean’ (mia-an-zi-bur-ia-áš KUR al-lab-ri-a-a),126 ‘from Artasari the Paddiraean’ (šá mar-ta-sa-ri URU pad(*)-di-ra-a-a),127 ‘from Datana the Ḫubuškian’ (šá mda-ta-na URU ḫu-bu-uš-ka-a-a)128, ‘Arramu the Urartian’ (mar-ra-mu URU ú-ra-ar-ṭa-a-a).129 It is evident that they have a

123- Zawadzki 2011/2012: 275. 124- For a full discussion on the theme of nisbe and ethnicity in the Neo-Assyrian written sources, see Fales 2013, 2015, 2017. 125- Grayson 1996: 9, 38. 126- Ibid., 40. 127- Ibid., 70. 128-Ibid., 70. 129- Ibid., 20. 2020, No. 7

geographical implication as well. Equally important here is the fact that in some cases a name is used as a toponym-ethnonym: ša MAN.MEŠ-ni ša KUR kal-di (‘from the kings of Chaldaea’);130 LÚ kal-du (‘Chaldean’);131 te-ne-šet KUR kal-di (‘the people of Chaldea’);132 BÀD.MEŠ ša KUR kal-di (‘fortresses of Chaldea’);133 fsa-am- si šar-rat KUR a*-ri-bi (‘Samsi, queen of the Arabs’);134 fia-ti-iʾ-e šar-rat LÚ a-ri-bi (‘Iatiʾe queen of the Arabs’);135 DINGIR.MEŠ ša LÚ a-ri-bi (‘gods of the Arabs’);136 LÚ a-ri-bi (‘the Arabs’);137 fap-kal-la-tú šar-rat LÚ a-ri-bi (‘Apkallatu queen of the Arabs’);138 LUGAL KUR me-luḫ-ḫa (‘king of the land Meluḫḫa’);139 LÚ me-luḫ-ḫe-e (‘Meluḫḫians’);140 KUR me-luḫ-ḫa (‘the land Meluḫḫa’);141 LÚ a-la-mu-ú (‘Elamite’);142 KUR.ELAM.MA.KI (‘the land of Elam’).143 It does seem very likely that in the latter cases, in which names are marked by both KUR and LÚ, following this type of translation, as Zawadzki did, which makes sense and is acceptable. Thus, it can be pointed out that in all cases where Parsua, Parsuaš, and Parsāya were mentioned by Assyrian scribes, a geographical implication was actually intended, not specifĳic ethnic groups. This interpretation corresponds with our present prosopographical knowledge of the central Zagros area in the 1st millennium BCE. The author is fully aware of the uncertainties involved, but he does believe that it can be of great help in gaining a clear-cut result. Going through the several toponyms and personal names connected with Parsua, Parsuaš, and Parsāya in Pre-Achaemenid cuneiform sources will makes clear to us, despite many uncertainties about their etymology, that the number of Iranian names therein was quite low.

Anzi: (unknown etymology), ruler of the city of Ḫalḫubarra (man-zi-i ša URUḫal-ḫu-bar-ra) in the land Parsuaš. He gave tribute to Sargon II in 714 BCE;144 Bāra: ruler of Ginzini (part of the 36 land Parsuaš) during the reign of Šamši-Adad V, shortened name based on a compound like Med. *Aspa-bāra (rider, horseman);145 Barzutā (mba-ar-zu-ta KURta-ur-la-a-a): ruler of Taurla (not far from Manna and Parsuaš), perhaps Iranian, patronymic OIran. *Bārz-vat-a;146 Bisirin: king of Armiya in the land Parsuaš during the reign of Šamši-Adad V, unknown etymology;147 Burburazu/Burbuazu: 1) Median ruler of the land Uratis (reign of Sargon II), 2) Median ruler of the city Ginkir (reign of Sargon II), 3) ruler of Bīt-Issar in Media (reign of Sargon II), compare

130-Ibid., 53. 131- Grayson and Novotny 2012: 33. 132- Ibid., 37. 133- Ibid., 75. 134- Tadmor and Yamada 2011: 59, 106. 135- Grayson and Novotny 2011: 34. 136-Leichty 2011: 19. 137- Ibid., 19. 138- Ibid., 19. 139- Ibid., 167. 140- Ibid., 89. 141- Ibid., 105. 142- Grayson and Novotny 2012: 33. 143- Ibid., 33. 144- Radner 1998: 112. 145- Fuchs and Schmitt 1999a: 268. 146- Fuchs and Schmitt 1999b: 274-275. 147- Fuchs 1999: 347-348. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

with OIran. *Purufraša or OIran. *Purufrasa, but it is non-Iranian (probably Kassite);148 Ḫumbe: ruler of Bīt-Zualzaš who gave tribute to Sargon II in Parsuaš, some scholars tried to compare it with OIran. *Xumbya, but it seems wiser to consider it as Elamite;149 Ilu-taklak: governor of NAM KURPar-su-a) (Sargon II), Akkadian name (O God, establishعParsua (mDINGIR-tak-lak L the name!);150 Karaku: Median city lord of Uriaka/ Urikaia (Sargon II), he brought tribute to Sargon’s II camp in Parsuaš. A diffferent etymology has been offfered and comparing it with OIran. *Kāra-ka or Elamite Ka(r)-rak-qa;151 Kitakki: city lord of Uriangi (Sargon II), brings tribute to Sargon II in Parsuaš, traced back to OIran. *Kiata-ka by Grantovskij;152 Makritu (mma- ki-ir-tu ša URU.É?–sa-ag-bat): ruler of Bīt-Sagbat in land Parsuaš, OIran. Māh-kṛta (‘made by the moon god’, ‘made like the moon’) or OIran. vahukṛta- (‘created by the good one’), but Iranian onomastics do not confĳirm either restorations;153 Mašdaku: 1) ruler of the city Andirpattianu in Media (Sargon II), 2) ruler of Aratis/šta in Media (Sargon II), perhaps Iranian OIran. Mazdā̌- ka-;154 Nabū-rēmanni: offfĳicial active in the region of Parsua (Sargon II), Akkadian origin (‘Oh Nabū, have mercy on me!’);155 Paiukku: 1) city lord of Kilambate (Sargon II), 2) city lord of Bīt- Kapsi (Sargon II), both of them brought tribute to Sargon II in Parsuaš, diffferent etymologies have been suggested (Iranian, Hurrian, Caucasian, and Elamite), but it can be interpreted as OIran. *pāyu-ka- based on Iran. *pāyu- (‘protector, guardian’) (cf. Av. pāiiiu, Ved. pāyú);156 Saḫḫī: In ADD 695, Saḫḫī is mentioned as ‘guarantee’ until the governor of Parsua gave back the fĳifty cavalrymen;157 Ardarā: ruler of land Uštašša in Na’iri (Šamši-Adad V), Iranian origin (‘true in faith’).158 Zadok believes Uštašša can be interpreted as Uštašša< *Višta-aça-< *Višta-aspa-.159 If 37 the proposed etymology for Uštašša is correct, it would be very interesting that *Višta-aça- is appearing in Parsua in the 9th century BCE;160 Parušta (mpa-ru-uš-ta KUR.ki-ba-ru-šá-a-a): ruler of the land Kibaruša (Šamši-Adad V), Iranian origin, OIran. *para(h)-stā- (‘standing at the head’) or OIran. *parūštra- (‘with many camels’) which is quite possible;161 Ašpaštatauk: ruler of Uila (Šamši-Adad V), Iranian origin, probably the fĳirst part can be compared with OIran. (Med.) *aspa- and can be restored as *Aspasti-tavaka (‘mighty by the possession of horses’);162 Mamaniš: ruler of Luksa in land Na’iri (Šamši-Adad V), Iranian origin (‘having in mind what

