##The Persian, the Magian and the Place of God, or how Darius became king

Something I have alluded to in many answers, but never gotten around to thoroughly disseminate, is the perplexing and fascinating matter of the succession crisis that led to the ascension of Darius, of the Achaemenid clan, to rulership of the most powerful political entity that had ever existed. Before we let Darius speak for himself, it behooves us to rehears the background.

Cyrus II of Anshan had laid the foundation for a powerful West Asian polity on his death in 530 BC. In the famed Cyrus cylinder, he had made amply clear who was to succeed him: his son, Cambyses. Cyrus also had another son, named Bardiya (sometimes called ”Smerdis” in Greek sources), as well as two daughters, Atosa and Artystone. Now the life of Cambyses is obscured by the incredibly hostility to him found in the sources of Herodotos (who claims to have visited Egypt to investigate the matter himself):

When they gave him the same account, he said that if a tame god had come to the Egyptians he would know it; and with no more words he bade the priests bring Apis. So they went to fetch and bring him. This Apis, or Epaphus, is a calf born of a cow that can never conceive again. By what the Egyptians say, the cow is made pregnant by a light from heaven, and thereafter gives birth to Apis. ...

When the priests led Apis in, Cambyses--for he was all but mad--drew his dagger and, meaning to stab the calf in the belly, stuck the thigh; then laughing he said to the priests: "Simpletons, are these your gods, creatures of flesh and blood that can feel weapons of iron? That is a god worthy of the Egyptians. But for you, you shall suffer for making me your laughing-stock."

The truth of the matter of the murder of the Apis bull has sometimes been called ”the oldest murder mystery in the world”. Irregularities in the records uncovered in Egypt of the burials of the bulls do not make matters simpler, although the most common point of view is that they suggest Cambyses did not actually kill the bull, since archaeological evidence suggests Cambyses went to some lengths to style himself as a Pharaoh. Herodotos goes on, and here it will get interesting:

But Cambyses, the Egyptians say, owing to this wrongful act immediately went mad, although even before he had not been sensible. His first evil act was to destroy his full brother Smerdis, whom he had sent away from Egypt to Persia out of jealousy, because Smerdis alone could draw the bow brought from the Ethiopian by the Fish-eaters as far as two fingerbreadths, but no other Persian could draw it… he sent Prexaspes, the most trusted of his Persians, to Persia to kill him. Prexaspes went up to Susa and killed Smerdis; some say that he took Smerdis out hunting, others that he brought him to the Red Sea (the Persian Gulf) and there drowned him. This, they say, was the first of Cambyses' evil acts; next, he destroyed his full sister, who had come with him to Egypt, and whom he had taken to wife.

The type of nonsensical just-so story explaining Cambyses’ murder of Bardiya (Smerdis) is rather typical of Herodotos, and apparently nobody can agree on exactly what happened. Herodotos goes on to say that it had not been typical for Persians to marry their sisters before Cambyses took Atosa to be his wife (known as khvaetvadatha or khvedodah in Zoroastrianism, literally close-kin marriage), which may well be true, although it appears to be contradicted by (very late) quotations of Herodotos’ contemporary Xanthos of Lydia mentioning ”cohabitation” among Magians of ”mothers and sons” and ”sisters and brothers”. There are a few possible explanations: It may have been Persian, but not Elamite custom, Cambyses’ kingship taking elements from both; it may have been something Cambyses did to style himself in accordance with the traditions of Pharaohs; it may be Herodotos just expressing his disapproval. Cambyses apparently also married his other sister Artystone; both would later be taken as wives by Darius, Atosa giving birth to his successor Xerxes.

I won’t torture you with Herodotos’ weird stories (yes, plural, there are two) of Cambyses’ death; they may be found at 3.32 here but take them to suggest there is reason to doubt the whole narrative. This brings us to what Darius has to say, in the famous Behistun inscription. Behistun comes from Old Persian Bagastana, meaning ”The Place of God”, ”Baga” also meaning ”benefactor” or ”wealth”, but referring to Aúramazda in Old Persian. Darius, not afraid to make a point, had the cliff sheared away after the inscription was completed, leaving it some 30 meters up in the air on the cliffside. The famous inscription opens:

(1) I am Darius (OP: Daraiavaush), great king, king of kings, king of Persia, king of lands, son of Vishtaspa, grandson of Arshama, the Achaemenid.

