The article deals with the question of the origin of the toponym Partava (ParOava-). After analyzing the data of Achaemenid inscriptions and information from Herodotus, the author comes to the conclusion that the name of this region goes back to the Massaget language (Saka Tigrahuda).
Key words: ParOava (ParOava-), Achaemenids, Massagetes, Saki tigrahauda.
The toponym Paroava (ParOava-) was first recorded in Achaemenid inscriptions, where it served to designate a small area in northeastern Iran. Partava was successively part of the Achaemenid Empire, the empire of Alexander the Great and the Seleucid state, and after the Parnae conquest it became the core of the Arsacid monarchy. At the same time, there is still a debate in science about the origin of this toponym.
So, I. M. Diakonov raised this name to Iransk. *pars -, *parsav - - "rib", "side", " edge "and believed that "Parthia was, apparently, the" edge" for the tribes that spoke southwestern dialects " (Dyakonov, 2008, p.100). But although the transition of the common Iranian *s to 0 is indeed characteristic of the Old Persian language [Kent, 1953, p. 33; Rastorgueva, 1990, p. 83], the existence of the form ParOava - already in the 7th century BC does not allow - contrary to R. Kent [Kent, 1953, p. 33] - to derive it from the " South- western " dialect [Grantovsky, 1961, p. 7, ed. 22; Grantovsky, 2007, p. 165]. At the same time, the toponym Partava cannot be either Median or Parthian, since in Western Iranian languages the common Iranian *s becomes s [Kent, 1953, p. 33; Rastorgueva, 1990, p. 83, 200-201]. E. A. Grantovsky believed that it is phonetically possible to construct an etymology of the name of the region and the people who inhabited it to the Indo-Iranian *Parthu-and compare it with the corresponding Indian ethnonyms [Grantovsky, 1961, p. 7]. According to S. V. Kullanda, this is unlikely from a historical point of view, since no names dating back to the Indo-Iranian *Parthu-are known in the Iranian world1. The same author points out:
"Taking into account that in the Iranian ethnonymy there are common names that go back to the Indo-Iranian *Parsa / u, such as, in particular, the self-names of Persians and Pashtuns, it should be assumed that the name of the Parthians goes back to the Iranian language, where *s gave b, i.e., given the location of Parthia on the border with the nomadic world, not it is possible that to Scythian 2, resp. Saki, which was characterized by just such a phonetic development" [Kullanda, 2012, p. 21].
What language can we talk about? It seems to me that this was most likely the language of the Massagetae, who lived east of the Caspian Sea across the Araks River-
1 Personal message from S. V. Kullanda dated 21.12.2011. I take this opportunity to once again express my sincere gratitude to him.
2 For this phonetic pattern peculiar to the Scythian language, see: [Vitchak, 1992, p. 55; Tokhtasv, 2005, p. 100; Kullanda, 2011, p.58].
Uzboy (Herod. I. 201, 204). In archaeological terms, they corresponded to the early Sakas of the Prisarykamysh delta of the Amu Darya and, thus, were Partava's northern neighbors. But the question remains as to how the place name of Massaget origin became known to the Medes, and then to the Persians.
The identification of the massagetae of Herodotus with the saka tigraxauda of Achaemenid inscriptions is widespread in science (Litvinsky, 1972, p. 174; Dovatur, Kallistov, and Shishova, 1982, p. 182). However, relatively recently A. A. Nemirovsky questioned the identity of these two ethnonyms. His arguments boil down to the following. First, according to Herodotus, the Massagetae were not subject to the Persians either under Darius (Herod. III. 89-97) or under Xerxes (Herod. VII. 61-96), and the Saks of Tigrahauda are mentioned in the Achaemenid royal inscriptions among the conquered peoples (Nemirovsky, 2005, p.221). Secondly, if Darius had conquered the Massagetae, surpassed Cyrus himself, and avenged his death, this great success would inevitably have been reflected in the propaganda of the Achaemenid kings. Meanwhile, when describing the campaign against the Saks of Tigrahaud in the Behistun inscription, Darius does not mention Cyrus in a single word (Nemirovsky, 2005, pp. 221-222). Third, since Herodotus, who followed the Persian usage, did not include Massagetae among the Scythians (Saks), the latter cannot be attributed to the Saks of Tigrahaud (Nemirovsky, 2005, pp. 222-223).
