a member of the Achaemenid family, ideally directly descended from his predecessor.
He usually chose his successor from among his sons and seems generally to have been
expected to choose the eldest. But this was not an unalterable rule – he could,
and did, if political considerations so dictated, select a younger son to the position
of crown-prince (Kent 1953 : XPf 27 – 36 ). Failing ‘legitimate’ offspring, by which
presumably the sons of primary wives are meant, the sons of secondary wives, ‘bastards’,
had the next best claim to succeed, which happened on occasion (see above, pp.
568–9). Conversely, husbands of royal daughters, i.e. royal sons-in-law, seem never
to have been able to claim the throne, although their offspring could become eligible
failing male royal children. The matrimonial policies of the Achaemenids were thus
carefully guarded as the marriage of royal daughters to members of the aristocracy
could lead to another family laying claim to the throne. This potential threat to the
Achaemenid monopoly of power led at times to the practice of endogamy, in order
to safeguard dynastic integrity.
On the king’s death, an important duty that fell to the legitimate successor was
the conveying of the body, in an elaborately decorated hearse, to Persepolis for burial
in the rock-cut tombs, which, from Darius I onwards, never varied in their pattern
and decoration. The ‘royal fire’, associated with the living king and located in various
districts, was extinguished when his death was announced followed by a period of
public mourning. The central authorities also funded cults at the tombs of past kings
and members of the royal family.
The coronation of the king took place in Pasargadae, the royal centre laid out by
Cyrus. It contained his tomb, quite unlike those of Darius I and his successors. It
was a free-standing, stone-built, gabled building, elevated on a series of steep steps
and set in a beautifully laid-out park. It was permanently guarded and had special
rituals regularly performed around it by magi (Persian learned men), who received
supplies from the royal treasuries (Arrian, Anabasis 6. 29. 4 – 7 ). Here the prospective
king went through an initiation ritual: he was dressed in the garments of Cyrus before
his rise to the kingship, ate bitter herbs and drank sour milk (Plutarch, Artoxerxes
3 ). Although the symbolism of the rite is not fully understood, it clearly evoked the
origins of the dynasty and connected the new king directly with the founder of the
empire. Only after completion of this ceremony, was he adorned with the royal
insignia and revealed to the people in his fully crowned, royal glory.
Emphasis is placed in some of the royal inscriptions and stories surrounding the
kings on their military valour and physical prowess. He underwent a special education,
also experienced by the sons of the aristocracy: young boys were taken from their
parents around age five and subjected to tough training in military and survival skills,
as well as being instructed in Persian myths and legends by the magi (Strabo 15. 3. 18 ).
Learning ‘to tell the truth’ was another aspect of this curriculum, the precise meaning
of which is disputed. A possible interpretation is that it relates to the concept of
loyalty to the king, who himself was empowered to uphold the god given order since
he was conceived as holding the throne as a grant from the supreme Persian god,
Auramazda. This loyalty to the king was expressed through total obedience, actively
promoting his personal wellbeing and guarding him from physical and political
dangers. Individuals who had particularly distinguished themselves in this respect
could be raised in rank by royal favour, expressed through royal ‘gifts’ of a special
— The Persian empire —