49 9. Darius: Retailer or Master? From the unstable and sometimes tragic Cambyses, we move on to Darius, whom Herodotus presents as an improvement in almost every way from his predecessor. One of the most well-known Persian kings, he is recognized by Herodotus and modern historians as an extremely capable administrator and tolerant ruler (3.89). Cambyses, as we have seen, fails in both those aspects, being negligent in administrative duties and showing contempt for the customs of his foreign subjects (3.16; 3.29). Darius seems to possess some of the best qualities of Cyrus, such as his organizational talent, and his ability to command armies, which is demonstrated in the quickness with which he puts down the rebellions that emerge in the power vacuum after Cambyses’ death. 31 Administrative capability is one of Darius’ strongest qualities, one that Herodotus makes clear in his listing of the satrapies and tribute payments that comprise the Persian Empire (3.89- 96). Darius’ restructuring is in fact a necessity in order to run the expanding (and often rebelling) Persian provinces. We see the consequences of unconsolidated territory in Book Three when the Magi seize power in Cambyses’ absence. While Cambyses is “spending his time in Egypt insane,” the steward of the household, a Zoroastrian priest and a Mede, usurps the throne (3.61). The ease with which this pretender and the Medes take power indicates, at least in the version of events Herodotus knew, that the Persians did not yet have an established system of accountable, responsible government. As Herodotus presents it, Cambyses in his eight-year rule did not spend nearly as much time tending to the affairs of state as he did on military campaign, both successful and disastrous. Following Cyrus’ able rule, Cambyses’ absence from Persia opens a 31 Young, T., “Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean C. 525 to 479 B.C.” 61-62..
50 gap in the process of the required consolidation of the empire, one that is duly closed by Darius. 32 Darius also continues Cyrus’ policy of toleration towards his new foreign acquisitions. The Persians break from the oppressive attitudes of the Neo-Babylonian and Neo-Assyrian states and even their predecessors the Medes, and instead use tolerance as a political tool to preserve peace. 33 Their internationalism comes at the expense of their own simple customs and traditions, something the Scythians on the other hand did not lose when they allegedly dominated Asia. According to Herodotus, the Scythians’ reign as rulers of Asia lasted for only 28 years, ending because “of their abusive and disdainful attitude” towards their subjects. They would apparently not only impose especially straining taxes on their vassals, but they would harass and steal from them as well (1.106). The Scythians’ refusal to adopt, or even tolerate foreign customs undermined their ability to rule others and resulted in their expulsion by the Medes. The reverse is true of the Persians; their tolerance of the Hebrews for instance gained them their loyalty, and even high praise as a savior. 34 In exchange for their general policy of tolerance, the Persians reaped the monetary and cultural benefits of their many dominions. Herodotus intimates, however, that even if Darius himself was a capable monarch, the trappings of empire had begun to rob the Persian people of their former hardiness. It appears not only in outward displays such as the wearing of foreign dress, but in their behavior. Whereas before Herodotus writes of the Persians using wine to trick others, as in the episode of Cyrus killing the Massagetae (1.211), we see the Persians themselves, 32 T. Young in the Cambridge Ancient Histories (51) and P. Briant (59-61) determine Cambyses’ legacy within classical sources to be an unfair bad press attributed to the king as a result of Herodotus’ overreliance on his biased Egyptian sources. 33 Young, T., “Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean C. 525 to 479 B.C.” 105. 34 Young, T., “Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean C. 525 to 479 B.C.” 103.