The view of women in Achaemenid Persia as reflected in Roxanâ Romance is primarily based on ancient texts from Persepolis (Pârsâ) Fortification Tablets, as well as other documents recovered from other Achaemenid sites. Secondary sources include the Gâthâs and Yasna of Avesta, as well as Hellenic sources, such as the Histories by Herodotos. Persepolis Fortification Archive, or more accurately, Achaemenid Administrative Archives, provide a tangible insight into the more realistic social and economic situation of Achaemenid women. Royal Women are identified, payments of rations and wages for men and women are documented and sealed orders by the royal women themselves or their agents gives us valuable information on how these powerful women managed their wealth. Land ownership by women was not exclusive to the Royal Women and the Achaemenid royal administration recognized all women as independent legal entities that could own, sell or lease their own lands. Archeological discoveries clearly indicate that women in Achaemenid Persia did not live secluded lives behind high walls of ‘harems’ with the sole purpose of bearing and rearing sons. Royal Women Title of Dukšiš (Royal Woman) indicated the relationship between these royal women and the Great King. Queen Mother, Great King’s mother, held the highest position among all the royal women. The next was the Queen, either the principal wife or the mother of the crown prince. Then came the Great King’s daughters and sisters. The Great King was the ultimate source of authority and his Royal Women lived within royal and traditional boundaries set by the King. Persepolis Fortification Archive reveal that Royal Women enjoyed economic independence, were involved in the administration of economic affairs, traveled and actively controlled their considerable wealth and position. They traveled extensively on the Royal Road; visited their estates and administered their land and wealth individually and at times with help from their King-husbands. Travel rations identify their travel partners, guards, servants, cooks, etc., and they were treated no different than royal men. They participated in royal festivities and banquets for the King and organized their own feasts and banquets. Education According to Greek historians, the royals and nobles were educated. Ctesias wrote of Roxana, the sister of Artaxerxes II’s son-in-law that: “She was very beautiful and highly skilled with the bow and spear”, indicating that royal and noble daughters received martial arts training similar to the royal and noble sons. Religion While the Persepolis Fortification Archive and the Greek sources are silent about the role of the Royal Women in religious ceremonies, Prophet Zoroaster (Zarathuštra) in the Gâthâs addresses men and women equally and even in some verses, calls to women first.
“Wise Lord, whoever in this world, man or woman performs the best in life, good deeds according to righteousness and service to humanity based on good mind, I shall accompany them in glorifying you and shall with all of them cross the Bridge of Chinvât.”
Mazdean girls not only enjoyed a respectful position in the society, they had the full freedom to choose their husbands. Prophet Zoroaster advised his daughter, Pouru-chista, on the occasion of her marriage of the importance of love and equality of men and women in holy union. Marriage Achaemenids were patriarchal and their ways were followed by the nobles and the Persians throughout the empire. Their marriage practices were most likely no different than the marriage practices among the Mazdeans. Marriage alliances between the Royal Daughters of the Great Kings, as well as most if not all the women of the imperial family, were critical instruments of imperial policy of forming closer relationships between the Great Kings and the ruling class of the empire. Although it is believed by some that marriage with close relatives even brothers and sisters was permitted based on biased Hellenic sources, extent of such practices are unknown. Remarkable extension of parental terms is an ancient Persian custom practiced even today, where young people are called sons or daughters and the elderly are referred to as father or mother, expressing respect and affection. This ancient practice along with the known practice of naming children after parents and grandparents could have also contributed to the confusion of the ancient writers, mistaking marriages among non-related couples to that of brothers and sisters. There are many fine love poems from ancient Babylon where lovers are commonly referred to as 'My Brother' or 'My Sister'. Marriage between cousins could have been more common. Such marriages normally occur when daughters receive a large inheritance and since dowries should also be paid, one practical solution for keeping the wealth in the family is to marry close relatives. But as nothing about the inheritance system in Achaemenid Persia, in known, it is impossible to know how family members inherited and speculate further. There is not much information about the marriage ceremonies either. The only direct account is the account of marriage of Roxana and Alexander and the mass weddings at Susa, when Alexander married Princess Stateira (Dukšiš Setęreh), daughter of the defeated Great King. According to the Greek historians, both weddings were carried out in the ‘local tradition’. However, cutting a loaf of bread with a sword, mentioned in both accounts, was a Macedonian tradition. It is likely that the ‘local tradition’, not recorded by the Hellenic historians, was similar to the Mazdean marriage ceremonies, still in practice today. While in the Biblical Book of Esther, a court historical fiction set during the Achaemenid reign, Esther, a common Jewish girl, marries the Great King and saves her people, no historical records of marriages among the imperial Achaemenids and non-Persians exists. Adultery The punishment for wife’s adultery was normally death. However, the Great King decided the punishment for adultery committed by the Royal Women. Divorce Divorce existed but no information on details exits. Amastris (Ammašiš), niece of Darius III, was married to Craterus (Krateros), Alexander’s General, at the Susa weddings. After the death of Alexander, Craterus divorced her and she remarried to Dionysius. Harems While some Hellenic sources suggested the veiling and seclusion of Persian women, royal seals found along the Persepolis Fortification Archive offer some indirect clues. Veiling has a long history in ancient Near East and Mediterranean cultures. In the first known reference to veiling, an Assyrian legal text of the 13th century BCE, it is restricted to respectable women and prohibited for all others. No images of Royal Women were found in Persepolis and other imperial Achaemenid sites, but there were no restrictions on the depiction of Persian women. According to Herodotus, a pure golden statue of Irtašdunâ, the favorite royal wife of King Darius existed. Achaemenid queens were depicted fully clothed in many seals, some with partial veils, and some with crowns, without veil.
