Van Der Spek - Cyrus The Great

iii
Extraction & control

StudiES in Honor
of MattHEw w. StolpEr
edited by
Michael Kozuh
Wouter F. M. Henkelman
Charles E. Jones
and
Christopher Woods
Funded by the Generosity of the Yelda Family
STUDIES IN ANCIENT ORIENTAL CIVILIZATIONNUMBER 68

THE OriEnTal insTiTuTE OF THE univErsiTy OF CHiCagO
CHICAGOILLINOIS
iv
Library of Congress Control Number: 2013956374

ISBN-10: 1-61491-001-4
ISBN-13: 978-1-61491-001-5
ISSN: 0081-7554
The Oriental Institute, Chicago
2014 by The University of Chicago. All rights reserved.
Published 2014. Printed in the United States of America.
Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilizations 68

Leslie Schramer and Thomas G. Urban
Series Editors Acknowledgments
Rebecca Cain, Dennis Campbell, and Brian Keenan assisted in the
production of this volume.
Cover Illustration
Matthew W. Stolper gazing at the colossal bull head (OIM A24065, Persepolis, Achaemenid) in the Robert and Deborah Aliber
Persian gallery of the Oriental institute Museum
Printed by McNaughton & Gunn, Saline, Michigan
The paper used in this publication meets the minimum requirements of american
national standard for information services Permanence of Paper for Printed
Library Materials, ANSI Z39.48-1984.
table of contents
list of abbreviations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
vii
Matthew W. stolper
Christopher Woods, Wouter F. M. Henkelman, Charles E. Jones, and Michael Kozuh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
viii
Bibliography of Publications of Matthew W. Stolper

Charles E. Jones, The Pennsylvania State University, University of Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
1.
Persepolis Fortification aramaic Tablet seal 0002 and the Keeping of Horses
Annalisa Azzoni, Vanderbilt University, and Elspeth R. M. Dusinberre, University of Colorado at Boulder. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
2.
An Episode in the Reign of the Babylonian Pretender Nebuchadnezzar IV

Paul-Alain Beaulieu, University of Toronto. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
3.
Achaemenid Estate(s) Near Pasargadae?

Rmy Boucharlat, CNRS University of Lyon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
17
4.
Les tablettes de bois du Grand roi (Note sur les communications officielles dans un royaume itinrant)
Pierre Briant, Collge de France . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
5.
royal Women in Elamite art

Elizabeth Carter, University of California, Los Angeles . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
6.
Iddin-Nab spir a gardu

Walter Farber, University of Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
7.
The Royal-Name Seals of Darius I

Mark B. Garrison, Trinity University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8.
De vie trpas
Franoise Grillot-Susini, CNRS Paris . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
9.
The Estates of ama on the br

Michael Jursa and Klaus Wagensonner, University of Vienna . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 109
10.
Elamite and Akkadian Inscribed Bricks from Bard-e Karegar (Khuzistan, Iran)
Michael Kozuh, Auburn University. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131
11.
reassessing the reign of Xerxes in the light of new Evidence

Amlie Kuhrt, University College London . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 163
12.
Cultural Exchange at Kltepe

Mogens Trolle Larsen, University of Copenhagen, and Agnete Wisti Lassen, Yale University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 171
13.
14.
27
37
41
63
67
The Curricular Context of an Akkadian Prayer from Old Babylonian Ur (UET 6 402)
Jacob Lauinger, Johns Hopkins University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189
Myth, History, Cosmology, and Hydraulics in Achaemenid Iran

Bruce Lincoln, University of Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197
15.
Biography of a Sentence: Assurbanipal, Nabonidus, and Cyrus

Piotr Michalowski, University of Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 203
16.
Periodicities and Period Relations in Babylonian Celestial Sciences

Francesca Rochberg, University of California, Berkeley . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 211
17.
On Persons in the Old Babylonian Law Collections: The Case of mr awlim in Bodily Injury Provisions
Martha T. Roth, University of Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
18.
Gilgamesh and the ius primae noctis

Gonzalo Rubio, Pennsylvania State University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 229
19.
Cyrus the Great, Exiles, and Foreign Gods: A Comparison of Assyrian and Persian Policies on Subject Nations
R. J. van der Spek, VU University Amsterdam. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
20.
Persians on the Euphrates? Material Culture and Identity in Two Achaemenid Burials from Hacnebi, Southeast Turkey
Gil J. Stein, The Oriental Institute, University of Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 265
21.
On the Dynasty of imaki: Twenty Years (or so) After

Piotr Steinkeller, Harvard University . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
Table of Contents
vi
22.
some Thoughts on the ustarbaru

Jan Tavernier, Universit catholique de Louvain. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 297
23.
a statue of Darius in the Temple of sippar

Caroline Waerzeggers, VU University Amsterdam . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 323
24.
Earth, Water, and Friendship with the King: Argos and Persia in the Mid-fifth Century
Matthew W. Waters, University of Wisconsin-Eau Claire . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 331
25.
Freedom and Dependency: Neo-Babylonian Manumission Documents with Oblation and Service Obligation
Cornelia Wunsch, School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London, and F. Rachel Magdalene, Leipzig University . . . . 337
26.
From Lower Land to Cappadocia

Ilya Yakubovich, University of Chicago . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 347
233
19
cyrus the Great, Exiles, and foreign Gods:

a comparison of assyrian and persian policies
on Subject nations
R. J. van der Spek, VU University Amsterdam*
introduction
Cyrus, king of Persia (559530 b.c.), conqueror of Babylon (539), has a good reputation, also among modern historians.
Most textbooks, monographs, and articles on ancient history stress his tolerance toward the countries and nations
he subdued. it is mentioned time and again that he allowed them freedom of religion, that he behaved respectfully
toward Babylon and its temple cults, and that he reinstated several cults, especially that of the god of israel in Jerusalem. This policy is often contrasted with that of the assyrian kings, who are presented as cruel rulers, oppressing
subdued nations, destroying sanctuaries, deporting gods and people, and forcing their subjects to worship assyrian
gods. Cyrus acts supposedly inaugurated a new policy, aimed at winning the subject nations for the Persian empire by
tolerance and clemency. it was exceptional that Cambyses and Xerxes abandoned this policy in Egypt and Babylonia.
in the prestigious Cambridge Ancient History volume on Persia, T. Cuyler young maintains that Cyrus policy was one of
remarkable tolerance based on a respect for individual people, ethnic groups, other religions and ancient kingdoms.1
* This contribution is an update of my article Cyrus de Pers in
assyrisch perspectief: Een vergelijking tussen de assyrische en Perzische politiek ten opzichte van onderworpen volken, Tijdschrift
voor Geschiedenis 96 (1983): 127 (in Dutch, for a general audience
of historians). it was based on a lecture given at the first achaemenid History Workshop, the Colloquium on Early achaemenid
History, held in groningen on May 29, 1981, organized by Heleen
sancisi-Weerdenburg. summaries of the lectures were published in
Persica: Jaarboek van het Genootschap Nederland-Iran / Annuaire de la Socit Nerlando-iranienne 10 (1982): 27384. For the study of assyrian
imperialism, see also my assyriology and History: a Comparative
study of War and Empire in assyria, athens, and rome, in The Tablet
and the Scroll: Near Eastern Studies in Honor of William W. Hallo, edited
by Mark E. Cohen, Daniel C. snell, and David B. Weisberg (Bethesda:
CDl Press, 1993), pp. 26270. i thank Jona lendering for the translation of this article into English and for his inspiring comments.
1
T. Cuyler young, Jr., The Early History of the Medes and the Persians and the achaemenid Empire to the Death of Cambyses, in The
Cambridge Ancient History, vol. 4: Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean, c. 525 to 479 B.C., edited by John Boardman, N.G.L. Hammond,
DavidM. Lewis, and M. Ostwald, 2nd ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge
university Press, 1988), p. 42. in the same vein: Muhammad a. Dandamaev and vladimir g. lukonin, The Culture and Social Institutions
of Ancient Iran (Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1989), pp.
348, 367. Older studies: A. T. Olmstead, History of the Persian Empire
(Chicago: university of Chicago Press, 1948, 1976), pp. 5152, 5758;
RichardN. Frye, The Heritage of Persia (Cleveland: World Publishing,
1963), pp. 78, 82, 120; idem, The History of Ancient Iran, Handbuch
der Altertumswissenschaft 3/7 (Munich: C.H. Beck, 1984); Roman
ghirshman, Iran: From the Earliest Times to the Islamic Conquest (Harmondsworth: Penguin Books, 1978), p. 133; sabatino Moscati, The
Face of the Ancient Orient: A Panorama of Near Eastern Civilizations in
Pre-Classical Times (garden City: Doubleday, 1962), pp. 28788; george
g. Cameron, ancient Persia, in The Idea of History in the Ancient Near
East, edited by robert C. Dentan (new Haven: yale university Press,

1955), pp. 9293; Jacques Duchesne-guillemin, religion et politique,
de Cyrus Xerxs, Persica 3 (19671968): 1; ismael Quiles, la philosophie sous-jacente au message de Cyrus, in Commmoration Cyrus,
Actes du congrs de Shiraz 1971 et autres tudes rdiges loccasion du
2500 e anniversaire de la fondation de lempire perse, vol. 1, edited by
Jacques Duchesne-guillemin, acta iranica 1 (Tehran: Bibliothque
Pahlavi; leiden: Brill, 1974), pp. 1923; Jzef Wolski, la constitution
de lempire diran et son rle dans lhistoire de lantiquit, in Duchesne-guillemin, ed., Commmoration Cyrus 1, p. 74; antonio Pagliaro,
Cyrus et lempire perse, in Commmoration Cyrus, Actes du congrs de
Shiraz 1971 et autres tudes rdiges loccasion du 2500e anniversaire de
la fondation de lempire perse, vol. 2, edited by Jacques Duchesne-guillemin, acta iranica 2 (Tehran: Bibliothque Pahlavi; leiden: Brill,
1974), pp. 323; gherardo gnoli, Politique religieuse et conception
de la royaut sous les achmnides, in Duchesne-guillemin, ed.,
Commmoration Cyrus 2, pp. 11790, esp. 15455; Muhammad a. Dandamaev, la politique religieuse des achmnides, in Monumentum
H.S. Nyberg, edited by Jacques Duchesne-guillemin, acta iranica 4
(Tehran: Bibliothque Pahlavi; leiden: Brill, 1975), vol. 1, p. 193. For
more relevant literature, see Pier luigi Tozzi, Per la storia della
politica religiosa degli achemenidi: Distruzioni persiane de templi
greci agli inizi del v secolo, Rivista Storica Italiana 89 (1977): 29 n.
29. Tozzi presents a less positive picture of the achaemenid kings,
quoted by Heleen sancisi-Weerdenburg, Yaun en Persai: Grieken en
Perzen in een ander perspectief (groningen: Drukkerij Dijkstra niemeyer, 1980), pp. 1516; cf. below. a more nuanced picture of Cyrus is
found in KlaasR. Veenhof, Geschichte des Alten Orients bis zur Zeit
Alexanders des Groen, grundisse zum alten Testament 11 (gttingen:
vandenhoeck & ruprecht, 2001), pp. 28891.
since the publication of this article in 1983 a lot has changed
thanks to the work of, among others, Pierre Briant, Histoire de lempire perse: de Cyrus Alexandre (Paris: Fayard, 1996) = From Cyrus to
Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire, English translation by Peter
233
234
R. J. van der Spek
The most important document in this context is the Babylonian Cyrus Cylinder. This clay cylinder was probably
intended for deposition in the foundation of the imgur-Enlil wall in Babylon. it was discovered in 1879 by Hormuzd
rassam in the amran Hill (temple area), and acquired in 1880 by the British Museum. 2 The document is one of the
latest examples of an age-old Mesopotamian royal tradition of depositing such cylinders in the foundations of temples
and palaces with the purpose of justifying the deeds of the king to the gods and to posterity.3 The Cyrus Cylinder is
especially notable as a document in which Cyrus denounces his Babylonian predecessor nabonidus as a usurper and
proclaims himself as the true Babylonian king, appointed by Marduk himself.
The cylinder has raised interest from its discovery, but received special attention in 1971 during a festival in Tehran in which the shah of Persia celebrated the 2,500th anniversary of the Persian monarchy. Part of the celebrations
was the presentation of a replica of the document to u Thant, then secretary general of the united nations; it has
ever since been on display since in the un headquarters in new york as the first declaration of human rights.4 a
state-organized conference intended as homage to Cyrus was held in shiraz.5 in the same vein, Cyrus tolerance was
treated by Cyrus Masroori in a volume dedicated to religious toleration.6 The discussions of this kind are valuable in that
they challenge the usual Eurocentric approach to the history of the near East in traditional scholarship, which tends
to see all the blessings of modern civilization as coming solely from greece and rome. it is good to see that in the past
decades this Eurocentric treatment of ancient near Eastern history (including that of the Hellenistic period) has lost
T. Daniels (Winona lake: Eisenbrauns, 2002); amlie Kuhrt, The

Cyrus Cylinder and achaemenid imperial Policy, Journal for the Study
of the Old Testament 25 (1983): 8397; idem, Babylonia from Cyrus to
Xerxes, in Boardman, Hammond, Lewis, and Ostwald (eds.), Cambridge Ancient History 4, pp. 11238; idem, Cyrus the great of Persia: images and realities, in Representations of Political Power: Case
Histories from Times of Change and Dissolving Order in the Ancient Near
East, edited by Marlies Heinz and Marian H. Feldman (Winona lake:
Eisenbrauns, 2007), pp. 16991; idem, The Problem of achaemenid
Religious Policy, in Die Welt der Gtterbilder, edited by Brigitte
groneberg and Hermann spieckermann (Berlin: Walter de gruyter,
2007), pp. 11742; idem, ancient near Eastern History: The Case
of Cyrus the great of Persia, in Understanding the History of Ancient
Israel, edited by H. g. M. Williamson, Proceedings of the British
Academy 143 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), pp. 10727;
Josef Wiesehfer, Ancient Persia: From 550 B.C. to 650 A.D., translated by azizeh azodi (London: I.B. Tauris, 1996), pp. 4951; idem,
Kontinuitt oder Zsur? Babylonien unter den achaimeniden, in
Religion und Religionskontakte im Zeitalter der Achmeniden, edited by
reinhard g. Kratz (gtersloh: gtersloher verlagshaus, 2002), pp.
2948; reinhard Kratz, From nabonidus to Cyrus, in Ideologies as
Intercultural Phenomena (Proceedings of the third annual symposium
of the assyrian and Babylonian intellectual Heritage Project, held
in Chicago, October 2731, 2000), edited by A. Panaino and Giovanni
Pettinato, Melammu symposia 3 (Milan: universit di Bologna and
isiao, 2000), pp. 14356.
However, the view of Cyrus as champion of religious toleration
is persistent. Cyrus Masroori devotes an entire article on Cyrus
supposed policy of religious toleration, contrasting it with the policy of the assyrian kings, in which he rejects Kuhrts analysis of
the cylinder (p. 22 and n. 49): Cyrus Masroori, Cyrus ii and the
Political utility of religious Toleration, in Religious Toleration: The
Variety of Rites from Cyrus to Defoe, edited by John Christian laursen
(new york: st. Martins Press, 1999), pp. 1336. The view of Cyrus as
human rights champion is also still strong in many books written
for a general audience. The traditional contrast between assyrian
cruelty and Cyrus course of mercy is maintained by Tom Holland,
Persian Fire: The First World Empire and the Battle for the West (london:
little, Brown, 2005), p. 12, who also, probably mistakenly, assumed
that Cyrus had spared Croesus of lydia (p. 14; see Wiesehfer, Ancient Persia, p. 50). The story, told by Herodotus (1.87), that the lydian king was saved from the pyre by a rain shower, is contradicted
by Bacchylides (Third Ode), who says that Croesus was taken away to
the Hyperboreans, i.e., the realm of the dead. The nabonidus Chronicle also suggests that Cyrus killed the king of lydia (see n. 184).
Kaveh Farrokh, Shadows in the Desert: Ancient Persia at War (Oxford:
Osprey, 2007), p. 44, still calls the Cyrus Cylinder the worlds first
human rights charter. The website of the Circle of ancient iranian

studies provides an equally uncritical platform for the eulogy of
Cyrus: www.cais-soas.com/ (accessed June 2009).
2
For a translation and more information on the Cyrus Cylinder,
see the appendix at the end of this article. For the findspot of the
cylinder, see C. B. F. Walker, a recently identified Fragment of the
Cyrus Cylinder, Iran 10 (1972): 15859.
3
it is strange that the cylinder was supposedly found in the amran
area (= temple area), while the document especially refers to the
restoration of the imgur-Enlil wall (inner city wall), so that one
would expect it to be found somewhere in that area. The latest royal
inscription of which we are aware is the antiochus Cylinder, dated
to 268 b.c. it was found by Hormuzd rassam, in 1880, in Borsippa. a
recent transliteration by Marten stol and myself can be consulted
online, on the livius website: www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/
antiochus_cylinder/antiochus_cylinder1.html. The most beautiful
flowers grow on the edge of the ravine: whereas the Cyrus Cylinder
is written in plain neo-Babylonian script, the antiochus Cylinder
is composed in Old Babylonian monumental signs. See also Amlie
Kuhrt and susan sherwin-White, aspects of seleucid royal ideology: The Cylinder of antiochus i from Borsippa, Journal of Hellenic
Studies 111 (1991): 7186.
4
This even led to the publication of a fake translation of the Cyrus
Cylinder on the web (www.farsinet.com/cyrus/), in which mention
is made of the Iranian god Auramazd, Cyrus announcement of
freedom of religion, and the abolishment of slavery, none of which
is present in the real Cyrus Cylinder. The fake translation is engraved on a plaque in the House of iran, Balboa Park, san Diego.
This plaque can be consulted on the web at www.kavehfarrokh.com/
news/a-new-translation-of-the-cyrus-cylinder-by-the-british-museum/, where, perhaps surprisingly, a reliable translation made by
irving Finkel is also provided. The British Museum, meanwhile, has
published an updated version of Finkels translation accompanied
by a translation in Persian: www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/article_index/c/cyrus_cylinder_-_translation.aspx (all websites accessed July 2010).
For a completely new edition of the cylinder (with new fragments
added), see irving l. Finkel, ed., The Cyrus Cylinder: The King of Persias
Proclamation from Ancient Babylon (london: i. B. Tauris, 2013). see also
the appendix to this article.
5
Proceedings published as Commmoration Cyrus: Actes du Congrs de
Shiraz 1971 et autres tudes rdiges loccasion du 2500e anniversaire de
la fondation de lempire perse, 3 vols., edited by Jacques Duchesne-guillemin, acta iranica 13 (Tehran: Bibliothque Pahlavi; leiden: Brill,
1974). Cf. n. 1, above.
6
Masroori, Cyrus ii.
235
ground, among others by the work of the dedicatee of this volume, Matthew stolper, as well as by amlie Kuhrt and
Pierre Briant. i hope to have done my bit in this as well. However, the worthy cause of deconstructing orientalism,
a term famously discussed by Edward said,7 is not furthered by presenting fake documents (see n. 4) and unhistorical
and anachronistic reconstructions.
The idea of Cyrus as the champion of religious tolerance rests on three fundamentally erroneous assumptions.
in the first place, it rests on an anachronistic perception of ancient political discourse. in antiquity, no discourse on
religious tolerance existed. religion was deeply embedded in society, in political structures, in daily life. This is true
for the ancient sumerian city-states, for the athenian city-state, and for the roman republic. Especially for expanding empires, authorities had to face the problem of encompassing a variety of political constructs with their religious
concepts embedded in them. sometimes this led to harsh treatment of subdued people and the destruction of temples,
but empires typically accepted a certain amount of multiformity in order not to provoke rebellion. in addition, polytheism was the normal type of religion in antiquity, which made it easier to accept the existence and also to respect the
power of foreign gods. it is not a coincidence that suppression of religion often had something to do with monotheistic
religions (persecution of Jews and Christians, who refused to accept gods other than their own; persecution of pagans
under Christian emperors). Persecution of religious beliefs and practices were usually related to would-be disturbances
of order (as in the case of the suppression of the Bacchanalia in rome in 186 b.c. or, possibly, the prohibition of the
Jewish cult in the temple of Jerusalem by antiochus iv in 168 b.c.).8
secondly, it is too facile to characterize Cyrus rule as one that had tolerance as its starting point. although it is
indeed possible to describe his policy as positively pragmatic or even mild in some respects, it is also clear that Cyrus
was a normal conqueror with the usual policy of brutal warfare and harsh measures. The will of the Persian king was
law, and no principal right of participation in government was allowed.
Thirdly, the comparison with assyrian policy is mistaken in its portrayal of that policy as principally different from
Cyrus. as we shall see, the assyrian attitude did not only consist of cruelty and intolerance, and the cult of assyrian
gods was not imposed on subdued peoples.
This article tries to place Cyrus policy in its ancient near Eastern historical context. i maintain that for centuries
the principles of government remained essentially the same: the assyrian empire (745612), the Babylonian empire
(612539), the Persian empire (539331), the greco-Macedonian empires of alexander the great, the Diadochi, and the
seleucids (33164) were not fundamentally different. assyria did not all of a sudden vanish from the earth in 614609
b.c., but its place was taken over by later dynasties and rulers. Of course, these had to adapt themselves to different
circumstances, but the similarities are striking. although i will concentrate on a comparison of assyrian and Persian
policies, because these are generally seen as opposites, i will occasionally digress on the other empires, to show that
many assyrian and Persian policies were common in the ancient near East. i shall deal with three subjects: religious
policy, the stance toward Babylon, and the treatment of new subjects (especially as regards deportation).
Persian religious Policy

Babylonian documents praise Cyrus because he restored the cult of the supreme god Marduk, purportedly neglected
by nabonidus, the last king of the Babylonian empire. The Cyrus Cylinder even states that the king had been chosen
by Marduk to seize power in Babylon. 9 The document also states that Cyrus returned the statues of the gods, which
had been taken away by Babylonian conquerors from the cities of Mesopotamia and across the Tigris, to their home
towns, that he ordered their temples to be rebuilt, and that he allowed their people to return home.10 it may be useful
to stress that the Cyrus Cylinder focuses on a limited group of cities, indicated by name, from Mesopotamia and the
Transtigridian regions; countries in which, as we will see below, the Persians had a special interest. The cylinder does,
therefore, not prove that all gods and all people were allowed to return, and cannot be constructed as proof as has
often been done that the Jews were allowed to go home in 539.
Edward W. said, Orientalism (london: routledge, 1978).