Concerning these statements, it can be noted that the Achaemenid inscriptions ignored the facts of the fall of certain territories from the empire (Shahbazi, 1982, p. 223, p. 157; Roaf, 1983, p. 128; Bosworth, 1995, p. 148; Badian, 1998, p. 207, 220; Balakhvantsev, 2006, p. 367). So, in the tomb inscription of Artaxerxes II A?P3 among the representatives of the peoples that make up its power are the overseas Scythian, the Skudra resident, the Egyptian, the Libyan, the Ethiopian, and the Khorezmian. However, in 359 BC none of these ethnic groups could have been subordinated to the Persians (for more details, see [Balakhvantsev, 2006, pp. 367-373]). However, the Achaemenid tradition of free handling of facts owes its origin not to Artaxerxes II, but to his ancestor Darius I.
As is known, Darius ' campaign against the Black Sea Scythians ended in complete failure: the Persians were unable not only to conquer Scythia, but also to capture at least a piece of land north of the Istrian Danube (Herod. IV. 118-141). Moreover, the Scythians themselves went on the offensive, marched through Thrace captured by the Persians as far as the Thracian Chersonesus (Herod. VI. 40)4, and then, having concluded an alliance with the Spartans, even planned to invade Media along the Phasis-Arax river (Herod. VI. 84). However, these circumstances did not prevent Darius from including the saka paradraya (overseas or European Scythians) in the list of conquered peoples in his tomb inscription in Naqsh-i Rustam (DNa 28-29), as well as depicting one of them as the bearer of the throne, which was later imitated by all his successors [Schmidt, 1970, p. 108-110, fig. 44]5.
Thus, by asserting that the Saks of Tigrahauda, unlike the Massagetae, were conquered by the Persians and, consequently, we are talking about different peoples, A. A. Nemirovsky shows excessive confidence in the Achaemenid inscriptions, which, as can be seen, did not at all seek to give their readers objective information about the administrative structure of the state, but were primarily intended to provide them with information about the administrative structure of the state. create one
3 In the literature (Kent, 1953, p. 155), this inscription is designated as such due to the ambiguity of the ordinal number of Artaxerxes.
4 Sometimes the Scythian invasion is dated to 511 BC [Fol and Hammond, 2011, p. 303], but according to Herodotus (Herod. VI. 40), this happened three years before Miltiades finally left the Csrsonss in 493 BC [Murrsyj, 2011, p. 575].
5 Some authors who note the falsity of Darius ' claims about the royal dignity of his ancestors and the circumstances of his seizure of power [Dandamasv, 1985, pp. 8-11, 68-70; Kyle & Young Jr., 2011, pp. 73-74] still try to find some real grounds for including the overseas Scythians in the list of conquered peoples [Dandamasv, 1985, p. 111 ; Kyle & Young, Jr., 2011, p. 89J. For Darius, the only and quite sufficient "reason" was his unwillingness to admit defeat.
they have an idea of the eternity and immutability of the empire [Balakhvantsev, 2006, p. 367, note 6].
Meanwhile, apart from the above-mentioned tendency of Achaemenid monuments to sacrifice reality in favor of ideology, one particular circumstance encourages doubts about the subordination of the Saka Tigrahuda to the Persians. In the list of troops that Xerxes led in the campaign against Hellas, only the Amirgian Scythians (Herod. VII. 64) are mentioned among the Saks, traditionally identified with the saka haumavarga of the Achaemenid inscriptions (Litvinsky, 1972, pp. 163-169, 174; Vogelsang, 1992, p. 192). The question is, if the saks of Tigrahuda were really conquered by Darius, then why does Herodotus not even hint at their presence in the army of Xerxes?
The second argument of A. A. Nemirovsky is based on the a priori belief that Darius treated Cyrus the Great with great reverence and perceived him as a model for comparison and imitation. But was this really the case? In the Behistun inscription, Darius mentions the founder of the Achaemenid empire only as the father of Cambyses, as well as other pretenders to the throne, and if in the Babylonian version Cyrus was still called "king of Parsu", then in the later added Old Persian version 6, which was personally approved by Darius [Dyakonov, 1986, p. 17], the name of Cyrus was never mentioned. accompanied by a royal title (DB 1 28, 39, 53, III 25, IV 9, 27-28; DBb 5-6; DBh 6-7).
