6.

Ctesias’ Persica: Persian Decadence in Greek Historiography*

Takuji Abe

Under the rule of Darius the Great, the Achaemenid Persian Empire oc-
cupied a vast area, stretching in a westerly direction to Asia Minor and Egypt,
and reaching east as far as the Indus. This world power was naturally of great
interest to Greeks alive at the time, as is evidenced by the written works across
various genres which they devoted to the topic. Today, this literature is indis-
pensible for the purpose of reconstructing past events; but as has often been
pointed out, these works present us with a Greek perspective of a Persian Empire,
and as such they are not without bias. Following the Persian retreat from Greece,
it is apparent that a discernable contempt arose among the Greek victors regard-
ing their defeated foe. During the century that followed, a Greek notion emerged
that a once flourishing Persian Empire now found itself in a state of decay. Up
until the modern era, this split view of Persian history, at first defined by a peri-
od of prosperity, but followed by a transition to one of decadence, was long used
to illustrate the importance of the Persian Wars as a historical turning point; not
only with regard to the Persian Empire, but as a contributing factor to the dawn
of European prosperity over the course of world history.
This view of Persian decadence is nowadays thought of as invalid, be-
cause the empire continued to exert military and diplomatic influence on its
neighbours even after the Persian Wars, up until its final phase. Contemporary
Greek writers nevertheless persist in asserting that decadence and corruption was
engendered within the empire. Pierre Briant, one of the greatest scholars of Per-
sian history of our time, explains their characterisation of the empire as moti-
vated by ideological aims; 1 they arbitrarily distorted the evidence concerning
the empire and its history in order to pursue their own political or philosophical
agendas. Contemporary evidence regarding the Persian Empire from anything
other than Greek sources was quite sparse, however, especially for the period

* Originally published as “Ctesias Persica to Zen 4-Seiki Girisiago-Bunken ni okeru Persia Teikoku
Suitai-shikan (Persian Decadence: Ctesias’ Persica and Fourth-Century Greek Works: in Japanese)’,
Sichō: The Journal of History, N.S. 65, 2009, 93-112.
1
Briant, 2001; Id., 2002: 787-789.
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

following Xerxes’ death. 2 In order to ascertain how accurate the Greek view of
actual state of Persian affairs was, it is therefore necessary to carefully evaluate
how Greek representation of Persian ‘decadence’ came into existence and sub-
sequently developed. In order to address this question, I will decode the descrip-
tions of Ctesias’ Persica and examine its impact on contemporary Greek works,
and those of the Athenians in particular.
Ctesias was a native of Cnidus, a Greek city situated in the
south-western part of Asia Minor.3 He was born in the middle of the fifth centu-
ry, two generations after his historian predecessor Herodotus. During the age of
Ctesias, the Asian coastal cities were temporarily ‘liberated’ from Persian subju-
gation by the Athenians. In practice, however, they are suspected to have been
under what amounted to ‘simultaneous’ rule of both Athenian and Persian em-
pires. At the very least, they are thought to have remained within the Persian
sphere of influence. Cnidus was renowned for its school of medicine, and Ctesi-
as was also a physician. After he moved to the Achaemenid court (according to
literary sources, he was involved in a war and captured, but this is a point of
some contention among modern scholars), he entered the service of Artaxerxes
and his mother Parysatis, and cared for them over the course of several years in
his function as doctor (probably shorter than the seventeen years he himself
claimed). He made his way back to the Aegean, perhaps by some means of de-
ception, and it was at this point that he compiled the Persica: the main work
discussed in this paper. He also completed various other texts at this time,
amongst which the other main work of his oeuvre, the Indica.
As is the case with many other classical works of literature, none of
Ctesias’ works survived intact, with the exception of one single piece of papyrus.
Subsequent ancient (Hellenistic, Roman, and Byzantine) authors referenced his
works, however, and more than forty of them commented on his life and works,
which modern classicists respectively refer to as his testimonia (T) and frag-
menta (F).4 According to these accounts, the Persica consisted of twenty-three
books in total. Together, they formed a historical chronicle of three empires, be-
ginning with the semi-legendary Assyrian kings Ninus and Semiramis, continu-
ing with Median history (Books 1-6) and terminating with the early reign of Ar-
taxerxes II, the year of 398/7, at which point Ctesias returned home (Books
7-23). The Persica will provide good material for the present discussion, since it

2
For historical evidence on Persian History, see e.g. Kuhrt, 1995: 647-652.
3
For the life of Ctesias, see Abe, 2007.
4
Among these later writers, Photius, Plutarch, and Nicolaus of Damascus are of significance to the
discussion here. For the particularities of Photius’ and Plutarch’s historiography, see Abe, 2007: 45-6.
For those of Nicolaus, see Toher, 1989; Lenfant, 2000a.

- 36 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

is a history written by an author with first-hand experience of the ‘decadent’ em-

pire.
I would now like to review the preceding studies and make clear the ob-
ject of my paper. We can name two significant scholars dealing with Persian
‘decadence’ as reflected in Ctesias’ Persica: Heleen Sancisi-Weerdenburg and
Dominique Lenfant. Sancisi-Weerdenburg was one of the organisers of an inter-
national, interdisciplinary society, the Achaemenid workshop, which was
launched in 1981. In the preface to its first proceedings she discusses the inti-
mate (and intricate) relationship among Greek literary sources regarding the
topic of Persian ‘decadence’.5 She further argues in her article for these pro-
ceedings that Ctesias in particular was of great importance in establishing the
notion of Persian decadence, due to the fact that his work describes the Persian
court as an environment full of harem-life, eunuchs, luxury and intrigues.6 Her
article, though suggestive, fails to go into much detail about Ctesias’ work. More
specifically, a necessary investigation is lacking of whether an early age of
prosperity is present in his history, contrasting the later described decadent peri-
od. Her study does not include such an attention to the diachronic perspective, or
the perspective of historical/chronological development. Sancisi-Weerdenburg’s
work was followed by Dominiqe Lenfant, who published several studies on the
historian, and commented on his texts. She came to a conclusion in her 2001
article that the reality of a decadence pervading the Persian Empire is not to be
gleaned from Ctesias. Lenfant deviated from Sancisi-Weerdenburg, arguing that
the activities of eunuchs and powerful women are recurrent in the Persica from
the very beginning of Cyrus right up until the time of Artaxerxes II, and there-
fore do not indicate a shift to decadence. 7 I will later assess the validity of her
claim, after exploring the world provided by Ctesias. Following these preceding
studies, I read the Persica while keeping a particular eye on the undertakings of
its eunuchs and women, who were regarded as a gauge for Persian decadence.8

