DEUTSCHES ARCHAOLOGISCHES INSTITUT EURASIEN-ABTEILUNG AUSSENSTELLE TEHERAN ARCHAOLOGISCHE MITTEILUNGEN AUS IRAN UND TURAN BAND 34 2002 SONDERDRUCK SCHRIFTLEITUNG BERLIN IM DOL 2-6 DIETRICH REIMER VERLAG GmbH - BERLINBuchbesprechungen 465 Staudammbauten gezwungenermaBen ~ weitgehend auf die Tell-Siedlungen in den Fluftilern konzentriert, kann Verf. zeigen, da im 2. It. v. Chr. auch die Hochlagen intensiv, wahrscheinlich saisonal genutzt wurden, Wahrscheinlich sind nicht nur die Siedlungsformen und die Nutzungs- weisen der Landschaft von Transkaukasien auf Ostanatolien ibertragbar, sondern die Ahnlichkeit der in vorliegendem Werk bekannt gemachten zu den in Transkaukasien vielfach ausgegrabenen Befunden laft es méglich erscheinen, auch die damit verbundenen kulturellen Modelle zu iibertra- gen. Es besteht somit eine erste Ausgangsbasis, um das Verhiiltnis zwischen den genannten Sied- Jungsriumen in Ostanatolien zu untersuchen. Literaturverzeichnis Aliyev 1977 V. Aliyev, Azerbaycanda tung davrunun bojalt gaplar madanijjati (Baku 1977), Bahsaliyev 1997 V. Bahsaliyev, Nahigevan Arkeolojisi (Istanbul 1997), Kohl/Tsetskhladze 1995 Ph. L. KohW/G. R. Tsetskhladze, Nationalism, politics and the practice of archaeology in the Caucasus. In: Ph. L. KohI/C. Fawcett (Hrsg.), Nationalism, politics and the practice of archaeology (Cambridge 1995) 149-173. Kroll 1984 St. Kroll, Archaologische Fundplatze in Iranisch Ost-Azerbaidjan, Archéologische Mitteilungen aus lran 17, 1984, 13-134, Kushnareva 1997 K. Kh, Kushnareva, The Southem Caucasus in Prehistory. Stages of cultural and socioeconomic devel- ‘opment from the eighth to the second millenium B.C. (Philadelphia 1997). Schachner 2001a ‘A. Schachner. Azerbaycan: Eine terra incognita der Vorderasiatischen Archiiologie, Mitteilungen der Deutschen Orient-Gesellschaft 133, 2001, 251-332 Schachner 2001b ‘A. Schachner, Zur Bildkunst des 2. Jahrtausends v. Chr. zwischen Kaspischem Meer und Van-See am Beispiel einer Stele im Museum von Astara (Azerbaycan). Archiiologische Mitteilungen aus Iran und Turan 33, 2001, 115-142. Annes 1991 B. Annes, Kyasrypa 2noxn epenieti Spouse: AsepGaiLuxata (Bary 1991) Baxxwannes 1992 B. Baxxasmes, K sonpocy xpononornu pacnicnol xepamukit w3 Haxnucuann. In: Respublika arxeolog vo etnograflarinm I elmi konferansinin materiallari (Baku 1992) 10-24, Andreas Schachner Institut fiir Vorderasiatische Archiologie Universitit Miinchen Geschwister-Scholl-Platz 1 80539 Munchen Marek J. Olbrycht, Parthia et ulteriores gentes: Die politischen Beziehungen zwischen dem arsakidischen Iran und den Nomaden der eurasischen Steppen. Quellen und Forschun- gen zur antiken Welt 30 (tuduv-Verlagsgesellschaft Miinchen 1998); 337 S.; ISBN 3-88073- 563-8 M. J. Olbrycht draws his information from an array of disparate sources, including authors from the Mediterranean world and China, epigraphy and numismatics from Iran, as well as archaeologi- cal remains. The focus of the work concerns the reconstruction of the political associations be- tween Arsakid Iran and its nomadic neighbors on the Eurasian steppe, for which Olbrycht relies on466 Buchhesprechungen the dating scheme established by J. W. Wolski', rather than an emphasis on the specific political and chronological events that contributed to the formation of the Arsakid state. By seeking to as~ certain the impact of political alliances, which enabled the Parthians to establish and maintain their kingdom, with various steppe peoples, Olbrycht demonstrates that the nature of Arsakid and nomadic relations was based on the fundamental principle of mutual reciprocity in which the Arsakids were themselves a clan of steppe origin of whom most - though not all ~ became inhabi- tants of sedentary Iran. Thus the work is focused on three primary areas: Parthyaia and the Trans~ caspian steppe on the Usboi constituting the heartland of the Arsakids, the zone consisting of the ‘Amu Darya and Syr Darya valleys, Baktria, Sogdiana and Choresmia, and finally that of north- western Iran, especially Media Atropatene, where the Parthians created a commercial and cultural exchange network with the Sarmatian peoples that extended north and south of the Caucus moun- tain range. In this respect, the study complements the small but growing number of publications devoted to the Parthians’. ‘The Achaemenid frontier satrapies and the nomads of Turkestan (the Massagetai, Dahai, and Sakai) enjoyed a mutual relationship based on common cultural traditions and similar socio- ‘economic and political interests (pp. 30-1). The Graeco-Makedonian conquest of the Achaemenid empire wrought a series of unforeseen consequences for both the steppe peoples of Turkestan and the agricultural zone of