148- Fuchs and Schmitt 1999c: 353-354. 149- Baker and Schmitt 2000: 478. 150- Baker 2000: 536. 151- Fuchs and Schmitt 2000a: 606. 152- Fuchs and Schmitt 2000b: 630. 153- Akerman and Schmitt 2001a: 675. 154- Baker and Schmitt 2001: 744. 155- Baker 2001b: 862. 156- Fuchs and Schmitt 2002: 979-980. 157- Kessler 2002: 1062. 158- Schmitt and Talon 1998: 129. 159- Zadok 2004: 103. 160- Ibid., 103. 161- Baker and Schmitt 2002a: 991. 162- Radner and Schmitt 1998a: 143-144. 2020, No. 7

is good’), cf. Iran. *Vahu-maniš-;163 Adadānu: ruler of Asati in Na’iri lands (Šamši-Adad V), probably Iranian origin (cf. *Ā̌dā̌-/Hada-dānna- ‘gift, present’ or *dāna ‘grain’ by Grantovskij);164 Arua: ruler of Kindutauš (Šamši-Adad V), Iranian origin (‘quick’, ‘brave’), cf. Iran. *Arva- and OIran. *Aryuku;165 Irtiṣati: ruler of Gingirda in western Iran (Šamši-Adad V), Iranian origin (‘born from truth’), cf. OIran. Ṛta-zāta;166 Satiriāia: a ruler in the land Na’iri (Šamši-Adad V), Iranian origin, OIran. (Med.) OP. *Xšaçiya- * and Xšaʋriya-;167 Arta-sirari: a ruler in the land Na’iri (Šamši-Adad V), Iranian (‘marvellous by truth’), the equation with OIran. (Med.) *Ṛta- sūra- (‘strong/ powerful by truth’) has been suggested;168 KURA-ra-ti-iš-ta/KURA-[ra]t-is!-ta/URUA- rat-is!-ti: it “render *Raɵaištar a hypothetical ancient west Iranian cognate of Avestan Raɵaē- štar, Raɵaē-štā, Raɵoi-štā;169 Parsania: During his third campaign, Šamši-Adad V imposed tribute to Zarišu of the land Parsania.170 Pa-ar-sa-ni-A+A is a gentilic of a form ending in –a/ āna- which may be based on either pārsa- or *parša-(ear of grain) or *Parša-.171

The interpretation of these toponyms and proper names is, however, far from straightforward and we are quite ill-informed. Nevertheless, gaining an understanding of this type of data is a difffĳicult task, but the picture is now more or less complete. As might be expected, the Neo-Assyrian sources speak of an Iranization process in Greater Media (maximum 45.37-minimum 32.36%) and Iranians were the dominant group in all Median territories.172 Zadok has gone so far as to categorize the distribution of diffferent ethnic elements in western Iran:173 38 “The Iranian toponymy prevails in Eastern Media (54.54-27.27%), ‘Inner’ Media (32.2-12%), Western Media (18.7-14.58%) and Parsua (10.4-4.16%). It has the same percentage as the Kassite toponymy in Gizilb/punda and environs (16-4%). The Hurro-Urartian toponymy prevails in Mannea and Northwestern Media (10.95 2.43% and 22.63-3.77% respectively) which bordered on Urartu. In both regions the Iranian toponymy is the second-largest group (9.72-1.21%

163- Akerman and Schmitt 2001b: 675-676. 164- Radner and Schmitt 1998b: 22. 165- Radner and Schmitt 1998c: 134; 1998d: 134-135. 166- Fuchs and Schmitt 2000c: 565. 167- Baker and Schmitt 2002b: 1096. 168- Radner and Schmitt 1998e: 134. It is also important to speak of Satarēšu, ruler of Nartu, and Satarēšu, ruler of Bīt-Bari in west ern Iran, during the reign of Sargon II. They may be connect ed to OIran. *Xšaʋr-aiša- or OIran. *Xšaʋr-iča- (Baker and Schmitt 2002c: 1096). Furthermore, Satarpānu as a personal name is referred to two times during the reign of Sargon II: 1) Satarpānu as a Median ruler of the land of Uppuri, 2) Satarpānu, the ruler of land of Barikanu, who brought tribute to the Sargon’s II camp. The name trace back to OIran. (Med.) *Xšaʋra-pāna (Baker and Schmitt 2002d: 1096). 169- Bartholomae 1961: 1506-1507; Zadok 2004: 105-106. 170- Grayson 1996: 186. 171- Apud Zadok 2004: 103. 172- Ibid., 104. For a possible presence of Varuna and Indra in Elamite texts and Gudea’s Inscriptions, see Zadok (1984: 47 no. 279, 54 no. 7.0; Roiter 2013: 65-69). 173- Zadok 2004: 105. Cf. Diakonofff 1985a: 63-64, 78-79; 1991: 14. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

and 7.54-5.66% respectively; Kassite toponymy has 7.29-3.65% and 5.65-0% respectively), whereas in the regions with dominant Iranian toponymy Kassite is almost everywhere the second-largest group (Parsua: 4.16-2.08%; ‘Inner’ Media 12-4%; Western Media 11.46-7.29%). The Zamuan toponymy has limited Kassite and Hurro-Urartian components (5.95-2.38% and 3.57% respectively). Iranian is the second-largest group (4.76-2.38%). On the whole there is a fairly high degree of accord between the toponymy and the anthroponymy of most regions. There is a certain persistence of pre-fĳirst millennium toponyms (8-4.23%).”

Neo-Elamite Texts After the fall of Neo-Assyrian Empire, written sources (with the exception of Babylonian evidence) of the greater part of the 7th and 6th centuries BCE fail to provide sufffĳicient information about our subject, but the Neo-Elamite cuneiform sources, especially the Acropole texts from Susa, are of great help to us and bring us instructive data about the early Persians. A number of points about these texts deserve careful mention. Over recent decades, the value of Neo-Elamite texts as an original source of data have been gaining increasing attention and have resulted in new interpretations. Contrary to the tendentious and one-sided information of Neo-Assyrian inscriptions, the Neo-Elamite administrative texts speak of Persians in an almost unprejudiced atmosphere.174 Several ethnic groups and toponyms are mentioned in these texts. In a voluminous paper, Iranians in Neo-Elamite texts, Tavernier identifĳied 93 Iranian personal names, 10 toponyms, and 4 loan words.175 Identifying Persians in these groups of texts has been the subject of several papers.176 It is well established that parsirra/ parsip refers to (early) Persians. All the following 39 examples have been derived from Henkelman’s paper:177

1. S 11, Obv. 1 1 BEba-ak-ráb-ba ˹du-iš˺ 2 1 BEti-ia-ad-da du-iš 3 1 BEma-at-ri-iš 4 PAP 3 ku-uk-tu PÍR.PÍR 5 kur-mán BEku-ud-da-, lower edge. 6 ka-ka-na 7 hu-ma-ka BEpár-sìp Rev. 8 AŠza-am-be-gìr-ip 9 du- hu-iš-da 10 ITI ŠE UD DIRIG 11 Aškur-du[-uš]-um. 1 1 (garment) Bakrabba received, 2 1 (garment) Tiyadda received, 3 1 (garment) Matriš received. 4 Total: 3 undyed? kuktu garments, 5–6 allocation from Kuddakaka, 7 were acquired; 7–9 Persians from Zampegir received (them). 10 Intercalary sixth month, 11 (at) Kurdušum. 32 ? 33 ? BE 2. S 94: 32- 33, ˹11 ˺ ku-uk-tu4 da-ban-ti-na [2 ] KI.MIN PÍR.PÍR PAP 13 Pár-sìp za-am-be-˹gìr- ip- du-iš˺. 11? kuktu-garments of the dabanti kind, 2? ditto, small?, in total 13 (garments) Persians from Zampegir- received. 3. S 166: 5’, 1 KI+KIN BEPár-sìp-ib-be. 1 ditto (for?) Persians. 4. S 166: 26’, ˹2?˺ ša-ma-raš BEPár-sìp-˹ib˺-be. 2 šamarraš (for?) Persians.

