Μηδίζω! The World of Achaemenid Hellas

Indicus · Mar 29, 2017

So, the Persians have discovered the Indo-European family? I've always found it odd that they weren't discovered, what with the sheer amount of interaction of the Greeks with Persians and Indians.

Daeres · Mar 30, 2017

fjihr said:
So, the Persians have discovered the Indo-European family? I've always found it odd that they weren't discovered, what with the sheer amount of interaction of the Greeks with Persians and Indians.

Artavazda did discover the Indo-European relationship, sort of, and the knowledge died with him. But there will be others.

Timaeus · Mar 30, 2017

So.

Mardonius, Pericles, Xerxes, Herodotus, and a certain Artabazus? Hm. So the next epilogue is probably another Hellene? Hm...

Daeres · Apr 1, 2017

Μηδίζω! THE WORLD OF ACHAEMENID HELLAS
CHAPTER 6: NOMOS or DATA

ATHENIAN LAW
ATHENIAN LAW UNDER THE AKHAIMENIDS

The settlement between Athens and King Xerxes that ended Athens’ part in the Persian Conquest was, in legal matters, a light touch. No measures were taken to remove or restrict demokratic governance of the city, or to reinstall some form of tyrannos over the city, and very little alterations to Athens’ laws were put in place, though alterations did occur. The main impact came from Persian oversight over the Athenian institutions of state, including its judicial matters. The Persian Arkhon was installed as the tenth member of the Athenian Arkhontes at this time, serving as the Persian King’s eyes and ears, but this was only the most visible intrusion into Athenian decision making. Over time, Persian soft influence would shape Athenian lawmaking and judicial practice into the more familiar form that would persist throughout the ancient era.

The Law of the King and the Law of Athenai

When King Xerxes accepted the surrender of Athens (480 BCE) it was in the sure knowledge that the rest of Hellas was to follow. He would have had very little interest in spending a long time formulating its governance, or on having to mind over the city afterwards. Therefore the package of laws that the King imposed on the city was relatively minimal. The state of Athens was prohibited from carrying out warfare against other Hellenes under the protection of King Xerxes, and it was required to hang over any traitors against the King within the city directly to the Persian garrison at Peiraieus, or to other sanctioned agents of the King. However, these laws were not without their difficulties for Athens. The law referring to the cessation of hostilities against other Persian-aligned Hellenes did not distinguish between the entire body of Athenian citizens and those specifically and particularly resident in Athens proper. In other words, were the Athenian citizens who had gone into exile in Italia to make war upon one of the King’s subjects Athens proper would be punished for it. The already fraught atmosphere between the ‘Exiles’ and the ‘Medizers’ became even more charged. Athens had no means to control the actions of their former citizens. When the Exiles merged with other Italiotes to form the polis of Dikaia (479 BCE), it was not clear whether those non-Athenian citizens of Dikaia would be counted as Athenians for the purposes of Xerxes’ laws, thus adding to Athens’ sense of being left at the mercy of their former comrades. Nor were the Exiles content to live a quiet life, they played an immediate and active role in affairs in Italia. Every time the Exiles declared war Athens held its breath.

Their worst fears would, in fact, come to pass with the expedition of Perikles and Herodotos to Krete against King Xerxes(450-444 BCE). The measures to isolate Athens from the expedition’s impact were swift, the moment news of the expedition reached the city vast swathes of the Exiles were declared atimia, and Athenian citizens were banned from joining the Italiote expedition under pain of atimia or worse. Whether King Xerxes considered these matters sufficient penance, whether he decided that his law did not actually apply in this situation, whether he decided mercy was the better course of action, many authors over many centuries have speculated. What can be said for sure is that Athens was not punished for the Kretan Expedition, and the city breathed a collective sigh of relief. This was taken as precedent that the King would not automatically take actions of Dikaia as implicating Athens, and thus that Athens as referred to in Xerxes’ laws solely referred to the citizens of Athens and Attika. Some of the venom between Athens and Dikaia ebbed away as a result of this legal interpretation. However, Athens experienced anxiety of a different kind when the Persian Phardates cut down two of the Athenians’ sacred olive trees (442 BCE). The lightness of Xerxes’ settlement had also left a void; it was not established whether servants of the Persian King could be subject to Athens’ laws. On many other matters it had been simple to overlook Persians breaking the law, but Phardates’ actions were impossible to ignore. The King Arkhon was bound to arrange a trial for Phardates, and at this point all eyes turned to the Persian Arkhon, at this time one Arsames. Arsames took the extraordinary step of allowing the trial to go ahead, and the Areiopagos then convicted Phardates of the crime he was obviously guilty of. This established the precedent that servants of the Persian King were, at the very least, subject to the sacred law of Athens, though this was not to be tested often.

Some kind of a legal framework had been established, then, by the time of King Kyros III(419-397 BCE). Athens had safely charted a course of safety between multiple threats, avoiding the example of Sparta or of Amphissa. Though many other worrisome incidents would occur under the Akhaimenids the legal spheres of Athens, the King, and their interaction had been successfully advanced, and perhaps more importantly was successfully maintained.

The Eyes of the King

The Persian Arkhon was perhaps, after the Persian garrison and their fortress, the most well known facet of Persian rule over Athens to outsiders. His was a most confusing role, at times; depending on the King’s level of interest in Hellas, or even the strength of the satrap in Hellas, he was either reporting primarily to the satrap or to the King personally. What was clear was his overall purpose; to monitor the arkhontes specifically and Athens generally for signs of insurrection, to act as a stabilising hand on a sometimes emotional demokratic polis, to keep an important naval asset to the King in prime condition to render that duty. For Athens the Persian Arkhon was second only to the satrap and the King in prominence but, for the Persian regime in Hellas, he was merely one of dozens of similar observers across the major poleis. There is thus a tendency for Athenian sources to vastly overstate his actual importance in the overall Persian regime. The sources only obliquely reference the fact that he rarely involved himself in matters of Athenian law. That task was primarily given over to the royal observers that monitored the Athenian lawcourts. These observers were to be found both in trials conducted by the Areiopagos and the wider Helaia.

Now, the aforementioned assent to the trial of Phardates by the Persian Arkhon Arsames was a major influence on the course of Athenian law, but despite this rare and important exception we must be clear in stating that these judicial observers were to have far more impact on Athenian legal practice than the Persian arkhon. Almost by accident they constructed a body of judicial precedent in Athenian law, which they did simply by the act of recording legal verdicts and assessing the reasons they deemed most likely for the result. The records of Mithradates in particular are a judicial resource to the present day, covering several major trials between 425-399 BCE. Indeed, Mithradates was himself to have a direct impact on Athenian justice; during the trial of one Kleon(418 BCE) the issue of slave testimony arose. Now it had been Athenian practice up to this point that slaves could only testify under torture. This repulsive practice was one that only rarely arose, but on this occasion it became apparent that this slave was indeed going to be tortured. Mithradates could not, and would not, stomach this torture actually being carried out, and took the extraordinary step of declaring himself the slave’s synegeros, daring the court to engage in his torture. This stretched Athenian legal procedure to breaking point, but it was also an intervention that at least somewhat attempted to use Athenian conceptions of justice. The trial was temporarily halted, itself extraordinary in a system where trials usually only lasted for a single day, often for only a few hours. The end result was that Mithradates, when the trial resumed the next day, was allowed to give the slave’s testimony, and of course the subject of torture was not even raised. This had the effect of destroying the credibility of the law requiring slaves to be tortured in order to give testimony, which was removed two years after the trial of Kleon.

This was only the most extraordinary incident whereby Persian judicial observers impacted on Athenian cases directly. As well as destroying the law requiring slave torture, they also resulted in the general lengthening of most trials for public crimes, encouraged a greater emphasis on evidence-based conclusions, and clamped down on the use of a trial to make claims for unrelated misdeeds and crimes. The Persians retained a reputation in Athens for honesty, but the reason that their observers made such an impact was out of the fear of what the satrap or, most particularly, the Persian king would do if they found the Athenian justice system wanting. Nonetheless, many of these changes were viewed positively, though few of them were liked by all Athenians, and exactly which of these reforms a given Athenian liked was often determined by their social status.

