Women's Rights in Achaemenid Persia

[Chulanlongkorn U Alumni]

I have heard from a few Persians that the Persians were the first people to explicitly support human rights. These things included abolishing slavery and given women equal rights as men. The examples given to me included Persian women serving in the military.

But how much of this is true though? What are the scholarly sources that supported this interesting claim? Is this merely Iranian propaganda?


Thank you

[conon394]

Persians were the first people to explicitly support human rights

In general this is a canard based on poor/politically motivated translations of the 'Cyrus Cylinder'.

For the basic issues you can find a good discussion here http://www.livius.org/ct-cz/cyrus_I/cyrus_cylinder.html

These things included abolishing slavery

Certainly Persia did no such thing - I have posted before and can do so again the easy evidence against this - that fact of Babylonian slave sales under Persian rule (via archeology - cuneiform tablets). In addition it clear from Herodotus the Persians made no effort to stop the use of slaves in the Greek cities they controlled and in fact benefited from it.

and given women equal rights as men

I am no scholar of Persia but I doubt it - perhaps more rights compared to some and has an Imperial culture a top a vast empire maybe - But certainly not spread anywhere else. As far as I can tell Persian women could not rule in their own right and in general played no particular free role in politics, or economic life substantially different from any other society of the day.

Edit: Determining women's right's right in the ancient world is tricky business. You certainly can't usually use the odd female ruler as much in the way of evidence and its often difficult balance law codes against traditions etc. Take Athens; reading just the lit of Aristocrats you get the sheltered closeted female - but no archeology supports woman's rooms, law suits don't either and Athens provides the first and earliest archeological evidence for female doctors...

The examples given to me included Persian women serving in the military.

Huh? as far as I know that is rubbish, you should send a pm to rez , but I cannot think of any example of Persian female soldiers.

[MAXlMUS]

equal rights between men and women, abolishment of slavery? no. but on the other hand the status of women in the east was superior to that of women in greece (excluding the spartans). take, for example, the fact there are numerous female queens in the 'east', whereas there isn't a single significant female greek ruler i can think of.

Edit: Determining women's right's right in the ancient world is tricky business. You certainly can't usually use the odd female ruler as much in the way of evidence and its often difficult balance law codes against traditions etc. Take Athens; reading just the lit of Aristocrats you get the sheltered closeted female - but no archeology supports woman's rooms, law suits don't either and Athens provides the first and earliest archeological evidence for female doctors...

and this is the problem - differentiating the status of upper status women from those of the lower classes. but since literary sources do exist, i think we should look in their direction instead of making assumptions based on archaeological data which may or may not turn out correct

As far as I can tell Persian women could not rule in their own right and in general played no particular free role in politics, or economic life substantially different from any other society of the day.

Huh? as far as I know that is rubbish, you should send a pm to rez , but I cannot think of any example of Persian female soldiers.

there is one famous woman i can think of who acted as a commander and a ruler of sorts (vassal to the persian king) - artemisia, who accompanied xerxes during the invasion and is said to have taken part in the naval fighting (sinking a greek ship) and given sound advice to xerxes. herodotus mentions that the greek commanders offered a reward for whoever would capture her because they hated the idea that a women could go to war against them. on the other hand both she and herodotus came from the same city, so there might be a bit of exaggeration from the writers part

[rez]

There is no mention of female Persians serving in the ranks. There was a little fuss made a few years ago over a female Achaemenid tomb where the body was buried with weapons. Thats the closest thing I've ever seen for proof.

Frankly I think its a foolish idea. The Greeks were exceedingly happy to criticise the Persian court for the influence that women were allowed to wield so if the Persians fielded female soldiers people like Xenophon would have had a field day.

Iranians are sometimes a little overzealous when it comes to proclaiming the liberty of the Achaemenids. Conon has wisely pointed out some of the errors and I can agree that women were by no means the equal partners of men since their political oppurtunities were minimal. But on the other hand they do appear to have wielded political influence if they were high ranking enough.

And thanks to the Persepolis Fortification Tablets we know that noble women were often found to be administering estates (PF 163) and in some cases were entirely self sufficient with their own sources of revenue (PF 164). We also have extensive evidence of the freedom Persian women had to travel (PF 168) confounding the misplaced notion of the harem. With the workforce of Persis we get the most enlightened approach to gender roles. Men and women were paid equal measure for equal work (PF 175) and in cases where a female worker was doing a more difficult job than a male co-worker she would be paid more than the man (PF 172).

there is one famous woman i can think of who acted as a commander and a ruler of sorts (vassal to the persian king) - artemisia, who accompanied xerxes during the invasion and is said to have taken part in the naval fighting (sinking a greek ship) and given sound advice to xerxes. herodotus mentions that the greek commanders offered a reward for whoever would capture her because they hated the idea that a women could go to war against them. on the other hand both she and herodotus came from the same city, so there might be a bit of exaggeration from the writers part

Artemesia wasn't even an Iranian woman let alone a Persian.

