Equality of women and men in ancient Persia

The thought alone causes most people to frown their eyebrows and stare at me in utter disbelief. Who says this? 

Well, obviously not our Greek and later Roman historians for whom the Persians were the enemy. Persian sources, however, describe their women as enterprising, independent, and resolute. This has been widely researched by Robbert Bosschart in his book All Alexander’s Women on which I commented repeatedly (see: Persia’s historical memory of Alexander). An updated version, his 5^th edition is now available on Amazon. 

His study, based on the in-depth research published by such experts as professors Amélie Kuhrt, Maria Brosius, Jozef Wiesehöfer, Wouter Henkelman, and others is concentrated on the clay tablets found at Persepolis (see: Fire over Persepolis) and saved by the fire as mentioned in his chapter Biographical/Geographical Notes: 

“An unintended consequence of these fires was the preservation of clay archive tablets, cooked and hardened. About a hundred Treasury Archive texts from Persepolis, recording royal payments in silver in 492-458 BC were made available between 1948 and 1965. Other texts, published in 1970, were written in Aramaic. This coincided with the biggest windfall: the discovery of over 8,000 texts, dated between 509 and 493 BC and found on tablets in the Persepolis Fortification Archive. They deal with the royal administration of food commodities. About 7,000 are written in the Elamite language of Susa, with some incrustations of Old Persian. Another thousand were written in Aramaic, but there is also one in Greek, one in Frygian, and a few in Neo-Babylonian.” 

He further underscores how and where women are mentioned performing tasks we would expect were those of men:

 … “the archive tablets routinely register travel rations of wine, beer and grain issued to royal women for extensive journeys throughout the empire on their own behalf. And … to commoner women ... For example, one tablet (… dated to 493 BC), registers a journey by a woman employee from Susa, Mizapirzaka, who has to carry a letter to Persepolis. The text adds that she carries a personal seal (…) that authorizes her to claim provisions at the waystations.” 

Until recently, the ruling opinion was that the Greeks doubted how women “could obtain and exercise power in the Achaemenid monarchy.  How could an empire be ‘well ruled’ if women were influential and even exercised power over the king himself?”…

.. “with the publication, around 1970, of numerous tablet texts from the Persepolis Fortification site … Dr Maria Brosius identifies a particular category of women officials who carry the title of Arashara.  … specifically mentions four Arasharas by name: Dakma, Harbakka, Matmaba and Sadukka. Meat rations are rare, so the issuing of 4 complete sheep to each of these women supervisors confirms their important payment level. …

At least ten more tablets refer to the salary of Arasharas, showing that these highly qualified women were better paid than male personnel of lower professional rank. …

[Achaemenid, maybe Arashara statuette

from Bosschart's book]

750 measures of wine among 65 employees; three Arasharas receive 30 measures each, whereas a male scribe at the same workplace gets only 20. On another tablet we even see an Arashara being issued 50 measures. The sliding scale of payment in order of professional qualification (and not by gender distinction) … distributes wine rations: two men who are called ‘manual workers’ get 10 measures each; two other men who are “doorkeepers” by profession, get 20 measures each; and the Arashara is allotted 30 measures. The highest payment (in grain) of all the tablets in the archive also goes to an Arashara: 75 quarts per month…

… an exceptionally high number of Arasharas worked at the service of queen-mother Irdabama. The circa 7,000 archive texts that have been translated so far mention some 150 places in the region of Persepolis (and in a few cases, beyond) where royal ladies had storehouses or workshops. Usually the personnel working there was overseen by Arasharas.”

...

"The tablets show women in a wide range of occupations in Persepolis: woodworkers and stoneworkers, artisans, winemakers, furniture makers, treasury clerks, storekeepers, carriers, grain handlers. A tablet dated to 502 BC refers to ‘Indukka, mother of Tuku’, stating that she is “the chief of the merchants”. It registers the amount of tax she has paid -in silver- on “the business deal that she has managed”.

