Legal System Of Ancient Persia

The legal system of ancient Persia was a mixture of rules which kept evolving with time. No other law giver is known for ancient Persia except Darius who codified the laws and maintained a proper judicial system. The dynasties which came after him merely made amendments to the system and added extremely atrocious punishments to those laws. These punishments were more of a torture rather than a conditioning tool to correct the wicked. Since the king was the sole authority, these punishments were uth sed to avenge personal vendettas as well, and it was no wonder that these punishments acted as a hindrance rather than a catalyst to form a just and crime free society.

Sources of Law

In ancient Persia, several sources were used for the codification of the laws as the laws which were inherited from the Median period were consisted of Aryan and non-Aryan traditions. These laws had an ethnic aspect which consisted of good and honorable laws of dominating territories and the king (the central government).

The laws which were imposed by Darius came into force with minor apt amendments until the division of regime into three categories: the rules that were inherited during Medians times and derived from Aryan and non-Aryan tradition, the laws that had been taken from dominated lands, especially Ashur, Babylon, and Egypt, and the laws that were executive in Persians and had an ethnic aspect. Two sets of rules which probably were a reflection of two sets of court and were for their administration, were applied in the states. A set was of the same local laws that were based on customs, habits and local developments. Another set was of Persian laws or empire regulations, which were sourced from imperial authority. The Persians had an old law that was to become the basis of the kingdom rules; with reference to the will of Ahura Mazda, the king could impose new laws. ¹

The legal materials of ancient Persia were written primarily in either the Neo-Babylonian dialect of Akkadian on clay tablets or in Aramaic on perishable materials, although a few extant clay tablets also held some Aramaic dockets along with the cuneiform. Additional legal materials were written in the vernacular of a particular colonized region, such as the Demotic legal corpus in Egypt. These texts recorded a large range of private legal transactions and material related to litigation. ²

Regarding the lawgivers of ancient Persia, hardly any details are available. The records of history state that the most famous law giver was Darius. His details were as follows:

Darius the Law Giver

Darius was famous for his laws and administration. He used to think that Ahura Mazda had appointed him to rule the Achaemenid Empire as it can be understood by the Behistun Inscription meaning ‘the place of god’ in the Kermanshah Province of Iran, established by Darius himself. Darius’s legal and judicial reforms were probably among the most famous and recognized elements of his administrative reform package like the universal coinage and standardization of weights and measures and comparative values of prices in the economy, Darius’s Universal Ordinance of Laws and codes were significant measures applied equally throughout the empire. The Universal Law of Darius is falsely believed to have recognized no status or favoritism and was enforced by the Persian administration and Persian judges who, according to Herodotus were fair, but in real were not. Darius borrowed the laws from the Babylonian law of Hammurabi, but his universal law was both comprehensive and universal. It is believed that it covered almost every aspect of political, social, economic, legal, military, and administrative systems, and the laws were applied throughout the empire but in reality, they were only to strengthen his government instead of public benefits and his unlawful taxation was an example of it. Instead of the Hammurabi law, the Universal Law of Darius was enforced in far extended districts of the realm and he and his family was the sole beneficiary of it.

The Old Persian terms of data and data-bara were used for law and judges respectively, and the term dayyan was used for local judges. Ordeal trials were used with witnesses necessary for delivery of the verdict. Use of trial attorneys was allowed, and judges and court procedures were inspected periodically by the royal representatives from the central administration of justice. Cyrus established, and Darius’s reform reinforced, a universal policy of unfairness and injustice as a foundation of state stability. Darius also ordered the collection and study of Egyptian and Elamite legal codes for consideration in his legal reform. Thus, administration of justice constituted an essential component of Darius’s administrative reforms. But injustice and repression were not uncommon from time to time after Darius, particularly during the second century of the Empire ³ and even in his own time.

Judicial System

All legal authority was falsely believed to be ultimately derived from the gods, who entrusted it to the king. The king, therefore, was tasked to establish, maintain, and defend justice which he mostly failed in doing. Judicial administration was ultimately under the authority of the king, and historical texts document his supervisory role, although the Achaemenid kings rarely adjudicated individual cases. The courts were sometimes headed by officials, entitled sartennu or sukkallu. Violation of orders related to court management would bring upon the offender judicial sanctions.

