下载掌阅APP，畅读海量书库
立即打开
In the “Xiyu zhuan 西域傳 A” of Hanshu 漢書 (ch. 96A), it is recorded:
In the past when the Xiongnu 匈奴 conquered the Da Yuezhi 大月氏 and the latter moved west and established themselves as masters of Daxia 大夏; the king of the Sai 塞 then moved south and established himself as master of Jibin 罽賓. The Sai 塞 tribes split and separated, repeatedly forming different states. To the northwest of Shule 疏勒, states such as Xiuxun 休循 and Juandu 捐毒 all belonged to the former Sai 塞 ethnic group.
In the “Xiyu zhuan 西域傳 B” of Hanshu 漢書 (ch. 96B), it is also recorded:
The state of Wusun 烏孫: ... [It] adjoins the Xiongnu 匈奴 in the east, Kangju 康居 in the northwest, Dayuan 大宛 in the west, and the various states with walled towns in the south. It was originally the land of the Sai 塞 [tribes]. When the Da Yuezhi 大月氏 turned west, defeated and expelled the king of the Sai 塞, the latter moved south and crossed over the Suspended Crossing; the Da Yuezhi 大月氏 then took up residence in his lands. Later, when the Kunmo 昆莫 of Wusun 烏孫 attacked and defeated the Da Yuezhi 大月氏, the Da Yuezhi 大月氏 migrated to the west and subjugated Daxia 大夏; the Kunmo 昆莫 of Wusun 烏孫 then took up residence there. For this reason, among the people of Wusun 烏孫 there are the Sai 塞 ethnic group and the Da Yuezhi 大月氏 ethnic group.
By reference to the four boundaries of the state of the Wusun 烏孫, described above, the so-called “land of the Sai 塞”, it is possible to infer that the former land of the Sai 塞 tribes in the valleys of the Rivers Ili and Chu.
We know that the Sai 塞 tribes controlled this area until 177-176
BCE
,
when they were expelled by the Da Yuezhi 大月氏 and, apart from a few who remained and gave allegiance successively to the Da Yuezhi 大月氏 and the Wusun 烏孫, either entered “Jibin 罽賓” across the Suspended Crossing or dispersed in the Pamir Region.
It is generally believed that “Sai 塞 ethnic group” [sək] was identical with “Sakās” which is recorded in Western literature. Study of the western records on the Sakās will enable us to see whether they do indeed correspond with the above-quoted Chinese records on the Sai 塞, and whether the two sources complement each other.
The earliest record on the Sakās occurs in the Behistun inscription of Darius I.
In this inscription (DBi, 12-20), it is recorded:
Saith Darius the King: These are the countries which came unto me; by the favor of Ahuramazda I was king of them: Persia, Elam, Babylonia, Assyria, Arabia, Egypt, (those) who are beside the sea, Sardis, Ionia, Media, Armenia, Cappadocia, Parthia, Drangiana, Aria, Chorasmia, Bactria, Sogdiana, Gandara, Scythia (Sakā), Sattagydia, Arachosia, Maka: in all, XXIII provinces.
Saith Darius the King: These are the countries which came unto me; by the favor of Ahuramazda they were my subjects; they bore tribute to me; what was said unto them by me either by night or by day, that was done.
And in the same inscription (DBii, 5-8), it is recorded:
Saith Darius the King: While I was in Babylon, these are the provinces which became rebellious from me; Persia, Elam, Media, Assyria, Egypt, Parthia, Margiana, Sattagydia, Scythia (Sakā).
And in the same inscription (DBv, 20-30), it is recorded:
Saith Darius the King: Afterwards with an army I went off to Scythia (Sakā), after the Scythians (Sakā) who wear the pointed cap. These Sakās went from me. When I arrived at the sea, beyond it then with all my army I crossed. Afterwards, I smote the Sakās exceedingly; another (leader) I took captive; this one was led bound to me, and I slew him. The chief of them, by name Skunkha — him they seized and led to me. Then I made another their chief, as was my desire. After that, the province became mine.
In the light of the above passages, it can be seen:
1. The Sakās had already been subject to the Achaemenid Empire before Darius I ascended the throne. Darius I killed Bardiya-Gaumāta and seized the crown in Sep. 522
BCE
. He then quickly put an end to the rebellion in Elam and in December, having crossed the Tigris River, he took Babylon and suppressed the riot there.
Since the above-quoted inscriptions read that Darius was in Babylon when the Sakās rebelled, the Sakās must have been subject to the Achaemenid Empire before 522
BCE
.
2. The Sakās’ rebellion was also quickly ended. According to the Behistun inscription (DBv, 1-14), “in both the second and the third year” after Darius I had come to the throne, he crushed the second rebellion of Elam and the rebellion of the Sakās. If the suppression of the Sakās took place after Darius I had crushed the rebellion of Elam, then it must have been in 519 BCE .
3. Only after Darius had come to the throne did the Achaemenid Empire set up the provinces and assign the tributes each should pay. Therefore, the country of the Sakās was set up as a province and the Sakās paid tribute after 519 BCE .
The exact location of the land of the Sakās remains in question. However, it seems more than likely that at that time the land lay on the northern bank of the Syr Darya.
1. In the Persepolis inscription of Darius I (DPh, 3-10), it is recorded:
Said Darius the King: This is the Kingdom which I hold, from the Scythians (Sakās) who are beyond Sogdiana, thence unto Ethiopia: from Sind, thence unto Sardis.
Since the land of the Sakās lay “beyond Sogdiana”, the only possibility is that the land was on the right bank of the Syr Darya.