(2) King Darius says: My father is Vishtaspa; the father of Vishtaspa was Arshama; the father of Arshama was Ariaramna; the father of Ariaramna was Teispes; the father of Teispes was Achaemenes (OP: Hakha-Manish).

(3) King Darius says: That is why we are called Achaemenids; from antiquity we have been noble; from antiquity has our dynasty been royal.

(4) King Darius says: Eight of my dynasty were kings before me; I am the ninth. Nine in succession we have been kings.

Week 62

 

On December 28^th 1918, the socialist reformer and interventionist Leonida Bissolati – once one of the leaders of the Italian socialist organization, then expelled in 1912 with the decisive contribution of Benito Mussolini; leader since then of his own Socialist Reformer Party, now a member of Vittorio Emanuele Orlando's war time Ministry – resigned from his position of Minister for Military Assistance and Pensions that he had held since the constitution of the new Government on November 1^st 1917 (after already serving as a Ministry without portfolio in the previous National Unity Government of Paolo Boselli). This choice marked the beginning of an adjustment in Orlando's Ministry to take place during January, amidst the preparations for the Peace Conference of Paris, producing what may be taken (or might have appeared) as a semi-spontaneous correction towards the national right, eventually overpowering the current of democratic interventionism after the lost battle for the resignation of Foreign Ministry S. Sonnino in the Summer of 1918. Something that Orlando apparently did not want – but didn't feel confident enough in his power to resist – producing an unfortunate impression of the Italian political front, right at the beginning of the post-war battles.

 

Sadly, I am going to derail this train of thought and further postpone the long awaited coverage of Bissolati's resignation. It may be worth going back a couple of weeks to the last Parliament session of November 1918 – hopefully you'll find the following as relevant and noteworthy as I did.

On November 23^rd – after a long insistence, the representative Carlo Centurione Scotto (dead in 1958; not to be confused with his father and later senator, also named Carlo Centurione Scotto who died in 1937) had been allowed to address the Chamber over a “personal matter”. The formula usually employed to discuss a rumor, an incident, an exchange of derogatory remarks that took place within the Parliament building but outside of session, or outside of it entirely, and required some form of official clarification. This one is a curious one indeed – but a significant one as well.

Explained the Prince Centurione:

Yesterday, as Hon. Giacomo Ferri was speaking [the socialist representative had conducted a strong attack on Antonio Salandra's famous speech of November 20^th – Salandra was somewhat of an extra-parliamentary leader of the Fascio Parlamentare], I interrupted him by declaring: “but, if Hon. Salandra had not made war, Italy would not have resurged!”. To this sentence the socialists reacted with a series of contumelies that, amidst the general noise of the Chamber, I could not understand.

Last evening, from the newspapers and from a few colleagues, I learned that Hon. Sciorati and three others had addressed to me the following sentences: “you disguised yourself as a porter; you painted your face! Dilettante detective!” and also that they used the word “snitch”, acting on behalf of the Fascio, of course, to which I am honored to belong.

Those strange words, that I would have immediately replied to, had I heard them at the time, need to be explained to the Chamber, since they contain a part of truth.

Last year, after Caporetto, convinced as I was that a large portion of the responsibility for the treachery that had been prepared fell onto the socialists and onto Giolitti's men, I resolved myself to make a direct experience of their political work of treason [the Chamber's transcription notes rumors and complaints from the left]; and that's the reason why, to enter their lairs, I dressed up as a worker.

Hence today, after a long investigation to establish the nature of their Bolshevik activities, I have been able to ascertain an intention to prepare right now, immediately after the victory, a revolutionary movement that, with the return of the soldiers from the front, should in a matter of minutes overpower and destroy our constitution. [This time, among the replies from the left, the official records kept track of the cries of “Porter! Porter!”]

That's how I was able to establish with factual and sure evidence, that I make available to the Chamber, that the true responsible for the facts of Turin and therefore for the disaster of Caporetto were [further interruptions] those that since that moment have been betraying their Motherland, that is the Hon. Senators Cefaly, Frassati, Panizzardi and the Hon. Representatives Giolitti, Falcioni, Chiaravaglio, Sciorati...

