Artaxerxes I, the Merciful and Long-Armed

30
Artaxerxes I, the Merciful and Long-Armed
A. P. Ryabushkin. "Esther before Artaxerxes", 1887.


Artaxerxes I (Artaxerxes - "Possessor of the righteous kingdom"), the fifth Persian king of the Achaemenid Empire, and also the pharaoh of Egypt, was honored with flattering reviews from authors of other nations. Plutarch, for example, wrote about him:



"Artaxerxes I, who surpassed all who reigned in Persia in mercy and greatness of spirit, bore the nickname Long-handed, because his right hand was longer than his left."

It should be noted that some consider the nickname Macrocheir - "Long-armed" or "Long-armed" - to be symbolic, meaning "he who has extended his power far."

Let us return to Plutarch, who in his Moralia asserts that Artaxerxes himself said:

"The business of a king is not to take, but to give."

And here is the opinion of Diodorus Siculus:

"Artaxerxes put the affairs of the kingdom in order... he dismissed those who were hostile to him, and from his friends he chose those who were competent and gave them satrapies. In addition, he took care of both the revenue and the training of the armed forces, and since on the whole his administration of the whole kingdom was gentle, he enjoyed the highest honor among the Persians."

Moreover, it is most likely this king, under the name of Artaxerxes, who appears as a positive hero of the Old Testament. Around 458 BCE, a group of Jews were allowed to return to Judea, and Ezra, "a priest, a scribe, who taught the words of the commandments of the Lord and the laws," was entrusted with governing them "according to the law of God." The king freed the Jerusalem Jewish community from taxes and even helped rebuild the Temple.

Since the inhabitants of Samaria were hostile to the returning Jews, Judea was separated from this province into a separate region, Yehud. Then the king's former cupbearer Nehemiah became the king's viceroy in Jerusalem, and he managed to obtain permission to rebuild the city's walls. However, this decision was later reversed, and the construction of the walls was resumed only in 422 BCE.

However, it should be noted that such an authoritative author as Josephus Flavius ​​attributed the activities of Nehemiah and Ezra to the period of the reign of Xerxes I, the father of the hero of the article.

Many also associate the biblical story with Artaxerxes I. history about the relative and adopted daughter of the Jew Mordecai, Esther. At first, Esther was a simple concubine of the king, but then she became his legal wife and saved her fellow tribesmen, who, on the slander of a certain Haman, were sentenced to complete extermination (in honor of the deliverance from executions, the Jews still celebrate the holiday of Purim).


Gustave Doré. Esther Accuses Haman Before Ahasuerus

In Jewish tradition, Esther is called the mother of the Persian king Darius II, which is unlikely, since many researchers generally consider this story to be just a parable. However, the plot was popular, and Artaxerxes and Esther became the heroes of many paintings, one of which (by A. P. Ryabushkin) you saw at the beginning of the article.

Artaxerxes became the hero of a number of literary works, including Jean Racine's tragedy Esther, written in 1689. And in the XNUMXth century, several feature films were made based on this story.

Now let's return to historical sources.

Origin and circumstances of coming to power


So, Artaxerxes I was the youngest son of the Persian king Xerxes I, and his mother Amestris was the daughter of his grandfather Darius I's sister. It is claimed that Artaxerxes was later greatly influenced by his mother, as well as his sister Amytis.

The exact date of birth of the hero of the article is unknown, but it is believed that it happened during the reign of Darius I.

In 465 BC, Xerxes died during a palace coup led by the commander of the royal bodyguards, Artabanus, and the eunuch Aspamitras. Xerxes' eldest son, Darius, was also killed. The circumstances of the palace coup are described differently.

Ctesias of Cnidus, Justin and Diodorus Siculus report that Artabanus, having killed Xerxes, blamed the king Darius for the death of this king and persuaded the hero of the article to avenge his father's death. Aristotle believed that Artabanus first killed Darius and only then Xerxes. He planned to ascend the throne himself, but the commander Megabyzus, who was married to Artaxerxes' sister, prevented him from dealing with the hero of the article. Artabanus was killed, his sons were executed, and the eunuch Aspamitra died during torture.

Artaxerxes apparently ascended the throne while still a teenager, and they say that he brought Themistocles, the main hero of the famous battle of Salamis, who was expelled from Athens and sentenced to death there, close to him.