 

… “Irdabama regularly orders greater amounts of foodstuffs to be delivered at the palace from her own … storehouses … Irdabama has more personnel working at her various factories. On top, she can direct the royal treasury to make payments in silver” …

As Alexander traveled in the company of Queen-mother Sisygambis from Issus to Susa the equality of royals and commoners must have become apparent. His close company with Barsine undoubtedly confirmed and enhanced the role of women. Dr. Maria Brosius further writes:

“Persian queens were much more than consorts, or than queen-mothers supposedly ruling a palace harem. They had a huge influence in decisions about whom to promote, whom to punish, whom to execute, or whose life to spare. Sisygambis, queen-mother of Darius III, also wielded such power, even after her son had been replaced on the throne by Alexander the Great. He pointedly upheld her status as the most prominent woman in the empire, and treated her as if she were his own mother.” 

There is little doubt about the real meaning behind the mass-wedding in Susa as arranged by Alexander in 324 BC (see: Susa with its unique glazed brick walls). Lacking time and knowledge, he could not personally choose the brides-to-be for his Companions and close friends but Sisygambis could and did. The brides, many of them princesses in their own right, were selected with care, and probably well-prepared by Sisygambis for their new role as wife of one of Alexander’s marshals. Their independence would inevitably trickle down to their children and children’s children. What an ambitious vision! 

Alexander always led by example. His wedding with Stateira, the eldest daughter of King Darius III, and Parysatis, the youngest daughter of King Artaxerxes III was celebrated at the same time as that of 90 court members. Each of the newlywed couples received a dowry from the king and on this happy occasion, Alexander granted a gratuity to his Macedonians who had taken Asian wives during his campaigns. He paid out of his own pocket for the proper education of their children. 

The Susa celebration was Alexander’s first step towards uniting West and East, not limited to Greece and Persia but encompassing the entire then-known world. He laid the basis for one single world in which everybody was equal, East or West, man or woman. What we call today an emancipated woman existed for 2,500 years, not as a dream but a reality! So much time has been lost on the subject! 

Alexander was a visionary, but none of his generals or friends understood his vision. The one exception was Hephaistion, but he died shortly after the wedding, poisoned no doubt. As a result, Alexander’s plans were muffled and erased from history. 

When the king died one year later, his world died with him. Had Alexander lived long enough, we would all speak Greek. What’s more, for 2,500 years our world would have been one where men and women lived on the same foot, with the same rights and the same status. 

The importance of Perinthus

In antiquity, Perinthus was of strategic importance as it controlled Athens’ grain route from the Black Sea through the Bosporus. Each spring Athenian ships loaded with wheat from the Danube and Maritza basins sailed down via Byzantium, the Hellespont, and further across the Aegean to Athens. 

Perinthus, near the modern city of Tekirdağ, had two harbors in the East and the West side of the peninsula both used for commercial and military purposes. So far, the remains of a shipwreck have been located at a depth of 60 meters, and the finding is under investigation. More of the city’s buildings are being exposed, including an Acropolis with large temples and a theater. Besides the many small artifacts such as bits of jewelry and statuettes, there also is a necropolis.

[Picture from Sozcu.com.tr]

In late 352 BC, King Philip of Macedonia was asked to assist a coalition of Central Thracia, consisting of Byzantium, and Perinthus in besieging the nearby fortress town of Heraion Teichos that threatened Perinthus (see: Philip is bouncing back). He marched his army east, took the town, and returned it to Perinthus, presumably its original owner. 

Philip’s presence in the area was a threat to the Athenians but also to the Persians aiming to control Perinthus. In 340 BC, the Persians ordered Pixodarus of Caria, their ally in Halicarnassus, to help Perinthus revolt against Philip. The operation was not successful. 

Pixodarus then changed his mind as Persia was in turmoil after the murder of King Artaxerxes III. He thought it wise to seek Philip’s support instead. He offered his daughter, Ada, in marriage to Philip’s retarded son Arrhidaeus. The pact was accepted. 

However, Alexander felt left out and decided to act on his own, offering himself as a marital candidate. When Philip got vent of this maneuver behind his back, the agreement with Pixodarus was called off. Philip seriously reprimanded his son by exiling several of his closest friends from Pella (see: Pella, the birthplace of Alexander). 

By 188 BC, Perinthus fell under the rule of Pergamon until the Romans took over in 129 BC. By the end of the 2^nd century AD, they used the port as a main hub to ship their troops between the Euphrates and the Danube fronts. On the other hand, Perinthus had an important connection with the Via Militaris that ran west to Philippopolis, Serdica, and Viminacium. From here, the Via Egnatia led to Thessaloniki, Dyrrhachion, and Brundisium. 