Iran, not least of which was the change in the traditional alliances between the “Scythians” and the frontier regions of Iran. During Alexander’s campaign of eastern Iran and Central Asia, the anti-Makedonian resistance never abated, even after he had left the region for India with recruits from among the Dahai and other Scythian groups (p. 38). Nor did the situation improve markedly under the Diadochoi and later Seleukids. The Laodike war and the ensuing shift away from eastern Iran and Central Asia to the west in the third century B.C. prevented the Se- leukids from effectively achieving an active administrative policy on two “fronts” (p. 38). The few measures that the Seleukids did undertake to meet the challenges of maintaining their eastern dominion failed primarily for two reasons: as co-tegent in Babylonia charged with overseeing the provinces east of the Euphrates, Antiochos I was too far removed from the realities facing the “Upper Satrapies”, so that when Andragoras, the Seleukid satrap of Parthia and Hyrkania, quit the empire in the middle of the century there was no one to prevent him from doing so. Moreover, the Seleukids’ inability, or unwillingness, to maintain the symbiotic relationship between “sedentary” and nomadic peoples and to prevent the disintegration of their eastern provinces formed part of a policy that had the effect of engendering the reorganization of alliances within and between Helle- nistic Iran and Central Asia and the steppe world beyond. For the steppe federations, the collapse of the Achaemenids followed by the disintegration of the Seleukid Iran presented a power vacuum in the territories of the “sedentary” cultural spheres, enabling them to march against an ineffectual Iran perceived as a land of plunder. The inevitable result was the unhindered incursion by the ‘Transcaspian Aparni into Andragoras’ nascem Parthyaian “realm”, who in short order established anew, Arsakid, state in 247 B.C.’ that encompassed Parthyaia, Hyrkania, and the Transcaspian steppe region of the Dahai, which afforded them political and economic relations with the Mas- sagetai Apasiakai of the region north of the Usboi. For Olbrycht, this inability to confront the no- madic world was the chief cause of the Seleukid kingdom's ultimate disintegration. The Arsakids were Aparni, members of the larger Dahai confederacy, who came from the steppe region of Cen- tral Asia where they had long enjoyed a special relationship with various Transcaspian and “Sar- matian” tribes. Their nomadic origin, therefore, was intimately connected with the Arsakid state throughout its history. The effectiveness of preserving these alliances is seen in the unsuccessful attempts of Seleukos II (pp. 62-4) and Antiochos III (pp. 65-6) to reestablish their authority over northeast Iran against the Arsakids, including the Transcaspian lowlands populated by a multitude of tribes. ' Especially Wolski 1993. ? . g, contributions in Wiesehofer (Ed.) 1998 and in Les Parthes 2002. * Most recently Luther 1999.Buchbesprechungen 467 ‘The period from Arsakes I to Phraates I (247-ca. 170 B.C.) marks the foundation and estab- lishment of the Arsakid kingdom, in which the principal development of this “ascent” occurred in the transformation from a nomadic way of life to that of a sedentary one. The Arsakid kingdom quickly emerged as a stable entity that was able to assert itself on numerous occasions against the Selelukids. The key to success was their ability to transform themselves from a nomadic tribal structure to a monarchy that relied almost exclusively on the resources of the “sedentary” world. Thus in a relatively brief period, the Arsakids had adopted the administrative infrastructure cre~ ated by the Seleukids and their predecessors while maintaining their connection with the nomadic world of the steppes (p. 76) A significant aspect of Arsakid relations with the steppe peoples was the degree to which these nomadic groups constituted a real threat to the security of the kingdom in the later half of the second century B.C, The consolidation of the Parthian kingdom from Arsakes I to Mithradates I (247-138 B.C.) provided the economic, political, and militaristic foundation of Arsakid expansion inito Iran and Turkestan, Mithradates I (c. 170-138 B.C.) in particular ushered in a new phase of Arsakid political aspirations by inflicting a decisive defeat against the Graeco-Baktrians in the northeast, which enabled him to annex Margiana and replace the Graeco-Baktrians as the dominat- ing power in the Amu-Darya basin and western Turkestan. In the west, Mithradates I seized the Seleukid domains of Media and Mesopotamia, followed by Persis and Elymais. Subsequent events grew out