The Representation of the Persian Empire in Ctesias’ Persica

The Persica includes many references to eunuchs, and there is a great
diversity of roles reserved for them within its narrative. They often associated
very closely with the royal family, and their actions were characterised as being

5
Sancisi-Weerdenburg, 1987a.
6
Sancisi-Weerdenburg, 1987b.
7
Lenfant, 2001.
8
All references to the text of Ctesias are from the Budé edition of Lenfant, 2004.

- 37 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

both positive and negative in nature. Unlike Herodotus’ Histories or Xenophon’s

Cyropaedia, in the case of the Persica, Cyrus the Great is portrayed as a man of
humble birth. Seeking a job, Cyrus was at first appointed as palace decorator to
Astyages, the Median King, and gradually ascended the courtly echelons. By
means of power, he ultimately overthrew the Medes, who had been suzerain to
the Persians. On his path to success, Cyrus was able to acquire a position close
to the Median king thanks to a recommendation from Artembares, a eunuch who
was the king’s chief cup-bearer (F 8d.6).
The second king, Cambyses maintained the company of three competent
eunuchs, called Izabates Aspadates and Bagapates (F 13.9). Izabates played a
key role in the preparations for invading Egypt, by helping his king arrange a
secret deal with Combaphis, a eunuch of the Egyptian king (F 13.10). Cambyses
seemed to truly confide in his own eunuchs; after having his brother Tanyoxarces
killed based on false assertions from Sphendadates, a Magian priest, regarding a
supposed plot against his person, the king revealed his feelings of anxiety to his
eunuchs, Bagapates and Izabates (F 13.11-13). Following the death of Tanyox-
arces, the Magus took over the late prince’s seat by assuming his appearance,
and upon King Cambyses’ passing, the priest in disguise was thus made king in
Tanyoxarces’ name (F 13.15). His eunuchs reacted in varying fashions to this
national crisis. The eunuch Tibetheus, although not one of Cambyses’, was
aware of Sphendadates’ actions, and informed Queen-mother Amytis of the truth,
in order to prevent the imminent usurpation of the throne by the malicious priest
(F 13.13). While Cambyses was approaching death, the eunuch Bagapates col-
laborated with Artasyras the Hyrcanian, in enabling the Magus to ascend the
throne as the king’s supposed successor. The eunuch Izabates, on the other hand,
after divulging the truth to the entire army, was promptly beheaded, most likely
by supporters of the priest’s cause (F 13.15). Although Bagapates initially re-
mained loyal to the Magus, he shifted allegiance to the seven Persian nobles af-
ter they rose up against the impostor; he subsequently devoted his time to the
restoration of the empire (F 13.16). Following Darius’ death, Bagapates spent the
last seven years of his life watching over his tomb (F 13.23).
Furthermore, in the final part of the Persica, which describes the scene
of the battle of Cunaxa – the battle between the recently enthroned king Arta-
xerxes II and his brother Cyrus the Younger, who challenged him and was killed
as a result –, eunuchs occupied prominent roles, acting on behalf of the king, as
well as on behalf of the rebel prince. While a eunuch named Pariscas guarded
the corpse of Cyrus, and was plunged in grief beside it, the eunuch Satibarzanes
went about looking to acquire some manner of drink for his king, who was in-
jured and suffered from thirst (F 20.12).

- 38 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

The aforementioned eunuchs acted in a subservient and honourable

manner, loyal to their masters and empire, but this was not always the case. Other
eunuchs had been known to betray their lords and plot against the state, as illus-
trated by the following examples.
a) Artapanus, a powerful courtier, assassinated his King Xerxes. An influential
eunuch of Xerxes known as Aspamitres was complicit in the plot. Together they
managed to convince Xerxes’ son Artaxerxes I that the murder was carried out
by his second son, Darius, and succeeded in having him unjustly executed (F
13.33).
b) Secyndianus, an illegitimate son of Artaxerxes I, involved a eunuch called
Pharnacyas in a plot to take the life of Xerxes I’s only legitimate son, Xerxes II.
He was assaulted while in a state of drunken slumber during a day of feasting in
the palace (F 15.48).
c) Artoxares, a eunuch under Darius II, plotted to take over control of the throne.
In his effort to acquire the appearance of a whole man, he wore a fake beard and
moustache (F 15.54).
The attempts of Aspamitres and Pharnacyas were met with success, but that of
Artoxares was prevented before he was able to carry out his plan. All of the plots
were exposed, however, and none escaped eventual punishment (F 14.34; F
15.52; F 15.54).
In the narrative of the Persica, eunuchs exert sway even on matters con-
cerning the army and the election of new kings. When Secyndianus, the illegiti-
mate son of Artaxerxes I, acceded to the throne by deceitful means, he disposed
of a eunuch by the name of Bagorazus.9 This act was one of the reasons Secyn-
dianus failed to win popularity with the soldiers under his command (F. 15.49).
When Darius II (another illegitimate son of Artaxerxes) gathered troops to raise
up against Secyndianus, Artoxares the eunuch, together with the cavalry com-
mander and the Egyptian satrap, placed the royal crown upon Darius II’s head,
and thus appointed him as new sovereign (F 15.50).
Eunuchism at the Persian court was perplexing and therefore fascinating
to contemporary Greeks.10 By examining their tragedies, Edith Hall evaluates
Greek views on ‘barbarians (non-Greek speakers)’, and argues that ‘the palace
eunuch of the Greeks’ imagination encapsulates their systematic feminization of
Asia; emotional, wily, subservient, luxurious, and emasculated, he embodies

9
Bagorazus is not explicitly described as a eunuch. It must be assumed he was, however, as he brought
the corpse of the late king Artaxerxes I to Persia (F 15.47), and this was a task usually reserved for a
eunuch. Furthermore, he is mentioned as an equal of the eunuch Pharnacyas (F 15.48).
10
Cf. Llewellyn-Jones, 2002. Lenfant, 2012, calls into question the assessment of eunuchs in Ctesias ’
account as historical figures.

