The Greeks and Persia PDF

Preview

Summary

PROCEEDINGS OF THE DUTCH ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL SOCIETY Series Editors: J.P. Stronk and M.D. de Weerd Executive Editorial Board: J.G. de Boer, A. Bruyns, D.W.P. Burgersdijk, R. Dijkstra, V.V. Stissi, R.L. Telling, and F.C. Woudhuizen (secretary) Corresponding Members: M.E.J.J. Van Aerde, V. ...

Description

PROCEEDINGS OF THE DUTCH ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL SOCIETY Series Editors: J.P. Stronk and M.D. de Weerd

Executive Editorial Board: J.G. de Boer, A. Bruyns, D.W.P. Burgersdijk, R. Dijkstra, V.V. Stissi, R.L. Telling, and F.C. Woudhuizen (secretary) Corresponding Members: M.E.J.J. Van Aerde, V. Blaåek, H.A.G. Brijder, R.F. Docter, N. Ergin, Sv. Hansen, J.M. Kelder, A. Kotsonas, R.D. Rees, G.R. Tsetskhladze, W.J.I. Waal, and F.M.J. Waanders Books for review and manuscripts for TALANTA as well as larger manuscripts for the Series or the Publications should be sent to: J.G. de Boer, Secretary of the Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society, c/o Oetewalerstraat 109, NL-1093ME Amsterdam, The Netherlands, or by e-mail to the secretary of the Editorial Board, . Administration and subscription: . Back issues: single issues from current and previous numbers are available from the Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society at the current single issue price. TALANTA numbers 1 (1969)-14/15 (1982/1983) and 20/21 (1988/1989)-24/25 (1992/1993), sold out numbers 16/17 (1984/1985)-18/19 (1986/1987) and 26/27 (1994/1995)-45 (2013), available Pdf’s of all back issues of Talanta are available for free on the website: . From numbers 46/47 (2014/2015) onwards: premium content only available by subscription on continuation; for the current rate contact us on . Monographs published and available from the Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society: Kluiver, J. 2003: The Tyrrhenian group of Black-Figure Vases. Studies of the Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society, New Series, Volume 1, edited by R.F. Docter, J.P. Stronk, and M.D. de Weerd. Amsterdam/Ghent, € 80,-. W. Achterberg, J. Best, K. Enzler L. Rietveld, and F. Woudhuizen 2004: The Phaistos Disc: A Luwian Letter to Nestor. Publications of the Henri Frankfort Foundation, vol. 13, edited by Maarten de Weerd. Amsterdam, sold out. Woudhuizen, Fred C. 2016: Documents in Minoan Luwian, Semitic, and Pelasgian. Publications of the Henri Frankfort Foundation, vol. 14, edited by Maarten D. de Weerd and Jan P. Stronk. Amsterdam (www.talanta.nl). Woudhuizen, Fred C. 2017: The Language of Linear C and Linear D from Cyprus. Publications of the Henri Frankfort Foundation, vol. 15, edited by Maarten D. de Weerd and Jan P. Stronk. Amsterdam (www.talanta.nl). Woudhuizen, Fred C. 2019: Etruscan as a Colonial Luwian Language: The Comprehensive Version. Publications of the Henri Frankfort Foundation, vol. 16, edited by Maarten D. de Weerd and Jan P. Stronk. Amsterdam (www.talanta.nl).

PROCEEDINGS OF THE DUTCH ARCHAEOLOGICAL AND HISTORICAL SOCIETY VOLUME LII (2020)

Series editors: J.P. Stronk and M.D. de Weerd

2020

Pre press: Beatrice de Fraiture Print: Ipskamp Drukkers, Enschede

© 2020 individual articles: the authors © TALANTA Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society No part of this book may be translated or reproduced in any form, by print, photo-print, PLFUR¿OPRUDQ\RWKHUPHDQVZLWKRXWZULWWHQSHUPLVVLRQIURPWKHSXEOLVKHU