The Matter of Exiles

The legal issue that caused the most problems for Athens throughout the Akhaimenid period was the matter of the Exiles in Italia. We have already seen how, at first, the actions of the Exiles seemed to hold Athens hostage, and then how in dire emergency the Athenians were prepared to entirely amputate their former comrades from the citizen body. This was not the only time that the Exiles would cause the Athenians problems. Even years after the Persian War was over there was a steady drip of disaffected Athenians that would head to Dikaia for pastures new, or to make their fortune. Was the Athenian state entitled to seize the properties of the existing Exiles, or those who left to join them? The answer was, at first, inconsistent. The Athenian state did seize the property of some of the Exiles, usually those with the most wealth or who were most prominent among the Exiles’ leadership. But that of many others was left alone, perhaps in the hope that many of the Athenians would come back. Despite all the trouble that their fellow citizens were causing at this time the Athenians did want the Exiles to come home. Some of them did after only a few years. The case brought by Thersidamos, a returnee, against those who had seized his property succeeded, seemingly establishing that the Athenian seizure of Exile land would be overturned in some fashion (453 BCE). The Periklean Expedition to Krete changed that overnight, alongside the mass declarations of atimia the Athenians also seized almost all of the remaining Exile property in Attika. Communication between the two communities was non-existent in this time.

However, by the time of King Kyros III many of the original grievances between the two communities had become irrelevant, and there were reasons to approach the matter of reconciliation. Dikaia had become one of the most important poleis in the Hellenic world, but its citizens desired access to those ancient festivals and rites, and though they had become mighty indeed they still sought some kind of recognition, approval even, from the metropolis. They might have had the Dikaian Dionysia, but they wanted to regain access to the Athenian Dionysia. Athens, for its part, still mourned the loss of so many of its best to far away lands, and even as it remained a key naval asset to the Persians it still operated at reduced power compared to its prime. An amnesty was sought by the Exiles, and a return of their citizen rights, and the wounds of the past had sufficiently healed that the Athenians agreed to this in 398 BCE. The Akhaimenid monarchs of this time were relatively disinterested in the affairs of Hellenes, giving the satrap somewhat of a free hand to determine strategic matters for Hellas. The satraps of Kyros III’s time, and those that came afterwards, decided that a reconciliation between the Hellenes of West and East was desirable, and made a policy of encouraging this. This meant that there was no Persian interference with the Dikaia-Athens amnesty at all, indeed there was subtle encouragement. This was to have major repercussions in the time of Amavadatos as satrap, as he used the renewed connection between Athens and Dikaia as justification for his expedition to Italia in 350 BCE, which was the immediate precursor to his revolt against the Persian King the following year.

Athens as Judicial Capital

We have seen various objections raised and alterations made by the Persians to Athenian justice. However, by the reign of King Ariabignes(397-341 BCE) it can be said that Athenian lawcourts had a high reputation in Hellas, both with fellow Hellenes and with the Persian administration. The fact that Kleisthenes’s reforms had not been overturned, that Athens remained a demokratic polis, gave an impression that the Persians had allowed the natural development of Athens to continue, and that Athens retained genuine freedom of speech. The Areiopagos in particular had a high judicial reputation. Throughout the early Akhaimenid period the Boule and the Areiopagos had competed for control over Athenian executive powers, each quietly blaming the other for the loss of the Persian War. By the reign of King Kyros III, however, the Persian administration had come to favour the Areiopagos, and this favour only increased as the Areiopagos became more respected for its judicial insight and impartiality. This then led Satrap Amavadatos to make Athens the centre of the satrapal judiciary in 354 BCE, directly integrating Athens into the upper level of satrapal administration for the first time. The Areopagos was now able to be called upon to judge cases arising from all different parts of Hellas, particularly when the Persians wished to give an impression that a truly just verdict had been reached. This decision can clearly been seen as a precursor to Amavadatos’ declaration of independence from the Akhaimenids, and directly tied the Athenians into the Amavadatid project. We can summarise Athenian justice in the Akhaimenid period by talking of fear and caution, but the tail end of Akhaimenid rule also showed what was to come afterwards; a return to self confidence, a notion that Athens was not simply a naval base to be kept under thumb but a trusted and favoured ally of their overlord.

Daeres · Apr 1, 2017

So, Athenian law being such a technical subject even within the subject of history, I feel like some context for Athenian law and governance might be a good idea. Call it a reverse April Fool's joke.

The Areios Pagos, known usually in English as the Areopagus, was both a lawcourt in Athens and originally a prestigious organ of governance too. It was originally somewhat similar to the Roman Senate in form and function. The reforms of Kleisthenes did not do away with this, but provided the groundwork for its later humbling; within 20 years of the Persian Wars the Areopagus was massively weakened, and reduced to only a few roles; small oversight over certain legislative processes, and holding jurisdiction over sacred law and murder cases. Most of its original powers then went to the Boule, the popular assembly, and the ability to try most cases went to the Helaia. This is associated with the competition between democratic and oligarchic minded parties immediately post-Persian war. The Areopagus nonetheless fluctuated in power depending on the times; in emergencies, Athens would often still look to its more aristocratic elements for security, including the Areopagus. For most of the Classical era of Greece the body was exclusively made up of ex-Archons, and thus represented experienced Athenian statesmen. Its reputation for impartial judgements in important legal matters was quite strong within Athens.

Atimia, referred to in the text, was the loss of political citizenship rights. If you were atimia, it was not just a matter of not being able to partake in Athenian political life, you weren't even allowed within the circuit of the Agora, and if you were found within it then fellow citizens were entitled to arrest you. It was quite a severe punishment for anyone who either wanted to take part in political life or was a prominent citizen. As a specific punishment it was usually the result of certain convictions, or a temporary condition if you failed to pay a fine owed to the state. However, certain behaviours automatically resulted in atimia, including prostitution. This meant that one could retroactively be declared atimia if a court decided that you had engaged in such behaviour, which occurred infamously in the trial of Timarkhos; Aiskhines, who was himself the defendant, argued that Timarkhos (his accuser) had been a child prostitute, and thus had no legal right to bring a case against him. Aiskhines won, effectively ending Timarkhos' career permanently. This was possible because Greek courts in session were not required to only pass judgement for the original crime, they were also able to pass judgement on accusations brought up in the course of legal argumentation, even if it had no relationship to the original issue. In this way Athenians could and would bring a case only to spend most of their time arguing for a totally different misdeed committed by the person.

A synegeros, plural synegeroi, was a supporting speaker. This was used in two ways in Athenian legal terminology. It referred to the practice of allowing defendants and prosecutors to have supporting speakers, usually to talk on expert matters, but in effect allowing them to act as some kind of advocate. There was no such thing as a lawyer in Athens, defendants and prosecutors were their own representatives, but the synegeros did allow for a stronger, more convincing speaker to take the place of the plaintiff, though there was always a token requirement for the person to say *something* on their own behalf before handing off. The other meaning of synegeros was the practice of appointing a team of prosecutors in the pursuit of a public trial, representing the Athenians as a state, but most public cases we're aware of still had private individuals bringing charges rather than 'the state'. There was, after all, no equivalent to a Crown Prosecution Service or a District Attorney, with the exception of some crimes the state's only involvement was one of the archons agreeing to, and organising, a trial before a particular jury.

There was also no state organ to extract compensation that had been awarded by the courts. In the case of a public fine the person could be declared atimia, but as for private compensation, that was effectively left to the person who had been awarded it. If the compensation was not freely given, the person expecting it was, within reason, allowed to simply confiscate property, in effect acting as their own bailiff.