Based on inscriptions from the late 2^nd century AD, it has been established that the provincial governors of Thracia had a residence in Perinthus. 

[Map from Stilus.nl]

In 286 AD, Emperor Diocletian renamed the city Heracleia to become a state capital. He may well have built a palace here as the outline of the ruins indicates a similarity with his palace in Nicomedia.

Under Constantine in 330 AD, Heracleia was supplanted by Byzantium which was renamed Constantinople. 

In the end, Perinthus lived a long and prosperous history thanks to its strategic location with ideal access to the Black Sea, the Aegean, and the Mediterranean, as well as inland Anatolia, and Egypt. Inevitably, it became a multicultural center populated by different peoples all speaking their own language. That sounds very close to today’s praise of Istanbul joining Europe and Asia. 

Persia's Historical Memory of Alexander

Robbert Bosschart has published an Updated Version 2025 to his book All Alexander’s Women, which deserves special attention.

Of particular interest is this newly reworked Chapter Persia's Historical Memory of Alexander, where the author focuses on the Persian side of history. The Achaemenids did not have a counterpart for the Greek writers and chroniclers and relied instead on the verbal transmission of Alexander’s life and deeds by way of mouth by their storytellers.

This new information is too good to be kept hidden in the dust of times, and I am very happy to share hereafter the most important information together with some of the magnificent illustrations. 

Persia's Historical Memory of Alexander

For Persia’s own first-hand memories of Alexander perforce we have to rely on oral history: all the published testimonies available today originated from texts of local storytellers, later written down and ‘enriched’ by scribes, poets or translators.

...

Early Persian/Arab authors who included history themes in their writings, based their texts both on oral history accounts and on written documents. From Umara in the 7th century AD up to Masudí in the 10th century they used all sorts of sources, including the first Arabic translations of the pseudo-Kallisthenes’ Alexander Romance.

As times went by, the most popular versions of Alexander’s exploits became more and more sensational and sexy, big adventure tales usually known as the Iskandar-Nama, the Book of Alexander. As a result, their reports about Alexander’s reign are quite entertaining literature, but in historical accuracy ‘few and far between’.

Therefore it is interesting to find that the only text with specifically Persian memories of Alexander’s life and deeds is, again, that of a simple storyteller. Or not exactly ‘simple’, for Abu Taher al-Tarsusí describes himself as «a compiler of histories and narrator of mysterious facts». The saga that Tartusi published under the title of Darab-Nama (‘Tale of Darius’) was a written version of an ancient folk story. From the 12th century AD on it became very popular.

The oldest manuscript we have is dated to 1580 AD, in an edition illuminated with precious miniatures made in India for the Mughal emperor Akbar. Painstaking research on this and other, later versions finally yielded in 1965 the definitive edition of the Darab-Nama. In his introduction, Professor Zabiholla Safa underlined that the text is based on oral source material that is much older than the Arabic translations of the Alexander Romance. In other words, the Darab-Nama reflects Persia’s own historical memory. 

Its title is rather misleading, because only 386 of the 1159 known pages concern Persia’s glory years under the revered figures of Darius the Elder and his successor. But the bulk of the text, 773 pages long, displays an elaborate tale of how his fictional granddaughter, princess ‘Buran-dokht’, first opposes, but finally permits Alexander’s conquest of Persia. 

A unique characteristic of the Darab-Nama is that here, Alexander does not get the brilliant leading role. That privilege is reserved solely for the purely Persian personage Buran-dokht. As long as the story takes place in Persia, Alexander is even portrayed as a hotheaded, at times stupid or cowardly, and always vulnerable young man, with no special military talents. More than once, Buran-dokht has to come and save him. Only after the story has moved to foreign lands, Alexander is allowed to become a brilliant warrior and wise statesman.

The Iskandar-Nama became a popular (and often hilarious) 

adventure tale with lots of action and sex

Of course, like many other works of oral literature, the Darab-Nama has been compiled over the centuries by successive storytellers. This makes it even more impressive that in Tarsusí’s final version, the text still manages to retain Persia’s popular memory of three historical facts concerning Alexander. 

