alternatehistory.com
Persian Law
All nations have their particular take on negotiating. The Hellenes will feign stinginess, and will later on introduce luxuries to surprise you. The Celts will look at you as a foe on the battlefield, then embrace you as a comrade once business is completed. The Egyptians will disdain everything in your possession, especially that which they desire the most. The Sards hate to haggle, the Corsicans won’t be seen to beg, the Romans love to treat you like the dirt on their shoe. But there is only one King of the Persians. Normal kings, and petty kings especially, love to show their wealth, to advertise their taste, power, and command over riches. The King of Persia does not show his wealth, though his wealth moves mountains, he does not brandish his power, though his power destroys nations overnight. Everything that this king is, everything that he commands, will bombard you from the moment you approach his capital. His roads which stretch from Sardis to Samarqand, his monuments which transform cliff into artifice, his armies which shudder the earth at their approach. His meeting house is greater in span than entire cities, its roof taller than any temple and held by great pillars that threaten the very heavens themselves. His servants hither and thither across this space as though it were as ordinary as their own homes. It is that realisation, that to this man the extraordinary is not a luxury but a choice, that even his servants are inured to power, that really shrinks a man, a small child in front of a giant and his house. Hearing these words, you will believe that as a child of Qarthadast you will be immune to such things, for how could any city in the world compare to its majesty and scale, even for one so powerful as the King of Persia? But trust me, nothing will prepare you for the court at Parsa.
Neither is this the only test you will find from the King of Persia, this is simply the test your mind endures by entering his space. For one thing, he will often test those he has never encountered before by asking their opinion on lawmaking. The King of Persia’s law is the law of his domains, and only he need be consulted to make decisions upon it. But he likes to test guests, ambassadors, and messengers to his court by asking whether they would ban a thing, or change the punishment for this crime or that crime, or whether with the following evidence such-and-such is likely to be guilty or not. The correct answer to these questions depends on the king and the person being asked, I have seen some praised for giving a well-reasoned opinion and others praised for saying that only the King of Persia need consider the matter. But be assured, the question will be coming, and the answer is expected to be forthcoming. It serves as a reminder of how absolute his command over the law of his kingdom is, and he will not suffer you to conduct your business without such a reminder. He can simply discuss matters of law as casually as if he were talking about the pleasant weather, or a piece of fine confectionary. It is also invitation for you to make a fool out of yourself. Be confident, not flippant. Be direct, not taciturn. Be ready.
You can see the mark of the King on the shophetim of the homeland. The situation there is as it was in the old days, where the shophetim rule as crowned and anointed sovereign. Yet despite this ancient grandeur they are a chastened caste, and view events with a narrow horizon, always fearing what may come over it. The shophetim of Qarthadast meanwhile, even bound by our strong constitution, are sovereign, they look around the world to understand what opportunities are present, even if they cannot always be pursued, even if we cannot yet achieve the necessary action. The presence of the King is the force that creates this state in the homeland; his fingers are all over the workings of state, and his law unquestionable. Only last year the king’s governor imposed the king’s law banning trade with the western Hellenes, the Adirim of all the homeland cities readily passing the legislation and the shophetim had no involvement in the process beyond observation and the sacred affix of signature. If the King could achieve such power over our cities in Ifriqa he would do so without a moment’s hesitation, and seeks any opportunity to gain a grip over our actions, no matter how small. For this is another reason we must always tread carefully around the King of Persia; the moment he feels that his law touches you, his claws come out and try grasp you round the throat.
This is quite possibly the worst essay on history I ever wrote in my time of learning and study at Takshila. It is included here to humble any reputation I have acquired for my later works, to show how one might teach historical method to a novice, and to conclusively prove that those with experience must start somewhere, and that first attempt is often not particularly impressive. The comments were made by my tutor, Buddhamita, and her patience with my earliest attempts at study are to be viewed with appropriate astonishment.
There are many legal traditions with claims to antiquity. Among those perhaps the most famous is the King’s Law of Asia, which has been maintained and refined for millenia. For those who seek insight into Asia they would do well to understand this legal system that underpins this ancient and powerful nation, which is thus the subject of this examination.
