Each of the texts supports the information about the different early empires discussed in Chapter 4 of the textbook. The first text from the banquet style of Assurnasirpal II describes the banquet held by the ruler in his palace. The document describes the food served to the guests in great detail, by listing the amounts of each product. Additionally, the text also offers more information about the guests of this banquet: “altogether 69,574 [including] those summoned from all lands and the people of Kalach”.
The degree of detail serves to highlight the ruler’s wealth, and the primary purpose of the inscription was thus to convey this idea of prosperity to the next generations. The second text was translated from a trilingual Behistun inscription, commissioned by Darius I, who ruled the Persian Empire. This text focuses on his military endeavors while also highlighting the influence of religion on the administrative structure of the empire. In particular, the document mentions Ahura Mazda, the main spirit worshipped in the Persian Empire. The content of the text suggests that Darius I rules in compliance with Zoroastrianist values and beliefs, contrasting him with the rulers of the states he conquered and the “Lie-followers”.
The third text is an excerpt from the Shangshu, which details the transition of power in the Zhou empire. Lastly, the fourth text pertains to the history of the Vedic Empire, focusing on the role of religion in people’s lives and the religious customs of the time. The document highlights the importance of dynasty in the empire and the connection between the living rulers and the spirits of their dead ancestors. Therefore, each text provides insight into various aspects of the life of the four empires.
The texts also offer information that can be used to support claims regarding the degree of centralization in each of the empires. Firstly, as explained in the chapter, the Neo-Assyrian empire had a low degree of centralization. Although the empire featured a political and geographic core called the Land of Ashur, it also included a large number of territories governed by subjects of Assyria. This structure is reflected in the text, which lists the number of people invited from different areas: “47,074 men [and] women who were invited from every part of my land, 5,000 dignitaries [and] envoys of the people of the lands Suhu, Hindanu, Patinu, Hatti, Tyre, Sidon, Gurgumu, Malibu, Hubushkia, Gilzanu, Kumu, [and] Musasiru, 16,000 people of Kalach, [and] 1,500 zar-ïqū of my palace”.
The Persian empire, in contrast, had a higher degree of centralization. As shown in the chapter, the Persian empire was founded by Cyrus, who defeated the kings who reigned over the local lands. In this empire, people were united under one ruler, and provinces were governed by relatives or associates of the king. This structure is reflected in the text, which explains the victory of Darius I over the local kings and shows that the “rebellious” provinces are now under the power of Darius I. Thirdly, the Zhou empire was mostly decentralized and consisted of over seventy small states, whose rulers accepted the authority of Zhou kings.
While the text does not explicitly refer to the degree of centralization, it highlights the role of Zhou’s patrimonial political structure in maintaining governance of the empire. For example, the text focuses on the passing of the royal power from father to son, emphasizing the importance of the “royal house”. The final document focuses on the Vedic empire, which differed from the other early empires in terms of its political structure. This empire was united not by political power but by culture and religion, and thus it was largely decentralized. Various territories of the Vedic empire were governed by local rulers, yet social and cultural unity was persistent. The text reflects this idea by explaining the journey of the young man’s mother and the central role of this journey in cultural integration.
The texts can also be used to explore the role of religion within each empire. The first text does not focus on religion. Instead, it glorifies the image of Assurnasirpal II, king of Assyria. This suggests that the role of religion in the Neo-Assyrian empire was tied to the rule of the king as an agent of Ashur, the empire’s national god. As a result, the text does not mention any religious customs or beliefs because they are already embedded in the king’s rule over the empire. The Persian empire was different in terms of religion, although some similarities remained. On the one hand, the text contains many references to Ahura Mazda and the power of this spirit.
On the other hand, the idea of the king being an agent of god is also evident in this text. Based on the inscription, the royal power was conferred to Darius by Ahura Mazda: “Ahuramazda put them into my hand; as was my desire, so I did unto them”. This suggests that religion had a prominent role in the Persian empire. In a similar manner, the third text conveys religious values and connects them to political power through the concept of the mandate of heaven.
Religion and politics in the text are intertwined, with past rulers of the Zhou dynasty described and prayed to like gods. This shows that religious doctrines were used in the Zhou empire to support patrimonial policies and grant authority to rulers. Although the religious idea of heaven is present in the text, it acts more as a symbol of the higher power than the embodiment of it.
The spirits of late kings, on the contrary, were the power that could shape politics in the Zhou empire. In the Vedic text, the role of religion is central because it focuses on the story of a young man willing to become a Brahman religious student. Whereas in other texts, religion is portrayed as a governing force, here, religion plays a socio-cultural role. The passage shows that religion united people from various backgrounds in a way that allowed them to form a new, collective identity. Hence, the role of religion in the Vedic empire was different from that in other early empires.
The texts are written from different perspectives, which also contributes to their portrayal of early empires. The first text was written from an elite perspective, which is evident from the writer’s position in the court and their level of education. At the same time, the text was commissioned by the king to convey his voice and message. This highlights the hierarchical nature of the empire, where there is a clear distinction between the members of the elite and the rest of the population.
It can be suggested that members of the elite were more educated and had connections both with the king and with his subjects in other territories. In a similar manner, the second text was written from the perspective of Darius I, as his words are cited throughout the text. This serves to establish the king’s power in the empire, showing that the Persian empire had a single ruler. In the text, the image of the king is contrasted with “lie-followers” and the oppressive kings who preceded him. The description of Darius, conveyed through his words, serves to establish his authority as the ruler. The third document was also written from the elite perspective since the author was familiar with the kings and served to report on the history of their rule in writing.
In line with the elite perspective of the other texts, the viewpoint of this excerpt allows showing both the patrimonial structure of power and the power of rulers in the Zhou empire. The tone with which the rulers are referenced shows their authority within the empire, emphasizing its hierarchical structure. Lastly, the Vedic text is written from a non-elite perspective, which enabled the writer to tell the story of regular people from Vedic communities.
Social encounters are crucial in the text, and rulers of the land are not mentioned at all, which supports the idea of socio-cultural rather than political unity in the Vedic empire. Thus, the tone and perspective of each text are important for understanding the empires’ social and political structure. Placed in the wider context, the texts provide further insight into the development of early empires, their cultural roots, and political ideologies.