Darius' 'Thousand and One Nights'- Royal politics as fairytale in Herodotus' third book

Ioannis M.
Konstantakos
Darius’ “Thousand and One Nights”:
Royal politics as fairytale in Herodotus’ third book
1. Darius’ inscription at Behistun: heroic propaganda

Darius’ inscription at Behistun is a singularity, a unique case in the history of
world literature. A new writing system was invented specifically for recording
this text; an entire language, Old Persian, acquired for the first time a scripted
form and a written literature for the sake of this work and its perpetuation. How
many literary compositions have had this kind of honour? Not even the Homeric
poems or the Vedas can boast of it, since they were recorded by use of alphabets
which had been developed already in earlier times for other practical purposes.
As regards its contents, the Behistun inscription exercised enormous influence on
subsequent historical tradition. Its account of Darius’ ascension to the throne
became the standard version of events for many centuries; it was reproduced by
all the historiographers of the classical Greek and Roman world and remained
unchallenged until modern times. It is possible that the Behistun text has
permanently altered the perception of past history. Many present-day scholars
believe that the false Bardiya never existed: Darius must have murdered the true
Bardiya, Cambyses’ genuine brother, in order to usurp the kingship. However,
this hypothesis is impossible to prove, because the Behistun version has
dominated every source and tradition since antiquity and has suppressed any
eventual trace of alternative accounts. Propagandistic writing has rarely enjoyed
so much power over time. Not even the Kadesh inscription of Pharaoh Ramses II
or the notorious Protocols of the Elders of Zion have had such long-ranging
effectiveness on the falsification of history.
In the narrative of Behistun, Darius’ rise to royal power is described in the
mode of epic poetry, like the glorious course of a mythical hero. The linguistic
structure and morphology of the text, with the repetition of formulaic elements,
the reiterated syntactic and phrasal patterns, the sequences of typical motifs and
expressions, is impressively close to the techniques of oral epic. It is a felicitous
scholarly hypothesis that the style and narrative mannerisms of the Behistun
inscription have been influenced by the oral heroic cantos of the Persian bards,
1
the ancestors of the gōsānān of the Parthian age, who would have performed in
the courts of Achaemenid kings and magnates. In their effort to create the first
extensive prose narrative in Old Persian, Darius’ advisers and bureaucrats must
have imitated the poetic voice and phraseology of the minstrels whom they
regularly heard in the royal courtly environment. The text of Behistun preserves
the resonance of the age-old epic poems which would have unfolded the
adventures of the mythical figures of ancient Iran, the feats of Keresaspa and
Fredun, Manuchehr and Kai Kaus, Kai Khusrau and Gushtasp.
The themes and layout of the narrative also replicate well-known episodes
from the corpus of Iranian heroic legends. The usurper of the Persian throne, the
Magus Gaumata, is portrayed with dismal features which recall the terrible
dragon king of Iranian myth, Azhi Dahhak. The latter had two dragon’s heads,
which sprang up from his shoulders and fed on human flesh; every day, two
Iranian youths were slain to feed the dragon king. Dahhak also murdered men
and women by the thousands; he mixed their blood in a vat and washed his body
with it, so as to magically increase his strength. In the Persian inscription,
Gaumata acts essentially the same role in a historicised context, without the
fabulous apparatus of the dragon legend: he murders a great number of people,
all those who had known the true Bardiya, so as not to be recognised; as a result,
the population fears him greatly.
Darius, on the other hand, is cast in the part of the dragon-slaying hero, like
the mythical Fredun who defeats Azhi Dahhak and takes the throne of Iran.
Darius attacks the Magus in his fortress at Media, in the same way as Fredun
invades and occupies Dahhak’s castle. In the mythical tradition, Dahhak is not
found in the castle; he has fled towards the mountains of the North-East, and
Fredun has to pursue him there, to wage his last duel against the dragon. In the
Behistun text, this particular motif is not part of the episode of Gaumata, who is
immediately captured and killed by Darius. The sequence of flight and
persecution is transplanted to other sections, to the narrative of Darius’ fights
with the various rebels who rise subsequently against his royal power. One of
those rebels, Phraortes of Media, is beaten in battle by Darius and his troops, but
is not directly captured; he flees to north-central Media, towards the mountains of
2
present-day Ray County, and Darius sends an army in his pursuit. The same
pattern is repeated in the case of Vahyazdata, a rebel in Persis, who flees after his
defeat in battle and is persecuted and captured in Mount Parga. Like the heroic
Fredun, Darius chases his fleeing enemies in the mountains.
Apart from the epic colouring, the Behistun text is also steeped in theology
and religious discourse. Darius is presented as the ruler who is favoured by
Ahura Mazda and exercises kingship by divine will. Darius is the champion and
defender of Truth, the main principle of cosmic order according to the ancient
Iranian faith. After deposing the usurper Gaumata, Darius restored justice, proper
religious worship, and the prosperity of the people in the Iranian lands; this is the
reason why Ahura Mazda brought him to the throne and keeps him in his royal
position. This portrayal recalls the so-called “Cyrus Cylinder”, an Akkadian text
composed by the Babylonian priests of Marduk, which recounts in a glorifying
manner Cyrus’ conquest of Babylon. In that account, similarly, Cyrus is exalted
as a divinely appointed monarch; Marduk selected him, among all the potentates
of the world, to depose the corrupt King Nabonidus and restore justice and
happiness to the long-suffering land of Mesopotamia. In his autobiography at
Behistun, Darius casts himself in the role of a new Cyrus by closely imitating the
earlier portrayal of Cyrus himself.
While Darius poses as the upholder of Truth, his enemies are castigated as
representatives of the opposite principle, the Lie, the cosmic force of evil in the
Iranian religion. All the rival rulers and rebels, who confront Darius, are
presented as impostors. Cambyses killed his brother Bardiya and concealed the
truth; he let the people of Iran believe falsely that Bardiya were alive. The
usurper Gaumata lied to the people by claiming that he was the true Bardiya and
the lawful heir of the Persian throne. The various rebels in the provinces are also
purveyors of falsity; each one pretends to be the scion of a great local dynastic
family and to have a legitimate claim to power. The Babylonian rebel
impersonates Nebuchadnezzar, the heir of the royal line of Babylon; Phraortes
pretends to be a descendant of the ancient Median king Cyaxares; the Persian
revolutionary, Vahyazdata, feigns again to be Bardiya the son of Cyrus.
3
The great irony is, of course, that the Behistun text is itself based upon a lie,
perhaps indeed upon more than one falsehood. Darius’ supposed genealogy,
ponderously prefixed to the narration of his feats in the inscription, is fake; it
designates Darius as a descendant of Achaemenes and brings him into connection
with the ancestors of Cyrus and Cambyses — the Persian royal family, with
which Darius had no kinship in point of fact. In addition, it is a viable scholarly
hypothesis that the false Bardiya did not exist, that the Magus Gaumata is a
propagandistic fiction, and that Darius killed the true Bardiya in order to take
hold of the throne. In that case, the entire official story of Darius’ rise would be a
fabricated legend, a historical forgery. Darius, the self-proclaimed champion of
truth, would in fact be the grandest liar of them all, the keenest disseminator of
falsity, the genuine representative of Angra Mainyu.
2. Herodotus’ novelisation of Behistun

Herodotus doubtless knew some version of the Behistun account. In spite of a
few differences in circumstantial details, the main outline of the events is the
same in the Greek historian’s oeuvre and in Darius’ inscription. Both works
parade identical or similar facts and incidents in essentially the same sequence. I
would like to imagine that Herodotus read a Greek translation of the Behistun
narrative, a copy written in a book scroll, like the papyrus with the Aramaic
rendering of the Behistun text which was unearthed at Elephantine. He might
easily have procured such a book from one of the Yauna, the Greek employees
and functionaries who had worked at Persepolis and other centres of Achaemenid
Persia and must have been Herodotus’ most reliable sources on Persian culture
and history. Alternatively, he might have discovered a copy in the library of
Demaratus’ descendants in their mansion at Mysia, or in the collection of
Hippias’ family home at Sigeion, or among the documents that Themistocles’
daughters brought back to Athens after their father’s death. Of course, there is no
certain evidence that Herodotus used such a written version. He may have been
orally appraised of the contents of the Behistun text by one of his many
informers about Persia — whether of Achaemenid or of Greek provenance.
4
Herodotus uses the same factual canvas as the Behistun narrative, but is not
restricted by it. He enriches the rudimentary storyline of the Behistun account
with plentiful other materials, which usually display a very different literary tone
than the stern Old Persian text. This is the most important distinguishing factor
between those two sources. The Behistun inscription offers a terse outline of
basic events, recounted in epic style and in a heroic mode. Herodotus’ additions,
on the other hand, are clearly of a novelistic and anecdotal brand, or even of a
fairy-tale and fabulous character. Instead of pursuing the traditional image of
Darius as an epic hero and a theological figure, a monster-slaying champion and
defender of the faith, Herodotus methodically turns the Persian king into a
trickster, a picaresque figure of many intrigues and guiles, a resourceful and
ruthless Schelm. The Herodotean Darius does not hesitate to use deceit in order
to succeed in his plans; he is enmeshed in a net of court machinations and
conspiracies, manipulates the people of his entourage, weaves secret schemes
and bends reality, in order to get hold of kingship. This Darius is not the
protagonist of an epic; neither does he resemble the holy monarchs of the Avesta.
Rather he is close to the figures of popular novella and humorous folktale; he
seems to emerge from the world of scabrous Ionian storytelling or of the Persian
court tales, which resonate in an ample range of later sources, from the novelistic
books of the Hebrew Bible to the courtly episodes of the Shahnameh.
2.1. The horse neighing at sunrise

The scenes and episodes which Herodotus grafts onto the blueprint of the
Behistun account are replete with typical motifs and plot patterns of the novella;
they present many parallels to famous novellistic, adventurous, and fabulous
tales of the ancient world, especially of the Orient. The core of the storyline,
Darius’ accession to the throne, is presented in the Behistun inscription as a
simple effect of divine will: after Darius has slain the usurper Gaumata, Ahura
Mazda bestows the kingship upon him, and Darius proceeds to restore order and
justice throughout the empire. In Herodotus’ narrative, by contrast, the
conspirators have recourse to a test or ordeal, so as to choose a new king among
themselves. The type of the ordeal is drawn from the world of the folktale and
5
the popular imaginary: the throne will be awarded to the man whose horse will
be the first to neigh at dawn, as the sun rises. A close parallel is found in a
Phoenician legend about the Tyrian king Strato, preserved in Justin’s epitome of
Pompeius Trogus’ Histories of Philip.
According to this tradition, the slaves have rebelled and taken over the city
of Tyre, killing all their masters. Only one of the slaves spares his aged master
Strato out of pity and hides him in his house. The slaves then decide to choose
one of their own to be the king of Tyre; it is agreed that the elect candidate will
be the first man who will see the rising sun the next morning. The hidden Strato
is apprised of the matter and gives his slave instructions on how to win the
contest. At dawn, the slaves gather in an open space and look towards the east,
waiting to see the sunrise; but Strato’s slave gazes in the direction of the west.
When dawn breaks, the sunlight starts gleaming on the loftiest points of the city,
and Strato’s slave is the first to catch a glimpse of the light, as it falls on the
highest rooftop, on the buildings of the west side. The others sense that this kind
of reasoning is uncharacteristic of a slave; they question the man, and he
confesses that he has hidden his master and followed his advice. The former
slaves then understand the value of a free man’s intellect; they liberate Strato and
make him their new king. In later ages, the same kind of ordeal for the selection
of the king was taken over into many popular folktales.
The tale of Darius and the horse neighing at sunrise represents a peculiarly
Persian adaptation of the folktale scenario. The ritual significance of horses in
ancient Iranian culture is well known. Because of the indigenous importance of
horse cult, the Persian narrative offers a variant of the usual folk test; the winner
of the contest, instead of being the man who first sees the sunlight at dawn,
becomes the owner of the horse which first neighs at sunrise. In addition, Darius’
victory is based on a sly trick, a piece of cunning more devious and fallacious
than the clever idea exploited by the slave in the Tyrian legend. Darius uses the
help of his horse-keeper Oibares; the horse-keeper makes his master’s stallion
mate with a beautiful mare in the city suburbs. Thus, the next morning, as the
seven Persian candidates pass with their horses from that particular suburb at
daybreak, Darius’ stallion is reminded of its delightful night there and neighs. In
6
another, more scabrous version, Oibares rubs his hand on the mare’s vagina;
thus, the next morning, as soon as he lifts his hand towards the stallion’s nostrils,
the horse is aroused and starts snorting and neighing.
This tale makes Darius look like a trickster figure taken out of a picaresque
novel; with the assistance of his servant, he uses a scabrous ruse to secure
kingship, at the expense of the rival candidates, who stick to the regular
procedure and wait for chance to determine the outcome. Darius does not exactly
use lies in this case; but he does conceal the truth about his servant’s artifice; his
rise to the throne is based on a crafty and dishonest practice. This is different
from the image constructed in the Behistun text, in which Darius is the strict
upholder of truth and is divinely rewarded with kingship because of his justice.
Herodotus has turned the ideology of Darius’ propaganda upside-down.
2.2. A court contest for the best regime

In the Behistun inscription, there is no question about the form of government to
be adopted after Gaumata’s deposition. It is considered self-evident that Iran is a
monarchy, and the god grants the kingship to Darius. In the Herodotean account,
famously, the three Persian magnates, Darius and his two comrades Megabyzus
and Otanes, carry out a debate about the best political constitution; each one of
them advocates a different form of government, and Darius wins the argument by
supporting the monarchy, in opposition to Megabyzus’ aristocracy and Otanes’
isonomia. This agonistic synkrisis of the main forms of state regime seems
characteristically sophistic; it might have been borrowed from a manual of
rhetorical exercises composed by Protagoras or Gorgias. Nevertheless, the
Herodotean episode also recalls a type of court contest that was well diffused in
Near-Eastern literature and is also found in ancient Persian novelistic traditions.
The tales of this kind are usually set in the milieu of the royal palace or court; the
protagonists are courtiers or wise men, who compete in solving intellectual
puzzles and riddle-like problems, especially the so-called “questions of the
superlative”, which ask which thing or concept is characterised by a given quality
to the highest degree.
7
An excellent specimen of this kind of court story is included in the first
book of Esdras, an apocryphal work of the Old Testament in the version of the
Septuagint. Three bodyguards of King Darius, who keep watch over the king’s
bedroom after a great banquet, pass their time with a competition of wisdom.
They propose to each other the question “what is the strongest”; each one writes
his answer in a sealed letter and places it under the Persian king’s pillow. After
waking up, Darius reads the answers, calls the three guards to his presence, and
each one makes a speech to expound and defend his own solution. Given the
setting in the Achaemenid royal court, it is likely that this Biblical story was
fashioned under the impact of the Persian tradition of court novellas, which has
influenced several Jewish narrative works of the Second Temple period.
Similar contests are found in the Persian national legendarium. According
to a Sasanian legend, at the time of King Bahram Gur, an ambassador from the
Roman Empire came to the Persian court to test the wisdom of the local sages; he
posed to the Persian high priest a series of questions concerning the definition of
abstract concepts (what is the “the within”, “the outside”, “the above”, “the
below”, “the infinite”, and “the vile”). The priest, after providing answers, posed
in turn two riddles of the superlative to the Roman envoy: what is the most
harmful thing and what is the most profitable thing in the world. In an earlier
myth, the charismatic hero Zal is similarly tested by the arch-mages and scholars
in the court of the Iranian king Manuchehr. In all these tales, clever grandees or
sages of the royal milieu compete in answering difficult questions, often about
superlative qualities. By analogy, in the Herodotean episode the three Persian
noblemen confront each other over another superlative riddle: what is the best
political constitution. Herodotus has amalgamated the rhetorical agones of the
sophists with a Near-Eastern tale type of court competition.
2.3. Zopyrus and the revolt of Babylon

