27 diciembre, 2018

December Highlight: Vessel handle in the form of a winged ibex

Vessel handle in the form of a winged ibex.
Date: 4th century BCE
Location: Musée du Louvre, Paris

· Iconography

The handle forms the boy of a winged ibex standing on its hind legs, its forelegs drawn, and its wings outspread as captured on the leaping position before soaring. The real species, the ibex, is easily identified due to the large ringed horns surmounting the head. Ibexes played a major role in Iranian and Mesopotamian art. They can be found in the earliest decorated ceramic examples in friezes, as a symbol of power, might and sovereignty. In pre-Islamic Iran, ibexes were a source of meat, horn and hide and it was popularly hunted. This was not exclusive for the Iranian areas, but also spread to the regions under the influence of Elam, Assyria and Babylonia. Its religious meaning, however, remains unclear, being the most clear connection the Zoroastrian deity of Victory Verethraqna, which appears before Zarathustra in the shape of a wild goat that could be interpreted as a male ibex.

The hind legs are resting on the head of a bearded old man with long ears, coiffed with a row of palmettes. According to Roman Ghirshman this figure could be identified with the Egyptian god Bes or the Greek Silenus. Bes was a deity worshiped as a protector of households, childbirth and mothers. Silenus, on the other hand, was the foster father and tutor of Dionysus.

· Origin

This handle in the shape of a winged ibex would have belonged to a metal vessel which would have had a second ibex symmetrically placed opposite it. The vessel would have most probably been in the shape of an amphora with a fluted body. This kind of recipient was highly prized among Iranian craftsmen and has important influences form the Greek art and the Iranian tradition of the terracotta animal-decorated vessels. Workshops producing this type of artefacts were dispersed through all the empire and not only in the central provinces, although they followed the models imposed by the authorities and the ruling trends.

· Technique

The incredible and fine details on the body, wings and horns of the creature is achieved by use of a technique known at least form the 3rd millennium BCE called lost-wax or cire-perdue. It is a method of metal casting in which molten metal is poured into a mould that has been previously created using wax. The wax melts and is drained away once the mould is completed.

· Context

Vessels with handles in the form of fantastic beasts or real animals can be found all along the archaeology of both Iran and Mesopotamia, since the zoomorphic decoration was a widespread feature in Iranian art. The fluted body of the vessel this handle would have belonged to was characteristic of the Achaemenid metal vessels, which had its precursor on terracotta vessels dating back to the 2nd millennium BCE.

Animals featured importantly through all the Achaemenid artistic examples, not only vessels but also reliefs, gold pieces, offerings and textiles. Some examples can be found in the friezes of the Apadana of King Xerxes (486-465 BCE) at Persepolis, where lions, bulls and horses represent royal tributes from the twenty-three provinces of the empire, but also symbols of eternal kingship and heavenly glory. The Achaemenid dynasty developed a fine taste for precious metal vessels with animal decorations in the round, sometimes adorned with precious stones.

· Further reading

About the Achaemenid dynasty:

About Verethraqna, yazata of Victory:


AMANDRY Pierre, "La Toreutique achéménide", in Antike Kunst, n 2, 1959, Allemagne, pp. 38-56.
BENOIT A., "Les civilisations du Proche-Orient ancien" in Manuels de l'Ecole du Louvre, Art et Archéologie, Paris, Ecole du Louvre, 2003, pp. 466-467, fig. 255.
CONAN J., DESCHESNE O., Le bitume à Suse : collection du musée du Louvre, Paris, Editions de la Réunion des musées nationaux, 1996, p. 323, fig. 393.
POTTS, D. T., “Ibex, Persian ii. In pre-Islamic Art and Archaeology”, Encyclopaedia Iranica, online edition, 2012.

15 octubre, 2018

The Achaemenid dynasty: a chronology

The Achaemenid Persian dynasty is probably one of the best known not just inside the History of Iran but within the whole Antiquity. In his Alcibiades Plato wrote that Haxāmanish, the family founder, was actually son of the hero Perseus, which was himself the son of Zeus. That is the reason for the dynasty of Kurush II to be known as “Persian”. But some of these kings are not as famous as others and sometimes the order and dates between then can be confusing. Therefore, here is a short list with all the kings reigning over the territory known as “Persia” from the 8th century until the arrival of Alexander the Great in 330 BCE.
For this list, we have only included crowned kings, but princes and secondary governors have been left aside. In addition, the original names —with the Old Persian, Elamite and Babylonian variations— have been maintained in bold and the westernised versions which they are normally known by are in brackets. This is just an attempt to present these characters as they truly were since many of the information from the Persians has arrived through Greek sources.