174- It is important to bear in mind that none of these toponyms and ethnonyms in Urartian, Assyrian, and Babylonian cuneiform sources are attest ed in Neo-Elamite texts. 175- Tavernier 2011: 243. 176- Basello 2005; Tavernier 2011; Henkelman 2011. 177- Henkelman 2011. 2020, No. 7

5. S 246: 18’’, ˹PAP˺ 6 BEPár-˹sìp˺ [- …]. total 6 (garments) (for?) Persians. 6. S 281: 20- 21, 2 sa-ah GIŠGIMEŠ BEPár-sìp a-raš[(…)] gi-ri-ih. 2 arrow heads (?) (of/and) arrow-shafts Persians deposited(?) (at) the storehouse. 7. S 281: 29, PAD 6 TUK 6 ˹BE˺Pár-sìp da-˹at˺-ia-˹na˺-ip ˹du-iš-da˺. total: 6 tukli garments (and) 6 (kuktu garments), Persians from Dat(ti)yana- received.

Discussing all aspects of these texts is beyond the scope of this paper, and we will restrict ourselves to Persians as an ethnic group in Elamite texts. Judging by these indications, it is well established and widely accepted that parsirra (Persian)/ parsip (Persians) were in close relationship with the Elamite state centered in Susa. Here, parsip is preceded by an animate determinative, BE.

Achaemenid Texts Gaining a clear picture of Pre-Achaemenid Persians will not succeed unless we compare them with Persians in documentary sources from the Achaemenid period. Pursuing this line of analysis, it would be helpful to make use of evidence drawn from Darius’ trilingual inscription at Bīsotūn (DB) (Elamite/AE, Akkadian/AA, and Old Persian /OP). All examples come from DB column I:178

40 OP AE AA 1Pārsaiy: § 1: 1 AŠparsip: § 1: 1 LÚParsāya: § 1: 1 2Pārsa: § 6: 14 DIŠParsip: § 6: 10 KURParsu: § 6: 5 3Pārsaiy: § 10: 34 DIŠParsip: § 10: 26 KURParsa: § 10: 14 4Pārsa: § 11: 41 DIŠPársìp: § 10b: 31 KURParsu: § 10b: 16 5Pārsam: § 12: 46 DIŠPársìp: § 11: 35 KURParsu: § 11: 19a 6Pārsa: § 13: 49 DIŠPársira: § 12: 37 LÚ˺Parsā˹ya˺: § 12: 20˹

Table 4: Achaemenid Pārsa and Persians in DB Inscription

To make sense of all these uses, they can be categorized in two groups: ethnonyms and toponyms. As we can see, while Pārsa (OP), Parsip (AE), and Parsāya (AA) have been used for Persians; Pārsa (OP), Parša (AE),179 and Parsu (AA) were used for the Pārsa region in the southwest (modern Fārs). The advantage of this information is abundantly clear, since it gives us a chance to put all these Pre-Achaemenid and Achaemenid data in one category and retrieve the Persians in cuneiform sources. Categorizing by types of determinative, it is clear that they are preceded by two types of determinatives: toponym (KUR, URU) and animate (BE→ Elam., LÚ→ Akk.). Parsua, Parsuaš and Parsāya are never preceded by the animate determinatives. They always appear with KUR and URU in cuneiform sources, and just in one example

178- Bae 2001; Vallat 1977; Grillot-Susini 1993. 179- Hallock 1969: 742. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Parsua is preceded by no determinative (in ADD 1057 as UDU Parsua).180 In the Pre-Achaemenid group, Parsumaš is the only one among the list that has been mentioned as an ethnic group. This again brings us to ABL 1311+. The letter subtly prepares data for a clear-cut argument about the land Parsumaš (KURPar-su-maš) and Parsumašians (LÚPar-su-maš).181 As suggested earlier, Parsamaš during Šamši-Adad V is possibly the same as Parsumaš in CT 53 110+ (Sargon II), ABL 961, 1309, 1311+ (Ashurbanipal), and Parsumaš in Neo-Babylonian sources (Nebuchadnezzar II). Be that as it may, however, we are not on solid enough ground to treat the texts like this; we can speak of Parsumašian people in southwest Iran from the reign of Šamši-Adad V till Ashurbanipal. There is not enough information about the society and culture of these Parsumašians, but, probably, we can speak as regards livelihood of stockbreeding or even (semi-) pastoralism. The Šamši-Adad V’s inscription suggests ownership of sheep and oxen by (the) people of the city of Parsamaš.182 Later, ABL 961 refers to ‘their flock’ (ṣēnu), yet while the people of Parsumaš have been mentioned beforehand,183 it is hard to interpret it as “the Parsumašians’ flock,” since the letter is much damaged (pers.comm. G. Frame). To put the discussion back in a chronological frame, we must note the changes. References to Parsumaš in the southwest led many scholars to suppose that LÚParsumaš refers to Persians in Pre-Achaemenid texts. If so, the question rises what happened to the Parsumašians (as an ethnic marker) at the eve of the birth of Achaemenid Empire? To answer this, the author is inclined to treat the subject in a diffferent way. Judging by Neo-Babylonian texts, Parsumaš and Parsumašians are mentioned in a text from the reign of Nebuchadnezzar II (dated between 595-569 BCE, only forty years at the most before the Cyrus’ revolt against the Median king, *Ṛštivaiga). In this case, Elamite texts speak of a continuity and Parsirra/ Parsip 41 is always used to identify the Persians. Decades later, in the Nabonidus chronicle (ii 15) Cyrus is indicated as the king of Parsu.184 In light of this data, it is apparent that Nebuchadnezzar II’s reign brings us the last occurrence of Parsumaš and the Parsumašians. Later, according to VAS 4 87/88 (521 BCE), Iddin-Nabū sent his slave to the house of a Persian (Bīt LÚPar-sa-a-a/LÚParsāya).185 Another document gives indication of a ‘town of Persians’ (URU Bīt LÚPar-ri-sa-a-a) in Nippur.186 Here, Ashurbanipal’s annals are of great interest. In these texts our sources speak for the fĳirst time of a kingdom in the land of Parsumaš during the reign of Ashurbanipal.187 Cuneiform sources describe the Parsumašians as a repository to recruit soldiers and of mobilization during the reigns of Sargon II and Ashurbanipal, and in most cases, despite the vague contexts, it seems that the Parsumašians were allied with the Elamite state (ABL 961, 1309, 1311+, CT 53 110+). Be that as it may, it is tempting to suggest, therefore, that by Parsumašians, Assyrian and Babylonian

180- Fales and Post gate 1992: no. 134. 181- Waterman 1930: 166-167; de Vaan 1995: 313-315. 182- Grayson 1996: 193. 183- Waterman 1930: 167. 184- Kuhrt 2007: 50. 185- Dandamaev 1992: 157. 186- Ibid., 157. 187-The author is not going to deal with the contentious quest ion of the Persian tribes and ruling class; however, a number of issues regarding these texts deserve brief mention. Referring to Parsirra/ Parsip in relation with Huri, Dat(ti)yana, Zambegir, while Greek sources speak of ten (Hdt. 1.125.3-4) and twelve tribes (Xen. Cyrop. 1.2.5), may simply implicate that the Neo-Elamite east ern territories (including Anšan/later Pārsa) were indeed the territory of many tribes (Alizadeh forthcoming; Frye 1983: 89-91). 2020, No. 7

sources referred to a confederation of (semi-) pastoralist groups (including Persian tribes and probably Elamites in Anšan and periphery lands) in Neo-Elamite eastern territories.188 It is probable that a Kuraš (not necessarily the same as the grandfather of Cyrus II), whose afffĳiliation to the Persian tribes is not clear, was the fĳirst one to bring the heterogeneous and centrifugal tribes under one command, but not necessarily a Persian Kingdom.189 Later, Babylonian sources referred to Parsumašians and an ambassadors from the land of Parsumaš.190 Whatever they came for, however, remains unveiled. Though the texts do not mention any king of Parsumaš. It is very interesting that the people from Parsumaš were still interested in Nebuchadnezzar II’s court. Following that time, documentary evidence stops referring to Parsumaš and the Parsumašian people. Although it does not bear out properly by current evidence at our disposal, it could be claimed that during the interval between Nebuchadnezzar II and Nabonidus the Parsumašian confederation did not exist anymore. Instead, it was the new-born dynasty (the Achaemenid dynasty) which strived for a true Persian kingdom. From that time, Babylonian sources speak of Parsu (Achaemenid Pārsa) and LÚParsāya (Persians) in close connection with new regime in the land of Pārsa. From the uprising of Cyrus II against *Ṛštivaiga onwards, Babylonian sources use several titles, but we fĳind no longer any sign of a king of Parsumaš or the Parsumašian people:

1. Cyrus Cylinder: Cyrus king of Anšan191 2. Brick from Ur: Cyrus, king of the world, king of Anšan, son of Cambyses, king of Anšan192 3. Nabonidus’ Chronicle: Cyrus king of Anšan, Cyrus king of Parsu193 42 4. Verse account of Nabonidus: Cyrus king of the world194 5. Miscellaneous economic documents: Cyrus king of Babylon, king of lands195 6. The Dynastic Prophecy: Cyrus king of Elam196

188- Henkelman (2003: 76 fn. 9, 78 fn. 17) suggest ed that “Parsua may perhaps refers to groups including Iranians but cannot with any certainty be taken to refer always as Iranians in an exclusive way”. Inst ead, he is of the opinion that Parsirra in the Acropole texts from Susa is the only one which probably refers to Persians and it is better to reserve “Persians” for the Achaemenid Period. 189- Cf. Levine 1974: 110-112; Reade 1978: 119; Brown 1980: 16-17; Frye 1983: 66-67; Hansman 1985: 34; Diakonofff 1985a: 78; 1985b: 18-20; Waters 1999: 102-103; 2011: 286 fn. 5. Discussing ABL, Waters suggest ed “diffferent groups of Persians (I prefer Parsumašians) attacked or allied themselves with the Elamites for varying purposes” (Waters 1999: 104). This led us to suppose that when Cyrus II revolted against the Medes and allied himself with the Maraphii and Maspii, this simply means that we have the same situation here and other tribes were not of the same mind about rebellion. It has also been suggest ed by de Miroschedji (1985: 287-288), that the power vacuum created by the collapse of Assyria prepared the situation and empowered the Persians. In this atmosphere of chaos and disorder, Kuraš called himself king (lugal) of Parsumaš. Furthermore, according to the annals, Kuraš and Pizlume “Furcht vor meiner Majest ät warf [ihn] nieder [...], [er schickte] seinen Friedensboten mit [seinem (schweren) Geschenk] nach Ninive, der Stadt meiner Herrschaft, und flehte [meine Herrschaft] an” (Borger 1996: 191f). For a ‘Teispide’ dynast y before the accession of Darius I to the throne, see Rollinger 1998; contra: Jacobs 2011; Henkelman 2011. 190- Zadok 1976: 66; Weidner 1939: 930; Tammuz and Rosen 2016: 50. 191- Berger 1974: 196; Schaudig 2001: 552-53, 555. 192- Schaudig 2001: 449. 193- Grayson 1975: 107; Brosius 2000: 8. 194- Schaudig 2001: 576. 195- Waters 2004: 94. 196- Van der Spek 2003: 317 17‘-18‘, 319. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Fig. 1: Presumptive Persians in Pre-Achaemenid and Achaemenid texts

To the author, this implies that we must diffferentiate Parsumašians from LÚParsāya (Babylonian) and Parsirra/ Parsip (Elamite). In other words, Parsumašians refers to many tribes (including Persians) and it would be better to exclude it as an exclusive mark of a Persian ethnicity. By contrast, Elamite sources have always referred to Persians as Parsirra/ Parsip over the period in its entirety. Although it will be difffĳicult to reach a consensus in this case, I fĳind myself in sympathy with those scholars who try to treat it in the light of long-term Elamite-Persian acculturation. If we identify Parsamaš from the reign of Šamši-Adad V with 43 Parsumaš and Parsumašians (from Sargon II to Nebuchadnezzar II), at least the claim can be made that some of the Persians and Elamites had been assimilating since the 9th century BCE.197 If so, then it can be no surprise that Elamite scribes did not mix up the toponyms and ethnic names discussed here.198

197- Cf. Henkelman 2011. 198- Cuneiform sources do not add further information about the relation between Parsua, Parsuaš and Parsāya with Iranians or more specifĳically Persians. However, it has been suggest ed that people from Parsua and the other variant forms in central Zagros refer to groups of Persians who were fĳinally were absorbed into the Median population (Young 1988: 5-16; Waters 1999: 101-102). According to Waters (1999: 101), there was a group of Persians in the central Zagros, but “the ultimate fate of the Persians in the central Zagros area is unknown. Perhaps they migrated southeast ward to join their cousins in Fars or were eventually absorbed by their Median neighbor”. It is worth noting that KURParsāya from the reign of Shalmaneser III were st ill referred to (as LÚParsāya) in Achaemenid Babylonia. It is, thus, possible to argue that KURParsāya could refer to a group of Persians in the central Zagros region. But, for the most part, and due to the flimsy and vague sources at our disposal, the relations between Parsua and Parsuaš with the Persians cannot be proved. 2020, No. 7