According to the Behistun text, after assuming kingship, Darius crushed a
number of revolts that broke out in various provinces. A stock narrative pattern is
adopted in all these episodes. A rebellious leader rises up in a certain area; Darius
sends an army to that region, led by himself or by one of his officials; the Persian
8
troops give battle against the rebels, vanquish them, and capture their leader. One
of those expeditions, the campaign to recapture the revolted Babylon, is also
included in the Herodotean narrative, once again greatly expanded with
novelistic elements. In the Persian inscription, Nidintu-Bel claims to be
Nebuchadnezzar son of Nabonidus, the lawful heir to the throne of Babylon, and
instigates a revolt. Darius marches to Babylonia with his army, fights a series of
three battles against the forces of Nidintu-Bel, and beats them every time; in the
end, Darius seizes the city of Babylon and punishes Nidintu-Bel.
The Herodotean version is more adventurous, filled with suspense and
intrigues. Darius is besieging Babylon for a long time without success. Finally,
one of his officers, the nobleman Zopyrus, infiltrates among the Babylonians by
means of a bold ruse: he mutilates himself, cutting his nose and ears, and
pretends that he has suffered this punishment by order of Darius. He therefore
poses as a defector and manages to gain the Babylonians’ trust. Having arranged
a plan with Darius in advance, Zopyrus gains a series of three victories against
small and badly armed contingents of the Persian army, which are sent against
Babylon at preordained spots. After these apparent feats, the Babylonians glorify
Zopyrus and hand over to him the keys of the city gates and the responsibility for
the defence. Then Zopyrus opens the gates and lets the Persian army in.
The sequence of Zopyrus’ three counterfeit victories over the Persian
troops, while he pretends to be a collaborator of the Babylonians, reverses and
almost parodies Darius’ successive battles against the Babylonian rebels in the
Behistun text. In the inscription, the Persian army wins a series of skirmishes
against the Babylonians, which climactically lead to Darius’ final conquest of the
city. In the Herodotean narrative, the Persian army is slyly arranged to lose a
series of skirmishes against the Babylonians, which climactically lead to
Zopyrus’ establishment in Babylon and hence to his treason and to Darius’
consequent conquest of the city. The military course of Darius the great marshal
is upturned in the context of Zopyrus’ plan; the victorious battles are replaced by
a travesty of war, a chain of faked defeats, which nonetheless lead to the same
triumphant result, the occupation of the enemy city.
9
Zopyrus’ central ruse of infiltration is of course a Herodotean addition,
inspired from the world of novella and adventurous romance. Commentators
have drawn attention to similar stratagems employed by Odysseus in Greek
myth. According to the Odyssey and the Little Iliad, the Ithacan king once
disfigured himself with blows, dressed up as a beggar, and thus infiltrated into
Troy, where he met Helen, killed some enemies, and gathered useful intelligence;
his information proved valuable to the Achaeans for the sack of the city. Parallels
are also found in the novelistic traditions of the ancient Orient. In the Capture of
Joppa, an Egyptian historical fiction from the Ramesside period, general Djehuty
employs a cunning trick, so that two hundred of his soldiers worm their way into
the fortified city of Joppa and conquer it from the inside.
Even more closely, the frame story of the third book of the Pañcatantra, the
famous Sanskrit collection of fables, displays the same outline as Zopyrus’
artifice. The crows and the owls are at war, but the minister of the crow king
conceives a wily plan to destroy the enemies; he asks his king to pluck his
feathers, smear him with blood, and throw him down to the foot of the tree; then
the king and the other crows leave their place and go to hide in the mountain.
When the owls arrive to attack the crows, they only find the crow minister, lying
on the ground, badly battered and injured. The crow minister claims that he has
been punished by his king, because he had suggested that crows cannot win the
war and must submit to the owls. The owls trust the crow minister and host him
in their fortress; thus the crow minister learns everything about the holes and
weak points of the owls’ place. He fills all the holes with cow dung, and then
escapes and calls the king and the army of the crows. The crows appear around
the owls’ fortress with lighted torches, set fire to the cow dung accumulated in
the holes, and thus the fortress is burned down, together with all the owls inside
it. The crow minister’s scheme in the Indian narrative is practically identical with
Zopyrus’ stratagem; the core of the tale, in both cases, consists in the hero’s self-
mutilation and defection as a means to gain the enemies’ trust and finally betray
their citadel. The analogies even extend to details, such as the crow minister’s
claim that he has been punished by his king for advocating submission to the
10
enemies; Zopyrus similarly tells the Babylonians that his ears and nose were cut
off by Darius because he proposed to abandon the siege of Babylon.
Once again, Herodotus has enriched the war feats of the Behistun text with
the plot patterns of novelistic storytelling. The most striking element in the
Herodotean reworking is Zopyrus’ attitude. In the Persian inscription, Darius
wins the wars and conquers the city by sheer force and thanks to the divine
favour of Ahura Mazda. Zopyrus, by contrast, employs unashamed lies, deceives
the Babylonians with a false account, fakes war victories, falsifies even his own
body, and uses every kind of fraud in order to capture the enemy city. Darius is
also complicit in Zopyrus’ ruses, since he has prearranged with Zopyrus the
series of forged military attacks and Persian defeats. The Persian king and his
men, the upholders of truth in the Behistun text, are now readily plunged into a
web of lies in order to gain the victory over their opponents. The end justifies the
means, and may Ahura Mazda forgive us.
Zopyrus’ cunning victory, placed at the end of the third book, marks the
finale of Darius’ accession narrative. After the re-conquest of Babylon, Darius
has firmly established his authority and is ready to embark in the grandiose
imperialistic plans of the following books. On the other hand, Zopyrus’ wily
scheme also looks back to the beginning of the story of Darius’ rise: the episode
of the false Smerdis, the usurper, which initiates the storyline of Darius’
conspiracy with the other Persian magnates and finally leads Darius to the
monarchy. The magus, who pretends to be Smerdis, has had his ears cut off by
Cyrus as punishment. This is how he is recognised as an impostor, although he
takes care to hide his head under his tiara and avoids public appearances. Otanes’
daughter, who sleeps with the false Smerdis as royal wife, manages to ascertain
that he has no ears and thus detects his fake identity. The motif of the mutilated
ears recurs in Zopyrus’ adventure, in a most characteristic manner. Zopyrus cuts
himself his nose and ears and claims before the Babylonians that this injury has
been inflicted on him by the Persian king as punishment. In this way, he manages
to win the Babylonians’ confidence and put his plan to practice. The repetition of
this motif binds the beginning and the end of Darius’ rise narrative in a kind of
ring composition. The magus hides his mutilated ears in order to carry out his
11
cunning scheme; conversely, Zopyrus shows off his mutilated ears in order to
execute his own wily ruse. From beginning to end of Darius’ story, the ears motif
is repeated but also reversed; as a result, Zopyrus is cast as a figure of lie no
smaller than the bogus Smerdis, the perpetrator of the great fallacy — the only
difference being that Zopyrus uses the deception for the opposite purpose, for the
benefit of the Persians rather than to their detriment.
2.4. The two usurpers, and how to get to them

Other episodes of the Herodotean narrative about Darius are also charged with
novelistic and romance-like motifs. The entire sequence of the conspiracy and
murder of the false Smerdis is fashioned like a court novella, full of intrigues,
suspense, and scenes of violent action. The magi are duplicated in the
Herodotean account: the false Smerdis is set up and manipulated by his brother
Patizeithes, an odd name that may be derived from the Old Persian title pati-
xšāyaθιya, the “viceroy”. Thus, the fake king is provided with his counsellor and
vizier, according to the standard binary pattern that dominates the entire
novelistic tradition of the ancient Orient. From the fictional romances of ancient
Egypt to the Tale of Ahiqar and the frame narrative of the Arabian Nights, the
Near-Eastern monarch is always coupled with his minister, who offers counsel
and invents wise schemes to secure his king’s power. The appearance of a pair of
magi, the false king and his handler, is a unique element in Herodotus’ narrative,
unattested in the Behistun account. Its evident resonance with the traditions of
oriental storytelling colours the Herodotean synthesis with novelistic overtones.
In Herodotus’ account, Darius and his co-conspirators do not hesitate to lie,
in order to access and attack the two Magians. Darius proffers a fictitious cover
story to bypass the guards at the palace gate and enter into the Magians’
presence: he claims to have just arrived from Persis carrying an important
message from his father to the king. This artifice resembles the stratagem used by
the warrior hero Qaren in an episode of ancient Iranian mythology. To infiltrate
into the castle of the rebel chieftain Salm, Qaren pretends to be a messenger
bringing an important order from Tur, another rebel who is Salm’s ally. On this
pretext, Qaren is granted admission into the enemy fortress. As soon as he is
12
inside, he undermines the defences of the castle and signals to the Iranian army to
attack. Darius’ artifice is drawn from the repository of romance-like and
adventurous intrigues that abounded in the courtly Iranian myths.
Indeed, the Herodotean Darius justifies the use of lies with a patently
amoral and opportunistic rationale: truthful men and liars, he claims, strive for
the same thing; both categories wish to gain some advantage, and use
respectively true or fraudulent statements as the most pertinent means for their
purpose. In Darius’ way of thinking, truth-tellers and lie-tellers are identical and
indistinguishable from each other. By the standards of the Behistun text and its
preoccupation with the sacrosanct principle of truth, these words are scandalous.
2.5. Darius and Atossa in bed

The Behistun inscription contains nothing regarding Darius’ campaigns against
Greece. All of his military ventures are set in Asia, in the broader milieu of the
Iranian plateau, from Babylonia and Elam to Media, Parthia, and Central Asia.
Herodotus adds the expedition against Greece to his storyline for obvious
thematic reasons, since his synthesis is focused on the Graeco-Persian conflict.
By comparison to the military reports of the Behistun text, the Herodotean
exposition of the preliminaries of the Greek war in the third book is again much
more romance-like. The centre of the plot is a scene set at the royal bedroom, in
which Atossa, in bed with Darius, prompts her husband to make war and conquer
the Greek mainland. Atossa is also using false pretexts in her attempt to persuade
Darius. She claims to be motivated by her desire to possess handmaidens from
Sparta, Corinth, and other Greek cities. Her real reason is that she owes a service
to Democedes, the physician who has cured her of a breast tumour. Democedes
has coached Atossa to incite Darius to an expedition to Greece, so as to work out
for himself an opportunity to escape from Persia. The warlike narratives of
Behistun, which followed the movements of troops and their battles over the
open space of empire, shed their place to stealthy intrigues that unfold in the
enclosed space of the royal private chambers.
The setting of this masterly scene, the royal bedroom at bedtime, is copied
out wholesale from the literary universe of the court novella. Famous examples
13
of this type of episode, involving a royal couple in their most intimate moments,
involve the nightly sessions of Sultan Shahryar and the clever Scheherazade in
the Thousand and One Nights, and the conversations of King Ahasuerus and his
wife Esther in the Biblical book of Esther. There are also parallels in the courtly
legends of the Iranian mythical tradition. The devious queen Sudabeh has several
consultations with her husband, the rash Kai Kaus, in her harem; almost every
time, she manages to lure the king to her side and make him forward her evil
schemes. The Bactrian ruler Mehrab and his wife, the prudent Sindokht, also
have conversations in their palace rooms concerning the future of their daughter
Rudabeh, who will end up marrying the Iranian hero Zal. Furthermore, Atossa’s
manipulation by Democedes recalls the analogous relationship between Esther
and her wise uncle Mordecai in the Biblical book. In both cases, an older man,
well-versed in court life and secret scheming, instructs the royal wife how to
handle the king and influence him towards specific courses of action.
3. Conclusion: Undermining Darius’ propaganda

Why is Herodotus so keen to overload Darius’ dynastic story with all those
fabulous elements? Why is the heroic narrative of Behistun transformed into a
court novella of conspiracies, secret machinations, and interior scenes? The key
for understanding Herodotus’ tactics may be sought in the motifs of intrigue and
deceit, which permeated the tradition of the court novella in the ancient world.
Those stock components of novelistic storytelling gave Herodotus the
opportunity to cast Darius and his entourage in the role of schemers and
purveyors of falsehood. Throughout Herodotus’ third book, both Darius himself
and his main agents use fraud repeatedly in order to secure royal power and
conquest. Darius lies to gain access to the Magians in the palace, and wins the
kingship by means of a stealthy trick. Zopyrus makes up a false story to acquire
the Babylonians’ trust; Atossa invents a fallacious pretext to persuade her
husband to campaign against Greece. In Darius’ new regime, everyone tells lies.
This image offers a complete contrast to the Behistun account, in which
King Darius is portrayed as the paragon and pillar of truth. The Darius of
Behistun owes his very kingship to his devotion to the truth principle, which has
14
rendered him the favourite of Ahura Mazda. His officers follow suit, vanquishing
the enemies in open battle, without recourse to insidious stratagems. By contrast,
the Herodotean Darius owes his throne to a fallacious intrigue, starts military
expeditions on false premises, and his generals conquer cities by means of
treacherous snares. By grafting a repertory of novelistic motifs on the basic
outline of the Behistun account, Herodotus upturns the official Achaemenid
ideology and the ideal of religious monarchy that was advocated in Darius’
propagandistic inscription. Herodotus’ entire narrative is woven of the stuff of
irony: the king who officially posed as the upholder of cosmic truth is in fact
himself a liar of gigantic dimensions.
Herodotus never questions in his oeuvre the veracity of the main tenets of
the Behistun account. He does not express doubts about Darius’ Achaemenid
genealogy or the existence of the false Bardiya. Nevertheless, it is clear from his
overall narrative that the Greek historian did not unreservedly swallow Darius’
propaganda. Contrary to the official image of the truthful king, the Herodotean
Darius is a serial liar, an expert manipulator of falsity. Any account promulgated
by such a man is bound to be mendacious, and this includes, of course, the text of
Behistun. By turning the sanctioned storyline of Darius’ inscription into a long
fairy tale of court intrigues, Herodotus insinuates his deeper disbelief in the
official version of events, as it was propagated by the Persian establishment. Like
Herodotus’ novelistic account, the Behistun text is another political fable, a
fictional narrative full of lies. Fortunately, Herodotus proves to be a far better
storyteller than Darius’ bureaucrats.
15
Ioannis M. Konstantakos
National and Kapodistrian University of Athens
Darius’ “Thousand and One Nights”:

Royal politics as fairytale in Herodotus’ third book
International conference:
The interconnectivity of literary, historical, and cultural levels in the Histories of Herodotus
Christian-Albrechts-Universität Kiel
November 20, 2024
Darius’ Inscription at Behistun (DB)
§1 I am Darius, the great king, king of kings, king in Persia, king of countries, son of Vishtaspa,
grandson of Arshama, an Achaemenid.
§2 Darius the king proclaims: My father is Vishtaspa; Vishtaspa’s father is Arshama; Arshama’s
father is Ariaramna; Ariaramna’s father is Cishpish; Cishpish’s father is Hakhaimanish
(Achaemenes).
§3 Darius the king proclaims: For this reason we are called Achaemenids. From long ago we are
noble; from long ago we are royal.
§4 Darius the king proclaims: Eight of our family were kings before; I am the ninth; nine kings are
we in succession.
§5 Darius the king proclaims: By the favour of Auramazda, I am king; Auramazda bestowed kingship
upon me.
§6 Darius the king proclaims: These are the countries who obey me; by the favour of Auramazda, I
was their king: Persia, Elam, Babylonia, Assyria, Arabia, Egypt, those of the sea, Lydia, Ionia, Media,
Armenia, Cappadocia, Parthia, Drangiana, Areia, Chorasmia, Bactria, Sogdiana, Gandara, Scythia
(Saca), Sattagydia, Arachosia, Maka; in all twenty-three countries.
(......................................................................................................................................................)
§9 Darius the king proclaims: Auramazda bestowed this kingship on me; Auramazda gave me his
help until I gained this kingship; by the favour of Auramazda, I possess this kingship.
§10 Darius the king proclaims: This is what was done by me after I became king: the son of Cyrus,
by name Cambyses, of our family, he was king here; this Cambyses had a brother, by name Bardiya;
he had the same mother, the same father as Cambyses; then Cambyses killed that Bardiya; when
Cambyses killed Bardiya, the people did not know that Bardiya had been killed; then, Cambyses went
to Egypt. When Cambyses had gone to Egypt, then the people became disloyal; and the Lie grew
among the people, both in Persia and Media and among the other peoples.
§11 Darius the king proclaims: Then there was a man, a magus, Gaumata by name; he rebelled in
Paishiyauvada. A mountain, by name Arakadri, from there – fourteen days of the month Viyakhna
had gone, when he rebelled. He lied thus to the people: ‘I am Bardiya, son of Cyrus, brother of
Cambyses.’ Then all the people became rebellious against Cambyses; they went over to him, both
Persia and Media, as well as the other peoples. He seized the kingship; nine days of the month
Garmapada had gone, then he seized the kingship. After that, Cambyses died his own death.
§12 Darius the king proclaims: This kingship, which Gaumata the magus took away from Cambyses,
this kingship had belonged for a long time to our family. After that, Gaumata the magus took it away
from Cambyses; he took to himself Persia, Media, as well as the other countries; he made them his
own, he became king.
Darius the magus-slayer (Behistun Inscription)
§13 Darius the king proclaims: There was no man, neither a
Persian, nor a Mede, nor anyone of our family, who could take the
kingship away from that Gaumata the magus. The people were very
much afraid of him, (thinking that) he would kill many people who
had known Bardiya previously. Here is the reason that he might
have killed people: ‘Lest they know that I am not Bardiya, son of
Cyrus.’ No one dared to say anything about Gaumata the magus,
until I came. Then I invoked Auramazda; Auramazda brought me
help. Ten days of the month Bagayadi were past, then I, with a few
men, killed that Gaumata the magus, and his foremost followers. A
fortress, by name Sikayahuvati, a district by name Nisaya, in
Media, that is where I killed him. I took the kingship away from
him; with the help of Auramazda, I became king; Auramazda
granted me the kingship.
§14 Darius the king proclaims: The kingdom which had been taken
away from our family, I re-established it, I put it back in its place.
In accordance with what had been previously, I made the cult-
centres, which Gaumata the magus destroyed. I restored to the
people, the pastures and herds, the household slaves and the
domains, which Gaumata the magus took away from them. I re-
established the people on its foundation, Persia, Media and the
other peoples. In accordance with what had been previously, I
brought back what had been taken away. By the favour of
Auramazda, this is what I did. I strove until I had restored our house
to its legitimate place, as (it was) before; with the help of
Auramazda, I strove in such a way that Gaumata the magus did not
make our house destitute.
Fredun the dragon-slayer
The heroic chase in the mountains (Behistun Inscription)
§24 Darius the king proclaims: A man called Fravartish, a Mede, rebelled in Media. He declared to the people, ‘I am
Khshathrita, of the family of Uvakhshtra.’ After that, the Median army, which was in the royal house, rebelled
against me. It went over to that Fravartish. He became king in Media.
§25 Darius the king proclaims: The Persian and Median army which was with me, was a small (force). Then I sent
out an army. A Persian called Vidarna, my subject, I made their chief. I spoke to them thus, ‘Go, smite that Median
army, which does not call itself mine.’ Then that Vidarna went with his army. When he reached Media – a town
called Maru, in Media – there he fought with the Medes. He who was chief among the Medes was not there at that
time. Auramazda helped me; by the favour of Auramazda, my army utterly defeated that rebellious army. Twenty-
seven days of the month Anamaka had gone by, then the battle was fought by them. (...)
§32 Darius the king proclaims: Then this Fravartish fled with a few horsemen. A place called Raga, in Media – he
went there. Then I sent an army in pursuit. Fravartish was seized; he was brought before me. I cut off his nose, ears
and tongue, and tore out one eye. He was held in fetters at my palace entrance; all the people saw him. After that, I
impaled him at Ecbatana; and the men who were his foremost followers, those I hanged at Ecbatana in the fortress.
§40 Darius the king proclaims: A man called Vahyazdata – a place called Tarava, a region called Yutiya, in Persia –
there he lived. He revolted in Persia for the second time. He spoke to the people thus: ‘I am Bardiya, the son of
Cyrus.’ Then the Persian army, which (was) in the palace (and had been summoned) from Anshan previously,
became rebellious to me, joined that Vahyazdata; he became king in Persia.
§41 Darius the king speaks thus: Then I sent forth the Persian and Median army which was with me. A Persian
called Artavardiya, my subject, I made their chief. The other Persian army went behind me to Media. After that,
Artavardiya went with his army to Persia. When he arrived in Persia – a place called Rakha, in Persia – there that
joined battle. Auramazda helped me; by the favour of Auramazda, my army utterly defeated that army of
Vahyazdata. Twelve days of the month Thuravahara had gone, then they fought the battle.
§42 Darius the king proclaims: After that, this Vahyazdata fled with a few horsemen; he went to Paishiyauvada.
From there, he got an army; again he marched against Artavardiya to join battle. A mountain called Parga – there
they joined battle. Auramazda helped me; by the favour of Auramazda, my army utterly defeated this army of
Vahyazdata; five days of the month Garmapada had gone by, then they fought the battle, and they took that
Vahyazdata prisoner, and they took his foremost followers prisoner.
Darius the just king, the equal of Cyrus
Inscription of Behistun The Cyrus Cylinder
§13 Darius the king proclaims: 4. a low person was put in charge of his country, but he set [a (…) counter]feit over them.
There was no man, neither a 5. He ma[de] a counterfeit of Esagil [and …] … for Ur and the rest of the cult-cities.
Persian, nor a Mede, nor anyone 6. Rites inappropriate to them, [impure] fo[od- offerings …] disrespectful […] were daily
of our family, who could take gabbled, and, intolerably,
7. he brought the daily offerings to a halt; he inter[fered with the rites and] instituted […]
the kingship away from that
within the sanctuaries. In his mind, reverential fear of Marduk, king of the gods, came to
Gaumata the magus. The people
an end.
were very much afraid of him, 8. He did yet more evil to his city every day; … his [people…], he brought ruin on them
(thinking that) he would kill all by a yoke without relief.
many people who had known 9. In response to their lament the Enlil of the gods grew very angry […] their territory.
Bardiya previously. (...) No one The gods who lived in them left their dwelling-places,
dared to say anything about 10. despite his anger (?) he brought them into Babylon. Marduk […], to all the places,
Gaumata the magus, until I whose dwelling-places were in ruins,
came. Then I invoked 11. and to the inhabitants of Sumer and Akkad, who had become like corpses, he turned
Auramazda; Auramazda brought his mind, he became merciful. He searched through all the countries, examined (them),
me help. Ten days of the month 12. he sought a just ruler to suit his heart, he took him by the hand: Cyrus, king of
Bagayadi were past, then I, with Anshan, he called, for dominion over the totality he named his name.
a few men, killed that Gaumata 13. Gutium and all the Umman-manda he made subject to him. The black-headed people,
whom he allowed his hands to overcome,
the magus, and his foremost
14. he protected in justice and righteousness. Marduk, the great lord, who cares for his
followers. A fortress, by name
people, looked with pleasure at his good deeds and his righteous heart.
Sikayahuvati, a district by name 15. He ordered him to go to Babylon, and let him take the road to Babylon. Like a friend
Nisaya, in Media, that is where I and companion he went by his side.
killed him. I took the kingship 16. His massive troops, whose number was immeasurable like the water of a river,
away from him; with the help of marched with their arms at their side.
Auramazda, I became king; 17. Without battle and fighting he let him enter his city Babylon. He saved Babylon from
Auramazda granted me the its oppression. Nabonidus, the king who did not honour him, he handed over to him.
kingship. 18. All the inhabitants of Babylon, the whole of the land of Sumer and Akkad, princes
and governors knelt before him, kissed his feet, rejoiced at his kingship; their faces
shone.
Darius the saviour, the equal of Cyrus
Inscription of Behistun The Cyrus Cylinder
§14 Darius the king proclaims: 19. ‘The lord, who through his help has brought the dead to life, who in (a time of) disaster and
The kingdom which had been oppression has benefited all’ – thus they joyfully celebrated him, honoured his name.
taken away from our family, I 20. I, Cyrus, king of the universe, mighty king, king of Babylon, king of Sumer and Akkad, king of
re-established it, I put it back in the four quarters,
21. son of Cambyses, great king, king of Anshan, grandson of Cyrus, great king, king of Anshan,
its place. In accordance with
descendant of Teispes, great king, king of Anshan,
what had been previously, I 22. eternal seed of kingship, whose reign was loved by Bel and Nabu and whose kingship they
made the cult-centres, which wanted to please their hearts – when I had entered Babylon peacefully,
Gaumata the magus destroyed. I 23. I set up, with acclamation and rejoicing, the seat of lordship in the palace of the ruler. Marduk,
restored to the people, the the great lord, […]
pastures and herds, the me the great heart, […] of Babylon, daily I cared for his worship.
24. My numerous troops marched peacefully through Babylon. I did not allow any troublemaker to
household slaves and the
arise in the whole land of Sumer and Akkad.
domains, which Gaumata the 25. The city of Babylon and all its cult-centres I maintained in well-being. The inhabitants of
magus took away from them. I Babylon, [who] against the will [of the gods …] a yoke unsuitable for them,
re-established the people on its 26. I allowed them to find rest from their exhaustion, their servitude I relieved. Marduk, the great
foundation, Persia, Media and lord, rejoiced at my [good] deeds.
the other peoples. In accordance 27. Me, Cyrus, the king, who worships him, and Cambyses, my own son, as well as all my troops
28. he blessed mercifully. In well-being we [walk] happily before him. [At his] great [command]
with what had been previously, I
all the kings, who sit on thrones,
brought back what had been 29. from all parts of the world, from the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea, who dwell [in distant
taken away. By the favour of regions], all the kings of Amurru, who dwell in tents,
Auramazda, this is what I did. I 30. brought their heavy tribute to me and kissed my feet in Babylon. From […], Ashur and Susa,
strove until I had restored our 31. Agade, Eshnunna, Zamban, Meturnu and Der as far as the territory of Gutium, the cities on the
house to its legitimate place, as other side of the Tigris, whose dwelling-places had [of o]ld fallen into ruin
32. – the gods who dwelt there I returned to their home and let them move into an eternal dwelling.
(it was) before; with the help of
All their people I collected and brought them back to their homes.
Auramazda, I strove in such a 33. And the gods of Sumer and Akkad, which Nabonidus to the fury of the lord of the gods had
way that Gaumata the magus brought into Babylon, at the order of Marduk, the great lord, in well-being
did not make our house 34. I caused them to move into a dwelling-place pleasing to their hearts in their sanctuar-ies. May
destitute. all the gods, whom I have brought into their cities,
35. ask before Bel and Nabu for the lengthening of my life, say words in my favour and speak to
Marduk, my lord.
Darius vs. the perpetrators of the Lie
§16 Darius the king proclaims: After I had killed Gaumata the magus, a man called Acina, son of Upadarma, rebelled in Elam.
To the people, he declared this: ‘I am king in Elam.’ After that, the Elamites became rebellious; they went over to that Acina;
he became king in Elam. And a man, a Babylonian, called Nidintu-Bel, son of Kin-zer, rebelled in Babylon; he lied to the
people thus: ‘I am Nebuchadnezzar, son of Nabonidus.’ Then all the Babylonian people went over to that Nidintu-Bel;
Babylonia became rebellious; he seized the kingship in Babylon.
§17 Darius the king proclaims: So then, I sent to Elam. That Acina was led to me as a prisoner; I killed him.
§18 Darius the king proclaims: After that, I went to Babylon, against that Nidintu-Bel, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar.
(...)
§22 Darius the king proclaims: A man called Martiya, son of Cincakhri – a town called Kuganaka, in Persia, was his home. He
rebelled in Elam; he declared to the people, ‘I am Imanish, king in Elam.’
§23 Darius the king proclaims: At that time, I was near Elam. Then the Elamites were afraid of me; they seized that Martiya,
who was their chief, and killed him.
§24 Darius the king proclaims: A man called Fravartish, a Mede, rebelled in Media. He declared to the people, ‘I am
Khshathrita, of the family of Uvakhshtra.’ After that, the Median army, which was in the royal house, rebelled against me. It
went over to that Fravartish. He became king in Media.
§25 Darius the king proclaims: The Persian and Median army which was with me, was a small (force). Then I sent out an
army. A Persian called Vidarna, my subject, I made their chief. I spoke to them thus, ‘Go, smite that Median army, which does
not call itself mine.’ (...)
§33 Darius the king proclaims: A man called Cicantakhma, a Sagartian, rebelled against me; he said to the people: ‘I am king
in Sagartia, of the family of Uvakhshtra.’71 Then I sent a Persian and Median army; a Mede called Takhmaspada, my subject
– I made him their chief. I spoke to them thus: ‘Go forth; the rebel army which will not call itself mine – defeat it!’ Then
Takhmaspada went off with the army; he joined battle with Cicantakhma. Auramazda helped me; by the favour of Auramazda,
my army defeated that rebel army and took Cicantakhma prisoner, brought him to me. After that I cut off his nose, ears, and