Standart of Kurush II the Great

The origins
These four following kings are unattested, but according to the remaining sources it can be deduced they were satraps ruling territories belonging to the Neo-Assyrian and Median empires.
1.     Haxāmanish (Achaemenes) is the person who gives the name to the dynasty. His name is formed with the words haxā, “friend”, and manah, “thinking power”. According to the inscriptions found at the archaeological site of Behistun and the data gathered by Herodotus, Haxāmanish would be the father of Chishpish and ancestor of Kurush II and Dārayavaush I. If he was a historical character, he would have probably lived between the end of the 8th century and the beginning of the 7th century BCE. However, Kurush II provides with no details about him in his genealogy although he calls himself “Achaemenid”. Most probably Haxāmanish was a figure of mythical ancestry who didn’t really existed but legitimised politically the dynasty.

2.     Chishpish (Teispes, c. 675-640 BCE), the son of Haxāmanish and the father of Ariyāramna, great-grandfather of Dārayavaush I. Chishpish appears only mentioned in the biography of Dārayavaush I. In the famous Cylinder of Kurush there is written a variation of the name, Shi-ish-pi-ish; this name appears to be linked with the same character as it is described as the great-grandfather of Kurush II with titles such as “great king of Anshan”. About this king, very little is known but he probably was a vassal of the Elamite Empire who expanded his dominions through the 7th century conquering Anshan and Pārsa.

3.     Kurush I (Cyrus I, c. 600-580 BCE) of Anshan or Persia. Probably the son of Chishpish and grandson of Haxāmanish who split his father’s enlarged kingdom with his brother Ariyāramna who ruled Pārsa, whereas Kurush I reign over Anshan. It seems to be also identified with another monarch of the time, Kuras of Parsumas, as he appears mentioned in Neo-Assyrian sources.

4.     Kambūǰiya I (Cambyses I, c. 600-559 BCE) the Elder. He is the younger son of Kurush I and the father of Kurush II. About his life, nothing is preserved that was written when he was alive, thus the most truthful sources being the inscriptions of Kurush II at his Cylinder. According to Herodotus and Xenophon Kambūǰiya I was not actually a King but a member of an influent family who married Mandana, the daughter of the Median King Astyages, and therefore he is considered a monarch. However, he never took over his father-in-law’s position as he stayed ruling over Anshan under the services of the Median empire.

Seal of Kurush I

The Empire
1.     Kurush II (Cyrus II, c. 600-530 BCE) the Great or the Elder, “Governor of the Four Corners of the World”. Kurush II is probably the most famous figure inside the Achaemenid dynasty for creating the first great Persian Empire and the biggest known at that time, from the Mediterranean Sea to the Indus Valley. Kurush II established a ruling system through satrapies and moved the capital to Pasargadae where his tomb still remains. From the decade of 1970 onwards, the artefact known as the Cylinder of Cyrus, a text given to the city of Babylon after its conquest, was considered the first Human Rights declaration of History. However, this is not accurate and there are many contradictions in that statement.

2.     Kambūǰiya II (Cambyses II, r. 530-522 BCE), son and successor of Kurush II. One of the most important conquests of this king was adding the kingdom of Egypt to the territories of the already vast Persian empire by defeating the pharaoh Psamtik III. During the reign of his father and after the conquest of Babylon Kambūǰiya II was named sovereign of the city, so he appears praised in the famous Cylinder alongside his father. Herodotus collected a legend about a certain army lost by the Persian king. According to his account, Kambūǰiya II had sent around 50.000 soldiers to the oracle of Amun at Siwa (Egypt), but when they were crossing the desert a sandstorm buried the army and they could never be found. In 2009 an archaeological mission found human, textile and military pieces of evidence under the sand, so perhaps there was some truth behind the legend.

Seal that shows Kambūǰiya II defeating the pharaoh Psamtik III

3.     Dārayavaush I (Darius I, c. 550-486 BCE) the Great. This sovereign left many written sources at his time being the most important the relief at Behistun written in Old Persian, Elamite and Babylonian. The script starts with a long genealogy that connects him with the founder of the dynasty, Haxāmanish. It also narrates how Dārayavaush I acceded to the throne by defeating the usurper Gaumāta. He established a new economic system with a new coin (the daric) and Aramaic became the official language of the empire. He also promoted the construction of roads to connect the separated parts of the territory. As a curiosity, many representations of Dārayavaush I are preserved in Egypt that show him as a pharaoh, as his presence there was of high relevance.