Athenian juries varied in size but were always an odd number, to prevent a hung court. There was no judge presiding over affairs, though theoretically one or other of the archons might be observing they didn't actually *do* anything in the court. The juries were large, usually 201 or 501, with a large jury being more like 1501 strong, with the particular jury for a particular case being randomly assigned at the start of each day, out of a yearly body of 6000 jurists or heliasts. Almost all trials began and were decided the same day, with private cases usually lasting a few hours and public cases the entire working day. At the same time that the Areopagus was weakened jury pay was introduced, to encourage Athenians to apply to be selected for jury service. You can imagine how rowdy and unguided proceedings would be in a setting like that, particularly when most cases are being prosecuted and defended on a personal basis. It's this situation that gives rise both to prominent synegeroi and to professional speechwriters. The reason we have so many Athenian legal speeches is because these professionals made sure to publish their good work, usually polished up, for everyone to see and admire, they'd even do this for a losing speech sometimes if it had been thought to be a good speech nonetheless. All jury voting was anonymous, and though past decisions would sometimes be brought up in speeches there was no notion of a body of case law guiding interpretation of particular laws.

Last but not least, Athenian law really did require that slaves be tortured in order for their testimony to be accepted. Women were almost never part of the proceedings in any fashion, in much the same way that 'polite' Athenian society always treated women. Most crimes did not have fixed punishments, so almost all trials, after the original verdict was reached, had a second round of speeches and deliberation by the jury, in this case to actually fix the punishment. Many laws did not also define the crime that was described within them, which as you can imagine is part of what allowed for such broad styles of legal argumentation.

The Athenian legal system as indicated in the update is already very different from that of OTL, as a result, not to mention the fact that the 'radical democracy' of the mid-late 5th century BCE never comes into existence.

(Woops this turned into a mini-essay)

Daeres · Apr 6, 2017

Μηδίζω! THE WORLD OF ACHAEMENID HELLAS
CHAPTER 6: NOMOS or DATA

EXTRACT FROM XENOKRITOS’ PERSIKA (448 BCE)
THE REBIRTH OF MESSENIA

Xenokles, having thus reluctantly accepted the rulership over Messenia, set about removing the most pernicious legacies of the Lakedaimonians within his lands. He re-established formations of hoplitai, the heliotes having in war only been utilised as expendable skirmishers by their hated masters, which also helped reinvigorate a sense of self-control and might among his people. He petitioned Mardonios the satrap for Messenia ownership of the sanctuary of Artemis Limnatis, which had been unjustly seized into Lakedaimonia in earlier times, and this petition was successful. He refounded and resettled the abandoned city at Ithome, where so many of the Messenians had given their lives attempting to regain independence, and also Pylos the home of Nestor, for although Xenokles was loyal to King Xerxes he hoped that in future congress between the western and eastern Hellenes might begin once again, and Pylos was ideally suited as a port for trade with the west.

However, his most momentous and famous legacy was also the most drastic; King Xenokles and the popular assembly together banned the institution of slavery throughout the lands of Messenia. They banned debt-slavery, they banned the taking of slaves in war, they freed any slaves that existed within Messenia at that time, they made a law saying that if somehow any slave should reside in Messenia that their children would be free, and they banned any trade in slaves from taking place on Messenian soil. This more than anything else set them apart from their fellow Hellenes, who petitioned Mardonios to reverse this ban, or at least to isolate Messenia from the rest of their lands. But this was also what recommended the Messenians so highly to the Persians. There can be no doubt that the Messenians are the most freedom-loving among the Hellenes, and that King Xenokles was made of the same stuff that King Xerxes was, a man born to lead and rule but who also had a love of justice.

THE PERSIANS BY ALEKTHARMA (942 CE)

XENOKLES: Here I propose my law, my countrymen, that would end the memory of that vile institution in which we were kept our entire lives by the Spartans, that would banish that injustice against dharma for all eternity from these lands, cleansing our souls and all of our sons and daughters who come after us. I proclaim, King Xenokles, that from this day forward, in all lands under my protection, in all lands that might come under my protection, that the practice of enslaving other human beings, that which casts the slaver into the very harshest parts of Hades, shall be ended in its entirety! That all slaves that find themselves within our lands be freed, and made part of the free Messenian nation! That no slave shall be permitted to enter my domains whilst they remain unfree! That this law shall never be rescinded! Messenians, do you believe this law to be just and in accordance with dharma?

MESSENIANS: We do!

XENOKLES: Then, with the help of Mardonios, we shall go further! No Hellene shall anywhere be permitted to remain a slave, and together with the Persians we will cleanse this land of its sins!

MESSENIANS: We shall!

POLEMADORAS: I must away to Athens, and warn them of this wretched do-gooder who threatens to remove our slaves forever.

THE FORTUNES OF HELLAS BY DAIPHANDIS OF SIRAKUSE (856 CE)
FREE MESSENIA (480 BCE-48 CE)

At length, Messenia was the great survivor of the Hellenic client states. Most of those poleis which had nominally retained their independence were directly incorporated into the Persian fold following the Great Revolt against Persian rule, but Messenia had remained loyal to the Persians throughout this turbulent time and they were duly rewarded by Xerxes reaffirming their self determination, despite the fact that the Messenians had in large part caused the tumult in the first place by their law banning slavery. On counterbalance, however, this so-called independence was something of a lie. There was no question that Messenia would declare war upon whomever the Persians asked them to, that Messenia was to remain aligned with the Persians. Nonetheless, Xenokles and his descendants minted only their own coinage, made their own treaties, and only rarely played host to Persian garrisons. They then survived a later round of centralisation, when Daieobazanes folded Thessalia directly into the Empire he did not do the same with Messenia. Messenia, unlike Thessalia, had been model subjects of the satrapy, and there was no need to stamp out their Persian-friendly attitudes by removing their independence.

As with most of Hellas, the Messenians slowly came to see the satrap as a more legitimate monarch than the Great King himself, Kyros III and his successors were usually unconcerned about matters involving Hellas entirely, and so the men of Messenia were willing participants in Amavadatos’ bid for independence, considering their satrap the legitimate heir to the legacy of Xerxes over his nominal king. Even under the concentrated military machine of the Amavadatids they retained their independence, and with the Amavadatid connection to Italia firmly established Messenia became more important than ever, with a new road connecting Pylos to the rest of the satrapy being completed the year of Amavadatos’ death. The Messenians were one of the most reliable subjects of the Amavadatids, and so it was a great shock to the system when the Amavadatids finally, ignominiously, collapsed.

Messenia was not entirely spared the horrors of war that followed, with Ithome besieged by the army of the self-appointed Basileus Lykaon, who established hegemony over much of Southern Hellas. However, Lykaon’s mastery over the Peloponnesos spared the Messenians much of the destruction inflicted upon Central, Eastern, and Northern Hellas. But they were never willing subjects of Lykaon and his descendants, and the moment the Imerian Empire decided to conquer Hellas the Messenians enthusiastically intervened on the side of the Kaukasians, seeing them as the nearest thing to legitimate successors of Xerxes and his dynasty. What might have been a hard fought campaign to win the Peloponnesos was instead over in a matter of weeks, and it was with some relish that the Messenians captured districts that still claimed some connection to the Spartans; their memory of bondage had not faded in the slightest. Upon the conquest’s conclusion the Messenians once more found themselves attached to a large, powerful Empire as an independent ally, rather than a direct subject.

The Imerians were quite happy to leave Messenia to its own devices, so long as it didn’t threaten their control over the Aigean Sea. Messenian adventurers plied the Great Sea with courage and optimism at this time, although they swiftly gained a reputation for moralising due to their hatred of slavery. However, at the sunset of the Imerians the Messenians were once again the great omen for the future, for it was the Tyrsenoi raid on Messenia that indicated that the Imerian aegis was weakening, and marked a turning of Hellenic attitudes. It was, ironically, the formation of the Hellenic Commonwealth, the first united, Hellenic-ruled state of all Hellas, that ended the position the Messenians had long enjoyed; Messenia was too vital a resource to be allowed independence from the other Hellenic states, and too vulnerable to the Tyrsenoi to argue against membership of the Commonwealth. The Messenians, of course, contributed Hellenarkhs to the Commonwealth’s assembly, having the ear of the Panhellen, but in this respect they were no different from any of the other provinces of the Commonwealth. The special legal status of Messenia as an ‘ally’ of whoever came to dominate Hellas, which had lasted for over 500 years, had come to an end. They were simply another link in the chain.