The most extensive of the three is the (re)appearance of a goddess from a legendary past, Anahita. Time and again she intervenes to promote and protect Alexander’s kingship. To begin with, as Nahid, Alexander’s secret mother, who succeeds in placing him on the throne of the Western empire called “Rum“. Then she pops up briefly as queen Aban-dokht, who becomes his lover, and presents him with the capital of Persia, Estakhr. Finally she shines forth on hundreds of pages as the divine Buran-dokht, who ends up marrying him and setting him on the throne of the empire. Which means that even in islamic Iran, popular folklore still remembered –from 1500 years back!– the goddess Anahita, her role as Giver of Kingship, and her blessing for Alexander.

The second historical fact reported about Alexander in the Darab-Nama refers to his double Persian marriage «according to core royal usage»; that is, the multiple political marriages practised by Cyrus the Great and Darius the Great in the 6th century BC. This is told as follows:

«Buran-dokht took Alexander by the hand, made him sit on the throne and saluted him as King of Iran. Then they sent messengers and letters from Estakhr to all the provinces to announce that Buran-Dokht and Alexander had married. 

The gates of the treasuries were opened, gold was distributed profusely, and with both of them installed on their thrones on equal footing, they had seven months of celebrations. In accordance with the core royal usage, Alexander was also given in marriage the daughter of King Shahush».

So here Alexander marries a daughter of king Darab and a daughter of a king called Shahush. History tells us that in Susa, in 324 BC, Alexander married princess Barsine/Stateira, daughter of Darius III, and the princess Parysatis, last daughter of a king we know as Artaxerxes III Ochus, but who was called ‘Vahush’ in Old Persian. So the «daughter of King Shahush» in the Darab-Nama evidently is the daughter of Shah Vahush, as Artaxerxes III was known to his court.

The Persian warrior-queen Buran-dokht repeatedly 

saves Alexander from his enemies. 

Here she defeats the Indian king Poros, when she grabs 

his war elephant by the trunk and overturns him.

(Miniature illustrating a Darab Nama manuscript of 1720 AD, 

now in the Statsbibliothek of Berlin)

The third popular memory of a historical fact embedded in this saga recounts Alexander’s decision to promote mass-marriages for the better integration of conquerors and conquered into one realm; a theme that takes up some 20 pages in the Darab-Nama. This is how the story goes:

Alexander and his army happen upon an island of women, and thousands of these invade the camp «searching for men». Alexander suspects that in reality they may be hostile, but soon understands they only want to make love —and then fears that his own men will “go berserk”, causing even worse problems. So he allows his wise chancellor –whose name is given as Plato— to apply a miracle-working solution.

Plato calls upon the women and asks them: «By the will of God, and so be all the Angels your witnesses, will you give yourselves in legal union to the men that will enter your city?» They agree. The storyteller concludes: «When the women were trying to seduce the men, it was the work of the Devil; but as soon as they were conveniently and legally married, it became God’s work, and Alexander could no longer be held responsible for any problems arising of their arrival».

Clearly, this is a remembrance of the mass-marriages (in reality, the legalization of de facto marriages) that Alexander organised in parallel with his double wedding at Susa in 324 BC. Out of his own purse, as Arrian reports in VII, 4, 8, he paid dowries for the Persian and other Oriental women who had taken up with his officers and soldiers, so they could be legally married.

The list totalled some 10,000 dowries, and the classical sources say that Alexander disbursed over 10,000 talents of silver for them; an amount equivalent to 150 million dollars of today. It is understandable that these marriages, converting thousands of concubines into legal wives, left an indelible memory among the Persians. 

Just as important was Alexander’s pledge that he would care for their offspring. Arrian notes in passing that he promised his veterans that their children from Oriental partners “will be educated as Makedonians”. But Diodoros tells more: he registers (in his Book XVII, 110, 3) that Alexander has set up a specific fund and appointed the necessary teachers to ensure that the 10,000 children his men have had with “women who were taken in war” will be educated “as is the right of free men”.

Alexander and his wise chancellor Plato receive Queen Sabaterah, 

who reigns over an island where only women live, 

and they all want sex with men. 