Themistocles before Artaxerxes, engraving from 1614.

A reward of 200 talents was set for the head of this strategist, which was given to... Themistocles (!), who voluntarily came to the king. And then he received control over several cities in Asia Minor. They say that young Artaxerxes often conversed with Themistocles, who gave him advice and told him a lot about Athens and other cities of Hellas.

Rebellions and mutinies


Artaxerxes began his reign at a rather turbulent time for the country: the war with Hellas had not yet ended, and palace coups led to a temporary weakening of the central government and rebellions in the provinces. In 464 or 462 BC, the satrap of Bactria rebelled, whom Diodorus Siculus calls the brother of the new king Gitaspes (Persian name - Vishtaspa), and Ctesias of Cnidus - "another Artapan". His army was defeated in two battles, the rebel was killed.

Much more serious was the rebellion in Egypt, which was led by the noble Libyan Inarus (Inarus II), a descendant of the 460th dynasty of Egyptian rulers. It began in XNUMX BC in the lands of the Egyptian delta and spread up the valley of this river. Another center of the rebellion appeared, led by Amyrtaeus I, the ruler of the XNUMXth Lower Egyptian nome with its center in the city of Sais. However, the capital of Egypt, Memphis, and the lands of Upper Egypt were controlled by the Persians.

In the great battle of Papremis, the rebels routed the army of the Egyptian satrap Achaemenes (Artaxerxes' uncle), who died in battle. In 459 BC, 200 ships from Athens and the allied cities of Hellas arrived to help the rebels. Along the way, this squadron plundered the island of Cyprus. Then the allies destroyed the Persian fleet, operating on the Nile River, and attacked Memphis. The siege of the city's "White Walls" fortress lasted almost a year and ended in success, although it cost the Greeks great losses.

Meanwhile, in 456 BC, the army of the Syrian satrap Megabyzus arrived in Egypt, supported by Phoenician ships. The Egyptians and Greeks suffered a crushing defeat, and the remnants of their troops retreated north, taking refuge in the Western Nile Delta on the island of Prosopitida. Here they were surrounded, but held out for another year and a half – until in 454 BC the Persians built a dam, through which they broke through to the island.

The losses of the Egyptians and Greeks were enormous, only a few (including Inar) surrendered in exchange for a promise of life. Nevertheless, the leader of the rebellion was executed in Susa. And then in one of the branches of the Eastern Delta of the Nile, the newly arrived Greek squadron (60 ships) was defeated, the commanders of which did not know that the main forces of the rebels had already been routed.

The new satrap of Egypt was Arshama (Sarsames, according to Ctesias of Cnidus), who may have been one of the grandsons of Darius I. But in the western part of the Nile Delta, Amyrtaeus's troops were still hiding. The fate of this leader of the rebellion is unknown, but Herodotus claims that, in the end, the Persians came to an agreement with his sons Fanniros (Tanniros) and Pausiris about preserving Libya and the territory of the Nile Delta for them, on condition of recognizing the power of the Persian satrap. Pausiris's son Amyrtaeus II then became the pharaoh of Egypt (the only representative of the XXVIII dynasty) and ruled for 6 years.

Finally, around 450 BC, the satrap Megabyzus, who had previously rendered many services to his wife's brother Artaxerxes, rebelled. He managed to win two battles, but when the Athenians tried to seize Cyprus, he nevertheless preferred to come to an agreement with the king - on very favorable terms for himself. And in 445 BC, Megabyzus' son Zopyrus fled from Artaxerxes to Athens, and died in one of the wars, fighting in the army of this city.

War with Greece


Artaxerxes' father also left behind an unfinished war with the cities of Hellas, in which the Athenians, as you remember, provided assistance to the rebellious Egypt. This war began in 480 BC, when the army of Xerxes I invaded Hellas. It was during that campaign that the Spartan king Leonidas died in the Thermopylae Gorge, the Greek fleet defeated the Persian fleet in the battle near the island of Salamis, and the allied army of the cities of Hellas defeated the army of Xerxes' cousin, Mardonius, in the battle of Plataea. The Persians suffered these defeats outside their own country, but they seriously damaged their reputation.