2. The Sakās whom Darius attacked in 519
BCE
apparently lived on the northern bank of the Syr Darya. The Behistun inscription mentions that Darius I “arrived at the sea”. “Sea (
daryah
)” here may be read as “wide water”, in which case it could refer to the Syr Darya.
3. Darius’ Persepolis inscription (DPe, 5-18):
Saith Darius the King: By the favor of Ahuramazda these are the countries which I got into my possession along with this Persian folk, which felt fear of me (and) bore me tribute: Elam, Media, Babylonia, Arabia, Assyria, Egypt, Armenia, Cappadocia, Sardis, Ionians, who are of the mainland and (those) who are by the sea, and countries which are across the sea; Sagartia, Parthia, Drangiana, Aria, Bactria, Sogdiana, Chorasmia, Sattagydia, Arachosia, Sind, Gandara, Scythians (Sakā), Maka.
Darius’ Naqš-e Rostam inscription (DNa, 15-30):
Saith Darius the King: By the favor of Ahuramazda these are the countries which I seized outside of Persia; I ruled over them; they bore tribute to me; what was said to them by me, that they did; my law — that held them firm; Media, Elam, Parthia, Aria, Bactria, Sogdiana, Chorasmia, Drangiana, Arachosia, Sattagydia, Gandara, Sind, Amyrgian Scythians (Sakā haumavargā),
Scythians with pointed caps (Sakā tigraxaudā), Babylonia, Assyria, Arabia, Egypt, Armenia, Cappadocia, Sardis, Ionia, Scythians (Sakā) who are across the sea, Skudra, petasoswearing Ionians, Libyans, Ethiopians, men of Maka, Carians.
Darius'
ūšā inscription (DSe, 14-30):
Saith Darius the King: By the favor of Ahuramazda these are the countries which I seized outside of Persia; I ruled over them; they bore tribute to me; what was said to them by me, that they did; my law — that held them firm; Media, Elam, Parthia, Aria, Bactria, Sogdiana, Chorasmia, Drangiana, Arachosia, Sattagydia, men of Maka, Gandara, Sind, Amyrgian Scythians (Sakā haumavargā), Scythians with pointed caps (Sakā tigraxaudā), Babylonia, Assyria, Arabia, Egypt, Armenia, Cappadocia, Sardis, Ionians, (those) who are across the sea, Skudra, Libyans, Ethiopians, Carians.
And Xerxes’ [I, 486-465 BCE ] Persepolis inscription (XPh, 13-28):
Saith Xerxes the King: By the favor of Ahuramazda these are the countries of which was king I seized outside of Persia; I ruled over them; they bore tribute to me; what was said to them by me, that they did; my law — that held them firm; Media, Elam, Arachasia, Armenia, Drangiana, Parthia, Aria, Bactria, Sogdiana, Chorasmia, Babylonia, Assyria, Sattagydia, Sardis, Egypt, Ionians, those who dwell by the sea and those who dwell across the sea, men of Maka, Arabia, Gandara, Sind, Cappadocia, Dahae, Amyrgian Scythians (Sakā haumavargā), Pointed-Cap Scythians (Sakā tigraxaudā), Skudra, men of Akaufaka, Libyans, Carians, Ethiopians.
All of these texts show that the Sakās whom Darius attacked lived on the northern bank of the Syr Darya.
First, the “Sakā” following “Gandara” in the list of Darius’ Behistun inscription (DBi); the “Sakās” following “Sind, Gandara” in the list of his Persepolis inscription (DPe); and “Sakās haumavargā, Sakās tigraxaudā” following “Gandara, Sind” in the list of his
ūšā inscription (DSe) and Naqš-e Rostam inscription (DNa),were all one and the same. And, according to the
History
of Herodotus, “The Sacae, who are Scythians, have high caps tapering to a point and stiffly upright, which they wear on their heads. ... These were Amyrgian Scythians but were called Sacae”. (VII, 64)
Since “Amyrgian” was identical with “haumavargā”, the so-called “Sakās haumavarga and Sakās tigraxaudā” were one and not two groups.
[1]
Both were, in fact, taken as one (“Sakā”) in the Behistun inscription (DBi) and Persepolis inscription (DPe). It was very possible that they were mistaken as two tribes owing to internal differences in custom. However, even if there were a group of “Sakās haumavargā” without pointed caps, it would be hard to draw a clear line between the land of the Sakās haumavargā and that of Sakās tigraxaudā, because both were sure to be included in “Sakās” in the list of Darius’ Behistun inscription (DBi) and his Perspolis inscription (DPe).
Second, according to Megasthenes [ c. 350-280 BCE ]:
India is four-sided in shape and the side which faces east and that which faces south are embraced by the Great Sea, while that which faces north is separated by the Emodus range of mountains from that part of Scythia which is inhabited by the Scythians known as the Sacae.
In addition, the “Sakās” were listed after Sind or Gandara in the list of Darius’inscriptions. It seems that the people at that time considered that the land of the Sakās lay near India. However, this might have been a misconception due to poor geographical knowledge. It is true that the Emodus Mountains are generally believed to be the Himalaya Mountains,
but the reference to them here should not be taken too literally. In other words, the record of Megasthenes shows only that the people at that time regarded the land of the Sakās as lying to the north of India, and cut off from the latter by high mountains. As the Sakās were used to being regarded as living in a place to the north of India, it is no surprise that the Achaemenids’ inscriptions refer to the Sakās in relation to Sind and Gandhāra.It is important to note that the inscriptions discussed in this paper provide sufficient indication that there was no definite link between the geographical positions of the provinces named and the order in which they were listed, so we should not consider that the land of the Sakās in the Achaemenids’ inscriptions was located near or adjoined Sind and Gandhāra.