Here Centurione was forced to interrupt his speech by the even louder reactions coming from the left. His accusations of treason – even in the context of the contemporary climate of tension between the interventionist and neutralist currents – were of extreme severity and, it might appear, rather untimely. His main targets had been the longest serving Italian Prime Minister Giovanni Giolitti and the Senator and Chief Editor of the Turin based newspaper La Stampa Alfredo Frassati - the main press outlet of Italian neutralism, who had been subject to the attacks and recriminations of the interventionist groups during the whole conflict and especially during the last twelve months after the defeat of Caporetto. But now the war was done and won; one can read a certain puzzlement in the reactions of the Chamber.

Centurione insisted nonetheless with his remarks:

I have evidence ready to be made available to the Chamber! […] I am ready to prove the existence of this treason and to provide the evidence of it to the Chamber, to prove the entire truth of what I just said.

After Centurione's conclusion, those he had mentioned in his speech begun to reply. Cleto Sciorati – the socialist representative from Alessandria – was the first one to speak

[…] In Turin it is well known […] what amount of foolish adventures has my adversary involved himself with in his quality of, let's say, volunteer agent of the public force. I have seen him with my eyes, at my door dressed as a porter.

Here Centurione interrupted him, forcing the President of the Chamber to cut him short:

And I am proud of it, because you are traitors, craven, traitors of your Motherland!

Sciorati resumed explaining how:

When I heard that Hon. Centurione had gone to the King's Attorney [to solicit his intervention on the matter] I went there myself […] and asked to be heard for clarification […] The King's Attorney explained to me that there had been no official complaint...

After him it was the turn of Alfredo Falcioni – member of Giolitti's liberal union, and from Turin himself – to ask to speak for a personal matter.

Representative Centurione has hereby declared that he has with him the evidence of this most serious accusation […] if you have such evidence, show it, because the Country has the right to strike back against those who might have betrayed it. […] Honorable colleagues, I am a gentleman and a honest man, and I have the right to demand for Hon. Centurione's accusations to be proven; otherwise I retain my right to claim that one who accuses and shows no evidence to sustain his claims is a coward!

Centurione again declared himself “ready to provide evidence in support of his claims”.

At this point (this is one of those transcriptions where it's easy to lose track of things – I am trying my best to parse it properly) Sciorati asked for an

inquest committee appointed by the President [of the Chamber] to examine the accusations made by Representative Centurione.

Centurione approved. Giulio Alessio though – the acting President of the Chamber, one of the two vices of veteran President Giuseppe Marcora – observed that, from a procedural point of view, such proposition had to be preemptively approved in the form of a motion.

It was then socialist representative and lawyer Giuseppe Emanuele Modigliani to offer his contribution to the debate explaining that:

[…] no matters of procedure could prevent an assembly to ascertain […] the validity of the worst possible accusation to be made against a group of its members. […] Either the accusation is true, hence those subject to it must leave the Chamber as traitors, or it is false [...], hence the one who made it must leave.

Modigliani suggested to use a majority vote to place the discussion of the supposed evidence at the top of the current order of business.

But even if the regulations did not include an adequate procedural formula […] who among our colleagues would want to refuse such proposition? The proposal made by Hon. Sciorati has to be debated by the Chamber immediately! It is not possible for a debate on the future of our country to continue with an entire group subject to the accusations of a colleague who is, until proven otherwise, respectable […] Were the Presidency not to accept such request, I do not know how the accused colleagues could continue to participate to the works […] It's about time those matters get sorted out. While the war was going on, one had to swallow all sorts of toads, for the reasons you all are aware of, but now that [...] it's over, this system must end. These physical and moral aggressions need to end.

As for me, for that infinitesimal portion of credence one imbecile may attribute to the accusations, I declare that the accused have the right to demand a rapid solution to know if they have to continue with their participation to the [Chamber's] works.

A sentiment echoed by the liberal-conservative Stanislao Monti-Guarnieri:

[…] The Chamber can't continue its works unless full light is shed on the entire affair. […] Such necessity trumps any regulation!

can someone recommend me books about mesoamerica?