ISBN: 978-90-72067-25-8 ISSN: 0165-2486 NUR: 683

TALANTA LII (2020), 5

INTRODUCTION In front of you, you have volume 52 of Talanta. It includes the papers as listed in the CONTENTS, p. 6. For Jan Stronk and Maarten de Weerd, this is the last volume of Talanta we take FDUH RI DV LWV FRHGLWRUV$IWHU RYHU WZHQW\¿YH \HDUV RI HGLWRUVKLS ZH KDYH GHFLGHGWR¿QDOO\VWHSEDFN:HOLNHWRH[SUHVVRXUWKDQNV±DQGJUDWLWXGH±WR ¿UVWRIDOO%HDWULFHGH)UDLWXUHZKRDVVLVWHGXVVLQFHLQPRUHZD\VWKDQ RQHDVSUHSURGXFWLRQRI¿FHUWR)UHG:RXGKXL]HQWRWKHPHPEHUVRIWKHHGLtorial board, and last but not least to the board of the Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society for their trust in our work. After we announced that we intended to step back, the board of the Dutch Archaeological and Historical Society has found Diederik Burgersdijk, Milinda Hoo and Pieter Houten prepared to succeed us: we wish our successors all the luck and wisdom they need to keep Talanta blooming (if it does bloom, what we like to think) as an independent journal for the ancient world, notably Roman Provincial history and archaeology and the world of the Ancient Mediterranean and adjacent areas. To our readers: thank you for bearing with us and good luck with all you intend to do. Jan P. Stronk & Maarten D. de Weerd

5

CONTENTS

Introduction

5

Van der Sluijs, Marinus Anthony (Canada), The Ins and Outs of Gilgameš’s Passage through darkness

7

Ünan, Serdar and Nazan (Turkey), Stone jewelry moulds from 6H\Õլ tömer Höyük

37

Koolen, Annelies (The Netherlands), Athenian cavalry inspection

55

Stronk, Jan P. (The Netherlands), The Greeks and Persia

71

/DÀÕ(UJQ7XUNH\ DQG0DXUL]LR%XRUD,WDO\  A bread stamp with the expression of ĭȍȈ=ȍ,in the museum of Afyonkarahisar, Western Turkey

89

SUPPLEMENTUM EPIGRAPHICUM MEDITERRANEUM 48 - 49 Woudhuizen, Fred C. (The Netherlands), On the Value of the Luwian Hieroglyphic Sign LITUUS *378 Woudhuizen, Fred C. (The Netherlands), On the status of Tawagalawas and the dating of the letter named after him

95 105

REVIEW Harrison, Thomas and Joseph Skinner, Herodotus in the Long Nineteenth Century (Jan Stronk)

120

CORRIGENDUM Corrigendum of Annex 2B in Kostas Sp. Giannakos 2019 INSTRUCTIONS to AUTHORS and TRANSLITERATIONS: see

6

130

TALANTA LII (2020), 71 - 87

THE GREEKS AND PERSIA1

Jan P. Stronk Lack of data has always been one of the main issues in studying antiquity, a theme that on the one hand distinguishes students of antiquity from other scholars, but on the other hand, ideally, should ensure a bond between ‘Altertumswissenschaftler’DOORYHUWKHZRUOG1HYHUWKHOHVVWKHUHKDYHULVHQVHYHUDOGLYLVLRQVLQWKLV¿HOG RI VFKRODUVKLS HVSHFLDOO\ LQÀXHQFHG E\ QLQHWHHQWKFHQWXU\ DXWKRUV$SDUW IURP that, there is at present a shocking gap between scholarship and the greater public DQGFRQVHTXHQWO\SXEOLFDZDUHQHVVRIWKHUHOHYDQFHRIVFKRODUO\DFWLYLWLHV $W present, new roads have been opened in the past twenty to thirty years that may HQDEOHXVWR¿QGQHZSRVVLELOLWLHVIRUUHVHDUFKDQGPLJKWKHOSXVWREULGJHH[LVW LQJGLIIHUHQFHV7KHWLWOHRIP\SDSHULVEDVHGXSRQWKDWRIWKHERRNE\$5%XUQ (1962). Like he did, I shall try to make clear what connects – in my case – ancient Greek authors and Persian history. These are fascinating, perhaps even bewildering and variegated, times we live in, still leaving aside that at the moment of reshaping this paper (in the latter months of 2020) we all are living through (the second wave of) the COVID-19 pandemic. At work, we have access to a wealth of data and – through a variety of PHGLD±KDYHWKHDELOLW\WR¿QGRXWDOPRVWDQ\WKLQJRIDQ\ERG\DOLYHDQGDFWLYH today. It is a stark contrast with the world we – or at least some of us – spend much of our time with, sc. antiquity. Obviously – I think –, there has been only one single antiquity (even though presently approached from a variety of directions and with an even greater variety of purposes, often resulting – even though not at all intentionally – in a too blurred picture of the era) but it is, in the end, a period we know way too little of. Lack of data has always been one of the main issues in studying antiquity, a theme that on the one hand distinguishes students of antiquity from other scholars, but on the other hand, ideally, should ensure a 1 This is an adapted version of a paper read at the conference “3(56,.$ – A Day of ‘Persian Things’ at Cardiff University”, organised by The British Institute of Persian Studies, London, and Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones and Eve MacDonald of Cardiff University, November 27th, 2019.