As for the “Sakās who are across the sea” in Darius’ Naqš-e Rostam inscription (DNa), they were obviously those who lived in “countries which are across the sea” in his Persepolis inscription(DPe), and also were “(those) who are across the sea” in his
ūšā inscription (DSe) and “those who dwell across the sea”in Xerxes’ Persepolis inscription (XPh); for they were all listed after the “Ionians who are by the sea” in these inscriptions. Thus, the “Sakās who are across the sea” must have been the Scythians who lived on the northern bank of the Black Sea, and whom Darius I attacked in 513
BCE
(cf. the
History
of Herodotus, IV, 1,46).
[2]
Also, according to Herodotus, “the Persians call all Scythians Sacae”. (VII,64) However, on the northern bank of the Black Sea, in addition to the Sacae, there were “the Taurians, the Agathyrsi, the Neuri, the Man-Eaters, the Black Cloaks, the Geloni, the Budini, and the Sauromatians”. (IV, 102) Therefore, it is not accurate to call them only “Sakās”. This may explain why the wording “Sakās who are across the sea” occurred only once in the Achaemenids’ inscriptions.
The following discussion deals mainly with the Sacae (Sakās) as described by Herodotus [ c. 484-425 BCE ].
1. According to Herodotus, Cyrus II [558-529 BCE ] planned to command the campaign against the Sacae, “For Babylon lay in his path, and the Bactrian people and the Sacae and the Egyptians, against whom he designed to lead an army himself, but against the Ionians he decided he would send another general”. (I, 153) In the book of Herodotus, however, there is no record of Cyrus’ campaign against the Sacae, but it does record the campaign against the Massagetae after his conquest of the Babylonians. (I, 201-204) Therefore, it may be considered that the Massagetae whom Cyrus II attacked were the Sacae.
First, according to Herodotus, “[the Massagetae are] a race, said to be great and warlike, who lives toward the east and the rising of the sun, beyond the river Araxes and opposite the Issedones”. (I, 201) Since the Araxes River may be identified with the Syr Darya, the land of the Massagetae lay in the same position as that of the Sakās recorded in the Achaemenids’ inscriptions.
Second, according to Herodotus, “the Massagetae wear the same kind of clothes as the Scythians and live much the same”. (I, 215) Since the Persians called all Scythians Sacae, it was very possible that they called the Massagetae,whose clothing and life-way were similar to the Scythians, Sacae. Herodotus also points out, “some say, besides, that they are a Scythian people”. (I, 201)
Third, the name “Massagetae” may mean “the great Saca horde”.
2. According to Herodotus (I, 204-214), the expedition of Cyrus II against the Massagetae was not succesful. The whole Persian army was destroyed, and Cyrus II himself was killed in the action. This shows that the northern bank of the Syr Darya was not yet subject to the Achaemenids before the death of Cyrus II. Cambysēs II [529-522
BCE
], who ascended the throne after Cyrus II, went on an expedition to Egypt in the fourth year of his reign, and died there. No record refers to his making an expedition against the Massagetae or the Sacae, but the Sacae who lived on the northern bank of the Syr Darya, as mentioned above, had already been subject to the Achaemenid Empire before Darius I ascended the throne. Therefore, it is conceivable that Cambyses II made an expedition against the Massagetae as soon as he ascended the throne to avenge the insult to Cyrus II. If so, the war must have come very quickly to an end with the victory of the Persians, and the Massagetae acknowledging allegiance to the Persians, and Cambyses II going on the expedition to Egypt after eliminating the trouble back at home.
If this is true, the Sakās whom Darius I attacked in 519 BCE must have been the Massagetae. However, this is not the only possibility. Another possibility is that those who were attacked by Darius I were not the Massagetae, but the Issedones as described by Herodotus.
According to Herodotus, the land of the Massagetae lay opposite that of the Issedones. Since the former lay on the northern bank of the Syr Darya, the latter must have lain in the valleys of the Rivers Ili and Chu,
which was a result of a migration of nomadic tribes across the whole Eurasian steppes. Herodotus recorded this migration based on various sources. In one section, he says:
The nomad Scythians living in Asia were hard pressed in war by the Massagetae and crossed the river Araxes into Cimmerian country. You see, what is now the country inhabited by the Scythians was in the old days said to be that of the Cimmerians. (IV, 11)
And in another section, he says:
The Issedones, says Aristeas, were thrust out of their lands by the Arimaspians, the Scythians by the Issedones; and the Cimmerians, living by the southern sea, being hard pressed by the Scythians, also left their country. (IV, 13)
Therefore, it is possible that the Issedones defeated the Massagetae, the latter defeated the Scythians, and the Scythians were forced into the Cimmerian country. The pressure on the Scythians came indirectly from the Massagetae, and directly from the Issedones. Thus it may be that the Issedones moved on westward from the valley of the Rivers Ili and Chu, and then occupied the northern bank of the Syr Darya, the land of the Massagetae, at a time when Darius I had not yet ascended the throne and Cyrus II had already died. After that, they were called Sakās by the Persians. According to the “Xiyu zhuan 西域傳” of Hanshu 漢書 (ch. 96), the former land of the Sai 塞 tribes (i.e., the Sakās) lay in the valleys of the Rivers Ili and Chu; and according to Arrian, all the Massagetae whom Alexander met with on his expedition lived on the southern bank of the Syr Darya (for details, see the ensuing section). If this is correct, we may speculate that the Issedones acknowledged allegiance to the Achaemenid Empire after they occupied the land of the Massagetae in order to consolidate their victory over the Massagetae. The Issedones had rebelled while Persia was in dire straits following the death of Cambyses II, and were pacified by Darius I.