Bibliography

Abdi, K., and Atayi, M. 2014. The Pre-Imperial Persians at the Land of Anshan. Some Preliminary Observations. In Excavating an Empire. Achaemenid Persia in Longue Durée. edited by T. Daryaee, A. Mousavi and Kh. Rezakhani, Costa Mesa, CA: 73-87. Akerman, K., and Schmitt, R. 2001a. Makirtu. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire II/2, Helsinki: 675. Akerman, K., and Schmitt, R. 2001b. Mamaniš. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire II/2, Helsinki: 675-676. Albright, W. 1921. Magan, Meluḫa, and the Synchronism between Menes and Narâm-Šin. In The Journal of Egyptian Archaeology 7, No. 1/2: 80-86. Alizadeh, K. forthcoming. Neo-Elamite Eastern Territories and Pastoralist People. The Case of Persian Tribes.” Paper presented at the 2nd Susa and Elam conference. History, Language, Religion and Culture, Belgium. Louvain-la-Neuve, July 6-9, 2015. Alizadeh, K. 2017. The Persians in Anšan and the Emergence of the Achaemenid Empire. PhD diss., University of Tehran. Austin, W. M., and Smith L. S. 1937. Sanskrit Parśu and Paraśu. In Journal of the American Oriental Society 44 57 No. 1: 95-98. Bae, C.-H. 2001. Comparative studies of King Darius’s Bisitun inscription. PhD Diss., University of Harvard. Baker, H. D. 2000. Ilu-taklāk. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire II/1, Helsinki: 536. Baker, H. D. 2001a. Nabū-šumu-iddina. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire II/2, Helsinki: 884-888. Baker, H. D. 2001b. Nabū-rēmanni. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire II/2, Helsinki: 862-864. Baker, H. D., and Schmitt, R. 2000. Ḫumbê. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire II/1, Helsinki: 478. Baker, H. D., and Schmitt, R. 2001. Mašdakku. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire II/2, Helsinki: 744. Baker, H. D., and Schmitt, R. 2002a. Parušta. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire III/1, Helsinki: 991. Baker, H. D., and Schmitt, R. 2002b. Satiriaia. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire III/1, Helsinki: 1096. Baker, H. D., and Schmitt, R. 2002c. Satarēšu. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire III/1, Helsinki: 1096. Baker, H. D., and Schmitt, R. 2002d. Satarpānu. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire III/1, Helsinki: 1096. Bartholomae, C. 1961. Altiranischs Wörtherbuch. Berlin: Walter De Gruyter & Co. Basello, G. B. 2005. Pre-Achaemenid Persians. An Elamite Point of View. Paper presented at the Erste Italienisch-Österreichisches Iranistisches Symposium. Cagli, September 17-19, 2005. Berger, P.-R. 1974. Der Kyros-Zylinder mit dem Zusatzfragment BIN II Nr. 32 und die akkadischen Personennamen im Danielbuch. In Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 64: 192- 234. Borger, R. 1996. Beiträge zum Inschriftenwerk Assurbanipals. Die Prismenklassen A, B, C= K, D, E, F, G, H, J und T sowie andere Inschriften. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Boucharlat, R. 2003. The Persepolis Area in the Achaemenid period. some reconsiderations. In Yeki bud, yeki nabud. Essays on the archaeology of Iran in honor of William M. Sumner. edited by K. Abdi and N. Miller, 237-242. Los Angeles, CA: University of California. Boucharlat, R. 2005. Iran. In L’archéologie de l’empire achéménide. nouvelles Recherches. edited by P. Briant and R. Bouchrlat, 221-292. Paris: Persika 6. Brosius, M. 2000. The Persian Empire from Cyrus II to Artaxerxes I. Cambridge: Lactor 16. Brown, S. C. 1980. Kinship to kingship. Archaeological and Historical Studies in the Neo-Assyrian Zagros. PhD Diss., University of Ottawa. Burney, C. 1994. Contact and Conflict in North-Western Iran. In Iranica Antiqua 29: 47-62. Burney, C. 1999. Beyond the Frontiers of Empire. Iranians and their Ancestors. In Iranica Antiqua 34: 1-20. C ameron, G. G. 1936. History of early Iran. IL and London: University of Chicago. Carter, E. 1994. Bridging the Gap Between the Elamites and the Persians in Southeastern Khuzistan. In Achaemenid History VIII. Continuity and Change. edited by H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, A. Kuhrt and M.C. Root, 65-95, Leiden: Brill. Cole, S. W., and Machinist, P. 1998. Letters from Priests to the Kings Esarhaddon and Assurbanipal. State Archives of Assyria XIII. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. Curtis, J. 2005. Iron Age Iran and the Transition to the Achaemenid Period. In Birth of Persian Empire (Idea of Iran 1). edited by Vesta S. Curtis and Sara Stewart, 112-131. London and New York: I. B. Tauris & Co Ltd. Dandamaev, M. A. 1992. Iranians in Achaemenid Babylonia. Columbia Lectures on Iranian Studies 6. Costa Mesa, CA: Mazda Publisher. 45 De Miroschedji, P. 1985. La fĳin du royaume d’Anšan et de Suse et la naissance de l’Empire Perse. In Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 75: 265-306. De Miroschedji, P. 1986. La localisation de Madaktu et l’organisation politique de l’Elam à l’époque Neo- Elamite. In Fragmenta Historiae Elamicae: Melanges Offferts à M. –J. Steve, Recherche sur les civilizations, Paris: 209–225. De Miroschedji, P. 1990. La fĳin de l’Elam: Essai d’analyse et d’interpretation. In Iranica Antiqua 25: 47-95. De Vaan, J-M. C. T. 1995. Ich bin eine Schwertklinge des Königs. Die Sprache des Bel-ibni, Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag. Diakonofff, I. M. 1985a. Media. In Cambridge History of Iran. vol. II. The Median and Achaemenian Periods. edited by I. Gershevitch, 36-149. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Diakonofff, I. M. 1985b. Elam. In Cambridge History of Iran. vol. II. The Median and Achaemenian Periods. edited by I. Gershevitch, 1-25. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Diakonofff, I. M. 1991. The cities of the Medes. In Ah, Assyria. Studies in Assyrian History and Ancient Near Eastern Historiography Presented to Hayim Tadmor. edited by M. Cogan and I. Epha’l, 13-20. Jerusalem: The Magnes Press, 13-20. Diakonofff, I. M., and Kashkai, S. M. 1981. Geographical Names According to Urartian Texts. Répertoire géographique des textes cunéiformes 9. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag. Eilers, W. 1954. Der Name Demawend. In Archiv Orientální 22: 267-374. Fales, F. M. 2013. Ethnicity in the Assyrian Empire: A View from the Nisbe (I): Foreigners and “Special” Inner Communities, In Literature as Politics, Politics as Literature. Essays on Ancient Near East in honor of Peter Machinist, D.S. Vanderhooft and A. Winitzer (eds.). Winona Lake: 47-74. Fales, F. M. 2015. Ethnicity in the Neo-Assyrian Empire: A View from the nisbe (II): “Assyrians”. In Homenaje 2020, No. 7