- 39 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

simultaneously all the various threads in the fabric of their orientalist dis-
course.’11 In fact, Herodotus also covered Persian history, and excluded depic-
tions of eunuchs from playing prominent or decisive roles in his Histories.12 In
stark contrast, the Persica, with its narrative of covertly manoeuvring eunuchs as
previously described, would have suggested to its readers a sense of imperial
corruption. Moreover, when considered from a diachronic viewpoint, it is worth
pointing out that their acts of treason, as explicated in the later books of the Per-
sica, were quite abundant, particularly following the murder of Xerxes.13
Ctesias is often judged to have been a historian who enhanced a stereo-
typed connotation of a ‘feminised Persia’.14 Admittedly, the Persica is opulent,
featuring multiple types of women – as is to be expected, not common but royal
women – as well as eunuchs, and allows them significant roles in its narrative.
Amytis the Elder, being the daughter of the Median king Astyages and
mother to Cambyses, is one of the figures to take centre stage in the Persica.
When her father Astyages was killed on the advice of Oebaras, an old friend of
Cyrus and partner in establishing the empire, Amytis was given permission by
Cyrus to torture and crucify Petesacas, the man responsible for the murder (F
9.6). Furthermore, when she was informed that Cambyses had his younger
brother killed, Amytis demanded that he deliver to her the Magian priest who
carried out the assassination. Upon having her demand met with refusal, she
committed suicide by ingesting poison. After her death, she came to Cambyses
in a vision and berated him for his horrible act of fratricide (F 13.13-14).
Amytis the Younger, daughter of Xerxes, did not hold any political sway,
but caused disturbance at court due to rumours regarding her inappropriate rela-
tionships with men. When Xerxes returned from his Greek expedition, he re-
buked his daughter for her adulterous reputation (F 13.32). In an unrelated inci-
dent after her husband’s death, she was discovered to be suffering from an afflic-
tion of the uterus, and was prescribed an ill-conceived treatment by a Coan doc-
tor named Apollonides, who claimed that her condition would improve upon
having sexual intercourse with a man (F 14.44). Amytis’ husband Megabyzus
was a figure of such considerable importance that he was entrusted with the re-
sponsibility for supressing the Babylonian (F 13.26) and Egyptian rebellions (F

11
Hall, 1989: 157.
12
Eunuchs make an appearance several times in the Histories, but do not play significant roles; see Hdt.
1.117; 3.4; 3.48-49; 3.77-78; 3.92; 3.130; 4.43; 6.9; 6.32; 7.187; 8.104-105.
13
As will be mentioned later, Cyrus’ eunuch Petesacas was executed as a retribution for his murder of
Astyages, the former Median king and father-in-law of Cyrus, ignoring the wishes of Cyrus and his wife
Amytis (F 9.6). This offense is difficult to count as treachery on his part, however, as he was merely
obeying an order from Cyrus’ old friend, Oebaras.
14
Sancisi-Weerdenburg, 1987b; Tagliaferro Manganelli, 1992/1993; Auberger, 1993; Hall, 1993.

- 40 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

14.37-38). As his stature within the empire increased, so did the perception of
scandal caused by his wife’s promiscuous behaviour at the court.
Amestris was the wife of Xerxes, but the passage, ‘Amytis kept compa-
ny with men, just as her mother Amestris had done before her’ (F 14.44), implies
that she shared a propensity for adultery with her daughter Amytis. In addition,
after Xerxes died she used her position as queen mother to seek punishment of
multiple individuals. To avenge her son Achaemenides, who was killed in the
battle of the Egyptian revolt, she crucified the Libyan Inarus, and beheaded the
fifty Greeks who accompanied him, violating a treaty in the process that guaran-
teed them freedom from harm (F 14.39). After her daughter Amytis died of dis-
ease, she apprehended Apollonides, the Coan doctor responsible for her care and
who seduced and abused her with wrong counsel. She consequently tortured him
for two months and then buried him while he was still alive (F 14.44). When her
grandson Zopyrus was stoned to death by a Caunian named Alcides, Amestris
had the man crucified (F 14.45).
Parysatis, wife of Darius II and mother of Artaxerxes II, is the most
powerful, lurid and characteristic woman in the Persica. In her capacity as the
king’s wife and mother, she slaughtered a good many of those who antagonised
her, or even so much as dared to intervene in her politics. As is well-known from
Xenophon’s Anabasis, when Artaxerxes II, the first son and the successor of Da-
rius’ kingship, was challenged by Cyrus the Younger, Parysatis consistently took
the side of the latter (Xen. Anab. 1.1.4; Cf. Plut. Artax. 2). This fraternal power
struggle was ultimately settled by the death of the rebel prince at Cunaxa. Fol-
lowing the conclusion of the feud, Queen-mother Parysatis put to death three
persons engaged in the death of Cyrus: Mithradates,15 who struck the first blow,
an anonymous Caunian who delivered the lethal blow, and a eunuch called
Bagapates, or alternatively, Masabates,16 who, on orders from Artaxerxes, muti-
lated Cyrus’ head and hand (F. 16.66-67; F 26).
Anabasis does not make it obvious why the mother always sided with
Cyrus, but the Persica implies a hidden political reason: the bloody enmity with
the Idarnid family, most probably the descendants of Idarnes (Hydarnes) I. This
probable ancestor would have collaborated with Darius I and five others (to-
gether known as the ‘Seven Persians’) to eliminate the usurping Magus (F

15
Mithradates was punished by Artaxerxes and Parysatis, but the question of who specifically acted as
executioner is accounted differently by Photius’ Bibliotheca and Plutarch’ Life of Artaxerxes. While
Photius relates that Parysatis took Mithradates from Artaxerxes and then killed him herself (F 16.67),
Plutarch states that Artaxerxes himself ordered the execution, and not his mother (F 26.16).
16
Bagapates in Photius’ excerpt (F 16.66), but Masabates in Plutarch’ Life of Artaxerxes (F 26.17).