3. According to Herodotus, after Darius ascended the throne, “He set up twenty provinces, which the Persians themselves call satrapies. He set up the satrapies and appointed governors to them and appointed the tribute they should pay, nation by nation. He assigned to each nation those that were nearest to it, but the farther peoples he assigned to one nation or another”. (III, 89) Among them, “the Sacae and the Caspii contributed 250 talents. This was the fifteenth province”. (III, 93) Some scholars have worked hard to locate the position of the Caspii province, and have tried to infer from it the position of the land of the Sacae, which was nearest to the land of Caspii people. However, it appears that they have failed in their endeavour. The main cause of their failure was that they presumed that the Sakās lived near the Sind or Gandhāra, based on their listing in the Achaemenids’ inscriptions. They took the Caspii as Casia of Ptolemy and tried to reconcile the records on the Sakās in the books of Herodotus and Ptolemy.
In my opinion, the Caspii, along with the Sacae, in the fifteenth province,lived in a place to the east of the Caspian Sea, and even perhaps to the east of the Aral Sea. Herodotus says:
So to the west of this sea called Caspian there is the barrier of the Caucasus, but to the east and the rising sun there succeeds a plain that stretches endlessly to the eye. A very great share of this huge plain the Massagetae have as their portion; it was against them that Cyrus was bent on making war. (I, 204)
The sea was called Caspian owing to the Caspii people, and the Caspian Sea here should include not only the present-day Caspian Sea, but also the Aral Sea. This is supported by Herodotus’s record: “The one of the mouths of the Araxes that flows through a clear channel empties into the Caspian Sea”. (I, 202) Further, “a plain that stretches endlessly” could refer to the plain which lay to the east of the Caspian Sea and the Aral Sea (the northern bank of the Syr Darya), where the homeland of the Massagetae lay in the reign-period of Cyrus II. This area was also the land of the Sakās who were attacked by Darius in 519 BCE . Therefore, from a starting point investigating the position of the Caspii province, one can also conclude that the Sacae (Sakās) lived on the northern bank of the Syr Darya.
As far as Herodotus’ statement — “the Caspii, Pausicae, Pantimathi, and Daritae paid jointly 200 talents. This was the eleventh province”. (III, 92) — are concerned, the Caspii here may have lived to the south or to the west of the present-day Caspian Sea.
This could explain why two peoples both named “Caspii” belonged separately to the fifteenth and the eleventh province.
In addition, according to Herodotus, “From Ecbatana and the rest of Media and from the Paricanians and the Orthocorybantians, 450 talents. This was the tenth province”. (III, 92) It has been suggested that “Orthocorybantioi” here could be a Greek translation of “tigraxaudā”.
If this is correct, it may be wiser to believe that wearing pointed caps was a very popular custom of the Scythians in different regions, not just of the Sakās who lived on the northern bank of the Sry Darya, than to consider that there were also “Sakās tigraxaudā” in Ecbatana and Media, etc.
4. According to Herodotus, Masistes, the son of Darius I, set off for Bactria because of being insulted by his elder brother, Xerxes I, “where he intended to raise the province in revolt and do the King the greatest mischief he could”. Then Herodotus commented:
This indeed would have happened if he had got to the Bactrians and Sacae first: for they loved him, and he was viceroy of Bactria. (IX,113)
Based on the above, it has been the suggested that the land of the Sacae was close to Bactria, namely, laying in the upper reaches of the Amu Darya.
In my opinion, this argument is unconvincing, because Herodotus did not say that the land of the Sacae was close to Bactria, and if Masistes had entered the Sacae’s land which lay on the northern bank of the Syr Darya, he would still have been able to raise the Bactrian province in revolt, for he was viceroy of Bactria, and the Bactrians “loved him”. Moreover, all of the above was only supposition on the part of Herodotus. Probably because both the Sacae and the Bactrians went with Xerxes I on the expeditions to Greece, and the two troops often fought side by side (VII, 64, 96, 184; VIII, 113; IX, 31),
Herodotus coincidentally associated the Sacae with Bactria.
From the
Anabasis of Alexander
of Arrian [86-160
CE
],
we can get a glimpse of the Sakās’ circumstances during the period when Alexander made his expedition.
1. According to Arrian, there had come to the aid of Darius III [336-330 BCE ] some troops such as the Indians, the Bactrians and Sogdians: “With these came also certain Sacae, a Scythian people, of the Scyths who inhabit Asia, not as subjects of Bessus, but owing to alliance with Darius; Manaces was their commander, and they were mounted archers”. (III, 8) It is also said that “As Aristobulus tells us, ... In advance, on the left wing, facing Alexander’s right, were the Scythian cavalry, some thousand Bactrians, and a hundred Scythe-chariots”. (III, 11) This shows that the Sakās at that time were an ally of the Achaemenid Empire, and they sent cavalry to support Darius III to resist Alexander’s invasion.
2. Arrian called the Sakās “a Scythian people, of the Scyths who inhabit Asia”. This was because, in the opinion of the Macedonians, there were more than one kind of Scythian people in Asia; and in addition to “the Asian Scythians” there were the so-called “European Scythians”.
Arrian mentions “the European Scythians” three times. On the first occasion, he says:
Envoys came too from the European Scythians, who are the greatest nation dwelling in Europe. With these Alexander sent some of the Companions, giving out that they were, by way of an embassy, to conclude a friendly agreement with them. ... (IV, 1)
On the second occasion, he says: “Now a second time envoys came to Alexander from the European Scythians, together with the envoys whom he himself had sent to Scythia ...”. (IV, 15) And third, he says that as Alexander was returning to Babylon, the European Scythians sent envoys who met him, congratulating him on his becoming King of Asia. (VII, 15) The so-called “European Scythians” were undoubtly the “Scythians” Herodotus mentioned, who drove away the Cimmerians and settled on the shore of the Black Sea. They were obviously Alexander’s ally. Except for these Scythians, all the remaining Scythians as seen in Arrian’s book were “the Asian Scythians”.
