1

Achaemenid Dynasty
DAVID STRONACH

The Achaemenid Persian Dynasty begins,

strictly speaking, with the accession of
Darius I (r. 522486 BCE) and ends, nearly
two hundred years later, with Alexander
of Macedons conquest of Iran in 330
(see ALEXANDER III, THE GREAT). It is traditional,
however, to refer to Cyrus II (r. 559530),
who descends from a separate royal line, as
the founder of the Achaemenid Empire.
Accordingly, this entry will not only examine
important aspects of the reign of Darius I,
as well as key achievements of his successors,
but will include essential reference to both
Cyrus and his son, Cambyses II (r. 530522).
The word Achaemenid is first encountered
in the opening lines of the BISITUN inscription, carved in or near 519, where Darius identifies an eponymous ancestor, Achaemenes, as
the founder of his dynastic line. In this text,
inscribed in Elamite, Akkadian, and Old
Persian, Darius defines his genealogy in the
following terms: My father was Hystaspes;
Hystaspes father was Arsames; Arsames father
was Ariaramnes; Ariaramnes father was
Teispes; and Teispes father was Achaemenes.
For this reason, Darius declares, we are called
Achaemenids.
In Darius genealogy we find one unexpected name: that of Teispes, whom Cyrus
identifies, in another context, as the founder
of his dynasty. From this it may be inferred that
one of the principal aims of Darius stated
genealogy was to arrogate to his own lineage
the patrilineal forebears of Cyrus. This act of
appropriation was subsequently reinforced at
PASARGADAI, the unfinished capital of Cyrus,
where Darius chose to erect a number of
fraudulent first-person inscriptions reading
I, Cyrus, the king, an Achaemenid. Palpably,
this terse wording does not reflect an altruistic
wish to honor Cyrus memory; instead it may
be assumed that the texts main purpose was to
make Cyrus appear to affirm his Achaemenid

identity. If these first-person trilingual inscriptions (written in Old Persian, Elamite, and
Akkadian) were indeed erected near 515, as is
now commonly supposed, they would stand
near the beginning of an interesting evolution
in the ways in which Darius chose to treat the
memory of his eminent near-predecessor. That
is to say that, while Cyrus is not given a title of
any kind in the Bisitun text, he is characterized
as king in the just-mentioned first-person
inscription. Then, at a time when the offspring
of the marriages that Darius had contracted
with the daughters of Cyrus were no doubt
starting to lend new legitimacy to Darius
progeny, Darius elected to erect elegant doorway images of Cyrus in the still unfinished
fabric of Palace P at Pasargadai. From the
testimony of various details in the rendering
of Cyrus pleated costume, this initiative can
be dated to ca. 510 a date that must then also
be ascribed to the accompanying legend,
Cyrus, the Great King, an Achaemenid, that
originally appeared on each of these once
part-gilded reliefs.

CYRUS II (THE GREAT)

One reason why Darius may have found it
tempting to introduce these specific additions
at Pasargadai is because this evocative site was
still without any visible inscriptions or indeed
any visual representation of its founder at the
time of Cyrus premature death in 530. The
only known record of Cyrus extended royal
lineage occurs, in fact, in the Cyrus Cylinder,
a foundation document that was drawn up in
BABYLON soon after the city fell to Cyrus arms
in 539. Amid striking references to the just
nature of his rule, Cyrus presents himself as
an adherent of MARDUK, the chief god of Babylon (and by the same token he omits any definition of his personal religious convictions).
In the text of the Cylinder, which was written
in Akkadian, the tribes of Iran are referred to
by such locally familiar terms as the GUTI and
the UMMAN-MANDA; and, in what could have

The Encyclopedia of Ancient History, First Edition. Edited by Roger S. Bagnall, Kai Brodersen, Craige B. Champion, Andrew Erskine,
and Sabine R. Huebner, print pages 3236.
2013 Blackwell Publishing Ltd. Published 2013 by Blackwell Publishing Ltd.
DOI: 10.1002/9781444338386.wbeah01001

