Darius I, the King of the Persepolis Tablets Author(s): Richard T.

Hallock Reviewed work(s): Source: Journal of Near Eastern Studies, Vol. 1, No. 2 (Apr., 1942), pp. 230-232 Published by: The University of Chicago Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/542130 . Accessed: 28/05/2012 08:36
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

The University of Chicago Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of Near Eastern Studies.

http://www.jstor.org

DARIUS I, THE KING OF THE PERSEPOLIS TABLETS

RICHARD T. HALLOCK

Previous to the discovery of the reference to Darius on the tablet Pers. 6754, discussed elsewhere in this issue by Professor Cameron, the writer had found other evidence to prove that the large group of tablets excavated at Persepolis by Herzfeld dated to the reign of Darius I. Professor Poebel's dating to Artaxerxes P first became highly suspect when impressions of three different royal seals, with the name of Darius inscribed in the Persian, Elamite, and Akkadian languages, were discovered on certain of the tablets. One of these seals has been found on fourteen tablets (dated in the years 21, 22, 24, and 28), in all of which the king is referred to (never, of course, by name) in the text. Another seal can be clearly identified on ten tablets (dated in the years 19, 22, 23, 24, and 25), all of which refer to the scribe Hinpirukka, mentioned below. The third seal has been found, thus far, only on five uninscribed labels. Further evidence was obtained by comparing the personal names of officials with those on the Treasury tablets. Such names are found mainly in texts of the type exemplified by Pers. 6754 discussed by Cameron--a type which occurs very frequently in the Treasury group and rather infrequently in the first group. With the aid of a table of names of officials occurring in the Treasury group, kindly provided by Cameron, six links have been discovered. Hjinpirukka (25-32;2 also written ijipirukka) appears as scribe, indicated as such by the verbal form "he wrote," on the tablets of both groups. trellis, Baradkama3 (28-32), followed by sarama, appears on a tablet of the large group and, followed by saramanna (with which sarama varies) or tu4-rui-iS, on a number of Treasury tablets. AMbaza(28-2) is followed by na-anKI.MIN4on tablets of both groups. Appi'manda (25-32) is followed by na-an ('Sil-ip-ma ma-ak-qa) on a tablet of the large group, by na-an-KI.MIN4 on several Treasury tablets. Hitibeul (24-?) is followed by -ikkamar, "from," on several tablets of the large group and, written Ijiuttibeulla, on one un1

AJSL,

LVI

(1939),

301-4.

2 These figures indicate, respectively, the date of the latest fortification tablet on which
the individual appears and the date of the earliest Treasury tablet on which he appears. 3 Rad (rat) is Cameron's reading of sign No. 32 in the sign list given by F. H. Weissbach, KA (Leipzig, 1911), pp. lxxvii-lxxxii. It occurs also in the personal name mir-dakur-rad-du-is in Pers. 3159, transliterated and translated by Poebel, AJSL, LV (1938), 133 f. 4 [That is, he is the "speaker," at whose order the tablet was written.-CAM.ERON.]

230

DARIUS I, THE KING OF THE PERSEPOLIS TABLETS

231

dated Treasury tablet mentioning Baradkama and [Hipiruk]ka (restoration not certain). Nutannuia (25-?) is followed by li-it on two tablets of the large group and by a word evidently to be restored as li-i[S] on an undated Treasury tablet on which Baradkama, Appi'manda, and Hip[irukka] also appear. An additional bit of evidence is supplied by a second tablet, Pers. 8275, mentioning Darius. Although the name is here followed by a break, the nature of the text leaves little doubt that it is the king who is referred to. It may also be noted that there is further evidence which it seems unnecessary to present here. We may turn now to the evidence upon which Professor Poebel dated the tablets to Artaxerxes I. The chief point involved was the occurrence of an intercalary Ululu in the nineteenth year of the king of the Persepolis tablets,5 whereas the nineteenth year of Darius I had been supposed to have an intercalary Addaru. The only evidence for the latter is a passage in Strassmaier, Darius, No. 495 (dated to the nineteenth year), line 10, which reads ITU.SE mahru-uz,"first Addaru," implying the existence of a second Addaru. Reference to Strassmaier's text shows the crucial gE sign to be shaded. Clearly our evidence for the dating of the tablets to Darius is sufficiently strong to override the difficulty which exists and to force us to conclude that either instead of KIN.6 It may thus be Strassmaier or the ancient scribe wrote GE that the nineteenth of assumed year Darius, i.e., the seventeenth year safely of the thirteenth cycle, had an intercalated Ulhlu.7 Professor Poebel also mentioned that the sign-forms on the Persepolis tablets are intermediate between those of Darius I and Artaxerxes II.8 The
5 Additional evidence for this intercalation is now found in Pers. 718, which lists by name the last six months of the eighteenth year and the thirteen months of the nineteenth year. In 11. 17 f. we find: dqa-har-ba- i-ia-i 2-um-me-na dqa-har-ba-Ai-ia-i', which is evidently to be rendered "Qarbagiiag, second Qarbagiag" (although otherwise the ordinal number always follows the substantive to which it refers). Note that we have here an additional variant form of the name of the sixth month, to be added to the list given by Poebel, AJSL, LV, 141. It may be mentioned that evidence has now been found for an intercalated Addtru in the sixteenth (Pers. 4303) and twenty-second (Pers. 11424 and, with some doubt, Pers. 1899, Pers, 5968, and Pers. 9916) years as well as in the twenty-fourth year (Pers. 9637, cited by Poebel, AJSL, LVI, 302, n. 2; also Pers. 5257 and Pers. 10134). Since these three intercalations fit both reigns equally well, they have no bearing on the present argument. 6 It is possible, judging from what can be deduced about his methods, that Strassmaier actually supplied a sign which was completely missing. As regards the possibility of an error by the ancient scribe, we may cite A. Pohl, NR U, Vol. II (Rome, 1934), No. 10, which in 1. 17 erroneously ascribes an intercalated Ullflu to the accession year of Darius I (cf. Poebel, AJSL, LVI, 134, n. 41). 7 According to the tables prepared by Dr. Waldo H. Dubberstein and Dr. Richard A. Parker for their forthcoming monograph on chronology, the seventeenth years of the four cycles immediately preceding this one all have Addhru intercalated, while the seventeenth years of the following cycles, so far as attested, all have Ulfilu. Thus the result of the discovery that the seventeenth year of the thirteenth cycle had an intercalated Ulfilu instead of an intercalated Addfru is merely to push the change back one cycle. 8 AJSL, LVI, 301.

232

JOURNALOF NEAR EASTERN STUDIES

comparison is, of course, between the cursive forms of the tablets and the monumental forms of the royal inscriptions. It does not occasion any surprise to discover that the cursive writing shows later forms than the contemporary monumental writing. In conclusion we may note that the dating of the tablets to Darius I agrees much better with the archeological discoveries, which provide considerable evidence of activity at Persepolis in the reigns of Darius and Xerxes but relatively little in the reign of Artaxerxes I.9
ORIENTAL UNIVERSITY INSTITUTE OF CHICAGO

9 Two tablets from the Treasury, dated in "Year 1," probably belong to the reign of Artaxerxes I.