[MAXlMUS]

Oh I know they had an explicit right to inherent - but so what could they vote, lead armies, decide on who to marry? All in all we have really just on thing that results from the Spartan states attack on private households. Could they sell their land to some rich Corinthian and emigrate, could they become doctors or artists - nope: so let not fall all over ourselves about their equality or freedom.

women's 'rights' as we know them today are a development of the past 100 years, so i think it's wrong to compare women from antiquity to women today

Female Queens do not imply female rights a couple of those female queens are from Halicarnassus here the average female had average Greek female rights.

i wasn't referring to halicarnassuss in particular (and besides she wasn't actually greek). there were several assyrian and arabian queens in antiquity. but persians and greeks being both indo european peoples, i wouldn't expect their status to differ much

Who says they had better rights?

When asked by a woman from Attica, "Why are you Spartan women the only ones who can rule men?", Gorgo replied, "Because we are also the only ones who give birth to men."

ok this is not a really serious argument, but spartan women did have a more marked role in society

and plz give your source for the athenian flute players

Artemesia wasn't even an Iranian woman let alone a Persian.

so was most of the 'persian' army

[rez]

so was most of the 'persian' army

But if the female soldier wasn't a Persian then it doesn't tell you anything about how liberally treated Persian women were. It merely supposes they were content to let other cultures field women.

[Chulanlongkorn U Alumni]

But if the female soldier wasn't a Persian then it doesn't tell you anything about how liberally treated Persian women were. It merely supposes they were content to let other cultures field women.

That's okay, Rez. This would still count as women's rights in Achaemenid Persian territories.

[MAXlMUS]

But if the female soldier wasn't a Persian then it doesn't tell you anything about how liberally treated Persian women were. It merely supposes they were content to let other cultures field women.

re-read my posts rez... i never mentionned (ethnic) persian women in particular

[conon394]

take, for example, the fact there are numerous female queens in the 'east', whereas there isn't a single significant female greek ruler i can think of.

Female Queens do not imply female rights a couple of those female queens are from Halicarnassus here the average female had average Greek female rights.

(excluding the spartans)

Who says they had better rights?

Oh I know they had an explicit right to inherent - but so what could they vote, lead armies, decide on who to marry? All in all we have really just on thing that results from the Spartan states attack on private households. Could they sell their land to some rich Corinthian and emigrate, could they become doctors or artists - nope: so let not fall all over ourselves about their equality or freedom.

there is one famous woman i can think of who acted as a commander and a ruler of sorts (vassal to the persian king) - artemisia, who accompanied xerxes during the invasion and is said to have taken part in the naval fighting (sinking a greek ship) and given sound advice to xerxes. herodotus mentions that the greek commanders offered a reward for whoever would capture her because they hated the idea that a women could go to war against them. on the other hand both she and herodotus came from the same city, so there might be a bit of exaggeration from the writers part

Again a female queen does not equal female warriors or equal rights. The fact Elizabeth ruled England says nothing about the fact that women in England did not have equal rights and did not serve in the military.

and this is the problem - differentiating the status of upper status women from those of the lower classes. but since literary sources do exist, i think we should look in their direction instead of making assumptions based on archaeological data which may or may not turn out correct

Fine but don't mistake upper class lit by and for the aristocrats for the norm.

[conon394]

And thanks to the Persepolis Fortification Tablets we know that noble women were often found to be administering estates (PF 163) and in some cases were entirely self sufficient with their own sources of revenue (PF 164). We also have extensive evidence of the freedom Persian women had to travel (PF 168) confounding the misplaced notion of the harem. With the workforce of Persis we get the most enlightened approach to gender roles. Men and women were paid equal measure for equal work (PF 175) and in cases where a female worker was doing a more difficult job than a male co-worker she would be paid more than the man (PF 172).

So should the fact an Athenian flute girl could easily make 3 times the amount a soldier could make suggest woman's rights in Attica?

The problem here is it seems to me is drinking the Aristocratic Kool-Aid and failing to see the real world of most people most of the time. The ideal of having a not working wife and is hardly just affect of the ancient world anyway - watch 'Leave it to Beaver' but it remains a bit of a chimerical for most people. The evidence from Athenian law cases shows women who command the finances of Athenian banking houses, and more broadly from comedy, art, curse tablets and sundry other its evidence of a whole class of Athenians women who work and take no crap from pompous aristocrats who want coddled women and an obsequious working class.

[rez]

So should the fact an Athenian flute girl could easily make 3 times the amount a soldier could make suggest woman's right in Attica?

Would she get paid as much as a male flute player?

But really, I'm not trying to make anything into a competition. I'm just pointing out what we know about Persia.

The problem here is it seems to me is drinking the Aristocratic Kool-Aid and failing to see the real world of most people most of the time. The ideal of having a not working wife and is hardly just affect of the ancient world anyway - watch 'Leave it to Beaver' but it remains a bit of a chimerical for most people. The evidence from Athenian law cases shows women who command the finances of Athenian banking houses, and more broadly from comedy, art, curse tablets and sundry other it and evidence a whole class of Athenians women who work and take no crap from pompous aristocrats who want coddled women and an obsequious working class

I agree. I am of the opinion that women's rights are more often than not underestimated all over the ancient world.