tore out one eye. He was held in fetters at my palace entrance; all the people saw him. After that, I impaled him at Arbela. (...)
§40 Darius the king proclaims: A man called Vahyazdata – a place called Tarava, a region called Yutiya, in Persia – there he
lived. He revolted in Persia for the second time. He spoke to the people thus: ‘I am Bardiya, the son of Cyrus.’ Then the
Persian army, which (was) in the palace (and had been summoned) from Anshan previously, became rebellious to me, joined
that Vahyazdata; he became king in Persia.
§41 Darius the king speaks thus: Then I sent forth the Persian and Median army which was with me. A Persian called
Artavardiya, my subject, I made their chief. The other Persian army went behind me to Media. After that, Artavardiya went
with his army to Persia. When he arrived in Persia – a place called Rakha, in Persia – there that joined battle. Auramazda
helped me; by the favour of Auramazda, my army utterly defeated that army of Vahyazdata. Twelve days of the month
Thuravahara had gone, then they fought the battle.
§42 Darius the king proclaims: After that, this Vahyazdata fled with a few horsemen; he went to Paishiyauvada. From there, he
got an army; again he marched against Artavardiya to join battle. A mountain called Parga – there they joined battle.
Auramazda helped me; by the favour of Auramazda, my army utterly defeated this army of Vahyazdata; five days of the month
Garmapada had gone by, then they fought the battle, and they took that Vahyazdata prisoner, and they took his foremost
followers prisoner.
Herodotus and the Behistun text
Darius’ accession to kingship
Herodotus 3.85-87
Δαρείῳ δὲ ἦν ἱπποκόμος ἀνὴρ σοφός, τῷ οὔνομα ἦν Οἰβάρης. πρὸς τοῦτον τὸν ἄνδρα, ἐπείτε διελύθησαν, ἔλεξε Δαρεῖος τάδε· Οἴβαρες,
ἡμῖν δέδοκται περὶ τῆς βασιληίης ποιέειν κατὰ τάδε· ὅτευ ἂν ὁ ἵππος πρῶτος φθέγξηται ἅμα τῷ ἡλίῳ ἀνιόντι αὐτῶν ἐπαναβεβηκότων,
τοῦτον ἔχειν τὴν βασιληίην. νῦν ὦν εἴ τινα ἔχεις σοφίην, μηχανῶ ὡς ἂν ἡμεῖς σχῶμεν τοῦτο τὸ γέρας καὶ μὴ ἄλλος τις. ἀμείβεται Οἰβάρης
τοισίδε· Εἰ μὲν δή, ὦ δέσποτα, ἐν τούτῳ τοί ἐστι ἢ βασιλέα εἶναι ἢ μή, θάρσει τούτου εἵνεκεν καὶ θυμὸν ἔχε ἀγαθόν, ὡς βασιλεὺς οὐδεὶς
ἄλλος πρὸ σεῦ ἔσται· τοιαῦτα ἔχω φάρμακα. λέγει Δαρεῖος· Εἰ τοίνυν τι τοιοῦτον ἔχεις σόφισμα, ὥρη μηχανᾶσθαι καὶ μὴ ἀναβάλλεσθαι,
ὡς τῆς ἐπιούσης ἡμέρης ὁ ἀγὼν ἡμῖν ἔσται. ἀκούσας ταῦτα ὁ Οἰβάρης ποιέει τοιόνδε· ὡς ἐγίνετο ἡ νύξ, τῶν θηλέων ἵππων μίαν, τὴν ὁ
Δαρείου ἵππος ἔστεργε μάλιστα, ταύτην ἀγαγὼν ἐς τὸ προάστιον κατέδησε καὶ ἐπήγαγε τὸν Δαρείου ἵππον καὶ τὰ μὲν πολλὰ περιῆγε ἀγχοῦ
τῇ ἵππῳ, ἐγχρίμπτων τῇ θηλέῃ, τέλος δὲ ἐπῆκε ὀχεῦσαι τὸν ἵππον. ἅμ᾽ ἡμέρῃ δὲ διαφωσκούσῃ οἱ ἓξ κατὰ συνεθήκαντο παρῆσαν ἐπὶ τῶν
ἵππων· διεξελαυνόντων δὲ κατὰ τὸ προάστιον, ὡς κατὰ τοῦτο τὸ χωρίον ἐγίνοντο ἵνα τῆς παροιχομένης νυκτὸς κατεδέδετο ἡ θήλεα ἵππος,
ἐνθαῦτα ὁ Δαρείου ἵππος προσδραμὼν ἐχρεμέτισε. ἅμα δὲ τῷ ἵππῳ τοῦτο ποιήσαντι ἀστραπὴ ἐξ αἰθρίης καὶ βροντὴ ἐγένετο. ἐπιγενόμενα
δὲ ταῦτα τῷ Δαρείῳ ἐτελέωσέ μιν ὥσπερ ἐκ συνθέτου τευ γενόμενα· οἱ δὲ καταθορόντες ἀπὸ τῶν ἵππων προσεκύνεον τὸν Δαρεῖον. Οἱ μὲν
δή φασι τὸν Οἰβάρεα ταῦτα μηχανήσασθαι, οἱ δὲ τοιάδε (καὶ γὰρ ἐπ᾽ ἀμφότερα λέγεται ὑπὸ Περσέων), ὡς τῆς ἵππου ταύτης τῶν ἄρθρων
ἐπιψαύσας τῇ χειρὶ ἔχοι αὐτὴν κρύψας ἐν τῇσι ἀναξυρίσι· ὡς δὲ ἅμα τῷ ἡλίῳ ἀνιόντι ἀπίεσθαι μέλλειν τοὺς ἵππους, τὸν Οἰβάρεα τοῦτον
ἐξείραντα τὴν χεῖρα πρὸς τοῦ Δαρείου ἵππου τοὺς μυκτῆρας προσενεῖκαι, τὸν δὲ αἰσθόμενον φριμάξασθαί τε καὶ χρεμετίσαι.
Now Darius had a clever groom, whose name was Oebares. When the council broke up, Darius said to him: “Oebares,
we have resolved to do as follows about the kingship: he shall be elected whose horse, after we are all mounted on our
horses in the suburb of the city, neighs first at sunrise. Now if you have any cunning, figure out how we and no one else
can win this prize.” “Master,” Oebares answered, “if this is to determine whether you become king or not, be confident
for this reason and have an easy mind, for no one else shall be king before you, such are the tricks I have.” “Then,” said
Darius, “if you have any trick such as you say, use it and don't put it off, for tomorrow is the day of decision.”
When Oebares heard that, he did as follows. At nightfall he brought one of the mares which Darius’ horse
particularly favored, and tethered her in the suburb of the city; then bringing Darius’ horse, he repeatedly led him near
the horse, bumping against the mare, and at last let the horse mount. At dawn of day the six came on horseback as they
had agreed. As they rode out through the suburb and came to the place where the mare had been tethered in the past
night, Darius’ horse trotted forward and whinnied; and as he so did there came lightning and thunder out of a clear sky.
These signs given to Darius were thought to be foreordained and made his election perfect; his companions leapt from
their horses and bowed to him.
Some say that this was Oebares’ plan; but there is another story in Persia besides this: that he rubbed this mare's
vulva with his hand, which he then kept inside his clothing until the six were about to let go their horses at sunrise,
when he took his hand out and held it to the nostrils of Darius’ horse, which at once snorted and whinnied.
Ordeal at sunrise
Justin, Epitome of Pompeius Trogus’ Philippic Histories 18.3.6-15
Ibi Persarum bellis diu varieque fatigati victores quidem fuere, sed adtritis viribus a servis suis multitudine abundantibus in digna
supplicia perpessi sunt, qui conspiratione facta omnem liberum populum cum dominis interficiunt atque ita potiti urbe lares dominorum
occupant, rem publicam invadunt, coniuges ducunt et, quod ipsi non erant, liberos procreant. Unus ex tot milibus servorum fuit, qui miti
ingenio senis domini parvulique filii eius fortuna moveretur dominosque non truci feritate, sed pia misericordiae humanitate
respiceret. Itaque cum velut occisos alienasset servisque de statu rei publicae deliberantibus placuisset regem ex corpore suo creari
eumque potissimum quasi acceptissimum diis, qui solem orientem primus vidisset, rem ad Stratonem (hoc enim ei nomen erat) dominum
occulte latentem detulit. Ab eo formatus, cum medio noctis omnes in unum campum processissent, ceteris in orientem spectantibus solus
occidentis regionem intuebatur. Id primum aliis videri furor, in occidente solis ortum quaerere. Vbi vero dies adventare coepit
editissimisque culminibus urbis oriens splendere, spectantibus aliis, ut ipsum solem aspicerent, hic primus omnibus fulgorem solis in
summo fastigio civitatis ostendit. Non servilis ingenii ratio visa; requirentibus auctorem de domino confitetur. Tunc intellectum est,
quantum ingenua servilibus ingenia praestarent, malitiaque servos, non sapientia vincere. Igitur venia seni filioque data est, et velut
numine quodam reservatos arbitrantes regem Stratonem creaverunt.
Here at Tyre, harassed for a long time, and in various ways, by attacks from the Persians, they resisted, indeed,
successfully, but, as their strength was exhausted, they suffered the most cruel treatment from their slaves, who were
then extraordinarily numerous. These traitors, having entered into a conspiracy, killed their masters and all the free
people of the city, and thus, becoming masters of the place, took possession of the houses of their owners, assumed the
government, appropriated wives to themselves, and begot, what they themselves were not, freemen. Out of so many
thousands of slaves, there was one who was moved to compassion by the mild disposition of his aged master and the
hard fortune of his little son, and looked upon them, not with savage fierceness, but with humanity, affection, and
pity. He put them out of the way, therefore, as if they had been killed; and when the slaves came to deliberate about the
condition of their government, and had resolved that a king should be elected from their own body, and that he should
be preferred, as most acceptable to the gods, who should first see the rising sun, he mentioned the matter to Strato (for
that was the name of his master), who was then in concealment. Being instructed by him, and proceeding with the rest,
about the middle of the night, to a certain plain, he alone, when they were all looking towards the east, kept his eye
directed towards the west. This at first seemed madness to the others, to look in the west for the rising sun; but when
day began to advance, and the rising luminary to shine on the highest eminences of the city, he, while all the rest were
watching to see the sun itself, was the first to point out to them the sunshine on the loftiest pinnacle of the town. This
thought seemed above the wit of a slave; and when they asked him who had put it into his head, he confessed that it
was his master. It was then seen how far the abilities of freemen surpass those of slaves, who, though they may be first
in viciousness, are not first in wisdom. The old man and his son were therefore spared; and the slaves, thinking that
they had been preserved by the interposition of some deity, made Strato king.
The court contest of the Persian grandees
Herodotus 3.80-83
Ἐπείτε δὲ κατέστη ὁ θόρυβος καὶ ἐκτὸς πέντε ἡμερέων ἐγένετο, ἐβουλεύοντο οἱ ἐπαναστάντες τοῖσι μάγοισι περὶ τῶν πάντων πρηγμάτων, καὶ
ἐλέχθησαν λόγοι ἄπιστοι μὲν ἐνίοισι Ἑλλήνων, ἐλέχθησαν δ᾽ ὦν. Ὀτάνης μὲν ἐκέλευε ἐς μέσον Πέρσῃσι καταθεῖναι τὰ πρήγματα, λέγων τάδε· Ἐμοὶ
δοκέει ἕνα μὲν ἡμέων μούναρχον μηκέτι γενέσθαι· οὔτε γὰρ ἡδὺ οὔτε ἀγαθόν. (...) πλῆθος δὲ ἄρχον πρῶτα μὲν οὔνομα πάντων κάλλιστον ἔχει,
ἰσονομίην, δεύτερα δὲ τούτων τῶν ὁ μούναρχος ποιέει οὐδέν· πάλῳ μὲν γὰρ ἀρχὰς ἄρχει, ὑπεύθυνον δὲ ἀρχὴν ἔχει, βουλεύματα δὲ πάντα ἐς τὸ κοινὸν
ἀναφέρει. τίθεμαι ὦν γνώμην μετέντας ἡμέας μουναρχίην τὸ πλῆθος ἀέξειν· ἐν γὰρ τῷ πολλῷ ἔνι τὰ πάντα. Ὀτάνης μὲν δὴ ταύτην γνώμην
ἐσέφερε, Μεγάβυξος δὲ ὀλιγαρχίῃ ἐκέλευε ἐπιτράπειν, λέγων τάδε· Τὰ μὲν Ὀτάνης εἶπε τυραννίδα παύων, λελέχθω κἀμοὶ ταῦτα, τὰ δ᾽ ἐς τὸ πλῆθος
ἄνωγε φέρειν τὸ κράτος, γνώμης τῆς ἀρίστης ἡμάρτηκε· ὁμίλου γὰρ ἀχρηίου οὐδέν ἐστι ἀξυνετώτερον οὐδὲ ὑβριστότερον. (...) δήμῳ μέν νυν, οἳ
Πέρσῃσι κακὸν νοέουσι, οὗτοι χράσθων, ἡμεῖς δὲ ἀνδρῶν τῶν ἀρίστων ἐπιλέξαντες ὁμιλίην τούτοισι περιθέωμεν τὸ κράτος· ἐν γὰρ δὴ τούτοισι καὶ
αὐτοὶ ἐνεσόμεθα, ἀρίστων δὲ ἀνδρῶν οἰκὸς ἄριστα βουλεύματα γίνεσθαι. Μεγάβυξος μὲν δὴ ταύτην γνώμην ἐσέφερε, τρίτος δὲ Δαρεῖος ἀπεδείκνυτο
γνώμην, λέγων· Ἐμοὶ δὲ τὰ μὲν εἶπε Μεγάβυξος ἐς τὸ πλῆθος ἔχοντα δοκέει ὀρθῶς λέξαι, τὰ δὲ ἐς ὀλιγαρχίην οὐκ ὀρθῶς. τριῶν γὰρ προκειμένων καὶ
πάντων τῷ λόγῳ ἀρίστων ἐόντων, δήμου τε ἀρίστου καὶ ὀλιγαρχίης καὶ μουνάρχου, πολλῷ τοῦτο προέχειν λέγω. ἀνδρὸς γὰρ ἑνὸς τοῦ ἀρίστου οὐδὲν
ἄμεινον ἂν φανείη· γνώμῃ γὰρ τοιαύτῃ χρεώμενος ἐπιτροπεύοι ἂν ἀμωμήτως τοῦ πλήθεος, σιγῷτό τε ἂν βουλεύματα ἐπὶ δυσμενέας ἄνδρας οὕτω
μάλιστα. (...) Γνῶμαι μὲν δὴ τρεῖς αὗται προεκέατο, οἱ δὲ τέσσερες τῶν ἑπτὰ ἀνδρῶν προσέθεντο ταύτῃ.
After the tumult quieted down, and five days passed, the rebels against the Magi held a council on the whole state of affairs,
at which sentiments were uttered which to some Greeks seem incredible, but there is no doubt that they were spoken.
Otanes was for turning the government over to the Persian people: “It seems to me,” he said, “that there can no longer be a
single sovereign over us, for that is not pleasant or good. (...) But the rule of the multitude has in the first place the loveliest
name of all, equality, and does in the second place none of the things that a monarch does. It determines offices by lot, and
holds power accountable, and conducts all deliberating publicly. Therefore I give my opinion that we make an end of
monarchy and exalt the multitude, for all things are possible for the majority.” Such was the judgment of Otanes: but
Megabyzus urged that they resort to an oligarchy. “I agree,” said he, “with all that Otanes says against the rule of one; but
when he tells you to give the power to the multitude, his judgment strays from the best. Nothing is more foolish and violent
than a useless mob. (...) Let those like democracy who wish ill to Persia; but let us choose a group of the best men and
invest these with the power. For we ourselves shall be among them, and among the best men it is likely that there will be the
best counsels.” Such was the judgment of Megabyzus. Darius was the third to express his opinion. “It seems to me,” he
said, “that Megabyzus speaks well concerning democracy but not concerning oligarchy. For if the three are proposed and all
are at their best for the sake of argument, the best democracy and oligarchy and monarchy, I hold that monarchy is by far
the most excellent. One could describe nothing better than the rule of the one best man; using the best judgment, he will
govern the multitude with perfect wisdom, and best conceal plans made for the defeat of enemies. (...) Having to choose
between these three options, four of the seven men preferred the last.
The court contest of Darius’ bodyguards
1 Esdras 3.1-4.42
Now King Darius gave a great banquet for all that were under him and all that were born in his house and all the nobles of Media and
Persia and all the satraps and generals and governors that were under him in the hundred and twenty-seven satrapies from India to Ethiopia.
They ate and drank, and when they were satisfied they departed; and Darius the king went to his bedroom, and went to sleep, and then
awoke. Then the three young men of the bodyguard, who kept guard over the person of the king, said to one another,“Let each of us state
what one thing is strongest; and to him whose statement seems wisest, Darius the king will give rich gifts and great honors of victory. He
shall be clothed in purple, and drink from gold cups, and sleep on a gold bed, and have a chariot with gold bridles, and a turban of fine
linen, and a necklace about his neck; and because of his wisdom he shall sit next to Darius and shall be called kinsman of Darius.”
Then each wrote his own statement, and they sealed them and put them under the pillow of Darius the king, and said, “When the king
wakes, they will give him the writing; and to the one whose statement the king and the three nobles of Persia judge to be wisest the victory
shall be given according to what is written.” The first wrote, “Wine is strongest.” The second wrote, “The king is strongest.” The third
wrote, “Women are strongest, but truth is victor over all things.” When the king awoke, they took the writing and gave it to him, and he
read it. Then he sent and summoned all the nobles of Persia and Media and the satraps and generals and governors and prefects, and he
took his seat in the council chamber, and the writing was read in their presence. And he said, “Call the young men, and they shall explain
their statements.” So they were summoned, and came in. And they said to them, “Explain to us what you have written.”
Then the first, who had spoken of the strength of wine, began and said: “Gentlemen, how is wine the strongest? It leads astray the
minds of all who drink it. (...) Gentlemen, is not wine the strongest, since it forces men to do these things?” When he had said this, he
stopped speaking.
Then the second, who had spoken of the strength of the king, began to speak: “Gentlemen, are not men strongest, who rule over land
and sea and all that is in them? But the king is stronger; he is their lord and master, and whatever he says to them they obey. If he tells them
to make war on one another, they do it; and if he sends them out against the enemy, they go, and conquer mountains, walls, and
towers. (...) Gentlemen, why is not the king the strongest, since he is to be obeyed in this fashion?” And he stopped speaking.
Then the third, that is Zerub’babel, who had spoken of women and truth, began to speak: “Gentlemen, is not the king great, and are
not men many, and is not wine strong? Who then is their master, or who is their lord? Is it not women? Women gave birth to the king and
to every people that rules over sea and land. (...) Gentlemen, why are not women strong, since they do such things?”
Then the king and the nobles looked at one another; and he began to speak about truth: “Gentlemen, are not women strong? The
earth is vast, and heaven is high, and the sun is swift in its course, for it makes the circuit of the heavens and returns to its place in one
day. Is he not great who does these things? But truth is great, and stronger than all things. The whole earth calls upon truth, and heaven