4.     Xshaya-ṛshā I (Xerxes I, 519-465 BCE) “the one ruling over heroes”. This is the king identified as Ahasuerus in the Book of Esther, at the Bible. The most famous episode for which Xshaya-ṛshā I is known is his battle against the armies led by king Leonidas at the Thermopiles. However, it is not often told that after defeating the Spartans Xshaya-ṛshā I reached Athens and destroy it, burning everything to the ground. After his campaigns in Greece, he came back to Persia to finish the architectonical projects started by his father: the Gate of All Nations and the Apadana of Persepolis. Xshaya-ṛshā I was murdered by Artabanus, who also killed that who would have been his first successor, young crown prince Dārayavaush.

5.     Ṛtaxshaca I (Artaxerxes I, r. 465-424 BCE) recovered power after killing Artabanus and his sons when he discovered him responsible for the death of his father and his older brother. His relationships with Greece met a turning point when he substituted military campaigns for economic moves, funding the enemies of Athens. After the Battle of Cyprus, Ṛtaxshaca I offered asylum to Themistocles, one of his father’s greatest enemies, and gave him some land inside his dominions so he could live there. Apparently, Ṛtaxshaca I suffered from neurofibromatosis, a disease that made two of his limbs to be longer than the other two.
Inscription of Dārayavaush I at Behistun
6.     Xshaya-ṛshā II, (Xerxes II, r. 425 BCE) was the first heir of Ṛtaxshaca I. after forty-five days of ruling he was murdered by Sogdianus, an illegitimate son of Ṛtaxshaca I or so tell the accounts of Ctesias, one of the most unreliable Greek sources.

7.     Dārayavaush II (Darío II r. 423-404 BCE). This prince’s first name was Ochus and apparently, he was a satrap in Hyrcania when Ṛtaxshaca I died. Even though the Greek sources tell that he killed the usurper Sogdianus after finding him responsible for the death of his brother, most likely the two princes proclaimed themselves as heirs to the throne of Persia and eventually Ochus was victorious, adopting them the dynastic name of Dārayavaush II.

8.     Ṛtaxshaca II (Artaxerxes II, r. 404-358 BCE). Greek authors gave him the epithet of mnemon, Μνήμων, “having a good memory”. He had to defend his position as king by confronting his brother Kurush the Younger who fought him with the aid of hired Greek mercenaries. Ṛtaxshaca II dedicated much of his fortune to architectonical projects such as the restoration of the Palace of Dārayavaush I in Susa or the construction of the Apadana of Ecbatana. Apparently, he had more than 115 sons and daughters, mostly illegitimate.

Golden daric from the rule of Ṛtaxshaca II

9.     Ṛtaxshaca III (Artaxerxes III, c. 425-338 BCE), son of Ṛtaxshaca II. He accessed the throne after his oldest brother was executed, the second one committed suicide and finally, the third one was assassinated. That was very likely the reason he murdered the whole royal family after gaining power, in order to guarantee his own security as the king. During his rule, the cult to Anahita and Mithra experimented a revival. The last years of his reign coincided with an increase of power and influence in the Macedonian kingdom in the figure of king Philipp II.

10.  Ṛtaxshaca IV (Artaxerxes IV, r. 338-336 BCE). As the youngest son of Ṛtaxshaca III, no one expected Ṛtaxshaca IV to ever rule. However, when the vizier Bagoi murdered the royal family he positioned the young prince at the throne and used him as a puppet for two years.

11.  Dārayavaush III (Darío III, r. 336-330 BCE), the last king of the Achaemenid dynasty. His name was originally Artashata and the Greek called him Codomannus. When Ṛtaxshaca IV died, Bagoi attempted to repeat his power strategy with Artashata as he had proved to be a promising young man in the campaigns against the Macedonians who were already expanding through the territories ruled by the Persia empire. However, Artashata got rid of Bagoi quite quickly and adopted the dynastic name of Dārayavaush III. The empire he accessed to was already in a very unstable state and the provinces had started different revolutions who weakened it

Tomb of Kurush II at Pasargadae



DARYAEE, T.: The Oxford Handbook of Iranian History, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012.
HOLLAND, T.: Persian Fire. The First World Empire, Battle for the West, London, Hachette, 2011.
KUHRT, A.: The Persian Empire. A corpus of Sources form the Achaemenid Period. London, Routledge, 2013.
SCHMITT, R.: “Achaemenid Dynasty”, Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol I, fasc. 4, 1983, pp. 414-426.
WILLIAMS JACKSON, A. V.: “The Great Behistun Rock and Some Results of a Re-Examination of the Old Persian Inscriptions on It”, Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 24, 1903, pp. 77–95.