[Gromovnik]

Would she get paid as much as a male flute player?

I'd say more. Would you rather watch a girl or a guy playing a flute?

[conon394]

I am of the opinion that women's rights are more often than not underestimated all over the ancient world.

I would agree as long we are talking about informal rights - on balance I think in general you can all to easily show the weight of the law formally was male biased.

I think its important to realize just how much of ancient law was interested in family rights vs individual rights.

Would she get paid as much as a male flute player?

Actually presumably yes since the key piece of evidence here is Athenian price controls aimed at flute girls (not generic flute players).. which implies that they could have commanded more money in the open market - not hint of a similar male orientated legislation is known...

But really, I'm not trying to make anything into a competition. I'm just pointing out what we know about Persia.

I understand that - my argument is just we know the Athenian state paid slaves, metic and citizen craftsmen the same rates for public work. We know from curse tablets, art, and dedications women craftsmen did exist at Athens and in the absence of any indication of limited pay for women I see no reason to doubt that we have really a general truism women craftsmen no doubt got equal pay. I imagine it was a difficult or relatively rare path to tread but if successful I see no difference.

[rez]

Actually presumably yes since the key piece of evidence here is Athenian price controls aimed flute girls.. which implies that they could have commanded more money in the open market - not hint of a similar male orientated legislation is known...

Interesting.

I understand that - my argument is just we know the Athenian state paid slaves, metic and citizen craftsmen the same rates for public work. We know from Curse tablists and art women craftsmen did exist at Athens and so I in the absence of any indicationof limited pay for women I see no reason to doubt that we have really a general truism women craftsmen know doubt got equal pay. I imagine it was a difficult or relatively rare path to tread but if successful I see no difference.

I cannot but agree.

[skag]

ANCIENT PERSIA RUUUUULZZZZZZZ

Achaemenids Arsacids & Sassanids FTW !!!

[conon394]

I would say the issue of archeology is problematic. It represents a not random sample but at the same time is true in way that even the best literary evidence often cannot be - very much so when it amount to an official record or pay receipt.

Women as craftsmen is problematic indeed since in general it attacks a sort of truth that I think most Greek or Persian or Roman or Carthaginian males head of household would likely not want to admit that their wives or sisters or daughters had to work (although again since we lack much in the way of a working class lit that is still something of a aristocratically biased view). Women as estate manager is a bit more OK since given the tendency for an imbalance in marriage age and add in war mortality for a widow to end up running an estate is a bit more likely. You can find indications from Athens and Greece of loans by females equivalent to the Persian evidence (I think).

[conon394]

That's okay, Rez. This would still count as women's rights in Achaemenid Persian territories

No - it merely suggests one female ruler amongst all of the Persian subject states... the diffrence here is lots of male dominates societies with male armies and male biased laws have allowed the odd female monarch - but that says nothing about the day to day right of the average female.

[rez]

So be it but Artemisia was still the unique exception to the rule. It doesn't point to any rights for women at large since she is an isolated royal example.

And of course if this about showing how liberal the Persians were they obviously noted the example of Artemisia but then deigned not to copy the idea since there is no repetition of this sort of thing.

All Artemisia proves is that Xerxes was willing to tolerate a royal woman in his navy. Her influence over policy can be nothing more than dramatic flourish on the part of Herodotus.

re-read my posts rez... i never mentionned (ethnic) persian women in particular

I know. But if the ethnic super-class that was the Persians did not promulgate military equality it stands to reason that any credit for military equality cannot go to the Persians which is what the OP hints at as the Iranian propaganda.

Not that Artemisia is any kind of evidence for military equality at all...

[MAXlMUS]

I know. But if the ethnic super-class that was the Persians did not promulgate military equality it stands to reason that any credit for military equality cannot go to the Persians which is what the OP hints at as the Iranian propaganda.

Not that Artemisia is any kind of evidence for military equality at all...

i agree 100%

[conon394]

ok this is not a really serious argument, but spartan women did have a more marked role in society

No they really did not…

Did they vote, attend the Spartan assembly, hold office, name one influential priestess, attend courts, lead armies, hold the place of a Spartan king as regent, serve on any boards, please tell if I am missing something.

So now that we have come back to the point that the only difference is they held a very constrained explicit property right. That right however existed in the broader sense of a totalitarian state that allowed them very little freedom with their ‘rights’. Who arranged their marriages by the way their fathers, could they just run off with any fetching Corinthian merchant who caught their eye – I don’t think so. What if they wanted to be poets or artists or pot painters oops not in Sparta…

Again you can match literary quips about Spartan women with Athenian ones Elpinice was as forward as any Spartan chic and what of the proof from comedy of Athenian women low class no less who would not take crap from aristocrats or the solid evidence of Athenian women doctors...