- 41 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

13.16). 17 Terituchmes, son of Idarnes, was married to Parysatis’ daughter

Amestris, but afterwards fell in love with his own sister Rhoxane. Having tired
of Amestris, Terituchmes planned to have her killed, and organised a revolt to
overthrow her father-king. His revolt ended in failure and Terituchmes lost his
life in the ensuing battle. Being vexed with the situation (her daughter’s death is
not mentioned explicitly but can be inferred from the context), Parysatis annihi-
lated the whole Idarnid family: Idarnes’ wife, all their children save one (F
15.55-56), and all sons of Terituchmes (F 15.61). The only exception who es-
caped this brutal purge was Stateira, wife of Artaxerxes II.
We can thus infer a political intent on the part of Parysatis; she could not
be tolerant with a king who had a consort from a rebellious lineage. Parysatis
initially intended to get rid of Stateira along with the rest of her kin, but Arta-
xerxes implored her not to; her life was spared for the time being (F 15.55-56).
Regardless, the king’s wife Stateira, after the battle of Cunaxa, persuaded her
husband to execute Clearchus, the Spartan general and friend of Cyrus the
Younger. As this act was carried out contrary to the wishes of Parysatis, the royal
mother responded by surreptitiously poisoning the princess, and so brought
about the culminating act of this vendetta (F 27.69-70; F 28.6; F 29b.1-10).
In the Persica, Parysatis is responsible for slaughtering the greatest
number of people, as well as being the woman who most frequently intervened
in politics. When Darius II ascended to the throne, he had three eunuchs in his
entourage, but depended mainly on the advice of Parysatis (F 15.51. Cf. F 15.50;
F 15.52);18 some examples of this are given below.
Shortly after Darius’ accession to the throne, Arsites, a full brother of
Darius, rose up against the king. This revolt failed, and Arsites was arrested as a
result. Disregarding the wish of Darius, who did not want to lose his brother,
Parysatis had him killed anyway, partly as result of her intimidation on her part
(F 15.52). When the doomed aspirations to kingship of Artoxares the eunuch
were revealed, he was captured and handed over not to the king, but to Parysatis
for his punishment (F 15.54). As mentioned before, only Stateira, the wife of
Artaxerxes, escaped the massacre that occurred after the unsuccessful revolt of
Terituchmes; this was solely as a result of Parysatis’ plea to Darius on behalf of
her son Artaxerxes, who begged his mother to side with him in an effort to attain
mercy for his wife (F 15.56). Thus, Parysatis’ voice constituted more than mere

17
Cf. Tagliaferro Manganelli, 1992/1993.
18
Darius pursued the impostor Secyndianus on Parysatis’ advice (F 15.50). During the revolt of his
brother Arsites and his nephew Artyphius, Darius was inclined to execute Artyphius upon his surrender,
but did not do so right way, and instead followed Parysatis’ advice. She believed that he could be used as
a means to ensure Arsites’ submission (F 15.52).

- 42 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

advice; she at times seemed to exert a considerable degree of leverage, and was
able to reach the king’s mind.
Discussed above are the royal women of the Persica. As is the case with
the eunuchs, the activities of royal women are to be clearly confirmed in the lat-
ter books of the work, with the notable exception of Cambyses’ mother, Amytis
the Elder. Whereas Cambyses’ mother is named Amytis in the Persica, she is
said to have been Cassandane, daughter of Pharnaspes, an Achaemenid in He-
rodotus’ Histories. Although she holds great significance as the mother of the
regal successor Cambyses, she did not have any further influence of note (Hdt.
2.1; 3.2-3). Compared to her, the presence of Amytis in the Persica is quite con-
spicuous, but this is to be expected as a result of the role cast for her in the nar-
rative. In Herodotus’ Histories, Cyrus was born in the purple, as a child of Man-
dane, daughter of the Median king Astyages (Hdt. 1.107). In the Persica, on the
other hand, he stemmed from a very common family, his father Atradates being a
mere brigand and his mother Argoste employed as a goat herder (F 8d.3); hence
it was through the blood of his spouse Amytis, the daughter of the Median king,
that the royal succession of Cyrus was validated. It is noteworthy, however, that
unlike Parysatis, Amytis did not wield power in such a way as to influence the
policies of Cyrus, or even manage to successfully persuade Cambyses to hand
over the murderer of her son. It is at this point that the Persica conveys the im-
pression of women intervening in politics in a more active and prominent fash-
ion as the story progresses.
The most famed royal Persian queen in all of Greek literature is Atossa,
who is featured in Aeschylus’ Persians as well as Herodotus’ Histories.19 As the
daughter of Cyrus, the wife of Darius, and the mother of Xerxes, her heritage
was of great importance to approval of the restructured empire under Darius.20
Herodotus attributes one of the causes of the Persian Wars to Atossa’s seduction
of her husband (Hdt. 3.133-134). He also notes that Xerxes succeeded Darius
even though he was not the eldest son, ‘for Atossa was all-powerful’ (Hdt. 7.3).
However, this well-known, powerful queen is not mentioned in the Persica, and
for any learned reader, who would also be acquainted with Herodotus’ Histories,
this omission gives the impression that the relative importance of the role of
women in the first half of the Persica is minimal.
As mentioned at the outset of this article, Dominique Lenfant, who leads
today’s studies of Ctesias, claims that the Persica tirelessly repeats the same
themes from the very beginning, and it is therefore difficult to pinpoint any spe-
19
In the play of Aeschylus, although a queen who is the wife of Darius and the mother of Xerxes makes
an appearance, she is anonymous.
20
Cf. Brosius, 1996: 47-64.

