Ascension Amidst Shadows

In the sprawling expanse of the Achaemenid Empire, under the shimmering skies of a realm that stretched from the Aegean Sea to the Indus River, the story of Artaxerxes I, known to history as Artaxerxes Longimanus for his distinctive longer right hand, unfolds. Born into royalty as the third son of Xerxes I, his path to the throne was neither straightforward nor bloodless. Artaxerxes’ early life was cast under the long shadow of his grandfather, Darius I, a ruler of vast ambitions and achievements. Yet, it was in the reign of his father, Xerxes, that fate’s wheel began to turn.

The year 465 BC marked a chilling chapter in the annals of the empire: Xerxes I, the great king, met his demise not in battle but through the treachery that festered within his own court. The mastermind behind this dark deed was none other than Artabanus, the Hazarapat, or commander of a thousand, who wielded immense influence as the commander of the royal bodyguard. With the silent whispers of a eunuch named Aspamitres, the conspiracy claimed the life of Xerxes, plunging the royal family into turmoil.

Greek historians have woven a narrative of tales around these events, with Ctesias and Aristotle providing differing accounts of the succession drama that ensued. According to Ctesias, Artabanus, in a cunning move, pinned the murder on Darius, the crown prince, setting the stage for a tragic fratricide as Artaxerxes, swayed by the deceit, eliminated his own brother to avenge their father. Aristotle, however, narrates a sequence where Artabanus eliminated Darius before turning his blade on Xerxes. The truth eventually emerged, and Artaxerxes, upon uncovering the betrayal, exacted vengeance on Artabanus and his kin, securing his ascent to the throne amid the storm of palace intrigue.

The Egyptian Challenge

No sooner had Artaxerxes taken the reins of power than he was faced with the flames of rebellion in Egypt. In 460 BC, the winds of revolt were stirred by Inaros II, a figure of royal lineage, possibly connected to the ancient pharaohs of Egypt’s Twenty-sixth Dynasty. With the support of Athenian allies, Inaros II challenged Persian rule, leading to a confrontation that tested the young king’s resolve and the empire’s might.

The rebellion reached its zenith when Inaros and his Athenian allies claimed victory over the Persian forces led by the satrap Akheimenes, forcing a retreat to Memphis. However, the tide of war turned as the Persian counteroffensive, under the command of Megabyzus, laid siege to the rebels. After two years of resistance, the siege concluded in 454 BC with the defeat of the Athenians and the capture of Inaros, who was then taken to Susa.

Artaxerxes I’s reign was thus marked from its inception by the dual forces of internal treachery and external rebellion. Through these trials, he would navigate the complexities of the empire, leaving a legacy that would be remembered in the chronicles of history. This period of his rule showcases not only the challenges of leadership in an expansive and diverse empire but also the resilience required to maintain power and authority in the face of adversity.

The Persian Gambit: Artaxerxes I and the Greek States

A New Approach to Old Rivals

The saga of Artaxerxes I’s reign is not merely a tale of internal strife and external challenges but also one of diplomatic ingenuity and strategic foresight. Following the stalemate that ensued after the Achaemenid Empire’s defeat at the Battle of Eurymedon around 469 BCE, the dynamics between the mighty Persian Empire and the fractious city-states of Greece entered a period of uneasy calm. It was during Artaxerxes I’s ascension to power that a novel strategy was unfurled, aimed not at direct confrontation but at undermining the Athenian power from within.

Artaxerxes, perceiving the intricate web of rivalries and alliances that defined the Greek political landscape, embarked on a strategy of supporting the adversaries of Athens financially. This infusion of Persian gold into the coffers of Athenian enemies marked a significant shift in the empire’s approach towards Greece, setting the stage for a complex game of shadow warfare that sought to weaken Athens indirectly.

The Shift of the Delian League’s Treasury

The Persian strategy bore immediate consequences, compelling the Athenians to relocate the treasury of the Delian League from its original location on the island of Delos to the fortified Athenian acropolis. This move, driven by the need for greater security and control, underscored the growing tensions and the Athenian leadership’s wariness of both external threats and internal dissent.