THE TWELVE VIRTUOUS KINGS OF YAWANA BY AGNITDATTA (459 CE)
KING KSANA KRI

King Ksana Kri was not born a king. He was born a slave under the Kingdom of Roni, the overlord of the Central Yona and conqueror of Ksana Kri’s homeland. All of Ksana Kri’s people had been enslaved to Roni, and not only was this crime against nature perpetrated but they did not prevent any among the Roni from killing slaves, both their own and those of others, at will, even having a part of their army to kill slaves in order to keep the others from insurrection. None among the other Yawana could overcome the Roni by strength of arms, though many tried in order to free their brethren. The Roni believed themselves protected by the Gods. But Ksana Kri was a man of many talents, and sent an eloquent letter to the Buddha Ksayasa of the Parasika, begging him to relieve his people and the others of Central Yawana from the bondage inflicted upon them.

Great King, thou of enlightened wisdom and mighty worldly powers, I beseech thee not on my behalf but on behalf of my people. My people suffer as none should suffer, endure pain purely of a kind to satisfy the greed of another rather than that endured from honest labour. All of them, and all of the Central Yawana, are chained and yoked to serve as slaves to another, to the Kings of Roni, already known to you as vile and wicked people deserving to be cast into Naraka for their misdeeds. This unnatural slavery is an evil that must be banished from the earth, and more unnatural still is the rendering of an entire people in such bondage. I ask thee, I beg thee, I implore thee to deliver us from these evil men, I ask that that the souls of my people be brought out from that which chains their bodies. I know that thou cannot rest whilst injustice prevails in your sight or your hearing, so here I make known to you our pain, our injustice.

Ksayasa duly came with the forces of Asia and rescued the Central Yawana from their cruel overlords, destroying the Threefold Prison Walls which the Roni had built to encircle Central Yawana, to keep their slaves contained within. The Roni were ended, remaining on the Earth as nothing more than a whisper of fear, a rumour of wickedness. The people of Ksana Kri, newly delivered from their plight, then decided to elect for themselves a king, being desirous of an overlord but wanting to decide for themselves what kind of a person would rule over them. They chose Ksana Kri, by virtue of his piety, good decision making, and eloquence, despite his lack of any noble parentage. His first act, his very first verbal command to the assembled multitudes of his people was to ban slavery from the entirety of Central Yawana, declaring that none would suffer from the vile institution so long as he lived, and so long as his people followed his laws. His people rejoiced, though others did not. The profitability of slavery, the luxury of having unfree servants with no recourse, the desire for inequality, this drove many to oppose Central Yawana and King Ksana Kri. He stood firm, and was aided once more by Ksayasa, and Central Yona was unbowed.

In the lands of Bharata much could be learned from the example of Ksana Kri. In the pursuit of enlightenment and virtue both there is no contribution that caste has to offer. This is something that the followers of the Buddha have always understood, and there are many who could stand to learn that lesson. Those who believe themselves virtuous and just who will otherwise mistreat and belittle those of lower caste than themselves are neither virtuous nor just. In addition, slavery is an evil, as all pious human beings recognise. It is not simply a facet of society, or a vice to be quietly tolerated in the face of pecuniary interests, it is a stain on the soul. It is a thing that drags a man down to Naraka as sure as the murder of another human being, you strangle the soul and claim that it is possible for another human being to lack freedom purely for your own benefit. If such a man as Ksana Kri, himself born in shackles, can understand and cleanse himself and his people of this evil, sloughing off slavery, then there is no excuse for a man of Bharata’s realm, absolutely no excuse at all.

EXTRACT FROM THE LETTERS OF PARCOL CHOLUMNA (1502 CE)
TO C. PAMEDA LIMANI (1452 CE)

It seems to me that the Restrictivists could quite easily call themselves Messenians, and the Supremacists the Persians, for both can ultimately trace their philosophical positions to those two ancient peoples. The Messenians, having endured mass-enslavement to the Spartans for centuries, wished restrictions upon royal power, and believed in co-operation between popular bodies and rulers to create a more wholesome, fairer union. The Persians, understanding how to construct grand imperial enterprises, wished the king to be the master of the state, granting him the power to solve any problem without recourse to another. But here there is one key difference between ancient antecedent and our supposedly more advanced times; the two great schools of modern Europan government believe these two positions to be irrevocably, totally opposed, but the Messenians willingly and happily submitted to the overlordship of the Persians, and the Persians not only willingly freed the Messenians from their bondage but were also happy for the Messenians to rule themselves according to their wishes. Xerxes was no more threatened by the constitutional model of Messenia than I am by my wife preferring the colour of saffron to purple.

And yet look at the present situation, in which all of Central Europa is cross-horned about such matters, with all manner of accusations of mob-rule, tyranny, collusion, corruption, anarchy, repression. The Messenians, at least, did something as radical for the time as banning slavery, and even then the Persians continued to support their subjects’ agitation for liberty. What have the modern Messenians done in the radical service of liberty? And what great monumental state have the modern Persians graced us with? Instead they threaten to set upon each other, within and without, considering and agitating for wars that would leave Europa charred in their wake. The Messenians successfully lived side by side with the Persians and their successors for 500 years, and the Persians founded Asia, strong and eternal. We can be better than this. Europa can stand alongside Asia and Africa as a pillar of the worldly order, but it will never do so by forcing harmony amongst ourselves at sword-point. Sometimes I would that you and I were kings ourselves, standing firm in the cause of common sense and true piety. For all Europa’s professed love for the wisdom of the ancients they seem to learn nothing from it whatsoever.

Indicus · Apr 6, 2017

That's a very progressive attitude by Agnitdatta and Kshana Kri. I presume that there are many exceptions to the ban on slavery in Kshana Kri's kingdom?

Daeres · Apr 6, 2017

Well Kshana Kri/Xenokles is more of a legendary/exotic figure to Agnidatta here, allowing him to be used as a moralising figure in his rants, it's the same for all of the titular Yawana kings the rest of his work goes on to talk about. Greeks, after all, are not really involved with India ITTL, but stories from Greece that make it out eastwards have that exotic tinge to them, particularly because they have something of a noble-savage type reputation for quite some time after the Persian Conquest. Greeks are to Agnidatta's audience what Native Americans were to 17th century philosophers of Europe, or what many barbarian peoples were to Greek and Roman authors.

Agnidatta himself is a Buddhist and of an explicitly anti-slavery bent. Buddhism both ITTL and OTL has never ever condoned slavery, but hasn't always actively opposed it either. Agnidatta, however, considers the institution of slavery as bad as the caste system, and oh boy does he have a list of things about 5th century CE India he doesn't like.

Workable Goblin · Apr 6, 2017

Daeres said:
Well Kshana Kri/Xenokles is more of a legendary/exotic figure to Agnidatta here, allowing him to be used as a moralising figure in his rants, it's the same for all of the titular Yawana kings the rest of his work goes on to talk about. Greeks, after all, are not really involved with India ITTL, but stories from Greece that make it out eastwards have that exotic tinge to them, particularly because they have something of a noble-savage type reputation for quite some time after the Persian Conquest. Greeks are to Agnidatta's audience what Native Americans were to 17th century philosophers of Europe, or what many barbarian peoples were to Greek and Roman authors.

That was one of my favorite parts of the update, the obviously anachronistic attitudes being assigned to Xenokles by later writers in pursuit of their own goals.

Daeres said:
Agnidatta himself is a Buddhist and of an explicitly anti-slavery bent. Buddhism both ITTL and OTL has never ever condoned slavery, but hasn't always actively opposed it either. Agnidatta, however, considers the institution of slavery as bad as the caste system, and oh boy does he have a list of things about 5th century CE India he doesn't like.

Sounds like a fun guy

souvikkundu25140017 · Apr 7, 2017

what was the extent of Agnidatta's kingdom?

