Древна Персия: Кратка история на Ахеменидската империя, 550 - 330 г. пр. Хр.

by Matt Waters

„Безценен нов източник за студентите, които изучават класическия свят и историята на Близкия изток! Ненадмината в своя ясен и стегнат език, „Древна Персия” се базира на богат текстов, визуален и археологически материал, за да обрисува разбираемо системите, местата и хората, изградили Персийската империя. Този концентриран в своето съдържание и майсторски поднесен труд е задължителен както за специалистите, така и за изкушените от историята читатели.“
Елспет Дюсинбер, Колорадски университет, Боулдьр

„Атрактивно написана, кратка и безпристрастна, тази компактна книга запълва една видима празнина в достъпната ни литература. Тя ще бъде приета с горещо одобрение и от студенти, и от други читатели, които искат да се запознаят с един ключов период от историята на древен Иран.“
Дейвид Стронах, Калифорнийски университет. Бъркли

По време на най-голямата си териториална експанзия при управлението на Дарий I (522 - 486 г. пр.н.е.) персийската империя на Ахеменидите включва територии, простиращи се от долината на река Инд до югозападна Европа и от западния край на Хималаите до североизточна Африка. В настоящата книга Мат Уотърс предлага подробен преглед на периода на тяхното управление, без да пропуска и множеството интерпретативни проблеми, пред които историците се изправят при възпроизвеждането и разбирането на нейната история. Настоящата книга предлага персийската гледна точка дори когато се позовава на гръцки текстови извори и археологически находки. Уотърс ситуира историята на ахеменидските перси в контекста на техните предшественици от средата на първото хилядолетие пр.н.е. и на техните наследници след завладяването на земите от Александър Македонски, изграждайки завладяващ разказ за това как империята запазва своята жизненост в продължение на повече от двеста години (ок. 550 - 330 г. пр.н.е.) и оставя неизличим отпечатък в историята на Близкия изток, Гърция и Европа.

МАТ УОТЪРС е професор по класическа и антична история в Уисконсинския университет-О Клер. Той е автор на A Survey of Neo-Elamite History (2000), а негови трудове са публикувани в множество научни списания, включително Iran, Revue d’Assyriologie и Journal of the American Oriental Society. Уотърс е стипендиант на Американския съвет на научните общества. Центъра за елинистични изследвания на Харвардския университет, фондацията за класическа литература „Лъоб“, както и на Института за хуманитарни проучвания „Медисън“ на Уисконсинския университет. През 2006 г. Американското ориенталско общество му присъжда наградата „Джонас Грийнфилд“ за най-добра статия в областта на проучванията на античния Близък изток, публикувана в рамките на три години от учен, ненавършил 40 години.

Genres: History, Nonfiction, Ancient History, Middle East

327 pages, Hardcover

First published December 31, 2013

About the author

Matthew W. Waters is Professor of Classics and Ancient History at the University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire.

Reviews

[Dimitri · Rating 4 out of 5]

The past is like an old sock.

Historians attempt to sew back the threads together from written sources, whereas archeologists prefer to unearth from the holes in between. The paucier the record, the more tedious the ground survey becomes. "Probably, Maybe, Possibly, This vase from dig X might date from..." and the ubiquitous "Further investigation is needed" - there's a reason I never liked archeology that much. That and the endless use of the toothbrush in all seasons.

Nevertheless, Waters completes the familiar tale of Cyrus, Xerxes and Darius III into an imperial saga of ups and downs, conquerors, lawgivers and and usurpers. We steer away from the Hellascentrism of Marathon, Salamis and the Macedonian conquest. Guess why things went right for the Greeks? They had White Walker timing, with several satraps newly subdued to the authority of the new Shah.

[Bryn Hammond · Rating 5 out of 5]

Five stars because you rarely see an entry-level history of this quality. They are not easy to do.

I found this unfailingly interesting (and I'm stalled in another introduction to ancient Persia on the grounds it's dull); comfortable and accomplished in its Persian-centred perspective, not awkward, even though we have to use Greek texts; fluently written. It's recent and up-to-date as I write this, which is important for discoveries. Well illustrated. With links. Concise indeed, but I don't see how you can possibly do better.

Persia seems particularly interesting for how you can run a state of numerous ethnicities. They tried for an inclusiveness:

Unlike their Assyrian predecessors, the Achaemenid kings did not portray in their monumental sculptures the violent subjugation of enemies. With the sole exception being the Bisitun relief of Darius I, subject peoples are not portrayed as humiliated or violently subdued. The message of the Apadana reliefs seems rather one of solidarity or inclusiveness between the King – to whom the procession and the gifts are directed – and his subjects... There is little doubt that Persepolis is a stunningly effective portrayal of that message. But how successful that message was among the Persians’ subjects is another matter. They may well have had an entirely different perspective.