For the development in the greco-roman world from a situation
in which religious commitment was predicated on civic identity
to a situation of competition and potential conflict between religious groups based on voluntary commitment, see John north,
The Development of religious Pluralism, in The Jews among Pagans
and Christians in the Roman Empire, edited by Judith lieu, John north,
and Tessa rajak (london: routledge, 1992), pp. 17493, quotation
from p. 187. a similar development is present in the ancient near
East from the early sumerian city-states to the world empires in the
first millennium b.c. still fundamental for the position of Judaism

and Christianity in the ancient world is a. D. nock, Conversion: The
Old and the New in Religion from Alexander the Great to Augustine of Hippo
(Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1933). For the relation of community and
religion, the process of mobility of people and their gods, concept
of syncretism, and the profusion of cults in the roman empire, see
James B. rives, Religion in the Roman Empire (Oxford: Blackwell, 2007),
pp. 10557. i owe these references to Jaap-Jan Flinterman.
9
Cyrus Cylinder (see Appendix), lines 1112.
10
Cyrus Cylinder, lines 3032.
236
R. J. van der Spek
reference to a return of Judahites from exile by order of Cyrus can be found in the biblical books of isaiah, Chronicles, and Ezra.11 although a return from exile under the achaemenid empire certainly took place, the historicity of a
return under Cyrus is disputed.12 The biblical evidence concerning a return under Cyrus is feeble; the actual return and
rebuilding rather seems to have taken place under Darius i and artaxerxes i. Diana Edelman has argued that the author
of second isaiah somehow must have known Cyrus propaganda concerning the Esagila temple of Babylon and hence
expressed similar hopes for the temple of Jerusalem, a point taken up later by the authors of Ezra and Chronicles.13
greek authors also give a favorable judgment of Cyrus. Herodotus reports that the Persians called him a father,
because he was gentle and procured the Persians all kind of goods.14 The Babylonians, however, feared his onslaught.15
Xenophon produced a romanticized and very favorable life of Cyrus, the Cyropaedia, intended as a kind of Frstenspiegel. Book 8 stresses the wickedness and decadence of the Persians after Cyrus. Ctesias, as far as his Persica is preserved,
seems to present a heroic picture of Cyrus and his triumphs.16
it is unnecessary to deal much longer with this positive aspect of Cyrus policy, because it is the subject of much
secondary literature, as discussed above. However, there are certain negative aspects as well, which were dealt with for
the first time by Pier luigi Tozzi.17 He pointed out that the Persians destroyed several greek sanctuaries, such as the
temple of Phocaea, whose destruction (an archaeological fact) most probably should be attributed to Harpagus, who
captured the city in the 540s on the orders of Cyrus. Herodotus and Ctesias did not close their eyes to the sometimes
brutal actions of Cyrus.18 Darius i, the king who supposedly contributed to the rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem19
and who supposedly protected the temple of apollo in Magnesia against a governor who had taxed the peasants on the
temple land,20 also destroyed temples, like the oracle at Didyma and sanctuaries of Eretria.21 in the Babylonian version
of the Bisotun inscription Darius proudly mentions the numbers of rebel leaders and soldiers whom he defeated, killed,
and executed.22 in short, both cruelty and mildness belong to Persian policy since Cyrus.23
11
isaiah 44:2445:8; 2 Chronicles 36:2223; Ezra 1 and 6:15.

K. D. Jenner, The Old Testament and Its Appreciation of Cyrus,
Persica 10 (1982): 28384; antonius H. J. gunneweg, Geschichte Israels
bis Bar Kochba, 3rd, revised ed. (stuttgart: Kohlhammer, 1979), pp.
13538; J. C. H. lebram, Die Traditionsgeschichte der Esragestalt
und die Frage nach dem historischen Esra, in Sources, Structures and
Synthesis (proceedings of the groningen 1983 achaemenid History
Workshop), edited by Heleen sancisi-Weerdenburg, achaemenid
History 1 (Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten,
1987), pp. 10338; Diana Edelman, The Origins of the Second Temple:
Persian Imperial Policy and the Rebuilding of Jerusalem (london: Equinox, 2005).
13
Edelman, Origins of the Second Temple, pp. 162208, argues that
the return under Darius i is also not historical.
14
Herodotus 3.89.
15
Herodotus 1.109.
16
Dominique lenfant, Ctsias de Cnide: la Perse, lInde, autres fragments
(Paris: les Belles lettres, 2004).
17
Tozzi, Distruzioni persiane.
18
Herodotus 1.164 for the capture of Phocaea; Tozzi, Distruzioni persiane, pp. 19, 2324. For a discussion, see Kuhrt, Cyrus the
great of Persia: images and realities, p. 173. Ctesias reports that
Cyrus had Croesus son killed before his fathers eyes, FGrH F9.4,
lenfant, Ctsias de Cnide, p. 110.
19
Ezra 6.
20
letter of Darius i to gadatas: Wilhelm Brandenstein and Manfred
Mayrhofer, Handbuch des Altpersischen (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz,
1964), pp. 9192. Pierre Briant now considers this inscription as a
falsification of roman date: Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, p. xviii n.
15; idem, Histoire et archologie dun texte: la lettre de Darius Gadatas entre Perses, grecs et romains, in Licia e Lidia prima dellellenizzazione (atti del convegno internazionale, roma, 1112 ottobre 1999),
edited by M. giorgieri, M. salvini, M. C. Trmouille, and P. vannicelli
(rome: Consiglio nazionale delle ricerche, 2003), pp. 10744.
21
Herodotus 6.19, 101.
22
Elizabeth n. von voigtlander, The Bisitun Inscription of Darius the
Great: Babylonian Version, Corpus inscriptionum iranicarum, Part 1:
inscriptions of iran, vol. 2: The Babylonian versions of the achaemenian inscriptions, Texts 1 (london: lund Humphries, 1978), passim.
23
The reputations of Cambyses and Xerxes are more complicated issues. Both have been accused of religious intolerance. For Cambyses
12
and the purported killing of the apis Bull, see n. 60, below. Xerxes destroyed the temples on the athenian acropolis (as a punitive
measure for athens support for the ionian revolt); this destruction
is supported by archaeology. late and potentially biased sources
claim that Xerxes did the same with the Babylon temple(s). For the
classical sources, see Olmstead, Persian Empire, pp. 23637 with n.
23. sancisi-Weerdenburg argued that the references in the so-called
Daiva inscription of Xerxes, in which it is stated that Xerxes destroyed sanctuaries of false gods, do not refer to a specific event,
but can better be seen as expression of royal ideology (disobedience
to the king is punished and holy places of rebellious people will be
destroyed), Yaun en Persai, pp. 147, 26667 (English summary);
Heleen sancisi-Weerdenburg, The Personality of Xerxes, King of
Kings, in Archaeologia Iranica et Orientalis: Miscellanea in honorem Louis
vanden Berghe, edited by leon de Meyer and E. Haerinck (leuven:
Peeters, 1989), vol. 1, pp. 54961. The purported destruction of the
temple of Babylon by Xerxes occurs in classical sources describing
the entry of Alexander in Babylon in October 331 b.c.: Diodorus
siculus 2.9.45, 9; strabo 15.3.910, 16.1.5; arrian, Anabasis 3.16.25,
7.17.14; the destruction of Babylon is not mentioned in the earlier
sources on Persian history, Herodotus and Ctesias. Pliny, Natural History 6.12122, says that the temple of Jupiter Belus was still standing
in his time. Doubts concerning Xerxes destruction of the temple
were expressed by amlie Kuhrt and susan sherwin-White, Xerxes
Destruction of Babylonian Temples, in The Greek Sources (proceedings of the groningen 1984 achaemenid History Workshop), edited
by Heleen sancisi-Weerdenburg and amlie Kuhrt, achaemenid History 2 (Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 1987),
pp. 6978. More recently, Caroline Waerzeggers convincingly argued
that Xerxes took severe, targeted measures against the traditional
temple elite in Babylon and a number of (but not all) Babylonian cities. The reason was their support for the insurrection of Bl-imanni
and ama-eriba in Xerxes second year of reign. See Caroline Waerzeggers, The Babylonian revolts against Xerxes and the End of
Archives, Archiv fr Orientforschung 50 (2003/2004): 15073. For an
evaluation of the condition and number of the temples in the early
Hellenistic period, see r. J. van der spek, The size and significance
of the Babylonian Temples under the successors, in La Transition
entre lempire achmnide et les royaumes hellnistiques, edited by Pierre
Briant and Francis Joanns, Persika 9 (Paris: ditions de Boccard,
2006), pp. 261306.
237
assyrian religious Policy

The treatment of assyria in modern secondary literature is as hostile as the treatment of Persia is favorable. The assyrian rulers are pictured as notorious for their aggressive expansionism and the fear they inspired among the subdued
nations. israel and Judah are just two of the states that had to bear the consequences. They were reduced to the status
of vassal states, which meant that their kings were only allowed to remain on their thrones on the condition that they
would recognize the assyrian king as their lord, pay tribute, and refrain from a foreign policy of their own. 24 in 722, a
rebellious israel was punished: it was added to the assyrian empire and became a province under an assyrian governor.
The Hebrew Bible is important for our knowledge of the policies of the assyrian administration, as it offers information from the point of view of the vanquished. The prophets especially show that people were afraid of assyrian
aggression (cf., e.g., isaiah 10:514; nahum), and probably rightly so: the royal inscriptions of the assyrian kings document cruel acts, the ruining of cities and temples, the destruction and deportation of the statues of the gods, torture
(impaling, flaying), and the deportation of citizens. The inscriptions of assurnasirpal ii (884859) especially contain
such gloomy stories.
The royal inscriptions stress that the kings performed their conquests on behalf and by order of the supreme god
Aur. The kings offered their deity an account of their policy in, for example, compositions of the type letter to god
X. The one written by sargon ii after his eighth campaign, against urartu, is best preserved. 25 it states that all gods on
earth should pay homage to Aur and come to his temple with all their riches.26 We also learn from assyrian sources
that the kings habitually looted temples and seized the gods statues, which they brought to the temple of Aur. The
letter of Sargon describes at great length how the (statue of the) Urartian god aldia was taken away, together with
his temples treasures.27
On the basis of these sources and several texts from the Hebrew Bible, scholars have tried to prove that it was
the policy of the assyrians to impose the cult of their gods on subdued people.28 This theory was proposed in 1908 by
A.T. Olmstead29 and has since been accepted by many students of Hebrew literature, like Theodor Oestreicher, who
interpreted the reforms of King Josiah as an anti-assyrian revolt,30 and by Jagersma in an overview of the history of
israel.31 Independently from each other, Morton Cogan and John McKay protested against Olmsteads hypothesis,32
McKay focusing on the Hebrew texts and Cogan on the assyrian ones. Their arguments can be summarized as follows:
1.
That the assyrians imposed the cult of their gods is stated nowhere in the Hebrew Bible. Had the assyrians
encouraged the introduction of a new cult, the prophets would certainly have mentioned this. One might add
that it is remarkable how unsuccessful the assyrian propaganda concerning the head of the assyrian pantheon
was. In the entire Bible the name of the god Aur does not occur, nor is his name preserved in any Greek or
Roman text. It indicates that the eulogy of Aur did not get far beyond the royal inscriptions and did not play
an important role in the subject territories.
2.
The Assyrian sources do not mention imposing the cult of Aur either. What the Assyrian kings wanted to
do was to exalt their royal god and emblem, Aur. This could be achieved by Assyrian victories, destruction
of temples and statues, deportation of statues, or imposing tribute on behalf of the temple of Aur. Assyrian
victories proved that their supreme god was more powerful than his rivals, which in turn legitimized their
24
van der spek, assyriology and History. The best treatment of
assyrian religious policy is now steven W. Holloway, Aur Is King!
Aur Is King! Religion in the Exercise of Power in the Neo-Assyrian Empire,
Culture and History of the ancient near East 10 (leiden: Brill, 2002).
25
Franois Thureau-Dangin, Une relation de la huitime campagne
de Sargon (Paris: geuthner, 1912); Walter Mayer, sargons Feldzug
gegen urartu 714 v. Chr.: Text und bersetzung, Mitteilungen der
Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft zu Berlin 115 (1983): 65132; Daniel David
luckenbill, Ancient Records of Assyria and Babylonia, vol. 2: Historical
Records of Assyria: From Sargon to the End (Chicago: university of Chicago Press, 1927), 13978.
26
Sargon, Letter to Aur (cf. n. 23), lines 31416. See also below.
27
Sargon, Letter to Aur, lines 346425; Luckenbill, Ancient Records,
17276.
28
see, for example, 2 Kings 16:18: ahaz, the king of Judah, introduced a few changes in the temple of Jerusalem because of the king
of assyria, after he had submitted himself to Tiglath-Pileser iii in
Damascus in 732 b.c. and so became his servant (2 Kings 16:7). He
also built a new altar in the temple of Jerusalem.
29
A. T. Olmstead, Western Asia in the Days of Sargon of Assyria, 722705
B.C. (New York: Holt, 1908), p. 171; idem, Oriental Imperialism,
American Historical Review 23 (1918): 75562, esp. pp. 75758; idem,
History of Assyria (new york: scribner, 1923); idem, History of Palestine
and Syria to the Macedonian Conquest (new york: scribner, 1931), p.
452.
30
2 Kings 2223; Theodor Oestreicher, Das deuteronomische Grundgesetz, Beitrge zur Frderung christlicher Theologie 27/4 (gtersloh:
Bertelsmann, 1923), pp. 911, 3758; idem, Reichstempel und Ortsheiligtmer in Isral, Beitrge zur Frderung christlicher Theologie 33/3
(gtersloh: Bertelsmann, 1930), pp. 3537.
31
H. Jagersma, A History of Israel in the Old Testament Period, trans.
by John Bowden (london: sCM Press, 1982), pp. 159, 163; reprinted
in idem, A History of Israel to Bar Kochba (london: sCM Press, 1994).
32
Morton Cogan, Imperialism and Religion: Assyria, Judah and Israel in
the Eighth and Seventh Centuries B.C.E., society of Biblical literature
Monograph series 19 (Missoula: society of Biblical literature and
scholars Press, 1974); John McKay, Religion in Judah under the Assyrians, 732609 B.C. (london: sCM Press, 1973).
238
R. J. van der Spek
actions. This thought was common in the ancient near East and can also be encountered in the Hebrew Bible.33
Destruction or deportation of the statues of the gods did not mean that the cult could not be restored with a
different statue, or with the original if it were allowed to return from exile. Where the assyrian texts speak of
the imposition of sacrifices to Aur and the great gods, this invariably refers to supplying goods to the temples
of assyria, not to the establishment of a cult in a vassal state. The only indication for the imposition of a cult
is the placing of the weapon of Aur in a newly conquered province.34
3.
Where the Hebrew Bible discusses the worship of foreign gods, it usually refers to Phoenician or Canaanite
deities, seldom to Mesopotamian gods, and never to Aur.35 nor is there a reference that introducing these
cults was an assyrian demand. McKay explained the introduction of foreign gods from the uncertainty of the
times, which made the believers open to new deities.36 Cogan stressed that israel and Judah, when they were
integrated into the world empire, developed more contacts with the outside world and were more inclined to
accept foreign gods.37
in 1982, Hermann spieckermann tried to refute Cogan and Mackays positions.38 He collected a number of assyrian
inscriptions that he took as referring to cultic impositions. some of these indeed suggest some interference into the
local cult (like the imposition of a royal stela with an image of the king and symbols of the gods in the palace of the king
of gaza; see n. 34), but none of them mentioning a clear-cut erection of an assyrian temple or the restructuring of an
indigenous temple into an Assyrian one. It is true that images of Assyrian kings and weapons of Aur were erected
in local temples (not only in provinces, as Cogan thought), but steven Holloway argued convincingly that these sacred
objects functioned as reminder of assyrian supremacy and as part of the ritual of loyalty oaths, stating that neither
administrative texts nor royal correspondence nor royal prophecies suggest that a cult of Aur was established on
foreign soil, nor do these sources provide evidence that assyrian temples were constructed for assyrian deities outside
Mesopotamia.39 also, the fact remains that the reforms in Judah and israel do not concern assyrian, but Canaanite
gods; Aur is not even mentioned once. Spieckermanns assumption that behind the traditional list of Canaanite gods,
Baal, Asherah, and the host of heaven (2 Kings 23:4), lurk the gods Aur and Itar, is absurd.40
at the same time, it is surprising that neither Cogan nor McKay recognized that the religious policy of assyria was
not unique; it was essentially identical to that of all ancient empires. McKay stated that the religio-political ideal of
the ancient semites was not therefore identical to that of the later greeks and romans who did try to impose or encourage the worship of their gods throughout their empires41 and Cogan also thought that the roman policy was to
impose their religion on other nations, because the manner of imperial rome was: cuius regio, eius religio.42 now this
may be latin, but as a principle formulated at the Peace of augsburg in 1555 (!), it has nothing to do with roman policy.
Both Cogan and McKay have obviously been influenced by more recent European history, in which a monotheistic faith
determined religious policy. To make this clear, we must re-investigate the situation in antiquity.
33
2 Kings 18:3335, Has any of the gods of the nations ever delivered its land out of the hand of the king of assyria? Where are
the gods of Hamath and arpad? Where are the gods of sepharvaim,
Hena, and ivvah? Have they delivered samaria out of my hand? Who
among all the gods of the countries have delivered their countries
out of my hand, that the LORD should deliver Jerusalem out of my
hand?; 2 Kings 19:12, Have the gods of the nations delivered them,
the nations that my fathers destroyed, gozan, Haran, rezeph, and
the people of Eden who were in Telassar? (i use the new standard
revised version, with some adaptations).
34
Cogan, Imperialism and Religion, p. 54. sargon changed the name of
the city Kiesim in the province of Parsua into Kar Nergal, brought
there the gods who advance before me, and erected a statue of
my majesty (annals from Dur-sharrukin Khorsabad, lines 9394).
in the city of Harhar, renamed Kar-sharruken, he established the
weapon of Aur, my lord, as their deity (line 99); see A. G. Lie,
The Inscriptions of Sargon II, King of Assyria, vol. 1: The Annals (Paris:
geuthner, 1929), pp. 1617; and andreas Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons II. aus Khorsabad (gttingen: Cuvillier, 1994), pp. 10205, 31718.
For a parallel, see the Display inscription (Prunkinschrift), line
63 (Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons, pp. 211, 347; luckenbill, Ancient
Records, 57). See also the inscription of Tiglath-Pileser III (not
mentioned by Cogan and MacKay) on the capture of gaza: as to
Hannu of Gaza (who had escaped to Egypt), [I took] his possessions
and [his] gods. I made an image of the (great) gods, my lords, and a
golden image showing me as king (on one royal stela?). [I set (the
stela / stelae) up] in the palace of the city of Ga[za], and I counted
(the stela / stelae) among the gods of their country. see Hayim
Tadmor, The Inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser III, King of Assyria (Jerusalem:
israel academy of sciences and Humanities, 1994; revised ed. 2008),
pp. 188, 22230, 3; I owe the reference and English translation to
Hanspeter schaudig, Heidelberg.
35
The altar that ahaz had built (see n. 28) was not an assyrian altar.
it was a holocaust altar, which was alien to the Mesopotamian tradition. The model of the new altar was the altar that ahaz had seen
in Damascus in syria.
36
McKay, Religion, pp. 7071.
37
Cogan, Imperialism and Religion, pp. 8896.
38
Hermann spieckermann, Juda unter Assur in der Sargonidenzeit (gttingen: vandenhoeck & ruprecht, 1982).
39
Holloway, Aur Is King, pp. 177, 198200 (quote on p. 200).
40
spieckermann, Juda unter Assur, p. 80 n. 107. in Judah under
assyrian Hegemony: a reexamination of Imperialism and Religion,
Journal of Biblical Literature 112 (1993): 40314, Mordechai Cogan discusses and refutes spieckermanns book more elaborately.
41
McKay, Religion, p. 74.
42
Cogan, Imperialism and Religion, p. 111.
239
Background of ancient religious Policy

religious intolerance was uncommon in ancient empires. This is a consequence of the polytheistic nature of their
religions: a polytheist can easily accept other gods than his own. This phenomenon has been studied among others by
the ancient historian g. J. D. aalders,43 who showed that polytheistic rulers are usually pragmatic in religious matters,
but can repress foreign cults when they consider them to be hostile to the state. several examples from the ancient
near East illustrate this. The acceptance of foreign gods is shown clearly in the Hittite and assyrian treaties, which
end with curse formulas invoking deities from both sides, who will unitedly punish the treaty-breaking party.44 The
relation between a great king and his vassal kings was often laid down in treaties like these. a good example of how
this could be effected is given in Sargons Letter to Aur concerning his eighth campaign regarding Ullusunu, king of
the Manneans. it is interesting to see how sargon tries to get loyalty not only from this king but also from the common
people by offering them a banquet, a procedure which Cyrus could have used as a model:
Before ullusunu, their king and lord, i spread a groaning (lit., heavy) banquet table, and exalted his throne high
above that of iranzu, the father who begot him. Them (i.e., the people of his land) i seated with the people of
Assyria at a joyous banquet; before Aur and the gods of their land they did homage to my majesty.45
a second example concerns king Hezekiah of Judah, who apparently had concluded a treaty of vassalage, since he
said after his ill-fated rebellion: i have sinned; withdraw from me. Whatever you impose on me i will bear. i have
sinned, that is, he conspired against the gods by whom the oaths had been sworn, among whom must have been yahweh. This is also why sennacherib could say to the inhabitants of Jerusalem: Moreover, is it without the LORD that I
have come up against this place to destroy it? The LORD said to me, Go up against this land, and destroy it.46 in other
words, sennacherib acts as the executor of gods punishment.
recognition of foreign deities can also be deduced from the ancient belief that the gods of an enemy could leave
their city, angry at its inhabitants. Esarhaddon repeatedly stresses this in his inscriptions, justifying his fathers sacking of Babylon by stating that the gods of that city were angry because its citizens had seized the temple treasures to
hire Elamites to fight against assyria.47 Deserting deities are also known from outside Babylonia. it is reported that
sanduarri, the ruler of Kundu and sissu in anatolia, was abandoned by his gods.48 There is even a text by assurbanipal,
in which this king devotes an emblem to an Arabian goddess to express his gratitude for her assistance in the assyrians
war against an Arab king.49 The same motif is known from virgils Aeneid, in which we read about the vanquished gods
of Troy50 and about gods who have left their city.51 among several ancient nations, the idea that the gods can leave their
city or country and can even desert to the enemy gave rise to rituals and prayers to the enemy gods, imploring them to
abandon their country and go over to the other side. The gods could be lured with promises, for instance, a promise to
build a temple. a ritual like this is known from Hittite52 and roman sources53 and is known by its latin name evocatio.
in the Bible, there is speculation about yahweh deserting Jerusalem and joining the assyrians in the story of the
assyrian siege of Jerusalem during the reign of Hezekiah. The assyrian supreme commander (rabshakeh = rab q, lit.,
chief cupbearer) declares: But if you say to me, We trust in the LORD our God, is it not he whose high places and
43
g. J. D. aalders H. Wzn, The Tolerance of Polytheism in Classical

antiquity and its limits, Free University Quarterly 9 (1964): 22342.
see now also Jan assmann, Of God and Gods: Egypt, Israel, and the Rise
of Monotheism (Madison: university of Wisconsin Press, 2008).
44
assyrian treaties: simo Parpola and Kazuko Watanabe, Neo-Assyrian
Treaties and Loyalty Oaths, state archives of assyria 2 (Helsinki: Helsinki
university Press, 1988). This is not the place to mention all editions of
the vast number of Hittite treaties. an accessible edition of a few examples is gary M. Beckman, Hittite Diplomatic Texts, Writings from the
ancient World 7, 2nd ed. (atlanta: society of Biblical literature, 1999).
45
luckenbill, Ancient Records, 149; Thureau-Dangin, Huitime campagne, lines 6263.
46
2 Kings 18:14 and 25. Compare Ezekiel 17:1121, where the prophet
warns King Zedekiah of Judah of the wrath of yahweh, because the
king has broken the treaty with King nebuchadnezzar of Babylonia.
47
Erle leichty, The Royal Inscriptions of Esarhaddon, King of Assyria
(680669 BC), The royal inscriptions of the neo-assyrian Period, volume 4 (Winona lake: Eisenbrauns, 2011), no. 104: i 18bii 1; no. 114:
i 1ii: 11; no. 116: 117. sennacherib had described this destruction
in a rock inscription at Bavian: Daniel David luckenbill, The Annals
of Sennacherib, Oriental Institute Publications 2 (Chicago: university of Chicago Press, 1924), p. 78, lines 4852. it seems remarkable
that exactly at the beginning of this inscription Marduk and nab,

