“And finally [Evagoras] so glutted the Persian kings with war that they, who at other times were not accustomed to make peace with their rebellious subjects until they had become masters of their bodies, abandoned this custom and instead were happy to make peace, and no longer interfered in Evagoras’ rule.” (Isocrates, Evagoras 63)
This is how Isocrates describes Evagoras’ settlement with the Achaemenid King Artaxerxes II in c. 376 BCE. For any historian familiar with Isocrates, it should come as no surprise that there are a number of problems with his characterization of the relationship between Evagoras and the Achaemenids. But I focus on one aspect of this interpretation: according to Isocrates, Evagoras, because of his martial prowess, was uniquely able to force Artaxerxes into a peace settlement; this was a particularly notable achievement because Achaemenid kings not only refused to negotiate with rebels, they would not stop until they had physical control over the rebel’s actual body.
There is a great deal of evidence to support Isocrates’ interpretation. However, I will argue that, in fact, Achaemenid kings were often quite willing to accept some sort of settlement with rebels, and often sought to rehabilitate those who had previously turned their backs on the Great King. As we shall see, this was done for very practical reasons, but was also securely grounded in traditional Iranian notions of kingship.
In order to demonstrate this, I will offer an overview of some cases where a rebellious subject was offered some sort of leniency, either in the form of a trial and acquittal, or in a negotiated settlement. It will be evident that, due to the nature of our sources, the cases are concentrated in the Western edge of the realm during only about one century, and relate almost exclusively to conflicts among the 'ethno-classe dominante,' and therefore cannot be used as a model for the entirety of the Achaemenid world. However, by integrating related Iranian and Near Eastern textual evidence, I will demonstrate that these cases reflect an important aspect of Iranian royal ideology.