2
been a further local accommodation, Cyrus
describes each of his named forebears
Cambyses (I), Cyrus (I), and Teispes as
a great king, king of Anshan. With this title
he appears to have evoked the storied (if no
longer vibrant) city of Anshan in southwestern
Iran, whose name would still have resonated in
the historical memory of a Mesopotamian
audience. Thus, while Cyrus and his forebears
may indeed have called themselves kings of
Anshan, only the future discovery of authentic
inscriptions of Cyrus from within southwestern Iran can be expected to reveal this rulers
home titulary and, hence, his preferred view
of his own identity.
In general terms, Cyrus building program
at his capital, Pasargadai, can be said to reflect
the milestones of his singular career. Thus, the
citys location, in the present-day Dasht-e
Morghab (the Plain of the Water Bird)
in northern Fars, appears to have been
dictated by the fact that this was the scene of
his decisive victory over Astyages, the last king
of Media, in ca. 550. Subsequently, following
an outbreak of hostilities between Cyrus
and Croesus of Lydia (see CROESUS), Cyrus
advanced westwards and seized the Lydian
capital, SARDIS, which probably fell in 547
or not long thereafter. This enabled Cyrus to
bring highly skilled planners, architects, and
stonemasons back to Iran to begin work
on his gleaming, partly stone-built capital.
Within this spacious site he experimented
with various new forms of columned hall, the
two latest examples of which, known as Palace
S and Palace P, no doubt helped to inspire
the quintessential reception hall of the Achaemenid Empire: namely the APADANA, introduced by Darius. Otherwise Pasargadai is
perhaps most notable for Cyrus finely preserved, upstanding tomb and for the Takht,
a monumental stone platform (on which
Cyrus may have intended to erect his private
palace). Indeed, the latter structure may have
been inspired by an important palace-related
platform at Lydian Sardis and it may have
given rise to aspects of the design of the great
terrace at PERSEPOLIS.

Insofar as Cyrus surviving buildings

and doorway reliefs do not accord with the
mature Achaemenid style that first becomes
evident during the reign of Darius, the art
and architecture of the time of Cyrus is usually
said to represent an archaic phase of Achaemenid design (although several researchers
are beginning to consider a new label referring to the canons of Teispid art). It may also
be noted that the one intact doorway relief
from Gate R at Pasargadai is of distinct historical interest. Based on earlier models of supernatural Neo-Assyrian guardians, it shows a
winged figure clad in an Elamite robe and
wearing an Egyptian hm-hm crown. Following
Cyrus capture of Babylon and the submission
of all Babylons former western territories,
this last exotic detail was doubtless meant to
reflect the extension of Cyrus power throughout the Levant, whether or not it was also
meant to signal his intention to add Egypt to
his dominions an ambition that was realized,
in 525, by his son and heir, Cambyses II.
While all Classical authors follow Herodotus
in referring to the madness and impiety of
Cambyses during his years in Egypt, important
archaeological evidence paints a very different
picture. In sharp contrast to the tradition of
the murder of the Apis bull by Cambyses
(Hdt. 3.29), contemporary inscriptions from
Memphis indicate that, when the Apis bull
died and was laid to rest in 524, Cambyses
was careful to follow much as his father
might have done in like circumstances the
expected, reverent role of an Egyptian monarch (cf. Briant 2002: 57).

DARIUS I (THE GREAT)

When news of a rebellion in Persia reached
Egypt in the spring of 522 BCE, Cambyses at
once took steps to return home. While he was
still in Syria, in the course of his homeward
march, he is said to have accidentally wounded
himself. Gangrene set in (Hdt. 3.66) and, not
long thereafter, his relatively brief, somewhat
enigmatic reign came to its bizarre end.