of tensions far to the east between Han China and the Hsiung-nu federation, resulting in the displacement of innumerable tribes in Inner Asia, who migrated into the Caspian and north Pontic steppes and the eastern regions of Parthia. By the later half of the century, they had overrun the remnants of the Greaco-Baktrian kingdom before finally settling in Central Asia, eastern Iran, and northwest India. The Arsakids’ newly acquired possessions in the northeast almost led to their destruction, for they found themselves in direct conflict with many of these recent arrivals. The eastern flank of the Parthian kingdom thus became the scene of a series of disastrous military engagements be- tween the Arsakid army and those of the Sakai and Tocharoi among others. Phraates II was killed in battle by the Sakai in c. 129 B.C. and Artabanos I died in Transoxiana fighting the Tocharoi (Yuehzhi) in 124/3 B.C. Under Mithradates 1, however, Parthian misfortunes in the east were reversed as he reasserted Arsakid authority over the region between 120 and 110 B.C. His actions in Transoxiana led to diplomatic and commercial contact between Parthia and China (p. 105), while political relations were established with many of these newly arrived peoples, like the tribes of the Upper Aorsi through whose region an important commercial route extended allowing goods from Babylon and India to pass with intermediaries in Media and Armenia (p. 134). Until the foundation of the KuSan kingdom, no power in Turkestan or easter Iran could seriously threaten the dominant position commanded by the Arsakids. Indeed, the Arsakid king- dom remained the only political entity strong enough to withstand the protracted wars and com- peting interests posed by the multitude of conquerors who had streamed into the region from Cen- tral Asia. By the end of the century, Graeco-Baktria and the Indo-Iranian borderland had been overrun and an entirely different ethno-political constellation had emerged in Transoxiana, Baktna, and eastern Iran. Yet Mithradates [I had transformed the Arsakid kingdom into a world power. The two centuries after the death of Mithradates II were marked by renewed threats in the west, particularly in Armenia. When Sinatrukes ascended the throne he founded a line of Arsakids, the “Sinatrukids”, created an alliance with the nomadic Sakaraukai, and established a network of close relationships with the various nomadic groups settled in eastern Iran and Baktria, Coin finds and ostraka from Old Nisa/Bagir indicate that throughout the first century B.C, the Arsakid king- dom experienced a growth in economic activity (p. 107). Indeed, throughout this century and into the first half of the first century A.D. from Phraates [V to Artabanos Ll, the steppe tribes played an increasingly important role within Parthian domestic affairs as various parties vied for power. ‘Thus Artabanos II (ca. 11/12-40 A.D.) established a new Parthian line, perhaps a collateral branch of the Arsakids, whose support lay in the traditional Arsakid heartland of Hyrkania, the468 Buchbesprechungen Dahai, and Parthyaia. The death of Artabanos II was followed by a civil war between Vardanes and his supporters from Media and Gotarzes II with his allies of Hyrkanians, Dahai and others from northeastern Parthia (pp. 165-7). In the first half of the first century A.D., Parthian and no- madic relations underwent further changes as the Sakai tribes inhabiting portions of eastern Iran gained their independence under the Indo-Parthian Gondophares. Meanwhile, the internal political struggles that had begun in the previous century climaxed with the accession of Vonones I to the throne. Although acknowledged as the blood relative of the “Scythian king”, his recognition was short-lived. As the champion of the nobility and the Parthian homeland of Hyrkania along with the Dahai and various Sakai tribes, including the “Sarmatians” in Armenia, Artabanos I usurped the throne marking the extinction of the older Arsakid dynastic lineage. His long reign (c. 11/12-40. A.D.), marred by crisis and ultimately tragedy, ushered in a period of paralysis within the Im- perium Parthicum engulfing the great families of the Parthian aristocracy in an east-west divide that also involved the Dahai and Sakai tribes of western Baktria. The competing factions in the dynastic dispute that vied for political and socio-economic domination over the kingdom culmi- nated in an internal crisis between Artabanos’ son, Vardanes, and Gotarzes Il, allowing many tribes on the periphery of the kingdom to enlarge their sphere of power, particularly the reconsti- tuted Yuezhi under KuSan hegemony in eastern Baktria. In a span of less than two decades, the