Artaxerxes was lucky in that the Spartans and their allies had already lost interest in this war, moreover, they were already openly hostile to Athens and the Delian Maritime Union created by this city. However, the Athenians at that time had a very good commander - Cimon, the son of Miltiades the Younger (the hero of the famous Battle of Marathon).

In 469 (according to other sources - in 466) BC, the Persians decided to go on the offensive. A large army was assembled, which was transported to the territory of Asia Minor - to Pamphylia. Here, near the mouth of the Eurymedon River (now called Köprüçay), Kimon managed to defeat the Persians in three battles in one day - two sea and one land battle.

It should be noted, by the way, that this river is known to many tourists: it is located between the Turkish cities of Antalya and Side, and now rafting excursions are conducted on it.

By the way, in 190 BC, another major battle took place at sea near the mouth of this river: the Rhodes fleet defeated the squadron of the Seleucid king Antiochus III, which was led by Hannibal Barca, who had been expelled from Carthage by the Romans. But we will continue the story about the era of the Greco-Persian wars of the XNUMXth century BC.

So, having received news that Egyptian ships with a large number of troops on board had anchored at the mouth of the Eurymedon River, Cimon set out to sea at the head of an allied fleet of 200 Athenian and 100 Ionian warships. His attack was unexpected for the Persians: many members of the Persian ships' crews were on the shore and did not even have time to arrive at their ships. The Greeks captured 200 triremes, and then, having landed on the shore, defeated the Persian land army.

But this was not the end, because just at this time the Phoenician squadron of 80 ships allied with the Persians arrived - a new naval battle began, ending with the victory of the fleet of Cimon. These victories shook the entire ancient world, and Plutarch wrote with full justification that Cimon in one day eclipsed the glory of the victories of Themistocles at Salamis and Pausanias at Plataea.


Markus Leupold-Löwenthal. Kimon, bust. Larnaca

After such a defeat, the Persians simply had no choice: they were forced to enter into negotiations, for which a delegation headed by Callias, the husband of Cimon's half-sister Elpinice (and the former wife of this commander - in Greece, marriage between half-brothers and sisters was allowed), arrived in Susa. A temporary agreement was concluded, which was called the Peace of Cimon.

The war continued in 460 BC after Athens and the Delian Maritime League came to the aid of the rebellious Egyptians – we have already discussed this in the previous chapter. This round went to the Persians.

In 449 BC, Cimon led a new squadron of Athens and the Delian League (200 ships). It went to Cyprus, where Cimon decided to attack the main stronghold of the Phoenicians allied with the Persians – the city of Kition. Here, during the siege, he died of some disease, ordering that his death be concealed.

Against the backdrop of the enemy attack on Cyprus, the rebellious Megabyzus decided to make peace with Artaxerxes and began to prepare an army for war with Cimon. The new Persian fleet was preparing to go to sea to fight the Greeks. Having ended the siege of Kition, the allies left Cyprus. On the way home, confident that they were led by the invincible Cimon, they routed both the Persian squadron (capturing 100 ships) and the enemy land army (near the city of Salamis).

The ancient Greek historian Phanodemus later wrote about this that the Athenians returned safely to their city "under the command of Cimon, who had died thirty days before."

The war had reached a stalemate, and neither side had the strength to inflict a decisive defeat on the other. The Persians were once again the first to initiate peace negotiations, and Kimon's son-in-law Callias set out for Susa again.

The result was the signing of a treaty in 449 BC, which is often called the Peace of Callias. Persia no longer had the right to send ships to the Propontis and the Aegean Sea or to keep troops closer than a day's horse ride from the western coast of Asia Minor. Athens, in turn, agreed to leave Cyprus and promised not to provide assistance to the rebels of Egypt. The western cities of Asia Minor remained part of the Delian League, but were recognized as subjects of the Persian king, and the Athenians had to withdraw their garrisons from them.

Change of strategy


Military defeats forced Artaxerxes to change his policy and use not armies and squadrons of warships, but gold coins, which were used to bribe the politicians of the Greek cities. And this immediately produced results, especially since the Greeks themselves were not against fighting each other for free.

The tragic events of 465 BC became the reason for the next cooling of relations between Athens and Sparta: a terrible earthquake almost destroyed Sparta, many citizens died, and to this misfortune was added the uprising of the helots in Messenia, which was suppressed only 10 years later.