[Iset · Rating 4 out of 5]

A clear and enjoyable primer on the Persian empire. It’s tricky to find non-fiction on the Persians; such texts are not nearly as ubiquitous as similar primers of ancient Greece, Rome, or even ancient Egypt. Often when searching I come across thin articles here and there on very specialised topics within Achaemenid history, but broad overviews for the beginner are rather lacking. To be fair, Waters highlights the reasons why this is probably the case in his introduction – so many of the sources we have for the Persians come from Greek writers who were removed from events, misunderstood certain customs and traditions, or simply accepted fantastical accounts as being more entertaining or painting Hellenistic culture in a better light. There are plenty of moments in the text where the author has to admit that we do not know what really happened, and that the Greek sources are downright contradictory or more like fairytales than useful narratives. Nevertheless, the book is a solid effort at gathering what sources we have, reading a coherent chronology for them, and critically assessing some of the more outlandish stories with a view to a plausible scenario.

8 out of 10

[Mark · Rating 4 out of 5]

Considering the limited amount of materials available to study it there are a considerable number of surveys of ancient Persia for readers to choose from, ranging from A. T. Olmstead's classic History of the Persian Empire to Lindsay Allen's recent The Persian Empire. Matt Waters concise survey, which covers the history of the Achaemenid empire from the reign of Cyrus I to its conquest by Alexander the Great in 330 in a little more than 200 pages, offers little that is substantially different from these books. Its merits are in it concision and organization, as Waters presents his information in a clear and unadorned manner. Though some might find its style a little dry, its straightforward coverage of the basics of Persian history and the operations of the empire makes it an excellent book for anyone seeking a starting point for understanding a subject long distorted by ancient Greek authors and modern-day artists.

[Mohammad Ali Abedi · Rating 3 out of 5]

A brief, layman history of Achaemenid Persian period. I enjoyed the quick read, although I have to admit that it was not written in a compelling manner. The most I got out of it was how utterly unreliable history is. The author keeps repeating this point with every information he represents, until it becomes sort of repetitive and annoying. I wanted to just say, okay, fine, I got it, it is unreliable, now just get on with it.

Coincidently, I was reading this while at the same time listening to a Podcast called “Hardcore History” with the subjects I listened to were actually about the same period. And that podcast brings the history much more to life. They also point out the unreliability of the sources, but it is not constantly repeated, plus they do not let it spoil a good story!

[Sean Chick · Rating 4 out of 5]

This is a good introduction to a sprawling topic, but one where most of our sources are the opponents of the Persian Empire. As such much of the text is a discussion of those sources, and the degree to which they might be accurate. On this mark I found Waters perhaps too critical, while I wondered why he did not bring up the Shahnameh. While a work of fiction, and not fully translated into English (I think) it does draw on Persian history and would have offered counter insights.

Waters also offered no commentary on Persian "decline" but rather ignored it out of hand. Yet, in the text I noted increasing rebellions, the quick submission of most cities to Alexander, and the nostalgia of the reign of Artaxerxes III. Indeed, the backward looking glance at former glories and ways, when it manifests in art (in this case royal wording went back to older forms) signals stagnation and a crisis of confidence. Yet, if not a great work, I can hardly think of no better introduction to the world's first grand imperial power. One may argue for the Hitties and Neo-Assyrians with much justification, yet Persia was more of a trend setter in terms of its complexity, policies, and territorial reach. It represented a break, as much as it did continuity, with the region's past.

[Elentarri · Rating 3 out of 5]

Matt Waters provides a detailed but brief historical overview of the Achaemenid period, 550-330 BCE. The author also examines the many interpretive problems historians face in constructing and understanding its history, especially since much of the history of this period is gained from Greek, rather than Persian sources. Interesting and informative.

For a less scholarly text, try Persian Fire by Tom Holland.

[Anscar · Rating 3 out of 5]

A really interesting-but-cautious high level history, zooming through 200+ years. It made me realise how little we know about the first world empire, and just how much of what I thought I knew was actually coloured by Greek stereotypes and propaganda that has persisted down the ages.

One of the main reasons I read this in the first place is that everyone knows the story of the Persian invasion of Greece, and the heroic efforts of the Greeks at Thermopylae and Salamis, etc, but that's all told from the Greek persepctive, and I wanted the persian one. Unfortunately it turns out we don't have *any* Persian sources for that campaign, but Matt Waters does his best to present it in terms of Achaemenid royal ideology and in context of the broader empire, and, spoilers, it turns out that the epic world-changing events of Marathon and Salamis were not actually that big a deal to the vast Persian empire. From their perspective, these were just part of many little border conflicts around the empire's fringes that most Persians probably didn't know or care about.

