SOURCES Three groups of sources play a specially prominent role in the reconstruction of satrapal administration: (1) The so-called lists (DB par. Correspondingly the lists have been interpreted as lists of peoples (Junge, pp. Attempts have been repeatedly made, and continue even today, to harmonize the sources (Bernard, 1987, pp. The entirely isolated position of the Herodotean list in terms of content leads to the supposition that Darius I undertook a fundamental reform of the administration, and the phrase in the opening passage (Hdt., 3.89) is interpreted correspondingly, although the formulation is far from being unambiguous. To these sources are to be added several hundred passages in Greek and Latin literature, as well as sporadic information in inscriptions (e.g., the Droaphernes inscription, see Briant, 1998; the Payawa sarcophagus inscription TL 40 d, see Laroche, p. But the chaotic arrangement of the list, which conflicts with geographic reality, its over-emphasis on the western regions, which shows that Herodotus had no authentic source at his disposal, and the fact that the data in the paragraphs in question are in conflict with all other sources, Greek and Latin texts included, force us to take a different methodological approach. 140-45) to provide a detailed proof that the list is of no use as historical testimony. This is due to the fact that, during the conquest of the Achaemenid empire, Alexander (356-323) preserved existing administrative structures everywhere, except in the extreme west. As satraps like Dādaršīš in Bactria and Vivāna in Arachosia ruled districts that appear as IV, pp. Any names missing among the enumerated countries belonged to a lower level of the hierarchy, and so their mention was unnecessary.
The campaigns of the two most important conquerors, Cyrus the Great and his son Cambyses, aimed at acquisition of the entire territory of the empires they were attacking. In other words, conquest of the ancient Oriental empires included their provinces: Lydia came with Cappadocia and the coastal provinces on the shore, Babylonia with Assyria, Media with Armenia, and so forth. Still deeper are the doubts about the existence of comparable governmental structures in the regions east of the central Iranian salt deserts that the sources hardly ever mention (reconstruction by Christensen; for critique and commentary, see Lommel; Kellens; Nagel, 1982, par. Because of the source material, the construction of the imperial administration can seldom be followed further down, but in the west it can be stated that Mysia belonged to Hellespontine Phrygia and Lycia to Caria as still minor entities, just as Phoenicia belonged to Ebir-nāri/Syria (see EBER-NĀRI). 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 continuity from the beginnings of the Achaemenid empire in the second half of the 6th century BCE until its collapse demonstrates that this administrative system was a construct that not only regulated administrative processes in peacetime, but proved effective during crises as well (Jacobs, 2003a).in primary and secondary sources reveals that they are not precise terms at all (Schmitt, 1976). Sound evidence is nonetheless extant to prove that major administrative complexes in Achaemenid times originated from earlier structures: Persia herself, Babylonia, Egypt, and Lydia.As a rule, Achaemenid imperial administration involved no primary administrative (re-)organization of the conquered territories but simply adaptation of existing structures. In the reconstruction of the administrative levels, it is clear that, the lower the level one chooses, the less comparable the individual areas become, because the administration was to a greater extent characterized by deeply rooted traditional structures.
This regional diversity explains the difficulty of determining within the general administrative hierarchy the precise rank of official titles gleaned from the study of local administrative archives (Briant, 2001, pp. The hierarchical structure meant that several Minor Satrapies formed a Main Satrapy, and two or more Main Satrapies a Great Satrapy.
An anonymous building worker has sparked outrage by placing a sign on the men's toilet of a Sydney city office block in an attempt to ban Muslims from washing their feet in the sink before their daily prayers.
The sign, which has a cartoon of a man with one of his feet in a sink and surrounded by a circle with a slash through it, was placed on the door of the men's toilet of an office block on Pitt Street, in Sydney's business district.
Her plays at provincial level back in Pakistan, as an all rounder and fast bowler.
Mr Faisal said that like most practising Muslims he didn't feel right if he missed out on any of his five daily prayers and that without ablution - called 'wudu' - he could not present himself before Allah to pray.
340) and Arachoti—preserved their exceptional position throughout the Achaemenid epoch and in most cases beyond it as well.