The authorities of Lacedaemon turned to Athens for help – and found support from Cimon, who convinced his fellow citizens of the need to help the Spartans. But the arriving Athenians were suddenly suspected of sympathizing with the rebellious helots and were required to leave Lacedaemon. In Athens, this was considered an insult, Sparta's enemies came to power, and Cimon, a friend of this polis, was expelled from the city.

Pericles came to power in Athens, and in 459 BC he began the Little Peloponnesian War with Sparta and its allied Greek cities. After the defeat at the Battle of Tanagra, Pericles himself proposed the return of his opponent Cimon to Athens (this was probably the wisest decision of Pericles in his entire life).

The Little Peloponnesian War was only a prelude to a major war that lasted 27 years – from 431 to 404 BC. It brought together two unions of Greek city-states – the Peloponnesian, created by Sparta, and the Delian naval one, led by Athens.


Peloponnesian and Delian alliances

Thucydides, who described the Peloponnesian War, compared it to the Trojan War, calling it much more difficult and bloody. And Persia now alternately helped Athens and Sparta. The successors of Artaxerxes I did the same.

During the reign of the grandson of the hero of the article, the Spartan king Agesilaus, having defeated the Persians near the city of Sardis, complained that Artaxerxes II “expels him with the help of an army of 30 thousand archers”: he was referring to the Persian coins – darics, with which the “demagogues” (“leaders of the people”) of Athens, Thebes, Corinth, Argos and some city-states of the Aegean islands were bribed.


Persian daric depicting an archer

This time, the Corinthian War began in Hellas, in which one of the best Spartan commanders, Lysander, the teacher and educator of Agesilaus, died.

The end of the life of Artaxerxes I


Diodorus Siculus believes that the reign of Artaxerxes I lasted 40 years, Eusebius of Caesarea believes that Artaxerxes I ruled for 41 years, and Ctesias of Cnidus speaks of 42 years. In any case, the period is more than respectable. Historians agree that, despite wars and rebellions, the Achaemenid state under Artaxerxes remained rich, strong and authoritative for its neighbors.

Artaxerxes I died in March 424 BC, and, as they say, on the same day as his wife Damaspe. According to some researchers, this may indicate that they were poisoned. He was buried near Persepolis - in Naqsh-e Rustam.


Tomb of Artaxerxes I in Naqsh-e Rustam


Artaxerxes I. Depiction on the tomb in Naqsh-e Rustam
30 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. -11
    21 September 2024 05: 22
    Oh, these IzToRii, oh, these IzToRii... winked
  2. +5
    21 September 2024 05: 51
    Thanks to the author for an interesting essay, biblical and historical context, generosity of illustrations Russian Russian! High bar: 5+
  3. +4
    21 September 2024 07: 03
    Persia now alternately helped Athens and Sparta. The successors of Artaxerxes I did the same.

    The wisest policy towards opponents.
  4. -6
    21 September 2024 07: 04
    Apart from traces of existence, nothing fruitful remains after despotism. This is the conclusion that can be drawn from this sandbox.
  5. -1
    21 September 2024 08: 30
    change their policy and use not armies and squadrons of warships, but gold coins, which were used to bribe the politicians of the Greek cities.

    This is a wise policy. Drawing parallels with our days - it would have been a thousand times cheaper to buy up the entire Kiev elite at the root in time than SVO. And there were people to buy up. Yulia Tymoshenko was swooning over Putin and signed a fantastically profitable gas agreement for Russia, because of which the supposedly pro-Russian Yankukovych imprisoned her. And Yulia would not have fled Kyiv, but without hesitation would have crushed the Maidan with tanks, which would have been the end of the Bande movement in Ukraine.
    1. -1
      21 September 2024 10: 22
      Quote: vet
      it was a thousand times cheaper than SVO to buy up the entire Kyiv elite in time

      When the SVO began, they thought that buying a Skaklyak top would be more expensive. They hoped for a quick sabre march and getting into history...
      1. +2
        21 September 2024 12: 14
        Quote: Luminman
        When the SVO began, they thought that buying a Skaklyak top would be more expensive. They hoped for a quick sabre march and getting into history...