Daeres · Apr 7, 2017

Agnidatta himself is scholar rather than ruler, I imagined him as attached to a kingdom either in Panchala or Kosala? This is in no way an admission that I am still figuring out the post-Agnimitrid history of India for this timeline, absolutely not >.>

Practical Lobster · Apr 7, 2017

This is a prime example of the best sort of posts in this timeline - showing an event from numerous perspectives, all of whom are overwhelmed by their own biases.

Daeres · Apr 10, 2017

Μηδίζω! THE WORLD OF ACHAEMENID HELLAS
CHAPTER 6: NOMOS or DATA

THE LAWS OF NATIONS C. BRANON mp SAIMTA (1545 CE)
THE CAULDRON OF HESPERIA

The three Italiote Leagues each left an indelible mark upon Hesperia, and none more so than in the matter of laws between poleis and between nations. It had not been standard practice among the Hellenes to consider such matters particularly important, with the general attitude being that every state was in an undeclared war with all others at all times. But the realities of life in Italia meant that this viewpoint was not sustainable, and with the foundation of the First Italiote League such things became a pressing issue. After the signing of the Peace of Aiskhylos with Qarthadast the League’s signatories decided the time had come to regulate affairs between poleis, so that the newly won peace would not be harmed by the proven tendency of Hellenes to squabble. They established the sacrosanct nature of ambassadors, learning well from the example of Sparta what happened to transgressors in that regard, they established that one poleis would not demolish or depopulate another as in the manner that Sybaris once had been, they established that matters of war would be subject to arbitration by a neutral member of the Italiote League.

Now it was not too long until Syrakousai withdrew from the First Italiote League, upon the installation of the new Pantarestid dynasty in that kingdom, but it nonetheless continued to respect these newly established laws, at least while the League continued to exist, and indeed avoided warfare of all kinds with fellow Hellenes through this period. Issues arose, however, after the breakup of the League, whereby the Italiotes were divided between Syrakousai, Kapue, and the Amavadatidai. Syrakousai no longer respected these established rules of the Italiote constitution, demonstrating a willingness to depopulate those cities it had gained hegemony over and to treat the Hellenes under the command of the Amavadatidai as though they were barbarians in the Italian Wars between the two powers. This is part of what ensured the collapse of Syrakousai’s control over Italia, and the creation of the Second Italiote League, for resentment grew so great that no armed force could hold the Italiote cities successfully, and once Megathenai was liberated the League immediately reformed itself.

The reinvigorated League resettled those poleis that Syrakousai had disturbed or depopulated as much as it proved possible, and for the first time guaranteed the integrity and territory of the League’s member states, effectively formalising their locations and borders permanently. The Second League, upon completing its refoundation, found that Hesperia was much changed from the time of the First League. Rather than a bewildering collection of kingdoms, poleis, tribes, and petty fiefdoms, Hesperia was now dominated by two large Leagues; the Tinian League of the Tyrsenoi and the Italiote League itself. It was clear that regulating affairs between the Tyrsenoi and the Hellenes was now as much a matter of diplomacy as warfare, with the First Zephyrian War resulting in a bloody stalemate. The Epizephyrian Treaty extended formal diplomatic and legal rights between the two powers of Hesperia, establishing the same inviolacy of ambassadors as between the Hellenic poleis, establishing the recognition of each League and its sovereignty, and creating a basic framework for the protection of prisoners, along with methods for their ransom or release.

This did not prevent further warfare between the Hellenes and Tyrsenoi, that was left to the Generation’s Peace signed at the end of the Second Zephyrian War. This established a total peace between the two Leagues, and a formal process for preventing further outbreaks of hostilities. The peace, it must be said, was better respected by the Tyrsenoi than the Italiotes; the Italiotes were able to conduct their conquest of Sikelia without any interference from the Tyrsenoi, whereas the collapse of the First Golden Generation’s rule in the Tinian League immediately resulted in the Kapuan War, a full invasion of Kampania by the Italiotes and their battalions. The Second Golden Generation, after repelling this invasion, did not conduct a reciprocal march on Italia. Instead, using merely the threat of their military response, they argued that the Italiotes had violated a sacred treaty, and demanded that there be compensation for these misdeeds. Not only did the Hellenes withdraw from all territories they had captured, Neapolis was awarded to the control of Kapue, without fighting additional battles or besieging the city at all. The Tyrsenoi, far from weakened, now seemed stronger than ever. This, and the desire for peace, prevailed upon the Italiotes to leave their northern neighbours undisturbed, whilst the Tyrsenoi themselves now considered the depredations of Keltoi on their northern frontier far more threatening than any threat the Hellenes might pose.

This led to the Golden Age of Hesperia, a peace lasting unbroken from the Ceding of Kapue to the rise of the Third Golden Generation’s control over the Tinians. Disputes continued to arise between the Tyrsenoi and the Italiotes, as they are wont to do between neighbours with great strength and plentiful interests, but these disputes were handled by negotiation alone. Thus these two powers both together advanced the Hellenic legacy of civilization, creating between them an international order of reason and rationality. This came to a shattering end when the throne of Tyrsena was captured by the Third Golden Generation, who sensed that the end was near for the Tinian League and the Empire of the Tyrsenoi. They believed that the only way to prevent this was to expand their control over Hesperia (and further afield) as much as possible, amassing men, horses, gold, land without end. So it was that Ati clan Rasna led his infamous campaign against Italia, breaking the joint peace, and committing many atrocities against the Hellenes in an attempt to break their will. So it was that the monstrosity of these deeds caused the Gods to send Leukerix against the Tinians. Such is the divine law that ultimately underpins the laws of nations. The Third Italiote League, reconstituting itself, no longer had a need for discourse with the north, as the Aouerni and Sekani were too barbaric and disorganised to engage in anything resembling regulated diplomacy. Instead they cultivated foreign allies and held the line against the Keltoi. But this network of friendship that they created, at first with Kapue, then with Utika, then with Korse and Sardinia, that is where the thread of civilized behaviour between different peoples was preserved, and where our laws of nations still in use today descend from, backed not by the threat of arms but by the law of the Gods.

A RESPONSE TO THE ANCIENT ASSERTIONS OF C.BRANON mp SAIMTA BY BRIGYA mp TOLOMBA (1551 CE)

It is one thing to wish to seem cultivated in matters of arkhaioteria. By all means, refer to Varvarines as Keltoi, Kaba as Kapue, or Aohni as Aouerni. There is a certain patter in scholarly matters that one finds hard to resist, and there is every reason to wish to blend in our refined society, to have people pay attention to your thoughts and not your dialect. All to the good. It is entirely another to put down the achievement of your own ancestors so as to be judged a good, civilized Varvari, praising instead (and exclusively) the lofty deeds of the Illenes, who of course have never wanted for praise or sympathy in the writings of humankind. When good printing material is spent on the subject of the culmination of international affairs in Hasbairdha is it so much to ask that the author commits himself to being more than an Illenophile with more enthusiasm than sense? Apparently this is too much for C. Branon, and in case any have had the misfortune of taking his volume for instruction it is time to demonstrate the fundamental cracks in his artifice.

Let us consider the author’s total silence on the matter of the Perseid state. Though not greatly long-lived the kingdom of Perseus had an immense impact on northern Hasbairdha’s matters of international law. The Kingdom itself was formed by a formal, signed, treaty of alliance between its constituent members and the person of Perseus himself. These constituents were of many different peoples, including the elder part of the Varvari stock, who had already dwelt in northern Hasbairdha for some time. For many of these peoples it was the first time any had been tied to a formal, sovereign document, or to any kind of recognised sovereignty at all. The foresame kingdom also engaged in formal relationships with its neighbours, not only the nascent Tinian Empire but also with others called Keltoi by the Illenes. Some of these exact same treaties, establishing borders, trading rights, the penalties for breaking hospitality, were used by the Tinians as their way of gaining control over these districts when they began to expand eastwards along the Bodha river. The Tinians might have taken the land by the rule of spear but they governed them by the rule of law, laws that were already in place.