Plato will ensure that they become legal spouses.

(Miniature from the 1720 AD manuscript of the Darab-Nama)

In Book XVIII, Diodoros adds that Alexander had decided to apply his integration policy on a much broader scale:

«…he intended to establish cities and to transplant populations from Asia to Europe and in the opposite direction from Europe to Asia, in order to bring the largest continents to common unity and to friendly kinship by means of intermarriages and family ties».

Alexander’s intermarriage policy found lasting approval in Persia, as shown by the positive comment of the storyteller in the Darab-Nama on the “miraculous solution” devised by Plato. In fact, all three of Tarsusí’s historical storylines, repeated again and again in the saga, must have met with notable approval of his Persian audience. After all, no storyteller makes a living by irritating his public.

Around the year 1000 AD, the prominent court poet Farrukhi Sistaní affirmed: “The story of Alexander’s exploits and his travels has found listeners everywhere, and everybody knows those tales by heart”. So Tarsusí and the storytellers before him had to take into account that among their public, there always would be people who remembered some previous version of the Alexander Romance.

As a case in point, their public in Ghazna could perfectly well remember an Eskandar-Nama compiled around 1015 AD out of stock tales of Persian storytellers that simply copied episodes from the pseudo-Kallisthenes Romance, with some fancy (and errors) added. In that text, Alexander is the undisputed hero of the saga. But to entertain the audience, this Eskandar-nama turns him into a comical figure who not only conquers kingdoms, but also women galore. He seduces princesses, amazons, warrior beauties, servant girls, widow queens, noble dames and even fairy queens (!) far and wide. With the result that this Alexander suffers all the problems of a bumbling man with too many wives and/or concubines.

When Alexander is listening to the deathbed pleas of king Darab, who begs him to treat his family well, Roxana makes her appearance in this Eskandar-Nama. “She is still young, you could marry her,” suggests Darab. (Here, Roxana is said to be not a daughter, but one of the wives of the Persian king.) Alexander answers hastily that this is a petition he will not agree to:

“God forbid that I should desire your wife, for I already have four wives, all free women, plus 40 concubines from here and from Greece.”

Roxana is an unavoidable heroine in all the Oriental translations of Romance episodes. So she also has to appear in the Darab-Nama. Well, more or less. When introducing his top star the princess Buran-dokht, Tarsusí takes the precaution of telling his public that «elsewhere she was also called Roshanak».

In other words, despite the fact that the following 773 pages prove without a shadow of doubt that his majestic Buran-dokht has nothing in common with the insignificant Roxana, Tarsusí still thought it wise to bow –if only once– to the Alexander Romance.

For my comments on Robbert Bosschart’s Third Edition, please refer to my earlier blogpost: All Alexander's Women.

How important was Barsine?

The question is actually double: How important was Barsine for Alexander? And how important was Barsine in the geopolitical world of her time? 

Authors from antiquity have not spent much ink on her, and she is only mentioned when she comes to the foreground, which isn’t often.  

Barsine was the daughter of Artabazus II, satrap of Hellespontine Phrygia in northwestern Turkey. Artabazus’ first wife was from Rhodes and was the sister of two capable generals, Mentor and Memnon. 

Artabazus revolted against the newly appointed Persian king, Artaxerxes III Ochus. Artaxerxes had ordered the dismantling of his mercenary army, which the satrap did not accept. Artabazus and his family (including Memnon) went into exile and found refuge at the court of Philip II in Pella. Barsine, who was fluent in Greek, must have met the younger Alexander during their stay. We don’t know the nature of their encounters or conversations, but we may safely assume that Alexander inquired about life and customs in Persia. After all, he impressed the Persian envoys at a young age as he questioned them pending his father’s return to the Palace. 

Three years later, Artabazus reconciled with the Persian king, and he returned to Persia, taking Barsine and his family with him. That happened in 343 BC, about one year after Aristotle arrived on the scene to teach Prince Alexander. Over the years, the entire company probably met the philosopher along with other distinguished visitors to the Macedonian court. 