The King’s Law, as understood by Asians and their bureaucracy, is more properly separated into two main components; the Law of Heaven and the Law of Life. The former is regarded as that divine law which is immutable, though the implied occlusion to changes to this body is overstated. The latter is the law as generated from law codes, the pronouncements of kings, and the precedent of legal judgements. Many in Asia regard the Law of Heaven as having lessened in import over recent times, and wish to return to a time in which this part of the law was more prominent.
The King’s Law ultimately draws from many legal traditions. The oldest codes cited as part of the King’s Law date to the ancient kingdom of Babiru, but it includes codes and pronouncements also from the Old Iranian Empire, the Empire of the Imerians, the Gimiri Empire, and many others besides. It also has adapted to the presence of many different religious traditions across Asia’s history. Indeed it has become a truism of Asia that each great dynasty will leave a new legacy upon the King’s Law, just as each is considered to add to its cultural richness and its military strength.
The core values of the King’s Law are as follows; the King is the ultimate jurist and interpreter of the law, but is also subject to the law and is not considered to be above it. It is this and his military leadership which underpins his authority in his kingdom. The King’s Law includes influences from the law of various cities but many within the Empire have their own city codes. Which laws can be superseded locally and which cannot has been a matter of thought and conflict throughout Asia’s history. It is now established that the King’s Law cannot be abrogated on matters of deadly offences against human life, treason against the Empire, or prevent the presence of the King or his recognised agents as vital to the operation of the legal process in that particular city.
The King’s Law allows any human being within the Empire to be entitled to a trial when accused of a crime, even if they are of unfree status. They may hire or acquire a speaker on their behalf for the process of a trial, but forfeit this right should they attempt to flee from an approaching trial, or if they assault any representative of the law that apprehends them with a manner of arrest. They may appeal a court or judge’s decision with someone of sufficient royally appointed authority, including the king himself, but the likelihood that the king himself will evaluate a petition such as this directly has varied greatly between dynasties and even particular kings. Those ancient kings with reputations for judicial discrimination and insight are highly praised and regarded among Asians, but it is also understood that the king has many responsibilities and that direct involvement in judicial proceedings may not always prove possible.
The King’s Law is widely respected within Asia, even among those who have opposed the continuation of rule by the monarchy. This has not always been so- the revolt of the Skuthiya movement, for example, perceived the core of the King’s Law to be the monarch, which in their eyes corrupted any of the legal processes and codes within it by its valuation of a despotic monarchy, and likewise the ancient Irrenes perceived the King and his law as despotic and sacrilegious to the power of the Gods. Indeed, as much as the authority of the king is bound up within the King’s Law, it is also considered one of the defining characteristics of the Asian nation.
The actual content of the King’s Law is hard to define compared to some other legal systems; there is no one central document but a series of documents which together form the King’s Law. Nonetheless, it is considered as defined and obvious as the sun and moon, and none seem to be able to imagine life without it. Indeed, perhaps it is not the King or the Asian nation who principally define themselves by the King’s law, but the very fabric of Asian society itself.
This is a solid start on the path of historical scholarship. Among other things you have demonstrated a willingness to use materials that are not created by the Zanga and combine these disparate sources together, along with a willingness to accept the views of a historical subject alongside your own more critical ones. There is still much to be done to improve your methodology, however, which I will explain.
Whilst much of your discussion is rooted in the present, nonetheless there is little temporality to your discussion. One does not get a sense of development or change over time except in rare snippets, whereas in a historical examination this is one of the most important things to consider. Likewise, despite your clear use of different Asian source materials you only briefly touched on the differences regarding the King’s Law among Asians. This is a method that canals history, but it is far better to build a mighty river. Your prose must be allowed to meander, and curve, and attain an inexorable flow.
You also do not always qualify your statements. When you state that a thing is believed by many Asians, it implies number but does not actually supply any such information. If your source uses such wide language then it is good to say so, and if this is your own conclusion then you must supply the meaning of ‘many’. Likewise when you speak of the ancient Irrenes opposing the King’s Law, do you mean those that fought against King Zayarsa, those that rebelled against the Iranians in their period of conquest, or do you mean to imply that all Irrenes in those times had such objections? Not qualifying such things can lead to your argument adopting a certainty it has not successfully demonstrated.
