New cuneiform evidence, part 1

[jona]

With my friend Bert van der Spek, I have been studying the cuneiform sources related to the reign of Alexander the Macedonian. Bert's official publication of five texts can be found in volume 13 of *Achaemenid History* (2003), which ought to be available in the library of every university with a department of ancient history and/or iranology.My friend is now preparing new editions of texts related to the Hellenistic age, I am continuing with my book on Alexander, scheduled to appear this October. It is in Dutch, but I thought it might be nice to pre-publish several bits and pieces that may be interesting to a larger audience. There will be more in the next couple of weeks.JonaCHRONICLE 8
Chronicle 8 is one of the Babylonian chronicles. Until now, it was interpreted as a source on Darius the Great, but restudy by Bert van der Spek has proved that the name Alexander is in the text as well. Those interested in a description of the tablet and the exact collation can find it in *Achaemenid History* 13 (2003). I merely give a possible translation, which is based on a new assumption that the horizontal lines that divide the text indicate new months, not years. Month
divisions are rare, but not uncommon. Bert van der Spek has no objections to my reading. Here it is. The events described all fit within the year 330 BCE. 3 [Month IV (July): Darius the king, from] his
throne they removed him. Be[ssus]
4 [sat on the throne and Artaxerxes] as his name
they named him, and Alexander and his troops
5 pursued Bessus the rebel king. Alexander with]
his few troops with the troops [of Bessus made
battle.]
6 [Bessus] killed [Darius the king]. The Hanaean
troops, his troops, which [...]
7 [... from Babylon (???) to (?) ] Darius, the
king, had gone, [were released.]
-------------------------------
8 [Month V, d]ay 15] Kidinnu was killed by the
sword. In the month VI (September), on the
[nth] day [X happened]
-------------------------------
9 [Month VII (October): The king was in] the land
of +Ü-zu-ia-a-nu, a city of the land of Gutium.
10 [.....]
-------------------------------
11 [Month VIII (November): From] the palace of
Babylon they brought out their goods
12 [.......... for] the making of the xx[........]
13 [................] for the performance of the
festival of Bel to the [Babylon]ians they gave.
-------------------------------
14 [Month IX (25 Nov - 24 Dec): ......

[jona]

Since my former message seems to have broken off, I continue the text of my initial posting.-------------------------------11 [Month VIII (November): From] the palace of
Babylon they brought out their goods12 [.......... for] the making of the xx[........]13 [................] for the performance of the
festival of Bel to the [Babylon]ians they gave.-------------------------------14 [Month IX (25 Nov - 24 Dec): ........]-Bel, his
son, to the office of satrap15 [he appointed .............] evil to the king
they plotted.
Comments 3 Month IV suits the date given by Arrian for the
death of Darius. The name Bessus is written Bi-
e- and then breaks off. 4 This was the sensation: the name Alexander is
really there. It was simply ignored in the
earlier edition by Grayson. 4 Bessus is immediately called Artaxerxes, and
not after several weeks, as Arrian says. Modern
speculations that Alexander would have been
willing to pardon Bessus, are incorrect. 6 "Hanaean troops": Macedonians. The hardly
intelligible sentence seems to refer to
Alexander dismissing troops, which is attested
in several sources too. 8 Kidinnu must be the famous astronomer. Even
Darius and Artaxerxes are introduced with
labels like "king". Kidinnu has no label and
must have been better known to the readers of
the tablets, the Chaldaeans. See
http://www.livius.org/k/kidinnu/kidinnu.htm for
more info on Kidinnu. 9 I think that +Ü-zu-ia-a-nu may be identical to
Susia, but Bert van der Spek is absolutely not
convinced. Gutium simply means "the east".15 This may refer to the official version of the
execution of Philotas and Parmenio.--
Jona Lendering
http://www.livius.org

[Cyrus]

>> I think that +Ü-zu-ia-a-nu may be identical to Susia, but Bert van der Spek is absolutely not convinced. Gutium simply means "the east".> I think that +Ü-zu-ia-a-nu may be identical to Susia, but Bert van der Spek is absolutely not convinced. Gutium simply means "the east".> I think that +Ü-zu-ia-a-nu may be identical to Susia, but Bert van der Spek is absolutely not convinced. Gutium simply means "the east". I think that +Ü-zu-ia-a-nu may be identical to Susia, but Bert van der Spek is absolutely not convinced. Gutium simply means "the east". I think that +Ü-zu-ia-a-nu may be identical to Susia, but Bert van der Spek is absolutely not convinced. Gutium simply means "the east".