the gods of Babylon and Borsippa, are invoked, while they hardly
play a role in sennacheribs other inscriptions. it shows again the
polytheistic way of thinking. Babylon may have been destroyed,
but sennacherib wants to have its god at his side. The same holds
true, mutatis mutandis, for Xerxes. after he had destroyed the city of
athens in 480 b.c., he ordered athenian exiles who had come into
greece in his retinue to make offerings on the acropolis in their
own fashion (Herodotus 8.54).
48
leichty, Esarhaddon, no. 1: iii 2013 (a Dingir.ME u-ma-ir-u-ma,
whom the gods abandoned).
49
K.3405 in Cogan, Imperialism and Religion, pp. 1619. a more detailed treatment of this motif can be found in the first chapter of
Cogans book (The assyrian Empire and Foreign gods: The Motive
of Divine abandonment).
50
virgil, Aeneid 1.68 = 8.11.
51
virgil, Aeneid 2.351.
52
albrecht goetze, Hittite rituals, incantations, and Description of
Festivals, in Ancient Near Eastern Texts Relating to the Old Testament,
edited by James B. Pritchard, 3rd ed. (Princeton: Princeton university Press, 1969), pp. 35153.
53
livy 5.21; Macrobius, Saturnalia 3.9.2.
240
R. J. van der Spek
altars Hezekiah has removed, saying to Judah and to Jerusalem, You shall worship before this altar in Jerusalem?54
The implication apparently is that Hezekiah made yahweh angry so that the god of israel may likely forsake his people.
To be sure, i do not claim that these words are a verbatim transcript of the speech by the assyrian commander.
K.A.D. Smelik55 has convincingly shown that this speech was drafted by the author of this part of the Bible to be relevant to its theological message. 56 in ancient historiography, speeches are hardly ever accurate renderings of what
was actually spoken and may serve a variety of ulterior purposes. yet, an author may make a speech more convincing
by working historical details into its Sitz im Leben. given the many realistic details, this seems to be case in 2 Kings. 57
returning to the matter of foreign gods, it is easy to multiply the number of kings who take the existence of such
gods seriously. alexander the great,58 Ptolemaic kings, and some roman emperors59 had themselves depicted as pharaohs
worshipping to the gods of Egypt. Even the well-known story of Herodotus concerning the Persian king Cambyses, who
after his conquest of Egypt killed the apis Bull, may be unhistorical as he is also depicted and documented as a pious
worshipper of the Egyptian gods, including the sacred apis Bull.60
recognition of foreign gods is, in short, completely normal in the polytheistic mind frame and missionary activity
is not to be expected. recognition could take place with the acceptance of a new god or with identification of a foreign god with a god of ones own pantheon. indeed, the identification of foreign gods with gods of the own pantheon
(syncretism) is widely attested. Herodotus calls Marduk of Babylon Zeus Blos61 and Melqart of Tyrus, Heracles.62
54
2 Kings 18:22; cf. the above quoted passage 2 Kings 18:25 (ad n. 46).
Klaas a. D. smelik, Zegt toch tot Hizkia: Een voorbeeld van profetische geschiedschrijving, Amsterdamse Cahiers voor Exegese en Bijbelse Theologie 2 (1981): 5067; idem, Distortion of Old Testament
Prophecy: The Purpose of isaiah XXXvi and XXXvii, in Crisis and
Perspectives: Studies in Ancient Near Eastern Polytheism, Biblical Theology, Palestinian Archaeology and Intertestamental Literature, edited by
a. s. van der Woude, Oudtestamentische Studin 24 (Leiden: Brill,
1986), pp. 7093; idem, Converting the Past: Studies in Ancient Israelite
and Moabite Historiography (leiden: Brill, 1992), esp. pp. 93128. see
also: Nadav Naaman, Sennacheribs Letter to God on His Campaign to Judah, Bulletin of the American Schools of Oriental Research
214 (1974): 2539.
56
This message was that the cult centralization installed by Hezekiah, which certainly must have met opposition in his own country, was criticized by Judahs archenemy, the assyrian king, which
brought the domestic opposition against it in the same camp as the
assyrian pagan king.
57
The assyrian dignitaries have proper assyrian titles (tartan = turtnu or tartnu military commander; rabsaris = rab a ri head
of court attendants; rabshakeh = rab q chief cupbearer). it is
indeed known that the assyrians used propaganda when besieging
cities. On a relief found in Sargon IIs new Assyrian capital Dur-arrukin (Khorsabad), a writer is shown reading a proclamation from
a siege engine in front of the besieged city. see yigael yadin, The
Art of Warfare in Biblical Lands: In Light of Archaeological Study (Jerusalem: international Publishing Company, 1963) vol. 2, p. 425 (i owe
this reference to K.R. Veenhof). It is also known that the Assyrian
kings sought to undermine their enemys confidence in their deities
(Cogan, Imperialism and Religion, pp. 921). There are several related
assyrian notions. Trust is not only an important concept in the
prophetic literature of israel (smelik, Zegt toch tot Hizkia, p. 60),
but also in assyrian sources. in sargons annals, it is said of samaria
that the people, together with their chariots and the gods in which
they trusted, I counted as my booty (Prism D from Nimrud [Calah]
iv.2549, in Cyril J. gadd, inscribed Prisms of sargon ii from nimrud, Iraq 16 [1954]: 17980). Cf. Hayim Tadmor, The Campaigns of
sargon ii of assur: a Chronological-Historical study, Journal of Cuneiform Studies 12 (1958): 34. For the historicity and the backgrounds
of the assyrian speeches in isaiah and Kings, see Hayim Tawil, The
Historicity of 2 Kings 19:24 (= isaiah 37:25): The Problem of Yer
Mr, Journal of Near Eastern Studies 41 (1982): 195206; H.Leene,
en
in Jesaja 37, 7: een kwestie van vertaalhorizon, Amsterdamse Cahiers 4 (1983): 4962; Peter Dubovsk, Hezekiah and the
Assyrian Spies: Reconstruction of the Neo-Assyrian Intelligence Services
and Its Significance for 2 Kings 1819 (rome: Pontificio istituto Biblico,
2006), pp. 23841.
58
David syme russell, The Jews from Alexander to Herod, 2nd ed. (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1978), p. 6; R. J. van der Spek, Darius
55
iii, alexander the great and Babylonian scholarship, in A Persian

Perspective: Essays in Memory of Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg, edited by
Wouter F. M. Henkelman and amlie Kuhrt, achaemenid History
13 (Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 2003), pp.
289346; M. Heerma van voss, alexander und die gyptische religion: Einige gyptologische Bemerkungen, in Alexander the Great: Reality and Myth, edited by Jesper Carlsen, Bodil Due, Otto Steen Due, and
Birte Poulsen (rome: lErma di Bretschneider, 1993), pp. 7173.
59
see the illustrations in gnther Hlbl, A History of the Ptolemaic
Empire (london: routledge, 2001); Jan Quaegebeur, aspecten van
de romeinse aanwezigheid in het land van de Faraos, Phoenix 26
(1980): 10631; idem, Cultes gyptiens et grecs en gypte hellnistique: lexploitation des sources, in Egypt and the Hellenistic World
(proceedings of the international Colloquium, leuven, 2426 May
1982), edited by E. vant Dack, P. van Dessel and W. van gucht, studia
Hellenistica 27 (leuven: Peeters, 1983); alan K. Bowman, Egypt after
the Pharaohs: 332 B.C.A.D. 642, from Alexander to the Arab Conquest
(Berkeley: university of California Press, 1986).
60
Herodotus 3.2729. Cf. Klaas a. D. smelik and E. a. Hemelrijk,
Who Knows Not What Monsters Demented Egypt Worships? Opinions on Egyptian animal Worship in antiquity as Part of the ancient
Conception of Egypt, in Aufstieg und Niedergang der rmischen Welt:
Geschichte und Kultur Roms im Spiegel der neueren Forschung, Part 2,
vol. 17.4: Religion (Heidentum: Rmische Gtterkulte, Orientalische Kult
in der rmischen Welt), edited by Wolfgang Haase (Berlin: Walter de
gruyter, 1984), pp. 18532000; inge Hofmann and anton vorbichler,
Das Kambysesbild bei Herodot, Archiv fr Orientforschung 27 (1980):
86105. For a recent discussion of the Egyptian sources, see amlie Kuhrt, The Persian Empire: A Corpus of Sources from the Achaemenid
Period (london: routledge, 2007), vol. 1, pp. 12224. as a caveat it is
useful to remember that the foundation charter of the university
of leiden, founded in 1575 by the leader of the Dutch revolt against
Philip II of Spain, William of Orange, was nevertheless emitted in
the name of the spanish king (suggestion Jona lendering). incidentally, a document from the Eanna temple in uruk, dated to the third
year of Cambyses, issued by the atammu, mentions a messenger of
the king asking to show old stelae of former kings kept in Eanna.
The document, BM 113249, is discussed by Michael Jursa, The Transition of Babylonia from the neo-Babylonian Empire to achaemenid
rule, in Regime Change in the Ancient Near East and Egypt: From Sargon
to Saddam Hussein, edited by Harriet Crawford, Proceedings of the
British Academy 136 (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007), p. 78.
its contents fit royal interest in the building operations of former
kings, an interest which was strong in neo-Babylonian kings such
as nabonidus.
61
Herodotus 1.18183 and 3.158.
62
Herodotus 2.44.
241
Complications mainly occurred when monotheists were involved or when religion played a role during an insurrection. This would lead one to expect that the kings of Judah (especially the kings who are said to have done away with
foreign gods, like Hezekiah and Josiah) would have objected to oaths of loyalty to their assyrian and (later) Babylonian
overlords, but they apparently did not.63 Problems, however, did arise in the seleucid age, especially during the reign of
antiochus iv Epiphanes (175164). This king had successfully invaded Egypt, but in 168 the roman envoy gaius Popillius
laenas ordered him to leave. in the meantime, a rebellion had started in Jerusalem, which may have had a pro-Egyptian
character. On their return from Egypt, the Seleucid armies violently suppressed the insurrection and desecrated the
temple by erecting a pagan cultic object, probably for the benefit of the garrison; in the Jewish literature it is called,
with a wordplay on Baal amm, iqqu meomm the abomination that makes desolate.64
J.-C.H. Lebram has offered an original reconstruction of the above events. His point of departure is Daniel, the only
available contemporary source.65 lebram argued that antiochus iv was not a religiously intolerant persecutor; on the
contrary, he recognized the foreign god and the sacredness of his temple precinct. For the orthodox, monotheistic Jews
in the end the victorious party it was, however, unacceptable that foreigners intervened with the cult, identified
the God of the Covenant with Baal amm or Zeus Olympius, and introduced their own cultic practices. It is against
these aspects that the author of Daniel directs his accusations, and although he opposes violent resistance, some of his
compatriots will have preached rebellion and resistance against the impure cult. People may even have been killed;66
this may be the historical fact behind the martyrs stories in Maccabees. 67 The so-called persecution decrees quoted
in these books68 they are not mentioned in Daniel are only a construction to blacken antiochus iv and justify the
Maccabaean revolt. There is, according to lebram, no evidence of a forced policy of Hellenization.69
it is well known that roman emperors, in later centuries, persecuted Christians. Their motivation, however, was not
per se religious intolerance, but was rather guided by their opinion that Christians were hostile to the state because they
refused to sacrifice to the emperor and the state gods. This is also why Christians refused to serve in the roman armies. 70
The potential for conflict increased when the government itself was monotheistic. Typically, it was not satisfied
with the recognition of the state gods leadership, but demanded exclusive worship of this deity. This may be observed with
the Egyptian king akhenaton, who tried to erase the name of amn, and with countless emperors and kings in the
Christian world, who did not even accept differing opinions about the correct cult of the one state god.71
assyria and Babylonia

The recognition of foreign gods in the polytheistic religions does not mean that all gods were equally appreciated. The
appreciation of foreign gods among the assyrians varied from deity to deity and could change over time. To understand
Cyrus policy, it is useful to take a close look at this aspect of assyrian religious policy.
The attitude toward foreign gods could vary from scorn to admiration and worship. admiration was, in the first
place, the prerogative of Babylonian deities. This comes as no surprise: Babylonia is where the Mesopotamian civilization originated. it was the country of the ancient sumerian cities and akkad, the city of the legendary King sargon,
63
2 Kings 18:14 and 25 (Hezekiah); Ezekiel 17:1219 (Zedekiah, who
was not purely yahwistic. note that Ezekiel did not condemn the
fact that he had a treaty with the Babylonian king quite the contrary!)
64
Daniel 11:31; i Maccabees 6:19.
65
J.-C. H. lebram, Perspektiven der gegenwrtigen Danielforschung, Journal for the Study of Judaism in the Persian, Hellenistic and
Roman Period 5 (1974): 133; idem, review of Apokalyptik und Hellenismus im Buche Daniel, by Martin Hengels, Vetus Testamentum 20 (1970):
50324; idem, Knig antiochus im Buch Daniel, Vetus Testamentum
25 (1975): 73772; idem, Daniel/Danielbuch, in Theologische Realenzyklopdie 8 (1981), pp. 32549, esp. pp. 33741.
66
Daniel 11:3135.
67
2 Maccabees 6:187:42.
68
1 Maccabees 1:4149 and 2 Maccabees 6:19.
69
since 1983 a flood of literature on this subject has appeared. For
a recent discussion, see Peter Franz Mittag, Antiochos IV. Epiphanes:
Eine politische Biographie (Berlin: akademie-verlag, 2006), pp. 22581.
Mittag likewise downplays Jasons and antiochos Hellenizing policy
(esp. pp. 24647), though he does not refer to the work of lebram.
The author pays much attention to the question whether Jerusalem
was turned into a polis (pp. 23947), a useless exercise as the word
polis was not a technical term before the roman period. Cf. r. J. van
der spek, Grondbezit in het Seleucidische Rijk (amsterdam: vu uitgeverij, 1986), pp. 4554; idem, The Babylonian City, in Hellenism in
the East: The Interaction of Greek and Non-Greek Civilizations from Syria to
Central Asia after Alexander, edited by amlie Kuhrt and susan sherwin-White (london: Duckworth, 1987), pp. 5774, esp. pp. 5759.
70
Cf. aalders, The Tolerance of Polytheism; g. E. M. de ste. Croix,
Why Were the Early Christians Persecuted? Past and Present 26
(1963): 638 (reprinted in Studies in Ancient Society, edited by M. i.
Finley [London: Routledge, 1974], pp. 21048); W. H. C. Frend, Martyrdom and Persecution in the Early Church: A Study of a Conflict from the
Maccabees to the Donatus (Oxford: Blackwell, 1965); Jakob Speigl, Der
rmische Staat und die Christen (amsterdam: Hakkert, 1970); lukas
de Blois, De vroeg-christelijke vredesopvatting en het vraagstuk
van de oorlog: Pacifisme en vreemdelingschap op aarde, in lukas
de Blois and adriaan Hendrik Bredero, Kerk en vrede in Oudheid en
Middeleeuwen (Kampen: Kok, 1980), pp. 2436.
71
a. rosalie David, The Ancient Egyptians: Religious Beliefs and Practices
(london: routledge, 1982), p. 158; Bruce g. Trigger, Barry J. Kemp,
David OConnor, and Alan B. Lloyd, Ancient Egypt: A Social History
(Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 1983), p. 220. Donald B.
redford, Akhenaten: The Heretic King (Princeton: Princeton university
Press, 1984).
242
R. J. van der Spek
who had once founded the first world empire. Babylonia was, in later ages, often and anachronistically, still called
akkad. it was also the land of Babylon, which had in about 1750 achieved world fame during the reign of Hammurabi.
Traditionally, the assyrians had close ties to Babylonia, because both countries had inherited the sumerian pantheon,
myths, literature, and cuneiform script. The assyrian language was closely related to Babylonian.
The city god of Babylon, Marduk, was a comparatively young deity, who had developed into Babylonias supreme god
since Hammurabis reign. He stood outside the sumerian pantheon, and had been introduced, somewhat artificially, as
son of Ea, replacing Enlil, the god of nippur. Consequently, Marduk is often called the Enlil of the gods. His position is
comparable to that of Aur, the god of the city of Assur and the supreme deity of the Assyrians. In the Assyrian version
of Enuma Eli, the Babylonian creation epic, the name of Marduk is everywhere replaced with that of Aur. From this,
we may deduce that in the Mesopotamian divine world, Marduk was seen as a competitor of Aur. The Assyrian deity
is also called the Enlil of the gods, and Ninlil, the wife of Aur.72
Taking the above into consideration we will examine the assyrian policy toward Marduk and the Babylonian cities.
The main source of our knowledge is the corpus of assyrian royal inscriptions, which were written on palace walls and
on clay cylinders or prisms buried in the foundations of temples and palaces. These texts are, obviously, very biased.
They glorify the deeds of the king and legitimate them before the gods. Fortunately, this biased image can be corrected
by state correspondence and the Babylonian chronicle series, which present a neutral point of view. For our purposes,
the bias of the inscriptions is not a problem, since we actually want to reconstruct the policy the assyrian kings were
aiming at as well as the image they wanted to project.73
studying the relevant texts, we must in the first place focus on the role of specifically Babylonian gods like Marduk,
and nab, his son, supreme god of Borsippa: what position do they have in the lists of gods in the royal inscriptions,74
which epithets and which type of worship (prayers, sacrifices) do they receive, and to what extent are orders by Marduk
and nab relevant to explain the kings acts? in the second place, we must look at the assyrian policy toward the Babylonians: what kind of administration did they impose? Did they privilege or terrorize the population?
surveying assyrian history from the twentieth to the seventh century b.c., it can be observed, firstly, that Marduk,
after becoming Babylonias supreme god, obtained an increasingly important role in assyria too. it is certain that in the
fourteenth century, he had a temple in assur.75 since the beginning of the ninth century, he is mentioned in the lists
of deities in the assyrian inscriptions.76 it is remarkable that, in these lists, Marduk and nab achieve an increasingly
higher status. Aur remains the supreme god, but as time goes by, Marduk and Nab (sometimes in inverted order) are
mentioned more frequently and on higher places. Of course, this phenomenon can best be discerned in inscriptions
dealing with Babylon, but it also happens in other texts. An eighth-century building inscription by governor Bl-arran-bl-uur even begins with Marduk and Nab,77 even though this official was responsible for a province in the north
(guzana). Marduks epithets become more honorable too: since sargon ii (722705), he is called the Enlil of the gods,
an honor that was until then only used for Aur.
Although she was locally known as Muliu. See Simo Parpola,

The Murderer of sennacherib, in Death in Mesopotamia: Papers Read
at the XXVIe Rencontre Assyriologique Internationale, edited by Bendt
alster, Mesopotamia 8 (Copenhagen: akademisk Forlag, 1980), pp.
17182. note also that she had a rival, era. see g. van Driel, The
Cult of Aur (assen: van gorcum, 1969), p. 88, lines 2022; p. 92,
lines 3336; p. 94, lines 2427; p. 98, line 27; p. 100, line 13; p. 102,
lines 5357 (!).
73
For the sargonid attitude toward Babylonia, see Peter Machinist, The assyrians and Their Babylonian Problem: some reflections, in Jahrbuch des Wissenschaftskolleg zu Berlin 1984/85: 35364;
grant Frame, Babylonia 689627 B.C.: A Political History, Publications
de linstitut Historique-archologique nerlandais de stamboul 69
(leiden: nederlands Historisch-archaeologisch instituut, 1992), pp.
24555; John a. Brinkman, Prelude to Empire: Babylonian Society and
Politics, 747626 B.C., Occasional Publications of the Babylonian Fund
7 (Philadelphia: university Museum, 1984); Holloway, Aur Is King,
pp. 34388.
74
Lists of gods are frequently inserted in the inscriptions. Often, the
prologue contains an invocation of a number of deities; the conclusion often contains a curse formula, invoking the wrath of the gods
for those who damage the inscription and their blessing for those
who take care of it. in the main body of the texts, deities are often
mentioned as lords or helpers of the king.
72
75
Mentioned in an inscription of Marduk-nadin-ahhe, the royal

scribe of Aur-uballi I (13651330); see Albert Kirk Grayson, Assyrian Royal Inscriptions, vol. 1: From the Beginning to Ashur-resha-ishi
I (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1972), p. 43 no. 276. see also amlie
Kuhrt, The Ancient Near East c. 3000330 B.C. (london: routledge, 1995),
vol. 1, p. 350.
76
Cf. the inscription of Tukulti-nunurta ii (890884 b.c.) from assur
in albert Kirk grayson, Assyrian Royal Inscriptions, vol. 2: From Tiglath-pileser I to Ashur-nasir-apli II (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1976), p.
106 486 = idem, Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC, vol. 1:
1114859 BC, The royal inscriptions of Mesopotamia, assyrian Periods
2 (Toronto: university of Toronto Press, 1991), p. 164 no. 1:8. see also
albert schott, Die anfnge Marduks als eines assyrischen gottes,
Zeitschrift fr Assyriologie und verwandte Gebiete 43 (1936): 31821;
ErnstF. Weidner, Studien zur Zeitgeschichte Tukulti-Ninurtas I,
Archiv fr Orientforschung 13 (19391941): 10924, esp. pp. 11923
(Marduk und die Kassiten in assyrien unter Tukulti-ninurta i);
Hillel a. Fine, Studies in Middle-Assyrian Chronology and Religion (Cincinnati: Hebrew union College Press, 1955), pp. 10612.
77
luckenbill, Ancient Records, 82426; Albert Kirk Grayson, Assyrian Rulers of the Early First Millennium BC, vol. 2: 858745 BC, The royal
inscriptions of Mesopotamia, assyrian Periods 3 (Toronto: Toronto
university Press, 1996), p. 241 no. 2.
243
Moreover, many assyrian rulers honored Babylonian deities. 78 a remarkable example is shalmaneser iii (858824),
who, after assisting his brother-in-law, Marduk-zakir-umi, in repressing a revolt, visited Cuthah, Babylon, and Borsippa. In his inscriptions, Shalmaneser gives the honor of having achieved victory to Marduk-zakir-umi. The Assyrian
king also mentions his sacrifices and public meals in the cities: For the people of Babylon and Borsippa, his people, he
established protection and freedom (ubar) under the great gods at a banquet. He gave them bread (and) wine, dressed
them in multicolored garments, (and) presented them with presents.79 in nimrud (the assyrian capital Calah), a statue
has been found, representing shalmaneser shaking hands with his Babylonian colleague. Both men are presented in
equal length, proving their equality.80
assyrian kings fighting against Babylonia also recognized and honored the Babylonian gods, even after they had
defeated their opponents. The first king to conquer Babylon was the empire-builder Tiglath-Pileser iii (745727). it is
remarkable that he did this only toward the end of his reign (729 b.c.), when a Chaldaean usurper occupied the throne
in Babylon. Once Tiglath-Pileser had captured the city, he did not treat it like other subject towns. He did not appoint
a vassal king or governor, but had himself crowned as king of Babylonia. in all aspects, he acted like a Babylonian king:
in this new role, he sacrificed to the gods of Babylon. He even took part in the new years festival, submitting himself
to several humiliating rituals: he had to lay down his royal dignity, declare that he had done nothing against Babylon
or its gods, and was hit in the face by a priest. During a procession, he had to grasp the hand of the statue of Marduk, a
motif often referred to in the assyrian royal inscriptions to describe that the king took part in the new years festival. 81
sargon ii acted in the same way. He had to reconquer Babylon after the Chaldaean Merodach-Baladan
(Marduk-apla-iddina) in 722 had taken the throne and had held it for twelve years.82 several assyrian kings stress
in their inscriptions that they acted on behalf of Marduk and nab. This is especially true for sargon, who presents
himself as chosen by Marduk to fight against Merodach-Baladan. We return to this claim below, in the context of the
Cyrus Cylinder. after sargon had finally conquered Babylon in 709 b.c., he honored the Babylonian gods and took part
in the new years festival:
in the month of Nisnu, the month of the going forth of the lord of the gods, i took the hand(s) of the great lord,
Marduk (and) nab, the king of all heaven and earth, and finished my march (lit., road) to the temple of the new
Years Feast. Outstanding bulls and fat sheep, geese, ducks together with (an) unceasing (supply) of (other) gifts,
I presented (lit., spread out) before them. To the gods of the sacred cities of Sumer and Akkad I offered [pure]
sacrifices. [In order to inflict a defeat upon] Marduk-apla-iddina (Merodach-baladan), son of Iakinu, [of Chaldaean
extraction, the likeness of an evil demon] I turned to th[em (the gods)]; with prayers and [supplications I prayed
to them. after i had accomplished the feast of my great lord Marduk, i departed without fear ? from] the sacred
cities of sumer and akkad.83
78
For a broader discussion with references, see Brinkman, Prelude

