Persianism in Antiquity.

• Author: Waters, Matt

Persianism in Antiquity. Edited by ROLF STROOTMAN and MIGUEL JOHN VERSLUYS. Oriens et Occidens, vol. 25. Stuttgart: FRANZ STEINER VERLAG, 2017. Pp. 557, illus. [euro]84.

This is an important book, one that touches on all periods of Persian and Iranian history from the Achaemenids onward. Even though the book's primary reason d'etre is the post-Achaemenid periods in antiquity and beyond, the Achaemenids' legacy--directly or indirectly--informs all of them, in sometimes surprising ways. In the volume's introduction, "From Culture to Concept: The Reception and Appropriation of Persia in Antiquity," the editors Strootman and Versluys take aim at several topics. Prominent among them is, of course, setting the parameters by way of a broadly defined conceptualization of "Persianism." This is initially defined as "the ideas and associations revolving around Persia and appropriated in specific contexts for specific (socio-cultural or political) reasons..." (p. 9). The framing of topic and definition(s) does not end there; it encompasses several interconnected elements, e.g., demarcating what is meant by "Persia" vis-a-vis "Iran" (pp. 10-11 and 22-28) and contextualizing the Achaemenid empire and its study within a wider, global framework as well. This discussion contributes to an ongoing trend that moves away from a Eurocentric view of world history, an East-West dichotomy created by the ancient Greeks (pp. 16 and 31-32).

The question of definitions remains an important, lingering one--a (if not "the") methodological core not only of how we are to understand the Achaemenids' historical imprint but also how we are to understand distinctions made among the earliest Iranians themselves, vis-a-vis the rise of the ruling elite and their interconnections across ancient Iran. It is only in the later periods, via the Sasanian embrace of eastern Iranian (Avestan) traditions that an "East-West dichotomy" within Iran itself may be fully appreciated. But this dichotomy manifested earlier, among other places in the royal inscriptions of Darius I and Xerxes. Seeking confirmation of this early dichotomy in various iterations of the dahyu-lists raises the question of distinctions between the various Iranian regions (or peoples), such as the significance of OP Ariya as an additional epithet in the royal titles (DSe [section]2 DNa [section]2; see editors' comment on p. 23 n. 60). Variations in the Achaemenid expressions of world dominion (XPh, DSf, etc.) also throw...