A sweeping history of the Persian kings that ruled an empire. Cyrus the Great, Darius, Xerxes, and their heirs. Regicide, patricide, fratricide. Unique methods of torturing and killing ones enemy. Wars against the Greeks. I was intrigued by it all. I learned a lot and came away knowing much more about this age than I did to begin with.

Thanks to NetGalley and the Publishers for a copy of this book.

I was not particularly aware of the fascinating history of the Persian empire, but I feel much better informed having read this book. Thanks Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones! This book is written in a very readable style, helping communicate the vast and often complex history.

If you're interested in history, this is a very helpful book!

Finally, there is a book on Persian history and contribution to the world. The West made a decision to follow the Greco-Roman model and even though Persia has contributed so much to both Asia and Europe, their contribution has always been ignored for geo-political reasons.
This book is a welcome tribute to the real, unbiased past and contribution of Persians. I would recommend it to anyone who wishes to look past the propaganda and understand the true history of the 'other' power that brought civilization to the world.
Thank you De Llewellyn-Jones.
Thanks to NetGallery for providing an e-copy of this wonderful book in exchange for an unbiased reivew.

Very interesting book of the epic Persian history.
For me as a westerner, the Orient is an ancient and continuing mystery. At some point I heard that the one we call Alexander the Great, is called Alexander the Terrible in Persia....You could say that is a a slightly different perspective ;) which is why I read this book. Compact and informative on the historical and current history of Persia, well to read.

Persians is a good first foray into Persian history. I didn't know anything about the Persian empire, but I finished the book feeling like I was no longer a total ignoramus. Llewellyn-Jones walked a fine line between detail and interest. I didn't feel bored because there was too much info, and I also didn't feel bored because the info was too shallow.

I'd recommend this to someone interested in history that doesn't know much about the Persians. It seems written towards interested laypeople rather than hardcore academic scholars.

A very quality history of a culture that is not often discussed! I am half Persian and have heard of Iran from my father who immigrated to the United States from Tehran. I loved being able to read about my history and will be recommending this book to several friends and family members!

This book is above ugly excellent - I cannot praise it enough. Perfect for GCSE Ancient History students to gain a better understanding of the period. I will be ordering copies of this for school.

Whilst this book was very interesting and informative, it was also rather dry which left me quite bored at times. I also came into this book with no knowledge on the subject matter so I’m not sure how accurate and factual the book is as I’ve seen some reviews questioning this.

An interesting and detailed history. This will be of interest to historians and those interested in the Middle East.

Oh my goodness gracious. I am not even sure I am going to be adequately able to say what I would like to about this book! I want to go back and read a finished copy of this book, looking deeper into some of the areas that I felt were not quite there - almost, but not quit

I enjoyed reading about some of the figures that developed and advanced the Persian empire, but felt that there was some reaching by the author on the subject. Now, admittedly, Persia is not my area of expertise. It is one area that I have been needing to dive into further, but due to time constraints, I never did. This book is a great starting point for me.
Now, I mentioned above that I want to read through it again, and some of ya'll might be asking WHY!?
There are a few reasons. As I said, there are some areas that I want to dive into a bit further and do some of my own research on. I can't sit here and say "that is just wrong, or I am not sure that is how that happened." Until I can research and draw my own conclusions - I am leaving the author as the undisputed expert.
Overall, I did enjoy reading through this book, and I can see a million different rabbit holes that I am wanting to dive into. Cyrus the Great is already on my hit list to dive into, and learn more on.

Decent start, and I look forward to seeing more from this author in the future.

Very, very good book! The writer fought my interest from the first chapter and never lost it, the book was informative and entertaining at the same time. This is a keeper!

This was definitely a more detailed look into the history of the Persian Empire than I've ever read before. At first it was more scholarly than I was expecting, but it slowly got more readable and hit a good stride for a book that could reach both historians and amateurs alike. I think it is more written towards college level courses or above, but arm-chair historians like me can still manage this large book if we work at it. I definitely appreciated the emphasis on sources and Persian sources in particular to make sure we were reading the history through the eyes of those who lived it instead of others (like Greeks) who wanted to make the Persians as "other" as possible.

I received an ARC of this book from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review

This is such an interesting book with the historical perspective switched. History is written by the victors so it was fascinating to learn about the Persian Empire from their point of view. There were some sweeping statements about historical events that favoured the Persians "characters." This made me question how objective the research is, but also wonder how objectively related was any historical event? Packed with information that was new to me, this was an enlightening and thought-provoking read.

Thanks to NetGalley and the publisher for the opportunity to read this book.

I received an ARC from NetGalley in exchange for an honest review.

This was super informative but kind of felt like reading a textbook... Not the most engrossing.

‘This story is told by the Persians themselves.’

Half a century ago, when I studied Ancient Greek history, the Persians were the bad guys. The sources we were drawing from, the Greek narratives, focussed on Greek heroism. I may have forgotten much of the history I learned, but the battle of Thermopylae in 480 BCE has stayed in my memory. Those noble Spartans, those dastardly Persians! Herodotus may have exaggerated a bit, but surely the essential facts were correct, or so I hoped. I read a little about Darius and Xerxes, but our studies moved onto the Peloponnesian War, and I left Thermopylae and Herodotus behind.