to Empire, pp. 2227.
79
inscription on the great bronze palace gates in imgur-Enlil (Balawat, near nimrud), vi.4. see grayson, Assyrian Rulers, royal inscriptions of Mesopotamia, assyrian Periods 3, pp. 2732 no. 5. Earlier
editions: adolf Billerbeck and Friedrich Delitzsch, Die Palasttore Salmanassars II von Balawat, Beitrge zur assyriologie 6/1 (leipzig: J. C.
Hinrichs, 1908), p. 139; Ernst Michel, Die assur-Texte salmanassars
iii. (858824), Die Welt des Orients 4 (1967): 32 v.5vi.3; luckenbill,
Ancient Records, 624. Cf. John A. Brinkman, A Political History of
Post-Kassite Babylonia, 1158722 B.C., Analecta Orientalia 43 (Rome:
Pontificium institutum Biblicum, 1968), p. 197.
80
M. E. l. Mallowan, Nimrud and Its Remains (london: Collins, 1966),
vol. 2, p. 447.
81
Brinkman, Post-Kassite Babylonia, pp. 24043. For the inscriptions
of Tiglath-Pileser iii, see now Tadmor, The Inscriptions of Tiglath-Pileser III. For the new years festival, see J. a. Black, The new year
Ceremonies in ancient Babylon: Taking Bel by the Hand and a
Cultic Picnic, Religion 11 (1981): 3959; amlie Kuhrt, usurpation,
Conquest and Ceremonial: From Babylon to Persia, in Rituals of
Royalty: Power and Ceremonial in Traditional Societies, edited by David
Cannadine and simon Price (Cambridge: Cambridge university
Press, 1987), pp. 2055; Julye Bidmead, The Aktu Festival: Religious
Continuity and Royal Legitimation in Mesopotamia (Piscataway: gorgias
Press, 2002); Karel van der Toorn, The Babylonian new years Festival: new insights from the Cuneiform Texts and Their Bearing on
Old Testament Study, in Congress Volume Leuven 1989, edited by J. a.
Emerton, vetus Testamentum supplements 43 (leiden: Brill, 1991),
pp. 33144. it must be noted that our main information concerning
the ritual of the new years festival comes from a document from
the Hellenistic period; cf. Marc J. H. linssen, The Cults of Uruk and
Babylon: The Temple Ritual Texts as Evidence for Hellenistic Cult Practice, Cuneiform Monographs (leiden: Brill; Boston: styx, 2004), pp.
21537 (edition) and p. 11 (date). We therefore cannot be sure that
the described rituals were exactly so en vogue in the neo-assyrian
period.
82
John a. Brinkman, Merodach-Baladan ii, in Studies Presented to
A.Leo Oppenheim, June 7, 1964, edited by Robert D. Biggs and JohnA.
Brinkman (Chicago: The Oriental Institute, 1964), pp. 653; R. J. van
der spek, The struggle of King sargon ii of assyria against the
Chaldaean Merodach-Baladan (710707 B.C.), Jaarbericht Ex Oriente
Lux 25 (197778): 5666.
83
Cf. Brinkman, Prelude to Empire, pp. 5354. For the inscriptions of
sargon ii, see Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons; lie, Inscriptions of Sargon;
D. g. lyon, Keilschrifttexte Sargons, Knigs van Assyrien (722705 v. Chr.),
assyriologische Bibliothek 5 (leipzig: J. C. Hinrichs, 1883; reprint
leipzig: Zentralantiquariat der Deutschen Demokratischen republik,
1977); Hugo Winckler, Die Keilschrifttexte Sargons nach den Papierabklatschen und Originalen neu herausgegeben (leipzig: Pfeiffer, 1889);
gadd, inscribed Prisms, pp. 173201, pls. xlivli; H. W. F. saggs,
Historical Texts and Fragments of Sargon II of Assyria: The Aur
Charter, Iraq 37 (1975): 1120. For a comparison of the ceremonial
entries of sargon ii, Cyrus, and alexander in Babylon, see amlie
Kuhrt, alexander and Babylon, in The Roots of the European Tradition,
edited by Heleen sancisi-Weerdenburg and J. W. Drijvers, achaemenid History 5 (Leiden: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten, 1990), pp. 12130. The quote is from the annals of sargon in the
Khorsabad palace, room ii, pl. 29:714, reconstructed from parallels
244
R. J. van der Spek
Marduks role was not limited to assyrian inscriptions regarding Babylon. This is shown especially by sargons
famous Letter to Aur, mentioned above, reporting his campaign against Urzana, prince of Muair in Urartu, who
had sinned against the oath taken by Aur, ama, Nab and Marduk. Because of the importance of this text, I quote
it in extenso:
Trusting in the strong support of Aur, father of the gods, lord of lands, king of the whole heaven and earth,
begetter (of all), lord of lords, to whom, from eternity, the Enlil (lord) of the gods, Marduk, has given the gods of
land and mountain of the four quarters (of the world) to honor him not one escaping with their heaped-up
stores(?), to bring (them) into Ehursaggalkurkurra;84 at the exalted command of Nab [Mercurius] and Marduk
[Jupiter], who had taken a course in a station of the stars (portending) the advance of my arms () I set out and
took the road to Muair.85
This shows that Aur is considered to be the supreme god of the world, to whom all other gods have to prostrate.
This does not mean that places of worship for the assyrian god had to be created all over the world; it means that the
statues of the other gods could be brought to Assur, that the subject nations had to pay tribute to Aurs temple and to
obey the Assyrian king, the enforcer of Aurs decrees. It is remarkable that Aur is presented as having received his
supremacy from Marduk, and this in a text that is not related to Babylonia, from a period in which sargon was not king
in Babylon, to be read in the city of assur on a special occasion. 86 Marduk is therefore in some sense superior to Aur.
One is reminded of the prologue to the Codex Hammurabi, in which we read that Anu and Enlil had given dominion of
all people (elliltu Enlilhood) to Marduk.87 in both cases, a city god is recognized as the main god of the pantheon.
In the codex, this means that Marduk, not Enlil, is the active ruler of the world. In Sargons Letter to Aur it is not
Marduk who rules the world, but Aur. The lines quoted above attribute world rule to Aur. It remains remarkable,
however, that the assyrian god receives his power from Marduk. Perhaps this can be explained from sargons policy
to present himself as king of all of Mesopotamia (both assyria and Babylonia) vis--vis urartu, the object of his campaign.88 This is corroborated by the statement, in line 60, that Sargon had received power from Aur and Marduk, and
the words of line 92, that the king of Urartu had broken his promise to the two gods. To stress that Aur was the ruler
of all Mesopotamia, his name is spelled in lines 13 and 63 of this inscription (and in many younger texts) as an.r.
Anar and Kiar were an ancient couple of gods, mentioned in the Babylonian creation epic; they were older than Anu
and Enlil. By identifying Aur with Anar, the Assyrian god had become a normal, general Mesopotamian god, more
than just a city god.
nab enjoyed similar favors from the assyrian kings. adad-nirari iii (811783) devoted a very large temple to him
at Calah.89 a dedicatory text by one of his officials has been found: Trust nab, do not trust any other god.90 From
assyrian personal names, in which the name of nab is often included, we can deduce that he enjoyed great popularity
in this age.91 Under the Sargonid dynasty, Nab became even more influential. On the occasion of the inauguration of
the new capital Dur-sharrukin, in 706, King sargon organized a banquet for the gods who were to have their residence
in the city. among them was nab, but not Marduk.92 Often, Nab is named before Marduk. The last great king of Assyria, assurbanipal, showed his faith in nab in prayers and in temple construction.93
in the inscriptions from room v, pl. 9:6b14, the Display inscription

and the nimrud prisms; cf. r. J. van der spek, The struggle of King
sargon, pp. 5859. Cf. lie, Inscriptions of Sargon, p. 5659: 384390
(room ii) + 1315 (room v); luckenbill, Ancient Records, 38; Fuchs,
Die Inschriften Sargons, pp. 15658 (lines 32028), 33233.
84
The temple of the god Aur in the city of Assur. Note that in
akkadian, the names of god, city, and country are all Aur. in this
article, i call the city assur and the country assyria.
85
Sargon, Letter to Aur, lines 31421 (cf. n. 26). Translation: Luckenbill, Ancient Records, 170.
86
A. Leo Oppenheim, The City of Assur in 714 B.C., Journal of Near
Eastern Studies 19 (1960): 13347, esp. 14447.
87
Codex Hammurabi, Prologue i.112. Cf. M. E. J. richardson, Hammurabis Laws: Text, Translation and Glossary (sheffield: sheffield academic Press, 2000).
88
suggestion F. r. Kraus in 1975 (pers. comm.).
89
Mallowan, Nimrud and Its Remains, p. 261.
90
inscription on two stone statues found in the nab temple of
Calah made by Bl-tari-ilumma, governor of Calah, for the life of
Adad-nrri, king of Assyria, his lord and (for) the life of Sammuramat, palace woman, his mistress (fsa-am-mu-ra-mat munus..gal
nin-). The last line of the inscription (line 12) reads: Whoever
you are, after (me), trust in the god nab! Do not trust in another
god. see grant Frame, Rulers of Babylonia: From the Second Dynasty of
Isin to the End of Assyrian Domination (1157612 B.C.), The royal inscriptions of Mesopotamia, Babylonian Periods 2 (Toronto: university of
Toronto Press, 1995), pp. 22627 no. 2002. also in luckenbill, Ancient
Records, 745. This is, incidentally, not an indication of monotheism;
at most, it is a henotheistic text: nab is represented as the only
reliable god and the only deity worthy of praise, but the existence
of the other gods is not denied.
91
Wolfram von Soden, Der Nahe Osten im Altertum, in Propylen
Weltgeschichte, vol. 2: Hochkulturen des mittleren und stlichen Asiens,
edited by golo Mann and alfred Heu (Berlin: Propylen, 1962), p.
119.
92
Winckler, Keilschrifttexte Sargons, pp. 15557 (Prunkinschrift);
Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons, pp. 23536, 353; luckenbill, Ancient
Records, 72.
93
Compare the inscription dedicated to nab in Maximilian streck,
Assurbanipal und die letzten assyrischen Knige bis zum Untergange
Ninivehs, 3 vols., vorderasiatische Bibliothek 7/13 (leipzig: J. C.
Hinrichs, 1916), vol. 1, p. 272 = luckenbill, Ancient Records, 99194
245
not only the Babylonian gods, but also the Babylonians themselves could count, post-conquest, on assyrian respect. in the twentieth century b.c., the Assyrian king Ilu-umma attacked Akkad (the future Babylonia). He tells that
on that occasion he made an end to several unlawfully imposed duties (corves and taxes).94 We already noticed that
shalmaneser iii organized banquets for the Babylonian population. since the reign of Tiglath-Pileser iii, most kings
stressed that the Babylonian cities were free of taxes. Tax freedom, but also the fact that the assyrian officials ignored
this privilege frequently, is a common theme in official correspondence. a good example is a letter to assurbanipal in
which the following is said about the Babylonians:
The words that the Babylonians spoke to the king: Ever since the kings, our lords, sat on the throne, you have
been intent on securing our privileged status (kidinntu) and our happiness (ub libbi). () Whoever enters inside
it, his privileged status (kidinntu) is secured. () Not even a dog that enters inside it, is killed. () And in having
made our privileged status sur[passing ] () So let the privileged status of the women who [] al[so be established] with us by the name of Babylon.95
The protection of the rights (ubar) of the citizens of sippar, nippur, and Babylon from taxation, forced labor, injustice, and breaking of treaties, against apprehensions of the king, is the subject of a document known as The advice
to a Prince (Frstenspiegel).96 The date of the composition is unknown, but it is to be noted that sargon ii claims to
have established the freedom (ubar) of these same cities sippar, nippur, and Babylon already before he actually had
conquered Babylon.97 The author who composed this advice may well have come from the Babylonian circles who
wrote letters to sargon requesting him to intervene in Babylon (cf. below).
in many respects, sargon can be compared to Cyrus. He conformed himself to Babylonian traditions, honored the
Babylonian gods, attended the new years festival, awarded privileges to Babylonian cities, and returned the statues of
the gods that had been taken away by Merodach-Baladan. There is even evidence that he came to Babylon at the invitation of influential individuals in Babylon, though not the highest officials such as the atammu. The evidence comes
not only from royal inscriptions, but also from letters sent to the assyrian court. in the inscriptions of sargon we read:
The people (lit., sons) of Babylon (and) Borsippa, the temple-enterers (rib biti), the umman officials, skilled in
workmanship, who go before and direct (the people) of the land, (all these) who had been subject to him, brought
the leftovers (of the divine meals) of Bl and Zarpanitu, (of) Nab and Tametu, to Dur-Ladinnu, into my presence, invited me to enter Babylon and (thus) made glad my soul (lit., my liver). Babylon, the city of the En[lil of
the gods], I entered amidst rejoicing and to the gods who dwell in Esagila and Ezida I brought pure, additional
offerings before them.98
several letters suggest that this was not mere propaganda talk. 99 One such letter is written by a certain Blunu, a
temple official, to nab-ahhe-eriba, vizier (sukkallu) of sargon:
Certain Babylonians, free citizens (mar-ban), friends who are loyal to the king and the vizier (sukkallu), my lord,
have written to me from Babylon. Send us [go]od news, whatever is appropriate! () He (= Bl) has ordained that
the son of Yakin (= Merodach-Baladan) be ousted [from] Babylon, and he has also spoken about the kings entry
and the dialogue between assurbanipal and nab in streck, Assurbanipal, vol. 1, p. 342 = luckenbill, Ancient Records, 112229.
94
albert Kirk grayson, Assyrian Rulers of the Third and Second Millennia BC (to 1115 BC), The royal inscriptions of Mesopotamia, assyrian
Periods 1 (Toronto: university of Toronto Press, 1987), p. 15 no. 1:
1416, He established the freedom (a-du-ra-ar) of the akkadians
and p. 18 no. 2: 4965, i established the freedom of the akkadians
and their children. i purified their copper. i established their freedom from the border of the marshes and ur and nippur, awal, and
Kismar, Dr of the god Itaran, as far as the city (Aur) = Grayson,
Assyrian Royal Inscriptions, vol. 1, 37, 42.
95
leroy Waterman, Royal Correspondence of the Assyrian Empire, 4 parts
(ann arbor: university of Michigan Press, 19301936), no. 878; new
edition and translation in F. reynolds, The Babylonian Correspondence
of Esarhaddon and Letters to Assurbanipal and Sn-arru-ikun from Northern and Central Babylonia, state archives of assyria 18 (Helsinki: Helsinki university Press, 1983), pp. 13032 no. 158; cf. Paul garelli and
v. nikiprowetzky, Le Proche-Orient asiatique: les empires msopotamiens,
Isral (Paris: Presses universitaires de France, 1974), p. 141; Frame,
Babylonia, pp. 36 and 110.
96
Transcription and translation in Wilfred g. lambert, Babylonian

Wisdom Literature (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1960; reprint
Winona lake: Eisenbrauns, 1996), pp. 11015.
97
CaD s.v. ubarr. references in sargons inscriptions: (1) an inscription on the backside of a plate: Winckler, Keilschrifttexte Sargons,
pl. 40:2 = Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons, pp. 5459 no. 1.3: 2; (2) a barrel cylinder inscription from Khorsabad: lyon, Keilschriftexte Sargons,
no. 1: 4 = Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons, pp. 2944 no. 1.1: 4; (3) a bull
inscription: lyon, Keilschrifttexte Sargons, no. 2: 5 = Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons, pp. 6074 no. 2.1: 5; (4) Bronze inscription: lyon, Keilschrifttexte Sargons, no. 3: 7 = Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons, pp. 4555
no. 1.2.1: 7. Cf. igor M. Diakonoff, a Babylonian Political Pamphlet
from about 700 B.C., in Studies in Honor of Benno Landsberger on His
Seventy-fifth Birthday, April 21, 1965, edited by Hans g. gterbock and
Thorkild Jacobsen, assyriological studies 16 (Chicago: university of
Chicago Press, 1965), pp. 34349.
98
annals of sargon from Khorsabad: lie, Inscriptions of Sargon, pp.
546: 37176 = Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons, p. 154: 31214 (translation pp. 33132); luckenbill, Ancient Records, 35, 40.
99
as suggested by Kuhrt, Cyrus the great of Persia: images and
realities, p. 174; idem, alexander and Babylon, pp. 12223.
246
R. J. van der Spek

to Babylon. Perhaps Bl will act so the king can perform a ritual and hear him. Let my lord do everything possible
so the army can come here and the king will obtain his objective. i am one who blesses my lord. i pray daily to
Marduk and Zarpanitu for the good health of my lord.100
another letter is from an unknown sender, your servant (who may have deliberately left out his name), to the
vizier (sukkallu) of sargon:
When will the king, my lord, come here and establish the privileged status (kidinnutu) of Babylon? () Why does
my lord remain silent, while Babylon is being destroyed? ama and Marduk have installed you for intercession
in assyria. Persuade the king to come here and to exempt (lu-zak-ki) Babylon for Marduk and (make) your name
everlasting in Esaggil and Ezida.101
it is an acceptable guess that Cyrus later likewise acted at the instigation of certain notables of the Marduk temple
in Babylon. There are more examples of empires invading a country at the request and with the support of authorities
of the land concerned. a good example is King ahaz of Judah, who invited Tiglath-Pileser iii to help him against a
coalition of King resin of aram and Pekah of israel (2 Kings 16:7). The history of roman imperialism is full of examples of cities that pleaded for roman intervention, like saguntum (against Hannibal, 218 b.c.), the greek city Massilia
(Marseilles) against neighboring gallic tribes (125 b.c.), and numerous greeks cities against Macedonia. an example of
this is the request of Pergamum and rhodes in 201 to intervene in greece. after rome had intervened with the help of
greek allies and the victory in the second Macedonian War had been attained, Titus Quinctius Flamininus declared the
greek cities free at the isthmian games of 196 b.c.102 in this and all other cases the request for intervention ended in
incorporation in the roman empire.
The permission to exiled people to return home is not a new feature of Cyrus policy. We know at least three assyrian kings who allowed deported people to return to Babylonia (discussed below).
The friendly policy toward Babylonia was obviously not the only one the assyrians pursued. apart from the conquest of another country constituting a hostile act by itself, several kings did so in a particularly harsh way. The bestknown example is sennacherib, who, from the very beginning of his reign, broke with some of the policies of his father.
He abandoned sargons new capital Dur-sharrukin and used nineveh instead, he consistently refused to mention his
father in his inscriptions, and he had a different attitude toward Babylonia from his father. Their policies can be compared, however, because they had to deal with the same problems: both kings had, early in their reigns, to cope with
the Chaldaean usurper Merodach-Baladan. sargon expelled him after twelve years, sennacherib after several months.
yet their ensuing acts could not have differed more. as pointed out before, sargon honored Babylonian gods, gained
support from priests and servants of Merodach-Baladan, and awarded privileges to Babylonian cities. sennacherib, on
the other hand, did not mention Marduk and nab in the inscription on his campaign against Merodach-Baladan. according to this text, he captured the priests and the servants of Merodach-Baladan, looted the palace, and sacked the
very cities that his father had privileged.103 sennacherib did not proclaim himself Babylonian king as previous kings
had done, but appointed a Babylonian puppet,104 later replaced by sennacheribs son. His attitude became even harsher
when the Babylonians captured this son and extradited him to Elam, assyrias archenemy. in 689, Babylonia was punished cruelly. The city was utterly destroyed, a fact that sennacherib describes at great length in two inscriptions. 105
Water from the Euphrates was led over the ruins, allowing the later assyrian king Esarhaddon to say that reed-marshes
and poplars grew profusely in it and threw out many offshoots. There were birds of the heavens (and) fish of the aps,
without number, in it.106 Maybe the prophet Isaiah had this in mind when he wrote: I will rise up against them, says
the LORD of hosts, and will cut off from Babylon name and remnant, offspring and posterity, says the LORD. And I
will make it a possession of the hedgehog (King James version: bittern), and pools of water, and i will sweep it with the
broom of destruction, says the LORD of hosts. 107
ABL 844: 713, rev. 116 = Manfried Dietrich, The Babylonian
Correspondence of Sargon and Sennacherib, state archives of assyria
17 (Helsinki: Helsinki university Press, 2003), no. 20; galo W. vera
Chamaza, Die Omnipotenz Aurs: Entwicklungen in der Aur-Theologie
unter den Sargoniden; Sargon II., Sanherib und Asarhaddon, Alter Orient
und altes Testament 295 (Mnster: ugarit-verlag, 2002), pp. 3132,
25254 no. 6.
101
aBl 1431: 1315, rev. 1116 = Dietrich, The Babylonian Correspondence, no. 21; vera Chamaza, Die Omnipotenz Aurs, pp. 2831, 24850
no. 3. For the supposed pro-assyrian party, see Diakonoff, a Babylonian Political Pamphlet, and Brinkman, Merodach-Baladan
ii, p. 20 n. 10. Brinkman is more cautious in his article Babylonia
under the assyrian Empire, 745627 B.C., in Power and Propagan-
100
da: A Symposium on Ancient Empires, edited by Mogens Trolle larsen,

Mesopotamia 7 (Copenhagen: akademisk Forlag, 1979), pp. 22350,
esp. pp. 23637.
102
Polybius 18.46; livy 33.3233.
103
luckenbill, Annals, pp. 4855, 9498 (Prism a1); idem, Ancient Records, 25567; note especially lines 4853 = Luckenbill, Ancient
Records, 262.
104
ibid., line 53.
105
luckenbill, Annals, p. 78 lines 4852; idem, Ancient Records, 438.
106
leichty, Esarhaddon, no. 108: iii 114.
107
isaiah 14:2223.
247
sennacheribs successor Esarhaddon abandoned this policy, without condemning his fathers approach, which he
attributed to the wrath of Marduk, who, angry about the sins of the Babylonians, had seized the temple treasures.108 in
his inscriptions, Esarhaddon stresses that he had Babylon restored and repopulated. Benno landsberger109 has shown
that this may be exaggerated, but it is a fact that a beginning was made with the reconstruction. Besides, it is interesting
to observe that Esarhaddon found it necessary to create this image of himself.
Esarhaddon strove to be succeeded by his two sons: ama-uma-ukin became king of Babylon, while Assurbanipal
received the rest of the empire. vassal rulers were forced to accept this arrangement under oath.110 in their inscriptions, both kings always spoke positively about Babylon and its gods. like Esarhaddon, assurbanipal boasts that he had
returned the statue of the god Marduk from nineveh to Babylon. among other texts, Cylinder l6, a display inscription
dedicated to Marduk for the reconstruction of the walls called imgur-Enlil and nimit-Enlil, makes his relationship to
Marduk explicit:
During my reign the great lord, Marduk, entered Babylon amid rejoicing, and in Esagila took up his eternal abode.
The regular offerings of Esagila and the gods of Babylon, i provided for (lit., established). The privileges (kidinntu)
of Babylon i maintained.111
it was probably this very inscription that Cyrus found when he restored the imgur-Enlil wall of Babylon, if we may
believe his own cylinder (Cyrus Cylinder, lines 38, 43). assurbanipal remains respectful toward Babylon even after an
insurrection by his brother had forced him to take the city in a protracted war. rebels were pardoned and orders were
given to restore the war damage.112
Why these changes in the Babylonian policy? Why did one king prefer the stick, and the other the carrot? investigating this subject is worthwhile as it may help us understand Cyrus attitudes toward, on the one hand, Babylon and
its gods and, on the other hand, the other deities and nations in his empire.
arguments for using the carrot are easy to find: a benevolent conqueror will more easily win the hearts and minds
of his new subjects, who will feel no need to revolt. We can also imagine arguments for using the stick: a terrorized
nation will be too scared to revolt.
There are other factors as well, however factors that are often ignored by modern historians. First, the kings
themselves clearly believed that there were religious reasons for their policies. Of course, religious beliefs have in the
course of history often been manipulated. liverani argued, with good reason, that the religious discourse of the pious
king as the executor of the orders of the assyrian gods was for assyrian kings a hypostatic way of describing assyrian
absolute power.113 This view may, however, be too one-sided. religious beliefs and fears are very real parts of human
life and kings were not free from them. For what other reason do the royal inscriptions so often stress the importance
of the gods orders or the accord that the deities, by means of oracular prescripts, gave to a royal decision? For every
important decision, the will of the gods was examined. Countless prayers survive in which the assyrian kings ask for
divine advice before the beginning of a military enterprise.114 On more than one occasion, King Esarhaddon had himself
replaced by a substitute king because an evil omen (like a lunar eclipse) would occur; in this way, the misfortune predicted by the omen would befall the substitute and not the real king.115 in a polytheistic worldview, all gods, the ones of the
foreign nations included, can send prosperity and calamities. it is possible to use ones own gods to intimidate foreign
deities, but one can also try to become friendly with them. When, for example, one builds a temple for a foreign god,
and one makes his nation pray on your behalf, the god may return the favor. it is at least worth trying. The biblical book
of Ezra (6:10) presents an image of Darius i mentioning, as an argument to rebuild the temple in Jerusalem, sacrifices
and prayers for the life of the Persian king and his sons. We encounter something similar in the Cyrus Cylinder when
the conqueror announces his decision to send back the images of the gods that had been captured by nabonidus.116
108
leichty, Esarhaddon, nos. 104: i 18b33; 114: i 1018; 116: 59.