blesses her. All God’s works quake and tremble, and with him there is nothing unrighteous. Wine is unrighteous, the king is unrighteous,
women are unrighteous, all the sons of men are unrighteous, all their works are unrighteous, and all such things. There is no truth in them
and in their unrighteousness they will perish. But truth endures and is strong for ever, and lives and prevails for ever and ever. With her
there is no partiality or preference, but she does what is righteous instead of anything that is unrighteous or wicked. All men approve her
deeds, and there is nothing unrighteous in her judgment. To her belongs the strength and the kingship and the power and the majesty of all
the ages. Blessed be the God of truth!” He ceased speaking; then all the people shouted, and said, “Great is truth, and strongest of all!”
Then the king said to him, “Ask what you wish, even beyond what is written, and we will give it to you, for you have been found to
be the wisest. And you shall sit next to me, and be called my kinsman.”
The court contest in the Iranian legendarium (I)
Firdausi, Shahnameh, C. 1553-1556 (abridged transl. D. Davis)
Mercury, when the heavens cannot be measured in leagues and noone has
Bahram Gur and the Ambassador of the Emperor of Byzantium access to their depths—such a man will astonish those with understanding.
One day Bahram said to his chief priest, “That messenger the emperor of Byzantium sent What is more contemptible than someone who numbers the stars in the
has been here a long time now; what kind of a man is he, and how wise is he?” The chief heavens?”
priest answered, “May the king of the world flourish, blessed by divine glory. He is an When the emperor’s representative heard these answers, he kissed the
old man, intelligent, and humble; he’s a persuasive speaker and has a soft voice. He was ground and acknowledged defeat. He turned to Bahram and said, “You rule
a student of Plato; he’s wise, knowledgeable, and from a good family. When he came he the earth, your majesty; ask for no more than you already have from God,
was very confident, but now he seems lost in our country, withered away like a tulip in since all the world is under your command and the heads of the haughty
winter; his body has grown emaciated and his face has turned the color of dry reeds”. (...) obey your orders. The world cannot recall another king like you, and your
Bahram summoned the messenger to his court, and the old man, who had seen the priestly advisor is more knowledgeable than other wise men. Philosophers
world and was eloquent and wise, entered the audience hall. His arms were crossed over are his slaves and bow their heads before his knowledge”. Bahram’s heart lit
his chest, and his head bowed: he knelt before the throne. Bahram questioned him kindly up at these words, and he showed his pleasure. He rewarded his chief priest
and motioned him to a turquoise studded seat. (...) with gold, fine clothes, a horse, and other goods. Having demonstrated his
The old man praised the king, saying, “May time and place never be without you. wisdom, the chief priest left the court in state, and the ambassador returned
You are the most magnificent of the world’s kings. (...) I bring greetings from the to his quarters.
emperor to the king, who wishes long life to you, your crown, and your authority. He has When the sun touched the heavens the king sat on his golden throne, and
also commanded me to ask your wise men seven things”. The king said, “Say what these the ambassador and chief priest presented themselves at court again. They
seven things are: a fine speaker is highly honored”. talked happily about various matters, and then the priest said to the
He called the chief priest forward, together with other distinguished advisors, and the ambassador, “You are unique in your intelligence; tell me, what is the most
messenger revealed what the emperor had told him to say. Addressing the chief priest, he harmful thing in the world, whose actions make one weep; and what is the
said, “Guide us then: what is that thing which you call ‘within’, and then what is that most profitable, whose actions raise a man up to glory?” The ambassador
thing which you call ‘outside’, because you know no other name for it? What is ‘above’ said, “A man who is knowledgeable will always be great and powerful,
and what is ‘below’, what is ‘limitless’, and what is ‘contemptible’? What is that thing while the body of an ignorant man is more contemptible than mud and
which has many names and which rules everywhere?” suitable for nothing good. Your question refers to ignorance and knowledge,
The chief priest answered him, “Be in no hurry, and do not turn aside from the path of and you have received, I think, a just answer. It is good to talk about
knowledge. There is one answer to each of your questions; that concerning ‘within’ and knowledge. If you would put the matter differently, tell me, since knowledge
‘outside’ is a small matter. ‘Outside’ is the sky, and ‘within’ is the air, by the glory of increases honor”.
God who orders all things. That which is ‘limitless’ in the world is God, and it is evil to The priest answered, “Think, then, for speech grows beautiful from
turn from him. ‘Above’ is paradise, and hell is ‘below’; and anyone who opposes God, he thought. The less a man hurts others, the greater an evil you should consider
too is evil. That which has many names and rules everywhere is wisdom that, old man, his death to be; but it’s right to rejoice in the death of evil men, since both
has many names; it is wisdom that enables a king to fulfill his desires. Some call it the good and evil are born for death. One is profitable, the other harmful,
‘kindness’, others ‘fidelity’; when wisdom leaves, pain remains, and oppression. The and you must make your wisdom distinguish between them”.
eloquent call it ‘righteousness’, the fortunate call it ‘cleverness’. Sometimes it is called The ambassador approved of this answer; he smiled and congratulated
‘the patient one’, sometimes ‘the keeper of secrets’, since speech is safe with it. Wisdom the king, saying, “Happy the land of Iran, that has such a king and such a
has innumerable names; you know nothing that is higher than wisdom, since it is the best chief priest! It is right that you demand tribute from the emperor of
of everything that is good. Wisdom seeks out the secrets that the world contains, those Byzantium, since your advisor is a king of the world”. Bahram was pleased
hidden things our eyes cannot see. As for what is ‘contemptible’, this refers to a branch by his words, and his heart opened like a rose in springtime. The ambassador
of knowledge of the works of God. The man who sees the shining stars in the high left the court.
heavens and claims to know their number, who says he can distinguish the rays of
The court contest in the Iranian legendarium (II)
Firdausi, Shahnameh, V. 208-211 (abridged transl. D. Davis)
Zal is tested by the archmages in the court of Manuchehr they are night and day which pass over us across the heavens.
The sages sat with Zal and questioned him, to test his wisdom. One of Third, the thirty horsemen you spoke of who pass before the
them said, “There are twelve flourishing, splendid cypress trees, each prince—of whom one is lacking, and then when one counts there
of which has thirty branches.” Another said, “There are two fine, are thirty again—these signify the fact that in some months one
swiftly galloping horses, one black as a sea of pitch, the other white as night is sometimes lacking. Now I shall unsheathe the sword of
clear crystal. They struggle and strive, but neither can overtake the my speech and explain the two trees on which the bird builds its
other.” A third said, “This is a wonder: there is a group of riders who nests. From the sign of Aries to that of Libra the world lies in
pass by the prince, and sometimes there are thirty of them when you darkness until it passes into the sign of Pisces, and the two
look, sometimes twenty-nine. One is not there, and then you count cypresses are the two halves of the heavens, of which one half is
again and there are thirty.” A fourth said, “You see a beautiful meadow always withered and one fresh. The bird is the sun, which keeps
filled with green plants and threaded with streams. A man comes there, the world in hope and fear. The city in the mountains is the eternal
holding a huge scythe, and he cuts down the plants, whether they are world, and the thorny waste is the fleeting world, which gives us
fresh or dry, never swerving aside as he does so.” Another said, “There now caresses and riches, and now pain and suffering. God counts
are two cypresses rising from the ocean, and a bird has built nests your breaths and prolongs or breaks off your days; a wind arises
there. He sits on one at night and on the other during the day. When he and the earth shakes, and the world is filled with cries and
flies up from the one its leaves wither and dry, and when he sits on the lamentation. The man with the sharp scythe who cuts down both
other it exhales the scent of musk. One is always withered, the other the fresh and withered plants, and who listens to no entreaties, is
always fresh and fragrant.” Another said, “In the mountains I time the reaper and we are like the plants who are cut down,
discovered a flourishing city, but people left it, preferring a thorny grandfather and grandchild alike, since he looks at neither young
waste, where they built houses towering up to the moon; they forgot nor old but cuts down all in his path. This is the way of the world,
the flourishing city and never mentioned it. Then an earthquake came, and no man is born from his mother but to die.”
and their houses disappeared, and they longed for the city they had When Zal finished his explanation, everyone there was
left. Now, explain these sayings to us: if you can do so, you will be astonished at his understanding. Manuchehr’s heart was pleased;
turning dust to musk.” he enthusiastically applauded him and gave orders that a banquet
Zal sat deep in thought for a while; then he threw back his as splendid as the full moon be held. They drank wine until the
shoulders, breathed deeply, and answered the priests’ questions, world grew dark and their wits were befuddled: the courtiers’
saying, “First, the twelve tall trees, each of which has thirty branches, cries resounded about the court, and when they left they did so
are the twelve months of the year; twelve times the moon is renewed happy and drunk, grasping one another’s arms.
in her place, like a new king seated on his throne, and each month has
thirty days; this is how time passes. As for the two horses who gallop
swiftly as fire, the white and the black striving to overtake one another,
The campaign to Babylon (Inscription of Behistun)
§16 Darius the king proclaims: After I had killed Gaumata the magus
(...) And a man, a Babylonian, called Nidintu-Bel, son of Kin-zer,
rebelled in Babylon; he lied to the people thus: ‘I am Nebuchadnezzar,
son of Nabonidus.’ Then all the Babylonian people went over to that
Nidintu-Bel; Babylonia became rebellious; he seized the kingship in
Babylon. (...)
§18 Darius the king proclaims: After that, I went to Babylon, against
that Nidintu-Bel, who called himself Nebuchadnezzar. (...) The army of
Nidintu-Bel held the Tigris. It took its stand there, and the water was
not fordable. So I placed my army on skins; I placed one part on
camels, for others I brought horses. Auramazda gave me help; by the
favour of Auramazda, we crossed the Tigris. There I utterly defeated the
army of Nidintu-Bel: twenty-six days of the month Aciyadiya had gone.
when we fought the battle.
§19 Darius the king proclaims: After that, I went to (the city of)
Babylon. But, when I had not yet reached Babylon, a town called
Zazana, beside the Euphrates – there this Nidintu-Bel, who called
himself Nebuchadnezzar, came with an army against me to offer battle.
Then we fought a battle; Auramazda helped me; by the favour of
Auramazda, I utterly defeated the army of Nidintu-Bel. The remainder
were thrown into the water. Two days of the month Anamaka had gone,
when we fought that battle.
§20 Darius the king proclaims: Then Nidintu-Bel fled with a few
horsemen. He went to Babylon. Then I went to Babylon. By the favour
of Auramazda, I captured both Babylon and Nadintabaira. After that, I
killed that Nidintu-Bel in Babylon.
Zopyrus at Babylon
Herodotus 3.150-160
Βαβυλώνιοι ἀπέστησαν, κάρτα εὖ παρεσκευασμένοι· ἐν ὅσῳ γὰρ ὅ τε μάγος ἦρχε καὶ οἱ ἑπτὰ ἐπανέστησαν, ἐν τούτῳ παντὶ τῷ χρόνῳ καὶ τῇ
ταραχῇ ἐς τὴν πολιορκίην παρεσκευάζοντο. καί κως ταῦτα ποιεῦντες ἐλάνθανον. (...) ἑπτὰ δὲ μηνῶν καὶ ἐνιαυτοῦ διεληλυθότος ἤδη ὁ Δαρεῖός
τε ἤσχαλλε καὶ ἡ στρατιὴ πᾶσα οὐ δυνατὴ ἐοῦσα ἑλεῖν τοὺς Βαβυλωνίους. (...) ἐνθαῦτα εἰκοστῷ μηνὶ Ζωπύρῳ τῷ Μεγαβύξου τούτου ὃς τῶν
ἑπτὰ ἀνδρῶν ἐγένετο τῶν τὸν μάγον κατελόντων, τούτου τοῦ Μεγαβύξου παιδὶ Ζωπύρῳ ἐγένετο τέρας τόδε· (...) ὡς δέ οἱ ἐδόκεε μόρσιμον
εἶναι ἤδη τῇ Βαβυλῶνι ἁλίσκεσθαι, προσελθὼν Δαρείῳ ἀπεπυνθάνετο εἰ περὶ πολλοῦ κάρτα ποιέεται τὴν Βαβυλῶνα ἑλεῖν. πυθόμενος δὲ ὡς
πολλοῦ τιμῷτο, ἄλλο βουλεύεται, ὅκως αὐτός τε ἔσται ὁ ἑλὼν αὐτὴν καὶ ἑωυτοῦ τὸ ἔργον ἔσται· κάρτα γὰρ ἐν [τοῖσι] Πέρσῃσι αἱ ἀγαθουργίαι
ἐς τὸ πρόσω μεγάθεος τιμῶνται. ἄλλῳ μέν νυν οὐκ ἐφράζετο ἔργῳ δυνατὸς εἶναί μιν ὑποχειρίην ποιῆσαι, εἰ δ᾽ ἑωυτὸν λωβησάμενος
αὐτομολήσειε ἐς αὐτούς. ἐνθαῦτα ἐν ἐλαφρῷ ποιησάμενος ἑωυτὸν λωβᾶται λώβην ἀνήκεστον· ἀποταμὼν γὰρ ἑωυτοῦ τὴν ῥῖνα καὶ τὰ ὦτα καὶ
τὴν κόμην κακῶς περικείρας καὶ μαστιγώσας ἦλθε παρὰ Δαρεῖον. Δαρεῖος δὲ κάρτα βαρέως ἤνεικε ἰδὼν ἄνδρα τὸν δοκιμώτατον
λελωβημένον, ἔκ τε τοῦ θρόνου ἀναπηδήσας ἀνέβωσέ τε καὶ εἴρετό μιν ὅστις εἴη ὁ λωβησάμενος καὶ ὅ τι ποιήσαντα. ὁ δὲ εἶπε· Οὐκ ἔστι οὗτος
ἀνὴρ ὅτι μὴ σύ, τῷ ἐστὶ δύναμις τοσαύτη ἐμὲ δὴ ὧδε διαθεῖναι, οὐδέ τις ἀλλοτρίων, ὦ βασιλεῦ, τάδε ἔργασται, ἀλλ᾽ αὐτὸς ἐγὼ ἐμεωυτόν,
δεινόν τι ποιεύμενος Ἀσσυρίους Πέρσῃσι καταγελᾶν. ὁ δ᾽ ἀμείβετο· Ὦ σχετλιώτατε ἀνδρῶν, ἔργῳ τῷ αἰσχίστῳ οὔνομα τὸ κάλλιστον ἔθευ,
φὰς διὰ τοὺς πολιορκεομένους σεωυτὸν ἀνηκέστως διαθεῖναι· τί δ᾽, ὦ μάταιε, λελωβημένου σεῦ θᾶσσον οἱ πολέμιοι παραστήσονται; κῶς οὐκ
ἐξέπλωσας τῶν φρενῶν σεωυτὸν διαφθείρας; ὁ δὲ εἶπε· Εἰ μέν τοι ὑπερετίθεα τὰ ἔμελλον ποιήσειν, οὐκ ἄν με περιεῖδες· νῦν δ᾽ ἐπ᾽ ἐμεωυτοῦ
βαλόμενος ἔπρηξα. ἤδη ὦν, ἢν μὴ τῶν σῶν δεήσῃ, αἱρέομεν Βαβυλῶνα. ἐγὼ μὲν γὰρ ὡς ἔχω αὐτομολήσω ἐς τὸ τεῖχος καὶ φήσω πρὸς αὐτοὺς
ὡς ὑπὸ σεῦ τάδε πέπονθα. καὶ δοκέω πείσας σφέας ταῦτα ἔχειν οὕτω τεύξεσθαι στρατιῆς. σὺ δέ, ἀπ᾽ ἧς ἂν ἡμέρης ἐγὼ ἐσέλθω ἐς τὸ τεῖχος,
ἀπὸ ταύτης ἐς δεκάτην ἡμέρην τῆς σεωυτοῦ στρατιῆς, τῆς μηδεμία ἔσται ὤρη ἀπολλυμένης, ταύτης χιλίους τάξον κατὰ τὰς Σεμιράμιος
καλεομένας πύλας· μετὰ δὲ αὖτις ἀπὸ τῆς δεκάτης ἐς ἑβδόμην ἄλλους μοι τάξον δισχιλίους κατὰ τὰς Νινίων καλεομένας πύλας· ἀπὸ δὲ τῆς
ἑβδόμης διαλείπειν εἴκοσι ἡμέρας καὶ ἔπειτα ἄλλους κάτισον ἀγαγὼν κατὰ τὰς Χαλδαίων καλεομένας πύλας τετρακισχιλίους. ἐχόντων δὲ μήτε
οἱ πρότεροι μηδὲν τῶν ἀμυνεύντων μήτε οὗτοι, πλὴν ἐγχειριδίων· τοῦτο δὲ ἐᾶν ἔχειν. μετὰ δὲ τὴν εἰκοστὴν ἡμέρην ἰθέως τὴν μὲν ἄλλην
στρατιὴν κελεύειν πέριξ προσβάλλειν πρὸς τὸ τεῖχος, Πέρσας δέ μοι τάξον κατά τε τὰς Βηλίδας καλεομένας καὶ Κισσίας πύλας· ὡς γὰρ ἐγὼ
δοκέω, ἐμέο μεγάλα ἔργα ἀποδεξαμένου τά τε ἄλλα ἐπιτρέψονται ἐμοὶ Βαβυλώνιοι καὶ δὴ καὶ τῶν πυλέων τὰς βαλανάγρας· τὸ δὲ ἐνθεῦτεν
ἐμοί τε καὶ Πέρσῃσι μελήσει τὰ δεῖ ποιέειν. ταῦτα ἐντειλάμενος ἤιε ἐπὶ τὰς πύλας, ἐπιστρεφόμενος ὡς δῆθεν ἀληθέως αὐτόμολος. ὁρῶντες δὲ
ἀπὸ τῶν πύργων οἱ κατὰ τοῦτο τεταγμένοι κατέτρεχον κάτω καὶ ὀλίγον τι παρακλίναντες τὴν ἑτέρην πύλην εἰρώτων τίς τε εἴη καὶ ὅτευ
δεόμενος ἥκοι. ὁ δέ σφι ἠγόρευε ὡς εἴη τε Ζώπυρος καὶ αὐτομολέοι ἐς ἐκείνους. ἦγον δή μιν οἱ πυλουροί, ταῦτα ὡς ἤκουσαν, ἐπὶ τὰ κοινὰ τῶν
Βαβυλωνίων· καταστὰς δὲ ἐπ᾽ αὐτὰ κατοικτίζετο, φὰς ὑπὸ Δαρείου πεπονθέναι τὰ ἐπεπόνθεε ὑπ᾽ ἑωυτοῦ, παθεῖν δὲ ταῦτα διότι συμβουλεύσαι
οἱ ἀπανιστάναι τὴν στρατιήν, ἐπείτε δὴ οὐδεὶς πόρος ἐφαίνετο τῆς ἁλώσιος. Νῦν τε, ἔφη λέγων, ἐγὼ ὑμῖν, ὦ Βαβυλώνιοι, ἥκω μέγιστον
ἀγαθόν, Δαρείῳ δὲ καὶ τῇ στρατιῇ [καὶ Πέρσῃσι] μέγιστον κακόν· οὐ γὰρ δὴ ἐμέ γε ὧδε λωβησάμενος καταπροΐξεται· ἐπίσταμαι δ᾽ αὐτοῦ
πάσας τὰς διεξόδους τῶν βουλευμάτων. τοιαῦτα ἔλεγε. οἱ δὲ Βαβυλώνιοι ὁρῶντες ἄνδρα τῶν ἐν Πέρσῃσι δοκιμωτάτων ῥινός τε καὶ ὤτων
ἐστερημένον μάστιξί τε καὶ αἵματι ἀναπεφυρμένον, πάγχυ ἐλπίσαντες λέγειν μιν ἀληθέα καί σφι ἥκειν σύμμαχον ἐπιτράπεσθαι ἕτοιμοι ἦσαν