One group of “Asian Scythians” were the so-called “Abian Scythians”, who “dwell in Asia” and were independent. While Alexander marched to Sogdiana, their “envoys came to Alexander”. Their detailed circumstances are unknown. Arrian said: “Homer spoke highly in his epic, calling them ‘justest of men’; ... chiefly through their poverty and their sense of justice”. (IV, 1) This statement might only be the author’s impression based on a false assumption. There is no reason to believe that these “Abian Scythians” were simply the Abians of whom Homer had spoken.
Another kind of Asian Scythian were the Massagetae. According to Arrian, when Alexander attacked Sogdiana, “Spitamenes (a Persian general) and some followers, fugitives from Sogdiana, had fled for refuge to the part of the Scythians called the Massagetae; there they collected six hundred horsemen of the Massagetae and arrived at one of the forts in the Bactrian region. Attacking the commandant of the garrison who suspected no enemy action, and the garrison with him, they destroyed the soldiers and kept the commandant in custody”. (IV, 16) Then they surrounded the city of Zariaspa, plundered the surrounding area and lay in ambush waiting for the defenders coming out of the city. When the Macedonians sped towards them, they fled quickly into the desert, where it was impossible for the Macedonians to pursue them further. (IV, 16) After that, Spitamenes arrived “at Bagae, a stronghold of Sogdiana, lying between the land of Sogdiana and that of the Massagetaean Scythians”, where he easily recruited three thousand horsemen of the Scythians to join with them in a raid on Sogdiana, which was occupied by the Macedonians. After being defeated, Spitamenes’ army again fled to the desert. “When they learnt that Alexander was already on the move and marching towards the desert, they cut off Spitamenes’ head and sent it to Alexander, to divert him, by this action, from themselves”. It was said: “Now these Scythians are in great poverty, and also, since they have no cities and no settled habitations, so that they have no fear for their homes, they are easy to persuade to take part in any war which may offer”. (IV, 17)
In the light of the above quotations, it is evident that the Massagetaean Scythians were at that time scattered on the southern bank of the Syr Darya, the border area of the Kizil Kum Desert, which was not far from Sogdiana. As stated previously, formerly the Massagetae lived on the northern bank of the Syr Darya, and the fact that they appeared on the southern bank of the Syr Darya was very possibly due to the pressure from their eastern neighbour, the Issedones. The earliest date when they could have been there was at the beginning of the reign of Cyrus II. After the Massagetae had been driven out of their former land, they became very poor, and lived by robbery.
The third kind of Asian Scythians may have been Sakās who occupied the northern bank of the Syr Darya.
3. According to Arrian, Alexander captured the city named Cyropolis that Cyrus II had built on the southern bank of the Syr Darya, “meanwhile an army of the Asian Scythians arrived on the banks of the river Tanais; most of these had heard that some of the natives on the far side of the river had revolted from Alexander and had the intention, should any important rising occur, to join themselves also in attacking the Macedonians ...”. (IV, 3) The Asian Scythians had a powerful army and confronted the Macedonians from the other side of the river. Alexander’s troops crossed the river to attack them, but, because it was very hot and his soldiers were thirsty, they were easily defeated. (IV, 4) “Soon afterwards envoys reached Alexander from the king of the Scythians; they had been sent to express regret for what had occurred, on the ground that it had not been any united action of the Scythian state, but only that of raiders and freebooters; the king himself, moreover, was desirious to perform what was laid upon them. Alexander gave a polite answer ...”. (IV, 5)
The so-called “Asian Scythians” here were obviously neither the Abian Scythians nor the Massagetae. The Abian Scythians had already sent their envoys to Alexander and had won the favour of the Macedonians. The Massagetae at that time appeared and disappeared in the desert on the southern bank of the Syr Darya. There is no similarity between a tribe who had no true homeland, were very destitute and lived on robbery, and the Scythians whose king led an army to confront Alexander. Therefore, it appears that the Scythians who occupied the northern bank of the Syr Darya could only be the Sakās who had allied with the Achaemenid Empire and had sent their horsemen to support Darius III in resisting Alexander. They had lived in the vast region from the Syr Darya to the River Ili at least since Darius I came to the throne.
4. It has been suggested that the Macedonians at that time mistook the Syr Darya for the Tanais River (i.e., the Don River), so that the Syr Darya, (i.e., the Jaxartes River), was taken by Arrian as a demarcation between the Asian Scythians and the European Scythians. He thus believed the Asian Scythians lived on the left bank of the river and the European Scythians on the right.
In my opinion, this theory is probably erroneous, for according to Arrian:
The springs of the Tanais too, which Aristobulus says is called by the natives another name, the Jaxartes, rise on Mount Caucasus; and this river also flows out into the Hyrcanian Sea. The Tanais, of which Herodotus the historian tells us that it is the eighth of the Scythian rivers, rises and flows out of a great lake, and runs into a greater lake, called Maeotis, will be a different Tanais. Some authorities regard this Tanais as the boundary between Asia and Europe; they imagine that from this corner of the Euxine Sea upwards the Lake Maeotis and this river Tanais which runs into the lake do actually part Asia and Europe, just as the sea near Gadeira and the nomad Libyans opposite Gadeira parts Libya and Europe; imagining also that Libya is parted from the rest of Asia by the river Nile. (III, 30)
From this passage, it is clear that Arrian never meant that the Jaxartes was the demarcation between Europe and Asia. He may have been wrong in saying that the river “rises on Mount Caucasus, and this river also flows out into the Hyrcanian Sea”, but from “they imagine that ...”. and so on, he was obviously talking about the Tanais River as described by Herodotus. A passage in the History of Herodotus may provide evidence:
The eighth is the river Tanais, which in its upper course comes from a great lake and issues into an even greater called the Maeetian. (IV, 57)
Moreover, no connection between the European Scythians and the Jaxartes River is found in Arrian’s records, so that it is hard to say that the Macedonians took the river as the demarcation between Europe and Asia. In fact, from our knowledge of the Asian Scythians, though the land of the Abian Scythians was unknown, the land of the Massagetaean Scythians without doubt lay on the left bank of the Jaxartes River and that of the Sakās on the right bank.
