The Persian Empire

by Kia, Mehrdad;

  See also: Cultures: Aparni; K&Q, Arsacid/Parthian: Arsaces I; Arsaces II; Peoples: Arsacid Army; Seleucids; Primary Documents: Document 21; Document 22; Document 23; Document 29

  Further Reading

  Ammianus Marcellinus. Translated by John C. Rolfe. London: William Heinemann, 1935.

  Arrian. The Campaigns of Alexander. Translated by Aubrey De Sélincourt. New York: Dorset, 1986.

  Bivar, A. D. H. “The Political History of Iran under the Arsacids.” In The Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3(I), edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 21–99. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

  Colledge, Malcolm A. R. The Parthians. New York: Praeger, 1967.

  Curtis, Vesta Sarkhosh, and Sarah Stewart, eds. The Age of the Parthians. London: I. B. Tauris, 2007.

  Debevoise, Neilson C. A Political History of Parthia. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1938.

  Frye, Richard N. The Heritage of Persia. Cleveland and New York: World Publishing, 1963.

  Justin. The History of the World. Translated by G. Turnbull. London: Printed for S. Birt and B. Dod, 1746.

  Lecomte, Oliver. “Vehrânkâ and Dehistan: Late Farming Communities of South-West Turkmenistan from the Iron Age to the Islamic Period.” In Parthica: Incontri Di Culture Nel Mondo Antico, edited by Antonio Invernizzi. Pisa: Istituti Editoriali Poligrafici Internazionali, 1999.

  Rawlinson, George. The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy. Tehran: Imperial Organization for Social Services, 1976.

  Schippmann, K. “Arsacids II: The Arsacid Dynasty.” Encyclopaedia Iranica, 1986, http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/arsacids-index#pt2.

  Strabo. The Geography of Strabo. Translated by Horace Leonard Jones. London: William Heinemann, 1930.

  Wolski, J. “The Decay of the Iranian Empire of the Seleucids and the Chronology of the Parthian Beginnings.” Berytus 12 (1956–1958): 35–52.

  Bessus

  Bessus was the Persian governor of Bactria (present-day northern Afghanistan) during the reign of the last Persian Achaemenid king, Darius III, who ruled from 336 to 330 BCE. Bessus served as a commander in Darius’s army when Alexander the Macedon attacked the Persian Empire. After the defeat of Achaemenid armies in the Battle of Gaugamela (Arbela) in October 331 BCE, Darius fled east. Bessus and several other commanders accompanied Darius on his eastward flight. Somewhere near present-day Damghan in northern Iran, Darius was murdered by Bessus, who fled farther east apparently hoping to reach his home base of Bactria to organize a resistance movement against Alexander. Bessus also proclaimed himself king of Asia, “wearing the royal mantle and the cap with the point erect, in royal fashion,” and adopted the royal title “Artaxerxes” (Arrian: 3.25). When Alexander marched against Bactria, Bessus did his best to slow Alexander’s advance by laying waste to the country south of the Oxus River. The burning of crops denied Alexander and his armies any access to food and fodder. Despite Bessus’s best efforts, however, Alexander continued his march, forcing Bessus to cross the Oxus River and seek refuge in Sogdiana, the region north of the Oxus and south of the Jaxartes, corresponding with present-day Tajikistan and eastern Uzbekistan. Aside from his own troops, Bessus also commanded fighting units from the armies of Spitamanes (Spitaman) and Oxyartes as well as cavalry from Sogdiana and the Dahae nomadic units. Before he could engage the Macedonians, however, Bessus was arrested by two of his subordinates, Spitamanes and Dataphernes, who contacted Alexander and negotiated the process of handing over the ill-fated governor to the Macedonian conqueror (Arrian: 3.30). According to one account, Spitaman changed his mind and refused to hand Bessus over to the Macedonians. Regardless, Bessus was seized and brought to Alexander, stripped of his clothes, and led away in a dog collar. When Alexander saw Bessus, he asked the former Bactrian governor why he had treated Darius III, “his king, kinsman, and benefactor, so shamefully, first seizing him, then hurrying him off in chains, and finally murdering him” (Arrian: 3.30). Bessus reportedly responded that his treatment of Darius “was not his alone: everyone close to Darius at that time had shared in it,” and their objective was simply “to win Alexander’s favor and so save their lives” (Arrian: 3.30). Alexander refused to spare Bessus’s life. The captive general was first subjected to torture. Alexander ordered Bessus’s “nose and the tips of his ears” to be cut off before executing him in front of his own countrymen (Arrian: 4.7).