In the end there was quite heavy emphasis on Persia's interactions with the Greek world, and secondarily Egypt and Babylonia - i.e. the western half of the empire. This is understandable given our source material, and the prevalance of archeological excavations, but it did mean that the eastern satrapies of Bactria, Aria and the Indus valley were barely mentioned again after their initial conquest by Cyrus and Darius I (and even then only cursorily). The latter - the Indus - I was especially interested to learn more about, so that was a bit disappointing.

All in all this has definitely given me a better perspective on the Persians, and a good basis to go forward with reading about more Middle East history. I think the most telling impact that this book had on me was that, when it finally came time for Alexander's epic conquest, I actually felt sorry for the Persians now, and sad that they had totally lost their hard-won empire.

[Paul Speck · Rating 2 out of 5]

I will begin by listing some useful takeaways from this book. Sources and evidence about the Achaemenid Empire are limited. Most sources that we have are Greek or Roman and characterized by intense anti-Persian prejudice and Western vs Eastern stereotypes. Herodotus is the best (and worst) of these prejudiced sources but because of his broad and enduring influence on Western historiography much care is needed to contradict, clarify, or dismiss numerous entertaining but nonfactual details. The Western (Greek) view of Oriental Civilizations (like the Achaemenids) became distorted in the mid-first century BCE and only grew worse over the next 2500 years (Americans versus Iranians). These are all worthy points, but do not constitute a "Concise History of the Achaemenid Empire."

The book offers no insight into ethnic composition of regions, size of cities, customs and culture, coinage and trade, Zoroastrian religion, science, engineering, agriculture. Ninety percent of the content has to do with royal successions, rebellions, and wars, often weighing the pros and cons of alternative accounts, unclear identities, and possible motives, only to conclude that we cannot really know. Then what were those 2-3 pages about? So many larger questions are unaddressed. How did the Achaemenid Empire differ from Babylonia and Assyria? How did their the Persian occupation of Egypt differ from that of other non-Egyptian occupations? Was Alexander's goal to Hellenize Persia or the blend the East and West? What remained of Persia after Alexander?

Is there really no data that speaks to all those subjects? Or is the author's focus too narrow and/or his sources too limited? Whatever. Learn twice as much in 10% of the time: see Wikipedia.

PS: Numerous photos and maps are included. They are mostly useless. Who was the editor from Cambridge University Press? He's destroying their brand.

[Art Wangchu · Rating 5 out of 5]

One of the best history books on Persia I've read. I do appreciate the author's handsome writing.

It is not easy to narrate this period of Persia based on the paucity of sources. But I think the author did it brilliantly. The only extant texts are those written by ancient Greeks and Romans, so we can see an interesting phenomenon that, when the Persians encountered the ancient Europeans, the story turned vivid and readable; when the Persians did not, the story turned sketchy and dry. This can't be helped to make the narration "Europe-centered", although the author always intends to prevent that orientation.

I really hope that one day we can read a book based on the perspectives of ancient Persian people. Too few texts remain existent after the Islamic conquest. We have excavated coins and inscriptions but these materials provide us scattered pieces of evidence from ancient ages. How can we know that they were as flesh-and-blood human beings as we are?

[Jacob Taylor · Rating 5 out of 5]

Served as a strong corrective to my Hellenocentric view of the ancient world. This book works well as an introduction to Achaemenid Persia, beginning with the collapse of Assyria and the rise of Cyrus and ending with Alexander’s conquest. Before this, my knowledge of the empire stopped at Cyrus, Thermopylae(though only the famed Spartan last stand), and Alexander. Waters provides a clear overview of Persian geopolitics, with appropriate detours on some of the more dramatic moments of empire. The writing stays accessible and well paced despite the long span of time it covers, and I’d recommend it to anyone looking to tip their toes in this era.

[Pushtigban · Rating 5 out of 5]

Such a great book. It provides deep insight into the Achaemenid's empire history and culture based on the latest research, without boring the reader with unnecessary, lengthy scholarly debates which could arise when the primary sources disagree. This was a surprisingly a smooth read. The author did his best to be impartial in his reporting and analysis. There was just enough information about each subject to cover each topic and the result is a great deal of easy to understand information in just over 200 pages.

[Ali · Rating 4 out of 5]

A straightforward history of the Achaemenid Empire, which clearly and concisely outlines the evidence from inscriptions, Herodotus and Diodorus for the campaigns of the various Persian kings. The most interesting chapters discuss the culture at court, and the structure of the bureaucracy. Waters is a careful scholar, which doesn't make for the most exciting reading, but it does the job well.

[Tejas · Rating 3 out of 5]

Informative and concise summary of the history of the Achaemenid Empire. Made the point that there’s a lot we don’t know. Succinctly summarized Persian royal ideology and gave overview of some administration. A lot of time spent on conquests and their details which I found dry compared to information about administration.