In other words, the Asian Scythians lived on both banks of the Jaxartes River and it was probably for this reason that the Macedonians mistakenly called the river the Tanias River. The division of the Scythians, whom Alexander met with, into European and Asian Scythians, must have been Arrian’s own invention.
This section will discuss the Sacae described in the
History of Alexander
of Quintus Curtius [probably of the 1st century].
It is generally believed that the authenticity of this book is far inferior to Arrian’s book.
1. It is recorded that Nabarzanes had said to Darius III before he kidnapped the latter: “the Indi and Sacae are under your rule”. (V, 9) This seems to show that the Sacae had been a dependent state of the Achaemenid Empire up to the time when Alexander went on his expedition against the Achaemenid Empire. This is different from Arrian’s records concerning the fact that the Sacae were an ally of Persia. We do not know which is correct.
2. An admonition of Alexander to his soldiers is recorded: “Nabarzanes has taken possession of Hyrcania, the murderer Bessus not only holds Bactra, but he also threatens us; the Sogdiani, Dahae, Massagetae, Sacae, and Indi are independent. All these, as soon as they see our backs, will follow them; for they are of the same nation, we are of an alien race and foreigners”. (VI, 3) One can tell the relationship between the Sacae and the Achaemenid Empire at that time from his words. And the fact that he named both the Sacae and the Massagetae here seems to indicate that they belonged to different tribes at that time, but this is different from the statement of Herodotus that the Massagetae who were attacked by Cyrus II were called the Sacae.
3. It is also recorded: “It was his [Bessus’] intention to withdraw into the land of the Sogdiani; he would oppose the Oxus River like a wall to the enemy, until powerful auxiliaries should assemble from the neibouring nations; the Chorasmii would come to him and the Dahae and Sacae, and the Indians and the Scythians dwelling beyond the River Tanais, not one of whom was so short of stature that he was not a head taller than a Macedonian soldier ...”. (VII, 4) Here the Sacae and the Scythians “dwelling beyond the River Tanais” are juxtaposed and the statement seems to indicate that the Sacae did not live on the northern bank of the Syr Darya. However, this may be understood instead as saying that not only did the Sacae tribe live beyond the Syr Darya but there were also other Scythians living there.
It is also recorded: “This campaign (in Sogdiana) by the fame of so opportune a victory completely subdued Asia, which in great part was revolting. They had believed that the Scythians were invincible; after their defeat they confessed that no nation would be a match for the Macedonians. Accordingly the Sacae sent envoys to promise that they would submit. ... Therefore he (Alexander) received the envoys of the Sacae courteously and gave them Euxenippus to accompany them”. (VII, 9) The Scythians here might be referring to the Massagetae, Dahae, etc., who lived on the southern bank of the Syr Darya. The so-called Sacae obviously lived on the northern bank of the river; and the above-cited record of Arrian (IV, 5) provides evidence of this.
The following is a discussion of the relevant records in the
Geography
of Strabo [64 or 63
BCE
-
c.
24
CE
]:
1. It is recorded: “Now the greater part of the Scythians, beginning at the Caspian Sea, are called Däae, but those who are situated more to the east than these are named Massagetae and Sacae,
whereas all the rest are given the general name of Scythians, though each people is given a separate name of its own. They are all for the most part nomads. But the best known of the nomads are those who took away Bactriana from the Greeks, I mean the Asii, Pasiani, Tochari and Sacarauli, who originally came from the country on the other side of the Iaxartes River that adjoins that of the Sacae and the Sogdiani and was occupied by the Sacae”. (XI, 8-2) This is the most important record on the Sacae in the book of Strabo. This shows that the so-called Sacae were made up of four tribes, i.e., the Asii and others. They lived formerly in the valleys of the Rivers Ili and Chu. (i.e., “the land of the Sai 塞” as described in the “Xiyu zhuan 西域傳” of
Hanshu
漢書, ch. 96) Therefore, they must have been the Issedones described by Herodotus.
First, “the country on the other side of the Iaxartes River that adjoins that of the Sacae and the Sogdiani and was occupied by the Sacae” must have been the land of the Massagetae described by Herodotus, which adjoined the valleys of the Rivers Ili and Chu in the east and Sogdiana in the west. This area had been occupied by the Sacae on the eve of the fall of the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom at the latest. From there the Sacae invaded Bactria.
Second, the Sacae must have lived in the valleys of the Rivers Ili and Chu before they occupied the land of the Massagetae. Therefore it is very possible that they were the Issedones described by Herodotus.
Third, the four tribes (the Asii and others) who occupied Bactria must have been the Issedones, because they had come from the country “occupied by Sacae”.
Fourth, “Asii” may be a transcription of “Isse[dones]” and one may consider that the four tribes (the Asii and others) belonged to one tribal confederacy and that all four tribes were called the Issedones (i.e., Asii), probably because the Asii once held a dominant position.
As stated in section C, the earliest date that the Sacae occupied the northern bank of the Syr Darya, i.e., the land of the Massagetae, would probably have been at the beginning of the reign of Cambyses II; after that they took possession of the vast region from the Ili River to the Syr Darya. It is very possible that they were called “Sacae” by the Persians because they physically replaced the Massagetae. In
c.