Renewed Hostilities and the Quest for Peace

The indirect tactics employed by Artaxerxes eventually reignited the flames of war. In 450 BCE, the Greeks, spurred by the need to counteract Persian influence, launched an attack at the Battle of Cyprus. Despite the ambitions that fueled this expedition, led by the Athenian commander Cimon, it failed to achieve decisive results, leading to a cessation of hostilities. The aftermath of this confrontation saw the emergence of discussions surrounding a peace agreement, known to history as the purported Peace of Callias. This treaty, allegedly concluded in 449 BCE among Athens, Argos, and Persia, aimed to establish a formal cessation of hostilities between the Greek states and the Persian Empire. However, the historical record on the existence and specifics of such a treaty remains a matter of debate, with some sources questioning the reality of a formalized peace agreement.

A Sanctuary for Themistocles

In a move that underscored the complexity of Artaxerxes’ diplomatic maneuvers, the Persian king offered asylum to Themistocles, the Athenian general who had once been instrumental in defeating his father Xerxes at the Battle of Salamis. This act of magnanimity towards a former foe highlights Artaxerxes’ capacity for strategic generosity. Themistocles, ostracized from Athens and seeking refuge from his erstwhile compatriots, was not only welcomed but was also endowed with lands across Magnesia, Myus, and Lampsacus to secure his sustenance, and Skepsis and Percote to provide for his clothing and housing needs, respectively. In his time in Persia, Themistocles immersed himself in the local customs, language, and traditions, embodying the complexities of Greek-Persian interactions during this epoch.

The narrative of Artaxerxes I’s engagement with the Greek states reflects a nuanced understanding of power, diplomacy, and the enduring quest for stability and influence in the ancient world. Through strategic financial support, the offer of asylum to a renowned adversary, and the maneuverings around the Peace of Callias, Artaxerxes’ reign is emblematic of a period where the fates of Greece and Persia were intricately intertwined, shaping the course of history in the process.

The Persian king Artaxerxes in the Book of Ezra and Nehemiah

Artaxerxes, a prominent Persian king, plays a crucial role in the biblical books of Ezra and Nehemiah, embodying the intersection of divine providence and imperial authority in the restoration of Jerusalem and the Jewish community post-exile. His reign is marked by a significant policy towards the Jewish people, facilitating their return to Jerusalem, the rebuilding of the city walls, and the restoration of the temple, which underscores the fulfillment of God’s promises through the agency of a foreign ruler.

Artaxerxes in the Book of Ezra

In the Book of Ezra, Artaxerxes’ edicts are pivotal for the Jewish return to Jerusalem and the temple’s reconstruction. Ezra 7 narrates the king’s decree that allowed Ezra, a scribe skilled in the Law of Moses, to lead a group of Israelites back to Jerusalem. This decree, issued in the seventh year of Artaxerxes’ reign (around 458 B.C.E.), not only authorizes the journey but also provides resources for the temple’s worship and offers autonomy in legal matters according to the Law of God and the law of the king. Artaxerxes’ decree is a testament to his recognition of the importance of the Jewish faith and the temple’s role in Jerusalem, showcasing a remarkable instance of a foreign monarch endorsing the restoration of religious practice and judicial autonomy within the Jewish community.

Artaxerxes in the Book of Nehemiah

The Book of Nehemiah further illustrates Artaxerxes’ involvement in the restoration efforts. Nehemiah, serving as the cupbearer to the king, is granted permission to return to Jerusalem to rebuild its walls after expressing his distress over the city’s dilapidated state (Nehemiah 2). Artaxerxes not only approves Nehemiah’s request but also provides him with letters to ensure safe passage and access to materials for the reconstruction project. This support highlights Artaxerxes’ trust in Nehemiah and his willingness to contribute to the welfare of Jerusalem, reinforcing the Persian king’s role as an instrument in the fulfillment of God’s plan for the restoration of His people.

Historical and Theological Significance

Artaxerxes’ actions, as documented in Ezra and Nehemiah, hold profound historical and theological significance. Historically, these events illustrate the Persian Empire’s policy of tolerance and support towards subject peoples and their religious practices, which contrasts with the more oppressive approaches of previous empires. Theologically, Artaxerxes’ edicts and support for the Jewish community are seen as part of God’s sovereign plan to restore Israel, demonstrating how God can use even foreign kings to accomplish His purposes.