- 43 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

cific moment in time as a turning point. It is true that the Persica features eu-
nuchs and women from the start. However, as has been shown in the discussion
so far, any risks of imperial instability brought on by the actions of eunuchs and
women present themselves mainly in the latter half of the Persica, and therefore
a reader might be given the misleading impression that they somehow gradually
disturbed, dominated and undermined the empire. At the same time, however, it
would seem to be ill-founded to conclude that this portrayal of a shift of influ-
ence over time was a result of the writer’s ideology, and brought forth intention-
ally, as claimed by Pierre Briant. This is because, in contrast to Athenian writers
mentioned below, Ctesias never articulates a direct opinion praising any Greek
state, and also never refers explicitly to an erosion of the empire.21 Above all,
one has to consider that other writers, as a result of the comparative lack of in-
formation available to them, were forced to fill in the gaps of their respective
narratives by engaging their imagination. Ctesias had no such need, and even if
he had intended to distort his representation of history, the fact that he had
first-hand knowledge would have restricted his historical narrative from deviat-
ing too far into the realm of fiction. Where did Ctesias’ history, and its corre-
sponding narrative, which could at first glance seem to corroborate the idea of
Persian decadence, originate? Did the influence of eunuchs and women at the
Persian palace actually grow as time passed?
The primary reason for an increasing trend of involvement on the part of
eunuchs and women can simply be explained by the uneven distribution of the
amount of surviving information available across the chronology of the original
work. Since the original text of the Persica has not survived, we cannot know
how many words or pages the author dedicated to each individual period or oc-
currence across his narrative. However, some surviving excerpts do indicate with
which topic a particular book began or ended. If one supposes that each book
was allotted roughly the same total length, it would be possible to calculate the
amount of text dedicated to the description of each individual reign. This could
be accomplished by collecting such relevant information in the following man-
ner; ‘In Books 7, 8, [9], 10, 11, 12, 13 Ctesias discusses Cyrus, Cambyses, the
Magus, Darius and Xerxes in depth’ (T 8). ‘The eleventh book of Ctesias of
Cnidus ends with the death of Cyrus. The twelfth begins with the reign of Cam-
byses’ (F 9.8; F 13.9). ‘Amestris also died at a very old age, as did Artaxerxes
after a reign of forty-two years. The end of Book 17, Book 18 begins’ (F 14.46).
‘In Book 19 he described how Ochus Dariaius (i.e. Darius II) died of illness in
Babylon after a reign of thirty-five years’ (F 16.57). ‘Book 21, 22, 23 – the last

21
Tagliaferro Manganelli, 1991/1992: 98-99.

- 44 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

of the history – relates the subsequent events. (Greek mercenaries following the
battle of Cunaxa are described later on)’ (F 27.68). It is thus shown that Ctesias
dedicated five books to Cyrus; he devoted only two books (12 and 13) to the
period covering reigns from Cambyses to Xerxes, four books (14 to17) to the
reign of Artaxerxes I, two books (18 and 19) to the reign of Darius II, and four
books (20 to 23) to the age between the enthronement of Artaxerxes II and the
returning of Ctesias.22
It thus becomes clear that the reigns of Cambyses, Darius and Xerxes, to
which Herodotus devoted more than two thirds of his Histories, were condensed
by Ctesias into a mere two books, which represents less than one-tenth of the
entire length of the Persica. On the other hand, with exception of Cyrus’ reign, it
is illustrated that he has a tendency to allocate a greater volume of his work to
events closer to his own time. The discrepancy between the reigns of Xerxes –
four books to forty-two years, or 10.5 years per book – and Darius II – only two
books to thirty-five years, or 17.5 years per book – seems unequal at first glance,
but can be explained by the fact that the actual reign of Darius lasted about
twenty years (this inconsistency may be either the result of a textual error, or a
misunderstanding on the author’s part).23 Remarkably, Ctesias devotes no less
than three books (F 27.68) to a period of only four years, spanning the battle of
Cunaxa (401 BCE) and his own return (398/7 BCE).
It is my belief that this disproportional page distribution is probably due
to the position that the author held while at the Persian palace. Some scholars
consider Ctesias to have promoted himself at the court in an exceptional manner,
and to have composed the Persica by referencing official documents and infor-
mation obtained from the king and his mother; a feat that only considerable stat-
ure would have allowed him to accomplish. Such an important person would
have been in a position to research bygone events with reasonably deep perspi-
cacity, and also to comment on the state of the empire from a global perspective.
If in spite of all this, Ctesias still chose to relate to us stories of turmoil caused
by eunuchs and women, one might surmise a hidden agenda on his part. Howev-
er, I concluded in my previous article focusing on his career, that contrary to tes-
timony of classical writers, Ctesias was merely one of several doctors to attend
to the Persian king; he was likely excluded from the heart of court, and was not
afforded the opportunities that a private individual would have had to interact
with the Persian king, his family and the Achaemenid elites, noblemen and mili-
tary officials. Hence he did not have the status to afford him a high vantage point

22
I exclude here two ephemeral kings, Xerxes II and Secyndianus.
23
Cf. Swoboda, 1901.

- 45 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

from which to discuss the empire in a broader and more profound context. The
information he would have been exposed to while ‘confined’ by his function as a
doctor likely amounted to no more than, for instance, hearsay circulating among
colleagues of court-workers, and he wrote his history based on this kind of
knowledge. 24 If this was the case, his descriptions of past events would likely
have been less detailed the further he was removed from them in time. Con-
versely, regarding more recent events, he would have been exposed to much
relevant rumour and gossip at the court, and his correspondingly more detailed
account would reflect this fact; eunuchs and woman would play a greater role in
his narrative, while any mention of them would grow increasingly sparse in ac-
counts further removed from Ctesias’ time. This tendency is clearly illustrated by
the final four years, which, as I noted in my previous paper, constituted a period
when Ctesias was less hampered by restraint, and relatively independent; he
filled many pages with detailed and extensive accounts of quarrels and feuding
within the royal family. Following this supposition, it might seem curious that
the historian spent as many as five books to Cyrus’ reign, which was farthest
removed from his own time. Yet, as deduced from Herodotus’ comments, ‘I
could give no less than three accounts of [the birth of] Cyrus’ (Hdt. 1.95) and
‘Among quite a few traditions related of Cyrus’ death, the one I have told is the
worthiest of credence’ (Hdt. 1.214), the empire’s founder was a half-historical
and half-legendary figure; he was portrayed in such a diversity of traditions that
Ctesias was able to obtain an exceptional amount of information on him.
The discussion so far shows that it is difficult to assume Ctesias fabri-
cated his claim of Persian decadence in an overt and intentional manner. It is,
rather, the volume and method of information gathering allowed him by his sta-
tus and circumstance in Persia that result in the narrative left to us; one in which
eunuchs and women engage in more prominent activity and influence as the
narrative progresses towards its conclusion. Ctesias did indeed touch upon one
single facet of the Persian court, but he was not able to present us with a grander
view of history; he merely relayed information procured from the circles to
which he himself belonged, while at times indulging in limited exaggeration.