        Who thought so?
        And how do you imagine outbidding the Ukrainian elite technically? Offering a Sberbank account instead of an account in a Swiss bank? An apartment on the Garden Ring instead of an apartment in the City? And a cottage in Sochi instead of a villa on the Cote d'Azur? Would they really have been outbidding? laughing
        1. 0
          21 September 2024 14: 43
          And how do you imagine the technical purchase of the Ukrainian elite?
          You understand all this somehow shallowly! wink
          1. +1
            21 September 2024 15: 58
            Quote: Dutchman Michel
            You understand all this somehow shallowly!

            Why flat? All financial roads lead to the Kula, as you know! And if we buy them and these funds are stored in world financial centers, then the Owners of these Centers will simply confiscate them - and accounts, and real estate, and everything else! We would have bribed them so that they would work in our interests, that is, against the interests of the West? And how will the West tolerate this? They will confiscate everything! And for this to happen, there is only one option described by me above - Sberbank \ apartment_in_Moscow \ house_in_Sochi! And does the Ukrainian elite need it?
            1. 0
              21 September 2024 18: 22
              Quote from: AllX_VahhaB
              And if we buy them and these funds are stored in the world's financial centers
              The elite is bought a little differently. Do you know how the British or the French do it? They educate their children in their best universities, feed them with real estate, and guarantee their power. Look, they are already tame. And no need for any SVO wink
              1. +2
                21 September 2024 19: 01
                They educate their children in their best universities,
                And then Jawaharlal Nehru comes along and breaks this trend!
                1. 0
                  22 September 2024 05: 48
                  Quote: 3x3zsave
                  And then Jawaharlal Nehru comes along and breaks this trend!
                  Well, there are exceptions to every rule. And the Indian elite, however, albeit weakly, is still tied to Britain and is even a member of the Commonwealth of Nations, headed by the current King Charles III. And this Commonwealth is much more tangible than the incomprehensible CIS. So there are instruments of pressure on the former colonies
              2. 0
                22 September 2024 06: 52
                Quote: Dutchman Michel
                They educate their children in their best universities and feed them with real estate.

                Well, what was I talking about? Moscow State University instead of Harvard, Garden Ring instead of City... And where do they keep their money?
            2. 0
              22 September 2024 07: 32
              Quote from: AllX_VahhaB
              And if we buy them and these funds are stored in the world's financial centers

              If we buy them, then the protoplasm we buy will be stored in Kyiv, on Bankova Street, and will do what the owners tell them to do. That's how world politics works...
    2. -5
      21 September 2024 12: 10
      Quote: vet
      It would have been a thousand times cheaper than SVO to buy up the entire Kyiv elite in time.

      There are two nuances here...
      1. In order to buy up, or rather to buy out, you need to have more money than those who issue this money! And this is an oxymoron wassat
      2. And who was supposed to buy it? Our top brass, which itself was bought by those who bought the Ukrainian one? request
      1. +1
        21 September 2024 14: 30
        "Our top brass" actually, we are talking about the Persians, but you can't live without Moscow and Kyiv?
    3. +4
      21 September 2024 13: 26
      buy up the entire Kyiv elite in time

      Yes, we have bought it and more than once, it’s just that our neighbors like to take the money first and then throw it away request
  6. 0
    21 September 2024 09: 27
    By the way, I always treated the Old Testament as a collection of legends and myths. But it turns out that there are serious historical links, it is very interesting.
    1. 0
      21 September 2024 15: 57
      So, at the basis of any myth there are usually real events, just greatly embellished for the sake of spectacle. Troy, Gilgamesh-Bilgamesh, various versions of the flood (the Jews stole it from the Sumerians, most likely), Atlantis, there is no end to them.
  7. -1
    21 September 2024 11: 50
    The king exempted the Jerusalem Jewish community from taxes
    Well, why the hell?! For what merits?
    1. +1
      21 September 2024 16: 01
      It's written that his Jewish wife contributed smile
  8. -2
    21 September 2024 13: 42
    Quote from: AllX_VahhaB
    And who was supposed to buy it? Our top brass, who were themselves bought by those who bought the Ukrainian ones?