Artaxerxes stands as a key figure in the biblical narrative, directly contributing to the Jewish people’s return from exile and the restoration of Jerusalem’s religious and civic life. His decrees, as recorded in the books of Ezra and Nehemiah, reflect a divine orchestration of events where a Persian king plays a pivotal role in the fulfillment of God’s promises to Israel. Through Artaxerxes’ support, the temple worship is reestablished, Jerusalem’s walls are rebuilt, and the law of Moses is reaffirmed among the people, marking a new chapter in the history of the Jewish community under Persian rule.

The Persian Empire: From Glory to Division

The Succession after Artaxerxes Longimanus

In the vast expanse of the ancient world, the Persian Empire stood as a beacon of power and civilization, its rulers’ legacies intertwined with the course of history. Following the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus, a series of events unfolded that would see the throne of Persia pass through the hands of his successors, each leaving their mark on the empire’s storied chronicle.

Diodorus Siculus, the ancient historian, chronicles the transition of power in the aftermath of Artaxerxes Longimanus. Xerxes, ascending to the throne, found his reign cut short after a mere year, or as some sources suggest, only two months. The throne’s precarious nature continued with Sogdianus, who, after ruling for seven months, was slain by Darius. This Darius, initially known as Ochus, adopted the regal name of Darius upon his ascension, embarking on a reign of nineteen years. He is identified in the biblical record at Nehemiah 12:22, marking a direct connection to the sacred texts.

The Reign of Artaxerxes II and His Successors

Artaxerxes II, known as Mnemon for his remarkable memory, succeeded Darius II. His tenure, spanning from 404 to 358 B.C.E., was marred by internal strife, including a significant Egyptian revolt and deteriorating relations with Greece. Artaxerxes III, also known by the name Ochus before his kingship, ruled from 358 to 338 B.C.E. His reign was noted for its severity, earning him the reputation as one of the most formidable rulers of Persia. His paramount achievement was the reconquest of Egypt, reasserting Persian dominance over the rebellious territory.

However, the empire’s might began to wane under the brief rulership of Arses, followed by Darius III, known as Codommanus, who ruled for five years. The assassination of Philip of Macedonia in 336 B.C.E. and the ascension of his son, Alexander the Great, marked a turning point. By 334 B.C.E., Alexander initiated a series of campaigns against Persia, culminating in decisive victories at Granicus and Issus, and finally at Gaugamela in 331 B.C.E., effectively bringing the Persian Empire to its knees.

The Division of Alexander’s Empire and the Seleucid Dynasty

Following the untimely death of Alexander, his vast empire was carved up among his generals, leading to the formation of the Seleucid Empire with Seleucus Nicator at its helm. Taking control of the Asiatic territories, including Persia, the Seleucid dynasty emerged, enduring until 64 B.C.E. The geopolitical landscape of the era saw the Seleucid kings, identified with the prophetic “king of the north” from the book of Daniel, in a prolonged struggle with the Ptolemaic dynasty of Egypt, the “king of the south.”

The Seleucids faced challenges not only from the Ptolemies but also from the Parthians, who gradually overran the territory of Persia proper in the centuries that followed. Their defeat by the Sassanians in the third century C.E. marked yet another chapter in the region’s tumultuous history, with Sassanian rule persisting until the Arab conquest in the seventh century.

Persia’s Legacy in Prophecy and Warfare

The influence of Persia extended beyond the battlefield and the political arena, finding mention in the prophecies of Ezekiel and Daniel. Persians were among the formidable warriors who contributed to the military might of Tyre, as noted by Ezekiel. Furthermore, Persia is listed among the nations aligned with the symbolic “Gog of the land of Magog,” destined to oppose Jehovah’s covenant people in the prophetic visions.

The narrative of Persia, from the reign of Artaxerxes Longimanus to the fall and division of the empire, reflects a saga of ambition, conflict, and transformation. It is a story that not only shaped the ancient Near East but also left an indelible mark on the course of world history, intertwined with the fulfillment of biblical prophecy and the shifting sands of power.