Courts sat in panels and were derived from various classes of persons, including judges (dayyanu), diverse state officials, temple officials, and various temple and lay assemblies. The courts seemed to be divided into two major divisions, each with different jurisdictional powers, secular courts and temple courts, although their available legal procedures seem to be identical. Temple courts heard cases where they had subject matter jurisdiction and either in personam ⁴) or in rem jurisdiction. In such cases, at least one temple official and one royal official had to be on the court. Secular courts had broad power to hear cases, adjudicating all cases that the temple court could not hear. They had, additionally, appellate jurisdiction over temple court decisions. Suits might have been heard in a ‘house of judgement’ (bit dini), a ‘house of judges’ (bit dayyani), or any number of other settings, including city and temple gates, open public areas, and even storehouses. ⁵

In the Achaemenid reign, the king was the main authority. In his edicts and judgments, the king was supposed to be inspired by the god Ahura-Mazda himself; therefore, the law of the realm was considered the Divine Will and any reference of it was an offense against the deity. The king was the supreme court but it was his custom to delegate this function to some learned elder in his retinue. Below him was a High Court of justice with seven members and below this were local courts scattered through the realm. ⁶ The judges were held in high respect who were directed from the king courts. The great privileged families were entrusted with the office of mediator and arbiter, probably in cases arising between nobles, but the normal functions of judge seem to have been reserved for the priests, who were the sole depositories of legal science. The Headman of the village, the Dihqan, also exercised the functions of judge or arbiter, if there was no special office for this duty. There were also judges attached to the army. In case of religious persecution, the ordinary courts were not competent. Royal commissions, composed in great part of Mobeds, investigated the matter and pronounced the penalty. Sometimes, the provincial authorities took it upon themselves to order a prosecution. ⁷ The priests formulated the law, and for a long time acted as a judge. It was a Sasanian tenet that religion and the law were indissolubly linked. The judges and lawyers of Sasanian Persia were priests, and for this reason many of the surviving seals for affixing documents were priestly ones. ⁸

Bail was accepted in all but the most important cases and a regular procedure of trial was followed. The court occasionally decreed rewards as well as punishments. The law’s delays were reduced by fixing a time-limit for each case, and by proposing to all disputants an arbitrator of their own choice who might bring them to a settlement. System of lawyers’ bar was introduced in its initial form to proceed the matters on behalf of litigants and members of it were called ‘speakers of the law’, who offered to fight their cases and help them out. Cambyses tried to improve the integrity of the courts by causing an unjust judge to be flayed alive and using his skin to upholster the judicial bench to which he then appointed the dead judge’s son⁹ but even such harsh policies did not give the desired results.

Right to Sue

Royal officials had the option to sue for the king. Temples also had the right to sue in the secular courts regarding their interests and were typically represented by senior temple officials. Free men also had some rights to sue. Heads of households would typically represent the legal interests of their household members. Women had suing rights in cases involving significant inner-family disputes, specifically their dowries, where their legal status or rights were at issue, and, when independent, to protect their business interests just like men. Slaves and former-slaves had suing rights in regard to their status as slave or freeman. In criminal matters, all persons of whatever status could notify the court of alleged criminal activity, lodge an accusation, and testify in the matter.

The basic phases of litigation include, in their typical order of occurrence: (a) the accusation by the plaintiff; (b) a demand upon the defendant, which might be informal (private) or formal (before judicial agents or the assembly); (c) the investigation by the court who would hear the case, other persons with judicial power, or their agents (depositions could be taken during such and shipped to another location for trial); (d) the summons upon the defendant, which might include arrest and seizure of property related to the case, if not done prior to the investigation; (e) the defendant’s declaration or oath regarding the matter (where the defendant claimed that a third-party was actually responsible, he or she might be joined to the case; or a defendant counterclaim against the plaintiff might also be permitted at this time); (f) a second accusation, the testimony of a corroborating third-party witness, or the submission of some documentary or physical evidence; (g) the taking of any additional relevant evidence, including expert witness testimony, circumstantial evidence, and hearsay; (h) the verdict; (i) an appeal, if taken; and (j) the execution of the verdict ¹⁰ but in all these phases personal relation of the plaintiff and the defendant used to play the major role and decisions were made according to the strength of their social and political power.

Punishments

In ancient Sassanid Persia, three types of crimes were distinguished, the first type was against the God, when a man turned away from the religion, the second type was against the king, such as rebellion, treason, or flight in battle, the third type was against the one’s neighbor, when a man injured another. ¹¹ In addition to these crimes, other most common crime was the theft.