When you touch upon this topic again, I would recommend including more detail. There are certain key details that have been forgotten or passed over in haste; the key involvement of the Old Iranian dynasty in the first creation of the King’s Law, the other political schools besides the Skuthiya who have objected to the King’s Law throughout the Empire’s history, the interactions of Asia’s many schools with the King’s Law. If you are concerned at writing about such a familiar topic as the interaction between Asian law and the laws of Asian Vihi that is fine; there are plenty of other schools that interact with the King’s Law; the Babira and their storm-worship, the Yahuda and their lord of covenant, the Mazi and their dead, and many others besides.
Nonetheless, this is an excellent early effort, and you should not be discouraged by the improvements that could yet be made, we are not born mastering complex topics and methodologies. The way of the Buddha is very complicated and hard to understand, and so it is with the discipline of history.
It came to pass that, in the city of Babilakalda, the city of heavenly temples, newly captured from the Kambojas and now capital of Agnimitra’s unending kingdom, the king Agnimitra was approached by Mahinda of Malawa, who he had charged to act as treasurer over the king’s vast new domains due to his honesty, attention to detail, and skill with mathematics. He bowed before his king, and spoke thus.
“O king, I have been carrying out your wishes; I have been accounting for the manner in which Darya carried out his taxation, I have been surveying his lands, I have become wise with how his chancellery was organised. But there has been a problem which has interfered with my attempts to do these things to the fullest degree which is necessary and has worried my intelligence. It seems that Darya ordered his lands so that each continued to be governed by their own laws. This was only abrogated when he wished to command them to do something directly, or had need of armed force at a time of war with a particular foreign enemy. Accordingly, each of his districts and provinces had particular arrangements and expectations for taxation to the royal treasury, not a fixed payment, nor variable payments based on a relationship with their size in households, but instead based on their value and ability to pay. Now I have these governors of Karmana, Aryava, Asura, Madiya, Diranka and many other besides making all sorts of claims as to what Darya had placed as an obligation on them. How could a king so mighty exercise such little power over his lands? How could such lands be governed without a single code of law?”
Agnimitra spoke thus.
“Mahinda, trusted servant, I have experienced Darya’s law as you know from a very early age, and I have already spent years in much examination over this very subject after I returned to Avanti. The compact between Darya and his subjects was that of protection, with payment from the nations of his kingdom being responsible for maintaining their protection from harm. In turn he believed that in their myriad natures lay beauty and wisdom, rather than seeking to change men he sought instead to grant them an environment in which they could change themselves. I am not myself minded to do otherwise, even withstanding his mismanagement and nefarious deeds the system that he had created was a just one for ruling over such lands as these now under my royal command. Now, as for those who now pretend that they once paid a given amount, or had a particular arrangement with the King Darya whose responsibilities I am now inhabiting, we have access to the records of those who have come before you. It will be easy to discover, truthfully, what these districts and provinces were paying and providing beforehand, down to the last measure given the precision of the bureaucrats of Darya. If they wish to receive new arrangements, different from what which was arranged with King Darya, then they must honestly state that this is their desire to you. If they will not be honest, but instead falsely give account of that which they owe, then you must bring the governors and rajanah of these districts to my attention, so that I might replace them with men who will honestly make requests of me, not attempt to mislead me. Such dishonesty is not becoming of one righteously intended by the Gods to rule over nations and people. It is quite another to openly desire and request something, even if it is egregious or beyond the other person’s power to grant, it is another thing entirely to conceal that you desire something and instead seek to achieve that desire by waiting for others to make a mistake. When I wished to take possession of the kingdom of Darya, and thought that he was unworthy to rule it any longer, I told him so.”