This then flows straight into the next key development the author ignores completely, which is the matter of the Maghail treaties between the Tinians and the Varvari peoples that they variously allied with, resettled, hired as warbands, and conquered. In many cases formal title was given, under the divine authority of Uni, both with regard to the existence of various peoples as distinct from others and to their entitlement to various segments of land. The relationship between Tinians and Varvari, from the Empire’s beginning to its end, was never simply that of conquered and conqueror, let alone that between even ‘barbarians’ against a cultivated power, but of particular groups in constant negotiation with the authority they saw as overlord, paymaster, guarantor, or at times holy sovereign. All of this constitutes a formal, legal process of equal development to that between the Tinians and Illenes, and of far greater complexity.

Though far be it from me to suggest rushing to the defence of the vaunted Illenes, we nonetheless find that the author does not even correctly praise those he hails to the many heavens. The Illenes, whom he credits as having no legal framework between their city-states whatsoever, were apparently themselves simply attacking whomever they liked, whenever they liked, with no repercussions, until the coming of Parcleih to Hasbairdha. A cursory, let alone critical, reading of Herodotos alone would furnish the skilled scholar with knowledge of regulated affairs; they would see, for example, the detailed description of the Delphic Alliance which protected the sacrosanct temple at Delphi from harm, and which also protected the members of the Alliance from one another, as the terms of the treaty specified that members could not destroy or depopulate one another’s cities, or cut those cities off from water supplies even at a time of war; they would also see the institution of proxenia, whereby a formally recognised citizen of one city would represent the affairs of another, and host the formal ambassadors of that represented city. They would find the establishment of Leagues between cities, the Italiote League was far from the first Illenic pact between sister-cities that had been constructed or thrown together.

It is typical of that certain kind of arkhaiterist that Hasbairdha be made out to be some magnificent but violent wilderness, mainly filled with savage tribes and barely civilized city-folk, where the Illenes are either the only civilized people at the time of Parcleih and his successors or in becoming civilized civilize the rest of the great peninsula. This is a simple, comforting truth that blinds the author and reader both, preventing them from true understanding. But our author decided to go one step further than that, and assert that the arrival of Leukerix represented the end of diplomacy and formal treaties between the North and South of Hasbairdha. Now, it is one thing entirely for people to argue what form of harbingers the Aohni were, it is understandable that there is dispute when for many of the Tinians it represented catastrophe, and when it resulted in such a wholesale destruction of the old order. It is quite another to claim that your own people, the Varvari, were brutish savages incapable of actually understanding or engaging in the laws of nations. It’s quite incredible to assert that the Later Aohni Confederacy, the legendary head of a hundred nations, was not capable of complex political theory. Are we to believe the assembled host of Leukerix was brought together by pork, rum, and vague gesturing in the direction of the Tinian Empire?

It is true that the Aohni were, at first, not forthcoming when it came to the matter of formal diplomacy with those they failed to conquer. But in this period of initial conquest many of the levy warbands of the Aohni were practically small fiefs unto themselves, heeding almost no direction from higher forces, not once they had tasted Hasbairdhan plunder, and the organised core of the Aohni army and government were almost immediately engaged in their fierce war with the Sagani. The southern border of the newly-won Aohni kingdom was neglected, that cannot be denied. But this situation did not last; after all, was it not formal treaty that established the border of Illenic and Aohni spheres of influence as the Tebra river? The period of diplomacy between the Aohni and Illenes did not last long, because the Aohni Empire that had destroyed the Tinian was itself being consumed, there was soon no Aohni presence in Hasbairdha to be negotiating with formally. It is more than a cheat to claim that the Aohni, and by extension all Varvari in the post-Tinian interregnum, were incapable of actual diplomacy.

A kind of silt has descended upon our understanding of civilization, and who is responsible for the current order of things. Depending on who is asked any combination of the Iellenes, Tinians, Carthagines, or even Persians are ultimately responsible for anything and everything contributing to anything good, advanced, or simply tolerable. Even the Varvari are willing to stake their own claim to achievement or civilized life on the foundations of the Tinians and Illenes, and apparently this now includes treating Varvari heritage as some embarrassing barbarism that by a process of years and special potions has been lifted from our souls and bodies. Quite what being Varvari is, according to C. Branon, I couldn’t possibly determine. When did we lose the ability to defend ourselves from these accusations? When did we start to become embarrassed at ourselves? One can call pride in one’s own nation at the expense of all else a kind of delusion, this is certainly true, but ignoring relevant facts underpinning our lives because of what other people have told you matters about the past is no less a delusion. I will tolerate it no longer, and neither should anyone else claiming the name of Varvari, whether you live in the Alba mountains, or Aohnia, or Madhlain, or Breisa, or even some distant corner of Ladhio. My hope is that, understanding all of this, C. Branon’s cravenly tome will be forgotten to scholars, sooner rather than later, and more distantly of all I hope that C. Branon might one day come to some understanding of what it is to actually comprehend the human past.

Daeres · Apr 15, 2017

Μηδίζω! THE WORLD OF ACHAEMENID HELLAS
CHAPTER 6: NOMOS or DATA

MONARKHIA BY IRMEN VOE (1513 CE)
THE TINIAN EMPEROR

It has become impossible to imagine the Tinians as having any other form of government besides that of the sacral monarkh. Goodness knows the Tinians became the model of monarkhia in Europa for the next five hundred years, and continues to inspire us to this present day, we take active pride in continuing to understand the gods via the divisions of the sky, and in building our cities to their sacred principles. However, at the time of the Persian Conquest the situation among the Tinians was radically different, a situation that has traditionally been ignored by the traditional scholars of our illustrious forebears due to their own bias in favour of strong, imperial rule. At that time of tumultuous change, of the Tyrsenoi poleis only Veii maintained its king still, the others all having adopted some mode of oligarkhic constitution or another, and this was the source of quite some discord between Veii, formerly the nominal head of the Rasnatic League, and the rest, in particular Tarchuna. Veii’s reputation is so grand that many are not aware that Tarchuna was actually the more populous, richer city, both as poleis and during the height of Tinian Empire. It is no small matter that this band of collegiate poleis, most of which had removed their kings, became a unitary state ruled by a single monarkh. Indeed, that monarkh originally ruled just one among many poleis, not even being the ruler of the grandest among them. What allowed the king of Veii to undertake such a mission, let alone succeed?

The answer of a hundred generations would be to point to the most famous event in Europan history, the so-called Battle of Destiny of 409 BCE. It is certainly relevant. The will of the Gods made manifest in a lightning bolt, all at once saving the North-Eastern districts of the Tyrsenoi and elevating the King of Veii to a man marked by the Gods. It is truly the stuff that shakes the foundation of the world. But this is only part of the story. For one, Larth Tulumnes’s metamorphosis into Larth Unalisa did not alter his legal status as ‘merely’ the King of Veii, at the time of his death he was still only the temporary head of the Rasnatic League. As the initial threat from the Keltoi ebbed, this emergency requirement for leadership ebbed also, and the leadership of all Tyrsenoi by the King of Veii was by no means ordained as permanent. In fact, this position may well have lapsed by the time of Amavadatos, for we find that the Tyrsenoi Lays refer to Arnth Unalisa as being appointed the leader of the League’s forces when the fleet of Perseus landed in Umbria in 380 BCE, and note the implication that he did not previously hold this position of command. The horde of Perseus was driven out of Lation by Amavadatos and his assembled confederates the next year, but we find that there was still enough of an intact army to give battle with Arnth Unalisa and the Tyrsenoi.