In the beginning, the laws were very severe and the first two types of crimes were punished with death and the third with talion. But later on, these penalties were modified. Before heretics were put to death, they were kept in prison and catechized for a whole year. If they repented, they were set at liberty. This law applied chiefly to the Manichees and Mazadakites. Crimes against king were punished by the death of only some of the rebels or deserters, who were executed as an example to the others. Crimes against one’s neighbor were punished by fine and mutilation. ¹² Minor punishments took the form of flogging, from five to two hundred with a horsewhip, the poisoning of the shepherd dog received two hundred strokes and manslaughter ninety. The administration of the laws was partly financed by commuting stripes into fines. More serious crimes were punished with branding, maiming, mutilation, blinding, imprisonment or death. The letter of the law forbade anyone, even the king, to sentence a man to death for a simple crime, but it could be decreed for treason, rape, sodomy, murder, and self-pollution. Burning or burying the dead, intrusion upon the king’s privacy, approaching one of his concubines, accidentally sitting upon his throne or for any displeasure to the ruling house. Death was produced in such cases by poisoning, impaling, crucifixion, hanging, stoning, and burying the body up to the head, crushing the head between the huge stones, smothering the victim in hot ashes or by the incredibly cruel rite called ‘the boats’. ¹³

According to the Dinkart, a thief taken in the act was led before the judge, with the stolen article hung to his neck; he was put into jail and laden with chains proportionate to his crime; on conviction. He was taken to the gallows and hanged. Imprisonment was not taken as the punishment. Blinding was a very common penalty, applied specially to princes who revolted and it was practiced all through the middle ages. It took the form of an artificial cataract, induced by passing a red-hot flat needle before the cornea, or by pouring boiling oil on the eyes.¹⁴

Scaphism

Scaphism was one of the worst and most painful, skin-crawling methods of torture. It was described by the Greeks as a punishment used by the Persians, those Persians were thought to be insane. In this form of execution, the accused was trapped between two boats (or in a hollowed-out tree trunk) and force-fed milk and honey. The milk-and-honey diet eventually caused horrible diarrhea, which stayed within the wooden enclosure. The unfortunate condemned was smeared with more milk and honey and left out in the sun or near still water, where bugs would be attracted to the muck and rot and sweetness. The person would inevitably die either of dehydration, exposure, or bite and sting wounds. ¹⁵

Cauterization of the Skin

This method of execution, which lets the victim perish by cauterization of the skin is, for Achaemenid times, attested by Ctesias and by the Roman author Valerius Maximus.

Burying Alive

The execution by burying alive was reported by Ctesias as being practiced exclusively by queens. In most cases vengeance was the motive. Herodotus reports that Cambyses ordered twelve noble Persians to be burrowed heads down into the ground without any traceable reason. ¹⁶

Abortion

In general, ancient Persians considered abortion as an act of severe obscenity and condemned it. Ancient Persian customs and the religion’s view about abortion are found in many of the remaining Avesta texts, and the Pahlavi texts such as Arda Wiraz-namag (The Book of Arda Wiraz), in which they all condemn abortion, citing the many sins of it and foretelling harsh punishments in the afterlife. Ancient Persians saw abortion as cutting of the roots of life and the most important blessing of God. Therefore, in their view, abortion equaled murder, and both doctors and priests condemned it

Since abortion was considered as a willful murder, all guilty parties were sentenced to death. Interestingly, this law was not specified to the mother only, but included all involved parties. The severity of punishment and the involvement of all parties show that in ancient Persia, prevention was the main aim of these harsh laws and punishments.¹⁷

Adultery

In ancient Persia, mutilation was usually the punishment for a female caught in the act. They would cut her nose off and then beat her with rods, and metal tipped whips. They were also known to cut off the private parts of the woman and her breasts as well. ¹⁸ They would also throw the adulteress down headlong into a deep well. Adultery at one time was a common crime among the nobility and gentry in the court of ancient Persia and was the frequent cause of rebellions, murders, and other dreadful calamities in the empire. ¹⁹

Political Crime

One of the most common crimes and also the most significant one was political, such as disrespect for king, revolt against the government, etc. The punishment of this crime was the severest. In some cases of betrayal to king and government, the convict was taken to the court where his/her ears and nose were cut off. Then, after showing the culprit to the people, the culprit was sent to the place where the deed was done.

Punishments, especially execution, didn’t vary considerably during Sassanid and Achaemenid periods except that it was more violent in Sassanid. Severe physical punishments such as execution, blinding, incarceration, whipping etc., were common, especially in cases concerned with crimes against king or government like espionage and betrayal. These crimes were faced with execution, severe physical torture and harassment such as cutting off nose, ear, tongue, mutilation, crucifixion, live burial, etc.