Μηδίζω! THE WORLD OF ACHAEMENID HELLAS
CHAPTER 6: NOMOS or DATA
CHAPTER 6: NOMOS or DATA
SEAS UNDER SKY BY SUPHUNIBAL (389 BCE)
THE PERSIAN KING
THE PERSIAN KING
All nations have their particular take on negotiating. The Hellenes will feign stinginess, and will later on introduce luxuries to surprise you. The Celts will look at you as a foe on the battlefield, then embrace you as a comrade once business is completed. The Egyptians will disdain everything in your possession, especially that which they desire the most. The Sards hate to haggle, the Corsicans won’t be seen to beg, the Romans love to treat you like the dirt on their shoe. But there is only one King of the Persians. Normal kings, and petty kings especially, love to show their wealth, to advertise their taste, power, and command over riches. The King of Persia does not show his wealth, though his wealth moves mountains, he does not brandish his power, though his power destroys nations overnight. Everything that this king is, everything that he commands, will bombard you from the moment you approach his capital. His roads which stretch from Sardis to Samarqand, his monuments which transform cliff into artifice, his armies which shudder the earth at their approach. His meeting house is greater in span than entire cities, its roof taller than any temple and held by great pillars that threaten the very heavens themselves. His servants hither and thither across this space as though it were as ordinary as their own homes. It is that realisation, that to this man the extraordinary is not a luxury but a choice, that even his servants are inured to power, that really shrinks a man, a small child in front of a giant and his house. Hearing these words, you will believe that as a child of Qarthadast you will be immune to such things, for how could any city in the world compare to its majesty and scale, even for one so powerful as the King of Persia? But trust me, nothing will prepare you for the court at Parsa.
Neither is this the only test you will find from the King of Persia, this is simply the test your mind endures by entering his space. For one thing, he will often test those he has never encountered before by asking their opinion on lawmaking. The King of Persia’s law is the law of his domains, and only he need be consulted to make decisions upon it. But he likes to test guests, ambassadors, and messengers to his court by asking whether they would ban a thing, or change the punishment for this crime or that crime, or whether with the following evidence such-and-such is likely to be guilty or not. The correct answer to these questions depends on the king and the person being asked, I have seen some praised for giving a well-reasoned opinion and others praised for saying that only the King of Persia need consider the matter. But be assured, the question will be coming, and the answer is expected to be forthcoming. It serves as a reminder of how absolute his command over the law of his kingdom is, and he will not suffer you to conduct your business without such a reminder. He can simply discuss matters of law as casually as if he were talking about the pleasant weather, or a piece of fine confectionary. It is also invitation for you to make a fool out of yourself. Be confident, not flippant. Be direct, not taciturn. Be ready.
You can see the mark of the King on the shophetim of the homeland. The situation there is as it was in the old days, where the shophetim rule as crowned and anointed sovereign. Yet despite this ancient grandeur they are a chastened caste, and view events with a narrow horizon, always fearing what may come over it. The shophetim of Qarthadast meanwhile, even bound by our strong constitution, are sovereign, they look around the world to understand what opportunities are present, even if they cannot always be pursued, even if we cannot yet achieve the necessary action. The presence of the King is the force that creates this state in the homeland; his fingers are all over the workings of state, and his law unquestionable. Only last year the king’s governor imposed the king’s law banning trade with the western Hellenes, the Adirim of all the homeland cities readily passing the legislation and the shophetim had no involvement in the process beyond observation and the sacred affix of signature. If the King could achieve such power over our cities in Ifriqa he would do so without a moment’s hesitation, and seeks any opportunity to gain a grip over our actions, no matter how small. For this is another reason we must always tread carefully around the King of Persia; the moment he feels that his law touches you, his claws come out and try grasp you round the throat.
THE PERSIANS BY KIMON (c.455 BCE)
ON LAW
ON LAW
Xerxes knows no law. He recognises no barriers or restrictions on his power, he is bound by no oaths or agreements. The power he possesses, gross beyond all measure, is not channeled for pious, virtuous, or harmonious works but for his own personal gain and according to his own personal whims. The only legal authority Xerxes and his Empire can be recognised as possessing is the fear of the sword magnified a hundredfold; would Aigyptos, ancient land of wisdom, ever have been made to come under his command by any other means? He is the man who would be Ouranos, carpeting the earth uniformly and inescapably, suffering no peers to exist, no equals with whom he would have to seek discourse, compromise, or legal justification for his actions. He is the ultimate criminal, his Empire the ultimate crime. But rest assured, all-knowing Zeus will ordain just vengeance, all shall be accounted for in the end.
THE LIBRARY OF JAMMARAKITA (1446 CE)
ON THE KING'S LAW OF ASIA
ON THE KING'S LAW OF ASIA
This is quite possibly the worst essay on history I ever wrote in my time of learning and study at Takshila. It is included here to humble any reputation I have acquired for my later works, to show how one might teach historical method to a novice, and to conclusively prove that those with experience must start somewhere, and that first attempt is often not particularly impressive. The comments were made by my tutor, Buddhamita, and her patience with my earliest attempts at study are to be viewed with appropriate astonishment.