Reception by the Contemporary Athenian Writers

Following its publication, the Persica was likely read by many, and its
author was approved as an authority on Persia.25 Considering Heleen Sanci-

24
Abe, 2007.
25
Jacoby, 1922: 2066-2067.

- 46 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

si-Weerdenburg’s proposition that Ctesias was a historian who contributed to the

concept of Persian decadence, we must not disregard the impact that his work
would have exerted on other authors, and its repercussion regarding the percep-
tion of the Persian Empire as effeminate. 26 The ‘womanish’ Persians and their
empire were already represented as such in the aftermath of the Persian Wars.
For instance, Aeschylus’ Persians is devoid of strong adult men, and the Ama-
zonomachia scene of vase paintings depicts the Amazons as wearing Persian
attires.27 How then was the milieu of women and eunuchs portrayed by Ctesias
connected with this Persian imagery a century after the Persian Wars? Before
addressing this question, I would, however, like to review the discourses of the
contemporary Athenians regarding Persian decadence, in comparison with that
of Ctesias.
Cyrus the Great, or the ‘father’ of the Persians (Hdt. 3.89), was regarded
among the Athenian writers as the most prestigious king, and admired as a mod-
el of the ideal monarch. Xenophon, who was born in Athens but spent a long
time in Asia Minor as a mercenary, saw an ideal ruler in Cyrus and wrote a
‘philosophical’ work, Cyropaedia, in which he cast him as a central figure. An-
tisthenes, the elder Socratic colleague of Xenophon, is said to have delivered
two treatises taking their titles from his name, Cyrus, and Cyrus, or Of Sover-
eignty (Diog. Laert. 6.1.16). The Athenian orator Isocrates quotes the deeds of
Cyrus in the eulogy dedicated to Evagoras, the Salamian king of Cyprus, in
which he praises the king’s great achievements by comparing them to those of
Cyrus. According to Isocrates, while Cyrus’ achievements of greatness were in-
deed substantial, they did not exceed those of Evagoras (9.37-38).
His son Cambyses contrasted sharply with the formidable reputation of
Cyrus, however; he failed to gain popularity among Athenians. After covering
Cyrus, the manner in which he established his empire and the reasons for its
success, Xenophon reveals in the ultimate chapter of the Cyropaedia, that ‘As
soon as Cyrus was dead, his sons fell into disagreement at once, cities and peo-
ples began to revolt, and everything began to deteriorate’ (8.8. 2). At this point,
Xenophon abruptly moves away from the preceding theme, and examines the

26
Ctesias is not highly though of by some classical writers, but most if not all criticism is directed at
another work of his, the Indica. Aristotle, for instance, dismisses him and accuses him of ‘being unrelia-
ble’, even though he himself borrowed occasionally from Ctesias without crediting his source (Hist. an.
8.28=T 11f). As to the Persica, although Plutarch criticises Ctesias by saying that his story is often akin
to fable and drama (Artax. 6. 9=T 11e), he makes use of it as his primary source for the Life of Arta-
xerxes; this clearly demonstrates the frequent reference of the Persica as information source regarding
the Persian Empire.
27
Hall, 1993.

- 47 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

path to corruption that Cyrus’ empire followed subsequent to his death. 28 As

will be discussed later, Plato states in the Laws that the empire was in the state of
decay from the onset of Cambyses’ reign (694C).
Whereas Darius, despite taking up arms in the Persian Wars, was held in
high regard as a reformer of his disordered empire, his son Xerxes was widely
disparaged. Aeschylus’ Persians draws Xerxes as an imprudent, arrogant, and
ruinous king, starkly contrasting his brilliant father Darius. In the Laws, Plato
posits that the empire was renovated by Darius once, but decayed forthwith un-
der the rule of his filial successor (695C-E); in the Republic, Platonic Socrates
condemns Xerxes as being conceited, as he was among those who had a great
opinion of his own power, like Periander, Perdiccas or Ismenias (336A).
Xerxes was unworthy of his father, but at the same time he was seen by
the Athenians as the adversary of Greece. Of the two kings engaged in the Per-
sian Wars, Lysias does not name Darius specifically, instead referring to him as
the king of Asia, but mentions only the name of Xerxes. His readers might even
have been mistakenly led to believe that Xerxes was responsible for the battle of
Marathon (2.27). Isocrates and his pupil Lycurgus also call Xerxes the enemy of
Athens and Greece (Isoc. 4.88-89; 5.42; Lycurg. Leoc. 68). The purpose of
Athenian orators here was to exalt the glory of Xerxes’ opponent by devaluing
his psychology and morality. Although the name of Xerxes was illuminated, and
Athens maintained sporadic contact with Persia, Athenian orators spoke of
Xerxes’ successors anonymously, as ‘the king’, ‘the great king’, or ‘the Persian
king’. This shift was, as Lenfant points out, mainly a result of Athenian rhetoric
designed to collectively represent the Persian kings as the ‘enemy’ of Greece or
Athens.29
The idea of Persian decadence was thus shared by many if not most
Athenian intellectuals contemporary with Ctesias. Differing from the Persica,
Socratic philosophers Xenophon and Plato underscored the change from a flour-
ishing empire to one in a state of decline, and others also illustrated the empire’s
corruption within the context of various themes, such as oratories and philo-
sophical theses. The discussion will now be focused on Isocrates’ Panegyricus,
To Philips, and Plato’s Laws, and centre around their shared similarities with the
Persica. These works are appropriate for use in this study, as all of them were
written after the Persica, and neither authors had any first-hand experience of
the Persian Empire. In other words, it is more probable that they based their de-
scriptions on information acquired from the Persica itself.
28
The authenticity of Xenophon’s last chapter of Cyropaedia is controversial, but I argue that it should
be ascribed to him, as any decisive evidence to the contrary does not exist.
29
Lenfant, 2000b: 42-46.