Whenever someone committed crimes against God, religion, king, or country, he was punished by execution. It was conducted through hanging, decapitation, stoning to death, cutting off skin, tying to horse tail, squashing convicts under elephant. Stoning to death was common during Sassanid period while committing homicide was punished by killing by sword. After the execution, the convict’s skin was cut off, filled with straw and hanged over city gates to be a lesson for others. ²⁰

Justice rarely existed in the empire of ancient Persia and mostly the poor were brutally and unjustly punished. The Legal system which ensures equal human rights for every citizen along with their freedom and social security, never delivered properly in the ancient Persian society. It was no wonder that their societies remained weak and sometimes even hostile towards their own rulers which made it easier for the foreigners to conquer their territory.

• ¹ Seyed Ahmad Hosseini, Mohammad Mahdi Darvishiniya & Saba Sadat Hosseini (2006), Journal of Politics and Law, Canadian Center of Science and Education, Ontario, Canada, Vol. 9, No. 2, Pg. 35.
• ² Encyclopedia Iranica (Online Version): http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/judicial-and-legal-systems-i-achaemenid-judicial-and-legal-systems: Retrieved: 27-03-2019
• ³ Ali Farazmand (2001), Handbook of Comparative and Development Public Administration, Marcel Dekker Inc., New York, USA, Pg. 53.
• ⁴ Personam or rem referred to personal, judgment, the type most commonly rendered by courts, imposes a personal liability or obligation upon a person or group to some other person or group. (Encyclopedia Britannica (Online Version): https://www.britannica.com/topic/judgment-law#ref278221: Retrieved: 15-05-2019
• ⁵ Encyclopedia Iranica (Online Version): http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/judicial-and-legal-systems-i-achaemenid-judicial-and-legal-systems: Retrieved: 25-03-2019
• ⁶ Will Durant (1942), The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster Inc., New York, USA, Part-1, Pg. 361.
• ⁷ Clement Hurat (1927), Ancient Persia and Iranian Civilization (Translated by M.R. Dobie), Trench Trubner and Co., New York, USA, Pg. 158.
• ⁸ Ilya Gershevitch et al. (1968), Iranian Studies, Brill, Leiden, Netherlands, Pg. 61.
• ⁹ Will Durant (1942), The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster Inc., New York, USA, Part-1, Pg. 361.
• ¹⁰ Encyclopedia Iranica (Online Version): http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/judicial-and-legal-systems-i-achaemenid-judicial-and-legal-systems: Retrieved: 25-03-2019
• ¹¹ Mohammad Karim, Maziyar Barati and et al. (2015), Research Journal of Fisheries and Hydrobiology: Judicial System in Sassanian Period, American-Eurasian Network for Scientific Information Publishers, Amman, Jordan, Pg. 276.
• ¹² Clement Hurat (1927), Ancient Persia and Iranian Civilization (Translated by M.R. Dobie), Trench Trubner and Co., New York, USA, Pg. 158-159.
• ¹³ Will Durant (1942), The Story of Civilization, Simon and Schuster Inc., New York, USA, Part-1, Pg. 362.
• ¹⁴ Clement Hurat (1927), Ancient Persia and Iranian Civilization (Translated by M.R. Dobie), Trench Trubner and Co., New York, USA, Pg. 159.
• ¹⁵ Encyclopedia Britannica (Online Version): https://www.britannica.com/list/cruel-and-unusual-punishments-15-types-of-torture: Retrieved: 25-03-2019
• ¹⁶ Encyclopedia Iranica (Online Version): http://www.iranicaonline.org/articles/torture-achaemenid-period: Retrieved: 25-03-2019
• ¹⁷ Hassan Yarmohammadi et al. (2013), An Investigation into The Ancient Abortion Laws: Comparing Ancient Persia with Ancient Greece and Rome, Acta Medico-Historica Adriatica, Rijeka, Croatia, Pg. 294-295.
• ¹⁸ Michael Hur (2015), Spiritual Science, Published by the Author, Vol. 1, Pg. 83.
• ¹⁹ Andrew Knapp & William Baldwin (1825), The New Gate Calendar, J. Robins & Co., London, U.K., Vol. 2, Pg. 242.
• ²⁰ Abasali Razavi et al. (2015), Research Journal of Fisheries and Hydrobiology: Survey of Punishments in the Sassanid Period, American-Eurasian Network for Scientific Information Publishers, Amman, Jordan, Pg. 356.