I have recently been studying the history of the Achaemenid (Persian) Empire. One of the things that surprised and saddened me was how so much of our sources mainly come from the ancient Greeks and not from the Persians themselves. I have therefore trier to find unique archaeological evidence from the Persian side and happened to come across this unique surviving inscription created by the Persians and this inscription is known as the ‘Xerxes I inscription at Van’. It is in modern-day Iran and was then part of the satrapy of Armenia under Persian control. Here it is below:
§1 A great god (is) Auramazda, who created this excellent (work) which one sees; who created happiness for man; who bestowed wisdom and energy upon Xerxes the king. §2a Xerxes the king proclaims: By the favour of Auramazda I am of such a kind that I am a friend to what is right, I am no friend to what is wrong. (It is) not my wish that to the weak is done wrong because of the mighty, it is not my wish that the mighty is hurt because of the weak. §2b What is right, that is my wish. I am no friend of the man who is a follower of the Lie. I am not hot-tempered. When I feel anger rising, keep that under control by my thinking power. I control firmly my impulses. S2c The man who cooperates, him do reward according to his cooperation. He who does harm, him I punish according to the damage. It is not my wish that a man does harm, it is certainly not my wish that a man if he causes harm be not punished. §2d What a man says against a man, that does not convince me, until I have heard testimony from both parties. §2e What a man does or performs according to his powers, satisfies me, therewith I am satisfied; it gives me great pleasure and I give much to faithful men. §2f Of such a kind (are) my intelligence and command; when you shall see or hear what has been done by me, both in the house and in battle that (is) my ability in addition to thinking and intelligence.
I find this passage extremely fascinating for numerous reasons. One reason I find it interesting is because of its position on a hill. It’s size is tremendous. I was therefore wondering what is the significance of this inscription? What also is the context for this unique archaeological translation? Thanks.
If you're seeking sources from within the Achaemenid Empire, you may be interested in some of my previous posts on the topic.
As for your question, I'm a little confused by your post because you asked about Xerxes at Van, which is within the borders of modern Turkey, 80km from the Iranian border. However, you posted an inscription from Persepolis in southwestern Iran (as an aside: it's XPl, with the letter L, not a 1). Then, you're final paragraph raises more questions. XPl is a loose stone tablet, probably once adorning a wall in the Persepolis palace complex. The inscription at Van (XV), is carved on a hill side, but I personally wouldn't call it's size "tremendous" at just 3x2 meters. XPl is a near exact copy of an inscription from Darius the Great, DNb, on his tomb at Naqsh-e Rostam. The royal tombs are also carved into a hillside, and they are truly gargantuan at 22x15 meters.
On a personal level, I certainly hope you wanted to know about XV because I find it fascinating and amusing. In Kuhrt's sourcebook, XV reads:
§1 A great god is Auramazda, the greatest of the gods, who created this earth, who created yonder sky, who created man, created happiness for man, who made Xerxes king, one king of many, one lord of many. §2 I (am) Xerxes, the great king, king of kings, king of all kinds of people, king on this earth far and wide, the son of Darius the king, the Achaemenid. §3 Xerxes the great king proclaims: King Darius, my father, by the favour of Auramazda, made much that is good, and this niche he ordered to be cut; as he did not have an inscription written, then I ordered that this inscription be written. §4 Me may Auramazda protect, together with the gods, and my kingdom and what I have done.
In both inscriptions you might be talking about, much of the text is simply standardized formulae. Various royal titles, descriptions of Ahura Mazda, and which order they were written in are used across almost all Achaemenid inscriptions. Some, like "a Persian, son of a Persian, and Aryan of Aryan stock," show some hints of a political or religious context in how they are used. In that example, it exclusively appears in inscriptions that (likely) reference revolt by the Persians' fellow Ariya. Others have no discernable reason for why they were used in favor of a different formula. One very practical option is that different titulature was chosen depending on the amount of space available for writing the more unique message.
The unique part of XV is section 3, where Xerxes "proclaims" that his father ordered a section of hillside near Van smoothed out for an inscription, but never got around to ordering what was actually supposed to be inscribed. So Xerxes just filled it in. All the preamble and postlude asking for blessings, and the core message is just "My dad wanted something here, but nobody knows what, and I felt like I should fill in the blank spot."
There is no further archaeological or written context to explain when Darius ordered the niche to be cut, why he didn't dictate a message for it, or why Xerxes felt compelled to fill it with such a banal message. The latter can at least be explained by a bit of royal embarrassment that there was this big, blank monument looming over the city, but Darius' motivations are entirely obscure. I have never even found scholarship that attempts to explain it. My personal theory, based on its location in Armenia, Van's role as the traditional regional capital, and themes from some of Darius' other inscriptions is that it was meant to connect to the Behistun Inscription (DB). Several of Darius' early inscriptions at Persepolis and Susa relate to the civil wars at the start of his reign, but the vast majority of apparently later texts drop that theme until a final reference on his tomb in Inscription DNa. However, that's just my theory.
XPl on the other hand is just about as un-unique as an Achaemenid inscription can get. It's almost a word-for-word copy of Darius' DNb. Lacking context for where XPl was situated in Persepolis, it's hard to know why Xerxes commissioned it. DNb is much easier to analyze because we have the context of Darius' tomb and the accompanying inscriptions, primarily DNa. The two major inscriptions on the tomb compliment one another nicely. DNa serves as a personal testiment of Darius' life and deeds, while DNb (and by extension XPl) is a philosophical statement, outlining the behavior and responsibilities of the ideal Persian king.
Darius clearly wanted to be remembered according to these ideals, which is reinforced by his use of the first person. However, the full corpus of his many inscriptions also shows that he was highly concerned with legacy and advising his successors. DB and DPe in particular directly address instructions to Darius' heirs. Thus, DNb appears to provide a guide for righteous rule for future generations. From that, we can plausibly interpret XPl as Xerxes claiming to live up to his father's ideals, and potentially its placement in Persepolis as way to put the message in a place where future kings were more likely to encounter the reminder from the forbearers on a regular basis.