Parthian kings, too preoccupied with solving their own internal problems, ali but sporadically abandonned 2 concerted foreign policy, and, therefore, lagged behind the initiatives taken by the Romans in Armenia under Claudius (p. 175). The later Arsakids, beginning in the second half of the first century A.D., were beleaguered by the Romans in the west and by nomads in the east, particularly in the northeast for control of northern Parthyaia (i.e. the foothills of the Kopet Dagh). Vologases I's reign (50-79 A.D.) signi- fied a dramatic change in Arsakid politics, for the nomadic Dahai and Sakai immediately at tempted to win ~ albeit unsuccessfully ~ the throne for themselves by championing the same party that had earlier supported Gotarzes. The long-standing relations with the Dahai and Sakai abruptly ended, as their influence within the inner political circle of Parthia dissipated. Vologases I and his son and successor, Pakoros II, implemented a strategy designed to strengthen the authority of the Arsakid house and to develop the Parthian economy, by introducing an ideology, proclaiming an “institutionelle Behauptung der Dynastie und die Sicherung des Staates” (p. 232). The circum- stances that led to these measures were the product of a foreign policy concentrated against Rome and Ku8an Baktria. With the exception of Trajan’s temporary incursion in the post-Pakores era, only ArdaxSir I’s insurrection against the Arsakids and his accession to power succeeded in ending Parthian rule in western Asia (p. 234). Although Vologases and his successors endured many de- feats by the KuSans in the east, they were nonetheless able to contain these conflicts to the regions constituting modem Afghanistan and to defend their possessions in the northeast, especially Mar- giana, which by now formed an important comerstone of the Arsakid kingdom, Ever since the first half of the first century A.D., the Alan confederation had constituted the main body north of the Arsakid kingdom. By the second century they had invaded Media Atropatene and Armenia, while further east the Ku8ans had long since incorporated northwest India into their Baktrian kingdom. Consequently, despite the challenges posed by the Kusans, Alani and the Imperium Romanum holding Parthian expansion in check, the kingdom continued to flourish economically under later Arsakids, especially Vologases I and Pakoros, who initiated a program of consolidation and ur- banization, particularly in their relations with the nomadic peoples regarding a commercial trade network system involving overland transportation (pp. 259-60). Olbrycht has succeeded in taking the Parthians out of the conception by the Greeks in the ‘Mediterranean and the Romans as constituting a world by themselves, alter orbis or alius orbis, and thus beyond the limited scope of “nomadism” and “periphery”. Rather he places the Arsakid kingdom within the larger context of the history of Iran and Central Asia: a steppe people not unlike others before and after them who underwent a transformation trom a “nomadic” existence to one in which they adopted the Iranian and Hellenistic traditions of those whom they conquered. The Arsakids thereby blended their nomadic tradition with that of the “sedentary” world to whichBuchbesprechungen 469 they now belonged, and in doing so created a successful political synthesis. Hopefully, Olbrycht will continue to extend his analysis of other nomadic peoples and their impact on the sedentary world of Asia and Europe’. Literaturverzeichnis Les Parthes 2002 B. Rémy (Ed.), Les Parthes. L’histoire d'un empire méconnu, rival de Rome. Dossiers d’Archeologie 271 (Mars 2002). Luther 1999 ‘A. Luther, Uberleguegen zur defectio der éstlichen Satrapien vom Seleucidenreich. Géttinger Forum fiir Altertumswissenschaft 2, 1999, 5-15 (http://www.efa.d-t.de/2-99/luther pdf). Olbrycht 2001a 'M. J. Olbrycht, Die Aorser, die Oberen Aorser und die Siraker bei Strabon. Zur Geschichte und Eigenart det Volker im nordostpontischen und nordkaukasischen Raum im 2.1. Jb. v. Chr. Klio 83, 2001, fase. 2, 425-450. Otbrycht 2001 b 'M. J. Olbrycht, Der Fembandel in Ostsarmatien und in den benachbarten Gebieten (zweite Halfte des 2. Jhs.~ 1. J. v. Che.), Laverna 12, 2001, 86-122. Wieschifer (Ed.) 1998 J. Wieschéfer (Ed.), The Arsacid Empire: sources and documentation. Historia Einzelschriften fase. 122 (Stuttgart 1998). Wolski 1993 J. Wolski, L’empire des Arsacides. Acta tranica 32, Troisiéme série, Textes et mémoires 8 (Leuven 1993), Jeffrey D. Lerner Department of History ‘Wake Forest University P.O. Box 7806 Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27109 USA. * See his most recent publications: Olbrycht 2001 a; Olbrycht 2001 b.