  See also: K&Q, Achaemenid: Darius III; Peoples: Alexander of Macedon (the Great); Spitaman

  Further Reading

  Arrian. The Campaigns of Alexander. Translated by Aubrey De Sélincourt. New York: Dorset, 1986.

  Quintus Curtius Rufus. The History of Alexander. London: Penguin, 1984.

  Hephthalites

  A nomadic confederation of unknown ethnic and linguistic origins that raided South and Southwest Asia in the fifth century CE, in the process defeating the Persian Sasanian armies in several military confrontations and establishing a large and powerful empire that lasted for more than a century. The Hephthalite Empire was eventually destroyed in a joint military campaign organized by the Western Turk state, based in Central Asia, and the Persian Sasanians.

  In the fifth century CE, the southern regions of Central Asia and the eastern provinces of the Persian Sasanian Empire were attacked by nomadic groups called Hephthalites. The ethnic and linguistic origins of the Hephthalites remain unclear. Initially, many scholars regarded the Hephthalites as a branch of the Hun people who invaded and wreaked havoc on Europe under their leader, Attila the Hun (r. ?–453 CE). The proponents of this theory argued that the Hephthalites were most probably from a Tibetan or Turkic ethnic stock. This theory was reinforced by statements from Byzantine historians such as Procopius. In describing the Hephthalites, he wrote that the Hephthalites were of “the stock of the Huns in fact as well as in name; however, they do not mingle with any of the Huns known to us, for they occupy a land neither adjoining nor even very near to them; but their territory lies immediately to the north of Persia. … For they are not nomads like the other Hunnic peoples, but for a long period have been established in a goodly land. … They are the only ones among the Huns to have white bodies and countenances which are not ugly. It is also true that their manner of living is unlike that of their kinsmen, nor do they live a savage life as they do; but they are ruled by one king, and since they possess a lawful constitution, they observe right and justice in their dealings both with another and with their neighbours, in no degree less than the Romans and Persians” (Procopius: I.iii. 2–7).

  In 1959, the Japanese scholar Kazuo Enoki utilized Chinese, Greek, and Persian sources to argue that the Hephthalites were a northeastern Iranian people who had originated from Tokharestan, the region formerly known as Bactria that corresponded with the territory of northern Afghanistan. More recently, several scholars have argued that the Hephthalites should be viewed as a heterogeneous tribal confederation, not as a homogenous ethnic and linguistic group.

  Beginning in the fifth century CE, the eastern provinces of the Persian Sasanian Empire were invaded by the Hephthalites. The Sasanian monarch Bahram V (r. 421–439 CE) tried to slow down the Hephthalite invaders by building towers to protect the northeastern provinces of his empire from the new invaders. His successors, particularly Yazdegerd II (r. 439–457 CE), spent much of their time on the throne preventing the Hephthalites from entering the northeastern province of Khorasan. One of Yazdegerd’s successors, Peroz (r. 459–484 CE), mobilized his army and fought the Hephthalites several times. In one campaign, he was defeated and captured by the Hephthalites and was forced to pay a substantial ransom for his release. After a second defeat, Peroz was forced to leave his son Kavad as a hostage with the Hephthalites. To avenge the humiliation he had suffered and against the advice of his close advisers, Peroz attacked the Hephthalites again in 484. This time the Sasanian monarch was defeated and killed on the battlefield. The victory over the Sasanian army and the death of the Persian king forced the Sasanian state to sue for peace and agree to pay an annual tribute. The He
phthalites began to interfere in the internal affairs of the Sasanian state and manipulate the civil war between the contenders to the throne in order to expand their own influence. For example, Kavad, who had grown up as a hostage among the Hephthalites, sought their assistance when he was deposed in 496 CE. With support from the Hephthalites, he raised an army and regained his throne in 499. In a series of campaigns from 560 to 563, Kavad’s son and successor, the Sasanian monarch Khosrow I Anushiravan (r. 531–579 CE), defeated the Hephthalites and put an end to their rule. The Persian monarch achieved this victory with significant support and assistance from the Western Turks, who imposed their political and military domination over much of Central Asia. The emperor of the Western Turks, Ishtemi (r. 553–? CE), attacked from the north, capturing Chach (present-day Tashkent, the capital of Uzbekistan), crossing the Jaxartes River (Syr Darya), and defeating the main Hephthalite army near Bokhara, forcing them to retreat southward. The Sasanian army had, however, occupied much of the southern regions of Central Asia, and the Hephthalites did not have any other alternative but to accept defeat. Squeezed between the Turk Empire to the north and the Persian Sasanians to the south, the Hephthalite state disintegrated. At the height of their power in the late fifth and early sixth centuries, the Hephthalites had ruled a vast empire that incorporated the entire territory of present-day southwestern China and much of present-day Tajikistan, Uzbekistan, and Afghanistan. They also penetrated northern India through Gandhara and defeated the Gupta Empire.