71

bond between ‘$OWHUWXPVZLVVHQVFKDIWOHU’ all over the world. Nevertheless, there KDYHULVHQREYLRXVGLYLVLRQVLQWKLV¿HOGRIVFKRODUVKLS,VKDOOYHQWXUHWRUHIHUWR but of few of them, knowing full well that they can be multiplied by many times. First of all, there is a distinctive chasm, issuing from a nineteenth-century tradition, between archaeologists, historians, and philologists; next, we encounter the equally obsolete opposition between Greece and Rome on the one hand and the Ancient Near East on the other. Moreover (but not directly related to the issues just referred to), there is at present a shocking gap between scholarship and the greater public (and, consequently, public awareness of the relevance of scholarly activities, in spite of some interest in programs from, e.g., National Geographic). Admitting that the division between scholarship and public knowledge has always existed and – likely – will always remain present between specialists and the general audience, the rift has – I am afraid – widened to such an extent that on the one hand a degree of indifference by the public for our work has arisen, on the RWKHUDVSDFHKDVRSHQHGLQZKLFKDOOVRUWVRIIDFWIUHHµWKHRULHV¶FLUFXODWH,¿QG that a dangerous development (that, to some extent, is even deteriorating by the VSUHDGWKURXJKµRI¿FLDOV¶>RIDOOVRUWV@RI±RIWHQXQVXEVWDQWLDWHG±µQHZV¶OLNH on the Amphipolis tomb) and intend to return to this issue at the end of my paper. Looking at the title of this paper, it might seem that I as well emphasize a distinction between Greeks on the one hand, Persia – or Persians – on the other. Such an idea would, though, be entirely wrong. The title of my paper is based upon that of the book by A.R. Burn (1962). Like he did, I shall try to make clear what connects – in my case – ancient Greek authors and Persian history. When I started reading Ancient History in the late 1960s, I was told that, to study Ancient Persia – notably the Achaemenid Empire-, it involved quite some reading of Greek because “all there is to know of Ancient Persia has been written by Herodotus.” Exaggerated as this claim appears to be (and – in fact – is), even the PHQWUL[ and patroness of Achaemenid Studies in the Netherlands, the late Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg, believed to some extent that the statement was not entirely without grounds. After all: the Achaemenid Persian royal inscriptions are highly formulaic and a-historic at best (cf. Kent 1953), to phrase it tersely. Further: contemporary Babylonian texts – e.g., like the $VWURQRPLFDO 'LDULHV – are largely limited in scope (as are the commercial archives of Murašû from 1LSSXU DQG (JLEL IURP %DE\ORQ ZKLFK DUH ³VSHFL¿F ORFDO DQG VKRUWWHUP´ Stolper 1985, 63) or essentially focus on events one way or another related to Babylonia, including those that are connected with Persian rulers; the tablets from Persepolis – both the )RUWL¿FDWLRQ and the 7UHDVXU\7H[WV – may provide some insight in economic and social history, but allegedly little more than that; the main archaeological sites of the Ancient Near East (including Persia) have already been excavated and revealed the information they contained (I lay it on as thickly as I can, obviously!).