177-176
BCE
, the Da Yuezhi 大月氏 occupied the land of the Issedones, or of the Sai 塞 (the valleys of the Rivers Ili and Chu) described by the “Xiyu zhuan 西域傳” of
Hanshu
漢書 (ch. 96). A part of the Sai 塞, i.e., Issedones moved south and reached the Pamir Region. In the light of above-cited record of Strabo, however, it seems that another part of the Issedones, who camped on the northern bank of the Syr Darya, the former land of the Massagetae, crossed the Syr Darya and the Amu Darya, and invaded Bactria. According to the most reliable theory, the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom was destroyed in
c.
140
BCE
. Therefore the invasion must have taken place around 35 years after the Issedones’ eastern territory was occupied.
One may surmise that the Issedones invaded Bactria when they could no longer stand invasions and harassment from their eastern neighbour, the Da Yuezhi 大月氏.
2. In the book of Strabo it is also recorded: “The Sacae and the Sogdiani, with the whole of their lands, are situated opposite India, but the Bactriani only for a slight distance; ... the Sacae and the Sogdiani are separated from one another by the Iaxartes River, and the Sogdiani and Bactriani by the Oxus River”. (XI, 8-8) Here it is clear that the land of the so-called Sacae lay on the northern bank of the Syr Darya. This had, of course, been the situation before the four tribes (the Asii and others) invaded Bactria. The statement that the Sacae and the Sogdiani, “with the whole of their lands, are situated opposite India” shows that the analysis of the position of the Sakās’ land in Darius’ inscriptions is correct. That the Sacae and the Bactriani were considered to be “a slight distance” apart might be one of the reasons Herodotus associated the Sacae with Bactria.
3. Strabo also gives a detailed description of the expedition against the Sacae by Cyrus II. The Sacae described by him were obviously the Massagetae described by Herodotus, for he says that “the Massagetae disclosed their valour in their war with Cyrus”. (XI, 8-6) The Massagetae, whom Cyrus II attacked, lived on the northern bank of the Syr Darya. And according to Strabo, “[Some of the Massagetae] inhabit mountains, some plains, others marshes which are formed by the rivers, and others the islands in the marshes. But the country is inundated most of all, they say, by the Araxes River, which splits into numerous branches and empties by its other mouths into the other sea on the north, though by one single mouth it reaches the Hyrcanian Gulf”. (XI, 8-6) However, because of the ambiguity in his words it is not possible to tell which bank of the Syr Darya the Massagetae inhabited. Perhaps he confused their situations at different times. Next, Strabo quotes Eratosthenes’ words: “Arachoti and Massagetae are situated alongside the Bactrians towards the west along the Oxus River”. (XI, 8-8) This obviously refers to the situation after they had been driven out of their former land.
In the
Natural History
of Pliny [23-79
CE
]
it is recorded: “Beyond (the Iaxartes River) are some tribes of Scythians. To these the Persians have given the general name of Sacae. ... There is an uncountable number of tribes, numerous enough to live on equal terms with the Parthians; most notable among them are the Sacae, Massagetae, Dahae, Essedones”. (VI, 19) In this passage, there are three problematic areas which need to be clarified.
1. The Persians first called the Massagetae, who lived on the northern bank of the Syr Darya, Sakās, and later on they called the Issedones (i.e., Asii and others), who drove out the Massagetae and occupied the northern bank of the Syr Darya, Sakās. Therefore, Pliny was basically correct to say that the Persians called the Scythians, who lived the northern bank of the Syr Darya, Sacae.
2. The Sacae, the Massagetae and the Essedones (Issedones) are juxtaposed as though they are three separate tribes, as the result of a confusion of Greek and Persian traditions.
3. The sources on which Pliny based his writing must be dated before the fall of the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom, when the Sacae had not yet moved south and had not crossed over the Syr Darya.
In the
Geography
of Ptolemy [
c.
100-170
CE
]
it is recorded:
The boundary of Sacara on the west is Sogdiana, on the side of which as we have before mentioned, is this country’s eastern boundary. The northern boundary looks toward Scythia, the boundary line running along the bend of the Jarxartes river extends to a terminus in 130°[E], 49 [N], on the east moreover it is bounded by Scythia along the line running through the Ascatancas mountains to the Imaus mountains 140°[E], 43°[N], extending through the Imaus mountains northward, terminating in 145°[E], 35°[N], on the south Sacara is bounded by the Imaus Mountains along the line uniting the mentioned termini. ...
Nomads occupy the land of Sacara; but the towns are without caves or forests. Those who are near the Jaxartes are the Caratae and the Comari;those along the mountain region are the Comediae, and the Massagetae, who are along the Ascatanca mountains; next, between these are the Grynaei, the Scythiae and the Toornae, below whom near the Imaus mountains are the Byltae. (VI, 13)
According to the above, in the period described by Ptolemy, the region of the Sakās was to the east of Sogdiana, to the west of the Pamir (the middle part of the Imaus Mountains), to the south of the Syr Darya (the Jaxartes River) and to the north of the Hindu Kush range (a branch range of the Imaus Mountains,which stretches westwards).
It is possible that these Sakās had either turned south from the valleys of the Rivers Ili and Chu then entered this region in 177-176
BCE
, or moved eastwards and entered the region after they had invaded Bactria from the northern bank of the Syr Darya in
c.
140
BCE
.
Ptolemy does not mention the Asii and the other three tribes, probably because all the tribes that entered this region were small ones, who had formerly belonged to the Asii and others. It is also possible that there were a few tribes among them which were not Sakās and Ptolemy may have mentioned them because they were scattered across the Sacara region.