It is in this victory, not far from Veii itself, and the division of Italia by Amavadatos, that we should see the concrete and legal existence of the Tinian Empire begin to form. The threat of large Keltoi armies was now clearly one that was not simply going to go away, but likewise the Tyrsenoi were now dealing with a full Persian-style monarkh in the fullness of its military power, and one that had with the stroke of a pen rewritten the entire map of Italia. Capua, and by extension the Tyrsenoi, benefited from the Peace of Amavadatos, with the Hellenic colonies of Campania being assigned to Capua’s dominion, along with the western Safini lands. But this was small comfort to the Tyrsenoi, for they were now introduced to a far mightier and bolder force than the Hellenes, and additionally now much of Calabria had been given over to the renewed ambitions of Syrakousai. The time had come to take measures to prevent the Tyrsenoi being overrun, particularly as the major poleis of Rome had also been elevated to the status of Amavadatid client state, and awarded much territory, including that of Faleri, considered by the Tyrsenoi to be a close ally. It is with the Faliscan War, fought against Rome, that we can finally point to a concrete Tinian Empire, with the King of Veii as arbiter of an emerging single state, for upon the conclusion of the war the Faliscan territory, all of its borders and boundaries, are explicitly brought into the power of the King of Veii, not the poleis of Veii but under the protection of the King of Veii specifically. It is at this time that the title of Zilath Rasnal Tinial, king of Tinia's People is first found in documentation from Veii, Tarchuna, and other cities of the Tyrsenoi heartland. The People of Tinia had been born.

The Tinians were a nation of strict boundaries and division, just as in their period of being the Tyrsenoi, and as we have just seen the monarkhs of Veii tailored their rise to power in some accordance with these principles, even as their unprecedented control over the Tyrsenoi peoples shattered every practical notion of fixed boundary between their poleis. The precedent of Lars Porsenna was widely utilised as a precedent for the actions of Arnth Unalisa, but all early references to Lars Porsenna portray him more as the leader of a temporary coalition of the Tyrsenoi poleis (just as Larth Unalisa had been), with the exception of Eastern Hellenic sources which refer to him as the King of the Tyrsenoi. It seems that the fiction of the poleis having separate, sovereign borders remained vital to internal cohesion well into the Empire’s history, given the discovery of tular border stones dedicated well into the time of the Second Golden Generation. The Tinian monarkh was seen, and wished to be seen, as preserving the traditional and sacred divisions of the Tyrsenoi despite his violation of all prior precedent. He did so by forming a rule above their traditional society, rather than being the monarkh of Veii he was the monarch of all Tyrsenoi. The poleis of the Empire were not obliterated under the rule of one among them, but instead brought into the protection of the Emperor.

This was also to the Emperor’s advantage because now he was only subject to sacred law, not to constitutional law, being above the powers of the traditional Tyrsenoi zilath. He was the intermediary of all Tyrsenoi with Tinia and Uni, and therefore subject to them in the judgement of his deeds. This was not as stabile a solution to maintaining power as they would have liked, however, for this inevitably led to the notion that a successful overthrow of any particular Tinian Emperor was divinely ordained. This added the spice of chaos to the ordered table which the monarkhs of Veii had carefully laid out after the reign of Arnth Unalisa. Nonetheless, it was not until the Third Golden Generation, over three centuries after the establishment of the Empire, that fatal and complex division arose between the constituents of the Tinians. Notably, the Third Golden Generation abolished the divisions between the poleis, according to their forebears an immense crime against the Gods and their divinely ordained division of the world. The invasion of Leukerix was divine retribution. The Tyrsenoi certainly believed this to be the case, and I see no reason to doubt that this specific action, the removal of sacred boundaries, was a leading cause and not, as many have asserted, the conquest of Italia. So sacred law created the Tinian Empire, so sacred law pulled them down.

DIGEST OF THE LAW OF TINIA AND UNI BY AULE CURUNAS (213 CE)
THE CASE OF RAMTHA ALFIAL (204 BCE)

To the Sacred Warrior, the Guardian of all the Rasna, the Master of the Four Directions, the Zilath of Zilaths, may the Gods forever have fated lightning to strike down your enemies, may your body be golden, may your generation last a thousand years.

I beseech you, oh great lord, to hear my dilemma, to listen to my argumentation, and to intervene to aid me, though I be not worthy of arguing that our destinies ever entwine.

I am Ramtha Alfial, daughter of Marce Alfial, citizen of the shpura of Clevsin. I am mistress of a household, both that left to me by my father and that which I have acquired through my own means. My homestead came to me from my father, along with many possessions which I will not bore you with listing exhaustively. I am married to a lauthi, a freedman who is Larth Temukle, and together we have a son and a daughter. This marriage is in accordance with the law of Clevsin, which permits the marriage of citizens with freedpersons, and was conducted with all rites and rituals as would be correct for such a sacred deed. Likewise, in accordance with the law, my son and my daughter cross the boundary from their father’s status as freedman to the arena of citizenship. But my cousin, Vel Alfial, who dwells in in Felsina, he has made claim of violation of sacred law against my marriage and against my children, and has attempted not only to claim that my children may not inherit my property but also to seize my property; in addition to my homestead in Clevsin I also possess, from my own money and in my own name, a house in the boundaries of Capeva, and this he attempted to have men of his household seize, and when they could not do so he filed a claim with the maru of Capeva, who has sealed the property up.

I beg that, with the full force of sacred law, you remind Vel Alfial, the people of Clevsin, and the people of Capeva, of the legitimacy the marriage I have undergone, and the sacred law that underpins both that and the status of my children by this man Larth Temukle. The truth of the situation is manifest yet Vel Alfial, my own blood, confuses matters for the civil authorities so much with his lies and constant demands, along with the reputation he has earned for his military service on the frontier, that the situation has reached impasse, and a fear seizes my household of what profane deeds may occur prior to the truth being correctly perceived. I beg that you cut through the flimsy shields he has erected and hold him from continuing to flout sacred and civil law. I pray that his fate is to be punished for his misdeeds, still further that the Sacred Warrior tears down his false claims of piety, proper observance of laws, and ownership over the property of myself and that which my children will inherit.

In this case, the Emperor of the time, Larth Tinial clan Unalisa II, intervened on behalf of Ramtha Alfial. This establishes that under the law of Tinia and Uni marriage and inheritance rights allowed by a constitution in a particular region is protected by the full force of sacred law. This establishes that it is permitted to allow the marriage of freedmen and women with citizenship. This establishes that it is permitted for children of a marriage of freedman and citizen to inherit the citizenship status. This establishes that under the law of Tinia women may own and inherit property, and that this does not automatically pass on to the husband upon marriage. This establishes that the enforcer of the law of Tinia and Uni may intervene in civil courts where this law is found to be broken. This establishes that a woman may directly petition the jurist or enforcer of the law of Tinia and Uni. This is a key text in illustrating Tinian law regarding marriage. This is a key text illustrating the proper interaction between enforcer and civil authorities.

ISONOMIK OF THE TINIAN ERA (1695 CE)
THE 12 PEOPLES

Before the Tinian Emperor was established, and the Twelve Rasna unified under their rule, the main unit of each Rasna was the city-state, known in Classical Rasnatic as the spura. The boundaries of these spura were marked by tular stones, the responsibility for maintaining and replacing these falling on the the maru, the magistrate responsible for maintaining public buildings and infrastructure. The Twelve Rasna each had their own spura, though the exact boundaries of these territories would change (in much the same way that Hellenic poleis behaved at this time), and some spura contained more than one city. Thus, within the boundaries of the spura, the traditional boundaries of the Rasna of that spura were also marked with tular stones, along with the actual boundaries of the city itself. Even before the Empire’s rise, the Twelve Rasna had a respect for, and focus upon, sacred boundaries.

Originally, each of the Twelve Rasna had a king, and this is what the title of zilath originally referred to in all circumstances, generally translated as equivalent to the Hellenic basileus. However, by the time of the Hellenic exiles’ arrival in Italia this had begun to change. As constitutional revolutions in Hellas had caused the collapse of tyrannies and their replacement by oligarkhic or demokratic constitutions, so the kings of the Twelve Rasna were done away with (with the key exception of Veii), with committees of zilaths functioning as the chief magistrates, analogies having been drawn with the board of arkhontes that ruled over Athenai. Zilaths also ruled over the smaller cities and towns of each spura, functioning as the highest level of urban magistrate.