There is no history of veiling among the Mazdeans of the Achaemenid period. Men and women were regarded equals and monasticism, celibacy, asceticism, and self-mortification were forbidden in Mazdaism.
The institutionalized practice of veiling in Persia originated after the Arab invasion of Persia in the 7th century. While Royal Women might have had their own quarters in the Achaemenid imperial palaces, more than likely such royal quarters pointed to the independence and freedom of the Royal Women within the boundaries of the imperial court.
Terminology, imagery and flights of fancy of a typical ‘oriental harem’ is best left to describe the lives of women in the courts of the much later Arabic and Turkish kingdoms. Eunuchs Closely related to the concept of a 'harem’ is the combination of Achaemenid Royal Women and scheming court eunuchs. No other subject fascinated ancient Greek and Roman writers more than the fanciful tales of imperial court intrigues of the imperial Persians fueled by alliances between powerful queens and ambitious eunuchs. While moralizing about ancient cultures is best left to moralist, it is hard to miss the particular interest of the ancient Hellenic writers in castration of beautiful boys marked for service in the imperial court, in light of their own sexual norms, that encouraged and celebrated intimate relationships between aristocratic and intellectual Hellenes of high rank and letter with young boys. The modern translation of 'Platoic Love', the essence of Plato's Symposium to a virtuous non-physical relationship among men and women was in the hands of much later western historians ofthe Victorian era who rendered the 'boy-love' of the ancient text into something more suitable to the sensibilities of their own times. There is little doubt that castration was a severe punishment imposed on royal subjects for rebellion against the Great Kings, but doubtful that they were carried out against the aristocracy, whose support was sought by the imperial government. Most ‘eunuchs’, castrated boys, sent to the imperial court, were of humble origins and worked as a part of the palace staff, with no better standing than other royal servants. Since the existence of ‘harems’ in Achaemenid courts is thus rejected, there was no need for herds of eunuchs to guard the Royal Women. Although it is not unlikely that eunuchs, like other palace and royal slaves, served in the private staff of the Great Kings and Royal Women. The view of all the Great Kings flanked mostly by faithful eunuchs simply defies logic and common sense, where punished men were supposedly faithful guardians of those who punished them with castration in the first place. That so many 'eunuchs' rose to the highest ranks in the highly stratified imperial Achaemenid court and army was almost impossible. It is absurd to believe that except for the Great King and the royal men, all the other men in the Persian court and army were castrated. More than likely, ‘Eunuch’ was applied or translated free-handedly when Hellene vocabulary failed to accommodate the Persian equivalence. The Babylonian ‘Ša ręš šarri’ (He who is stationed at the head of the King), became ‘Sârîs’ in Hebrew, and regularly translated to ‘eunuch’ in Septuagint, Greek version of the Hebrew Bible Book of Esther. Women of the King While the Achaemenid Kings traditionally married within a small circle of Persian Seven Noble Families, ‘Women of the King’ were their concubines, mostly beautiful virgins sent to the imperial court from all over the vast empire to forge a closer alliance with the Great King. They were taught singing and dancing and attended royal banquets and went on royal hunts.
The major distinction between the status of the Royal Women and the Women of the King was manifested in the status of their sons, where only royal sons of the Royal Women were legitimate heir to the Achaemenid Throne. The existence and status of illegitimate royal sons were sources of dynastic contention throughout the later part of the Achaemenid rule. Ordinary Women Most Persian women owned property, managed their assets, and participated in economic activities. They had employment opportunities, earned wages and were economically independent. Persepolis Fortification Archive indicate that some professions were undertaken by both men and women while others were restricted to either men or women. Both men and women supervised the mixed royal workshops and received similar rations. The highest-ranking female workers were called araš-šarâ (great chief). They appeared regularly in the imperial records, were employed at different locations and managed large groups of worker, including women, children and sometimes men. They received high rations of wine and grains exceeding all the other workers in the unit including the men. Ordinary workers received rations according to their skills and men and women with similar skills and jobs received equal rations. Contemporary sources in Babylon and other Achaemenid sites shed some light on the legal side of the marriage alliances of ordinary couples. No doubt similarities existed with Persian customs. The marriage contracts were usually between the husband and the male members of the bride’s family. The husband pledged to take the woman in marriage and presented gifts to the bride and her family. If the husband decided to take a second wife, he had to give the first wife a specified sum of money, and she could return to her home. The women’s dowry could include land, household goods, jewelry, money and slaves. The contracts were sealed in front of several witnesses who were also named in the legal agreements. Patriarchal system prevailed and fathers, brothers, husbands and sons had far more rights and privileges than their women and children. New mothers and pregnant women received higher rations and sons were preferred over daughters. Mothers of baby boys received twice the amount compared to mothers of baby girls. Female Slaves Slavery existed in almost all the ancient civilizations. The imperial Achaemenids were a notable exception who freed the slaves in their vast empire. According to the Persepolis Fortification Tablets, the splendid Achaemenid Palaces in Persepolis (Pârsâ) were built by men and women who were paid in coins or rations or both. While their imperial benevolence was attributed to good politics by historians, it was just another 'good deed', a manifestation of their Mazdan religious beliefs that considered liberty of man as a pillar of the divine law of the universe.
What the Babylonians called ‘arad šarri’ (royal slaves) and ‘arad ekalli’ (palace slaves), were most likely the servants who along with the eunuchs served in the imperial households of the Achaemenids.