Ptolemy refers twice to the Issedon(es), who may well have been the Asii and others. He says:
Scythia beyond the Imaus mountains is terminated on the west by Scythia within the mountains and next to Sacae, the mountain range separating it running northward; on the north is unknown land; on the east it is bounded by Serica along a direct line which terminates in 150°[E], 63°[N] and 160°[E], 35°[N] on the south by the part of India beyond the Ganges river as far as the line which unites the designated termini; a part of the western section of the Auzaciis mountains is in Scythia, the terminus of which is in 149°[E], 49 [N] and a part of the Casii Mountains as they are called, terminus of which is in 152°[E] 41°[N] and an equal part of the western section of the Emodus mountains, the terminus of which is in 153°[E], 36°[N]. In the Auzaciis Mountains is the source of the Oechardis river which is located in 153°[E], 51°[N]. The Scythian Abii inhabit the northern parts of this Scythia, and below these are the Scythian Hippophagi; next to these is the Auzacitis region; below this is the region which they call Casia, and below this are the Scythian Ghatae; then the Achassa region and below this next to the Emodus mountains the Scythian Ghauranaei. The towns in this region are Auzacia (144°[E] 49°40＇[N]), Issedon Scythia (150°[E] 48°30＇[N]), Chaurana (150°[E] 37°15＇[N]), Sotta (145°[E] 35°20＇[N]). (VI, 15)
And secondly he says:
In the northern parts of Serica the races of the Anthropophagi pasture their flocks, below whom the race of the Annibi reside in the mountains of this name; between these and the Auzacios is the Sizyges race, below whom are the Damnae; then the Pialae on the Oechardes river, and below this the Oechardae of this same name. Toward the east from the Annibi are the Garinaei and the Rhabbanae, and below these the Asmiraea region above the mountains of this name; below these mountains of Casius, the great race of the Issedones dwell, and near the beginning of these mountains are the Throani; below these toward the east are the Thaguri, near the mountains of this name; below the Issedones are the Aspacarae, and below these the Batae, and further southward, next to the Emodi and Serici mountains are the Ottorocorae. (VI, 16)
The following are among the impotant towns of Serica: Throana (174°40＇[E], 47°40＇[N]); Issedon Serica (162°[E], 45°[N]) and Thogara (171°20＇[E], 39°40＇[N]). Based on Ptolemy, it is possible to draw three conclusions:
1. Since the Imaus Mountains described by Ptolemy refer to the Pamir Plateau and its branch ranges which run in various directions, the “Scythia beyond the Imaus Mountains” indicates the region which was encircled by the Altai Mountains, the Tianshan Mountains, the Pamir Plateau and Himalaya Mountains; thus a large part of the Tarim Basin and Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau would be included in it.
As for the Serica, it is generally taken to be a part of China.
2. As to the location of the Issedon Scythian town, there are five theories:Qiuci 龜茲, Yanqi 焉耆, Shule 疏勒, Gumo 姑墨 and Jingjue 精絕.
All of them are found in the Tarim Basin. According to the most reliable theory, the Issedon Serica is identical with the town of Yixun 伊循 in the state of Shanshan 鄯善, as referred to in the “Xiyu zhuan 西域傳 A” of
Hanshu
漢書 (ch. 96A). Therefore the Issedones must have been the Shanshan 鄯善 people, and the so-called Casius Mountains by the town might be the Āltyn Tagh.
3. Both the Issedon Scythia and the Issedon Serica took their names from the Issedones. The Issedones must have been those who entered into the Tarim Basin from the west of the Pamir Plateau. As mentioned in section F, “Issedones” may have been a transcription of “Asii”; but, since Ptolemy called it a great ethnic group, it may have included more tribes than the Asii, and it would not be amiss to regard “Issedones” as synonymous with “Sakās”.
[1] Both Marquart1896-1905, pp. 139-140, and Shiratori1970VI(sk) consider that here Herodotus confused two distinct Sakās. I disagree. Also, Gershevitch 1985, pp. 219-220, 253-254, points out that since all the Sakās wore the pointed-hood, “Sakās haumavargā” and “Sakās tigraxaudā” do not necessarily mean there were two different groups of the Sakās. At the same time, he distinguishes between the “Sakās haumavargā”, namely “Sakās beyond Sogdiana” who lived on the northern bank of the Syr Darya, and the “Sakās tigraxaudā”, who were attacked by Darius in 519 BCE , in the Caspian-Aral region. The reason given is that the Egyptian text of Darius’ Suez inscription refers to the “Sakā of the Marsh”, whom Darius attacked as soon as he had put down the revolt of Margiana. I disagree. Even if Darius I turned to attack the Sakās as soon as he had put down the revolt of Margiana, this does not show that the land of the Sakās lay in the Caspian-Aral region. Moreover, even if the Sakās took part in the revolt of Margiana, this does not necessarily mean that their land could not have lain on the northern bank of the Syr Darya. As regards the interpretation of the text of the Suez inscription, there are many different theories among scholars, and in fact the so-called “Sakās of the marshes and the Sakās of the plains” might well be “the Sakā who are in back of the Sogdian land”. See Szemerényi.
[2] See Gershevitch1985, p. 254. In addition to Darius’ Naqš-e Rostam inscription, the Persepolis inscription of Artaxerxes’ II [404-359 BCE ] or III [358-338 BCE ] also refers to the “Sakās who are across the sea”. Cf. Szemerényi1980. But there is great doubt as to whether the latter showed what actually happened in Artaxerxes (II or III) period, because the 30 names of the countries and the order in which they are listed are the same as those of Darius’ Naqš-e Rostam inscription.