So, I was intrigued by the title of this book and keen to read more about the great kings of Persia. As Professor Llewellyn-Jones writes:

‘We cannot believe much of what Herodotus said, and yet we cannot do without him.’

Professor Llewellyn-Jones draws on inscriptional and archaeological evidence from the ancient Near East to provide this detailed, readable account of the Achaemenid dynasty. This account begins with the arrival of the Persians on the Iranian plains. Professor Llewellyn-Jones writes about Persian religion and culture, including the bureaucratic systems developed to govern an empire at one stage which extended from Libya to the Steppes of Asia and from Ethiopia to Pakistan. While the great kings were nomadic travellers around their territory, the palace-city of Persepolis was the heart of the empire.

‘The story of the Achaemenids is an epic soap opera of naked ambition, betrayal, revenge and murder ...’

And through the kings: Cyrus the Great, Darius, Xerxes, and their successors, we learn of fights between brothers for power, of fights between wives and concubines each seeking to promote their own son as successor to the reigning king, while eunuchs and courtiers competed for influence.

The narrative takes us through the fall of the empire at the hands of Alexander and onto an epilogue which provides information about contemporary Iran’s relationship with the Achaemenid heritage.
I finished this book with a greater appreciation of the Achaemenid dynasty, especially of the bureaucratic processes developed to deal with a diverse and widespread empire.

Note: My thanks to NetGalley and Perseus Books for providing me with a free electronic copy of this book for review purposes.

Jennifer Cameron-Smith

An informative and well researched book about the history of a civilization that is usually considered in relation to Greeks.
I found this book well written and interesting.
Highly recommended.
Many thanks to the publisher and Netgalley for this ARC, all opinions are mine

**Thank you to NetGalley and the publisher for providing me with a review copy of this work. I voluntarily read and reviewed an advanced copy of this book. All thoughts and opinions are my own. **

In this book, Llewellyn-Jones does an amazing job of telling the history of Persia in an engaging way. He tells the history of this region and its kings, as much as is possible with available sources, from the perspective of the people themselves. This history does an good job of identifying where popular perceptions gained from outside sources and created through media both historic and contemporary affect the way we see Persian history, and at what points those ideas differ from the likely reality.

This book covers a lot of ground, and makes clear in the epilogue how many more volumes it would take to cover the entirety. This is an area of history that gains little attention in comparison to other ancient civilizations, and it has been fascinating learning about the Achaemenids, the way their empire grew, functioned and stretched across the ancient world, its decline and its enduring legacy. There were moments when the author did seem to make some assumptive leaps regarding individuals' thoughts and motivations, though having not personally read the sources regarding those passages, I can't be certain about how the source material does or does not support those statements.

Overall an interesting and engaging read about a rich and fascinating period of history.

Of course, any history of the Persian Empire is particularly interesting. Although it was relatively short-lived (from about 559 to 330 BCE), it dates from a period when we first have quite a few written sources. In the case of the Persian Empire, these are predominantly Greek, and therefore suspect, because for the Greeks Persia usually was the great enemy. The author of this book, Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones, puts this in the spotlight and claims to offer nothing less than a correction to that distorted Greek image. His intention is to rely mainly on other sources than Greek ones. Unfortunately, he only lives up to this to a limited extent. His account still seems to be based mainly on Greek sources, and the picture he paints of the Persian leaders (with Cyrus II and Darius the Great as epigones, of course) is just as degrading as, for example, the one Herodotus made. Only the chapters on Persian culture give a bit more space to Persian voices themselves. So, interesting for sure, but this book certainly doesn't deliver what it promises. Thanks to Netgalley for an Advanced Reading Copy.

My thanks to both NetGalley and Perseus Books for an advanced copy of this new historical study.

History is not only written by the victors, but by generations after the victors, based on previous writings. A Biblical of Greek view of history takes precedent over other works, mainly because they parrot a view of history that people have come to accept, or even more want to accept. Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones, chair in Ancient History at Cardiff University has in his book Persians: The Age of the Great Kings, written a history the Persians using their own sources, works and art and tries to tell more truthful history of these people than history has done.

The book is written well with much sourcing from new finds and recent deciphering and translations from various archeological sites. The story can get a tad confusing, many names, many actions, but Professor Llewellyn-Jones is very good at keeping both the pace and the narrative together and moving. Starting from early migrations and moving to the present day, the story is full of interesting facts and figures, with most of the book focusing on the Achaemenid Dynasty, their power, coups and actions. Professor Llewellyn-Jones is not easy on his subject, quick to point out that the leaders were very aware and very good at propaganda, and used this quite well to cover up some of their messier actions, while acting as benevolent watchman of their subjects.

A very well written history on a subject that I knew about from other works and writers, and have been shown that I knew less than I thought. Professor Llewellyn-Jones has written a comprehensive overview of a complicated subject, and made it interesting and easy to follow. Recommended for readers of history books, which much of this might be new, or to people that enjoy a good book on subjects that are new to them.