- 48 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

As mentioned above, Isocrates held Cyrus the Great in high esteem.

However, when regarding the contemporary Persian Empire he incites his read-
ers (the Panegyricus was originally written in the form of a public speech, but
was never actually delivered as such by Isocrates; it is assumed instead to have
been published as a political pamphlet) to wage war against the ‘Great King’,
reiterating the extent to which the Persian Empire has decayed. Isocrates points
to the Persian Empire as being a common enemy of the Greeks, and in doing so
he sought to unite Greek states under the banner of Athens in the Panegyricus, or
Macedon, a newly-rising kingdom at the moment of To Philips. There had been
long and enduring strife between Athens, Sparta and Thebes, providing a strong
motivation for a unifying conflict against a common foe. His fervent speech,
however, did not successfully eliminate discord even among Athenians, as
demonstrated by Demosthenes in On the Symmories (354 BCE), who discour-
aged them from a hasty commencement of hostilities with the Persians, although
admitting the Persian King to be the common enemy of Greeks (14.3).
In any case, for the purpose of unifying the Greek states and urging a
war against Persia, Isocrates needed to show that the Persian Empire of his day
was not as powerful as it had once been. As evidence for this claim, he provides
the example of the return march of the Ten Thousand Greek mercenaries, who
after having been left stranded in Persia’s interior following the death of their
employer Cyrus, escaped back to the Black Sea with their numbers fast dwin-
dling (4.145-149). This campaign is known to us mostly on the basis of the
Anabasis, written by Xenophon, who was himself part of the troops. However,
Domenica Paola Orsi suggests the possibility, by means of philological compar-
ative study, that Isocrates referred not to Anabasis, but Ctesias’ Persica instead. 30
Regarding his topic of discussion, the decay emphasised by Isocrates mainly
concerns military depletion, and this would not seem to be directly related to the
Persica. However, the Greek word anandria (cowardice) used by Isocrates to
describe the military decline of Persia, which is the antonym of andreia (virility),
and hence the physical impotence implied could be related to the lack of manli-
ness referenced in Greek literature. A tenuous link might thus be suggested be-
tween Isocrates’ arguments and the narrative of powerful women and sexually
incomplete men (eunuchs) pictured by Ctesias.
Plato’s Laws was, on the other hand, written around the 350s, and con-
stituted his final and most lengthy dialogue (twelve books). Just as in another
one of his great works, the Republic, he undertook to establish the ideal frame-
work of a state ‘by arguments’ (702D). The more practical aspects of this objec-

30
Orsi, 1980.

- 49 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

tive are set forth from Book 4 onwards, while the first three books are reserved
for preliminary discussion. In Book 3, through an examination of their history, a
debate is held regarding the origin and development of political societies, and
the Persian decadence is quoted as a model contrapositive of the ideal (a prefer-
ence is expressed instead for the constitutions of Sparta and Crete). The Atheni-
an (who is commonly presumed to represent Plato himself) explains his opinion
that there are two matrices of constitution, termed monarchy and democracy, the
extreme case of the former being the Persian state, and that of the latter repre-
sented by Athens. The Persians under Cyrus maintained the proper equilibrium
between servitude and freedom; after first liberating themselves from Median
oppression, they became the masters of many others. Nevertheless, once they
rose to power, they failed in effective administration, due to excesses of servi-
tude and despotism. The reason for this collapse was rooted mainly in the aban-
donment of Persian educational practices. The original Persian tradition was one
of arduous training in the craft of their fathers, by which means shepherds of
great toughness were raised. Once they established their empire, however, the
upbringing was left in the hands of women and eunuchs; their successors were
thus raised in luxury, and with a lacking of discipline. Upon taking over the reins
of power, brothers struggled among themselves for control of the throne, and as
a consequence the prosperity of their empire was squandered, Plato explains
(693D-698A).
Plato and Isocrates shared some common arguments. Regarding the role
of education in Persian decadence, Isocrates held the same opinion as Plato; mil-
itary incompetence was the result of an educational system which served only to
raise a cowardly and faithless people (4.150-153). Plato also suggests decadence
by stating that moral deficiency is detrimental to military discipline (Leg.
697D-698A). Regarding a possible influence from Ctesias’ Persica in Plato’s
theory, one can point to the fact that he includes eunuchs and women as part of
the empire’s decadence. This is, however, insufficient evidence for attributing a
clear connection to the Persica, as there is no mention or implication of eunuchs
and women directly participating in the education of the royal family. The Per-
sian Empire had been portrayed as effeminate long before, but it is at this mo-
ment that the view emerged of women and eunuchs being involved directly in
the empire’s decline; Plato would have been influenced or inspired by the Per-
sica, but only while in the process of developing his own theory.