a Mario Liverani, M.G. Biga, J. Cordoba et al. (eds.), ISIMU 11-12: 183-204. Fales, F. M. 2017. Ethnicity in the Assyrian Empire: A View from the Nisbe, (III) “Arameans” and Related Tribalists. In At the Dawn of History. Ancient Near Eastern Studies in Honour of J. N. Postgate. Y. Hefffron, A. Stone, and M. Worthington (eds.). Volume 1. Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns: 133-177. Fales, F. M., and Postgate, J. N. 1992. Imperial Administrative Records Part 1. Provincial and Military Administration. State Archives of Assyria VII/I. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. Fales, F. M., and Postgate, J. N. 1995. Imperial Administrative Records, Part 2. Provincial and Military Administration. State Archives of Assyria XI/II. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. F rahm, E. 2015. Whoever Destroys this Image. A Neo-Assyrian Statue from Tell Ağāğa (Šadikanni). In Nouvelles assyriologiques bréves et utilitaires: 77-82. Frahm, E., and Schmitt, R. 1999. Bārû/ Barrû. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/2, Helsinki: 273. Frye, R. N. 1983. The History of Ancient Iran. (Handbuch der Altertumswissenschaft: Alter Orient-Griechische Geschichte-Römische Geschichte. Band III, 7). München: Verlag C. H. Beck. Frayne, D. R. 1992. The early dynastic list of geographic names, American Oriental Series 74: New Haven, CT. Fuchs, A. 1994. Die Inschriften Sargons II. aus Khorsabad. dissertation zur Erlangung des philosophischen doktorgrades am Fachbereich historisch-philologische wissenschanften der George-August-Universität zu Göttingen, Göttingen: Cuvillier. Fuchs, A. 1999. Bisirain. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/2, Helsinki: 347-348.\ Fuchs, A. 2003/2005. Parsuaš. In Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie10, Berlin/ 46 New York: De Gruyter: 340-342. Fuchs, A., and Parpola, S. 2001. The Correspondence of Sargon II, Part III. Letters from Babylonia and the Eastern Provinces. State Archives of Assyria XV. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. Fuchs, A., and Schmitt, R. 1999a. Bāra. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/2, Helsinki: 268. Fuchs, A., and Schmitt, R. 1999b. Barzūtā. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/2, Helsinki: 274- 275. Fuchs, A., and Schmitt, R. 1999c. Burburazu/Burbuazu. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/2, Helsinki: 353-354. Fuchs, A., and Schmitt, R. 2000a. Karakku. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire II/1, Helsinki: 606. Fuchs, A., and Schmitt, R. 2000b. Kitakki. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire II/1, Helsinki: 630. Fuchs, A., and Schmitt, R. 2000c. Irtiṣati. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire II/1, Helsinki: 565. Fuchs, A., and Schmitt, R. 2002. Paikku. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire III/1, Helsinki: 979- 980. Gadd, J. C. 1954. Inscribed Prisms of Sargon II from Nimrud. In Iraq 16: 173-201. Ghirshman, R. 1951. Iran. From the Earliest Times to the Islamic Conquest. Harmondsworth and New York: Penguin Books. Ghirshman, R. 1977. L’Iran et la migration des Indo-Aryens et des Iraniens. Leiden: Brill. Glassner, J.-J. 2004. Mesopotamian chronicles. Society of Biblical Literature 19, edited by B. R. Foster: Atlanta, GA. Gœtze, A. 1952. Muṣaṣ(ṣ)ir. In Revue d’Assyriologie et d’archéologie Orientale 46 No. 3: 158-159. Gorris, E. 2014. Power and Politics in Neo-Elamite Kingdom. PhD diss., Université catholique de Louvain. Grayson, A. K. 1975. Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles. Texts from Cuneiform Sources 5: Locust Valley, NY: J. Augustin. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Grayson, A. K. 1996. Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC. II (858-745 BC). (The Royal Inscriptions of Mesopotamia. Assyrian Periods 3). Toronto: University of Toronto. Grayson, A. K., and Novotny, J. 2012. The Royal Inscriptions of Sennacherib. King of Assyria (704–681 BC). Vol.3/1. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Grillot-Susini, F. 1993. La version élamite de la trilingue de Behistun. une nouvelle lecture. In Journal Asiatique 282: 19-59. Haerinck, E., and Overlaet, B. 2003. Soundings at Tall-i Qaleh (Hasanabad), Fars Province, Iran. In Yeki bud, yeki nabud. Essays on the archaeology of Iran in honor of William M. Sumner. edited by K. Abdi and N. Miller, 192-200. Los Angeles, CA: University of California. Hallock, R. T. 1969. Persepolis fortifĳication tablets, Oriental Institute Publications 92, Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Hämeen-Anttila, J. 1987. A New Text Relating to Ashurbanipal’s Elamite Wars. In State Archives of Assyria Bulletin I/1, Helsinki: 13-16. Hansman, J. 1985. Anshan in the Median and Achaemenian Periods. In Cambridge History of Iran. vol. II. The Median and Achaemenian Periods. edited by I. Gershevitch, 25-35. Cambridge and New York: Cambridge University Press. Henkelman, W. F. M. 2003. Persians, Medes and Elamites. acculturation in the Neo-Elamite period. In Continuity of empire (?). Assyria, Media, Persia. edited by Giovanni B. Lanfranchi, Michael Roaf and Robert Rollinger, Padova. Sargon editrice e libreria, 2003: 181-231. Henkelman, W. F. M. 2008. The other gods who are. studies in Elamite-Iranian acculturation based on the 47 Persepolis Fortifĳication texts. Leiden: Brill. Henkelman, W. F. M. 2011. Cyrus the Persian and Darius the Elamite. a Case of Mistaken Identity. In Herodot und das Persische Weltreich [Herodotus and the Persian Empire]. Akten des 3. Internationalen Kolloquiums zum Thema “Vorderasien im Spannungsfeld klassischer und altorientalischer Überlieferungen,” Innsbruck, 24.–28. November 2008, edited by Robert Rollinger, Brigitte Truschnegg, and Reinhold Bichler, 577-634. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. Herzfeld, E. 1968. The Persian Empire. Studies in Geography and Ethnography of the Ancient Near East. Wiesbaden: Franz Steiner Verlag. Hofffmann, K. 1940. Vedische Namen. In Worter and Sachen 21: 139-161. Imanpour, M.-T. 1998. The Land of Parsa. the fĳirst Persian Homeland. PhD Diss., Manchester: University of Manchester. Imanpour, M.-T. 2003/1381. The geographical location of Parsa, Pars(w)ash, and Parsumash. In The Quarterly Journal of Historical Studies, 1/1 and 2: 29-50 (in Persian). Jacobs, B. 2011. Kyros, der Großkönig, der Achämenide. zum verwandtschaftlichen Verhältnis und zur politischen und kulturellen Kontinuität zwischen Kyros, dem Großen und Dareios I. In Herodot und das Persische Weltreich [Herodotus and the Persian Empire]. Akten des 3. Internationalen Kolloquiums zum Thema “Vorderasien im Spannungsfeld klassischer und altorientalischer Überlieferungen,” Innsbruck, 24.–28. November 2008, edited by Robert Rollinger, Brigitte Truschnegg, and Reinhold Bichler, 635-663. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz Verlag. Kessler, K. 2002. Saḫḫi. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire III/1, Helsinki: 1062. Kinner-Wilson, J. 1962. The Kurba’il statue of Shalmaneser III. In Iraq 24: 90-115. König, F. W. 1938. Bīt-Bunak(k)u/I. In Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie II, 2020, No. 7

Berlin/New York: De Gruyter: 38. Kramer, C. 1977. Pots and peoples. In Mountains and Lowlands. Essays in Archaeology of Greater Mesopotamia, Bibliotheca Mesopotamica 7. edited by L. D. Levine and T. C. Young, 91-112. Bibliotheca Mesopotamica VII, Malibu, CA: Undena Publication. Kuhrt, A. 2007. The Persian Empire. A Corpus of Sources of the Achaemenid Period. London/New York: Routledge. Kwasman, T., and Parpola, S. 1991. Legal transactions of the royal court of Nineveh. State Archives of Assyria VI. Helsinki: Helsinki university press. Lanfranchi, G. B. 1995. Assyrian Geography and Neo-Assyrian Letters. The Location of Hubuskia Again. In Neo-Assyrian Geography. edited by Mario Liverani. Rome. Quaderny di Geografĳia Storica 5, 127-137. Lanfranchi, G. B. 2003. The Assyrian Expansion in the Zagros and the Local Ruling Elites. In Continuity of empire (?). Assyria, Media, Persia. edited by Giovanni B. Lanfranchi, Michael Roaf, and Robert Rollinger. Padova. Sargon editrice e libreria, 2003: 79-118. Lanfranchi, G. B., and Parpola, S. 1990. The correspondence of Sargon II, part II. letters from the northern and northeastern Provinces. State Archives of Assyria V. Helsinki: Helsinki University Perss. Liebig, M. 1991. Zur Lage einiger im Bericht über den 8. Feldzug Sargons II. von Assyrien genannter Gebiete. In Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 81: 31-36. Liebig, M. 1996. Nochmals zur Geographie des 8. Feldzuges Sargons II. von Assyrien. In Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 86: 207-210. 48 Livingstone, A. 1989. Court Poetry and Literary Miscellanea. State Archives of Assyria III. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. Luckenbill, D. 1924. The annals of Sennacherib. Oriental Institute Publications 2. Chicago, LA: University of Chicago Press. Lyon, D. G. 1883. Keilschrifttexte Sargon’s König von Assyrien (705-722 v. chr). Leipzig: J.C. Hinrichs‘sche Buchhandlung. Leichty, E. 2011. The Royal Inscriptions of Esarhaddon, King of Assyria (680– 669 BC), Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Levine, L. D. 1972-75a. Ḫamban. In Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie IV, Berlin/ New York: De Gruyter: 71. Levine, L. D. 1972-75b. Ḫašimur. In Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie IV, Berlin/ New York: De Gruyter: 134. Levine, L. D. 1972-75c. Ḫarḫar. In Reallexikon der Assyriologie und Vorderasiatischen Archäologie IV, Berlin/ New York: De Gruyter: 134. Levine, L. D. 1973. Geographical Studies in the Neo-Assyrian Zagros: I. In Iran 11: 1-27. Levine, L. D. 1974. Geographical Studies in the Neo-Assyrian Zagros-II. In Iran 12: 99-124. McCall, B. 2009. The Mamasani Archaeological Survey. Epipalaeolithic to Elamite Settlement Patterns in the Mamasani District of the Zagros Mountains, Fars Province Iran. PhD Diss., University of Sydney. McCall, B. 2011. Re-assessing Elamite Highland Boundaries. New Evidence for the Middle and Neo-Elamite in the Mamasani valley, South West Iran. In Susa and Elam. Archaeological, Philological, Historical and Geographical Perspectives, Proceedings of the International Congress held at Ghent University, December 14-17, 2009. edited by K. De Graef and J. Tavernier, 191-205. Leiden: Brill. Medvedskaya, I. N. 1999. Media and its neighbors I: The Localization of Ellipi. In Iranica Antiqua 34: 53-70. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Minorsky, V. 1945. The tribes of western Iran. In Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland 75 No. 1/2: 73-80. Minorsky, V. 1957. Mongol Place-Names in Mukri Kurdistan. In Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies 19: 58-81. Mollazadeh, K. 2013/1391. Paršua, Parsua, Parsuash and Parsumash: their relation to Persians, and the Persians’ immigration in to Iran. In Journal of Historical Science Studies, 4/ 2: 107-123 (in Persian). Mousavi, A. 2005. Comments on the Early Iron Age in Iran. In Iranica Antiqua 40: 87-99. Mousavi, A. 2008. Late Bronze Age in North-Eastern Iran. An Alternative Approach to Persisting Problems. In Iran 46: 105-120. Muscarella, O. W. 1966. Hasanlu 1964. In The Metropolitan Museum of Art Bulletin 25: 121-135. Olmstead, A. 1948. History of the Persian empire, Oriental Institute Publications 36. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Overlaet, B. 1997. A Report on the 1952 and 1954/55 Soundings at Tall-i Taimuran (Fars), Iran. In Iranica Antiqua 32: 1-51. Parpola, A. 2012. The Dasas of the Rgveda as Proto-Sakas of the Yaz I -related cultures. With a revised model for the protohistory of Indo-Iranian speakers. In Journal of Indo-European Studies. Monograph series 60: 221-264. Parpola, S. 1970. Neo-Assyrian Toponyms. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 6: Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener Verlag. Parpola, S. 2002. A Letter to Sennacherib referring to the conquest of Bit-Hẚiri and other events of the year 49 693. In Ex Mesopotamia ET Syria Lux, Festschrift für Manfried Dietrich. Alter Orient und Altes Testament 281, 559-580: Münster. Parpola, S., and Porter, M. 2001. The Helsinki atlas of the Near East in the Neo-Assyrian period: Casco Bay Assyriological Institute. Pecorella, P. E., and Salvini, M. 1982. Researches in the Region between the Zagros Mountains and Urmia Lake. In Persica 10: 1-46. Pirart, E. 1994. Les noms des Perses. In Journal Asiatique 283/1 (1994): 57–68. Potts, D. T. 2005. Cyrus the Great and the Kingdom of Anshan. In Birth of Persian Empire (Idea of Iran 1). edited by Vesta. S. Curtis and Sara. Stewart, 7-28. London and New York: I. B. Tauris & Co Ltd, 2005. Potts, D. T. 2016. The Archaeology of Elam. Formation and Transformation of an Ancient Iranian State. (2nd edition). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Radner, K. 1998. Anzî. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/1, Helsinki: 112. Radner, K., and Schmitt, R. 1998a. Ašpaštatauk. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/1, Helsinki: 143-144. Radner, K., and Schmitt, R. 1998b. Adadānu. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/1, Helsinki: 22. Radner, K., and Schmitt, R. 1998c. Arua. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/1, Helsinki: 134. Radner, K., and Schmitt, R. 1998d. Arukku. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/1, Helsinki: 134- 135. Radner, K., and Schmitt, R. 1998e. Artasirari. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/1, Helsinki:134. Reade, J. 1976. Sargon’s Campaigns of 720, 716, and 715 BC: Evidence from the Sculptures. In Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Studies 35 No. 2: 95-104. Reade, J. 1978. Kassites and Assyrians in Iran. In Iran 16: 137-143. 2020, No. 7