72

As another example that the gist of the statement seems to be (or: has been) shared by some, might count those truly formidable books published by Amélie Kuhrt (2007), where, e.g., the sources for the Greco-Persian Wars largely consist of passages from Herodotus’ account. Referring to the Battle of Marathon, Christopher Tuplin still wrote in 2010 that we should not look primarily in Persian sources for a Persian perspective on occurrences like ‘Marathon’. As it is, according to Tuplin, the best possibility to acquire a Persian perspective (e.g., on Persia’s intentions leading up to ‘Marathon’) is as yet to be acquired from Greek sources, referring in particular to Aeschylus’ play Persae2. Nevertheless, reading that play, we ultimately see very little ‘Persia’ but instead actually loads – both r hidden and less hidden – of Athenian propaganda. To put it in perspective: Per sae is the second and only surviving part of a now otherwise lost trilogy that won WKH¿UVWSUL]HDWWKHGUDPDWLFFRPSHWLWLRQVLQ$WKHQV¶ 'LRQ\VLD city festival in 472 BC, with Pericles serving as choregos: as such, we naturally might expect it to be ELDVHG$VLWLVWKHSKUDVHWKDW³WKH¿UVWFDVXDOW\RIDZDULVWUXWK´LV±ZURQJO\± ascribed to this very Aeschylus3. We have, in my view, no reason at all to believe that most Greeks in his days – or in later days – were any better than the grim image of this saying draws. A genuine ‘Persian perspective’ in Greek sources seems, therefore, extremely questionable. Part of the problem with turning to Greek sources for a ‘Persian perspective’ is caused by the fact that many (if not the majority) of the Greek sources on Persia and/or Persians seem to have been determined by their authors’ fascination for rather than by their knowledge off and/or genuine interest in WKHLU VXEMHFW >P\ HPSKDVHV -36@ , DP DIUDLG WKDW WKLV DWWLWXGH PD\ KDYH FDXVHG WKDW PXFK SRtential information has eluded us. To use a, perhaps far-fetched, comparison to illustrate the issue: imagine a period of one or two centuries after us and consider the image our great-grandchildren are going to have of the Middle East at present with ONLY the descriptions of it presented by U.S.-politicians like Donald J. Trump or Michael R. Pompeo and/or political commenters of FOX-News (again, admittedly, the example is – for clarity’s sake – extreme). The image our great-grandchildren will then acquire is (probably and/or hopefully) not one we, today, would recognize. 2 In the Persae, Queen Atossa plays a prominent part. It is, though, remarkable that she hardly features in the Persepolis tablets (only in 6 of them by the Elamite form of her name udusa(na), none of them dating to later than 500/499 BC). Either she died around that time or her rise to prominence only started after 493 BC, the year our last record of the Persepolis )RUWL¿FDWLRQ7DEOHWV 3)7 GDWHVIURPIRUWKHODWWHUFRQFOXVLRQVHH:)0+HQNHOPDQ µ;HU[HV$WRVVDDQGWKH3HUVHSROLV)RUWL¿FDWLRQ$UFKLYH¶ 1,12$QQXDO5HSRUW, 26-33 at 33. 3 7RWKHEHVWRIP\NQRZOHGJHWKHSKUDVHLV¿UVWDWWHVWHGLQ3KLOLS6QRZGHQ¶VLQWURGXFWLRQ to E.D. Morel, 1916: Truth and the War, London, vii. Even though the gist of the remark often shines through in Aeschylus’ work, the actual quote – regrettably – cannot be attributed to him.