The Religion of Ancient Persia

The religion of ancient Persia, particularly during the Achaemenid period, was characterized by Zoroastrianism. This monotheistic faith centered around the teachings of the prophet Zoroaster and was the state religion of the Persian Empire.

Zoroastrianism: Core Tenets and Practices

Zoroastrianism is founded on the principle of dualism, where Ahura Mazda (also known as Ormazd) represents the ultimate truth and goodness, and Angra Mainyu (or Ahriman) embodies lies and chaos. The religion teaches that the world is a battleground between these two forces, and humanity has a critical role in the struggle through the choices between good and evil.

The sacred scriptures of Zoroastrianism are compiled in the Avesta, which includes the Gathas, hymns thought to have been composed by Zoroaster himself. The Avesta outlines the religion’s doctrines, moral teachings, and rituals.

Zoroastrians worship through prayers and temple fire rituals, considering fire as a symbol of divine truth and purity. The community’s ethical focus is encapsulated in the maxim “Good Thoughts, Good Words, Good Deeds,” which guides individual behavior.

Zoroastrianism’s Influence on Persian Governance and Culture

As the state religion, Zoroastrianism influenced Persian governance and culture significantly. The kings of Persia, including Artaxerxes I, were seen as divinely appointed guardians of the faith. They were expected to rule according to the principles of Asha (truth and order) and to combat the forces of Druj (deceit and disorder).

Inscriptions from the period, such as those at Persepolis, reflect this religious perspective, emphasizing the king’s role in maintaining cosmic order. Royal decrees and the legal system were infused with Zoroastrian ethics, promoting justice and the protection of the weak.

Zoroastrianism’s Legacy

Zoroastrianism’s legacy continued well beyond the Achaemenid Empire, influencing subsequent Persian dynasties, the development of Jewish angelology and demonology, and contributing to the religious ideas of Christianity and Islam. Despite the decline of Zoroastrianism after the Muslim conquest of Persia, it still survives today among the Parsi community in India and Zoroastrians in Iran.

The religion of ancient Persia during the Achaemenid period, Zoroastrianism, played a pivotal role in shaping the empire’s identity, ethics, and governance. Its monotheistic beliefs, emphasis on moral choice, and enduring cultural impact constitute a significant chapter in the religious and philosophical history of the world.

Zoroastrianism, the Persian Kings, and the Jews

The favorable treatment of the Jews by Persian kings, including Cyrus the Great’s edict that ended the Babylonian Captivity, can indeed be viewed through the lens of the Persian religion, particularly Zoroastrianism. The principles and tenets of Zoroastrianism likely influenced Persian rulers’ policies towards conquered or subject peoples, including the Jews. Here are several points of connection:

Religious Tolerance and Ethical Duty

Zoroastrianism emphasized ethical conduct and the promotion of order (Asha) over chaos (Druj). Persian kings, as adherents to these principles, saw themselves as the shepherds of truth and justice. This perspective fostered a degree of religious tolerance and a sense of ethical duty to support the restoration of order, which could manifest as the liberation of captive peoples and the restoration of their religious practices.

Monotheism and Divine Sovereignty

Zoroastrianism is essentially monotheistic, recognizing Ahura Mazda as the supreme deity. This belief in one supreme god might have facilitated respect for the Jewish monotheistic faith, which also revolves around the worship of a single, sovereign God, Jehovah. The similarities between the two religions, although not identical in theology, may have led to a mutual respect or at least an acceptance of common ground.

Political Strategy and Empire Stability

The Persian kings understood that the stability of their empire relied on the cooperation and contentment of their diverse subjects. By allowing the Jews to return to their homeland and rebuild their temple, the Persians were ensuring loyalty and order within their realm. This approach was pragmatic as well as being informed by their religious views that promoted righteousness and peace.