There are many legal traditions with claims to antiquity. Among those perhaps the most famous is the King’s Law of Asia, which has been maintained and refined for millenia. For those who seek insight into Asia they would do well to understand this legal system that underpins this ancient and powerful nation, which is thus the subject of this examination.
The King’s Law, as understood by Asians and their bureaucracy, is more properly separated into two main components; the Law of Heaven and the Law of Life. The former is regarded as that divine law which is immutable, though the implied occlusion to changes to this body is overstated. The latter is the law as generated from law codes, the pronouncements of kings, and the precedent of legal judgements. Many in Asia regard the Law of Heaven as having lessened in import over recent times, and wish to return to a time in which this part of the law was more prominent.
The King’s Law ultimately draws from many legal traditions. The oldest codes cited as part of the King’s Law date to the ancient kingdom of Babiru, but it includes codes and pronouncements also from the Old Iranian Empire, the Empire of the Imerians, the Gimiri Empire, and many others besides. It also has adapted to the presence of many different religious traditions across Asia’s history. Indeed it has become a truism of Asia that each great dynasty will leave a new legacy upon the King’s Law, just as each is considered to add to its cultural richness and its military strength.
The core values of the King’s Law are as follows; the King is the ultimate jurist and interpreter of the law, but is also subject to the law and is not considered to be above it. It is this and his military leadership which underpins his authority in his kingdom. The King’s Law includes influences from the law of various cities but many within the Empire have their own city codes. Which laws can be superseded locally and which cannot has been a matter of thought and conflict throughout Asia’s history. It is now established that the King’s Law cannot be abrogated on matters of deadly offences against human life, treason against the Empire, or prevent the presence of the King or his recognised agents as vital to the operation of the legal process in that particular city.
The King’s Law allows any human being within the Empire to be entitled to a trial when accused of a crime, even if they are of unfree status. They may hire or acquire a speaker on their behalf for the process of a trial, but forfeit this right should they attempt to flee from an approaching trial, or if they assault any representative of the law that apprehends them with a manner of arrest. They may appeal a court or judge’s decision with someone of sufficient royally appointed authority, including the king himself, but the likelihood that the king himself will evaluate a petition such as this directly has varied greatly between dynasties and even particular kings. Those ancient kings with reputations for judicial discrimination and insight are highly praised and regarded among Asians, but it is also understood that the king has many responsibilities and that direct involvement in judicial proceedings may not always prove possible.
The King’s Law is widely respected within Asia, even among those who have opposed the continuation of rule by the monarchy. This has not always been so- the revolt of the Skuthiya movement, for example, perceived the core of the King’s Law to be the monarch, which in their eyes corrupted any of the legal processes and codes within it by its valuation of a despotic monarchy, and likewise the ancient Irrenes perceived the King and his law as despotic and sacrilegious to the power of the Gods. Indeed, as much as the authority of the king is bound up within the King’s Law, it is also considered one of the defining characteristics of the Asian nation.
The actual content of the King’s Law is hard to define compared to some other legal systems; there is no one central document but a series of documents which together form the King’s Law. Nonetheless, it is considered as defined and obvious as the sun and moon, and none seem to be able to imagine life without it. Indeed, perhaps it is not the King or the Asian nation who principally define themselves by the King’s law, but the very fabric of Asian society itself.
This is a solid start on the path of historical scholarship. Among other things you have demonstrated a willingness to use materials that are not created by the Zanga and combine these disparate sources together, along with a willingness to accept the views of a historical subject alongside your own more critical ones. There is still much to be done to improve your methodology, however, which I will explain.
Whilst much of your discussion is rooted in the present, nonetheless there is little temporality to your discussion. One does not get a sense of development or change over time except in rare snippets, whereas in a historical examination this is one of the most important things to consider. Likewise, despite your clear use of different Asian source materials you only briefly touched on the differences regarding the King’s Law among Asians. This is a method that canals history, but it is far better to build a mighty river. Your prose must be allowed to meander, and curve, and attain an inexorable flow.
