Fichamento de Daniel Snell

Fichamento de Daniel SnellSobre a Prsia

Historical Overview Mario Liverani

Pg. 17

Elam was conquered and its capital city Susa destroyed, but that allowed for the growth of a new power, Persia, in the same area.

Pg. 18

The mental map of the universal empire, however, was not so satisfactory in the Chaldean version as it had been in the Assyrian version. Besides Babylonia, the political system included a major state like Egypt (Saite dynasty), a growing state like Persia (heir of Elam), and the Anatolian kingdoms of Lydia, Tabal/Cappadocia, Armenia, and Khilakku/Cilicia. The ethnic confederacies of the Medes and the Northern Arabs were no longer an outer periphery, but they became an integral part of the system. Farther away, the Greek cities and the South Arabian caravan cities were also becoming more and more linked through trade and mercenary military service to the Near Eastern world.

Axial Age. Surgimento das religies monotestas

Maiores inovaes tcnicas originrias dos pases tnicos da semi-periferia

The Persian empire of the Achaemenid dynasty was not the heir of the loose Median confederacy, but rather of the Elamite tradition. Persia was virtually congruent with Elam in its narrow definition, and the Persian administration at Persepolis used the Elamite language and script for its archives.

No technical innovations mark the new period, and Babylonian irrigation agriculture bloomed spectacularly in the last part of the Chaldean period and the beginning of the Achaemenid period without any breaks. Also the cultural tradition remained unchanged during the Persian period. The Babylonian scribes continued to use their own script and language, and the Babylonian deities were still worshiped in the same temples. Astrologers continued to record the position of the stars and the historical events according to their time-honored tradition, and Akkadian literary texts, omen collections, and lexicographical lists were still copied in the schools as before.

The Persian empire was in a sense a synthesis of different traditions, among which the Babylonian tradition was predominant. The empire inherited from Assyria the very idea of empire, and the basic features of the celebrative apparatus. It inherited from Elam the federal system of governance that had been typical of the Iranian peoples for a long time. And it inherited from Media important features of court life, and probably the Zoroastrian religion. The empire included the Babylonian templecities and the Phoenician city-states as different but equally acceptable centers for running the economy.

But things went differently from what the Persians planned, and the struggle between the universal empire and the last city-states not only ended in the unpredictable rebuff of the Persians, but also generated in Greek, and later European, minds the opposition between East and West, between despotism and democracy, slavery and freedom, magic and rationality, and redistribution and enterprise, which was to mark world history for many millennia to come.Chpater 4. World hegemony. Paul-Alain Beaulieu

Pg. 49. Idia de Hegemonia Mundial, como era entendido?

Such views were circulated at least as early as the Hellenistic period, and they found a literary and spiritual expression in the Book of Daniel, which envisioned in the metaphorical dream and vision of chapters 2 and 7 a succession of four hegemonies: the Babylonians, the Medes, the Persians, and finally the Greco-Macedonians, each kingdom inferior to the preceding, the disintegration of the last one leading to an eschatological climax (Apud: Hartman and Di Lella 1978: 2942).

Pg. 55 Assyria certainly did not fall more swiftly than the succeeding Babylonian or Persian empires, which disappeared from the world scene even faster than they had arisen.

Pg. 58.

Unlike what happened in Assyria, the end of the Babylonian empire did not cause the demise of the Babylonian urban core. Babylonian cities had prospered before the empire and continued to do so under the Persian and Hellenistic monarchies.

Why suddenly in the sixth century the balance tipped in favor of the Persians, we simply do not know. It is probable that various economic, demographic, and technological factors worked in their favor, but we lack the kind of information that would make the analysis of those factors possible. The irruption of the Persians onto the world stage and their swift success seem as sudden and unexplainable as that of Islam in the seventh century of our era. In a relatively short span of time the Persians built an empire so territorially extensive that even by modern standards it would seem extremely difficult to administer.

Mapa Mundi com Babilnia hegemnica, central (Horowitz 1998: 2042).

Pg. 59

The Persians, led by the ruling family called the Achaemenids, certainly possessed an innate genius for co-opting the administration and structure of the kingdoms they conquered, and this must to some extent explain their successThe superimposition of Achaemenid imperial institutions was therefore slow and cautious. Their function was to ensure the regular flow of taxes to the center for the maintenance of the court and the military.

one of the most conspicuously attested Achaemenid institutions in Babylonian documents was the regime of military colonies (family Murashu of Nippur).

Non Persianization. Different of Rome and Assyria.