Reade, J. 1979. Hasanlu, Gilzanu, and Related Considerations. In Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan 12: 175-181. Reade, J. 1995. Iran in the Neo-Assyrian period. In Neo-Assyrian Geography. edited by Mario Liverani. Rome. Quaderny di Geografĳia Storica 5, 31-42. Reiner, E. 1973. The Location of Anšan. In Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan 67: 57-62. Reynolds, F. 2003. The Babylonian Correspondence of Esarhaddon and Letters to Ashurbanipal and sin-šarru- iškun from Northern and Central Babylonia. State Archives of Assyria XVIII. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. Rollinger, R. 1998. Der Stammbaum des achaimenidischen Königshauses oder die Frage der Legitimität der Herrschaft des Dareios. In Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan 30: 155–209. Rollinger, R. 1999. Zur Lokalisation von Parsu(m)a(š) in der Fārs und zu einigen Fragen der frühen persischen Geschichte. In Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 89: 115-139. Rollinger, R. 2008. The Median “Empire”, the End of Urartu and Cyrus’ the Great Campaign in 547 BC (Nabonidus Chronicle II 16). In Ancient West and East 7: 51-65. Roiter, D. E. 2013. An Indo-European God in a Gudea Inscription. In Nouvelles assyriologiques bréves et utilitaires: 65-69. Rubio, G. 2006. Writing in another Tongue: Alloglottography in the Ancient Near East.In Margins of Writing, Origins of Culture, Oriental Institute Seminars No. 2, edited by Seth Sanders, 33-66: Chicago, IL. Russell, H. F. 1984. Shalmaneser’s Campaign to Urarṭu in 856 BC and the Historical Geography of Eastern 50 Anatolia according to the Assyrian Sources. In Assyriological Studies 34: 171-201. Salvini, M. 1982. Forschungen in Azerbaidjan: Ein Beitrag zur Geschichte Urartus. In Archiv für Orientforschung 19: 384-94. Salvini, M. 1995. Some Historic-Geographical Problems Concerning Assyria and Urartu. In Neo-Assyrian Geography, edited by Mario Liverani. Rome. Quaderny di Geografĳia Storica 5, 43-53. Salvini, M. 2004. Archaeology and Philology. Reconstructing the History of Northwest Iran in the Urartian Period (9th-7th Centuries B.C.). In Proceedings of the International Symposium on Iranian Archaeology. Northwestern Region. edited by M. Azarnoush. 63-76. Tehran: Published by Iranian Center for Archaeological Research. Salvini, M. 2008. Corpus dei Testi Urartei. Le iscrizioni su pietra e roccia I Testi. Vol.1. Roma: Istituto di Studi sulle Civiltà Dell’egeo e Del Vicino Oriente. Scheil, V. 1911. Textes élamites-anzanites, quatrième série. Mémoires de la Délégation française en Perse 11 [continued as Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique en Iran]: Paris. Schaudig, H. 2001. Die Inschriften Nabonid von Babylon und Kyros‘ des Grossen. Münster: Ugarit-Verlag. Schmitt, R., and Talon, Ph. 1998. Ardāra. In Prosopography of the Neo-Assyrian Empire I/1, Helsinki: 128-129. Skalmowski, W. 1995. Old Persian Parθava. In Immigration and Emigration within the Ancient Near East. Festschrift E. Lipiński. edited by K. Van Lerberghe and A. Schoors. 305- 312. Leuven. Smith, S. 1951. Parsuash and Solduz. In Professor Pure Davoud Memoria. The Iran league. Vol. 2, 62-77: Bombay. Starr, I. 1990. Queries to the sungod divination and politics in Sargonid Assyria. In State Archives of Assyria IV. Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. Steve, M.-J. 1987. Nouveaux mélanges épigraphiques. Inscriptions royales de Suse et de la Susiane. Mémoires de la Délégation française en Perse 53 [continued as Mémoires de la Délégation Archéologique en Iran]: Nice. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Streck, M. P. 1990. Das Gebiet der heutigen Landschaften Armenien, Kurdistān und Westpersien nach den babylonisch-assyrischen Keilschriften. In Zeitschrift für Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archäologie 15: 257-382. Stronach, D. 1963. Excavations at Pasargadae. fĳirst preliminary report. In Iran 1: 19-42. Stronach, D. 1974. Achaemenid Village I at Susa and the Persian Migration to Fars. In Iraq 36: 239-248. Stronach, D. 1997. Anshan and Parsa. early Achaemenid history, art and architecture on the Iranian Plateau. In Mesopotamia and Iran in the Persian Period. Conquest and Imperialism, 539-331, proceedings of a seminar in memory of Vladimir G. Lukonin, edited by J. Curtis. 3553, London: British Museum. Stronach, D. 2003. Early Achaemenid Iran. new considerations. In Symbiosis, symbolism, and the power of the past. Canaan, ancient Israel, and their neighbors from the Late Bronze Age through Roman Palestine, proceedings of the Centennial Symposium, edited by W. G. Dever and S. Gitin, 133-144. W.F. Albright Institute of Archaeological Research and American Schools of Oriental Research, Jerusalem, May 29/31, 2000. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Sumner, W. M. 1972. Cultural Development in the Kur River Basin, Iran. An Archaeological Analysis of Settlement Patterns. PhD Diss., University of Pennsylvania: Philadelphia, PA. S umner, W. M. 1994. Archaeological measures of cultural continuity and the arrival of the Persians in Fars. In Achaemenid History VIII. Continuity and Change. edited by H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg, A. Kuhrt and M.C. Root, 97-105, Leiden: Brill. Tadmor, H., and Yamada, Sh. 2011. The Royal Inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III (744-727 BC) and Shalmaneser V (726-722 BC). Kings of Assyria, Vol. 1. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. 51 Tammuz, O., and Rosen, B. 2016. Diplomats and Renegades in the Neo-Babylonian Empire. In Nouvelles assyriologiques bréves et utilitaires (2016): 51-53. Tavernier, J. 2011. Iranians in Neo-Elamite Texts. In Elam and Persia. edited by J. Álvarez-Mon and M. B. Garrison, 191-261. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Vallat, F. 1977. Corpus des inscriptions royales en élamite achéménide. PhD Diss., Paris. Vallat, F. 1993. Les noms géographiques des sources suso-élamites. Répertoire géographique des textes cuneiforms 11. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag. Van der Spek, R. J. 2003. Darius III, Alexander the Great and Babylonian Scholarship. In Achaemenid History XIII. A Persian Perspective. Essays in Memory of Heleen Sancisi Weerdenburg. edited by W. Henkelman and A. Kuhrt, 289-346. Leiden: Brill. Vera Chamaza, G. 1994. Der VIII. Feldzug Sargons II: Eine Untersuchung zu Politik und historischer Geographie des späten 8. Jhs. v. Chr. (Teil I). In Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan 27: 91-118. Vera Chamaza, G. 1995/1996. Der VIII. Feldzug Sargons II: Eine Untersuchung zu Politik und historischer Geographie des späten 8. Jhs. v. Chr. (II). In Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan 28: 235-267. Waterman, L. 1930. Royal correspondence of the Assyrian Empire. Ann Arbor, MI: University of Michigan press. Waters, M. 1999. The earliest Persians in southwestern Iran. the textual evidence. In Iranian Studies 32 No. 1: 99-107. Waters, M. 2000. A Survey of Neo-Elamite History. State Archives of Assyria XII, Helsinki: Helsinki University Press. Waters, M. 2004. Cyrus and the Achaemenid. In Iran 42: 91-102. Waters, M. 2011. Parsumaš, Anšan, and Cyrus. In Elam and Persia. edited by J. Álvarez-Mon and M. B. 2020, No. 7

