Online dating chico ca
But even then there were voices that questioned the usefulness of the list (Krumbholz, 1883, pp. To document the extent of the empire completely, it would be quite sufficient to enumerate all provinces of one specific level of the administrative hierarchy. This was already so in the case of Paul Krumbholz (1861-1945), the first who—at least for Asia Minor—attempted a more comprehensive treatment of satrapal administration. As a way of allowing both the OP inscriptions and Herodotus’s list to count as reliable, the possibility was repeatedly considered of assigning administration and fiscal matters to two different bureaucratic systems (Balcer, 1989, pp. ’ look at the sculptured figures which bear the throne platform” (Schmitt, 2000, p. The assumption of incompleteness, however, proves to be invalid if one accepts that the administration was structured hierarchically, a proposition that is both obvious and demonstrable for local bureaucracies and in the imperial administration. The satrapies formed a system which made it possible to rule over the whole Achaemenid territory, to raise and forward taxes, to recruit military forces, and to control local bureaucracies. 139), in archives (e.g., Hallock; Stolper, 1990; Koch), and on coins (e.g., Alram, pp. From the viewpoint of literary history it is an insertion from another genre, the epic, and is to be evaluated accordingly (Armayor). 255-57), this is no surprise, since that research throws ever more sharply into relief the way in which the fashioning of material is a decisive component in Herodotus’s historical work (Bichler and Rollinger, pp. The catalogue of Herodotus is as incompatible with the lists of the Achaemenid inscriptions as with those of the Alexander historians or with the numerous attestations of the Greek and Latin authors. These vary in reliability, but, taken together, they do allow reconstructing the empire’s divisions at Babylon and Triparadisus (Jacobs, 1994, pp. As a result, a very considerable degree of continuity is detectable from the time of Darius III (r. He either retained in their posts the officials he came upon or replaced them with people who enjoyed his trust. 87), and even quite recently Pierre Lecoq (1990) has tried to provide this interpretation with a philological foundation. 299-305) with, at most, 23 items and the list in XPh with 32 are at odds with the observation that the empire’s territory remained substantially unchanged. The conclusion was drawn that the lists were more or less incomplete, especially in view of the omission of names that were regarded as indispensible, such as Cilicia, Hellespontine Phrygia, and Syria (Krumbholz, p. If some names were nevertheless added in later inscriptions, it was to foster the illusion that, now as before, the rulers were augmenting their territorial property, although the process of extending the frontiers had been stagnating since the last decade of the 6th century BCE.
Yet the oldest catalogue originates from the Bisitun inscription, a text whose aims included historical documentation.
The central Minor Satrapy always gave its name to the Main Satrapy, and likewise the central Main Satrapy gave its name to the Great Satrapy.
While offices in inferior units were hereditary within families and could even be held by local rulers—the latter arrangement being a feature of regulated autonomy (Jacobs, 1999)—the administrators of Great Satrapies were in each case newly appointed by the royal court; and such offices were probably without exception held by Achaemenid princes who did not reach the throne and by members of privileged families (Jacobs, 1994, pp. The old capitals—Sardis, Babylon, Memphis, Ecbatana, Pasargadae, Bactra (see BACTRIA, in III, p.
Classical sources furthermore preserved numerous pieces of information about the provinces’ geographical setting.
The provinces were defined territorially, as is proved not least by the fact that one of the satrap’s duties was to measure their land (Hdt., 6.42; cf. Hence Greek and Latin sources frequently attest that provincial boundaries were marked by boundary stones as well as passes, rivers, mountain peaks, or other natural barriers. The capital of the province was apparently Pasargadae, where the satrap seems to have held office (Arr., 3.18.10-11; Curt., 10.1.22; Strab., 15.3.3).