3
According to Darius version of events,
carved into the cliff at Bisitun, the kingship
had fallen into the hands of a usurper,
Gaumata the Magian (see MAGI, PERSIAN), who
claimed to be Cyrus second son, Bardiya. In
Darius own words, There was not a man,
neither Persian nor Mede, nor anyone of our
family who could wrest the kingdom from the
imposter. This impasse set the stage for the
overthrow of Gaumata and, in the view
Darius promulgated, the restoration of the
Achaemenid Persian line on its time-honored
foundations. Perhaps in reality Darius seized the
throne in a violent coup that cost Cyrus one
surviving son his life, and perhaps the widelyheld conviction that this was indeed the
case accounts for the scale of unrest that shook
even the home provinces of the empire during
the first year of the reign of Darius. Nevertheless,
the new sovereign quickly displayed unerring
strategic instincts that allowed him to overcome
all opposition and to embark on a long and
productive reign. In keeping, moreover, with
Darius distinct pride in his Persian identity,
his home capital present-day Persepolis
(ancient Parsa) was erected in the very heart
of the Persian homeland.
The reign of Darius was characterized by
innovation. He introduced the Old Persian
cuneiform script, he designed the first Achaemenid coins, and, apart from his vaunted
administrative skills, he sponsored a new,
evolved style in Achaemenid art and architecture that successfully absorbed and transformed
the many separate traits that contributed to
its formation. In this latter connection Nylander
has remarked that, most, if not all, Achaemenian works of architecture, sculpture, relief
[and] toreutic . . . partake of the same refined
aesthetic language, saturated with beauty of line,
and a calm, serious dignity not devoid of
a subdued emotion; he goes on to note that
this unity is maintained for almost two centuries, a fact indicating some degree of congruence
between the art and the society that created and
used it (Nylander 1970: 17).
Noteworthy among the artistic and architectural accomplishments of his reign are

the peaceful scenes of gift-giving that Darius

selected for the monumental reliefs that adorn
the socle of the Apadana at Persepolis. However, with scant regard for the testimony of
Darius inscriptions, which draw explicit
attention to the feats of the Persian man,
many modern interpreters of the reliefs have
persisted in believing that, while individuals
in pleated court dress represent Persians,
those in riding dress represent Medes. This
unwarranted assumption has been thought to
attest the Medes superior riding skills (and
even a faint possibility that some form of
Persian and Median co-regency persisted
from the time of Darius onwards). Fortunately,
however, a long overlooked detail from one of
the side panels of Darius great funerary relief
at nearby Naqsh-e Rustam has revealed the
flaws in this line of reasoning. Here Aspathines,
one of Darius foremost Persian followers, is
shown dressed in riding attire beneath an
inscription that identifies him by name as the
bearer of the kings battle-axe. It follows that all
the leading figures in riding dress at Persepolis,
from the parade-marshal to the kings
featured weapon-bearer (not to mention the
various ushers and assembled nobles who also
wear trousers) probably represent highranking Persians in attendance at the royal
court. As for the considerations that may
have persuaded Darius to represent the
Persians in two distinct costumes, it may be
suggested that he used these two contrasted
forms of parade dress at his court to draw
attention to his kingdoms dual inheritance,
in which the pleated costume reflected the
Achaemenid empires southerly, Persian heritage, while the tight-fitting riding dress of the
Persians evoked the empires equally vital
holdings in Iranian and neighboring territories
to the north and northeast.

FROM XERXES (R. 486464) TO

DARIUS III (R. 336330)
As the first of Darius sons to have been born
in the purple, Xerxes proved to be a dutiful