[Daniel Tserovski · Rating 5 out of 5]

A wonderful and very thorough study of ancient Persia - from the beginning to the very end of the Achaemenid dynasty, with the burning of Persepolis by Alexander the Great and the assassination of Darius III. Both detailed without being boring and, although written at a high level, accessible to non-history professionals. I definitely recommend it!

[Nitin Prasad · Rating 4 out of 5]

Interesting introduction to Achaemenid Persia that got me curious to learn more about Sassanid Persia as well; the author does a reasonably good job at choosing some interesting anecdotes and keeping this accessible to someone without any background, while staying close to the source material.

[Josh Drost · Rating 3 out of 5]

I learned a lot from this book about Persian history, however, it is quite dry.

[Jameel Haque · Rating 2 out of 5]

Meh.

[Jan Aiyulian · Rating 4 out of 5]

Scholarly, yet held my interest with well-written prose.

[Steven Peterson · Rating 4 out of 5]

A very nicely done work.

One of the first thing a reader picks up is how sparse good information is regarding the ancient Persian Empire (550-330 BCE). The Achaemenid Empire (a name derived to establish legitimacy of the dynasty) was the major power on the planet at that time--only to be overthrown by Alexander the Great and his Macedonian led forces.

One of the key problems in knowing the nature of this Empire is the dependence on such sources as the Greeks and scripture. And much of the information is not very reliable. The Greeks, for instance, would apparently relate historical instances in a political manner. While there is some evidence from the Persian Empire, there are many gaps. Thus, there is a (justifiable) tentativeness to this book.

The work itself is set up in a chronological manner, We learn of the emergence of the Empire with Cyrus the Great's rise to power. Then, Cambyses. After them, Daruis I, Xerxes I, Artaxerxes I, Darius II, Artaxerxes II, Artaxerxes III, Artaxerxes IV, and Darius III. And--then--Alexander the Great's triumph over the Persians.

Many subjects are discussed that illuminate--even with incomplete information--the Empire: the bureaucracy and governance structure of the Empire, religion and ideology, succession crises as these occurred, the Persian economy and so on.

All in all, despite the data problems, a fascinating work. . . .

[motobass4321 · Rating 4 out of 5]

As another review said, this is a very good primer. This concise history leans on the Greeks - Herodotus mainly - as that constitutes most of what we have about their empire. On the other hand, the Greeks standard talking points on the Persians are critiqued and we get a good sense of the bias in these sources and how that makes sense in the Greek's sense(s) of themselves. As such, 'Ancient Persia' is of interest to the general reader in Classical or Hellenistic Greek history.

I also enjoyed the emphasis on the many things the empire did right by way of continuity with the laws, customs, Gods (to a seemingly large extent), and historical references of the preceding empires in that region. The Elamites are a constant reference here, themselves largely unknown. The continuity was illustrated by the many multi-language inscriptions on the monuments that the king of kings put up upon concluding successful wars.

Matt Waters has a good, flowing style that makes this an enjoyable read and gets the interested reader excited about what the future of the study of this empire can hopefully yet provide.

[Bettie]

Description: The Achaemenid Persian Empire, at its greatest territorial extent under Darius I, held sway over territory stretching from the Indus River Valley to southeastern Europe and from the western Himalayas to northeast Africa. In this book, Matt Waters gives a detailed historical overview of the Achaemenid period while considering the manifold interpretive problems historians face in constructing and understanding its history. This book offers a Persian perspective even when relying on Greek textual sources and archaeological evidence. Waters situates the story of the Achaemenid Persians in the context of their predecessors in the mid-first millennium BCE and through their successors after the Macedonian conquest, constructing a compelling narrative of how the empire retained its vitality for more than two hundred years and left a massive imprint on Middle Eastern as well as Greek and European history.

[Rob Roy · Rating 3 out of 5]

We've heard about the brave fight of the Greeks against the Persians, and they Alexander's conquest of that empire, but what do we know of the Persians? This book attempts to answer that, with a brief history of the Persian Empire from Cyrus the Great to Darius III. It is a solid attempt, but, and the author laments this, the sources just are not there. Much of what we know of the Persians is from Greek sources. It would be like historians studying the United States two thousand years from now, only having Soviet sources. Nonetheless, even a skeletal view is well worth the effort to help balance the history we've been taught in school.

[Milele · Rating 3 out of 5]

Solid, modern (other ancient persia books are quite out of date with more recent research) and a good balance between concise and detailed. I should try to re-read and re-review this in a couple years because I'm not sure if my occasional failure to follow the thread or stay engaged is because of me (busy times) or the book.

[Amir · Rating 3 out of 5]

Exceptional, concise introduction. Slightly lacking references. Very good primer