[jona]

> I think you mean Susa (Susia or Tus is a city in
> Khorasan in north east of Iran), as you see in
> this map: I think you mean Susa (Susia or Tus is a city in
> Khorasan in north east of Iran), as you see in
> this map: I think you mean Susa (Susia or Tus is a city in
> Khorasan in north east of Iran), as you see in
> this map: Khorasan in north east of Iran), as you see in
> this map: Khorasan in north east of Iran), as you see in
> this map: this map: this map:No, the name Susa was written with other characters; I meant Susia / Tus.Your map shows the original location of Gutium, in the late third millennium BCE. In late Akkadian, the word Gutium had come to signify "the east".Jona

[nick]

Hi Jona -Thank you Jona, great news - very interesting. I am confused only by the interpretation that Bessus and Alexander made "battle". They were on terms of war, yes, but I don't know about any real battlefield confrontation. So, what is the explanation here? Do we miss this confrontation in the sources (Arrian)? Or should we translate this word in the tablet in a differt way?Well, many thanks for sharing this wonderful piece of information with us.Dank je wel -Nick

[jona]

Hi NickNice to hear from you again.I don't know what "to battle" means, either. The verb that is used can mean anything, including full-scale sieges and minor skirmishes. It can certainly not be excluded that the last hour of Darius's life was more violent than the Greek and Latin sources want to admit.I suppose that if Alexander's little army really attacked the army of Bessus / Darius, and made sure that the king was really killed, the Macedonians would never have told so.Jona

[smittysmitty]

Hi Jona, yes thats fantastic news, look forward to hearing more on the matter.I'm a little intrigued as to what line 15 relates too. (he appointed........evil to the king they plotted), I assume it relates to the priests of Bel, but perhaps not?I look forward to hearing some more re. the decipherment - very refreshing

[susan]

Thanks for sharing this, it's very interesting.
Could Kidinnu be regarded as a Zoroastrian - and if so, could this be a reference to the suppression of the Zoroastrian religion, that occurs in some traditions of Alexander ? Also, do the verb forms indicate that it is Alexander who had Kidinnu killed, or is this just an interpretation ? If so, then it brings into query Alexander's stated tolerance and respect for other religions.
Another thought - do the tablets make clear when Alexander became regarded as being king ? Which king is referred to as being in the land of +Ü-zu-ia-a-nu ? Is it Alexander or Bessus ?Regards
Susan

[jona]

Kidinnu was a Babylonian and an astronomer; in western languages, he would be called a chaldaean, i.e. a priest of Bel (=Marduk). So, he's no zoroastrian.> Another thought - do the tablets make clear when
> Alexander became regarded as being king ? Another thought - do the tablets make clear when
> Alexander became regarded as being king ? Another thought - do the tablets make clear when
> Alexander became regarded as being king ? Alexander became regarded as being king ? Alexander became regarded as being king ?As soon as he entered Babylon in October 331, the chaldaeans start to call him 'king'. I will discuss it in a new post. His kingdom of Persia is harder to date; several Persians seem to have recognized Alexander as their king in 331 (e.g., Abulites), others were still sceptical in 324.Jona

[jona]

"evil to the king they plotted": I like to think that it is the official version of the execution of Philotas and Parmenio - but I can not prove it. "The king" can only be Alexander, who was recognized as king of Babylonia in October 331.Jona

[susan]

JonaI've just tracked down your review of Heckel & Yardley's sources. I was particularly interested in your ideas about Alexander's name and its possible pronunciation. Can you mention it in your new thread ?RegardsSusan

[jona]

It's kind of you to track down my article on Heckel and Yardley.I know that the end, that the name of the king was pronounced in the Macedonian tongue as /Alexandar/, is a teaser. My arguments were that (a) /Alexandros/ is the common Greek rendering of a name that *may* be Macedonian, like /Philippos/ is a Greek rendering of /Bilippos/; (b) cuneiform sources render Alexander's name as /A-lek-sa-an-dar/, never as /A-lek-sa-an-dar-ru-su/, which would have been the normal rendering of /Alexandros/.I suggested that cuneiform sources may one day become evidence to see the differences between "normal" Greek and Macedonian / Northwest-Greek more clearly.After my review was published, I received several replies from linguists, and most of them agreed that I had a point. Maybe they are right. But the most convincing reply came from professor Ruijgh from my home town Amsterdam. He sent me two letters and gave lots of evidence that Semitic languages, when they render foreign words, never use the nominative, but the stem. In other words, we would have expected a name like Alexandros to be rendered as /A-lek-sa-an-dar/.I found his letters very convincing, especially since professor Ruijgh is a specialist in early Greek dialects and their relations with other languages. We were still discussing the subject matter when I was told that the good man had died, quietly, during a walk in the Amsterdam Vondelpark.At the moment, I tend to retract my suggestion. Professor Ruijgh's argument seem convincing.Jona

[agesilaos]

Could the Kiddinnu not be Darius? Diodoros and Justin both preserve his given name as Codomannos, which seems too close for coincidence. The astronomer suggested poses problems, we do not know his dates and there seems no reason why an astronomer now in the rear should be executed. Surely, Hanaean ( if this is a variant of Yauna) may equally well refer to DariusGÇÖ Greek mercenaries and this may be a note of their desertion. Would line 7 bear the sense that GÇÿDarius the King was gone and he was now Kidinnu GÇÿ(his name as a private citizen)? This would then explain the next entry. Kidinnu would not have a title as he was no longer king and had reverted to his given name, the royal name now no longer applicable.Without knowing the size of the lacunae it is impossible to attempt any reconstruction but are these suggestions possible? Also I know my Persian would not bear it!

[jona]

That's a lot of interesting matter.(1)
Kidinnu - Codomannus: I've sent it to a specialist, but this man is a bit soccer crazy and is currently more interested in the E.C.(2)
On the other hand, Darius' private name was not Codomannus, but Artashta.(3)
Size of lacunae: this is a problem when you're posting on the internet. See
http://www.livius.org/cg-cm/chronicles/chron8_01.html for my attempt to render the lacunae too.Jona