τῶν ἐδέετο σφέων· ἐδέετο δὲ στρατιῆς. ὁ δὲ ἐπείτε αὐτῶν τοῦτο παρέλαβε, ἐποίεε τά περ τῷ Δαρείῳ συνεθήκατο· ἐξαγαγὼν γὰρ τῇ δεκάτῃ
ἡμέρῃ τὴν στρατιὴν τῶν Βαβυλωνίων καὶ κυκλωσάμενος τοὺς χιλίους τοὺς πρώτους ἐνετείλατο Δαρείῳ τάξαι, τούτους κατεφόνευσε.
μαθόντες δέ μιν οἱ Βαβυλώνιοι τοῖσι ἔπεσι τὰ ἔργα παρεχόμενον ὅμοια, πάγχυ περιχαρέες ἐόντες πᾶν δὴ ἕτοιμοι ἦσαν ὑπηρετέειν. ὁ δὲ
διαλιπὼν ἡμέρας τὰς συγκειμένας αὖτις ἐπιλεξάμενος τῶν Βαβυλωνίων ἐξήγαγε καὶ κατεφόνευσε τῶν Δαρείου στρατιωτέων τοὺς
δισχιλίους. ἰδόντες δὲ καὶ τοῦτο τὸ ἔργον οἱ Βαβυλώνιοι πάντες Ζώπυρον εἶχον ἐν στόμασι αἰνέοντες. ὁ δὲ αὖτις διαλιπὼν τὰς συγκειμένας
ἡμέρας ἐξήγαγε ἐς τὸ προειρημένον καὶ κυκλωσάμενος κατεφόνευσε τοὺς τετρακισχιλίους. ὡς δὲ καὶ τοῦτο κατέργαστο, πάντα δὴ ἦν ἐν τοῖσι
Βαβυλωνίοισι Ζώπυρος, καὶ στρατάρχης τε οὗτός σφι καὶ τειχοφύλαξ ἀπεδέδεκτο. προσβολὴν δὲ Δαρείου κατὰ τὰ συγκείμενα ποιευμένου
πέριξ τὸ τεῖχος, ἐνθαῦτα δὴ πάντα τὸν δόλον ὁ Ζώπυρος ἐξέφαινε. οἱ μὲν γὰρ Βαβυλώνιοι ἀναβάντες ἐπὶ τὸ τεῖχος ἠμύνοντο τὴν Δαρείου
στρατιὴν προσβάλλουσαν, ὁ δὲ Ζώπυρος τάς τε Κισσίας καὶ Βηλίδας καλεομένας πύλας ἀναπετάσας ἐσῆκε τοὺς Πέρσας ἐς τὸ
τεῖχος. (...) Βαβυλὼν μέν νυν οὕτω τὸ δεύτερον αἱρέθη, Δαρεῖος δὲ ἐπείτε ἐκράτησε τῶν Βαβυλωνίων, τοῦτο μέν σφεων τὸ τεῖχος περιεῖλε καὶ
τὰς πύλας πάσας ἀπέσπασε (τὸ γὰρ πρότερον ἑλὼν Κῦρος τὴν Βαβυλῶνα ἐποίησε τούτων οὐδέτερον), τοῦτο δὲ ὁ Δαρεῖος τῶν ἀνδρῶν τοὺς
κορυφαίους μάλιστα ἐς τρισχιλίους ἀνεσκολόπισε, τοῖσι δὲ λοιποῖσι Βαβυλωνίοισι ἀπέδωκε τὴν πόλιν οἰκέειν.
Zopyrus at Babylon (transl.)
The Babylonians revolted. They had made very good preparation; for during the reign of the Magus, and the rebellion of the seven, they had
taken advantage of the time and the confusion to provision themselves against the siege; and (I cannot tell how) this went undetected. (...) A
year and seven months passed, and Darius and his whole army were bitter because they could not take Babylon. (...) But in the twentieth
month of the siege a marvellous thing befell Zopyrus, son of that Megabyzus who was one of the seven destroyers of the Magus: one of his
food-carrying mules gave birth. (...) As soon as he thought that it was Babylon’s fate to fall, he came and inquired of Darius if
taking Babylon were very important to him; and when he was assured that it was, he then cast about for a plan by which the city's fall would
be accomplished by him alone; for good service among the Persians is very much esteemed, and rewarded by high preferment. He could
think of no other way to bring the city down than to mutilate himself and then desert to the Babylonians; so, making light of it, he mutilated
himself beyond repair, and after cutting off his nose and ears and cropping his hair as a disfigurement and scourging himself, he came before
Darius.
The king reacted very violently to seeing a man so well-respected mutilated, and springing from the throne he uttered a cry and asked
Zopyrus who it was who had mutilated him and why. (...) “Unfeeling man, you give a pretty name to an ugly act if you say that it was on
account of those besieged that you did for yourself past cure. Why, you poor fool, will the enemy surrender sooner because you mutilated
yourself? How could you not have been out of your mind to disfigure yourself?” “Had I told you,” said Zopyrus, “what I intended to do, you
would not have let me; but now I have done it on my own. Now, then, if you do your part we shall take Babylon. I shall desert to the city as
I am, and I shall say to them that I suffered this at your hands; and I think that I shall persuade them, and thus gain a command. Now, on the
tenth day after I enter the city, take a thousand men from the part of your army about which you will least care if it is lost, and post them
before the gate called the gate of Semiramis; on the seventh day after that, post two thousand more before the gate called the gate of the
Ninevites; and when twenty days are past after that seventh, lead out four thousand more and post them before the Chaldean gate, as they
call it; allow neither these, nor the others that go before them, to carry any weapons except daggers; leave them these. But immediately after
the twentieth day command the rest of your army to assault the whole circuit of the walls, and post the Persians before the gate of Belus and
the gate called Cissian. For I think that once I have done conspicuous things the Babylonians will give me, among other things, the keys of
their gates; then it will depend on me and on the Persians to do what is necessary.”
Having given these instructions, he went to the gates, turning and looking back as though he were in fact a deserter. When the watch
posted on the towers saw him, they ran down, and opening half the gate a little asked him who he was and why he came; he told them that
he was Zopyrus and was deserting to them. When they heard this, the gatekeepers brought him before the general assembly of the
Babylonians, where he made a pitiful sight, saying that he had suffered at the hands of Darius what he had suffered at his own because he
had advised the king to lead his army away, since they could find no way to take the city. “Now,” he said in his speech to them, “I come as a
great boon to you, men of Babylon, and as a great bane to Darius and to his army and to the Persians; for he shall not get away with having
mutilated me so; and I know all the issues of his plans.”
When the Babylonians saw the most well-respected man in Persia without his nose and ears and all lurid with blood from the scourging,
they were quite convinced that he was telling them the truth and came as their ally, and were ready to give him all that he asked; and he
asked for a command. When he got this from them, he did exactly as he had arranged with Darius. On the tenth day he led out the
Babylonian army, surrounded and slaughtered the thousand whom he had instructed Darius to put in the field first. Seeing that he produced
works equal to his words, the Babylonians were overjoyed and ready to serve him in every way. When the agreed number of days was past,
he led out once more a chosen body of Babylonians, and slaughtered the two thousand men of Darius' army. When the Babylonians saw this
work too, the praise of Zopyrus was on everyone's lips. The agreed number of days once again passing, he led out his men to the place he
had named, where he surrounded the four thousand and slaughtered them. And when he had done this, Zopyrus was the one man
for Babylon: he was made the commander of their armies and guard of the walls.
So when Darius assaulted the whole circuit of the walls, according to the agreed plan, then Zopyrus' treason was fully revealed. For while
the townsmen were on the wall defending it against Darius' assault, he opened the gates called Cissian and Belian, and let the Persians
inside the walls. (...) Thus Babylon was taken a second time.
Novelistic stratagems: The Capture of Joppa
Egyptian papyrus, ca. 1200 BCE (transl. E. F. Wente) And he caused the two hundred baskets, which he had
Now after a time they were intoxicated, and Djehuty said had fabricated, to be brought and caused two hundred
to [the Rebel of Joppa, ‘‘I shall deliver] myself along soldiers to descend into them. And their arms were
with (my) wife and children unto… your city for filled with… ropes and manacles, and they were sealed
yourself personally. Let the gro[oms] drive in [the shut. And they were given their sandals along with
chariot horses a]nd have fodder [giv]en to them; their carrying-poles and ... and every fine soldier was
otherwise an Apir may pass by [and steal one of] them.’’ assigned to carry them, totaling five hundred men.
So the chariot horses were secured and given fodder. They were told, ‘‘As soon as you enter the city, you
And [... the great baton of] King Menkheperre, l.p.h., shall release your companions and seize hold of all
and someone came and made report to Djehuty. persons who are in the city and put them in rope-bonds
Now [when the Rebel of Jo]ppa said to Djehuty, ‘‘It is straightaway.’’
my wish to see the great baton of King Menkheperre, And someone came out to tell the charioteer of the
l.p.h. [There is a woman here] by the name of Tiutnofre. Rebel of Joppa, ‘‘Thus says your lord, ‘Go tell your
By the Ka of King Menkheperre, l.p.h., she shall be mistress, ‘‘Be of good cheer! It is to… us that Seth has
yours today [if you will be so] kind as to bring it to… delivered Djehuty along with his wife and his children.
me,’’ he acquiesced and brought the baton of King Here are the first fruits of their servitude,’’ so you…
Menkheperre, l.[p.h., concealed in] his apron. And he shall say to her regarding these two hundred baskets’,’’
stood straight up and said, ‘‘Look at me, O Rebel of which were (actually) filled with men and manacles
[Joppa! Here is] King Menkheperre, l.p.h., the fierce and ropes.
lion, Sakhmet’s son, to whom Amon has given his Then he went in advance of them in order to impart
[strength.’’ And he] lifted his hand and smote upon the the good news to his mistress saying, ‘‘We have
Rebel of Joppa’s temple so that he fell / [sprawling] captured Djehuty!’’ And the defenses of the city were
before him. And he put him in manacles [...] the leather. opened up for the arrival of the soldiers, and they
And he [said], ‘‘Let [there be brought to me] a clamp of entered the town [and] released their companions. And
copper. [We shall make a] restraint for this Rebel of they captured [the] townspeople, both young and old,
Joppa.’’ So the clamp of copper of four nemset-weight and put them in rope-bonds and manacles. So the
was attached to his feet. energetic arm of Pharaoh, l.p.h., captured the town.
Novelistic stratagems: Pañcatantra
Book 3: On War and Peace: Crows and Owls (transl. P. Olivelle) ‘My Lord, listen to this. It so happened that, after Your Honour had
caused a massacre of a sort and left, Meghavarṇa , seeing the warriors that
In a certain forest there was once a large banyan tree. It appeared to offer
had escaped the slaughter, became quite despondent and consulted with his
words of warm welcome to travellers with its cooling shade under its
ministers. To make a long story short, they were scheming to destroy you.
abundant foliage and cluster of trunks. In that tree lived a king of crows
At that point I said to Meghavarṇa : “The owls are powerful, and we are
named Meghavarṇa, the Cloud-coloured, with a retinue of a thousand crows.
weak. So, without question, submitting to them alone will guarantee our
Not too far from that tree there also lived a king of owls named Arimardana,
welfare.” (...) Saying that I was siding with the enemy, the bird then
the Crusher-of-foes, with his retinue of a thousand owls. Arimardana had
impudently reduced me to the condition you find me in.’
learned all about Meghavarṇa’s fortress from his owls. One day, driven by his
When he heard this, Arimardana took counsel with his ministers who
inborn enmity towards crows, he came at night with a large squadron of owls
had been in the service of his father. (...) Arimardana lifted Cirarṃjivin and
and attacked Meghavarṇa with a force as formidable as Death itself. After
started to carry him to his fortress. Then, to further inspire confidence,
inflicting a terrible massacre on the crows, he departed.
Cirarṃjivin said to him: ‘Your Majesty, what is the use of taking me
The next morning Meghavarṇa assembled the crows that had escaped the
along? In this condition I am good for nothing. In my present plight, life
slaughter, many with broken beaks, wings, and feet, and received a report on
itself is of little use to me. So make a fire for me and I will throw myself
the condition of the camp. Then he opened a meeting of his ministers to
into it. (...) It was on account of you, after all, that I have been reduced to
obtain their counsel. (...) Then the courtier Cirarṃjivin said:
this plight. So, by the power acquired through sacrificing my body in the
‘Your Majesty, this is what you should do. Pluck out my feathers, berate
fire, I want to take birth in the womb of an owl to take my revenge on the
me in the harshest possible words, smear me with blood from the crows that
crows.’ (...)
have already been killed, throw me down at the foot of this very banyan tree,
When Arimardana reached the entrance to his fortress, he said to his
and go to the Ṝsyamūka mountain. You should remain there with your
ministers: ‘Prepare for Cirarṃjivin whatever place he likes to occupy.’
followers until I return to you after I have accomplished what I set out to do
Cirarṃjivin made his residence at the entrance to the fortress, thinking that
by dispatching our enemies to their death using the strategy set forth in the
when the time came it would be easy to escape from there. (...)
authoritative texts. And you should not feel sorry for me in the least bit.’
Within a very short time Cirarṃjivin regained his strength and grew
After all that had been carried out and the sun had set, Arimardana
back his feathers, so that his body became as handsome as that of a
accompanied by his warriors landed on that same banyan tree. But he did not
peacock. By now he had learnt all about the strength and valour of his
see a single crow there. So he went to the top of the tree and thought: ‘Where
enemies, the weak points of and approaches to their fortress, and the like.
have those enemies of mine gone?’
(...) He set out to bring about the destruction of the owls. First he filled the
Meanwhile, who was lying on the ground unseen by them, thought: ‘If
holes at the entrances to the fortress with cow-dung and then went quickly
these enemies leave without noticing what has happened to me, then what
to Meghavarṇa. Meghavarṇa embraced him warmly and began to ask about
would I have accomplished?’ (...) After reflecting in this manner, Cirarṃjivin
everything that had happened to him. But Cirarṃjivin interrupted: 'My
uttered a very feeble cry. The owls that were close by heard it and,
Lord, this is not the time to describe what happened to me. There is no
recognizing it to be a crow’s cry, reported the matter to their lord. When he
time to lose. Each of you should take a stick and go there; 1 will come with
learned about it, Arimardana became curious. He flew down, ascertained the
the fire. Let us go quickly and bum down the residence of our enemies
facts, and said to his ministers: ‘Ask him who he is.’ The crow: ‘I am
with all of them inside .’
Cirarṃjivin.’ When he heard that, the owl king said in amazement: ‘This is
They carried out the plan to the letter. They put the sticks and the like
the foremost minister of the crow king, his most beloved! How did he end up
into the holes filled with cow-dung and set fire to them. And in one fell
in this condition?’ When he was questioned in this manner, Cirarṃjivin
swoop all their enemies were annihilated.
replied:
Smerdis, Zopyrus, and the mutilated ears motif
Herodotus 3.68-69
οὗτος ὁ Ὀτάνης πρῶτος ὑπώπτευσε τὸν μάγον ὡς οὐκ εἴη ὁ Κύρου Σμέρδις ἀλλ᾽ ὅς περ ἦν, τῇδε συμβαλόμενος, ὅτι τε οὐκ ἐξεφοίτα ἐκ τῆς ἀκροπόλιος
καὶ ὅτι οὐκ ἐκάλεε ἐς ὄψιν ἑωυτῷ οὐδένα τῶν λογίμων Περσέων. ὑποπτεύσας δέ μιν ἐποίεε τάδε· ἔσχε αὐτοῦ Καμβύσης θυγατέρα, τῇ οὔνομα ἦν
Φαιδυμίη· τὴν αὐτὴν δὴ ταύτην εἶχε τότε ὁ μάγος καὶ ταύτῃ τε συνοίκεε καὶ τῇσι ἄλλῃσι πάσῃσι τῇσι τοῦ Καμβύσεω γυναιξί. (...) τρίτην δὲ ἀγγελίην
ἐσπέμπει παρ᾽ αὐτὴν λέγουσαν ταῦτα· Ὦ θύγατερ, δεῖ σε γεγονυῖαν εὖ κίνδυνον ἀναλαβέσθαι τὸν ἂν ὁ πατὴρ ὑποδύνειν κελεύῃ· εἰ γὰρ δὴ μή ἐστι ὁ
Κύρου Σμέρδις ἀλλὰ τὸν καταδοκέω ἐγώ, οὔτοι μιν σοί τε συγκοιμώμενον καὶ τὸ Περσέων κράτος ἔχοντα δεῖ χαίροντα ἀπαλλάσσειν, ἀλλὰ δοῦναι
δίκην. νῦν ὦν ποίησον τάδε· ἐπεάν σοι συνεύδῃ καὶ μάθῃς αὐτὸν κατυπνωμένον, ἄφασον αὐτοῦ τὰ ὦτα· καὶ ἢν μὲν φαίνηται ἔχων ὦτα, νόμιζε σεωυτὴν
Σμέρδι τῷ Κύρου συνοικέειν, ἢν δὲ μὴ ἔχων, σὺ δὲ τῷ μάγῳ Σμέρδι. ἀντιπέμπει πρὸς ταῦτα ἡ Φαιδυμίη φαμένη κινδυνεύσειν μεγάλως, ἢν ποιῇ ταῦτα·
εἰ γὰρ δὴ μὴ τυγχάνει τὰ ὦτα ἔχων, ἐπίλαμπτος δὲ ἀφάσσουσα ἔσται, εὖ εἰδέναι ὡς ἀϊστώσει μιν· ὅμως μέντοι ποιήσειν ταῦτα. ἡ μὲν δὴ ὑπεδέξατο
ταῦτα τῷ πατρὶ κατεργάσεσθαι, τοῦ δὲ μάγου τούτου τοῦ Σμέρδιος Κῦρος ὁ Καμβύσεω ἄρχων τὰ ὦτα ἀπέταμε ἐπ᾽ αἰτίῃ δή τινι οὐ σμικρῇ. ἡ ὦν δὴ
Φαιδυμίη αὕτη, ἡ τοῦ Ὀτάνεω θυγάτηρ, πάντα ἐπιτελέουσα τὰ ὑπεδέξατο τῷ πατρί, ἐπείτε αὐτῆς μέρος ἐγίνετο τῆς ἀπίξιος παρὰ τὸν μάγον (ἐν