  See also: K&Q, Sasanian: Bahram V; Kavad I; Khosrow I Anushiravan; Peroz

  Further Reading

  Frye, R. N. “The Political History of Iran under the Sasanians.” In The Cambridge History of Iran, Vol. 3(I), edited by Ehsan Yarshater, 116–180. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1983.

  Litvinsky, B. A. “The Hephthalite Empire.” In History of Civilizations of Central Asia, Vol. III, 138–165. Paris: UNESCO Publishing, 1996.

  Procopius. History of Wars, Books I–II. Translated by H. B. Dewing. Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 2006.

  Iranian Society and Power Structure (Arsacids/Parthians and Sasanians)

  The Zoroastrian holy book the Avesta divided ancient Iranian society into three distinct social classes, namely the priests, the warriors, and the peasant farmers or cultivators. A fourth class, the artisans, is mentioned only once in the Avesta. The basic level of social organization in traditional Iranian society was the patrilineal family. A group of settled families engaged in farming and/or animal husbandry constituted a village. Villages deriving their lineage from a common ancestor formed a clan, and several of these clans who traced their origins to a common ancestor constituted a tribe. A tribe was both a genealogical and a spatial reality. Because the structure of the society was based on a patriarchy, each unit was represented by a male individual who was responsible for his social unit. Thus, the family household was led by the head of the household, the village by the village headman, and the tribe by the tribal chief.

  The power structure of the Parthian Arsacid state (r. 247/238 BCE–224 CE) was based on a coalition between the ruling Arsacid royal family and a group of landowning families who ruled various provinces of the empire as local kings. The support of these families, such as the Suren and the Karen, was critical to the internal stability and preservation of the Arsacid monarchy. Each family had a military force independent of the king’s army. In 53 BCE, the Suren possessed sufficient political, military, and financial power to mobilize an army of 10,000 cavalrymen to confront and defeat a much larger Roman army under the command of Marcus Licinius Crassus. Some of these families enjoyed special privileges. For example, the head of the Suren family enjoyed the right and privilege of placing the crown on the head of a new Arsacid king at the coronation ceremony. In return for their support for the ruling family, the Arsacids had allowed these families to accumulate enormous power and impose their control over the regions they controlled. Thus, the Karen were centered in Nahavand in western Iran, and the Suren were centered in the eastern province of Sistan. Because of the paucity of reliable sources, our knowledge about the administrative structure of the Arsacid (Parthian) state is extremely limited. Scattered and fragmentary evidence collected from inscriptions and documents unearthed at Nisa in southern Turkmenistan, Susa in southwestern Iran, and Dura Europos in eastern Syria, on the right bank of Euphrates, indicate a highly advanced, decentralized, and flexible administrative structure that varied from one region to the next. The Greek author Strabo wrote that the Arsacid monarchs were appointed by two councils, “one that of kinsmen [the Arsacid nobility], and the other that of wise men and Magi,” but he did not elaborate on how the process worked (Strabo: 11.9.3–10). A rock relief at Bisotun near Kermanshah in western Iran shows Mithridates II and four of his high officials. A Greek inscription identifies one of these dignitaries as Gotarzes (Godarz), satrap of satraps, most probably the same Godarz who raised the flag of rebellion in Babylon and proclaimed himself the king in the last years of Mithridates’s reign. Another high official is Kophasates (Kohzad), who is identified as “privy councilor” (Bivar: 41). According to one source, “the post of satrap, a provincial governor in the Achaemenid era, lost much of its old importance in Parthian times,” being replaced by “such posts as that of city-governor only, like Khwasak, satrap of Susa in AD 215” (Colledge: 63).