La dinastía Aqueménida: una cronología

La dinastía persa Aqueménida es probablemente una de las más conocidas no solo de la historia de Irán, sino de la Antigüedad. Platón en su Alcibiades escribía que Haxāmanish, el fundador de la familia, era realmente hijo del héroe Perseo, que era a su vez el hijo de Zeus. Por eso a la dinastía de Kurush II se la conoce como “persa”. Pero muchos de estos monarcas no se conocen tanto como otros, y a veces las fechas y el orden entre ellos puede ser confuso, así que os traemos una pequeña lista con todos los reyes que gobernaron en el territorio que se conocía como “Persia” desde el siglo VIII hasta la llegada de Alejandro Magno en 330 AEC.
Para nuestra lista solo hemos escogido reyes coronados, pero no hemos incluido príncipes ni gobernadores secundarios. Además, hemos mantenido los nombres originales en negrita —con las versiones en Persa Antiguo, Babilónico o Elamita— y entre paréntesis hemos colocado el nombre occidentalizado por el que normalmente se les conoce. Esto no es sino un intento de presentaros a los personajes como aquellos que fueron, ya que como sabréis mucho de los persas nos ha llegado a través de fuentes griegas.

Estandarte de Kurush II el Grande

Los orígenes
No se ha comprobado que estos cuatro reyes realmente existan, pero en base a lo que nos queda en las fuentes podemos deducir que se trataba de sátrapas que gobernaban territorios pertenecientes al imperio Neo-Asirio y el imperio Medo.
1.     Haxāmanish (Aquemenes) es la persona que le da nombre a la dinastía. Su nombre está formado por las palabras haxā, “amigo”, y manah, “poder de pensamiento”. Según las inscripciones encontradas en el sitio arqueológico de Behistun y los datos recogidos por Heródoto, Haxāmanish sería el padre de Chishpish y ancestro de Kurush II y Dārayavaush I. De haber sido un personaje real, probablemente habría vivido entre el final del siglo VIII y el principio del siglo VII AEC. Sin embargo, Kurush II no da ningún detalle en su genealogía que mencione a este rey, aunque sí se denomina “Aqueménida”. Lo más probable es que Haxāmanish sea la figura del ancestro mítico de la dinastía, pero que no existiese realmente y cumpliese un papel de legitimación política.

2.     Chishpish (Teispes, c. 675-640 AEC), el hijo de Haxāmanish y el padre del tatarabuelo de Dārayavaush I, un príncipe llamado Ariyāramna. Chishpish solo aparece nombrado en la biografía de Dārayavaush I. En el famoso Cilindro de Kurush está escrita una variación del nombre, Shi-ish-pi-ish, que se ha querido relacionar con el mismo personaje; este ancestro es descrito como el tatarabuelo de Kurush II, con títulos como “gran rey de Anshan”. Se sabe muy poco de este personaje, pero probablemente fuese un vasallo de los Elamitas que expandió su territorio a lo largo del siglo VII AEC conquistando y anexionando Anshan y Pārsa.

3.     Kurush I (Ciro I, c. 600-580 AEC) de Anshan o de Persia. Probablemente el hijo de Chishpish y nieto de Haxāmanish, se repartió el reino expandido por su padre con su hermano, Ariyāramna, que se quedó con Pārsa, mientras que Kurush I gobernó Anshan. Parece que se quiere identificar a este rey con otro monarca del periodo, Kuras de Parsumas, como aparece mencionado en fuentes Neo-Asirias.

4.     Kambūǰiya I (Cambises I, c. 600-559 AEC) el Mayor. Es el hijo más joven de Kurush I y padre de Kurush II. De su vida no se conserva nada escrito durante su tiempo, siendo las fuentes más fiables las inscripciones de Kurush II en su Cilindro. Según Heródoto y Jenofonte, Kambūǰiya I no era un rey, sino una persona de familia influyente que se casó con Mandana, la hija del rey medo Astiages, y por eso se le considera un monarca, aunque nunca llegó a ocupar el puesto de su suegro. Siguió gobernando en Anshan, pero siempre al servicio del imperio de Media.