περιτροπῇ γὰρ δὴ αἱ γυναῖκες φοιτῶσι τοῖσι Πέρσῃσι), ἐλθοῦσα παρ᾽ αὐτὸν ηὗδε, ὑπνωμένου δὲ καρτερῶς τοῦ μάγου ἤφασσε τὰ ὦτα. μαθοῦσα δὲ οὐ
χαλεπῶς ἀλλ᾽ εὐπετέως οὐκ ἔχοντα τὸν ἄνδρα ὦτα, ὡς ἡμέρη τάχιστα ἐγεγόνεε, πέμψασα ἐσήμηνε τῷ πατρὶ τὰ γενόμενα.
This Otanes was the first to guess that the Magus was not Cyrus’ son Smerdis and who, in fact, he was; the reason was, that he never left
the acropolis nor summoned any notable Persian into his presence. And having formed this suspicion Otanes did as follows: Cambyses had
taken his daughter, whose name was Phaedyme; this same girl the Magus had now and he lived with her and with all Cambyses’ other
wives. (...) He sent her this third message: “Daughter, your noble birth obliges you to run any risk that your father commands you to face.
If this man is not Smerdis son of Cyrus but who I think he is, then he must not get away with sleeping with you and sitting on the throne
of Persia, but be punished. Now, then, when he lies with you and you see that he is sleeping, feel his ears; if he has ears, rest assured that
you are living with Smerdis son of Cyrus; but if he has none, it is Smerdis the Magus.” Phaedyme answered by messenger that she would
run a very great risk by so doing; for if it should turn out that he had no ears, and she were caught feeling for them, he would surely kill
her; nevertheless she would do it. So she promised to do this for her father. Cyrus son of Cambyses during his reign cut off the ears of this
Magus Smerdis for some grave reason. So Phaedyme, daughter of Otanes, performed her promise to her father. When it was her turn to go
to the Magus (for their wives go in sequence to the Persians), she came to his bed and felt for the Magus' ears while he slumbered deeply;
and having with no great difficulty assured herself that he had no ears, she sent and told this to her father as soon as it was morning.
Herodotus 3.154, 156.
ἐνθαῦτα (sc. Ζώπυρος) ἐν ἐλαφρῷ ποιησάμενος ἑωυτὸν λωβᾶται λώβην ἀνήκεστον· ἀποταμὼν γὰρ ἑωυτοῦ τὴν ῥῖνα καὶ τὰ ὦτα καὶ τὴν κόμην κακῶς
περικείρας καὶ μαστιγώσας ἦλθε παρὰ Δαρεῖον. (...) ἦγον δή μιν οἱ πυλουροί, ταῦτα ὡς ἤκουσαν, ἐπὶ τὰ κοινὰ τῶν Βαβυλωνίων· καταστὰς δὲ ἐπ᾽ αὐτὰ
κατοικτίζετο, φὰς ὑπὸ Δαρείου πεπονθέναι τὰ ἐπεπόνθεε ὑπ᾽ ἑωυτοῦ, παθεῖν δὲ ταῦτα διότι συμβουλεύσαι οἱ ἀπανιστάναι τὴν στρατιήν, ἐπείτε δὴ
οὐδεὶς πόρος ἐφαίνετο τῆς ἁλώσιος. Νῦν τε, ἔφη λέγων, ἐγὼ ὑμῖν, ὦ Βαβυλώνιοι, ἥκω μέγιστον ἀγαθόν, Δαρείῳ δὲ καὶ τῇ στρατιῇ [καὶ Πέρσῃσι]
μέγιστον κακόν· οὐ γὰρ δὴ ἐμέ γε ὧδε λωβησάμενος καταπροΐξεται· ἐπίσταμαι δ᾽ αὐτοῦ πάσας τὰς διεξόδους τῶν βουλευμάτων. οἱ δὲ Βαβυλώνιοι
ὁρῶντες ἄνδρα τῶν ἐν Πέρσῃσι δοκιμωτάτων ῥινός τε καὶ ὤτων ἐστερημένον μάστιξί τε καὶ αἵματι ἀναπεφυρμένον, πάγχυ ἐλπίσαντες λέγειν μιν
ἀληθέα καί σφι ἥκειν σύμμαχον ἐπιτράπεσθαι ἕτοιμοι ἦσαν τῶν ἐδέετο σφέων.
Zopyrus, making light of it, he mutilated himself beyond repair, and after cutting off his nose and ears and cropping his hair as a
disfigurement and scourging himself, he came before Darius. (...) When they heard this, the gatekeepers brought him before the general
assembly of the Babylonians, where he made a pitiful sight, saying that he had suffered at the hands of Darius what he had suffered at his
own because he had advised the king to lead his army away, since they could find no way to take the city. “Now,” he said in his speech to
them, “I come as a great boon to you, men of Babylon, and as a great bane to Darius and to his army and to the Persians; for he shall not
get away with having mutilated me so; and I know all the issues of his plans.” When the Babylonians saw the most well-respected man
in Persia without his nose and ears and all lurid with blood from the scourging, they were quite convinced that he was telling them the truth
and came as their ally, and were ready to give him all that he asked.
Conspiracy and murder of the false Smerdis
Herodotus 3.61
Καμβύσῃ δὲ τῷ Κύρου χρονίζοντι περὶ Αἴγυπτον καὶ παραφρονήσαντι ἐπανιστέαται ἄνδρες μάγοι δύο ἀδελφεοί, τῶν τὸν ἕτερον
κατελελοίπεε τῶν οἰκίων μελεδωνὸν ὁ Καμβύσης. οὗτος δὴ ὦν οἱ ἐπανέστη μαθών τε τὸν Σμέρδιος θάνατον ὡς κρύπτοιτο γενόμενος, καὶ
ὡς ὀλίγοι εἴησαν οἱ ἐπιστάμενοι αὐτὸν Περσέων, οἱ δὲ πολλοὶ περιεόντα μιν εἰδείησαν. πρὸς ταῦτα βουλεύσας τάδε ἐπεχείρησε τοῖσι
βασιληίοισι· ἦν οἱ ἀδελφεός, τὸν εἶπά οἱ συνεπαναστῆναι, οἰκὼς μάλιστα τὸ εἶδος Σμέρδι τῷ Κύρου, τὸν ὁ Καμβύσης, ἐόντα ἑωυτοῦ
ἀδελφεόν, ἀπέκτεινε. ἦν τε δὴ ὅμοιος εἶδος τῷ Σμέρδι καὶ δὴ καὶ οὔνομα τὠυτὸ εἶχε Σμέρδιν. τοῦτον τὸν ἄνδρα ἀναγνώσας ὁ μάγος
Πατιζείθης ὥς οἱ αὐτὸς πάντα διαπρήξει, εἷσε ἄγων ἐς τὸν βασιλήιον θρόνον. ποιήσας δὲ τοῦτο κήρυκας τῇ τε ἄλλῃ διέπεμπε καὶ δὴ καὶ ἐς
Αἴγυπτον προερέοντα τῷ στρατῷ ὡς Σμέρδιος τοῦ Κύρου ἀκουστέα εἴη τοῦ λοιποῦ ἀλλ᾽ οὐ Καμβύσεω.
Now after Cambyses, son of Cyrus, had lost his mind, while he was still in Egypt, two Magus brothers rebelled against
him. One of them had been left by Cambyses as steward of his house; this man now revolted from him, perceiving that
the death of Smerdis was kept secret, and that few knew of it, most believing him to be still alive. Therefore he plotted
to gain the royal power: he had a brother, his partner, as I said, in rebellion; this brother was in appearance very like
Cyrus' son Smerdis, whom Cambyses, his brother, had killed; nor was he like him in appearance only, but he bore the
same name too, Smerdis. Patizeithes the Magus persuaded this man that he would manage everything for him; he
brought his brother and set him on the royal throne; then he sent heralds to all parts, one of whom was to go
to Egypt and proclaim to the army that henceforth they must obey not Cambyses but Smerdis, the son of Cyrus.
Herodotus 3.72
ἀμείβεται Δαρεῖος τοῖσδε· Ὀτάνη, [ἦ] πολλά ἐστι τὰ λόγῳ μὲν οὐκ οἷά τε δηλῶσαι, ἔργῳ δέ· ἄλλα δ᾽ ἐστὶ τὰ λόγῳ μὲν οἷά τε, ἔργον δὲ
οὐδὲν ἀπ᾽ αὐτῶν λαμπρὸν γίνεται. ὑμεῖς δὲ ἴστε φυλακὰς τὰς κατεστεώσας ἐούσας οὐδὲν χαλεπὰς παρελθεῖν. τοῦτο μὲν γὰρ ἡμέων ἐόντων
τοιῶνδε οὐδεὶς ὅστις οὐ παρήσει, τὰ μέν κου καταιδεόμενος ἡμέας, τὰ δέ κου καὶ δειμαίνων· τοῦτο δὲ ἔχω αὐτὸς σκῆψιν εὐπρεπεστάτην τῇ
πάριμεν, φὰς ἄρτι τε ἥκειν ἐκ Περσέων καὶ βούλεσθαί τι ἔπος παρὰ τοῦ πατρὸς σημῆναι τῷ βασιλέϊ. ἔνθα γάρ τι δεῖ ψεῦδος λέγεσθαι,
λεγέσθω. τοῦ γὰρ αὐτοῦ γλιχόμεθα οἵ τε ψευδόμενοι καὶ οἱ τῇ ἀληθείῃ διαχρεώμενοι. οἱ μέν γε ψεύδονται τότε ἐπεάν τι μέλλωσι
τοῖσι ψεύδεσι πείσαντες κερδήσεσθαι, οἱ δ᾽ ἀληθίζονται ἵνα τι τῇ ἀληθείη ἐπισπάσωνται κέρδος καί τις μᾶλλόν σφι ἐπιτράπηται.
οὕτω οὐ ταὐτὰ ἀσκέοντες τὠυτοῦ περιεχόμεθα. εἰ δὲ μηδὲν κερδήσεσθαι μέλλοιεν, ὁμοίως ἂν ὅ τε ἀληθιζόμενος ψευδὴς εἴη καὶ ὁ
ψευδόμενος ἀληθής. ὃς ἂν μέν νυν τῶν πυλουρῶν ἑκὼν παρίῃ, αὐτῷ οἱ ἄμεινον ἐς χρόνον ἔσται· ὃς δ᾽ ἂν ἀντιβαίνειν πειρᾶται,
διαδεικνύσθω ἐνθαῦτα ἐὼν πολέμιος, καὶ ἔπειτα ὠσάμενοι ἔσω ἔργου ἐχώμεθα.
“Otanes,” answered Darius, “there are many things that cannot be described in words, but in deed; and there are other
things that can be described in words, but nothing illustrious comes of them. You know well that the guards who are set
are easy to go by. There is no one who will not allow us to pass, from respect or from fear, because of who we are; and
further, I have myself the best pretext for entering, for I shall say that I have just arrived from Persia and have a
message for the king from my father. When it is necessary to lie, lie. For we want the same thing, liars and those
who tell the truth; some lie to win credence and advantage by lies, while others tell the truth in order to obtain
some advantage by the truth and to be more trusted; thus we approach the same ends by different means. If the
hope of advantage were taken away, the truth-teller would be as ready to lie as the liar to tell the truth. Now if
any of the watchmen willingly let us pass, it will be better for him later. But if any tries to withstand us, let us note him
as an enemy, and so thrust ourselves in and begin our work.”
Iranian legend: Qaren infiltrates the castle of Salm
Firdausi, Shahnameh, V. 116-118 “I come from Tur, who bade me not
(transl. A. G. Warner & E. Warner) Stop to draw breath, and said, ‘Go to the castellan
Qaren replied: “O gracious sovereign! And say to him, Be watchful day and night,
If to the least of all his warriors Share both in weal and woe, guard well the castle,
The Shah vouchsafeth to entrust a host, Be vigilant, and if Shah Manuchihr
I will secure Salm’s only gate for combat Shall send his troops and standard ’gainst the hold
Or for retreat. For this exploit I need Assist each other, and put forth your strength;
Tur’s royal standard and his signet-ring, And may ye overthrow the enemy’.”
Then will I make a shift to seize the hold The castellan heard this and recognised
And go to-night ; but keep the matter close.” The signet-ring; they oped the castle-gates;
He chose six thousand veterans of name, He saw the seeming, but he saw no more.
Who when the sky grew ebon placed the drums (...)
Upon the elephants, and full of fight At break of day Qaren, who loved the fight,
Set forward toward the sea. Qaren resigned Set up a standard like the moon full-orbed ;
The army to Shirwi and said: “I go He shouted and made signals to Shirwi
Disguised as envoy to the castellan And his exalted chiefs. Shirwi perceiving
To show to him the signet-ring of Tur. The royal standard made toward the hold,
When I am in the castle I will raise Seized on the gate, threw in his troops and crowned
The standard, and will make the blue swords gleam. The chiefs with blood. Here was Qaren and there
Approach ye then the hold, and when I shout Shirwi, the sword above, the sea below.
Make onset and lay on.” By noon the castle’s form and castellan’s
He left the host Had vanished. Thou couldst see a cloud of smoke,
Hard by the hold while he himself advanced, But ship and castle were invisible.
And when he reached the castle told his tale, Fire blazed, wind blew, rose horsemen’s shouts and cries
Showed to the castellan Tur’s signet-ring For help. At sunset hold and plain were level,
And said: And twice six thousand of the foe were slain.
A pitchy reek rose o’er a pitchy shore
And all the surface of the waste ran gore.
Darius and Atossa in the bedroom
Herodotus 3.133-135
Ἐν χρόνῳ δὲ ὀλίγῳ μετὰ ταῦτα τάδε ἄλλα συνήνεικε γενέσθαι· Ἀτόσσῃ τῇ Κύρου μὲν θυγατρί, Δαρείου δὲ γυναικὶ ἐπὶ τοῦ μαστοῦ ἔφυ φῦμα, μετὰ δὲ
ἐκραγὲν ἐνέμετο πρόσω. ὅσον μὲν δὴ χρόνον ἦν ἔλασσον, ἡ δὲ κρύπτουσα καὶ αἰσχυνομένη ἔφραζε οὐδενί, ἐπείτε δὲ ἐν κακῷ ἦν, μετεπέμψατο τὸν
Δημοκήδεα καί οἱ ἐπέδεξε. ὁ δὲ φὰς ὑγιέα ποιήσειν ἐξορκοῖ μιν ἦ μέν οἱ ἀντυποργήσειν ἐκείνην τοῦτο τὸ ἂν αὐτῆς δεηθῇ, δεήσεσθαι δὲ οὐδενὸς τῶν
ὅσα ἐς αἰσχύνην ἐστὶ φέροντα. ὡς δὲ ἄρα μιν μετὰ ταῦτα ἰώμενος ὑγιέα ἀπέδεξε, ἐνθαῦτα δὴ διδαχθεῖσα ὑπὸ τοῦ Δημοκήδεος ἡ Ἄτοσσα προσέφερε ἐν
τῇ κοίτῃ Δαρείῳ λόγον τοιόνδε· Ὦ βασιλεῦ, ἔχων δύναμιν τοσαύτην κάτησαι, οὔτε τι ἔθνος προσκτώμενος οὔτε δύναμιν Πέρσῃσι. οἰκὸς δέ ἐστι ἄνδρα
καὶ νέον καὶ χρημάτων μεγάλων δεσπότην φαίνεσθαί τι ἀποδεικνύμενον, ἵνα καὶ Πέρσαι ἐκμάθωσι ὅτι ὑπ᾽ ἀνδρὸς ἄρχονται. ἐπ᾽ ἀμφότερα δέ τοι φέρει
ταῦτα ποιέειν, καὶ ἵνα σφέων Πέρσαι ἐπίστωνται ἄνδρα εἶναι τὸν προεστεῶτα καὶ ἵνα τρίβωνται πολέμῳ μηδὲ σχολὴν ἄγοντες ἐπιβουλεύωσί τοι. νῦν
γὰρ ἄν τι καὶ ἀποδέξαιο ἔργον, ἕως νέος εἶς ἡλικίην· αὐξομένῳ γὰρ τῷ σώματι συναύξονται καὶ αἱ φρένες, γηράσκοντι δὲ συγγηράσκουσι καὶ ἐς τὰ
πρήγματα πάντα ἀπαμβλύνονται. ἡ μὲν δὴ ταῦτα ἐκ διδαχῆς ἔλεγε, ὁ δ᾽ ἀμείβετο τοισίδε. Ὦ γύναι, πάντα ὅσα περ αὐτὸς ἐπινοέω ποιήσειν εἴρηκας· ἐγὼ
γὰρ βεβούλευμαι ζεύξας γέφυραν ἐκ τῆσδε τῆς ἠπείρου ἐς τὴν ἑτέρην ἤπειρον ἐπὶ Σκύθας στρατεύεσθαι· καὶ ταῦτα ὀλίγου χρόνου ἔσται
τελεύμενα. λέγει Ἄτοσσα τάδε· Ὅρα νυν, ἐπὶ Σκύθας μὲν τὴν πρώτην ἰέναι ἔασον· οὗτοι γάρ, ἐπεὰν σὺ βούλῃ, ἔσονταί τοι. σὺ δέ μοι ἐπὶ τὴν Ἑλλάδα
στρατεύεσθαι· ἐπιθυμέω γὰρ λόγῳ πυνθανομένη Λακαίνας τέ μοι γενέσθαι θεραπαίνας καὶ Ἀργείας καὶ Ἀττικὰς καὶ Κορινθίας. ἔχεις δὲ ἄνδρα
ἐπιτηδεότατον ἀνδρῶν πάντων δέξαι τε ἕκαστα τῆς Ἑλλάδος καὶ κατηγήσασθαι, τοῦτον ὅς σευ τὸν πόδα ἐξιήσατο. ἀμείβεται Δαρεῖος· Ὦ γύναι, ἐπεὶ
τοίνυν τοι δοκέει τῆς Ἑλλάδος ἡμέας πρῶτα ἀποπειρᾶσθαι, κατασκόπους μοι δοκέει Περσέων πρῶτον ἄμεινον εἶναι ὁμοῦ τούτῳ τῷ σὺ λέγεις πέμψαι
ἐς αὐτούς, οἳ μαθόντες καὶ ἰδόντες ἐξαγγελέουσι ἕκαστα αὐτῶν ἡμῖν· καὶ ἔπειτα ἐξεπιστάμενος ἐπ᾽ αὐτοὺς τρέψομαι. ταῦτα εἶπε καὶ ἅμα ἔπος τε καὶ
ἔργον ἐποίεε. ἐπείτε γὰρ τάχιστα ἡμέρη ἐπέλαμψε, καλέσας Περσέων ἄνδρας δοκίμους πεντεκαίδεκα ἐνετέλλετό σφι ἑπομένους Δημοκήδεϊ διεξελθεῖν
τὰ παραθαλάσσια τῆς Ἑλλάδος, ὅκως τε μὴ διαδρήσεταί σφεας ὁ Δημοκήδης, ἀλλά μιν πάντως ὀπίσω ἀπάξουσι.
A short time after this, something else occurred; there was a swelling on the breast of Atossa, the daughter of Cyrus and
wife of Darius, which broke and spread further. As long as it was small, she hid it out of shame and told no one; but
when it got bad, she sent for Democedes and showed it to him. He said he would cure her, but made her swear that she
would repay him by granting whatever he asked of her, and said that he would ask nothing shameful. And after he
treated her and did cure her, Atossa addressed Darius in their chamber as she had been instructed by Democedes:
“O King, although you have so much power you are idle, acquiring no additional people or power for the Persians.
The right thing for a man who is both young and the master of great wealth is to be seen aggrandizing himself, so that
the Persians know too that they are ruled by a man. On two counts it is in your interest to do this, both so that the
Persians know that their leader is a man, and so that they be occupied by war and not have time to plot against you. You
should show some industry now, while you are still young: for sense grows with the growing body, but grows old too
with the aging body and loses its edge for all purposes.”
She said this as instructed, but he replied with this: “Woman, what you have said is exactly what I had in mind to do.
For I have planned to make a bridge from this continent to the other continent and lead an army against the Scythians;
and this will be done in a short time.” “Look,” Atossa said, “let the Scythians go for the present; you shall have them
whenever you like; I tell you, march against Hellas. I have heard of Laconian and Argive and Attic and Corinthian
women, and would like to have them as servants. You have a man who is fitter than any other to instruct and guide you
in everything concerning Hellas: I mean the physician who healed your foot.” Darius answered, “Woman, since you
think that we should make an attempt on Greece first, it seems to me to be best that we first send Persian spies with the
man whom you mention, who shall tell us everything that they learn and observe; and then when I am fully informed I
shall rouse myself against them.” He said this, and no sooner said than did it. For the next day at dawn he summoned
fifteen prominent Persians, and instructed them to go with Democedes and sail along the coast of Hellas; telling them,
too, by all means to bring the physician back and not let him escape.
Esther and the Persian king in private moments
Book of Esther 5.1-8
On the third day Esther put on her royal robes and stood in the inner court of the king’s palace, opposite the king’s
hall. The king was sitting on his royal throne inside the palace opposite the entrance to the palace; and when the
king saw Queen Esther standing in the court, she found favor in his sight and he held out to Esther the golden
scepter that was in his hand. Then Esther approached and touched the top of the scepter. And the king said to her,
“What is it, Queen Esther? What is your request? It shall be given you, even to the half of my kingdom.” And
Esther said, “If it please the king, let the king and Haman come this day to a dinner that I have prepared for the
king.” Then said the king, “Bring Haman quickly, that we may do as Esther desires.” So the king and Haman came
to the dinner that Esther had prepared. And as they were drinking wine, the king said to Esther, “What is your
petition? It shall be granted you. And what is your request? Even to the half of my kingdom, it shall be
fulfilled.” But Esther said, “My petition and my request is: If I have found favor in the sight of the king, and if it
please the king to grant my petition and fulfil my request, let the king and Haman come tomorrow to the dinner
which I will prepare for them, and tomorrow I will do as the king has said.”
Book of Esther 7.1-8