73

However, even though having “the Greek connection” phrased so poignantly (in an attempt to put the saying “not entirely without grounds” somewhat in perspective), I think the time has come to redress matters even further. Over the last 25-odd years, I have read and written frequently on Greek views on, what is phrased with such an awful Hellenocentric term, “Greek-peripheral cultures” (or “griechische Randkulturen”: cf. the – related – title of the book edited by Von Barloewen in 1961), like Thracians and Persians, leading to my main subject – or project – “Persian History in Ancient Greek Historiography”. This project generated until today books and papers on Ctesias (e.g., Stronk 2010), Diodorus (Stronk 2017), and the Greco-Persian Wars (e.g., Stronk 2016-7 and Stronk 2019: on the latter rests part of this paper). From the Greco-Persian Wars I intend, in this paper, to focus on one event in particular, sc. the Battle of Marathon, constantly in relation with a view on ‘the Greeks and Persia’. Looking at all accounts of this battle, including its build-up and aftermath, one element strikes the eye, sc. that, with one exception, no transmitted Greek (or W Roman) author ventures to present a solidd and/or H[SOLFLWUHDVRQ>P\HPSKDVHV -36@RUDFDXVHIRUWKH3HUVLDQ.LQJ'DULXVWRRUGHUDQLQYDVLRQRI*UHHFHLQLQ our reckoning, 490 BC. That one exception is Aristotle4: ȉઁ į੻ įȚ੹ IJ઀ ઀ ੒ ȂȘįȚțઁȢ ʌંȜİȝȠȢ ਥȖ੼ȞİIJȠ ਝșȘȞĮ઀ȠȚȢ; IJ઀Ȣ ĮੁIJ઀Į IJȠ૨ ʌȠȜİȝİ૙ıșĮȚ ਝșȘȞĮ઀ȠȣȢ; ੖IJȚ İੁȢ Ȉ੺ȡįİȚȢ ȝİIJૃ ਫȡİIJȡȚ੼ȦȞ ਥȞ੼ȕĮȜȠȞǜ IJȠ૨IJȠ Ȗ੹ȡ ਥț઀ȞȘıİ ʌȡ૵IJȠȞ. ʌંȜİȝȠȢ ਥijૃ Ƞ੤ ǹ ʌȡȠIJ੼ȡȠȣȢ İੁıȕĮȜİ૙Ȟ Ǻ ਝșȘȞĮ૙ȠȚ IJઁī ਫ਼ʌ੺ȡȤİȚ į੽ IJઁǺ IJ૵Țī Ț IJઁʌȡȠIJ੼ȡȠȚȢਥȝȕĮȜİ૙ȞIJȠ૙ȢਝșȘȞĮ઀ȠȚȢ, IJઁ į੻ ǹ IJ૵Ț Ǻǜ ʌȠȜİȝȠ૨ıȚ Ȗ੹ȡ IJȠ૙Ȣ ʌȡંIJİȡȠȞ ਕįȚț੾ıĮıȚȞ. ਫ਼ʌ੺ȡȤİȚ ਙȡĮ IJ૵Ț ȝ੻Ȟ Ǻ IJઁǹIJઁ ʌȠȜİȝİ૙ıșĮȚ IJȠ૙Ȣ ʌȡȠIJ੼ȡȠȚȢ ਙȡȟĮıȚǜ IJȠ૨IJȠ į੻ IJઁ Ǻ IJȠ૙Ȣ ਝșȘȞĮ઀ȠȚȢǜʌȡંIJİȡȠȚ Ȗ੹ȡ ਷ȡȟĮȞ. ȝ੼ıȠȞ ਙȡĮ țĮ੿ ਥȞIJĮ૨șĮ IJઁ Į੅IJȚȠȞ, IJઁ ʌȡ૵IJȠȞ țȚȞોıĮȞ.

‘Why did the Athenians become involved in the Persian war?’ means ‘What cause originated the waging of war against the Athenians?’ and WKHDQVZHULVµ%HFDXVHWKH\>LHWKH $WKHQLDQV@ UDLGHG 6DUGLV WRJHWKHU with the Eretrians’, since this originated the war. Let A be war, B unprovoked raiding, C the Athenians. Then B, unprovoked raiding, is true of C, the Athenians, and A is true of B, since men make war on the unjust aggressor. So, A, having war waged upon them, is true of B, the initial aggressors, and B is true of C, the Athenians, who were the aggressors. Hence here WRR WKH FDXVH ± LQ WKLV FDVH WKH HI¿cient cause – is the middle term. Arist. $3R. 94a36-94b8.