Benno landsberger, Brief des Bischofs von Esagila an Knig Asarhaddon, Mededelingen der Koninklijke nederlandse akademie van Wetenschappen, afdeling letterkunde 28/6 (amsterdam: noord-Hollandsche uitgevers Maatschappij, 1965), pp. 1437.
110
D. J. Wiseman, The vassal Treaties of Esarhaddon, Iraq 20 (1958):
199; Parpola and Watanabe, Neo-Assyrian Treaties, pp. 2858 no. 6.
111
Cylinder l6: 1012 in streck, Assurbanipal, pp. 23637; same
phrase in Cylinder l2: 811 = streck, Assurbanipal, pp. 23031 = luckenbill, Ancient Records, 96364.
112
streck, Assurbanipal, rassam Cylinder, pp. 391, iii.128iv.109;
luckenbill, Ancient Records, 79697.
113
Mario liverani, The ideology of the assyrian Empire, in larsen,
ed., Power and Propaganda, pp. 297317, esp. p. 301.
109
114
see, for instance, ivan starr, Queries to the Sungod: Divination and
Politics in Sargonid Assyria, state archives of assyria 4 (Helsinki: Helsinki university Press, 1990).
115
landsberger, Brief des Bischofs von Esagila, pp. 3851, esp. p. 51;
cf. Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts, p. 626. The ritual is well
known in the near East. For a discussion see: Klaas a. D. smelik,
The omina mortis in the Histories of alexander the great, Talanta
1011 (19781979): 92111; simo Parpola, Letters from Assyrian and
Babylonian Scholars, state archives of assyria 10 (Helsinki: Helsinki
university Press, 1993), pp. xxiixxxii (collection of references in
the ancient near East, the classical texts, and beyond).
116
Cyrus Cylinder, lines 3436; cf. Paul-alain Beaulieu, an Episode
in the Fall of Babylon to the Persians, Journal of Near Eastern Studies
52 (1993): 24161.
248
R. J. van der Spek
That religion could influence royal policy is also proven by the fact that sennacherib and Esarhaddon consulted
seers. One of the most interesting texts in this respect this is a document dealing with an investigation of the causes of
death of sargon ii.117 Sennacheribs father had been killed in action, but his body could not be retrieved. Obviously, the
gods were angry, and three or four teams of haruspices had to find out which sin sargon had committed to raise the
divine wrath: Did he sin against the gods of [Assyria ] or against the gods of the land of Akkad (= Babylonia), or did
he break oaths to the king of the gods (= Aur)?118 unfortunately, the damaged tablet does not preserve the answer.
in his 1958 article, Tadmor assumed that sargons sin was his pro-Babylonian policy, because there is a reference to the
erecting of a statue of Aur (Anar) and the great gods, something that is also recorded in Sennacheribs inscriptions.
if Tadmor was right, sennacheribs destruction of Babylon may be (partially) explained as a reaction to sargons sinful
policy. landsberger suggested that the text was written in the time of Esarhaddon, that it was a text made in order to
support Esarhaddons policy to rebuild Babylon and to return the statue of Marduk from assur to Babylon. sargon is
criticized for his neglect of Aur and Sennacherib confessed to have neglected Marduk.119 in Parpolas final synthesis
and edition of the document, Sargon is criticized of honoring Aur too much at the expense of Marduk (see n. 117). I
find this interpretation speculative at best.
In my view, King Sennacherib simply mentions three possible sins of Sargon: against Aur, against Marduk, or
against the oaths sworn in a treaty. One may endorse Parpolas idea that the sin of Sargon was the breach of a treaty
between sargon and Merodach-Baladan.120 as discussed above, the breaking of a treaty was considered a great offence,
one that could indeed arouse the anger of the gods. so the solution was to remedy all three possible sins: crafting a
statue for Aur and one for Marduk in order to reconcile those gods who were implored in the curse formula of a
treaty between Assyria and Babylonia. The document has nothing to do with a preference for either Aur or Marduk.
an interesting feature of the document is, furthermore, that sennacherib complains that assyrian scribes prevented
him from making the statue of Marduk (if it is really Marduk): As for me, after I had made the statue of Aur my
lord, Assyrian scribes wrongfully prevented me from working [on the statue of Marduk] and did not let me make [the
statue of Marduk, the great lord] (rev. 2123). Apparently, Esarhaddon was to finish the job of his father by making
(remaking?) the statue of Marduk and return it to Babylon. That sennacherib had not finished the job is attributed
to assyrian scribes, a remarkable feature for a document found in nineveh. so Esarhaddon reconciled with the gods,
whose wrath Sargon had incurred by breaking a treaty sworn to Aur and Marduk. Sennacherib already had tried to
reconcile with Aur by making a statue for this god, but had failed in the case of Marduk (with the lame excuse that
he was prevented from doing so by the scribes). Esarhaddon now finally finished the job by making a statue of Marduk
and leading it to Babylon. landsberger and his followers consider the document as a defense of Esarhaddons policy.121
it might as well have been a document composed at the accession of Esarhaddon by some rival scribe or diviner meant
as an exhortation to rebuild Babylon, as we shall see below.
garelli122 did not see a major break in sennacheribs religious policy as regards Babylon as a reaction to his father
sargon. in his view, the ejection of sennacheribs son to the Elamites and the great number of insurrections offered
sufficient political justification for the sack of Babylon. De liagre Bhl offered similar suggestions. 123 garelli also
doubted whether Sargon was really all that pro-Babylonian, since Sargon, by equating Aur to Anar, placed this god
higher than Marduk.124 Moreover, garelli suggests that the assyrian kings were not much interested in Babylon and
117
Transliteration and translation in alasdair livingstone, Court
Poetry and Literary Miscellanea, state archives of assyria 3 (Helsinki:
Helsinki university Press, 1989), pp. 7779, no. 33; editio princeps:
Hayim Tadmor, The sin of sargon, Eretz-Israel 5 (1958): 15062
(in Hebrew) and *93 (English summary); i owe the translation to
P. a. siebesma. Cf. Paul garelli, les sujets du roi dassyrie, in La
voix de lopposition en Mesopotamie (colloque organis par linstitut
des Hautes Etudes de Belgique, 19 et 20 mars 1973), edited by a.
Finet (Brussels: Institut des Hautes Etudes de Belgique, [1973]), pp.
189213, esp. pp. 19399. For a new edition and re-evaluation, see
Hayim Tadmor, Benno landsberger, and simo Parpola, The sin of
sargon and sennacheribs last Will, State Archives of Assyria Bulletin
3/1 (1989): 351. livingstone, Court Poetry, follows this edition.
118
The reconstruction proposed in Tadmor, landsberger, and Parpola, sin of sargon, p. 10, and adopted by livingstone, Court Poetry,
p. 77, reads: was it because [he honoured] the gods o[f Assyria too
much, placing them] above the gods of Babylonia [, and was it
because] he did not [keep] the treaty of the king of gods [that Sargon
my father] was killed [in the enemy country and] was not b[uried] in
his house? i find this too speculative; it infers too much from lost
lines. The crucial passages, in which mention is made of the statue

of Marduk, are lost. in the case of sennacheribs recommendation
to posterity (in Parpolas view to sennacheribs son Esarhaddon)
all supposed references to Marduk and Babylonia are in the breaks.
119
Tadmor, landsberger, and Parpola, sin of sargon, pp. 3334.
120
ibid., pp. 4849.
121
in the same vein, ann M. Weaver, The sin of sargon and Esarhaddons reconception of sennacherib: a study in Divine Will,
Human Politics and royal ideology, Iraq 66 (2004): 6166.
122
garelli, les sujets du roi dassyrie, pp. 19596.
123
F. M. Th. de liagre Bhl, Eine Tauschurkunde aus dem fnften
Regierungsjahr des Aur-ndin-umi (694 v. Chr.), in Orientalia
Neerlandica: A Volume of Oriental Studies Published under the Auspices of
the Netherlands Oriental Society (Oostersch Genootschap in Nederland) on
the Occasion of the Twenty-fifth Anniversary of Its Foundation (May 8th,
1945) (leiden: sijthoff, 1948), pp. 11637, esp. pp. 11718.
124
That this argument is not very strong is suggested by sargons
letter to the gods in which Anar (= Aur) is said to have received
dominion over the world from Marduk.
249
assumes that the faction theory, which maintains that sargon and Esarhaddon were exponents of a pro-Babylonian
faction and that sennacherib was a representative of an assyrian nationalist party, is mistaken. in this, he is supported
by landsberger, who argues that Esarhaddons pro-Babylonian policy was mere propaganda and that this king hosted
the same feelings toward the ancient city as his father had done before him.125
This does not explain, however, why sennacherib never mentions sargon in his inscriptions, why he abandoned
sargons new capital Dur-sharrukin, why he changed his attitude toward Babylon at the very start of his reign,126 and
why Marduk and nab are almost absent from his inscriptions.127 it is very difficult to explain sennacheribs hostility
toward his father because we have no explicit statements about it, but it does not seem unreasonable to assume that
he was aware of some sin of sargon, whatever it may have been.
a second example of the influence of religion and prophecy on policy is Esarhaddons decision to revoke his fathers
resolution to destroy Babylon. as his motive, Esarhaddon mentions the clemency of Marduk: The merciful god Marduk
wrote that the calculated time of its abandonment (should last) 70 years, (but) his heart was quickly soothed, and he
reversed the numbers and thus ordered its (re)occupation to be (after) 11 years.128
letters found in nineveh inform us about what appears to have been the true reason of Esarhaddons u-turn. it
must be noted that his succession had not been easy. His father sennacherib had appointed Esarhaddon as his successor,
but an elder brother tried to prevent his accession. Esarhaddon even had to flee to exile. Meanwhile, sennacherib was
assassinated by his son Arda-Muliu.129 From his exile, Esarhaddon managed to capture nineveh and seize the throne.
The cardinal point is that there had been a seer who had issued a dual prophecy: that Esarhaddon would become king
and that Babylon would be repopulated. in a letter it is stated that because the first part of the prophecy had come
true, the new king had to make sure that the second part of the prophecy would be fulfilled as well.130 i suggest that
the document concerning the sin of sargon, discussed above, originated from the circles of this same seer, sneering at
assyrian scribes who had prevented sennacherib from doing the right thing.
it is clear that much of what the assyrian kings said about their policy is too positive from a historical perspective.
yet there is no doubt that Babylonian cities received a special treatment, different from the ways in which other parts
of the empire were dealt with. as we have seen, only sennacherib adopted from the very beginning of his reign a
hostile and merciless approach toward Babylon. in his Babylonian policy, Cyrus thus followed age-old traditions, as
described in the Cyrus Cylinder.
Cyrus and Babylonia

after the fall of the assyrian empire a Babylonian dynasty conquered Mesopotamia and chose Babylon as its capital.
nebuchadnezzar ii (605562) has become especially famous for refurbishing Babylon (and notorious because he deported
the Judeans). The last neo-Babylonian king, nabonidus (556539), may have met opposition in Babylon because of his
exceptional behavior. He stayed out of Babylon for ten years, made Tem (Thaema) in Arabia his residence, and left
the administration in Babylon to his son Belshazzar. as long as nabonidus stayed away, the new years festival did not
take place. in these years, temple grounds were subject to palace regulations.131 in addition, nabonidus seems to have
had a preference for the moon god sn at the expense of Marduk. He spent much on the building of temples for sn at
arran and Ur and even called Esagila and other temples houses of your (= Sns) godhead.132 in the propaganda text
125
landsberger, Brief des Bishofs von Esagila, p. 16.

Babylonian Chronicle from nabonassar to shamash-shuma-ukin,
ii.19iii.38. albert Kirk grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles,
Texts from Cuneiform studies 5 (locust valley: augustin, 1975), pp.
7782 no. 1 = Jean-Jacques glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles, Writings from the ancient World 19 (atlanta: society of Biblical literature, 2004), pp. 193202, no. 16.
127
Marduk is mentioned only thrice and nab only twice and that
without any epithet.
128
leichty, Esarhaddon, nos. 104: ii 19; 114: ii 1218; cf. slightly
different no. 116: 1819. (in cuneiform = 70; = 11)
129
= arad-dnin.ll = adrammelek in 2 Kings 19:37. Cf. Parpola, Murderer of sennacherib, pp. 17182.
130
Parpola, Murderer of sennacherib, p. 179 n. 41. The letter is
from prophet Bl-uezib, who had been imprisoned before and apparently risked his life with his prophecy: i am the one who told
the omen of the kingship of my lord the crown prince Esarhaddon
126
to the exorcist Dad and the queen mother saying: Esarhaddon will
rebuild Babylon and restore Esaggil, and [honor] me why has the
king up until now not summoned me? (aBl 1216 = Parpola, Letters
from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars, no. 109: 1416).
131
Cf. the so-called edict of Belshazzar (yBT vi.103): Denise Cocquerillat, Palmeraies et cultures de lEanna dUruk (559520), ausgrabungen der Deutschen Forschungsgemeinschaft in uruk-Warka 8
(Berlin: gebr. Mann, 1968), pp. 37, 108. see g. van Driel, The Edict
of Belazzar: An Alternative Interpretation, Jaarbericht Ex Oriente
Lux 30 (19871988): 6164.
132
references: Hanspeter schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids von Babylon und Kyros des Groen, Alter Orient und Altes Testament 256
(Mnster: ugarit-verlag, 2001), p. 21 n. 90. For an interpretation of
nabonidus reign, see Paul-alain Beaulieu, The Reign of Nabonidus,
King of Babylon, 556539 B.C., yale near Eastern researches 10 (new
Haven: yale university Press, 1989), esp. pp. 4365 (The Exaltation
of sn in the inscriptions of nabonidus).
250
R. J. van der Spek
called King of Justice, Marduk is equated with sn. 133 it must be admitted that much of the anti-nabonidus evidence
comes from pro-Cyrus propaganda after the Persian takeover. The main documents are the Cyrus Cylinder and the socalled verse account of nabonidus, a satirical pamphlet ridiculing nabonidus preference for sn and his pedantry as
scholar.134 amlie Kuhrt correctly argued that a united opposition of the Babylonian priesthood against nabonidus
cannot be asserted, first of all because a category priesthood is a European concept that did not exist in Babylonia,
secondly because the temple administration was largely dependent on royal supervision and benefaction, and finally
because there is hardly evidence from the time of nabonidus himself.135 However, some discontent with nabonidus
measures as regards the temple is to be expected and even if the Cyrus Cylinder and the verse account are part of Persian propaganda, they may well have had a kernel of truth, if only to render them more convincing. Beaulieu pointed
out that many allegations in the verse account find their basis in nabonidus own inscriptions. He concludes that vocal
and active opposition against nabonidus among at least part of the scribal circles must have existed.136
it is von sodens assumption that in nabonidus time propaganda for and against the king existed side by side. The
King of Justice137 and the royal Chronicle138 are examples of pro-nabonidus literature, the verse account is the voice
of the opposition. von soden suggests that the latter was composed already before Cyrus conquest of Babylon by a
scribe from these hostile circles or adapted from such a document shortly after.139
The scribes and scholars from the anti-nabonidus circles had hoped that, after the deposition of nabonidus, Cyrus
would radically get rid of the Babylonian king and his policies, and that he would give Marduk and Esagila a privileged
position and perhaps depose the high officials, the atammu (head of the temple administration) Zeria and the zazakku
(registry official) rimut, who were appointed by nabonidus and seemingly are ridiculed as flatterers of nabonidus in
the verse account (but see below for a different interpretation). Caroline Waerzeggers recently argued that the Cyrus
Cylinder must be interpreted as a document mirroring views and hopes of the local elite, more or less as a manifesto
on what conditions the kingship of Cyrus was acceptable. regardless of whether or not the initiative came from Cyrus
or the priests the message is one of political hope, Cyrus hope that he would be accepted as Babylonian king and the
hope of the Babylonian elite that the new king would accept the duties belonging to this kingship as regards the temple. Hopes of both parties, Waerzeggers concludes, were destroyed within one generation.140 This view partially agrees
with that of amlie Kuhrt, who argued that surrender of Babylon to invading kings was more than once the result of
negotiations between the local elite and the king, sargon ii in 709, Cyrus in 539, and alexander the great in 331 b.c.
(see above, n. 83).
indeed, at least some of the expectations were not satisfied. Cyrus saw to it that Esagila was not damaged and
that the normal rites could be performed, but he did not take part in the new years festival in person. That Cyrus (or
Cambyses?) appeared in Elamite (= Persian) attire at Cambyses investiture ritual may have shocked some Babylonians
(although the sources do not state so explicitly). Babylon lost the position it had enjoyed before Cyrus: it ceased to be
the core of an empire; the new king represented a new power structure.141
133
schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids, pp. 57988, P2 iii 18, iv 26, vi 9.