Barsine married her uncle Mentor, a Greek mercenary general in Persian service, while she still was young. Mentor died soon afterward, leaving her with a daughter. In those circumstances, Memnon took her as his wife that same year, 338 BC. He already had several sons from a previous marriage. We can safely assume that Barsine’s opinion in these matters didn’t count. What’s more, she became a second mother to her husband's (teenage?) sons. Just as Mentor, Memnon led an army of mercenaries for the Great King. Having a lovely wife familiar with the Greek language and culture, no doubt, added to his prestige. 

In 334 BC, when Alexander, now king of Macedonia, faced the Persian army at the Granicus River, Memnon fought on the enemy’s side. Although the battle was lost, the general’s capabilities were recognized by Darius, and he was appointed as commander of the Persian fleet in the Aegean. This honor may be a questionable trust because, in exchange, Barsine had to stay at King Darius’ court with her father, Artabazus. 

A year later, during the siege of Lesbos Memnon fell ill and died. Barsine was widowed for a second time. 

Around that time, Alexander had reached Issus where he defeated Darius in November 333 BC. When Parmenion rode to Damascus to take hold of the Persian treasury, the baggage train, and the women of the aristocrats, he met Barsine and brought her to Alexander. 

Her relationship with Alexander lasted five or six years. I wonder whether she traveled with Darius’ mother, wife, and children, who had been taken in Issus. Alexander was constantly on the move, conquering the eastern Mediterranean and Egypt and marching to Babylon and Susa, where he finally installed the Persian Royal Family. Barsine stayed at Alexander’s side, and we can only guess which quarters she occupied when the army was on the road. 

During that time, Artabazus remained faithful to Darius until the Great King was murdered by Bessus, who then proclaimed himself the new king of Persia. Artabazus refused to submit to Bessus and left, taking his mercenaries with him. He joined Alexander, who rewarded him with the satrapy of Bactria. Here he was reunited with Barsine. 

She is mentioned again by ancient historians about 327 BC at the end of Alexander’s campaign in Sogdia. However, it is unclear in which order the events unfolded precisely. 

The fact is that Barsine became pregnant and gave birth to Heracles. Alexander never recognized his son, his first-born, although he must have loved him, giving him the name of his ancestors. Is it possible that Alexander resented Barsine for having Heracles without his consent? She and little Heracles stood in his way for his bigger plans, meaning to marry Princess Stateira as – probably – agreed with Sisygambis. Barsine must have known of those plans, so she had no excuse. 

It is, in any case, a strange coincidence that Alexander almost immediately married Roxane, the daughter of a local chieftain. This was not love at first sight, as most authors claim. It was a purely political move to end the three-year wars through Bactria and Sogdia. 

Artabazus requested to be relieved of his duties in Bactria because of his old age. Alexander accepted his resignation and Artabazus left for Pergamon taking Barsine and the little boy with him. Artabazus seems to have produced an elegant way to retire, and, at the same time, he created the best solution for Barsine since there was no longer a place for her at Alexander’s court. She had to say goodbye to the snow-topped mountains of the Hindu Kush after sharing so many miles with the Macedonian troops and her great love.

Barsine met Alexander again in 324 BC when she attended the mass wedding at Susa. Her daughter from Mentor married Nearchus. Two of her sisters were also given in marriage to Alexander’s companions, but the sources (Plutarch and Arrian) are at odds with each other about the names. 

Hardly a year later, Alexander died in Babylon. I wonder whether Barsine was still in nearby Susa, close enough to say her goodbyes to the man she once loved? If she returned to Pergamon after the wedding, she could never make it to Babylon in time. 

She and Heracles quietly spent the next decade in Pergamon. In 310 BC, Cassander as king of Macedonia, summoned Alexander IV, Alexander’s 14-year-old legitimate son with Roxane, to Pella to be poisoned. 

The news traveled fast and eventually reached Pergamon, as poor Heracles was now at the center stage in the drama of the Succession War. Initially, general Polyperchon had been defending the cause of the now 17-year-old Heracles, but in 309 BC, he fell into Cassander’s vicious trap. Cassander made many great promises of money and power in exchange for eliminating Heracles. For one hundred talents, Polyperchon tricked Heracles into accepting an invitation for dinner and poisoned him. Barsine, who had traveled with her son, was murdered shortly afterward, although some sources pretend she was murdered simultaneously. Sadly, Heracles didn’t even receive a proper burial in the cemetery of his ancestors, and neither did Barsine. 