You also do not always qualify your statements. When you state that a thing is believed by many Asians, it implies number but does not actually supply any such information. If your source uses such wide language then it is good to say so, and if this is your own conclusion then you must supply the meaning of ‘many’. Likewise when you speak of the ancient Irrenes opposing the King’s Law, do you mean those that fought against King Zayarsa, those that rebelled against the Iranians in their period of conquest, or do you mean to imply that all Irrenes in those times had such objections? Not qualifying such things can lead to your argument adopting a certainty it has not successfully demonstrated.
When you touch upon this topic again, I would recommend including more detail. There are certain key details that have been forgotten or passed over in haste; the key involvement of the Old Iranian dynasty in the first creation of the King’s Law, the other political schools besides the Skuthiya who have objected to the King’s Law throughout the Empire’s history, the interactions of Asia’s many schools with the King’s Law. If you are concerned at writing about such a familiar topic as the interaction between Asian law and the laws of Asian Vihi that is fine; there are plenty of other schools that interact with the King’s Law; the Babira and their storm-worship, the Yahuda and their lord of covenant, the Mazi and their dead, and many others besides.
Nonetheless, this is an excellent early effort, and you should not be discouraged by the improvements that could yet be made, we are not born mastering complex topics and methodologies. The way of the Buddha is very complicated and hard to understand, and so it is with the discipline of history.
THE TALE OF AGNIMITRA BY SUKRATU (95 CE)
THE LAW OF THE KAMBOJAS
THE LAW OF THE KAMBOJAS
It came to pass that, in the city of Babilakalda, the city of heavenly temples, newly captured from the Kambojas and now capital of Agnimitra’s unending kingdom, the king Agnimitra was approached by Mahinda of Malawa, who he had charged to act as treasurer over the king’s vast new domains due to his honesty, attention to detail, and skill with mathematics. He bowed before his king, and spoke thus.
“O king, I have been carrying out your wishes; I have been accounting for the manner in which Darya carried out his taxation, I have been surveying his lands, I have become wise with how his chancellery was organised. But there has been a problem which has interfered with my attempts to do these things to the fullest degree which is necessary and has worried my intelligence. It seems that Darya ordered his lands so that each continued to be governed by their own laws. This was only abrogated when he wished to command them to do something directly, or had need of armed force at a time of war with a particular foreign enemy. Accordingly, each of his districts and provinces had particular arrangements and expectations for taxation to the royal treasury, not a fixed payment, nor variable payments based on a relationship with their size in households, but instead based on their value and ability to pay. Now I have these governors of Karmana, Aryava, Asura, Madiya, Diranka and many other besides making all sorts of claims as to what Darya had placed as an obligation on them. How could a king so mighty exercise such little power over his lands? How could such lands be governed without a single code of law?”
Agnimitra spoke thus.
“Mahinda, trusted servant, I have experienced Darya’s law as you know from a very early age, and I have already spent years in much examination over this very subject after I returned to Avanti. The compact between Darya and his subjects was that of protection, with payment from the nations of his kingdom being responsible for maintaining their protection from harm. In turn he believed that in their myriad natures lay beauty and wisdom, rather than seeking to change men he sought instead to grant them an environment in which they could change themselves. I am not myself minded to do otherwise, even withstanding his mismanagement and nefarious deeds the system that he had created was a just one for ruling over such lands as these now under my royal command. Now, as for those who now pretend that they once paid a given amount, or had a particular arrangement with the King Darya whose responsibilities I am now inhabiting, we have access to the records of those who have come before you. It will be easy to discover, truthfully, what these districts and provinces were paying and providing beforehand, down to the last measure given the precision of the bureaucrats of Darya. If they wish to receive new arrangements, different from what which was arranged with King Darya, then they must honestly state that this is their desire to you. If they will not be honest, but instead falsely give account of that which they owe, then you must bring the governors and rajanah of these districts to my attention, so that I might replace them with men who will honestly make requests of me, not attempt to mislead me. Such dishonesty is not becoming of one righteously intended by the Gods to rule over nations and people. It is quite another to openly desire and request something, even if it is egregious or beyond the other person’s power to grant, it is another thing entirely to conceal that you desire something and instead seek to achieve that desire by waiting for others to make a mistake. When I wished to take possession of the kingdom of Darya, and thought that he was unworthy to rule it any longer, I told him so.”
- Daeres
- Word Count: 3k