ibid., pp. 56378; English translations in Pritchard, Ancient Near
Eastern Texts, pp. 31215; Kuhrt, Persian Empire, pp. 7580.
135
amlie Kuhrt, nabonidus and the Babylonian Priesthood, in
Pagan Priests: Religion and Power in the Ancient World, edited by Mary
Beard and John north (london: Duckworth, 1990), pp. 11955.
136
Paul-alain Beaulieu, nabonidus the Mad King: a reconsideration
of His steles from Harran and Babylon, in Representations of Political
Power: Case Histories from Times of Change and Dissolving Order in the
Ancient Near East, edited by Marlies Heinz and Marian H. Feldman
(Winona lake: Eisenbrauns, 2007), pp. 13766, esp. p. 160. Jursa,
The Transition of Babylonia, pp. 7394, downplays the extent of
the discontent with nabonidus policy, because there was no rift
between temple authorities and the palace (the temple officials
were mostly appointed by the king) and because many high officials stayed in power, among whom the atammu and the zazakku of
Esagila (cf. previous note). Jursa, however, has no explanation for
the fact that these officials remained in office although they supposedly were ridiculed as sycophants in the verse account. Jursa is
correct in his argument that a lot of continuity existed in the governance of Babylonia, as happens most of the time in regime change,
but the realities of the power structure in Babylon probably were
complex. some circles will have supported nabonidus and his name
apparently had a positive connotation among the rebels against
DariusI, others will have retained their jobs despite their allegiance
to nabonidus (note that nabonidus himself was spared and exiled,
134
not killed), and again others will have had a more radical antipathy
against the last Babylonian king and may have written letters to
Cyrus like the (partly anonymous) officials had done to sargon ii.
The verse account may have been a scholarly satire coming from
this group, but not intended for a wider audience.
137
schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids, pp. 57988.
138
ibid., pp. 58995.
139
Wolfram von soden, Kyros und nabonid: Propaganda und gegenpropaganda, in Wolfram von soden, Aus Sprache, Geschichte und
Religion Babylonien, series minor (istituto universitario orientale,
Dipartimento di studi asiatici) 32 (naples: istituto universitario
Orientale, 1989), pp. 28592, esp. p. 288.
140
lecture delivered June 30, 2010, vu university, amsterdam.
141
Nabonidus Chronicle III.2428 in the interpretation of AndrewR.
george, studies in Cultic Topography and ideology, Bibliotheca Orientalis 53 (1996): 36395, esp. pp. 37980; so also Kuhrt, Persian Empire, p. 51. i reject von sodens opinion that the nabonidus Chronicle
was a piece of pro-Cyrus propaganda. The document treats nabonidus with a certain detachment. it stresses that the king did not take
part in the Aktu festival, but no judgment is given. It is also stressed
that the other ceremonies were performed correctly (ki almu). The
participation of the king in the new years ceremony in his seventeenth year is duly recorded and it was also done correctly (ki
almu iii.8). negative reports about Cyrus are his slaughter of Babylonian people after the battle at sippar (iii.14) and his attendance
of the investiture of Cambyses as viceroy in Elamite dress, but no
251
Cyrus continued nabonidus policy of exploiting the temple lands, he did not kill nabonidus and did not remove
Zeria and rimut from office. Kristin Kleber observed that the atammu Zeria was still in office in the ninth year of Cyrus
and the zazakku rimut in the fifth year of Cambyses. so she concluded that the composition of the verse account must
have taken place much later, after the revolt of two rebels from the time of Darius i (522 and 521 b.c.), who both called
themselves nebuchadnezzar, son of nabonidus.142 The allusion to nabonidus by these rebels would have been the occasion to compose this derogatory document concerning the last Babylonian king.143 Taking into account von sodens
and Waerzeggers observations one may alternatively suggest that the verse account was not late, but rather early,
just before or after Cyrus accession. Zeria and rimut would as shrewd politicians have welcomed Cyrus in Babylon and
have praised Cyrus rededication of Esagila to Marduk, if we accept Waerzeggers proposal that in the verse account (v
1828) there is no question of sycophancy of these officials toward Nabonidus, but that it was Cyrus, who took away
from Esagila the crescent of the moon god sn and was supported in this by Zeria and rimut.144
subsequent generations cherished different opinions of nabonidus, though. a negative judgment is still preserved in
a prophecy text, the Dynastic Prophecy, a historical composition in the form of predictions from the downfall of assyria
to (at least) alexander the great, seemingly issued in the neo-assyrian period, but apparently being vaticinia ex eventu
from the early Hellenistic period. 145 The prophecy on nabonidus is negative (he will plot evil against akkad 146),
while Cyrus is judged favorably (During his reign Akkad [will live] in security147).
Berossus, on the other hand, does not seem to have had a negative view of nabonidus religious policy.148 as mentioned above, the Babylonian rebels under Darius i claimed to be nebuchadnezzar, son of nabonidus, implying that
nabonidus was a respectable Babylonian king. if lambert was right, the pro-nabonidus treatise King of Justice is preserved on a tablet copied in the seleucid-Parthian period.149
it is possible that under these circumstances of internal conflicts in Babylonia, some Babylonian diviners and
priests predicted Cyrus victory, explicitly linking this to the restoration of the cult of Marduk, and actually invited
him to intervene, similar to the calls of their predecessors in the days of sargon ii. a comparable prophecy is known
from a Hebrew source:
[I am the LORD] who says of Cyrus, He is my shepherd, and he shall carry out all my purpose; and who says of
Jerusalem, it shall be rebuilt, and of the temple, your foundation shall be laid. Thus says the lord to his anointed, to Cyrus, whose right hand i have grasped to subdue nations before him and strip kings of their robes, to open
doors before him and the gates shall not be closed. () For the sake of my servant Jacob, and Israel my chosen,
i call you by your name, i surname you, though you do not know me.150
Just like a seer could successfully urge Esarhaddon to make sure that the second part of the prediction would come
true, a Jewish and a Babylonian prophet may have tried to achieve their aims through Cyrus.151
judgment is given. Cf. amlie Kuhrt, some Thoughts on P. Briant,
Histoire de lEmpire Perse, in Recherches rcentes sur lempire achmnide, Topoi, supplement 1 (Paris: ditions de Boccard, 1997), pp.
299304. Cf. gauthier Tolini, Quelques lments concernant la prise
de Babylone par Cyrus (octobre 539 av. J.-C.), ARTA 2005.003: 113.
142
Bisotun Inscription I 16, III 49, IV 52 (Persian version, translation: Kuhrt, Persian Empire, pp. 14158); lines 3131, 85, 9192 (Babylonian version, translation: von voigtlander, The Bisitun Inscription,
pp. 5556 and 60).
143
Kristin Kleber, Zria, atammu von Esangila und die Entstehungszeit des Strophengedichts, Nouvelles assyriologiques brves et utilitaires 2007/52.
144
Caroline Waerzeggers, Very Cordially Hated in Babylonia? Zria
and Rmt in the Verse Account, Altorientalische Forschungen 39
(2012): 31620.
145
Column II.16. Editio princeps: Albert Kirk Grayson, Babylonian
Historical-Literary Texts (Toronto: university of Toronto Press, 1975),
pp. 2437; collated new edition: r. J. van der spek, Darius iii, pp.
31133, no. 5.
146
Dynastic Prophecy II.16.
147
Dynastic Prophecy II.24, i-na bal-e- kur uri.ki ub-tum ni-i[htum tu]. Grayson understood this as: During his reign Akkad [will
not enjoy] a peaceful abode. This cannot be correct. There is hardly
room for an extra sign ul or nu not. in addition, this is a sentence
common in the omen literature, always used in the affirmative,
and as this text is closely related to the omens it will have been in
this context similarly. Cf. van der spek, Darius iii, pp. 31920. The
expression in affirmative sense is preserved indeed in the Cyrus

Cylinder itself: kur.kur ka-li-i-na u-ub-ti n-eh-t -e-i-ib (line 36,
fragment B; cf. schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids, p. 554) and on a
brick inscription of Cyrus: kur u-ub-ti n-eh-ti -e-ib (ibid., p. 549,
K1, 2a: 6).
148
Berossus apud Josephus, Contra Apionem 1.15153.
149
Wilfred g. lambert, a new source for the reign of nabonidus,
Archiv fr Orientforschung 22 (1968/1969): 18. Cf. schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids, p. 591; Beaulieu, nabonidus the Mad King, pp.
13740.
150
isaiah 44:28451 and 4.
151
isaiahs prophecy may of course be considered to have been vaticinatio ex eventu, but Babylonian and Jewish prophets could well have
anticipated a Persian victory before 539. it is interesting to note that
Beaulieu, nabonidus the Mad King, argues that the Babylonian
scholars wanted to challenge the royal monopoly in religious affairs,
were hence opposed to nabonidus plans, and thus ridiculed nabonidus scholarship. We may detect a similar development in the Jewish
scribal circles who denounced kingship (1 samuel 8), denounced all
israelite and many Judahite kings, especially the last one, Zedekiah,
and who managed to set up a temple state without kings under Persian rule at the instigation and inspiration of scribe Ezra. For the
role of Jewish scribal circles in the creation of the Hebrew Bible, see
Karel van der Toorn, Scribal Culture and the Making of the Hebrew Bible
(Cambridge: Harvard university Press, 2007).
Doubts on the historicity of the return of Jewish exiles under
Cyrus are expressed by Edelman, The Origins of the Second Temple, cf.
252
R. J. van der Spek
The author of Deutero-isaiah would have been as disappointed in Cyrus as his Babylonian contemporaries. Cyrus
promise (if it was made at all) to repatriate the Judaeans was probably not implemented before Darius i (see nn. 12
and 13). One might ask how the Verse Account could be preserved as long as Zeria and Rimut lived. If Waerzeggers
interpretation is correct (see above, at n. 144), there is no problem, as the verse account is pro-Cyrus and Zeria and
rimut are supporting Cyrusdecision to rededicate Esagila to Marduk. But the verse account may also be the voice of a
minority view. as a matter of fact, the Hebrew Bible is also the voice of a minority group in ancient israel, the yahweh
alone party, yet well preserved.152
it is sobering to note that even nabonidus early in his reign had high expectations of Cyrus and considered him to
be a small servant of Marduk, who would defeat the Medes; see the Ehulhul inscription from Harran in schaudig, Die
Inschriften Nabonids, p. 436, no. 2.12 / 11: i 27.
The Cyrus Cylinder and Babylonia

The Cyrus Cylinder is first and foremost a document intended to legitimize Cyrus rule. in order to justify his conquest
it was necessary to blacken his predecessor as much as possible. and so he did. Cyrus wanted to stress that Marduk,
the god of Babylon, had turned his back on nabonidus; from this it logically followed that Marduk had looked for and
chosen a new king, who happened to be Cyrus. The reason was that nabonidus had abominated the cult of Marduk in
the temple of Babylon. a full quote of the start of the cylinder is illuminating:
[When Mar]duk, king of the whole of heaven and earth, who, in his , lays waste his ][.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. broa]d(?) in intelligence, [ . who inspects(?) the world quar]ters,[.. .. ..
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..] his [off]spring, a insignificant (person) (i.e., Belshazzar) was
installed for the lordship of his country and? [.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
.. a coun]terfeit (i.e., crown prince Belshazzar) he imposed upon them. A counterfeit of the Esagila he bu[ilt and
.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..]x for Ur and the rest of the cultic centers. A ritual which was improper to them, [impure] fo[od offerings .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ir]reverently, he daily recited and offensively he
interrupted the regular offerings; he [interfered with the rituals .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..] he established in the midst
of the cultic centers. On his own accord [lit., in his mind] he e[nde]d the worship of Marduk, king of the gods.153
The gist of this is clear: nabonidus had installed an unworthy viceroy in Babylon, had desecrated Esagila, he made
a counterfeit of it. Marduk had become angry. The slander that nabonidus had made a counterfeit of Esagila is also
made in the verse account, another piece of anti-nabonidus propaganda:
nn. 13 and 14. as a matter of fact, the prophet apparently knew that
Cyrus would take Babylon without a battle (to open before him the
double doors, so that the gates will not be shut) as is stated in the
nabonidus Chronicle (grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles,
no. 7 = glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles, no. 26 iii.15) and the Cyrus
Cylinder (line 17), which would date the prophecy after the battle
of sippar some days before the capture of Babylon, when it was
decided to open the doors for the conqueror. The attempt of David
vanderhooft to rescue Herodotus story that Babylon was taken by
force on the basis of Jeremiah 51:3032 is unfounded. in this passage
it is also stated: The warriors of Babylon have given up fighting
(as they did after Sippar) and One runner runs to meet another,
and one messenger to meet another, to tell the king of Babylon
that his city is taken on every side (to inform nabonidus who had
fled [Nabonidus Chronicle III.15]?). However, the author of Jeremiah expected total destruction of Babylon (51:5558), which did not
happen. it must be admitted that Jeremiah 51 possibly was modified
several times. it seems as though the oracle against Babylon was
a reworked oracle originally intended for nineveh. The fact that
reference is made to the kings (plural) of Media in verses 11 and 28
and that the enemies are urartu, the Manneans, and the skythians
(verse 27) better fits the assyrian period, as is suggested by Menko
vlaardingerbroek in his forthcoming dissertation (vu university
amsterdam) The greek and Biblical Perception of Mesopotamia:
idiosyncrasies and Distortions. He will make an end to the sounds

of revelry (verse 55) may either reflect historical reality (Aktu
festival in Tashritu, as suggested by Vanderhooft [p. 359]), but may
also betray knowledge of Herodotus 1.191 and Xenophon, Cyropaedia
7.5.15, a story reworked in Daniel 5. Cf. David vanderhooft, Cyrus ii,
liberator or Conqueror? ancient Historiography Concerning Cyrus
in Babylon, in Judah and the Judeans in the Persian Period, edited by
Oded Lipschits and Manfred Oeming (Winona Lake: Eisenbrauns,
2006), pp. 35172. vanderhooft is right, of course, in interpreting
Cyrus as a conqueror (battle of sippar!), not a liberator. Tolini argues on the basis of an administrative document concerning repairs
on the Enlil gate, that some force at least was necessary for Cyrus
to take the city; cf. Tolini, Quelques elements concernant la prise
de Babylone par Cyrus; and n. 141, above.
152
Morton smith, Palestinian Parties and Politics that Shaped the Old Testament (new york: Columbia university Press, 1971); van der Toorn,
Scribal Culture.
153
Cyrus Cylinder, lines 17; see appendix. it was Finkel who proposed the translation counterfeit for tamlu in line 5 (ta-am-i-li
.sag.l) and line 4 ([.. ta-am]-i-li -a--ki-na e-ru-u-un. Cf. schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids, p. 551. Counterfeit has a more negative connotation than the usual translation imitation or replica
and so better fits the context.
253
a-na .kur tam-i-lu si-mat lu-me-il

.hl.hl lu-um-bi zi-kir- ana a-a-t
To the temple (= Esagila) he will make equal a temple (eu) that is a counterfeit of a proper appurtenance, he will name it Ehulhul (= name of the temple of sn in Harran) for eternity.154
This reminds us in some way of the attempt of the assyrian rabshakeh before Jerusalem to discredit Hezekiahs
policy of cult centralization and find support among opponents of it (cf. above).155 However propagandistic these statements may have been, they are likely to contain some kernel of truth. Hezekiah did take away shrines of yahweh from
the countryside for cult centralization.
But, the Cyrus Cylinder continues and i am paraphrasing now with Marduks pity for the people of sumer and
akkad, who have become like corpses. Marduk decides to show his mercy.
He examined and checked all of the lands, and he searched constantly for a righteous king, his hearts desire.
He took his hands, he called out his name: Cyrus, king of Anshan; he proclaimed his na[me] for the rulership over
all and orders him to march on Babylon (lines 1115).
Phrases reminiscent of the Cyrus Cylinder can be found in the inscriptions of sargon and Esarhaddon. in the annals
of sargon, we read that the Chaldaean Merodach-Baladan (Marduk-apla-iddin), ruling in Babylon, ignored the will of
Marduk for twelve years and even despised the god.
For twelve years against the will of the gods, he ruled and governed Babylon, the city of the Enlil (of the gods).
Marduk, the great lord, saw (i-u-[ul]!) the evil deeds of the Chaldaean that he hated, and the deprivation of his
royal scepter and throne was established on his lips. Me, sargon, the reverent king, he (Marduk) chose from all
kings and he correctly appointed me. He lifted my head in the land of sumer and akkad. To cut off the feet of the
Chaldaean, the evil enemy, he made strong my weapons. On the orders of my great lord Marduk, I prepared the
weaponry, pitched my camp, and ordered [my soldiers] to march against the evil Chaldaean.156
Here, sargon is, like Cyrus, the chosen of Marduk. His predecessor is an evil demon, who rules against the will of
Marduk, who is a foreigner, a Chaldaean. note that the Dynastic Prophecy stresses the fact that nabonidus established
a reign (pal) of arran. Likewise, Esarhaddon claimed to have been chosen by Marduk from his brothers to become
king.157 The wrath of Marduk and his mercy to Babylon are mentioned most clearly in a text by this assyrian king:
Marduk, the Enlil of the gods, became angry, but he had mercy and ordered the rebuilding of the city.158
There is much irony in the observation that Merodach-Baladan adopted the same kind of propagandistic theology:
[At that] time, the great lord, the god Marduk, had turned away in divine wrath from the land of Akkad, and
the evil enemy, the Subarian (= Assyrian), exercised the rule over the land of Akkad for [seve]n [years, unt]il the
days had elapsed, the appointed time had arrived, (and) the great [lord], the god Marduk, became reconciled with
the land of akkad, with which he had become angry.
He (the god Marduk) looked (with favor) upon Marduk-apla-iddina (II), king of Babylon, prince who reveres
him, to whom he (the god Marduk) stretched out his hand, legitimate eldest son of Erba-Marduk, king of Babylon,
who has made firm the foundation(s) of the land. The king of the gods, the god asari,159 duly named him [to] the
shepherdship of the land of sumer and akkad (and) personally said: This is indeed the shepherd who will gather
the scattered (people).160
in the inscriptions of sargon and in the Cyrus Cylinder (lines 2228), the king enters Babylon without violence.
Just like his assyrian predecessor, Cyrus presents himself as the one who removes the yoke from the Babylonians and
restores a damaged city. in lines 2830, we read that the kings of all countries came to bring tribute to Cyrus and this
returns in the Dynastic Prophecy (II.23). Again, this is a topical remark, taken from the Assyrian annals; Sargon also
mentions this in the context of his entering of Babylon.161
154
verse account ii.6; cf. schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids, p. 567.

For a deviating English translation, see Pritchard, Ancient Near Eastern Texts, pp. 31215 (translation A. L. Oppenheim).
155
2 Kings 18:22; cf. the above quoted passage 2 Kings 18:25 (see n.
46).
156
annals of sargons twelfth year: lie, Inscriptions of Sargon, p. 43:
26773; Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons, pp. 32633, 25566; luckenbill,
Ancient Records, 31.
157
see above, n. 129; leichty, Esarhaddon, nos. 104: ii 9b23a; 114:
ii 19iii 8.
158
see above and n. 128.

asari was an ancient sumerian god, equated with Marduk.
160
Clay cylinder of Marduk-apla-iddin concerning repairs of the
Eanna temple in uruk. This document was found in the north-West
Palace of sargon in Calah (nimrud) and may have been taken from
uruk as trophy by sargon. Translation: Frame, Rulers of Babylonia,
p. 137.
161
lie, Inscriptions of Sargon, p. 5557: 37577; Fuchs, Die Inschriften
Sargons, p. 155: 31416 (translation, p. 332).
159
254
R. J. van der Spek
in line 33 of the cylinder it is stated that Cyrus allowed the gods of sumer and akkad that had been brought to
Babylon by nabonidus, to return to their own cities.162 This is exactly what sargon did in 707 with the gods of ur,
uruk, Eridu, larsa, Kisik, and nimid-laguda whom Merodach-Baladan had seized and taken to Dur-yakin. 163 it is understandable that sargon and Cyrus publicly rejected their predecessors policy to move gods from their temples to
other places. yet, what Merodach-Baladan and nabonidus had done was not sacrilegious at all. it fits the polytheistic
worldview of ancient man, discussed above. The move had two purposes. By collecting as many gods as possible into his
city a threatened king could accumulate divine power, which would help his defense. at the same time it was a token of
reverence to move the gods of cities that could not be defended and bring them to the most defensible city. nabonidus
acts in this respect are neutrally mentioned by the nabonidus Chronicle. after reporting that in the seventeenth year
of nabonidus the new years festival was correctly performed, the text continues:
In the month [IIVI LugalMaradda and the god]s of Marad, Zababa and the gods of Kish, Ninlil [and the gods of]
Hursagkalamma entered Babylon. until the end of the month ululu (29 august26 september 539 b.c.) the gods
of Akka[d] from everywhere entered Babylon. The gods of Borsippa, Cuthah and Sippar did not enter.164
apparently, Borsippa, Cuthah, and sippar were considered to be too close to necessitate migration to Babylon. The
operation was to no avail. One month later Nabonidus army was defeated at Opis, Sippar was taken on October 10th,
and Babylon on the 12th. Between november 539 to March 538 the gods of akkad, whom nabonidus had brought down
to Babylon returned to their sacred cities, as is neutrally stated in the chronicle (III.2122). It is Cyrus who constructs
this as an act of piety and reconciling the gods anger.
in line with the policy of sargon and other kings, Cyrus saw to it that the rituals in Esagila were not disturbed and
showed reverence to the Babylonian gods, as is stated in the Cyrus Cylinder and confirmed by the nabonidus Chronicle.
We also read in the Cyrus Cylinder that Cyrus sacrificed geese, ducks, and turtledoves on top of the usual sacrificial
birds (line 37). in this he also simply tries to outdo nabonidus: in the En-nigaldi-nanna Cylinder 165 nabonidus makes a
similar claim concerning sheep. The section closely mirrors a description of bird sacrifices by sargon and other assyrian
and Babylonian kings.166 Finally, we reach the purpose of the cylinder: it is a foundation text for the rebuilding of the
wall known as imgur-Enlil and/or a quay along the citys ditch (lines 3839). it is remarkable that Cyrus explicitly and
reverently referred to an assyrian king: an inscription with the name of assurbanipal, a king who had preceded me,
i saw in its midst (line 43). There are indeed parallels with texts by this king; they were discussed by Jnos Harmatta,
who showed that the royal titles used by Cyrus are assyrian rather than Babylonian.167 in this respect Cyrus even went
into the footsteps of his wretched predecessor: nabonidus himself spoke reverently about assurbanipal.168
One might ask why there is no reference to any Persian god in the Cyrus Cylinder. Didnt the Assyrian kings always
stress their allegiance to their supreme god Aur (next to other gods such as Marduk) and stress the fact that foreign
gods had to accept Aurs supremacy? Didnt the Persian kings have their own tutelary deity in Auramazd? In the
Bisotun Inscription of Darius I, Auramazd is the only god mentioned by name (apart from and all the gods).169 The
answer is that the Cyrus Cylinder was intended for Babylonian usage and conformed to local religion and practices. in
this the cylinder is not unique. The assyrian building inscriptions of Esarhaddon destined for Babylon do not mention
Aur at all; they are all about Marduk and other Babylonian gods.170 The same is true for the Babylon inscriptions of
assurbanipal, such as the l6 cylinder, discussed above.171 Darius i, for that matter, applied the same policy. in the copy
162
it is confirmed by the nabonidus Chronicle (grayson, Assyrian

and Babylonian Chronicles, no. 7 iii.212); note that the removal of
the gods is criticized in the verse account vi.125 (schaudig, Die
Inschriften Nabonids, pp. 572, 578).
163
van der spek, The struggle of King sargon, pp. 6566.
164
Nabonidus Chronicle III.812 (my translation; cf. www.livius.org
> Mesopotamia); grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, no. 7;
glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles, no. 26.
165
schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids, p. 377, ii.18; cf. Beaulieu, Reign
of Nabonidus, p. 131
166
references: CaD s.v. kurk (kur.gi.muen) goose, CaD s.v.
paspasu (uz.tur.muen) duck, and CaD s.v. sukanninu (tu.gur.
muen) turtledove. For sargon, see van der spek, The struggle
of King sargon, p. 58, inscription from Khorsabad, room v, pl. 9,
line 12.
167
Jnos Harmatta, les modles littraires de ldit babylonien
de Cyrus, in Duchesne-guillemin, ed., Commmoration Cyrus 1, pp.
2944.
168
For references, see schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids, p. 708.
169
Babylonian version: von voigtlander, The Bisitun Inscription of

Darius the Great: Babylonian Version, pp. 44 and 61, lines 103 and 104;
Persian version the other gods who are: Kuhrt, The Persian Empire,
p. 1489, IV 62 and 63.
170
leichty, Esarhaddon, nos. 104126 (Aur is mentioned once in a
god list: no. 113: 22).
171
Cylinders l1 (rebuilding of Esagila and Eturkalamma, mentioning
Marduk and ishtar), l2 (rebuilding of Esagila and Ebabbar in sippar,
found in Sippar [Abu Habba], mentioning Marduk and ama), P1
(a barrel cylinder probably from Babylon mentioning the return of
Marduk), l6 (repair of Esagila and the imgur-Enlil wall), the Emah
Cylinder (restoration of Emah, mentioning the goddess residing
there, Ninmah [Streck, Assurbanipal, vol. 2, pp. 22640]). Stelae S2
and s3 (Esagila) only mention the fact that assurbanipal acts at the
command of Aur, ama, and Marduk (ibid., pp. 24048). On brick
inscriptions from Babylon it is again Marduk and on bricks from
nippur Enlil (idem,Assurbanipal, vol. 3, pp. 5053; commentary in
idem, Assurbanipal, vol. 1, pp. xlxlv).
255
of the Bisotun Inscription found in Babylon, the name Auramazd was replaced by Bl. 172 The Seleucid king AntiochusI
was the last king of whom a clay cylinder is preserved. it was deposited in Borsippa and the concern is only Borsippas
god Nab (see n. 3). No reference to any Greek god is made. As far as we know, neither Aur nor Auramazd, Zeus, or
apollo ever got a shrine in Babylon.
Cyrus policy, however, was not just one of adoration of Babylon. in everyday life, he acted just like his predecessors. He may have entered Babylon peacefully, as is recorded by the nabonidus Chronicle and by the Cyrus Cylinder,
but he could only achieve this after having defeated the Babylonian army at Opis and having slaughtered the people,
again according to the nabonidus Chronicle.173 Cyrus did not abolish the tribute that the Chaldaean kings had ordered
the temples to pay;174 in the Cyrus Cylinder Cyrus is praised for receiving heavy tribute from the whole world (lines
2830). Cyrus made Babylon part of a satrapy with a Babylonian, later a Persian, satrap.175 The greek sources also do not
unequivocally advocate Cyrus clemency in Mesopotamia. although Herodotus story about Cyrus conquest of Babylon
(after a siege and by a stratagem of diverting the Euphrates) is probably unhistorical, he accentuates the great fear of
the Babylonian population for the advance of Cyrus army.176 and even Xenophon, in his hagiographic description of
Cyrus, describes how Cyrus sent the companies of cavalry around through the streets and gave them orders to cut
down all of whom they found out of doors, while he directed those who understood syrian (syristi, aramaic) to proclaim
to those in their houses that they should stay there, for if anyone should be caught outside he would be put to death
(Cyropaedia 7.4.31). He also made the proclamation that all Babylonians deliver up their arms; and he ordered that
wherever arms should be found in any house, all the occupants should be put to the sword (7.4.33).
To summarize: to the best of our knowledge, Cyrus propaganda and policy are highly traditional, with Babylonian
as well as assyrian precedents.
The Cyrus Cylinder and the assur Charter of sargon ii

so far we have focused on Babylonia, as the Cyrus Cylinder is first of all a document from and concerning Babylon. as
matter of fact, if one would look for a first declaration of human rights, the so-called assur Charter has older credentials.
it is a document in which sargon ii restores the privileges of the city of assur, the city of privilege (uru ki-di-ni, lines
12, 23). The preceding king, Shalmaneser V, is denounced, the invoked god (in this case Aur) has become angry with
this imposter and has chosen sargon in order the restore the ancient rights. The text starts with an evocation of the
god Aur, just as the cylinder probably started with the evocation of Marduk. It is stated that Aur, to renew the cult
of the temple, to make the ritual perfect, to make the cult center perfect, he steadfastly gazed on me amongst all the
black-headed (people) and promoted me (sargon) (lines 1314). The city of assur, whose people from ancient times
had not known corve nor forced labor, shalmaneser (v), who did not reverence the King of the universe, brought his
hand to that city for evil, and so imposed hardship. He grievously imposed corve and forced labor (upon) its people,
(and) so counted (them) as people of serf status (ern.me hup-i). At that time the Enlil of the gods in the anger of his
heart overthrew his reign (bala). Me, sargon, the legitimate king, he promoted; he made me grasp scepter, throne,
(and) crown (lines 3135). i conceived a desire to bring about the freedom (zaktu) of those citizens (line 38). The
text of the charter was to be inscribed on a silver vessel (line 41).177
172
ursula seidl, Ein Monument Darius i. aus Babylon, Zeitschrift fr

Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archologie 89 (1999): 10104; Eine
Triumphstele Darius i. aus Babylon, in Babylon: Focus mesopotamischer Geschichte, Wiege frher Gelehrsamkeit, Mythos in der Moderne, Colloquien der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 2 (saarbrcken:
saarbrckener Drckerei und verlag, 1999), pp. 297306. Cf. Wouter
F. M. Henkelman, Cyrus the Persian and Darius the Elamite: A Case of Mistaken Identity, in Herodot und das Persische Weltreich / Herodotus and the
Persian Empire, edited by robert rollinger, Brigitte Truschnegg, and
reinhold Bichler, Classica et Orientalia 3 (Wiesbaden: Harrasowitz,
2011), p. 578 n. 6.
173
nabonidus Chronicle iii.1214 (grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian
Chronicles, p. 109): iti du mKu-ra al-tum ina h.ki (= u.ku/
h.ki) ina ugu [g] d -diq-lat ana ern-ni kur uri.ki ki d-
<<ern.me uri.ki ki d->> un.me kur uri.ki bal.ki sar sar
un.me gaz In the month Tartu (27 September26 October 539),
when Cyrus did battle at Opis on [the bank of] the Tigris against the
army of akkad, the people of akkad retreated. He (Cyrus) plundered
and killed the people. Cf. lamberts translation: in Tishri when
Cyrus did battle with the army of Akkad at Opis on the [bank] of the
Tigris, the soldiers of akkad withdrew. He (Cyrus) took plunder and
defeated the soldiers (of akkad) (Wilfred g. lambert, Cyrus Defeat
of nabonidus, Nouvelles assyriologiques brves et utilitaires 2007/14).

Though this interpretation is possible, i find it unlikely. although
ni exceptionally can mean soldiers (in assyrian letters in the
context of levying and assembling people for all kinds of duties; cf.
CaD s.v. ni 1d), the normal meaning refers to the people of city and
countryside. i would say that in this passage a deliberate opposition
is made between the Babylonian soldiers (ern-ni = ummani) and the
Babylonian people (un.me = ni). a parallel may be found in the
Diadochi Chronicle (grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, no.
10: rev. 29: un.me bala.ki), where it is stated that the population
of Cuthah retreated due to the plundering by the army of antigonus.
in the Ptolemy iii Chronicle (BCHP 11: 1011) we see the same opposition: the common people of Babylon (un.me) are slaughtered by
the heavily armed Macedonian troops of the Egyptian army (lern.
me kur Ha-ni-i).
174
Dandamaev, Politique religieuse, pp. 5253; Briant, From Cyrus
to Alexander, pp. 6776; Jursa, The Transition of Babylonia.
175
Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, p. 71.
176
Herodotus 1.190.
177
saggs, Historical Texts and Fragments of sargon, pp. 1120 (i
owe this reference to H. schaudig).
256
R. J. van der Spek
Cyrus and the Other Nations

On both the fields of religious policy and everyday administration not just regarding Babylon but also other nations
Cyrus has a good reputation, just like most of his successors. it is often presented as something special that the Persian kings did not intervene in the internal affairs of the foreign nations.178 One has to remember two things, however.
in the first place, refraining from direct involvement in internal affairs was normal practice among ancient conquerors. Their aim was, above all, to accumulate land and wealth and eliminate any potential rival power. The subdued
nations had to pay a certain amount of tribute how this was collected did not matter and had to be loyal to their
new masters. As long as the subjects paid and were loyal, local rulers could usually remain on their thrones. Only when
the vassal kings revolted, stopped paying tribute, or allied themselves to foreign nations did the great king see a reason
to intervene. a new vassal king would be appointed or the kingdom would be converted into a province.179 The process
of provincialization of the conquered countries sped up especially under Tiglath-Pileser iii, and had been completed
largely (but not completely180) during the Persian empire. if anything, there is a tendency toward more involvement,
not less. The reorganization of the empire and the increasing burden of taxation during the achaemenid period (esp.
Darius i) seem to have had serious consequences.181 Cyrus appears to have been less an organizer than a conqueror;
he did not introduce important new policies in the administration of the empire. The major changes came only in the
reign of Darius i and especially after the revolts of the second year of Xerxes.182
in the second place, Cyrus clemency toward the subdued nations must not be exaggerated. The massacre among
the Babylonians after the battle of Opis has already been mentioned. The Nabonidus Chronicle mentions how he looted
the Median capital Ecbatana after he had captured it.183 in 547, Cyrus killed the king of lydia184 and lydians, Phrygians,
and urartians were probably deported to nippur.185 although Herodotus reports otherwise, it is likely that Cyrus executed the lydian king Croesus.186
178
see n. 1; for a different view, see now Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, pp. 7984.
179
The system of vassal states is best known in the Hittite empire of
the late Bronze age thanks to numerous published vassal treaties.
The literature is too vast to be mentioned here. For the assyrian
treaties, see Parpola and Watanabe, Neo-Assyrian Treaties. Cf. r. J.
van der spek, assyriology and History.
180
in Cilicia a local dynasty could until 401 b.c. stay in power
(Herodotus 1.28, 74; Xenophon, Anabasis 1.2.12; afif Erzen, Kilikien
bis zum Ende der Perserherrschaft [Ph.D. diss., Leipzig university,
1940], pp. 97130). In Phoenician cities kings could remain seated
on their thrones; see H. Jacob Katzenstein, Tyre in the Early Persian Period (539486 B.C.E.), Biblical Archaeologist 42/1 (1979): 2334;
Josette Elayi, lessor de la Phnicie et le passage de la domination
assyro-babylonienne la domination perse, Baghdader Mitteilungen 9
(1978): 2538. a third example of princes within the Persian empire
are the greek tyrants in ionian cities.
181
Olmstead, Persian Empire, pp. 18594 (whose interpretation of
Persian overtaxation as leading to higher prices, however, is erroneous: overtaxation and hoarding lead to deflation rather than
inflation); cf. Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, pp. 388471. see also
Hans g. Kippenberg, Religion und Klassenbildung im antiken Juda (gttingen: vandenhoeck & ruprecht, 1978), pp. 4277; and nehemiah
5:4. Michael Jursa and Caroline Waerzeggers, On Aspects of Taxation in achaemenid Babylonia, in Organisation des pouvoirs et contacts
culturels dans les pays de lempire achmnide, edited by Pierre Briant
and M. Chauveau, Persika 14 (Paris: ditions de Boccard, 2009), pp.
23769.
182
Jursa, The Transition of Babylonia, passim. Differently, lisbeth
s. Fried, The Priest and the Great King: Temple-Palace Relations in the Persian Empire (Winona lake: Eisenbrauns, 2004), pp. 848. she stresses
new appointments by the Persian kings, but ignores the fact that
Zeria, the atammu, and rimut, the zazakku, had remained in office.
183
nabonidus Chronicle ii.24 (grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian
Chronicles, no. 7; glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles, no. 26).
184
nabonidus Chronicle ii.16 (grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, no. 7; glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles, no. 26). The passage
has long been taken to refer to lydia, but many other readings have
been proposed, most recently by robert rollinger, who argued that
it did not regard lydia but urartu (ina iti gu ana kur -[ra-u
il-li]k); robert rollinger, The Median Empire, the End of urartu

and Cyrus the greats Campaign in 547 B.C. (nabonidus Chronicle
ii.16), Ancient East and West 7 (2008): 5165. On March 12, 2013, I
collated the tablet together with Mark geller, irving Finkel, and
stefan Zawadzki, and we all agreed that the reading Lu is by far the
most acceptable reading, while is impossible. it was also suggested
by professor Wilfred F. lambert on June 3, 2010 (cf. stefan Zawadzki,
The Portrait of nabonidus and Cyrus in Their(?) Chronicle: When
and Why the Present version Was Composed, in Who Was King? Who
Was Not King? The Rulers and the Ruled in the Ancient Near East, edited
by Petr Charvt and Petra Makov Vlkov [Prague: Institute of Archaeology of the Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, 2010],
pp. 14254, esp. p. 147 n. 27). i now propose the following transliteration of the traces, including those on the right edge: II 16 ina
iti gu ana kur Lu--[du gi]n lugal- gaz bu--a- il-q u-lit
ram-ni- ina ! (text: lu) -e-li [] egir u-lit-su <> ar-ri ina
gl-i (uabi), in the month iyyar (Cyrus) [mar]ched to Ly[dia].
He killed its king, he took its valuables (and) a garrison of his own
he stationed in it! afterwards he had his garrison and the royal
treasury! (bt arri) in it. note that the verb gaz = dku can either
mean to kill or to defeat, but in the context of an individual the
translation to kill is to be preferred. so it appears that Croesus was
killed, as can be derived from Bacchylides (see n. 1).
185
The Murash archive provides evidence that deportees from
lydia, Phrygia, and urartu were settled in nippur. a document from
430 b.c. mentions the sardian Midas (mMi-da- lSa-par-da-a-a; veysel Donbaz and Matthew W. stolper, Istanbul Mura Texts [Leiden:
Nederlands Historisch-Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul, 1997],
p. 79, no. 3: 3). in nippur was a hadru (group of military landholders) of Phrygians and lydians (lMu-ka-a-a u lLud-da-a-a BE 10 90:
10f; PBs 2/1 144: 31; CBs 5148: 3) and of urartians and Melitenians
(l-ra--a-a-a u lmi-li-du-a-a) headed by a aknu (foreman) named
Iltamme-barakku: BE 10 107: 2, 3, 6, and lower edge; cf. Matthew W.
stolper, Entrepreneurs and Empire: The Mura Archive, the Mura Firm,
and Persian Rule in Babylonia, Publications de linstitut Historique-archologique nerlandais de stamboul 54 (leiden: nederlands Historisch-archaeologisch instituut te istanbul, 1985), resp. p. 79, no. 60
and p. 78, no. 53 and p. 250. Cf. Israel Ephal, The Western Minorities in Babylonia in the 6th5th Centuries B.C.E.: Maintenance and
Cohesion, Studia Orientalia 47 (1977): 7479.
186
Herodotus 1.867. see above, n. 1.
257
Cyrus owes his good reputation to the presumed fact that he allowed exiles to return home. There are indeed
indications for this, but again, we must not look at the facts in isolation. allowing the return of exiles was not a new
policy; and besides, the Persians were not above exiling other nations themselves.
regarding Cyrus decision to allow the exiles to return, we find evidence in the Cyrus Cylinder and the Hebrew
Bible.187 The cylinder was in the first place intended for Babylon, and this is the reason why it pays so much attention
to this city. yet there is also an interesting section (lines 2834) devoted to other nations, in which the return of exiles
is mentioned:
[By his] exalted [command], all of the kings who sit upon thrones, of all the quarters of the world, from the Upper
Sea to the Lower Sea, those who dwell [in distant regions], kings of Amurru (= the West), those who dwell in
tents,188 all of them, their heavy tribute they brought to me and in Babylon they kissed my feet. From [Babylon]
to Assur and Susa, Akkad, the land of Enunna, Zamban, Meturnu, Dr, as far as the border of Gutium, the cultic
center[s at the other si]de of the Tigris (the eastern bank), whose dwelling places had been in ruin since long,
i made the gods, who had dwelled therein, return to their places and made them take residence forever. all of
their people i gathered and returned them to their settlements. and the gods of the land of sumer and akkad,
whom nabonidus had made enter, at the anger of the lord of the gods, into Babylon, at the command of Marduk
the great lord, in well-being, i made them dwell in their cellae, dwellings pleasing to their heart.
This is not a full amnesty for all exiles: the decree refers to the gods and people from several cities in Mesopotamia
and iran only. yet, there is a parallel to the proclamation of Cyrus quoted in Ezra 1:24.189 in both cases, the restoration
of the temple is mentioned first, the return of exiles is secondary:
Thus says King Cyrus of Persia: The LORD, the God of heaven, has given me all the kingdoms of the earth, and he
has charged me to build him a house at Jerusalem in Judah. Any of those among you who are of his people may
their God be with them! are now permitted to go up to Jerusalem in Judah, and rebuild the house of the LORD,
the God of Israel he is the God who is in Jerusalem; and let all survivors, in whatever place they reside, be
assisted by the people of their place with silver and gold, with goods and with animals, besides freewill offerings
for the house of god in Jerusalem.
The edict in Ezra 6:35 refers only to the rebuilding of the temple and the return of its vessels. Evidently, there can
be no reference to the return of the statue of the israels god.
as we have seen, the return of the statues of the deities was nothing new: the assyrian kings did the same, and
not just with Mesopotamian statues.190 at the beginning of his reign, Esarhaddon issued a proclamation that closely
resembles Cyrus edict. The assyrian king states that he is the one who returned the plundered gods of the lands from
the city assur to their (proper) place and let them dwell in security.191 variants to this text have: who restored the
splendid appearance of the plundered gods of the lands, returned them from assyria to their (proper) places, and (re)
confirmed their income.192 We also read that Esarhaddon allowed several arabian gods, which are mentioned by their
names, to return.193 assurbanipal even gave a star emblem to an arabian goddess in gratitude for her help against the
arabian leader uate.194 another example is the restoration of the cult of yahweh in samaria by the assyrians and the
installation of an israelite priest, as mentioned in the book of Kings.195 The closest parallel comes from nabopolassar,
the founder of the neo-Babylonian dynasty, who like Cyrus at his accession returned gods to iran, as described in the
Babylonian chronicle concerning the early years of nabopolassar: The accession year of nabopolassar in the month
adar: nabopolassar returned to susa the gods of susa whom the assyrians had carried off and settled in uruk.196
187
Biblical passages in which Cyrus name is mentioned: 2 Chronicles

36:2223; Ezra 1:18; 3:7; 4:35; 5:1317; 6:1314; isaiah 44:2528;
45:19; Daniel 1:21; 6:29; 10:1. The historicity of the return under
Cyrus is disputed; cf. nn. 13 and 14.
188
The Babylonian scribes had a preference for archaic geographic designations. amurru (the West), the biblical amorites, were
traditionally regarded as nomadic tribes who lived in tents, even
though that was hardly true in Cyrus time. gutium is an archaic
designation for lands east of the Tigris.
189
Elias J. Bickerman, The Edict of Cyrus in Ezra 1, Journal of Biblical
Literature 65 (1946): 24975, interprets Ezra 1 as an oral proclamation
and Ezra 6:35 (in aramaic) as the official edict. The authenticity
of proclamation and edict is widely contested, e.g., by gunneweg,
Geschichte Israels, pp. 13538; Edelman, Origins of the Second Temple,
pp. 151208 et passim. But even if the edicts are not historical, they
still give valuable information of the theological foundation of a

return of exiles which is paralleled in the Cyrus Cylinder.
190
191
leichty, Esarhaddon, no. 1: ii 2224; cf. nos. 105: vii 511 and 107:
vii 714.
192
leichty, Esarhaddon, no. 128: 11; albrecht goetze, Esarhaddons
inscription from the inanna Temple in nippur, Journal of Cuneiform
Studies 17 (1963): 130, line 11.
193
leichty, Esarhaddon, nos. 1: iv 116; 6: iii 110; Cogan, Imperialism
and Religion, p. 35.
194
195
2 Kings 17:2432; according to Ezra 4:2 it was King Esarhaddon
who did this.
196
grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, no. 2: 1517.
258
R. J. van der Spek
But let us return to the Cyrus Cylinder. With the gods, their worshippers returned. This policy has not been pursued
by the assyrian kings on a large scale, but is not unknown. The synchronistic History, a history of the assyrian-Babylonian conflicts from an Assyrian point of view, informs us about Adad-Nirari III: He brought [back] the abducted peoples
[and] assigned to them an income, a regular contribution (and) barley rations.197 When sargon ii captured Dur-yakin,
he freed the inhabitants of sippar, nippur, Babylon, and Borsippa, who had been imprisoned by Merodach-Baladan.198
Esarhaddon allowed the return of the Babylonians, who had, during the reign of sennacherib, been sold, expelled, or
forced to flee, and he reinstated the citys privileges.199
apparently, both assyrian and Persian kings found it expedient to allow people, every now and then, to return
to their homes. This does not mean that they abandoned their policy of deportation. Cyrus probably deported the
inhabitants of Sardis, the capital of Lydia: from the Mura archive, we know that there was a community of Lydians
(sardians) in nippur.200 This deportation may have taken place after the lydian revolt of Pactyes, Cyrus governor of
sardis.201 according to Herodotus, Cyrus intended to enslave and sell all the lydians; Croesus is said to have been afraid
that this would happen. in the end, Cyrus decided to be lenient, but Pactyes and his fellow rebels had forfeited their
freedom. it was the Median Mazares who executed the order and proceeded to enslave the inhabitants of Priene.202
Herodotus expression to enslave can, in this context, only mean to deport, even when it was not the custom
in the ancient near East to lower the status of those who were deported. More often, the people were settled en bloc
in special settlements, where they could keep their own communities. it is understandable, however, that the greeks
equaled enslaving and deportation. They saw their compatriots disappear to unknown provinces of the Persian
empire, without knowing what happened to them. Because the greeks had the custom to enslave their prisoners of
war, they believed that the Persians had done the same. Besides, the deportations showed the power of the great king,
who could treat his people at will, as one does with slaves.203
Deportations by Cyrus successors

later Persian kings also deported people. Histiaeus, who became leader of the ionian revolt after the death of aristagoras in 497, made the ionians believe that Darius i intended to send the greeks to Phoenicia and settle Phoenicians in
greece.204 although Herodotus comments that this was not really among Darius plans, we may deduce from his account
that deportation was considered to be a possibility. not much later,205 we read how the Persians threatened to enslave
the ionians, castrate their sons, deport their daughters to Bactria, and give their land to others. We know that Darius
deported inhabitants of Thrace to Phrygia in asia Minor,206 and sent people from Miletus to a town near the Persian
gulf.207 On that occasion, the temple of Apollo in Didyma was looted and sacked; the priests, the Branchidae, were sent
to Bactria, where alexander the great met their descendants.208
197
grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, no. 21: iv.1920 (=