Sello de Kurush I

El imperio
1.     Kurush II (Ciro II, c. 600-530 AEC) el Grande o el Mayor, “gobernador de los cuatro rincones del mundo”. Kurush II es probablemente la figura más famosa dentro de la dinastía Aqueménida por formar el primer gran imperio persa de la Antigüedad y el mayor que se había contemplado hasta la fecha, desde el Mediterráneo hasta el Valle del Indo. Kurush II estableció el gobierno a través de diferentes satrapías y trasladó el poder a Pasargada, la capital, donde todavía hoy se puede admirar su tumba. El conocido como Cilindro de Ciro, un texto entregado a la ciudad de Babilonia tras su conquista, se consideró desde los años 70 como la primera declaración de Derechos Humanos de la historia, pero esto no es del todo cierto y hay mucha contradicción en la afirmación. Para mayor información sobre Kurush II, hemos hablado sobre él en detalle con nuestros amigos de El Café de la Lluvia. Podéis encontrar el podcast aquí.

2.     Kambūǰiya II (Cambises II, r. 530-522 AEC), el hijo y sucesor de Kurush II. Una de las conquistas más importantes de este rey fue anexionar el reino de Egipto a los territorios del ya de por sí vasto imperio persa, derrotando al faraón Psamético III. Durante el reinado de su padre y tras la conquista de Babilonia Kambūǰiya II fue nombrado soberano de la ciudad, por lo que aparece bendecido junto a su padre en el famoso Cilindro. Heródoto recoge una leyenda sobre un supuesto ejército perdido por el rey persa. Según su versión, Kambūǰiya II habría enviado alrededor de 50.000 soldados al oráculo de Amón en Siwa (Egipto), pero cruzando el desierto una tormenta de arena enterró al ejército, del que nunca más se supo. El caso es que en 2009 se encontraron restos humanos, textiles y militares cerca del oasis, así que tal vez la historia tuvo algo de realidad.

Sello que muestra a Kambūǰiya II derrotando al faraón Psamético III.

3.     Dārayavaush I (Darío I, c. 550-486 AEC) el Grande. Este soberano dejó varias fuentes escritas en su tiempo, siendo la más importante el relieve de Behistun escrito en persa antiguo, elamita y babilonio. La escritura empieza con una larga genealogía que lo enlaza con el fundador de la dinastía, Haxāmanish. En él también cuenta cómo accedió al trono derrotando a Gaumāta, un usurpador. Estableció un nuevo sistema económico con una nueva moneda (el dárico) y convirtió el arameo en el idioma oficial del imperio, además de impulsar la construcción de un sistema de carreteras. Como curiosidad, hay muchas representaciones de Dārayavaush I como faraón en Egipto, ya que su presencia allí también tuvo mucha relevancia.

4.     Xshaya-ṛshā I (Xerxes I, 519-465 AEC) “el que gobierna sobre los héroes". Este es el rey identificado como Ahasuerus en el Libro de Esther, dentro de la Biblia. El episodio más famoso por el que se conoce a Xshaya-ṛshā I es por su enfrentamiento contra los ejércitos liderados por el rey Leónidas en las Termópilas, pero lo que no se suele contar es que, después de derrotar a los espartanos, Xshaya-ṛshā I llegó hasta Atenas y la destruyó, quemándolo todo hasta los cimientos. Después de sus campañas en Grecia, regresó a Persia para finalizar los proyectos arquitectónicos empezados por su padre: la construcción de la Puerta de las Naciones y la Apadana de Persépolis. Xshaya-ṛshā I fue asesinado por Artabanus, que también asesinó al que sería su primer sucesor, el joven príncipe Dārayavaush.

5.     Ṛtaxshaca I (Artaxerxes I, r. 465-424 AEC) recuperó el poder al matar a Artabanus y a sus hijos después de descubrirle responsable por la muerte de su padre y su hermano mayor. Sus relaciones con Grecia cambiaron al sustituir las campañas militares contra la Hélade por un ingreso de fondos casi constante a los enemigos de Atenas. Después de la batalla de Chipre, Ṛtaxshaca I le dio asilo a Temístocles, quien fuera uno de los grandes enemigos de su padre, y le cedió un territorio en sus dominios para que pudiera mantenerse allí. Al parecer, Ṛtaxshaca I sufría de neurofibromatosis, una enfermedad que provocaba que dos de sus extremidades fueran más largas que las otras dos.