With the Achaemenids, on the other hand, conquered people were fully recognized as distinct and left undisturbed as long as they acknowledged their vassal status within the empire. There is no evidence for the extensive and sometimes brutal restructuring which characterized the previous Mesopotamian empires.Chapter David Warburton Work.

Pg. 175

By the Persian period, awards of land plots allowed entrepreneurs to manage land for the aristocracy, and thus the entrepreneurs were responsible for arranging the labor (Stolper 1985).Tendncia do Trabalho de artesos convergirem no sistema persa para as cidades imperiais.Chapter Etnicidade

A questo da estirpe ariana (arya cia). Pgina 341. Pihip Jones. Divine and Non-Divine KingshipParticularly in the south, however, this consolidation was accompanied by a degree of social differentiation. Kings of Babylonia often claimed different ethnic status from their subjects as Kassites, Chaldeans, Assyrians, Persians, and finally Macedonians.Importncia das LnguasPoltica de Pronunciamentos plurilngues

Henri Limet

Pg. 379

Later, by a semantic development in the Persian period, the word meaning tongue or language came to refer to nationality. The expression foreign language has to be translated as foreign people. In a prophecy, the expression funny language referred to a barbarian people that could take command of the city.Lngua Importantes. Medo-Persa, Elamita, Babilnico, Aramaico, Egpcio, Grego-ldio. Outras lnguas tnicas valorizadas?Triunfo do aramaismo anterior a poca persa, mas estimulado por este (reicharamaisch).Pag 380

Later the Persians were concerned about giving accurate images of the prisoners and the bearers of offerings, with the assistance of Greek sculptors, for instance on the Persepolis reliefs. At that time Aramaic became the official language of the empire, and it is well known that the Persian kings tolerated several religions.Continuidade de Marduk

Continuidade de poucas tradies egpcias. Reforma de Cambises. Nabonidus or Cyrus Cylinder (?). Cambises entra vestido com roupa elamita (!) para ultraje dos sacerdotes babilnicos.

Imprio como garantidor, mas homegeneizador de etnicidades.Chapter democracy and freedom. Snell & Mathew Martin Ill

Pg 400

Herodotus conveyed a story, perhaps more relevant to Greek thought than to Persian, but still perhaps of interest in his eastern Mediterranean milieu, in which Persian nobles debated the varieties of types of governments they might choose. They naturally accepted the later king Darius argument that monarchy was better than

oligarchy or democracy, but they clearly assumed that everyone would want to

minimize tyrannical government (Liverani 1993c: 29; Snell 2001: 18; n. 17 to

Herodotus 1987 III, 802).

Prsia e Fencia pag 401In the Persian period and later (539 BCE) there were assemblies with councilors in Phoenician cities and a mixture of democracy and oligarchy in the best known of the colonies, the north African city of Carthage. At Carthage officials were elected by broad-based assemblies, but the highest offices could be held only by rich men on the grounds that they would have the leisure to perform the official functions (Sommer 1999: 248, 251; Aristotle 1990 II, viii, 1273a).Prsia e Israel pg 416Luta interna sobre hegemonia religiosa: Partido de Yaweh-somente versus partido Politesta, animista. Levando em conta a vacilao de Israrel na poca de Acabe e Jezebel, havia um forte partido que predicava por antigos cultos de fertilidade e astrais, assim como divindades de origem mesopotmica e fencia.

Vitria do Monotesmo se deu na poca persa. Com o reforo da idia de libertao do Cativeiro (livro de Daniel), a reconstruo do Templo em Esdras e Neemias e o estatuto privilegiado Judeu em Ester.

Ultimate victory came to the Yahweh-alone party during the Persian period, 539331 BCE. The grand narrative of the Old Testament was shaped by the victors who divided the kings of Israel and Judah into the just and the unjust depending on their degree of adherence to the principles of the Yahwehalone party.Palace Museum

It contained some remarkable antiquities such as the famous lion of Babylon, a statue of Puzur-Ishtar, an Ur III official in Mari, Assyrian stelas and reliefs, as well as inscriptions from various areas of the city of Babylon [and from] Sippar, also a relief with a Hittite hieroglyphic inscription. Some of these items were likely taken as booty on various Babylonian raids. Interestingly, they were not presented to the gods as votive offerings, but were installed in the museum. This museum was obviously kept up since the collection was added to after the time of Nebuchadnezzar [604562 BCE] and in fact included an inscription of Nabonidus [555539] and even a stele of Darius [521486 from the next, Persian, dynasty] . . . It seems likely that this museum was not only a royal cabinet of antiquities, but was also open for citizens to view. (Biggs 1979)