glassner, Mesopotamian Chronicles, no. 10).
198
Winckler, Keilschrifttexte Sargons, pp. 13435 (Prunkinschrift);
luckenbill, Ancient Records, 40; Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons, pp.
189248 (translation pp. 34355); annals of sargon from Khorsabad:
lie, Inscriptions of Sargon, pp. 6465: 89 = Fuchs, Die Inschriften Sargons, p. 169: 37374 (translation p. 335).
199
leichty, Esarhaddon, nos. 104: v 1038; 105: vii 1235a; 107: viii
117. Two letters to Esarhaddon are relevant. The first is aBl 418
= reynolds, The Babylonian Correspondence, no. 14: lines 1014, rev.
113, a letter of ubaru, governor (aknu) of Babylon to the king: i
have entered Babylon. The people of Babylon welcomed me, and
they bless the king every day, saying: (He is) the one who returned
Babylons captives and booty. also the chiefs of Chaldea (lra--ni
kur kal-du) from sippar to the mouth of the sea bless the king,
saying: (he is) the one who resettled Babylon. all the lands are
happy before the king, my lord. The second is aBl 702 = Parpola,
Letters from Assyrian and Babylonian Scholars, no. 169, a letter of Zakir
complaining about illaya, appointee of the king, who wanted to
collect taxes, lines 410: The Babylonians and the(ir) governor
(aknu) ubaru (said to them): There is no such order of the king!
last year, in Calah, when you appealed to the king for the collection
of old debts (incurred) while Babylon was still intact, he lost temper
with you, (shouting): What is there in Babylon (to collect)? The
city was in ruins, and i have resettled it and established its free-
dom! () illaya does not wish the settling of Babylon (rev. 7). See
also landsberger, Brief des Bischofs von Esagila, pp. 3234; Manfried
Dietrich, Die Aramer Sdbabyloniens in der Sargonidenzeit (700648),
Alter Orient und Altes Testament 7 (Kevelaer: Butzon & Bercker;
neukirchen-vluyn: neukirchener verlag, 1970), p. 152.
200
Cf. n. 185.
201
Herodotus 1.15456. Suggestion H.T. Wallinga (pers. comm., July
24, 1981), to whom i also owe the following references.
202
Herodotus 1.161.
203
Cf. Bustenay Oded, Mass Deportations and Deportees in the Neo-Assyrian Empire (Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, 1979); Ephal, Western
Minorities; Joachim Oelsner, Zur Sklaverei in Babylonien in der
chaldischen, achmenidischen und hellenistischen Zeit, Altorientalische Forschungen 5 (1977): 7180; Muhammad a. Dandamaev,
Slavery in Babylonia: From Nabopolassar to Alexander the Great (626331
B.C.) (DeKalb: northern illinois university Press, 1984).
204
Herodotus 6.3.
205
Herodotus 6.9.
206
Herodotus 5.12, 1416, 98.
207
Herodotus 6.1929.
208
strabo 11.11.4; Quintus Curtius rufus 7.5.2835. Cf. Briant, From
Cyrus to Alexander, pp. 434, 505, 955, 1027; F. l. Holt, Alexander the
Great and Bactria, supplements to Mnemosyne 104 (leiden: Brill,
1988), pp. 7374.
259
in 490, the Persians captured Eretria, looted the temples, sacked the cities, and enslaved the inhabitants.209 in Platos
Laws210 we read how this happened: the Persian soldiers gave each other a hand, made a line, and closed the people in
as if in a net. The Greek uses a special verb, , from dragnet. The inhabitants of Chios, Lesbos, and
Tenedos were terrorized in the same fashion,211 which was a well-known Persian custom. according to Herodotus there
were islands in the Persian Gulf that were used to house deportees, for which he uses the technical term .212
The expression is also used when he describes the deportation of the Thracians (Paeonians),213 and we also read this
word when he tells that the inhabitants of libyan Barca were sent to a village in Bactria.214
a non-greek source confirms deportation as a Persian policy: a Babylonian chronicle about artaxerxes iii tells that
in 345 b.c. prisoners from sidon reached Babylon and susa.215 This must have been the punishment for a revolt that
took place during the reign of artaxerxes. The landholding groups (hadrus) with geographical designations in nippur,
mentioned in the Murash archive, betray deportations by Persian kings: Phrygians and lydians, urartians and Melitenians (see above, n. 184), Armaja (an iranian ethnic group), Aiaja (asians from asia = western asia Minor?), Carians
(Bannaja who were in Cambyses army216), Cimmerians, Tyrians, arabs, indians, and skudrians.217
all this shows that the Persians never abolished deportation. 218 Besides, the greco-Macedonian rulers, who succeeded the achaemenid kings, deported people too. alexanders policy in sogdia was ruthless.219 an inscription from
Magnesia informs us that the inhabitants of this city were sent to antioch-in-Persis.220 Ptolemy i took many captives
from Judaea and samaria and settled them in Egypt.221 Briant has pointed out that the Macedonian kings in the Hellenistic kingdoms replaced large groups of people in order to populate their newly founded cities.222 an example is the
resettlement of Babylonians in seleucia-on-the-Tigris.223 another example is the deportation of Jews from Mesopotamia
to asia Minor by antiochus iii.224
The deportation of large groups of people is a policy that was pursued in the entire history of the ancient near
East, although it did not always happen on the same scale. The greatest and most numerous deportations took place
during the reigns of the three kings who founded the assyrian empire: Tiglath-Pileser iii, sargon ii, and sennacherib.
later, the number of deportations decreased.225 This was to be expected, because deportation is especially useful for
founding and stabilizing an empire. When it had been solidly founded, the necessity was no longer there. That the
assyrians achieved exactly this stability is proved by the fact that the Babylonians, Persians, and Macedonians could
take over their world empire part and parcel. Cyrus benefited from earlier deportations, and could even permit himself
a policy of repatriation.
This was facilitated by the fact that the assyrians had kept the communities of the conquered intact. 226 The
neo-Babylonian kings deported their subjects even while keeping their urban organization intact.227 The Jews in Babylonia could keep and record their traditions. after that, repatriation was comparatively easy. This policy did not shock
the people involved deeply: many people preferred to stay in their new countries. The Jewish community of Babylonia
still existed in modern iraq until recently, and Herod the great settled a community of Babylonian Jews in Batanaea
near the sea of galilee.228
209
Herodotus 6.101.
Plato, Leges 698d.
211
Herodotus 6.31.
212
Herodotus 3.93, 7.80.
213
Herodotus 5.12.
214
Herodotus 4.204; cf. 6.9.
215
grayson, Assyrian and Babylonian Chronicles, no. 9: 18 (= glassner,
Mesopotamian Chronicles, no. 28).
216
Caroline Waerzeggers, The Carians of Borsippa, Iraq 68 (2006):
122.
217
stolper, Entrepreneurs and Empire, pp. 7279; Wouter F. M. Henkelman and Matthew W. stolper, Ethnic identity and Ethnic labelling
at Persepolis: The Case of the skudrians, in Organisation des pouvoirs et contacts culturels dans les pays de lempire achmnide, edited
by Pierre Briant and M. Chauveau, Persika 14 (Paris: ditions de
Boccard, 2009), pp. 271329.
218
Cf. Briant, From Cyrus to Alexander, pp. 50507.
219
alexander destroyed seven sogdian cities and deported the inhabitants to alexandria-Eschate; cf. Holt, Alexander the Great and
Bactria, p. 58.
210
220
Wilhelmus Dittenberger, Orientis Graeci Inscriptiones Selectae, vol.
1 (leipzig: Hirzel, 1903), no. 233; English translation: M. M. austin,
The Hellenistic World from Alexander to the Roman Conquest: A Selection of
Ancient Sources in Translation, 2nd, augmented ed. (Cambridge: Cambridge university Press, 2006), no. 190.
221
Josephus, Antiquitates Judaicae 12.78 (i owe the reference to Jona
lendering).
222
Pierre Briant, Colonisation hellnistique et populations indignes: la phase dinstallation, Klio 60 (1978): 5792.
223
Pausanius 16.1.3. Cf. r. J. van der spek, The astronomical Diaries as a source for achaemenid and seleucid History, Bibliotheca
Orientalis 50 (1993): 9798, where it is argued that contrary to accepted opinion astronomical Diary -273 B does not refer to this
deportation.
224
Josephus, Antiquitates Judaicae 12.3.4, 14853.
225
Oded, Mass Deportations, p. 19.
226
ibid., pp. 2325.
227
Ephal, Western Minorities.
228
Josephus, Vita 11; idem, Antiquitates Judaicae 17.2.13, 2331.
260
R. J. van der Spek
Conclusion
The Persian attitude toward subject nations did not principally differ from the assyrian attitude. Cyrus did not introduce a new policy.
Cyrus much-praised religious tolerance was not a new, but a time-honored policy pursued by many ancient
near Eastern kings, who wanted to have as many gods as possible on their side and hoped to gain the support of their
worshippers. Tolerance, in antiquity, was almost never a matter of principle. if a conqueror deemed it useful, he
could also forcefully compel a nation into submission, and Cyrus did not abstain from this policy. such a harsh policy
incidentally does not constitute evidence for religious intolerance. Destruction of temples, removal of cult images,
and the like were not intended to prove that a particular god did not exist, or to prove the correctness of a dogma or
creed. repression of religious practices was rare in antiquity; it was, however, at issue when a monotheistic religion
(of the victor or the vanquished) was involved, when religion had become the vehicle of rebellion, or was considered
to be hostile toward the state.
regarding Babylon, Cyrus policy was traditional as well. showing reverence to the ancient city and its civilization
was a policy that had also been pursued by earlier kings. sennacherib and to some extent nabonidus are rare exceptions.
if the situation required it, the Persians could be merciless too. Xerxes targeted measures against the rebellious temple
elite of a number of Babylonian temples (but not against the cults as such) is a good example that also underlines the
pragmatic nature of such measures.
Finally, we have seen that Cyrus treatment of subdued nations did not introduce new elements. non-interference
with local government is a common characteristic of the empires of the ancient near East. still, the influence of the
central government had a tendency to increase since the days of Tiglath-Pileser iii. Cyrus did not abandon this policy.
The policy of deportation exhibits a certain development: after the first mass deportations by the assyrian conquerors,
their number and volume gradually decreased since the days of Esarhaddon. yet this policy never disappeared; the
seleucids still deported people. Cyrus permission to the deportees to return was not innovative either: it belongs to
a general policy of, on the one hand, punishment and intimidation and, on the other hand, pragmatic clemency a
policy that could be applied to both human beings and their gods.
it is also evident that it is misleading to treat categories, like the Babylonians or the priest hood, as if they were
always of one opinion and acted unitedly. as always, real society is and was more complex.
What created Cyrus remarkable popularity? a partial explanation is Cyrus policy of appeasement of local elites,
a policy which he shares with other successful conquerors and founders of empires like Tiglath-Pileser iii, sargon ii,
alexander the great, T. Quinctius Flamininus, Julius Caesar, augustus, and others. With a shrewd policy combining
(ruthless) military power, negotiations with local elites, and sometimes real or fictional invitations to intervene, these
conquerors were able to acquire a certain degree of acceptance from the subdued.229 This policy must entail tangible
benefits for elites and citizens, like respect for age-old traditions and confirmation of privileges, endowments to temples, tax exemptions, repatriation of peoples and their gods, and this must be accompanied by efficient propaganda,
in which the ousted ruler is depicted as violator of old traditions and privileges. When the reality of imperial rule
becomes evident conquerors demand income and insurrections start, repression of local elites can be the result,
like in the time of sennacherib and Xerxes.
Cyrus was very successful in his propaganda and modern historiography is still influenced by it. This success is
explained by the fact that relevant groups of people, that is, relevant in the sense of their literary heritage, rightly
or wrongly could ascribe benefits to this ruler: Babylonian scribes (Cyrus Cylinder, verse account), Jewish exiles who
gratefully saw that the kingdom that had brought them into captivity was beaten (Hebrew Bible), greek authors who
had acquaintance with Persians regarding Cyrus as the liberator from the Median yoke and who liked to make an
opposition between the father Cyrus and the evil Xerxes, the destroyer of athens (Herodotus, Xenophon, alexander
historians). it is interesting to note how this propaganda works. The Babylonian sources hail Cyrus because he rescued
Babylon from oppression by nabonidus and saved the city, the Hebrew authors expected Cyrus to destroy it. in both
cases Cyrus went his own way. He did not kill nabonidus and he did not destroy Babylon.
it is the difficult task of modern historians to look through these images created by Cyrus himself and by groups
with their different interests and biases to create a balanced picture. a way to do this is to examine Cyrus deeds and
propaganda in the light of comparable policies and propaganda of preceding and succeeding kings of the same period and region. This does not mean that all kings and emperors pursued exactly the same policy. Different kings have
229
Kuhrt, alexander and Babylon, pp. 12130. acceptance obviously does not imply absence of resistance. The fact that usurpers
from the time of Darius i claimed to be sons of nabonidus and the
fact that polemic documents like the verse account were produced
attest to that fact. Cf. Beaulieu, Reign of Nabonidus, p. 323.
261
different characters and have to cope with different problems. some rulers are more inclined to clemency than others,
and Cyrus reputation must have some basis in his deeds. What i have tried to show, however, is that this policy was
part and parcel of well-established customs among ancient near Eastern kings and that the interpretation of the Cyrus
Cylinder as the first declaration of human rights is anachronistic and certainly a misnomer.
appendix: The Cyrus Cylinder

The text of the Cyrus cylinder is thus far known from two documents:
a1: Barrel clay cylinder (BM 90920; 1880-06-17,1941) found in Babylon by Hormuzd rassam in 1879. length:
21.9 cm, diameter 7.8 and 7.9 cm (edges) to 10.0 cm (middle). lines 111, 3645 are partly lost; lines
2431 contain a small gap.
a2: a fragment of this cylinder showed up in 1972 at yale university (nBC 2504); its contains lines 3640
of the main text and is now joined with it.
In 2010, two fragments from one large tablet were identified in the British Museum, the first by WilfredG. Lambert
(BM 47176), the second by irving l. Finkel (BM 47134):
B1: BM 47134 (1881-8-30,656); part of lines 12; 4245
B2: BM 47176 (1881-8-30,698); part of lines 3337
Editions
Editio Princeps
a1: H. C. rawlinson, The Cuneiform Inscriptions of Western Asia, vol. 5: A Selection from the Miscellaneous Inscriptions of
Assyria and Babylonia (london: r. E. Bowler, 1875), no. 35 = v r 35.
a2: P.-r. Berger, Der Kyros-Zylinder mit dem Zusatzfragment Bin ii nr. 32 und die akkadischen Personennamen
im Danielbuch, Zeitschrift fr Assyriologie und Vorderasiatische Archologie 65 (1975): 192234.
latest scholarly edition of a12: schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids, pp. 55056, with references to earlier editions.
Previous English Translations
Kuhrt, Persian Empire, pp. 7074.
Complete new edition including B1 and B2 with transliteration, translation, commentaries, and studies of the object:
irving l. Finkel (ed.), The Cyrus Cylinder: The King of Persias Proclamation from Ancient Babylon (london: i. B. Tauris,
2013). see also i. l. Finkel, www.britishmuseum.org/explore/highlights/article_index/c/cyrus_cylinder_-_translation.aspx
The translation below results from a reading class on texts of nabonidus and Cyrus at vu university (amsterdam),
organized by Marten stol and myself in fall 2009, for which our students Barend Maltha and Bastian still prepared
an edition, translation, and commentary (forthcoming on www.livius.org). it is based on the edition of the cylinder
fragments a12, combined with Finkels translations of B12 on the British Museum website. Each line contains ca. 55
signs, but in the later part of the cylinder the signs seem to be more widely spaced. in the transliteration two dots (..)
represent the space for approximately one missing sign. see also www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_i/cyrus_cylinder.html.
We thank irving Finkel for sharing the information concerning the new fragments with us and for suggestions of some
of the translations prior to the publication of his new edition. nevertheless, our translation diverges at some points
from Finkels and any mistakes are our sole responsibility.
1.
2.
[When Mar]duk, king of the whole of heaven and earth, . who, in his , lays waste his ]
[.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. broa]d(?) in intelligence, [ who inspects(?)

the world quar]ters,
262
3.
4.
R. J. van der Spek
[.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..] his [off]spring, an insignificant (person) (i.e.,

Belshazzar) was installed for the lordship of his country.
and? [.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. a coun]terfeit (i.e., crown
prince Belshazzar) he imposed upon them.
5.
A counterfeit of the Esagila he bu[ilt and .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..]x for Ur and the

rest of the cultic centers.
6.
a ritual which was improper to them, [impure] fo[od offerings .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ir]reverently,

he daily recited and offensively
7.
he interrupted the regular offerings; he [interfered with the rituals .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..] he established
in the midst of the cultic centers. On his own accord [lit., in his mind] he e[nde]d the worship of
Marduk, king of the gods.
8.
He continuously did evil against his city [i.e., Marduks city]. Daily [.. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..] his [peo]ple; by the
yoke, without relief he ruined all of them.
9.
At their complaints, the Enlil of the gods [i.e., Marduk] became furiously angry an[d .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..]
their boundaries. The gods who dwell within them [i.e., the temple precincts], they abandoned
their cellae,
10.
out of anger [i.e., Marduks] that he [i.e., Nabonidus] had made (them) enter into Babylon. Marduk,
the ex[alted Enlil of the gods] relented. To all the inhabited places, of which the sanctuaries were
in ruin,
11.
and (to) the people of the land of sumer and akkad who had become (like) corpses he turned his mind
and took pity on them. He examined and checked all of the lands,
12.
he searched constantly for a righteous king, his hearts desire. He took his hands, he called out his
name: Cyrus, king of anshan; he proclaimed his name for the rulership over all.
13.
The land of gutium, all of the umman-manda (i.e., the Medes) he made (them) bow at his feet. The
black-headed people, whom he (Marduk) had subjected into his (Cyrus) hands,
14.
with justice and righteousness he (Cyrus) shepherded them time and again. Marduk, the great lord,
caretaker of his people, looked joyfully upon his good deeds and righteous heart.
15.
He ordered him to go to Babylon his city. He made him take the road to Tintir (= Babylon), and like a
friend and companion, he walked at his side all the way.
16.
His vast army, whose number cannot be known, like water (drops) in a river, went at his side, girded
with their weapons.
17.
Without a fight or a battle he made him enter shuanna (= Babylon), his city. Babylon, he turned (away)
from hardship. He delivered nabonidus, the king who did not revere him, into his hands.
18.
all of the people of Tintir (= Babylon), all the land of sumer and akkad, nobles and governors, they
bowed to him and kissed his feet. They rejoiced at his kingship and their faces shone.
19.
The lord by whose support all the dead were revived, he spared them all from hardship and distress,
they greeted him friendly and praised his name.
20.
i am Cyrus, king of the world, great king, strong king, king of Babylon, king of sumer and akkad, king
of the four quarters,
21.
son of Cambyses, great king, king of anshan, grandson of Cyrus, great king, king of anshan, descendant
of Teispes, great king, king of anshan,
22.
the eternal seed of kingship, whose reign Bel and nabu love, whose kingship they desire for their
hearts pleasure. When i entered Babylon in a peaceful manner,
23.
in rejoicing and celebration, i established my lordly abode in the royal palace. Marduk, the great lord,
established for me as his f[a]te a magnanimous heart, which loves Babylon. Daily i sought his
worship.
24.
My vast army marched peacefully in the midst of Babylon. i did not allow any trouble maker in all of
the la[nd of Sumer] and akkad.
25.
26.
27.
I shepherded in well-being the city of Babylon and all its cultic centers. The citizens of Babylon []
upon [w]hom he (i.e., Nabonidus) had imposed a yoke which was not decreed for them as if without di[vine inten]tion.
I put to rest their exhaustion, their burden(?) I released. Marduk, the gre[at] lord, rejoiced at [my
good] deeds
and kindly sent blessings upon me, Cyrus, the king who worships him, and Cambyses, [my] offspring,
[and] my enti[re] army,
28.
so that we could go [about] in peace and well-being before him. [By his] exalted [command], all of the
kings who sit upon thrones,
29.
of all the quarters of the world, from the Upper Sea to the Lower Sea, those who dwell [in distant
regions], kings of Amurru [i.e., the West], those who dwell in tents, all of them,
30.
their heavy tribute they brought to me and in Babylon they kissed my feet. From [Babylon] to Assur
and susa,
31.
Akkad, the land of Enunna, Zamban, Meturnu, Dr, as far as the border of Gutium, the cultic cent[ers
at the other si]de of the Tigris [i.e., the eastern bank], whose dwelling places had been founded
in ancient times, (or: in ruin; cf. line 10)
32.
i made the gods, who had dwelled therein return to their places and made them take residence for
ever. all of their people i gathered and returned them to their settlements.
33.
and the gods of the land of sumer and akkad, whom nabonidus had made enter, at the anger of the
lord of the gods, into Babylon, at the command of Marduk the great lord, in well-being,
34.
i made them dwell in their cellae, dwellings pleasing to the heart. May all the gods whom i had made
enter into their cultic centers
35.
daily plead in front of Bl and Nab to lengthen my days and may they speak words on behalf of my
welfare, and may they say to Marduk, my lord that: King Cyrus, who worships you and Cambyses,
his son,
x x [.. .. .. .. ..]x. May they be the providers of our shrines until distant(?) days, x[.. .. ()]. The people
of Babylon blessed the kingship, (and) all of the lands (i.e., their population(s)) i made dwell in
peaceful abodes.
36.
37.
[.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..] (line 38) [Dai]ly I increased copiously (line 37) [the number of offerings
with n] goose, two ducks, ten turtledoves, above the (former offerings of) a goose, ducks, and
turtledoves
38.
[.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..]. Dur-Imgur-Enlil, the great wall of Babylon, I sought to strengthen its
[defe]nse.
39.
40.
41.
42.
43.
44.
45.
[.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..] the quay of baked bricks on the bank of the city moat, which a former
king ha[d built, but had not com]pleted its construction-work,
[.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. who had not made it surround the city] on the outside, which a former king
had not made, his (i.e., Cyrus) workmen, the lev[y of his land, in/to] Babylon.
[.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. with bitumen] and baked bricks, I made anew and [completed th]eir [work].
[.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. splendid gates of cedar] with a bronze overlay, thresholds and door-sockets [cast in copper, I installed (line 43) in all t]heir [gates].
[.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..] an inscription of Assurbanipal, a king who went

before [me, I saw in its midst].
[..] in its place(?). May Marduk, the great lord, [present to me (line 45)] as a gift [a long] li[fe
and the fullness of age, a secure throne and an enduring rei]gn
[........... and may I ... in] your heart forever.
263
264
R. J. van der Spek
abbreviations
aBl
BCHP
BE 10
CAD
CBs
FGrH
PBs 2/1
robert Francis Harper, Assyrian and Babylonian Letters

irving Finkel and r. J. van der spek, Babylonian Chronicles of the Hellenistic Period (forthcoming)
albert T. Clay, Business Documents of Murash Sons of Nippur, Dated in the Reign of Darius II (424404 B.C.), The Babylonian Expedition of the university of Pennsylvania, series a: Cuneiform Texts 10. Philadelphia: university
of Pennsylvania, Department of archaeology and Palaeontology, 1904
A. Leo Oppenheim et al., editors, The Assyrian Dictionary of the Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago. Chicago: The Oriental Institute of the University of Chicago, 19562010
Catalogue of the Babylonian section, university Museum, Philadelphia
Felix Jacoby, Die Fragmente der griechischen Historiker. Berlin: Weidmannsche Buchhandlung, 19231959
albert T. Clay, Business Documents of Murash Sons of Nippur, Dated to the Reign of Darius II (424404 B.C.). university
of Pennsylvania Publications of the Babylonian section 2, no. 1. Philadelphia: university Museum, 1912

Van Der Spek - Cyrus The Great

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Van Der Spek - Cyrus The Great

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Van Der Spek - Cyrus The Great

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

iii

Extraction & control

Funded by the Generosity of the Yelda Family

STUDIES IN ANCIENT ORIENTAL CIVILIZATIONNUMBER 68

Library of Congress Control Number: 2013956374

Studies in Ancient Oriental Civilizations 68

Printed by McNaughton & Gunn, Saline, Michigan

Bibliography of Publications of Matthew W. Stolper

An Episode in the Reign of the Babylonian Pretender Nebuchadnezzar IV

Achaemenid Estate(s) Near Pasargadae?

royal Women in Elamite art

Iddin-Nab spir a gardu

The Royal-Name Seals of Darius I

The Estates of ama on the br

reassessing the reign of Xerxes in the light of new Evidence

Cultural Exchange at Kltepe

Myth, History, Cosmology, and Hydraulics in Achaemenid Iran

Biography of a Sentence: Assurbanipal, Nabonidus, and Cyrus

Periodicities and Period Relations in Babylonian Celestial Sciences

Gilgamesh and the ius primae noctis

On the Dynasty of imaki: Twenty Years (or so) After

some Thoughts on the ustarbaru

a statue of Darius in the Temple of sippar

From Lower Land to Cappadocia

cyrus the Great, Exiles, and foreign Gods:

East, edited by robert C. Dentan (new Haven: yale university Press,

R. J. van der Spek

T. Daniels (Winona lake: Eisenbrauns, 2002); amlie Kuhrt, The

human rights charter. The website of the Circle of ancient iranian

Persian religious Policy

Edward W. said, Orientalism (london: routledge, 1978).

first millennium b.c. still fundamental for the position of Judaism

R. J. van der Spek

isaiah 44:2445:8; 2 Chronicles 36:2223; Ezra 1 and 6:15.

assyrian religious Policy

R. J. van der Spek

Background of ancient religious Policy

g. J. D. aalders H. Wzn, The Tolerance of Polytheism in Classical

that exactly at the beginning of this inscription Marduk and nab,

R. J. van der Spek

iii, alexander the great and Babylonian scholarship, in A Persian

assyria and Babylonia

R. J. van der Spek

Although she was locally known as Muliu. See Simo Parpola,

Mentioned in an inscription of Marduk-nadin-ahhe, the royal

For a broader discussion with references, see Brinkman, Prelude

R. J. van der Spek

in the inscriptions from room v, pl. 9:6b14, the Display inscription

Transcription and translation in Wilfred g. lambert, Babylonian

R. J. van der Spek

da: A Symposium on Ancient Empires, edited by Mogens Trolle larsen,

leichty, Esarhaddon, nos. 104: i 18b33; 114: i 1018; 116: 59.

R. J. van der Spek

lines. The crucial passages, in which mention is made of the statue

Cyrus and Babylonia

landsberger, Brief des Bishofs von Esagila, p. 16.

R. J. van der Spek

schaudig, Die Inschriften Nabonids, pp. 57988, P2 iii 18, iv 26, vi 9.

expression in affirmative sense is preserved indeed in the Cyrus