Garrison, 285-296. Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbrauns. Weidner, E. F. 1931. Die älteste Nachricht über das Persische Königshaus. Kyros I. ein Zeitgenosse Aššurbânaplis. In Archiv für Orientforschung 7: 1-7. Weidner, E. F. 1939. Jojachin, König von Juda, in babylonischen. In Keilschriftexten Mélanges syriens offferts à Monsieur René Dussaud II. P. Geuthner, 923-935: Paris. Widmer, P. 2012. Etymologisches und Historisches zum Namen der Perser. In Iranistische und indogermanistische Beiträge in Memoriam Jochem Schindler (1944-1994), edited by V. Sadovski and D. Stifter, Wien: Verlag der Österreichischen Akademie der Wissenschaften. Witzel, M. 1987. On the localisation of Vedic texts and schools. In India and the Ancient world: History, Trade and Culture before A.D. 650. edited by G. Pollet, 173-216. Leuven. Witzel, M. 1989. Tracing the Vedic dialects. In Colette Caillat, Dialects dans les litteratures indo-aryennes, Actes du Colloque International organise par UA 1058 sous les auspices du C.N.R.S avec le soutien du College de France. de la Fondation Hugot du College de France. de l’Universite de Paris III. du Ministre des Afffaires Etrangeres, Paris (Fondation Hugot) 16-18 Septembre 1986, 97-264. Paris. Witzel, M. 1995. Early Indian History. Linguistic and Textual Parameters. In Language, material culture and ethnicity. The Indo-Aryans of ancient South Asia, edited by G. Erdosy, 85-125. Berlin and New York: Walter de Gruyter. Wright, E. M. 1943. The eighth campaign of Sargon II of Assyria (714 BC). In Journal of Near Eastern Studies 2 No. 3: 173-186. 52 Young, T. C. 1967. The Iranian migration into the Zagros. In Iran 5: 11-34. Young, T. C. 1988. The early history of the Medes and the Persians and the Achaemenid Empire to the death of Cambyses. In Cambridge Ancient History. Vol. II/1. The Middle East and Aegean Region c.1800-1380 B.C. edited by J. Boardman, N. G. L. Hammond, D. M. Lewis and M. Ostwald, 139-164. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Young, T. C. 2003. Parsua, Parsa, and Potsherds. In Yeki bud, yeki nabud. Essays on the archaeology of Iran in honor of William M. Sumner. edited by K. Abdi and N. Miller, 242-248. Los Angeles, CA: University of California. Zadok, R. 1976. On the connections between Iran and Babylonia in the sixth century BC. In Iran 14: 61-78. Zadok, R. 1981/1982. Iranian and Babylonian Notes. In Archiv für Orientforschung 28: 135-139. Zadok, R. 1984. The Elamite Onomasticon. In Istituto Orientale di Napoli Roma. Supplemento n. 40, fasc. 3. Vol. 44: 1-84. Zadok, R. 1985. Geographical Names According to New- and Late-Babylonian Texts Répertoire géographique des textes cunéiformes 8. Wiesbaden: Dr. Ludwig Reichert Verlag. Zadok, R. 2000. On the extent of Sargon II’s sixth campaign in Media. In Nouvelles assyriologiques bréves et utilitaires: 9. Zadok, R. 2001. On the location of NA Parsua. In Nouvelles assyriologiques bréves et utilitaires: 1-4. Zadok, R. 2002. The Ethno-Linguistic Character of North-Western Iran and Kurdistan in the Neo-Assyrian Period. In Iran 40: 89-151. Zadok, R. 2004. Israelites, Judeans and Iranians in Mesopotamia and Adjacent Regions. In God’s Word for Our World, Theological and Cultural Studies in Honor of Simon John De Vries. edited by J. H. Ellens, D. L. Ellens, R. P. Knierim and Isaac Kalimi. 98-127, London and New York: T & T Clark International. Zawadzki, S. 2011/2012. Umman-manda revisited. In State Archive of Assyria Bulletin XIX: 267-278. Samuel Jordan Center for Persian Studies and Culture

Zarrinkoob, R., Alizadeh, K. 2018/1396. The Localization of Parsua, Parsuaš, Parsamaš and Parsumaš: a reconsideration. In Journal of Historical Science Studies 9/1: 39-58 (in Persian). Zimansky, P. E. 1985. Ecology and empire: the structure of the Urartian state. Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilization 41. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press. Zimansky, P. E. 1990. Urartian geography and Sargon’s eighth campaign. In Journal of Ancient Near Eastern Studies 49 No. 1: 1-21. Zournatzi, A. 2011. Early Cross-Cultural Political Encounters along the Paths of the Silk Road. Cyrus The Great as a King of the City of Anshan. In Proceedings of the fĳirst national Conference “Iran and the Silk Road”. edited by D. Akbarzadeh, 1-15. Tehran.