4 7KHDOOHJHGGLVFXVVLRQRQLQYDGLQJ*UHHFHEHWZHHQ$WRVVDDQG'DULXVZH¿QGLQ+HURdotus 3.134.5 can hardly be viewed as a serious ground but can, at best, only be regarded as a ‘constructio post eventum’.

74

It comes very close to a cause I previously suggested (Stronk 2016-17, 154-155), viz. that “the Achaemenids practised a religious system, centred around $X UDPD]GƗK (the “Wise Lord”), which may be interpreted as (proto) Zoroastrianism, in which ‘arta’ (“righteousness”, “justice”, “order”: cf. Kent 1953, 170 s.v.) played a key role. The Ionian Revolt, and especially the action against Sardis by a combined Atheno-Eretrian force, had been a clear breach of (imperial) order and had to be put right, if only to restore proper order.” In the Greek view (to phrase it thus), too, the Great King’s IJȚȝȒ (“honour”, “dignity”, “authority”) had been affected, even seriously affected, and he could – therefore – be expected to react. In fact, if he would not react, his IJȚȝȒ would be ruined completely. Different from Aristotle, our main source for the Greco-Persian Wars, HeroGRWXVSUHVHQWVXVOHDYLQJDVLGHWKH±OLNHO\¿FWLRQDO±FRQYHUVDWLRQEHWZHHQ Darius and Atossa referred to above, note 4) with no single plausible cause – or reason – for these wars, apart from some vague reference to the Trojan War, the abduction by Paris of Helen and similar far-fetched stories5. Though Herodotus does not claim, like Thucydides did, that his work was intended as a țIJોȝĮ İȢ Įੁİȓȓ (“a treasure for all time to come”: Th. 1.22), he comes very close doing so: ਺ȡȠįȩIJȠȣ ਞȜȚțĮȡȞȘııȑȠȢ ੂıIJȠȡȓȘȢ ਕʌȩįİȟȚȢ ਸ਼įİ, ੪Ȣ ȝȒIJİ IJ੹ ȖİȞȩȝİȞĮ ਥȟ ਕȞșȡȫʌȦȞ IJ૶ ȤȡȩȞ૳ ਥȟȓIJȘȜĮ ȖȑȞȘIJĮȚ ȝȒIJİ ਩ȡȖĮ ȝİȖȐȜĮ IJİ țĮ੿ șȦȝĮıIJȐ, IJ੹ ȝ੻Ȟ ਰȜȜȘıȚ IJ੹ į੻ ȕĮȡȕȐȡȠȚıȚ ਕʌȠįİȤșȑȞIJĮ, ਕțȜİ઼ ȖȑȞȘIJĮȚ, IJȐIJİਙȜȜĮ țĮ੿ įȚૃ਴Ȟ ĮੁIJȓȘȞ ਥʌȠȜȑȝȘıĮȞ ਕȜȜȒȜȠȚıȚ

This is the display of the inquiry of Herodotus of Halicarnassus, so that things done by man not be forgotten in time, and that great and marvellous deeds, some displayed by Hellenes, some by foreigners6, not lose their glory, y including among others what was the cause of their waging war on each other. Hdt. 1.1.1.

As regards the last promise, his initial statements on its origin make this claim seem to be largely empty boasting, as indicated above.

5 At least, it seems to have been conceived as such by Aristophanes (444-385 BC). In his $FKDUQLDQV, lines 524-534, he seems to put in his character Dicaeopolis’ mouth that the cause of the events of 431 BC (and the beginning of the Peloponnesian War) was the abduction of three whores, thereby especially ridiculing the passage by Herodotus referred to above. 6 Usually, I would translate ȕȐȡȕĮȡȠȚȚ as “Persians”, but as Herodotus’ Histories also pays attention to, e.g., Egypt, Thrace, and Scythia, I prefer here the more neutral “barbarians” or “foreigners”, meaning non-Greek speaking peoples, even though the main subject of Herodotus’ work obviously is – what we now refer to as – the Persian Wars and his introduction emphatically bears on these wars...