Latest / The Achaemenid Empire: Persia's Golden Age of Power — Fexingo History / Artaxerxes II and the War of Brothers
Transcript
- Lucas: Welcome back to the Fexingo History podcast. For anyone stepping into these conversations with us through the ancient world, we’ve spent a lot of time looking outward at how Persia managed its vast territories, from the Royal Road to the satrapies. But today, we’re turning inward to look at a moment when the empire’s greatest strength became its most dangerous vulnerability. Lucas: It is the year 401 BC, and the throne in Susa is held by Artaxerxes II. He has been king for about twenty-five years, ruling over a peace that has made the empire incredibly wealthy. But right now, he is terrified because his own brother, Cyrus the Younger, is marching an army toward him. And this isn't just a small raid; it is a massive force designed to usurp the throne entirely. Luna: So the threat is coming from inside the house? Lucas: Exactly. It’s a classic fratricide scenario, but on a scale that shakes the foundations of the Middle East. Cyrus has always had ambitions, ever since their father Darius II was on the throne, but this campaign is different. He has gathered everything he can command from the western satrapies—Lydia, Phrygia, Cappadocia—and he has done something unprecedented. He has hired fifteen thousand Greek mercenaries to fight alongside his Persian levies. Lucas: These are hoplites, heavily armored infantrymen trained for the brutal close-quarters combat of Greek warfare. To Cyrus, they represent the elite spearhead he needs to smash through any loyalist resistance. To Artaxerxes, they are a terrifying unknown variable entering the heartland of Persia. Luna: Did Artaxerxes know what kind of soldiers were coming? Lucas: He suspected, but the sheer number and quality of them probably exceeded his worst fears. When the two armies finally met near the village of Cunaxa, just north of Babylon, the scale of the engagement was staggering. Herodotus would have loved this level of detail, but our best source here is actually Xenophon, one of those Greek mercenaries who survived the battle and wrote about it later in his book, the Anabasis. Lucas: The battle unfolded in a standard way for the region. On the left wing, Cyrus placed his heavy cavalry and the Greek mercenaries. On the right, Artaxerxes positioned his own heavy cavalry and the bulk of the Persian foot soldiers. In the center, both kings stood with their personal guards, surrounded by chariots and scythed wagons designed to cut down enemy ranks. Luna: And the Greeks were on Cyrus's side? Lucas: They were. They were commanded by experienced generals like Memnon of Rhodes and Proxenus of Thebes. These men were professionals, used to fighting in tight phalanx formations. When the battle began, Cyrus charged his left wing directly against Artaxerxes’s right. The Greek phalanxes advanced steadily, pushing back the Persian levies that tried to stop them. It looked like Cyrus might actually win. Lucas: But then, in the center of the field, Artaxerxes saw his chance. He led a direct charge against Cyrus’s position. It was risky, putting the king himself in harm's way, but he had the numbers and the momentum. Cyrus rode out to meet him, and in the chaos of that central melee, Cyrus was struck down and killed. The head of the rebellion was gone in an instant. Luna: So the Greeks won their fights but lost the war? Lucas: Precisely. With Cyrus dead, the Greek mercenaries found themselves deep behind enemy lines, without a leader, without orders, and surrounded by a hostile empire that viewed them as invaders. Artaxerxes won the battle, but he had just created a massive problem. He had thousands of highly trained, angry, and unemployed warriors wandering in the middle of his territory. Lucas: What happened next is one of the most fascinating episodes of diplomatic intrigue in antiquity. The Persian commanders invited the Greek generals to negotiate. They promised safe passage home if the Greeks would swear allegiance to the new king. But there was a catch. Artaxerxes wanted them to agree not to attack any Persian cities on their journey back. Luna: Did the generals trust the Persians? Lucas: They were desperate enough to listen. During the negotiations, a man named Orontas betrayed them. He was a Persian satrap who had ostensibly joined Cyrus but had actually been playing both sides. He revealed to Artaxerxes that several of the Greek generals, including Memnon and Proxenus, had previously fought against Persia in other conflicts. Lucas: Artaxerxes seized on this. He invited the top generals to a parley under a flag of truce and then executed them on the spot. It was a brutal move, stripping the Greek army of its leadership while they were still vulnerable. Only one man escaped: Cleon, who managed to slip away and take command of the remaining forces along with another officer named Clearchus. Luna: That sounds like a death sentence for the whole army. Lucas: It seemed like it. Imagine being fifteen thousand Greek hoplites, hundreds of miles from home, in the middle of Mesopotamia, with no leaders and a furious king chasing you. But what followed was a masterpiece of survival. Under the leadership of Cleon and later Xenophon, who emerged as a voice among the soldiers, the army began the long retreat north. Lucas: This is the route that makes up the bulk of the Anabasis. They marched through Armenia, avoiding major battles whenever possible, relying on discipline and speed. They faced constant harassment from local tribes and Persian cavalry, but they kept moving. It wasn't just a march; it was a strategic withdrawal that turned a disaster into a legend. Luna: How did they even get food during that march? Lucas: They foraged, traded with local communities, and sometimes