Bryn Mawr College Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology Faculty Classical and Near Eastern Archaeology Research and Scholarship 2005 The Achaemenid Empire in South Asia and Recent Excavations in Akra in Northwest Pakistan Peter Magee Bryn Mawr College, [email protected] Cameron Petrie Robert Knox Farid Khan Ken Thomas Let us know how access to this document benefits ouy . Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.brynmawr.edu/arch_pubs Part of the Classical Archaeology and Art History Commons, and the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons Custom Citation Magee, Peter, Cameron Petrie, Richard Knox, Farid Khan, and Ken Thomas. 2005. The Achaemenid Empire in South Asia and Recent Excavations in Akra in Northwest Pakistan. American Journal of Archaeology 109:711-741. This paper is posted at Scholarship, Research, and Creative Work at Bryn Mawr College. http://repository.brynmawr.edu/arch_pubs/82 For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Achaemenid Empire in South Asia and Recent Excavations in Akra in Northwest Pakistan PETER MAGEE, CAMERON PETRIE, ROBERT KNOX, FARID KHAN, AND KEN THOMAS Abstract subject peoples. A significant proportion of this The impact of the Achaemenid annexation of north- research has been carried out on the regions that westernPakistan has remained a focus for archaeological border the classical world, in particular Anatolia,1 researchfor more than a century.A lack of well-stratified the Levant,2and Egypt.3In contrast, the far eastern settlementsand a focus on artifactsthat are not necessar- extent of the which is the for the effects of control empire, encompassed by ily appropriate assessing imperial borders of Pakistan and haveuntil now obfuscatedour understandingof this issue. modern-day Afghanistan, In this article, we present the results of three seasons of has received less attention. In this paper, we present excavationsat Akra located in the North West Frontier data from new excavations in northwest Pakistan Provinceof Pakistan.Although researchwas cut short in that provide fresh insight into indigenous settle- 2001 by global events,our preliminaryresults indicate that ments in this and also to the the between and the region during prior relationship urbanism, trade, of Achaemenid annexation 1 . Achaemenid annexationwas considerablymore complex period (fig. ) than previouslyargued by scholars.Akra experienced rapid Royal inscriptions, edicts, and administrative growthin settlement at the beginning of the first millen- texts dating from the reign of Darius onward indi- nium B.C.,several centuries before the Achaemenidsruled cate that there were three provinces located along this area, and exhibited contacts with regions in both the eastern frontier of the Achaemenid in India and CentralAsia this time. When empire peninsular during what is South Asia: Gandara, and we are able to return to Pakistan,we hope to investigate today Thatagus, furtherthe causesof this settlementexpansion and trade.* Hindush.4 Toponyms, derivatives, and derivative ethnic designations also appear in the descriptions of the empire and its inhabitantsrecorded by a num- INTRODUCTION ber of contemporary and later classical authors, in- The Achaemenid capitals at Pasargadae, Perse- cluding Herodotus, Arrian, and Quintus Curtius.5 polis, and Susa have traditionally provided the ba- The commemorative Behistun inscription, which sis of our understanding of the archaeology of the was carved between ca. 520 and 518 B.C.,6 lists Achaemenid empire. However, in recent decades Gandara and Thatagus among the provinces that archaeologists and historians alike have turned Darius inherited when he seized the throne in 522 their attention to the peripheries of the empire in B.C.7Thatagus also is listed as one of the provinces search of evidence of how the Achaemenids ruled that rose up against the new king8 and was the loca- * The authorswould like to thank the following scholars 4Vogelsang1990, 97-102. For a comprehensivereview, see who read over drafts of this and made many useful Vogelsang 1992, 94-179. paper 5 comments and corrections;any errors that remain are the E.g., Sattagydiaand India in Herodotus (3.89-95 [de responsibilityof the authors:Professor Dan Potts (Sydney), Selincourt 1972]); India in Arrian (Anabasis3.8.3-4, 3.28.1, ProfessorJames Wright (Bryn Mawr), Professor Stephanie and Indica[Brunt 2000, 2004]) , and QuintusCurtius (4.12.9, Dalley(Oxford) , and ProfessorDerek Kennet (Durham). The 9.7.14 [Rolfe 1976]); Sattagydians,Gandharians, and Indians fieldworkthat providedthe data on which this paper is based in Herodotus (3.98-105, 7.61 ff. [de Selincourt 1972]); and would not have been possiblewithout the financialassistance various types of Indians in Arrian (3.8.3-4. 