So far, this paper has addressed two issues: whether Ctesias’ Persica in-
corporates an idea of Persian decadence, and in which manner it was linked to
the portrayal of decline clearly described by his contemporaries. I initiated the

- 50 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

discussion with the question of whether it is possible to discern Persian deca-

dence in the book of a Greek writer who experienced the Persian Empire
first-hand. Contrary to Lenfant’s argument, that decadence within the empire is
unlikely to be represented due to the fact that the Persica mentions eunuchs and
women from beginning to end, I propose that readers would have been left with
the impression of a tumbling empire from the late fifth century onwards, with a
decline being the result of eunuchs and women who engaged in conspiracies and
intervened in politics more frequently as the story progresses. However, unlike
contemporary Athenians, who stressed Persian decadence in accordance with
their specific themes, it is difficult to point to a clear-cut delineation of Persian
collapse in Ctesias’ history. This is partly due to the genre of his work being a
history, but rather also a result of the sheer amount of information it conveys, as
well as its strong gossipy nature. This style was caused by the fact that Ctesias
gathered information as a doctor who was confined to the court, and not in a po-
sition to have any direct contact with important royalty, but rather fated to spend
his time solely in the company of eunuchs and female servants.
As to the question of how related the Persica was to the depictions of
Persian decadence in the works of his contemporary Athenians, I did not pro-
gress beyond pointing out some common features. This is due to the fact that
these works fail to make any direct reference to the Persica (ancient Greek au-
thors generally did not cite by name the preceding writers referenced by them,
except for the purpose of delivering critique). H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg under-
scores the part played by Ctesias in creating the view of Persian decadence, but
we can hardly detect the direct echoes of the Persica in fourth-century Athenian
sources such as Isocrates’ Panegyricus, To Philips, and Plato’s Laws. However,
considering their depiction of the royal princes as having been educated by eu-
nuchs and of Persian males as having been emasculated, it is not to be denied
that the Persica, which is populated by malicious and pernicious eunuchs and
women, accentuated the femininity of the empire.
All in all, I conclude that the Persica was not shaped by Ctesias’ adher-
ence to an ideology of Persian decadence, whilst possibly becoming the very
source of such an ideology. Taking into consideration Ctesias’ career, that he was
born in Asia Minor, worked at the Persian court, and spent practically his entire
life within the Persian effective sphere, it can be said that his work is a reflection
of the Persian Empire as he actually experienced it. The ideology of Persian
decadence that came into existence at this time was accepted by Hellenistic and
Roman writers, and was subsequently absorbed as part of universal history. Ar-
rian, for instance, describes to us a scene at the eve of the battle of Issus where
Alexander delivers a speech, in which he relates how the Persian Empire was

- 51 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

smothered in luxury, indolence and softness (Anab. 2.7.4-5). Here, a reader

would note the repetition of the very same motif as that of other writers dis-
cussed in this paper. Although the success and development of the idea of Per-
sian decadence is a topic of great value and interest, this goes beyond the scope
of the present study, and should be discussed elsewhere.

Bibliography
Abe, T., 2007: “Rekishika Ctesias no Keireki to Persica (Ctesias of Cnidus: His Stay at
the Persian Court and Its Influence on the Persica: in Japanese)”, Seiyoshigaku:
The Studies in Western History 228, 43-57.
― 2009: “Ctesias Persica to Zen 4-Seiki Girisiago-Bunken ni okeru Persia-teikoku
Suitai-shikan (Persian Decadence: Ctesias’ Persica and Fourth-Century Greek
Works: in Japanese)”, Sichō: The Journal of History N.S. 65, 93-112.
Auberger, A., 1993: “Ctésias et les femmes”, DHA 19, 253-272.
Briant, P., 2001: “History and Ideology: The Greek and ‘Persian Decadence’”, in: T.
Harrison (ed.), Greeks and Barbarians, Edinburgh, 193-210.
― 2002: From Cyrus to Alexander: A History of the Persian Empire, Winona Lake.
Brosius, M., 1996: Women in Ancient Persia (559-331 BC), Oxford.
Hall, E., 1989: Inventing the Barbarian: Greek Self-Definition through Tragedy, Oxford.
― 1993: “Asia Unmanned: Images of Victory in Classical Athens”, in: J. Rich and G.
Shipley (eds.), War and Society in the Greek World, London and New York,
108-133.
Jacoby, F., 1922: “Ktesias”, RE XI, 2032-2073.
Kuhrt, A., 1995: “The Achaemenid Empire (c. 550-330)”, in: Id., The Ancient Near
East: c. 3000- 330 B.C., Vol. 2, London, 647-701.
Lenfant, D., 2000a: “Nicolas de Damas et le corpus des fragments de Ctésias: du frag-
ment comme adaptation”, AncSoc 30, 293-318.
― 2000b: “Les rois de Perse vus d’Athènes”, in: M. Seranski (ed.), Les grands hommes
des autres. Actes du X colloque Poznan-Strasbourg des 4-6 novembre 1998, Poz-
nań, 33-49.
― 2001: “Le ‘décadence’ du grand roi et les ambitions de Cyrus le Jeune: aux sources
perses d’un myth occidental?”, REG 114, 407-438.
― 2004: Ctésias de Cnide: la Perse, l’Inde, autre fragments, Paris.
― 2012: “Ctesias and His Eunuchs: A Challenge for Modern Historians”, Histos 6,
257-297.
Llewellyn-Jones, L., 2002: “Eunuchs and the Royal Harem in Achaemenid Persia

- 52 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

(559-331 BC)”, in: S. Tougher (ed.), Eunuchs in Antiquity and Beyond, London,
19-49.
Orsi, D.P., 1980: “Della presenza di Ctesia in Isocrate e Diodoro”, AFLB 23, 107-114.
Sancisi-Weerdenburg, H., 1987a: “Introduction”, Achaemenid History, Vol. 1, Leiden,
xi-xiv.
― 1987b: “Decadence in the Empire or Decadence in the Sources?: From Source to
Synthesis: Ctesias”, Achaemenid History, Vol. 1, Leiden, 33-45.
Swoboda, H., 1901: “Dareios 2”, RE IV/4, 2199-2205.
Tagliaferro Manganelli, M.T., 1991/1992: “Principesse persiane nell’opera di Ctesia di
Cnido I: attendibilità di Ctesia”, AIV 150, 85-111.
― 1992/1993: “Principesse persiane nell’opera di Ctesia di Cnido II: politica femminile
alla corte achemenide”, AIV 151, 461-503.
Toher, M., 1989: “On the Use of Nicolaus’ Historical Fragment”, ClAnt 8, 159-172.

- 53 -
Ctesias’ Persica T. Abe

- 54 -