The Twelve Rasna were not the only Rasna of that time either. Centuries before colonists had been sent out to the North-East and to the South, establishing the regions of Padani and Kampania, with multiple cities being set out at each location. It was written in the Tinian histories that each of these regions possessed their own Twelve Rasna, or at the very least twelve cities, but we struggle to find evidence for cities in this number until the late 4th century BCE. We can certainly point to Capeva, and a number of ancillary towns, in Kampania, but little else, and likewise only a few cities are known from Padani at this time, including Felsina. Almost all Tinian cities had ancient foundations, and it is possible that the latter cities of these two regions had simply begun as towns and villages too small to be recorded until the 4th century BCE.

At some point it is believed that the district known as Lation to the Hellenes, the dwelling grounds of the Latini peoples, was attached either to the Twelve Rasna or constituted a fourth League of Rasna. The early history of this region is greatly obscured by the many upheavals of the 4th and 3rd centuries BCE, but it is known that the royal dynasty of Roma, the chief city of the region, was considered to be descended from that of Veii, and also that the Falisci continued to send delegates to the annual festival of Veltha (see below) even before they were conquered in the early days of the Tinian Empire. What precisely the early connection was between the Twelve Rasna and Lation is hard to read, as the Latini spoke very different languages to the Rasnatic tongue, yet the two regions were deeply connected by blood and culture. What few tales were preserved in Roma were written many centuries later, and are distorted first by their integration into the Tinian Empire, and then by their Hellenisation in the late Arkait era. It is hard to know if the Romana had always asserted their dynasty of kings to be from Veii, or whether this was adopted as a way of aligning themselves with their new masters.

Each recognised spura would send yearly representation to the great festival of Veltha, which had both divine and secular functions; this was where the Rasnatic League’s member spura would discuss matters of importance, but also where games, festivals, and contests would be held, and also the site of a great market whenever the festival was held. This is the origin of the Tinian Empire’s assembly, and the source of Velsuna’s great market district.

The Hellenes made great comment out of the treatment of women in the Twelve Rasna, often scandalised as a matter of fact. Though it was not unusual for the peoples of Hesperia to treat women as legal persons, and social equals to their husbands and male relatives, this was anathema to Hellenic culture of the time. This was not, as some historians once claimed, due to the actions of the Tinian Emperors, or the Empresses that twice ruled over the Tinians during the Second Golden Generation, this was already an established facet of the culture of the Twelve Rasna.

Until the coming of the Hellenic exiles there had, traditionally, been a deep and abiding alliance between the Twelve Rasna and the Foinikes, which translated also into an alliance with the city of Qartadast. This went so far as to permit the establishment of Foiniki temples in the ports and cities of the individual spura. The alliance, in this period, collapsed due to the Hellenic conquest of Sikelia, and after the successful repulse of the Twelve Rasna’s expedition against the Italiotes. Trade continued to flourish between the two peoples, but there was never again a military alliance between them, for the interests of the Foiniki pivoted westward, and for their part the Twelve Rasna no longer considered the Foiniki valuable allies against foes in Hesperia, or no longer effective ones at any rate. This fostered a sense of self-reliance among the Twelve Rasna that would become key.

All in all, the period of the Twelve Rasna is eminently comparable to the Hellenes; they were predominantly governed in city-states that would, when necessary, meet against a common threat, but would otherwise war upon one another. They colonised advantageous lands around them, and through these colonies interacted with many other cultures, both by general congress and specific trade. But the Twelve Rasna come across as a vulnerable island in increasingly treacherous seas, and their potential demise was highlighted with the invasion of Keltoi in 409 BCE, when it was only divine intervention that prevented the loss of Felsina and the entire district of Padani to the Keltoi. To the north the Keltoi, to the south the Latini and the Hellenes, from the mountains Ombri and Safini and Sabini, to the east the Perseids. Little would they have known that they would eventually come to surpass them all.

(1790 CE)

To La,
I hope I find you well.
On the estate today I stumbled across this remarkable piece of history; a weight measure from the Tinian age! What a find! From the inscription on the bronze it seems to be an official measure of Larth Veltina, which I’m sure you’ll confirm with your expert eyes. I know how much you love your arkaiotery so, without further delay, I had it sent with this letter. It’s in prime condition, and what dirt there was I removed extremely carefully. I don’t quite know what you’ll do with it, but I’m sure you’ll find a use for it.
With love,
Ramsa

To Ra,
Hope you’re doing well and not too bored without me.
What a find indeed! It is indeed a measure of Larth Veltina, you do underestimate your Classical Rasnatic so my sister. Indeed it’s more than a weight, for the Tinians this is also a lode point for the sacred divisions of weight. The difference between a drachma and a stater was not just a matter of law and trade, but also a holy division. I shall treat the measure with due respect and care. If you’re needing a project to keep you occupied, maybe you could do some digging on this Larth Veltina, who was likely a magu at the very least. Maybe there’s an old Tinian shrine in the fields somewhere, that’ll keep the priests happy!
With love,
Lar

Practical Lobster · Apr 22, 2017

Just caught back up, great as ever.

If it's not too much of a spoiler, how did the term for the Rasna monarch change in the text from King to Emperor? The last title you give is Zilath Rasnal Tinial - but that definitionally isn't a higher rank than King (although it is higher than the King of a single city). I would assume that Emperor in this setting would be a translation of "King of Kings" which I imagine in this world where Rome is absent would be the highest conceivable title in both India and Iran, and thus ultimately most of the western world as well. Did the Rasna develop a new title that ranked above a mere King, or is the use of Emperor merely to convey the scope of the Rasna Empire?

Daeres · Apr 22, 2017

Little of both- it's used to convey the relative scope and centralised power of the Empire's monarchy, and it's also because they borrow the title King of Kings from the Second Golden Generation onwards as one of the collection of titles the 'King of Veii' has since acquired. The First Golden Generation improvised becoming permanent head of the Etruscan League, then head of all the Etruscan cities, then the conqueror of non-Etruscan lands. The Second Golden Generation, as a dynasty, is the creator of the formal vision of Rasna Empire and Emperorship that Europe then carries throughout its subsequent history, as seen in an earlier updates with their formal diplomatic relationship with the Italiote League.

B_Munro · May 14, 2017

Now I'm getting this confused with Lobster's alternate Ocumene - I was puzzled by the fact that the northern Italians hadn't been overrun by the Celts!

Too many interesting pre-BC TLs to keep up with.

So, an Etruscan Empire in the works. In post #246, where the author compared Europe to Africa and Asia, I assume that he refers to smaller areas than "Africa" and "Asia" in our world?

Daeres · Aug 21, 2017

B_Munro said:
Now I'm getting this confused with Lobster's alternate Ocumene - I was puzzled by the fact that the northern Italians hadn't been overrun by the Celts! Too many interesting pre-BC TLs to keep up with.

So, an Etruscan Empire in the works. In post #246, where the author compared Europe to Africa and Asia, I assume that he refers to smaller areas than "Africa" and "Asia" in our world?

Africa refers to what the Romans would have called Africa here, so it is indeed much smaller than the term in our world. As for Asia, it doesn't refer to a continent, but its precise bounds are era-dependent; one of the conceits of this timeline is a cohesive 'Asia' (analagous to the Greek use of the term Asia eg; to describe the Achaemenid King's imperial title, 'King of Asia') equivalent to a China or an Egypt.

Daeres · Aug 22, 2017

Μηδίζω! THE WORLD OF ACHAEMENID HELLAS
CHAPTER 6: NOMOS or DATA

SEAS UNDER SKY BY SUPHUNIBAL (389 BCE)
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

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

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

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.”

Indicus · Aug 22, 2017

Daeres said:
THE LIBRARY OF JAMMARAKITA (1446 BCE)
ON THE KING'S LAW OF ASIA

I think you mean 1446 CE.

Μηδίζω! The World of Achaemenid Hellas

Recent threadmarks

Indicus

Daeres

Timaeus

Daeres

Daeres

Daeres

Indicus

Daeres

Workable Goblin

souvikkundu25140017

Daeres

Practical Lobster

Daeres

Daeres

Practical Lobster

Daeres

B_Munro

Daeres

Daeres

Indicus

Recent threadmarks