However, this was far from the only case of belittling the role and dignity of Cyrus. In the same Behistun inscription, Darius states that eight members of his family (tapa) were xsauaoiua kings (DB I 9-10). It is generally assumed that Darius refers to Achaemenes, Chishpish, Cyrus I, Cambyses I, Cyrus II the Great, Cambyses II, as well as his great-grandfather Ariaramna and grandfather Arshama (Dandamaev, 1985, p. 11; Kyler Young Jr., 2011, p.40). Researchers have already noted that Ariaramna and Arshama not only could not have been kings in Parsa [Dandamaev, 1985, p. 11], but most likely did not have a royal title at all [Bryant, 1996, p. 122-123] 7. Meanwhile, by ascribing the title xsayaoiya to both Cyrus II and his direct ancestors, Darius covertly not only exalted his grandfather 8 and great-grandfather, but also belittled Cyrus, depriving him of the title "great king", with which he is mentioned in Mesopotamian sources [Kyler Young Jr., 2011, p. 58]9.
Thus, Darius treated his predecessor with an undisguised dislike, which may have developed even in the last years of Cyrus ' reign. Thus, according to Herodotus, Cyrus suspected Darius of intending to seize power and even planned to arrest him (Herod. 1. 209—210). Therefore, it is hardly surprising that Darius does not mention Cyrus in his account of the campaign against the Saka Tigrahuda. Darius, who tried to create the impression that he was the first of the Persians to become a "great king" and was under the exclusive protection of Ahuramazda, could well have perceived the deaths of Cyrus and Cambyses as a "divine providence" that opened the way for him, as the most worthy, to power.
6 See: [Dandamaev and Lukonin, 1980, p. 269 (with previous literature)].
7 A. I. Ivanchik's attempt [Ivanchik, 2000, p. 177, 198] to" defend " the veracity of this statement of Darius cannot be considered successful. According to him, Cyrus II and his direct ancestors were kings of Anshan, while Ariaramna and Arshama ruled another Persian principality. However, A. I. Ivanchik does not take into account the fact that Parsa, divided into separate principalities, could not overthrow the Median rule. In addition, sources are unanimous in stating that by the time of the beginning of the uprising against Astyages, Cyrus II was the king of all of Parsa (Anshan). See: [Dandamaev, 1985, p. 8-11; Kyler Young Jr., 2011, p.41-12].
8 When Darius mentions his elderly grandfather Arshama in the Susa inscription, he does not mention his royal dignity (DSf 13).
9 I do not refer here to the titulature of Cyrus II in the Persian inscriptions from Pasargadae, since it is still impossible to say with certainty that they were carved under Darius 1 [Dandamaev and Lukonin, 1980, pp. 265-266; Stolpcr, 2005, p.23].
Turning to the analysis of the ethnic nomenclature used in the work of Herodotus and Achaemenid inscriptions, one should immediately object to A. A. Nemirovsky, who claims that the" father of history " generally followed the Persian usage. Thus, the name saka tigraxauda is a typical exoethnonym, the use of which was generally typical for the inscriptions of Darius and Xerxes (DPh 5-6; DNa 29; DSe 27-29; XPh 23-25). The appellative "massagetae" used by Herodotus seems to be an endoethnonym, i.e., a self-name, which also clearly contains the element "sak" (Dovatur, Kallistov, and Shishova, 1982, p.183). Although it is true that Herodotus did not consider the Massagetae to be Scythians (Herod. I. 201), this has nothing to do with the question discussed here.
In view of the above, we have no data to reject the identification of the Saka Tigrahuda with the Massagetae of Herodotus. The following observation can be made in favor of it. In the Achaemenid era, the tenth Median tax district included the Orthocoribantii (Herod. III. 92). This exoethnonym is a tracing paper from the old Persian tigraxauda and means "pointy-capped". One can hardly agree with the opinion of V. Vogelsang, who sees in the mention of Orthocoribantis the proof that the tenth district included the peoples living beyond the Caspian Sea, including the Saks of Tigrahuda (Vogelsang, 1992, p. 203). The fact is that the tribes inhabiting the Caspian coast were included in the eleventh district (Herod. III. 92), and the Parthians and Hyrcans 10 - in the sixteenth (Herod. III. 93). Therefore, there is no reason to believe that the Orthocoribantii of Herodotus lived to the east of the Caspian Sea. They could only be a part of the Saka Tigrahuda who migrated to Mussel. It is logical to assume that this migration was a consequence of their campaigns in northwestern Iran, undertaken even before the formation of the Median power. The reality of these raids is evidenced by a bone pommel with an Aramaic inscription from the Sakar-chaga 3 burial ground in the Southern Aral Sea region, dating back to the end of the VIII-VII centuries BC [Yablonsky, 1996, p. 52, Fig. 5]. Since in the second half of the VIII century BC, the eastern border of the Aramaic language's sphere of use was located in Western Mussels and Manna (Lemaire, 1998, p. 15-30; Balakhvantsev, 2012, p. 358-361), then the tigrahuda saks must have reached at least the Zagros Mountains and Lake Urmia. It is precisely because of their presence in Media that the Orthocoribantians could have contributed to the penetration of the Paroava form - through the medium of Median - into the language of Achaemenid royal inscriptions, where this toponym was already perceived as quite Old Persian [Grantovsky, 1961, p. 7, note 24].