Prophecy and Divine Favor

The release of the Jews and the support given to them to rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem can also be seen in the context of the biblical prophecy. The book of Isaiah names Cyrus as the one who would decree the rebuilding of Jerusalem (Isaiah 44:28). Cyrus and his successors might have been aware of these prophecies, and such awareness could have influenced their favorable disposition towards the Jews. The idea that their reigns were part of a divine plan would align well with the Zoroastrian view of history as the unfolding of divine will.

The Persian kings’ favorable actions towards the Jewish people can be seen as the intersection of Zoroastrian religious principles, political strategy, and possibly an awareness of Jewish prophecy. Their policies reflect a complex interplay between faith, pragmatism, and the desire to maintain a stable and just empire under what they believed was divine guidance and favor.

The Historical and Archaeological Evidence

Artaxerxes in the Elephantine Papyri

The Elephantine Papyri are a collection of ancient documents that shed light on the life of a Jewish community living in Elephantine, an island in the Nile River, during the fifth century B.C.E. These documents, written in Aramaic, provide invaluable insights into the social, religious, and political interactions between the Jewish community and the surrounding Egyptian and Persian societies. Among these texts, Artaxerxes, King of Persia, is mentioned, underscoring the broader impact of Persian rule on the Jewish diaspora communities of the time.

Context and Content

The Elephantine Papyri include a series of letters and legal documents that detail various aspects of daily life, religious practices, and the legal standings of the Jewish community in Elephantine. This community had its own temple to JHVH, indicating the presence of a distinct form of Jewish worship outside Jerusalem, which persisted under Persian authority. The papyri mentioning Artaxerxes specifically relate to correspondence between this Jewish community and the Persian government, as well as with the Jewish leadership in Jerusalem.

Artaxerxes’ Role and Influence

The references to Artaxerxes in the Elephantine Papyri highlight the Persian king’s authority and the administrative mechanisms of the Persian Empire concerning its subjects, including the Jewish diaspora. One notable instance involves a petition sent to Artaxerxes and his officials, seeking permission to rebuild the Jewish temple in Elephantine, which had been destroyed in a local conflict. This appeal demonstrates the community’s reliance on Persian support for their religious and cultural restoration, reflecting the broader policy of tolerance and support for local customs and religions under Persian rule.

The correspondence indicates that the Jewish community in Elephantine recognized Artaxerxes’ sovereignty and sought his approval for their religious and civic endeavors. It illustrates the extent of Persian influence over the affairs of its subjects and the avenues available for diaspora communities to seek redress and support from the imperial administration. The mention of Artaxerxes in these documents also serves as a testament to the interconnectedness of the Persian Empire, where a community of Jews in Egypt could directly petition the king.

Historical Significance

The inclusion of Artaxerxes in the Elephantine Papyri provides a concrete example of the Persian Empire’s administrative practices and its approach to governance over a diverse empire. It showcases the empire’s capacity to accommodate and manage the needs of various ethnic and religious groups within its borders. Furthermore, these documents offer a unique perspective on the Jewish diaspora’s experience during the Persian period, highlighting the complexities of their relationship with both the Persian authorities and the Jewish leadership in Jerusalem.

Artaxerxes’ mention in the Elephantine Papyri is a significant historical marker that illustrates the Persian Empire’s influence on the Jewish diaspora in the fifth century B.C.E. These documents reflect the administrative and religious dynamics of the time, showcasing the Persian kings’ role in facilitating or regulating the religious life of their subjects. Through the lens of the Elephantine Papyri, Artaxerxes emerges as a figure of authority whose decisions impacted the religious and communal life of a Jewish community far from the center of Persian power, offering insights into the broader themes of governance, tolerance, and cultural interaction within the Persian Empire.

More Historical and Archaeological Evidence 

The inscription described on the bowl seems to be a typical royal Achaemenid inscription, denoting the high status and wide-reaching power of the Persian monarch. Artaxerxes, like other kings of the Achaemenid Empire, would have been referred to with titles such as “the great king,” “king of kings,” and “king of countries,” which emphasizes his sovereignty over a vast empire that spanned multiple lands and peoples. Identifying himself as the “son of Xerxes the king” also establishes his dynastic legitimacy, connecting him to his well-known predecessor and father, Xerxes I, thereby reinforcing his rightful place on the throne.