Now about my questions formulated at the beginning of my post. How important was Barsine for Alexander? Well, she was important enough to keep her at his side for about six years. All this time, she managed not to get pregnant. Barsine knew that Alexander dearly wanted and needed an heir during those years of intimacy. She also knew that his plan was to marry a Persian princess. Barsine spoiled this by wanting a child of her own. Alexander had his principles and stuck to them. Nobody, not even sweet and gentle Barsine, was allowed to interfere. His sudden marriage to Roxane may be seen as a statement toward Barsine. Historians say Alexander fell in love with Roxane because of her beauty. In my mind, her beauty may be a nice bonus, but it was not the main reason. 

How important was Barsine in the geopolitical world of her time? Barsine was a beneficial source of information about the Persian court, Persian habits, and culture. After all, she had lived at least three years at the court of King Darius. Speaking Greek was an important asset to avoid misunderstandings. Alexander was an excellent judge of character, and having met Artabazus at Pella, he knew that he was a man of his word and could be trusted. Artabazus was loyal to Alexander. Having his daughter at the king’s side was a warranty that worked both ways. Barsine and her father contributed to Alexander’s larger plan. The birth of Heracles disturbed this goal – something Alexander never could or would accept. Barsine no longer fit his purpose in the new world he was building.

The most important temple of Anahita at Istakhr

In an earlier blog (see: The powerful goddess Anahita in Persia), I took a closer look at the goddess Anahita originating in Central Asia and later worshiped throughout Persia to the end of the Sassanid rule. A few centuries later, the Islam annihilated whatever was left of the goddess’ rich legacy. Yet her spirit lived on thanks to the Zoroastrian believers.

The city of Istakhr (also spelled as Estakr) is to be found five kilometers north of Persepolis but is rarely visited. It may well have been a suburb of the Achaemenid royal residences of Persepolis. Not much remains of this settlement and even less of the once so grand temple. As early as the 4^th century BC, Artaxerxes II, erected a statue in honor of Anahita or Anaitis as the Greeks called her, and placed it inside the temple among other goddesses.

Anahita’s best-known temples are those located of Kangavar, near ancient Ecbatana, and at Bishapur. But the most important sanctuary, however, stood here at Istakhr near Persepolis. Sadly, all that remains of this Temple of Anahita in Istakhr is one uninspiring column with part of its double-headed bull capital. Many of the Achaemenid columns were re-used in the construction of an early mosque that probably replaced the Fire Temple. 

[Picture kindly shared with me by Robbert Bosschart]

In its heyday, the Achaemenid city of Istakhr was an important starting point on the ancient caravan route to the Indus Valley, which ran through the Southeastern Provinces of Sistan and Kandahar. According to the Arab sources mentioned hereafter, the temple had been ravaged by the Macedonians. It is possible that this happened when Alexander’s soldiers rampaged through the city of Persepolis (see: Fire over Persepolis), but that still remains unclear.

During the Parthian Empire (247 BC–224 AD), the sacred fire of the temple of Anahita was kept burning.

The Sassanids, who came to power in 224 AD, rebuilt Istakhr, apparently using much of Persepolis’ rubble. King Ardashir (224-242 AD), promoted the city as his first capital till it was replaced by Ctesiphon. The empire’s treasury, however, remained in Istakhr.

The temple survived for centuries as “the house of Anahid’s fire” and it seems that most, if not all the Sassanid kings were crowned at this temple.

In 640 AD, Istakhr was attacked by the Arabs. Shiraz was founded in 684, and eventually replaced Istakhr, whose power was broken. 

The Arab traveler, historian and geographer Al-Mas’udi, also known as the Herodotus of the Arabs, visited the temple of Istakhr in the 10th century AD. He described it with the following words: ”It stood, …, at the foot of a mountain, where the imprisoned wind made a noise like thunder, night and day’” … “ still standing, “pillars, made from blocks of astonishing size, surmounted by curious figures in stone representing horses and other animals, of gigantic shapes and proportions" (text copied from the Encyclopaedia Iranica). 

The city of Istakhr was last documented in numismatics with a dinar issued in 1063 AD. Over the course of time, the temple sank into oblivion.