It would be possible to put an end to this, if not for one circumstance. Analyzing the name of the Massaget tsarevich common Iranian * Spargapaisa - (Herod. I. 211, 213), experts on Iranian languages have repeatedly noted that in the Massaget language the common Iranian *s has passed into s [Grantovsky, 2007, p.184; Vitchak, 1992, p. 55-56; Kullanda, 2011, p. 49]. If this is the case, then it is not possible to derive the toponym Partava from the Saka language of Tigrahuda. However, the probability that Herodotus heard the name Spargapis from the mouth of Massaget 11 is very small. Rather, we are dealing here with a foreign language transmission that could have influenced the original form of the name [Grantovsky and Rayevsky, 1984, p. 49]. I believe that the name Spargapis came down to us not in Massaget, but in the Median transmission, where, as noted above, the common Iranian *s passed into the Median s. Thus, there are no obstacles to considering the toponym Paroava (Paroava-) to be derived from the Saka language of Tigrahauda (Massaget)12, no longer remains.
10 According to the inscriptions of Darius of Bshistun (DB I 16, II 92-98, III 1-10), Suz (DSc 21; DSm 8) and Naqsh-i Rustam (DNa 22), as well as data from Strabo (Strabo. XI. 9. 1), Hyrkania was united in one administrative unit with Parthia and paid taxes together with the last one.
11 It is difficult to assume, on the one hand, the possibility of any Massaget entering the Mediterranean, on the other-Herodotus himself never visited the east of the Caspian Sea.
12 This circumstance allows us to conclude that the Massagst language had one common isogloss *s >o with Scythian.
list of literature
Balakhvantsv A. S. K voprosu o vremya otpadeniya Khorezma ot derzhavy Akhsmsnidov: istochnikovedcheskiy aspekt [On the question of the time of the fall of Khorezm from the Akhsmsnid Empire: a source study aspect]. Zapiski Vostochnogo otdeliya Rossiiskogo arkheologicheskogo obshchestva, vol. II, St. Petersburg: Peterburgskoe Vostokovedenie, 2006.
Balakhvantsv A. S. Arameiskaya napravisa iz Rysaykino (k voprosu o scythskikh pokhodakh v Perednuyu Azii) [Aramean inscription from Rysaykino (on the issue of Scythian campaigns to the Front Asia)]. Kul'tury stepnoy Evrazii i ikh vzaimodeystvie s drevnymi tsivilizatsiyami: Materialy mezhdunarodnoi nauchnoi konferentsii, posvyashchennoi 110-letiyu so deya rozhdeniya M. P. Gryaznov, St. Petersburg, 2012. Kn. 2.
Vitchak K. T. Scythian language: experience of description // Questions of linguistics. 1992. № 5.
Grantovsky E. A. Drsvnsiranskos ethnic name *Parsava-Parsa II Brief reports of the Institute of Asian Peoples. Issue XXX. Moscow, 1961.
Grantovsky E. A. Early history of the Iranian tribes of Western Asia. 2nd ed. Moscow: Vostochnaya literatura Publ., 2007.
Grantovsky E. A., Raevsky D. S. On the Iranian-speaking and "Indo-Aryan" population of the Northern Black Sea region in the ancient era / / Ethnogenesis of the peoples of the Balkans and the Northern Black Sea region I Ed. by L. A. Gindin. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1984.
Dandamaev M. A. Politicheskaya istoriya Akhemenidskoy derzhavy [Political history of the Achaemenid Empire].
Dandamasv M. A., Lukonin V. G. Kul'tura i ekonomika drevnego Irana [Culture and Economy of ancient Iran]. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1980.
Dovatur A. I., Kallistov D. P., Shishova I. A. Narody nashey strany v Istorii Gerodota [The peoples of Our Country in the "History" of Herodotus].