I have a question. If someone is writing about an entire dynasty and not just one individual, can it still be called hagiography?

I wanted to like this book. I really did. When living in Istanbul, I had an Iranian Muslim coworker. In my current town, I now have an Iranian Christian coworker. I have also known many other Iranian ex-pats while here in Turkiye. They're everywhere. And one thing that unites all of them, be they Muslim, Christian, or atheist, is their love for Cyrus. For a long time my Muslim coworker was convinced that the Quran said Cyrus was a man without fault. It broke his heart to find out what he had been told as a child was not true. Without question, Cyrus was one of the greatest kings to ever walk this earth. If you don't believe me, just ask any of my Iranian friends.

Or read this book. Lloyd Llewellyn-Jones apparently believes the same thing about the entire Achaemenid dynasty that my friend did about Cyrus. Now, in my friend this is excusable. He is just passing along something he had been told and just assumed it was true. In an author, you would assume LLJ had done a little more homework. The first inkling I received that this was not to be so was when I realized that there were no footnotes or references. Perhaps it was because I received an advanced reader's copy, but there were no footnotes or references. I like to check an author I've never read before to see how accurately and faithfully they are using their sources (and what sources they are using). There was no way for me to even know if he was simply making things up out of thin air (and more than once, I was a little suspicious of this). Perhaps this is simply because I am reading the book three months before it hits the shelves. Hopefully, this and common editing mistakes (like "cettainly" on p216) will be fixed before April.

What I have less hope for are the factual mistakes or blatant misrepresentations found throughout the book. I noted a half dozen in my read-through. There were probably many more I didn't catch simply because I am not as familiar with the subject at hand. But here are a few examples:

"The Persians entered Macedon and Xerxes met with his ally, the client king Alexander I..."
Over the course of a few chapters, LLJ mentions his "ally" Alexander I probably at least ten times. The purpose is to cast shade on the later Macedonian kings Philip and Alexander III for their disloyalty to their ally. But LLJ never mentions that Alex I was known as the Philhellene (friend of Greeks). Nor does he point out that even as Alexander I was fulfilling his obligations to Xerxes (who defeated him and forced him into subservience years before), he was also passing information, men, and supplies on to the Greeks, his true friends and allies. This is all well-attested historical fact, but it is deliberately ignored because it doesn't fit into LLJ's propaganda.

In addition, LLJ claims that there were 700 Greeks at Thermopylae. Actually, once the rest retreated, Leonidas had his 300 Spartans and 1,100 Boetians. So, twice what the author claims. I would love to know where he got that number but... no footnotes. But the real error is what comes next. LLJ writes, "Notwithstanding the Western fixation with the story of the 300 Spartans, the Battle of Thermopylae can only be interpreted as a great Persian victory." I had to rub my eyes to make sure I had read that correctly. Then I rubbed them again. Once I realized I wasn't imagining things, I had to put the book down and laugh. The author was imagining things and inviting us to join in his lunacy. At best estimate, Xerxes force outnumbered the Greeks by 50 to 1. More likely it was closer to 100 to 1 or even beyond. I've read legitimate sources who put his army at 360,ooo. Xerxes sent waves of 10,000 men at a time, over and over again to crash against a force a tenth their size. By all accounts, within the first hour, or at best within a few, that small Greek force should have been steamrolled. But instead, they held out for three days. Even then, they were only defeated because Xerxes found a way around them and hit them from both sides. When it was all said and done, more than twenty thousand Persians lay dead on the battlefield. By both numbers and in morale, the Persians were crushed. But don't take my account for that. Just read pretty much every Greek and military historian who has ever written on the subject.

LLJ later comments that Xerxes should not have tried to fight the Athenians at sea but instead should have continued his land crusade instead. Not a chance. The first sea battle was pretty much a draw. He had pretty good odds there. but poor Xerxes was probably still having nightmares of the hotgates. If only 1,400 soldiers could do that much damage, he didn't dare find out what a full force would do. Between Marathon and Thermopylae, he had learned his lesson. But our author is still in dreamland.

I could go on to talk about how LLJ castigates Heroditus for accusing Xerxes for worshipping a tree and decorating it with jewelry, and then about ten pages later points out that Xerxes seal was of him with votive offerings under a tree adorned with jewelry. I could point out how he says that the Persian kings weren't all that decadent and immoral. After all, they are no worse than Ivan the Terrible, Wu Zetian, and Stalin (page 326). I'm sorry, but if that's your comparison... ouch. To be fair, the history of the last few reigns really did seem like something straight out of Game of Thrones, despite his protestations. I could talk about...

But in closing, I will just quote LLJ. "In Iran prose histories and verse histories, written or orally transmitted, were often based on the same historical materials (best not call them 'facts') and were crafted into diverse versions or readings of 'the past'; one version did not have supremacy over another since all shared a place in the Iranians' transmission of their 'history'. What happened in the past, or what is said to have happened, or indeed, what might have happened in the past or never happened at all, was permitted a space in the Persian understanding of the pre-Islamic era." What I was hoping for was a great book on Persian history. What I got was a continuation of this fine tradition of blending fact with fiction.

Take a pass on this one.