In the context of Achaemenid art and artifacts, such inscriptions were not merely decorative but served to communicate and legitimize the ruler’s authority. They would have been read by many across the empire, serving as a reminder of the king’s power and the divine favor thought to support his rule. The presence of such an inscription on a bowl may indicate that the object had a ceremonial use or was intended as a diplomatic gift, which was a common practice in the Persian court to demonstrate the king’s wealth and generosity. These objects often found their way into various parts of the empire and beyond, serving as tangible symbols of the Achaemenid ruler’s widespread control and influence.

Artaxerxes I, a significant figure in the Achaemenid dynasty, ruled the Persian Empire from 465 to 424 B.C.E. His reign is marked not only by the biblical references and the Elephantine Papyri but also by various archaeological findings that provide a broader understanding of his rule and the Persian Empire’s influence during this period. These archaeological evidences include inscriptions, coins, and monumental architecture, which together offer a richer picture of Artaxerxes’ reign and the administrative, cultural, and economic aspects of the Achaemenid Empire.

Inscriptions

One of the primary sources of archaeological evidence for Artaxerxes’ reign comes from inscriptions. While specific inscriptions directly attributed to Artaxerxes I are less common than those of other Persian kings like Darius I or Xerxes I, there are still notable references:

• Persepolis Inscriptions: At Persepolis, the ceremonial capital of the Persian Empire, inscriptions from the time of Artaxerxes I may not be as prominent as those from earlier rulers, yet the site itself, with its palaces and administrative buildings, continued to be developed and used during his reign. The ongoing construction and maintenance of the site during his rule would have required royal decrees and support, reflected indirectly through the architectural achievements there.
• Daiva Inscription of Xerxes: Although directly associated with Xerxes I, this inscription is significant for understanding the religious and administrative policies continued by Artaxerxes I, especially regarding the empire’s stance on local religions and the suppression of the Daiva cult. The continuity in policy and administration from Xerxes to Artaxerxes is part of the archaeological narrative that informs us about the Achaemenid dynasty’s governance.

Coins

Coins from the Achaemenid period, including those minted during the reign of Artaxerxes I, serve as valuable archaeological evidence. These coins provide insights into the economic practices, trade, and administrative organization of the empire. They often bore symbols and inscriptions indicative of the reigning monarch, although identifying specific coins to Artaxerxes I’s reign can be challenging due to the standardized designs used throughout the Achaemenid period. Nonetheless, numismatic evidence contributes to our understanding of the period’s economic history and the extent of Persian influence across its territories.

Architectural Evidence

While specific monumental projects directly attributed to Artaxerxes I are less documented than those of his predecessors or successors, the continued use, expansion, and maintenance of existing sites like Persepolis during his reign are significant. The architectural developments at sites such as Susa and Persepolis during the Achaemenid period reflect the empire’s wealth, the complexity of its administrative systems, and the Persian kings’ role as patrons of monumental architecture. These sites, through their inscriptions, reliefs, and architectural innovations, provide a backdrop against which the reigns of Achaemenid kings, including Artaxerxes, can be assessed.

Conclusion

While direct archaeological evidence specifically attributed to Artaxerxes I might not be as abundant as for other Persian monarchs, the inscriptions, coins, and monumental architecture from the Achaemenid period collectively offer a glimpse into his reign and the broader imperial context of his time. These findings, alongside textual sources like the biblical accounts and the Elephantine Papyri, contribute to a multifaceted understanding of Artaxerxes I’s rule, his contributions to the Persian Empire’s administration and cultural legacy, and the historical context of the fifth century B.C.E.

About the Author

SCROLL THROUGH THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES BELOW

BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM

BIBLE TRANSLATION AND TEXTUAL CRITICISM

BIBLICAL STUDIES / BIBLE BACKGROUND / HISTORY OF THE BIBLE/ INTERPRETATION

EARLY CHRISTIANITY

HISTORY OF CHRISTIANITY

CHRISTIAN APOLOGETIC EVANGELISM

TECHNOLOGY AND THE CHRISTIAN

CHRISTIAN THEOLOGY

CHRISTIAN DEVOTIONALS

CHRISTIAN FICTION