I. M. Dyakonov O getsrografii i se mesto v istorii razvitiya pisma [On getsrography and its place in the history of the development of writing]. Issue IV. Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1986.
Diakonov I. M. Istoriya Medii [History of the Mussel]. St. Petersburg: Philological Faculty of St. Petersburg.GU, 2008.
Ivanchik A. I. Istoriya derzhavy Akhsmsnidov: istochniki i novye interpretatsii [History of the Akhsmsnid Empire: sources and new interpretations]. 2000. № 2.
Kyle-Young, Jr., Early History of the Medes and Persians and the Ahsmsnid empire before the death of Cambyses, Kembridzhskaya istoriya drevnego mira, vol. IV. Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean. Ca. 525-479 BC Moscow: Ladomir Publ., 2011.
Kyle and Young, Jr., Strengthening the Power and Reaching the Limits of its Growth under Darius and Xerxes, Kembridzhskaya istoriya drevnego mira, vol. IV. Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean. Ca. 525-479 BC Moscow: Ladomir Publ., 2011.
Kullanda S. V. Uroki skifskogo [Scythian lessons]. 2011. № 5.
Kullanda S. V. Scythian words in the Avesta? // East (Oriens). 2012. № 1.
Litvinsky B. A. Ancient nomads "Roofs of the World", Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1972.
Murrsyj O. Ionijskoe vosstanie [The Ionian Uprising]. Kembridzhskaya istoriya drevnego mira [Cambridge History of the Ancient World], vol. IV. Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean. Ca. 525-479 BC Moscow: Ladomir Publ., 2011.
Nsmirovskiy A. A. Massagsta Gerodota i saki tigrahuda [Massagists of Herodotus and Saki tigrahuda]. Proceedings of the conference dedicated to the 90th anniversary of Igor Mikhailovich Diakonov I, edited by M. M. Dandamasva. St. Petersburg: State Hermitage Publishing House, 2005.
Rastorgueva V. S. Comparative and historical grammar of Western Iranian languages: Phonology, Moscow: Nauka Publ., 1990.
Tokhtas S. R. Problema skifskogo yazyka v sovremennoy nauke [The problem of the Scythian Language in Modern Science]. Ethnic Contacts and Cultural Exchanges North and West of the Black Sea from the Greek Colonization to the Ottoman Conquest I Ed.V. Cojocaru. Iasi: Trinitas, 2005.
Fol A., Hammond N.-J.-L. Persians in Europe (in addition to Greece) / / Cambridge history of the ancient world. Persia, Greece and the Western Mediterranean. Ca. 525-479 BC Moscow: Ladomir Publ., 2011.
Yablonsky L. T. Saki of the Southern Aral Sea region, Moscow: Institute of Archeology of the Russian Academy of Sciences, 1996.
Badian Е. The King's Indians // Alexander der Grosse. Eine Welteroberung und Ihr Hintergrund. Vorträge des Internationalen Bonner Alexanderkolloquiums, 19-21.12.1996 / hrsg. von W. Will. Bonn: Dr. Rudolf Habelt GMBH, 1998.
Bosworth A.B. A Historical Commentary on Arrian 's History of Alexander. Vol. II. Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1995.
Briant P. Histoire de L'Empire Perse de Cyrus à Alexandre. P.: Fayard, 1996.
Kent R.G. Old Persian: Grammar, Texts, Lexicon. New Haven: American Oriental Society, 1953.
Lemairc A. Une inscription aramcenne du VIIIe siècle av. J.-С. trouvée à Bukan (Azerbaïdjan iranien) // Studia Iranica. 1998. T. 27.
Roaf M. Sculptures and Sculptors at Pcrsepolis // Iran. 1983. Vol. 21.
Schmidt F. Persepolis III: The Royal Tombs and Other Monuments. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1970.
Shahbazi A.Sh. Darius in Scythia and Scythians in Persepolis //Archaologische Mitteilungen aus Iran. 1982. Bd. 15.
Stolper M.W. Achacmcnid Languages and Inscriptions // Forgotten Empire: The world of Ancient Persia I Ed. by J.E. Curtis, N. Tallis. L.: The British Museum Press, 2005.
Vogelsang W.J. The Rise and Organisation of the Achaemenid Empire: the Eastern Iranian Evidence. Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1992.
New publications: |
Popular with readers: |
News from other countries: |
![]() |
Editorial Contacts |
About · News · For Advertisers |
![]() 2020-2025, BIBLIO.UZ is a part of Libmonster, international library network (open map) Keeping the heritage of Uzbekistan |