  Ardashir, a vassal of the Arsacid dynasty and the governor of Istakhr in the province of Fars, revolted against the last Arsacid monarch, Artabanus IV. Ardashir defeated and killed Artabanus IV on the battlefield in 224 CE. After the establishment of the Sasanian dynasty, the large landowning families, who had enjoyed a great deal of power during the reign of the Arsacids, preserved their power and privileges. Throughout the reign of the Sasanian dynasty, the members of the Suren, Karen, Mehran, etc., occupied important positions of power within the royal court, the central government, and the army. For example, as late as the sixth century Bahram, known as Bahram Chobin (Chubin), from the Mehran family, rose to the rank of commander of the Sasanian army and eventually seized the throne as Bahram VI, proclaiming himself as the king of kings before he was defeated by Khosrow II Parvez, who reestablished Sasanian authority with assistance from the Byzantine state.

  The late Sasanian society was divided into four distinct classes, with each class subdivided into several strata: the priests, the warriors, the government administrators, and the fourth estate, which included peasant farmers, artisan farmers, and merchants. The Zoroastrian high priests acted as the ideological allies and defenders of the Sasanian monarchy. However, as clergymen who had to administer to the needs of the masses, the mobads also posed as the protectors of the common folks. The army consisted of the cavalry and the infantry, while government officials were divided into secretaries, accountants, scribes, historians, poets, physicians, astrologists, etc. The commoners, or the fourth estate, consisted of merchants, craftsmen, artisans, and peasant farmers. They produced the goods and paid the taxes that sustained the state. The guild tradesmen or craftsmen constituted an important segment of the urban population. Other segments of the urban population included traders and merchants who organized short- and long-distance trade. The peasant farmers constituted the overwhelming majority of the population in the empire. The Iranian states preferred peasants to nomads, because those who cultivated the land were settled, paid taxes, and could be recruited for the army, whereas nomads, who were not settled, disliked and avoided both. As an armed and mobile group, the nomads were unruly and difficult to bring into line, and the Arsacid and Sasanian Empires both struggled to settle the empire’s nomads.

  Each social class was under the authority of its own chief and spokesman. Thus, the head of the religious hierarchy was the mobadan mobad, the commander of the army was the Eran spahbad, the head of the civil administration was the Eran dibirbad, and the leader of the fourth class was the wastrioshan-salar, wastriosh-bad, or hotakhshbad. Each class worshipped at its own designated Zoroastrian fire temple
: the priests at Adur Farnbag at Karian in Fars in southern Iran; the members of the army, including the members of the Sasanian royal family, at Adur Gushnasp at Shiz in Azerbaijan; and the commoners at Adur Borzen Mihr. At the top of the power pyramid stood the shahanshah (king of kings). In theory, the shah enjoyed a divine right to rule; as a consequence, his subjects considered him the sole source of legitimate power. He could therefore demand absolute obedience from them, including complete control over their lives and possessions. According to tradition, he owned all state lands and could dispose of them as he saw fit. Despite this absolute power, the opinion of the Zoroastrian high priests and landowning nobility could strongly influence the shah’s decisions and actions. The great god Ahura Mazda (Ohrmazd) had entrusted his people to the shah’s care, and the king was responsible for their safety and protection. During the Sasanian period, the shah was entrusted with the protection, promotion, and expansion of Zoroastrianism, which had been elevated by Ardashir I and his successors as the official religion of the Persian state. Immediately below the king were the members of the Sasanian royal family. Below them were the members of the large landowning feudal families (vispuran), including the Karen, Suren, Mehran, etc. As in Parthian times, they constituted the most important segment of the nobility and possessed large estates throughout the empire. These powerful and influential feudal families constituted the military and administrative backbone of the Sasanian monarchy. Their participation in collecting taxes and providing military support for the monarchy, particularly during campaigns against foreign enemies, was crucial to the security and stability of the empire. The members of the lesser nobility (azatan) and landed magnates (dihganan/dihqanan) also constituted important segments of the Iranian ruling class. Below them were the grandees (wuzurgan) and senior civil servants—the great secretaries (dibiran), and tax collectors.