4
successor. Thus, while the best-known event
of Xerxes reign remains his ill-fated campaign against Greece, he clearly adhered to
his fathers veneration of AHURA MAZDA, he
completed many of his fathers major building
projects, and, following the dizzying pace of
conquest under Cyrus and Cambyses, he may
be said to have done much to carry through his
fathers project of consolidating the far-flung
Achaemenid Empire. Indeed, it is not a little
remarkable that successive Persian monarchs
maintained effective military and administrative control over an area that stretched from
the first cataract on the Nile to the banks of the
Jaxartes in the far northeast for the better part
of 200 years. During this time there is no proof
that the worship of Ahuramazda was forcefully
imposed on any territories within the bounds
of Achaemenid control. In addition, Cyrus
well-attested respect for local beliefs and
traditions appears to have served, by and
large, as a model for later kings.
Xerxes son and successor Artaxerxes I
(r. 464425) is unanimously hailed in classical
sources as a capable monarch. Apart from
overcoming a serious challenge to Persian
rule in Egypt, he completed the greater part
of the major building program at Persepolis,
and, in 449/448, he apparently approved the
Peace of Callias with the Athenians.
A severe crisis arose early in the reign of
Artaxerxes II (r. 404359), the grandson of
Artaxerxes I, when his elevation to the throne
came to be contested by his brother, Cyrus the
Younger (d. 401). When the armies of the two
siblings met at the battle of CUNAXA, not far
from Babylon, the issue could well have gone
either way. However, Cyrus decision to lead
a direct attack on the position occupied by
his brother proved, by a narrow margin, to be
a fatal miscalculation. It was an event that
obliged Cyrus stranded ten thousand Greek
mercenary troops to undertake their epic
five-month retreat to Greece, a march immortalized in Xenophons Anabasis (see XENOPHON).
With regard to his building activities, Artaxerxes II is known especially for a number of
initiatives at SUSA. There he laid out an entirely

new palace on the right bank of the Shaur

River, and, in what was almost certainly
intended as a timely gesture to refurbish one
of the more vivid symbols of the enduring
repute of his great-great-grandfather, Darius
I, he took steps to restore the famed apadana
at Susa, which had long stood unused following a fire in the mid-fifth century.
Artaxerxes III (r. 359338) was able to
demonstrate something of the still considerable resilience of the Achaemenid empire by
restoring Persian authority over Egypt after an
interval of nearly sixty years. Other threats
loomed. In particular, the almost unchallenged
progress of the Ten Thousand through the very
heart of the dominions of the Great King can
hardly have done anything but provoke,
among Greeks, visions of extended conquest
far to the east. In keeping with such inviting
horizons, Alexander of Macedon crossed the
Hellespont in 334. His further progress,
punctuated by comprehensive victories at the
battles of ISSOS (333) and GAUGAMELA (331),
brought him, late in 331, to the gates of Babylon,
Susa, and, not least, Persepolis. The subsequent,
infamous fire that engulfed most of the major
buildings on the terrace at Persepolis in May of
330 may well serve as an incontestable mark of
the demise of Achaemenid power, even if the
final days of Darius III (r. 336330), the last of
the Achaemenids, only ended, not long afterwards, on a distant road to the east where the
unfortunate king was fatally wounded at the
instigation of the satrap, BESSOS.
SEE ALSO: Medes, Media; Persian, Persians;
Zoroastrianism.

REFERENCES AND SUGGESTED READINGS

Briant, P. (2002) From Cyrus to Alexander:
A history of the Persian Empire, trans. P. T. Daniels.
Winona Lake, IN.
Kent, R. G. (1953) Old Persian: Grammar, texts,
lexicon, 2nd ed. New Haven.
Kuhrt, A. (2007) The Persian Empire: A corpus of
sources from the Achaemenid Period, 2 vols.
London.

5
Nylander, C. (1970) Ionians in Pasargadae: Studies
in Old Persian architecture. Uppsala.
Potts, D. T. (2005) Cyrus the Great and the
Kingdom of Ansan. In V. S. Curtis and S.
Stewart, eds., Birth of the Persian Empire: 728.
London.
Stronach, D. (1978) Pasargadae. Oxford.
Stronach, D. (1997) Anshan and Parsa: Early
Achaemenid history, art and architecture on the

Iranian Plateau. In J. Curtis, ed., Mesopotamia

and Iran in the Persian Period: Conquest and
imperialism 539331 BC: 3553. London.
Stronach, D. (2011) Court dress and riding dress at
Persepolis: New approaches to old questions. In
J. Alvarez-Mon and M. B. Garrison, eds.,
Elam and Persia: 47587. Winona Lake, IN.
Waters, M. (2004) Cyrus and the Achaemenids.
Iran 42: 91102.