    The latter is just nonsense. Why would the master want to conflict with those he bought?
    Sanctions, proxy war... why the hell?
    The current confrontation between the Russian Federation and the West is clearly not a fight between Nanai boys; it is quite serious.
    1. +1
      21 September 2024 16: 06
      Quote: Illanatol
      The latter is just nonsense. Why would the master want to conflict with those he bought?
      Sanctions, proxy war... why the hell?
      The current confrontation between the Russian Federation and the West is clearly not a fight between Nanai boys; it is quite serious.

      Of course it is serious! Our Capital wants to go from being peripheral to being one of the center! And for the sake of the interests of Capital, no lives of citizens are spared! So it is VERY serious!
      And the fact that our elites were bought, no one questions it! For whose benefit was the country plundered? Where was the capital taken? Where was the money stored, which is now swept aside? And what are Kudrin and Gref doing now? Are they sitting, or not? And Chubais?
  9. +1
    21 September 2024 14: 24
    Valeria, I recognize you by this detail: if the material is smart and there is no epigraph - you!
  10. -2
    21 September 2024 22: 23
    It is much more interesting to understand who the Achaemenids are. They could have come from the Sakas, Cimmerians, Scythians, Kassites, Hyksos, Arameans.
    And in those times Assyria had a great influence on countries and peoples.
    The article does not mention wars involving Assyria at all.
    The Assyrians kept a census of prisoners in the tens of thousands, this is documented. And the fact that the Persians killed in the millions is fantasy.
  11. +1
    22 September 2024 07: 53
    Quote from: AllX_VahhaB
    Of course it is serious! Our Capital wants to go from being peripheral to being one of the center! And for the sake of the interests of Capital, no lives of citizens are spared! So it is VERY serious!
    And the fact that our elites were bought, no one questions it! For whose benefit was the country plundered? Where was the capital taken? Where was the money stored, which is now swept aside? And what are Kudrin and Gref doing now? Are they sitting, or not? And Chubais?


    And how can SVO "our Capital" become a center thanks to SVO? If you want to join the club of the chosen ones, starting a fight with its members is clearly not the best way.
    In their favor, first of all. Yes, at first our home-grown bourgeoisie shared with partners. But then they finally realized that there was no need to share, they could keep most of it for themselves and saw up resources independently, if they strengthened the army and saved their "nuclear loaves". That's how "sovereign democracy" appeared.
    The story is not new; a similar scenario occurred in the North American colonies during the time of King George.
    But if the States, having ceased to be colonies, really became a capitalist metropolis, then our scenario will be different... however, there is no real capitalism left anywhere, something new is coming.
    The main money is still at the base, inside the country. What was kept in foreign banks is in fact only a small part. Get it into your head: money is not generally kept, it should be spinning and working, bringing in profit. The whole country is like a big JSC.

    Kudrin, Gref and Chubais are no longer involved, they were driven away from the trough. They may not be sitting, but they are no longer sawing off the budget.
  12. +2
    23 September 2024 09: 26
    Quote from DiViZ
    It is much more interesting to understand who the Achaemenids are. They could have come from the Sakas, Cimmerians, Scythians, Kassites, Hyksos, Arameans.
    And in those times Assyria had a great influence on countries and peoples.
    The article does not mention wars involving Assyria at all.


    What times were those? Nineveh had already been destroyed. The Babylonian, Medes, and Urartian armies left no stone unturned in the "Lions' Den".
    The founder, one must assume, should be considered Cyrus the Great. Well, he was a Persian. That the Persians (then tributaries of the Medes) were relatives of the Scythians is quite probable.
    So by that time both Assyria and Babylon were no longer important. Although, perhaps, Babylon, destroyed by Cyrus, was still rebuilt.
    1. 0
      23 September 2024 14: 48
      And I was there too, honey, drinking beer and it was running down my mustache.
      Or maybe not Babylon, but Babilim or maybe KÁ.DINGIR.RAKI. It's called whatever you like by anyone
      1. 0
        24 September 2024 21: 51
        The Achaemenids were from a branch of the rulers of Mittaniya.
        Because their coats of arms are the same and the Indo-Aryans reached Syria and founded the city of Palmyra
  13. +2
    25 September 2024 00: 07
    An article about Persians. Very interesting. Thanks to the author.
    But what does SVO have to do with it? Is there nothing else to talk about?