From these formulas a reconstruction model of how royal or satrapal commands were created can be drawn up:
1 A high official (e.g. satrap) passes a (royal) command in Old Iranian to one of his officials. This person (PN1) is the one who knows the command.
2 The official transmits the command to the interpreter (PN2) in Old Iranian. This is equivalent to formula P.
3 The interpreter notes it down in Aramaic.
4 If necessary, the interpreter also makes a translation into Egyptian or Elamite.
5 He passes this translation to an indigenous scribe (PN3).
6 This scribe makes an additional copy, the copy of which is preserved.
The interpreters‐scribes, called teppir in Elamite, spr in Aramaic, and sepīru in Akkadian, occupied a considerable position in the Achaemenid administration. This is corroborated by the high rations they received according to the Persepolis Fortification Tablets (Tavernier 2007b: p. 63). In fact, interpreters (῾ερμηνεύς) occur frequently in the Greek sources (e.g. Xen., Anab., 1.2.17 and 8.12).
This also implies that Aramaic, although it did not supplant the local languages which remained in use throughout the Achaemenid period (Briant 1996: p. 524), was imposed on the empire as an administrative language. It lay as a veil on the whole territory of the Achaemenid Empire. In this capacity, Aramaic was the linguistic binder of the empire, the language used throughout its territory, between the Old Persian level and the local administrative level. The following table makes this clear:
| Administration level | Language |
|---|---|
| King, satraps | Old Persian |
| Administration: top level | Aramaic |
| Administration: local level | Egyptian, Elamite, etc. |
Through this system, the Achaemenids managed to keep their realm together and to put up an efficient state administration. Yet, further studies will hopefully deepen our knowledge of the Achaemenid language policy.
REFERENCES
1 Ambler, W. (2001). Xenophon: The Education of Cyrus. Ithaca: Cornell University Press.
2 Briant, P. (1996). Histoire de l’Empire perse de Cyrus à Alexandre, Achaemenid History 10. Paris: Fayard.
3 Heller, A. (2010). Das Babylonien der Spätzeit (7.–4. Jh.) in den klassischen und keilschriftlichen Quellen, Oikumene: Studien zur antiken Weltgeschichte 7. Berlin: Verlag Antike.
4 Henkelman, W.F.M., Stolper, M.W. (2009). Ethnic identity and ethnic labelling at Persepolis: the case of the Skudrians. In P. Briant, M. Chauveau (eds.), Organisation des pouvoirs et contacts culturels dans les pays de l’empire achéménide, Persika 14. Paris: de Boccard, pp. 271–329.
5 Jacobs, B. (2003). Die altpersischen Länderlisten und Herodots sogenannte Satrapienliste (Historien III 89–94): Eine Gegenüberstellung und ein Überblick über die jüngere Forschung. In R. Dittmann, C. Eder, and B. Jacobs (eds.), Altertumswissenschaften im Dialog: Festschrift für Wolfram Nagel zur Vollendung seines 80. Lebensjahres, Alter Orient und Altes Testament 306. Münster: Ugarit‐Verlag, pp. 301–343.
6 Joannès, F. (1984). Contrats de marriage d’époque récente. Revue Archéologique, 78, pp. 71–81.
7 Joannès, F. (2009). Diversité ethnique et culturelle en Babylonie récente. In P. Briant, M. Chauveau (eds.), Organisation des pouvoirs et contacts culturels dans les pays de l'empire achéménide, Persika 14. Paris: de Boccard, pp. 217–236.
8 Jursa, M. (2010). Der neubabylonische Hof. In B. Jacobs, R. Rollinger (eds.), Der Achämenidenhof – The Achaemenid Court, Classica et Orientalia 2. Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, pp. 67–106.
9 Rollinger, R., Henkelman, W.F.M. (2009). New observations on ‘Greeks’ in the Achaemenid empire according to cuneiform texts from Babylonia and Persepolis. In P. Briant, M. Chauveau (eds.), Organisation des pouvoirs et contacts culturels dans les pays de l’empire achéménide, Persika 14. Paris: de Boccard, pp. 331–351.
10 Ruffing, K. (2009). Die ‘Satrapienliste’ des Dareios: Herodoteisches Konstrukt oder Realität. Archäologische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan, 41, pp. 323–340.
11 Stolper, M.W. (1985). Entrepreneurs and Empire: The Murašû Archive, the Murašû Firm, and Persian Rule in Babylonia, Uitgaven van het Nederlands Historisch‐Archaeologisch Instituut te Istanbul 54. Istanbul: Nederlands Instituut voor het Nabije Oosten.
12 Tavernier, J. (2007a). Iranica in the Achaemenid period (ca. 550–330 B.C.): Lexicon of Old Iranian Proper Names and Loanwords: Attested in Non‐Iranian Texts, Orientalia Lovaniensia Analecta 158. Leuven: Peeters.
13 Tavernier, J. (2007b). The case of Elamite tep‐/tip‐ and Akkadian uppu. Iran, 44, pp. 57–69.
14 Tavernier, J. (2008). Multilingualism in the Fortification and Treasury Archives. In P. Briant, W.F.M. Henkelman, and M.W. Stolper (eds.), L’archive des Fortifications de Persépolis: État des questions et perspectives de recherches, Persika 12. Paris: de Boccard, pp. 59–86.
15 Tavernier, J. (2015). Des Lyciens à Persépolis et Mésopotamie durant la période achéménide (c. 521–331 av. J.‐C.). In R. Lebrun, E. Raimond, and J. De Vos, (eds.), Studia de Lycia Antiqua (Hethitica 17). Leuven: Peeters, pp. 147–174.
16 Tavernier, J. (2017) The Use of Languages on the Various Levels of Administration in the Achaemenid Empire. In B. Jacobs, W.F.M. Henkelman & M.W. Stolper (eds.), Die Verwaltung im Achämenidenreich. Imperiale Muster und Strukturen / Administration in the Achaemenid Empire. Tracing the Imperial Signature. Classica et Orientalia 17, Wiesbaden: Harrassowitz, pp. 337–412.
17 Tavernier, J. (2018). Multilingualism in the Elamite kingdoms and the Achaemenid empire. In J. Braarvig, M. Geller (eds.), Studies in Multilingualism, Lingua Franca and Lingua Sacra, Max Planck Research Library for History and Development of Knowledge. Berlin: Pro Business, pp. 407–420.
18 Tavernier, J. (2020). Persian in official documents and the processes of multilingual administration. In C.J. Tuplin, J. Ma (eds.), Aršāma and his World. The Bodleian Letters in Context III. Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 75‐96.
19 Tolini, G. (2008). Les travailleurs babyloniens et le palais de Taokè. ARTA 2008.002, pp. 1–11.
20 Uchitel,