3.28.1 [Brunt of the AustralianResearch Council, BritishMuseum, Society 2004]) and QuintusCurtius (4.12.9, 9.7.14 [Rolfe 1976]) . For for SouthAsian Studies (British Academy) , AustralianInstitute a comprehensivereview of the relevantclassical sources, see of Nuclear Science and Engineering, and the Universityof Vogelsang 1992, 180-244. Withoutthe assistanceof numerous officialsin Paki- 6Schmidt 1990, 299-300. Sydney. 7 stan, fieldworkin Bannu would not have been possible. We Inscriptionof DariusI at Bisutum (hereafterDB) , sec. 6, would like to thankcurrent and previousdirectors-general of 1.12-17; Kent 1953, 117-9; Lecoq 1997, 187-214. This dat- archaeologyand the manygovernment officials in Bannuwho ing for Darius'accession follows the chronology outlined in facilitatedour staythere. Vogelsang 1986, 130; 1992, 122; 1998, 197. ^.g^Sancisi-WeerdenburgandKuhrt^ljSummers^S, 8DB,sec. 20, 2.5-8, Kent 1953, 121-3. The detailsof Darius' 85-108; Dusinberre1999, 73-102. accession have been extensivelydiscussed; for recent assess- 2 E.g., Stern 1982. ments, see Vogelsang (1998, with references).For a provoca- 3 E.g., Sancisi-Weerdenburgand Kuhrt1991. tiveassessment of the ethnicityof Cyrus,see Potts(forthcoming) . 711 AmericanJournal of Archaeology109 (2005) 711-41 712 PETER MAGEE ET AL. [AJA109 Fig. 1. Map of the Near East and South Asia. (Archaeological Computing Laboratory,University of Sydney) tion of one of the three battles in the ensuing cam- relationships between Baxtrish (Bactria) and paign against rebellious forces in the eastern prov- Gandara,11and between Harauvatish (Arachosia) inces of the empire.9 However,the date of the initial and Thatagus,12which might mean that Gandara annexation of Gandaraand Thatagus is not certain. and Thatagus were annexed when Cyrus secured Recent assessments of the classical sources that Arachosia and Bactria. Whether or not this is the relate Cyrus' expedition to Central Asia agree that case, Darius considered them to be part of his em- he marched through Arachosiain southern Afghani- pire in 522 B.C. stan, destroyed the city of Capisa (modern Begram), It is generally supposed that Hindush is analo- and then campaigned into Bactria between 539 gous with modern Sind,13 although there are no and 530 B.C., when he died somewhere in the north- excavated remains that support this suggestion.14 east of his newly expanded empire.10The arrange- This province is not mentioned in the Behistun ment of the provinces in a number of Darius' inscription, but it does appear on all but one of royal inscriptions has been taken to indicate close Darius' other survivinginscriptions,15 including two 9Fleming1982; Bivar 1988, 200; Vogelsang 1990, 100;1992, 12Vogelsang1985, 79-80; 1990, 100; 1992, 110-5, 129. 127-9. Discussedfurther below. Discussedfurther below. 10 ParticularlyHerodotus (1.169, 1.201-16 [de Selincourt 13Reviewedin Bivar(1988, 202-4), whereTaxila is proposed 1972]) butalsoPliny (6,24.92 [Rackhaml989]),Arrian(3.27.4 as a possible alternative,although the route of Scylaxthat is [Brunt2004] ) , and QuintusCurtius (7.3.1 [Rolfe 1976]) . See reconstructeddoes not passTaxila. See also Vogelsang 1990, Francfort(1988, 170), Bivar (1988, 198-90), and Vogelsang 101-2. 14 (1992,1 87-9) , who listother sources.In contrast,Briant (2002, Although there are significantIron Age remainsat Pirak 38-40) maintainsthe order presented by Herodotus, imply- in Baluchistan,the latest occupation phase (period III) has ing thatCyrus campaigned to CentralAsia before and afterhis been dated to ca. 1100-800 B.C. (Jarrigeand Santoni 1979, victoryin Babylonin 539 B.C. 12-3; Vogelsang 1985, 75-7). 11 15 Vogelsang 1990, 99-100. Discussedfurther below. Kent 1953, DH 147, DNa 137-138, DPe 136, DPh 136- 2005] THE ACHAEMENIDEMPIRE IN SOUTH ASIA 713 of the so-called foundation charters from Susa that journeys to or from Hindush appears to have been do not mention either Gandara or Thatagus.16 authorized in Harauvatish,suggesting that they may Hindush appears with Thatagus among the 24 "for- have been made via another route, possibly east tress cartouches" inscribed on either side of the through Baluchistan to Carmania.26 While this base of a statue of Darius, recovered at Susa in group of documents as a whole provides an often 17 1972, and both are also represented on the so- intimate view of the movement of individuals and called canal stelae from Egypt.18Bivar has suggested groups to and from the east of the Achaemenid that Hindush was annexed in 515 B.C., following empire and of the routes that were being used, it is the reconnaissance of the Indus River by Scylax of difficult to establish the significance of the paucity Caryandaundertaken in 517