So the king and Haman went in to feast with Queen Esther. And on the second day, as they were drinking wine,
the king again said to Esther, “What is your petition, Queen Esther? It shall be granted you. And what is your
request? Even to the half of my kingdom, it shall be fulfilled.” Then Queen Esther answered, “If I have found
favor in your sight, O king, and if it please the king, let my life be given me at my petition, and my people at my
request. For we are sold, I and my people, to be destroyed, to be slain, and to be annihilated. If we had been sold
merely as slaves, men and women, I would have held my peace; for our affliction is not to be compared with the
loss to the king.” Then King Ahasu-e′rus said to Queen Esther, “Who is he, and where is he, that would presume
to do this?” And Esther said, “A foe and enemy! This wicked Haman!” Then Haman was in terror before the king
and the queen. And the king rose from the feast in wrath and went into the palace garden; but Haman stayed to beg
his life from Queen Esther, for he saw that evil was determined against him by the king. And the king returned
from the palace garden to the place where they were drinking wine, as Haman was falling on the couch where
Esther was; and the king said, “Will he even assault the queen in my presence, in my own house?” As the words
left the mouth of the king, they covered Haman’s face.
Royal chambers scenes in Iranian myth (I)
Firdausi, Shahnameh, V. 532, 542-543, 546 Oh, why art thou so cold to me, my fair!
(transl. A. G. Warner & E. Warner)
For thou art all I long for, thou alone?’
Another day at dawn Sudaba sought This is the truth — I am constrained to tell thee : —
The Shah and said: “O ruler of the host! ’Twas he that threw the crown from my black locks,
The sun and moon have never seen thy peer, And rent the robe upon my bosom thus!”
Or any like thy son. Let all the world The Shah was troubled, asked her many questions,
Rejoice in him; so send him to thy bower And thought: “If she saith sooth, and if she hath
To see his sisters and thy favourites. No evil end in view, I must cut off
Tell him: Go visit oft thy sisters there, The head of Siyawush: that will unlock
Whose hearts are full, whose cheeks are wet, with yearning. These bonds of villainy.”
Then will we pay him worship, give him gifts, (...)
And bring the tree of service into fruit.” Then all the slaves within the palace came
The Shah replied: “Thou sayest right; thou hast In haste before Sudaba, they beheld
A hundred mothers’ love for him.” Two infants lying dead upon the salver,
(...) And cries rose o’er the palace and o’er Saturn.
She rent her robes and tore her cheeks. A cry The sound of wailing reached and woke Kaus
Rose from her bower, her clamour reached the street. Who listened trembling, asked, and heard how fortune
The palace was all hubbub; thou hadst said: Had dealt with his fair spouse. Sleepless and anxious
“’Tis Resurrection-night!” News reached the Shah, He rose at dawn, went in and saw Sudaba
Who hurried from the imperial golden throne Prostrate, the women frantic, and two babes
Toward the bower in his solicitude, In evil plight, flung on a golden salver!
And when he found Sudaba with rent cheeks, Sudaba rained the water from her eyes,
And all the palace full of babblement, And said: “Behold this bright sun — Siyawush!
He questioned every one in deep concern, I often told thee of his evil deeds,
Not knowing what that Heart of stone had done. But thou didst foolishly believe his words.”
Sudaba wailed and wept before him, tore The heart of Shah Kaus was filled with doubt,
Her hair, and told him: “Siyawush approached He went his way, remained a while in thought,
My throne. He caught me in his arms and cried: Then said : “What remedy shall I apply?
‘My soul and body brim with love for thee I must not treat the case with levity.”
Royal chambers scenes in Iranian myth (II)
Firdausi, Shahnameh, V. 152-153, 180-182
Know that the son of Sam hath striven to snare
(transl. A. G. Warner & E. Warner) Rudaba and misled her ardent heart.
It came to pass that at the dawn one day Now ’tis for us to find a remedy.
Mihrab walked stately from the audience-chamber, I have exhorted her without avail;
And going toward his women’s bower beheld Her heart I see is troubled, her face wan.”
Two Suns within the hall; one was Rudaba, Thereat Mihrab sprang up and seized his sword,
The fair of face, the other was Sindukht, His cheek grew livid and his body shook
The prudent and devoted; both were decked With rage; his heart was full, he groaned and cried:
Like garths in spring — all colour, scent, and grace. (...) “Her blood shall flow for this.” Sindukht sprang too,
Sindukht, whose smiles displayed her pearly teeth, Clasped him about the waist, and cried: “Now hear
Between her jujube lips asked of Mihrab : Thy handmaid speak one word, then do what heart
“How did thy visit prosper? May the hand And wisdom counsel thee.” He shook her off
Of ill be far from thee! What is he like And bellowed like a maddened elephant :
— Sam’s hoary son ? What is he suited for — “I should have cut her head off at her birth.
A nest or throne? Doth he behave as man, I left her grandsire’s way and let her live;
And walk in chieftains’ steps?” Mihrab replied : Now she hath wrought on me this devilry. (...)”
“Fair-faced Cypress with the silver breast! She said: “O marchlord! do not speak so wildly.
Of all the warrior- paladins of earth Sam knoweth all: be not so greatly moved.
Not one can tread his steps.” He left the Kargasars for this: all know it.”
(...) Mihrab replied : “Fair dame! deceive me not.
Mihrab, much gratified by Zal’s attentions, Could one imagine wind obeying dust?
Returning found Sindukht upon her couch I care not I so thou canst keep us scathless.
Pale and distressed; he asked her: “What hath happened? A better son-in-law than noble Zal
Speak! Wherefore are thy rosy lips thus faded?” There cannot be as all know, great and small. (...)”
She said: “I have been musing for a while She said: “Great prince! ne’er may I be enforced
About these goodly treasures and this wealth (...) To use deceit with thee; thy harm is mine;
In time our pride and glory must abate; I share thy sorrows. What I said is true
We yield them to the foe; our toil is wind; And it was on my mind. I had at first
A narrow bier is ours at last. (...) Myself the same misgiving, which is why
With this before us I know not Thou sawst me lying down absorbed in grief;
where we ever shall find rest.” But if this is to be ’tis not so strange
Mihrab replied: “Thou tellest an old tale: As to occasion this anxiety.
It is the fashion of this Wayside Inn. Sarv of Yaman pleased Faridun; prince Zal
One is abased, another flourisheth. Is not unmindful of that precedent.
(...) we cannot By mingling fire with water, air with earth
Contend against the All-just Judge.” She answered: Earth’s dark face is made bright.”
“The wise would take a very different view (...)
Of what I said. Now can I hide from thee
A secret such as this and these grave doings? (...)
Royal chambers scenes in Iranian myth (III)
Firdausi, Shahnameh, V. 198-199
(transl. A. G. Warner & E. Warner) “One must not always grieve at spending treasure.
Prepare slaves, horses, thrones, and casques to go.
When these events were bruited at Kabul We yet may save our country from the flames
Mihrab in fury called Sindukht and vented To shine though faded now.”
His rage against Rudaba on his wife.
He said: “The only course for me, since I
Must yield before the monarch of the world,
Is to take thee with thy polluted child
And slay you shamefully and publicly.
Thereat perchance the Shah will be appeased
And earth grow peaceful. Who within Kabul
Would dare to strive with Sam or feel his mace?”
Sindukht sank down before him and considered.
Then having hit on an expedient,
For she was shrewd and subtle, came before
The sunlike king with folded arms and said:
“Hear but one word from me, then do thy will.
If thou hast wealth to purchase life bestow it,
And know thou that this night is big with fate.
Yet though night seemeth long ’twill pass, and earth
Be like a signet-ring of Badakhshan.”
Mihrab replied: “No old wives’ tales to warriors!
Say what thou know’st and use all means for life,
Or else array thee in the robe of blood.”
She said: “There is no need of that, great king!
But I must go to Sam to draw this sword
And to appeal to him in fitting terms,
For wisdom is the cook when speech is raw.
To labour for our lives is my part, thine
To find the presents and entrust to me
Thy hoarded wealth.” “Here is the key,” he said,
Behistun and Herodotus: the narrative of lies

Darius' 'Thousand and One Nights'- Royal politics as fairytale in Herodotus' third book

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Darius' 'Thousand and One Nights'- Royal politics as fairytale in Herodotus' third book

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Darius' 'Thousand and One Nights'- Royal politics as fairytale in Herodotus' third book

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Ioannis M.

1. Darius’ inscription at Behistun: heroic propaganda

2. Herodotus’ novelisation of Behistun

2.1. The horse neighing at sunrise

2.2. A court contest for the best regime

2.3. Zopyrus and the revolt of Babylon

2.4. The two usurpers, and how to get to them

2.5. Darius and Atossa in bed

3. Conclusion: Undermining Darius’ propaganda

Darius’ “Thousand and One Nights”:

Book of Esther 7.1-8

You might also like