raided. It was harsh work. Many died from exposure, hunger, or skirmishes. But they maintained their cohesion. There’s a famous quote from Xenophon about this period where he notes that the Greeks were more united in their desire to survive than they had ever been in their home cities. The shared trauma forged a incredible bond. Lucas: Eventually, they reached the Black Sea coast at Trapezus. When the soldiers saw the water, they cheered, realizing they were finally safe. They had returned to civilization after months in the wilderness. The Ten Thousand had achieved the impossible: they had walked out of the heart of the Persian Empire alive. Lucas: Before we dive deeper into how this victory affected Persian politics, I want to share a quick note about how this show exists. We don’t have advertisers or corporate sponsors. Everything you hear is produced by a small team funded entirely by listeners like you. If this conversation has added value to your week, consider supporting us monthly at buy me a coffee dot com slash fexingo. It helps us keep the research deep and the production clean. Luna: Yeah, it really keeps the focus on the stories rather than selling anything. Lucas: It does. And it allows us to cover topics like this without worrying about fitting into a commercial slot. So, back to Artaxerxes. He had survived the rebellion, but the cost was high. He had executed his brother’s top commanders, which sent shockwaves through the Greek world. Sparta, in particular, was furious. Lucas: Sparta had been a key ally of Cyrus in his earlier campaigns, and the murder of Greek generals violated the concept of guest-friendship, or xenia, which was sacred in Greek culture. This act pushed Sparta into a more aggressive stance against Persia, leading to decades of proxy wars in Asia Minor. The Peace of Antalcidas eventually ended this, but the tension remained. Luna: Did Artaxerxes regret killing those generals? Lucas: Probably not at the time, but it created a legacy of distrust. He proved that the Persian king could be ruthless, but he also showed that the empire could be challenged from within. For the rest of his reign, Artaxerxes had to be careful about how he treated his relatives and his satraps. The shadow of Cyrus hung over every decision he made. Lucas: There’s also the matter of Hystaspes, another son of Darius II who governed Bactria. He considered launching his own rebellion later in Artaxerxes’s life, inspired by his brother’s success. While he never got far, it shows that the model of fraternal rivalry was baked into the succession process. The empire didn’t have a clear rule for who inherited the throne, so brothers often competed, sometimes violently. Luna: So the system itself encouraged civil wars? Lucas: It certainly did. Without a strict primogeniture law, any son with enough support in a satrapy could try his luck. It was a gamble that paid off for Artaxerxes in 401 BC, but it drained resources and created instability. The empire was vast, but its political structure was fragile when it came to leadership transitions. Lucas: We often think of the Achaemenids as a monolithic power, but they were constantly balancing these internal threats. The Battle of Cunaxa wasn't just a military engagement; it was a stress test for the entire imperial system. And while Artaxerxes passed that test, the scars it left influenced Persian diplomacy and military strategy for the next fifty years. Luna: It feels like a precursor to all the struggles Rome would face later. Lucas: There are definitely parallels. Civil wars, usurpations, the use of foreign mercenaries—all of these elements appear again and again in history. But the Persian response was unique in its scale and its ability to absorb the shock. Even after Cunaxa, the empire continued to function, collecting taxes and maintaining roads, despite the internal trauma. Lucas: It’s a reminder that empires are resilient, but their resilience depends on how they handle their own people. Artaxerxes managed to hold it together, but he did so through a mix of brute force and careful diplomacy. The Greeks went home, the satraps stayed quiet, and the Great King remained on his throne. Luna: Did any of those Greek mercenaries stay in Persia? Lucas: Some did, eventually settling in various parts of the empire or serving in other capacities. But the main body returned to Greece, bringing back stories of Persian wealth and organization that fascinated their fellow citizens. Xenophon’s account became a classic text, studied for generations not just for its military details, but for its insights into leadership and survival. Lucas: So, as we wrap up this look at the War of the Brothers, what stands out to you? Is it the military aspect, or the political maneuvering? Luna: The political side feels more dangerous in the long run. Lucas: I agree. The battlefield victory was temporary, but the erosion of trust between the royal family and the satraps was permanent. It set a pattern that would continue until the empire’s final collapse. Each time a king died, there was a risk of another Cunaxa, another brother rising up. It kept the court in a state of perpetual anxiety. Lucas: For now, though, Artaxerxes secured his position. He ruled for another forty years, enjoying the stability that Cyrus’s defeat bought him. The empire continued to shine, its gold coins flowing, its temples built, its roads maintained. The golden age wasn't over yet, but the cracks were beginning to show. Luna: It’s interesting how internal threats can be just as deadly as external ones. Lucas: They often are. We tend to focus on the big invasions, like Alexander’s conquest, but the slow decay from within, the feuds and betrayals, those are what weaken an empire before the final blow arrives. Thanks for listening, and I’ll see you in the next episode.