Inscripciones de Behistun.

6.     Xshaya-ṛshā II, (Xerxes II, r. 425 AEC) fue el primer heredero de Ṛtaxshaca I. A los cuarenta y cinco días de gobernar fue asesinado por Sogdianus, hijo ilegítimo de Ṛtaxshaca I, o esto es lo que nos cuenta Ctesias, una de las fuentes griegas menos fiables.

7.     Dārayavaush II (Darío II r. 423-404 AEC). Este príncipe se llamó Ochus antes de Dārayavaush, y al parecer era sátrapa de Hyrcania cuando Ṛtaxshaca I murió. A pesar de que las fuentes griegas cuentan que asesinó al usurpador Sogdianus cuando se enteró de que este había matado a su hermano Xshaya-ṛshā II, lo más probable es que ambos príncipes se proclamasen herederos del trono de Persia y finalmente Ochus se impuso, nombrándose Dārayavaush II.

8.     Ṛtaxshaca II (Artaxerxes II, r. 404-358 AEC). Los autores griegos le concedieron el epíteto mnemon, Μνήμων, “el que tiene buena memoria”. Tuvo que defender su posición como rey luchando contra su hermano, Kurush el Joven, que se enfrentó a él con la ayuda de mercenarios griegos. Empleó mucha de su riqueza en proyectos arquitectónicos, como la restauración del palacio de Dārayavaush I en Susa o la construcción de la Apadana de Ecbatana. Al parecer tuvo más de 115 hijos en total, la mayoría de ellos ilegítimos.
Dárico de oro del reino de Ṛtaxshaca II

9.     Ṛtaxshaca III (Artaxerxes III, c. 425-338 AEC), hijo de Ṛtaxshaca II, subió al trono después de que su hermano más mayor fuese ejecutado, el segundo cometiese suicidio y finalmente el tercero fuese asesinado. Seguramente por esto, después de acceder al poder Ṛtaxshaca III asesinó a toda la familia real para garantizar la seguridad de su posición. Los últimos años de su reinado coincidieron con un aumento de poder e influencia en el reino macedonio en la figura del monarca Filipo II. Durante su gobierno el culto a Anahita y a Mithra volvió a ser importante.

10.  Ṛtaxshaca IV (Artaxerxes IV, r. 338-336 AEC). Como el hijo más pequeño de Ṛtaxshaca III, nadie esperaba que Ṛtaxshaca IV llegase a gobernar. Sin embargo, cuando el visir Bagoi asesinó a la familia real colocó al joven príncipe en el trono y lo utilizó como marioneta durante los dos años en los que mantuvo el poder.

11.  Dārayavaush III (Darío III, r. 336-330 AEC), el último rey de la dinastía Aqueménida. Origilamente se llamó Artashata y los griegos lo llamaron Codomannus. Cuando Ṛtaxshaca IV murió, Bagoi intentó repetir su estrategia de poder con Artashata, ya que había demostrado ser un joven prometedor en sus campañas militares contra los macedonios, que ya habían empezado a expandirse por los territorios del imperio persa. Sin embargo, Artashata se deshizo de Bagoi muy deprisa y adoptó el nombre dinástico de Dārayavaush III. El imperio al que accedió ya estaba en un estado muy inestable y las provincias habían empezado diferentes revoluciones que lo debilitaron a pasos agigantados. Finalmente, en 330, los ejércitos de Alejandro Magno se hacían con el control y ponían fin a la dinastía de los Aqueménidas.

Tumba de Kurush II el Grande


DARYAEE, T.: The Oxford Handbook of Iranian History, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2012.
HOLLAND, T.: Persian Fire. The First World Empire, Battle for the West, London, Hachette, 2011.
KUHRT, A.: The Persian Empire. A corpus of Sources form the Achaemenid Period. London, Routledge, 2013.
SCHMITT, R.: “Achaemenid Dynasty”, Encyclopaedia Iranica, vol I, fasc. 4, 1983, pp. 414-426.

WILLIAMS JACKSON, A. V.: “The Great Behistun Rock and Some Results of a Re-Examination of the Old Persian Inscriptions on It”, Journal of the American Oriental Society, vol. 24, 1903, pp. 77–95.