Quick viewing(Text Mode)

The Sixteen Lands of Videvdat 1 Airyān¢M Vaźjah and the Homeland of the Iranians

The Sixteen Lands of Videvdat 1 Airyān¢M Vaźjah and the Homeland of the Iranians

PERSICA XVI, 2000 49

THE SIXTEEN LANDS OF VIDEVDAT 1 AIRYÂN¢M VAÊJAH AND THE HOMELAND OF THE IRANIANS

Willem Vogelsang Research School CNWS Universiteit Leiden

1. Introduction

The Vidêvdât (Av. vi.daêva.dâta, ‘Law against the ’),1 formerly commonly known as the Vendidâd, forms part of the so-called Younger .2 It deals mainly with purification and atonement. The of the text is marked by various ‘mistakes’ in inflexion, in contrast to other, apparently much older parts of the Avesta, as for instance the ‘Old ’ Gâthâs. A relatively late date for its final composition has therefore commonly been accepted; a date as late as the post-Achaemenid period was suggested by I. Gershevitch.3 The first chapter (fargerd) of the Vidêvdât contains a list of sixteen lands which, according to the text, were created by Ahura Mazdâ. The list starts with the land of Airyân¢m Vaêjah, ‘the expanse of the ’,4 and ends with a reference to the land along the Ra∞hâ, a mythical river the name of which is also found in ancient Indian sources (compare Skt. Rasâ). At the end of the list the text informs us that there were many other beautiful countries. In keeping with Zoroastrian mythology, all of the sixteen lands created by Ahura Mazdâ were plagued, according to the text, by a particular counter-creation of A∞gra Mainyu, the evil entity in and Ahura Mazdâ’s opponent. These curses are mentioned in the text, but since some of the relevant words occur only once in the Avesta and their etymology still poses many problems, their meaning often remains unclear.5

1 For the name itself, see Benveniste 1970. 2 For a short introduction to Avestan literature, see Gershevitch 1968: 10-28, with pp. 26-29 particu- larly concerned with the Vidêvdât. 3 Gershevitch 1968. Henning (1942) has suggested that one of the measuring systems that are referred to in the Vidêvdât, is of Graeco-Roman origin. 4 For another etymology and meaning of the word (‘Stromschnelle’), see Oettinger, unpublished ms., p. 372. 5 For a discussion of these words, see Christensen 1943: 61ff. 50 WILLEM VOGELSANG

The contents and arrangement of Vidêvdât 1 have long been a topic of discussion.6 The sequence of the names was interpreted by H.S. Nyberg7 and D. Monchi-Zadeh8 as being arranged in the form of a boustrophedon, whereby the majority of the lands are located in Eastern Irân, while some should be situated in Western Irân. H. Humbach9 interpreted the list as a series of semi-circulars, reaching from Eastern to Western Irân, with the centre in the mountains between and Areia, called the Masdoranon Oros by (VI 5.1). According to Humbach, the name of this mountain range reflects the name of Ahura Mazdâ. Another interpretation of the Vidêvdât list was brought forward by Gh. Gnoli.10 holds the opinion that all the lands belong to the Eastern Iranian world, and that the first name of the list, Airyân¢m Vaêjah, should be regarded as the cen- tre of Zoroastrian worship, and be located in or near Seistân (along the Afghânistân-Irân border). While many of the names in the list can be compared with names that occur in other sources (e.g. the Achaemenid inscriptions and classical sources), others remain to be con- vincingly identified. additional problem is the question whether all of the lands that are mentioned in the list refer to an actual geographical location, or whether in at least some cases we are dealing with mythical names that bear no direct relationship to a spe- cific area. Such a point has often been brought forward as regards the first and the last names in the list: Airyân¢m Vaêjah (No. 1) and Upa-Aodaêshu-Ra∞hayâ (No. 16). Another, but related problem is the question whether the list was originally composed as it is now, or whether it incorporates one or more smaller sections that were combined or added upon, for instance with the first name of the present list. That the full text of Vidêvdât 1 was re-edited subsequent to its first composition seems indicated by the apparent interpolations in the passages dealing with Airyân¢m Vaêjah (Vid. 1,3) and Var¢na (Vid. 1,14). Whether the sequence of geographical names contained in the text was also seriously altered remains a moot point. Leaving aside the problem of the history of the text prior to its final composition, I start this paper from the assumption that at the time it was composed as it stands today, it was regarded as a coherent, and realistic survey of some of the lands of Ahura Mazdâ worship.11 In other words, the present list must, at some time, have made sense to its ‘consumers’, the people using the list. This means that all the lands included in the list had, at least to the composer and his audience, a specific geographical location, however vaguely defined. The possibility that some of the lands also had a mythical significance still remains.12

6 A. Christensen (1943); Gh. Gnoli (1967; 1975; 1977; 1980); E. Herzfeld (1947: 738-770); H. Humbach (1960); M. Molé (1951); D. Monchi-Zadeh (1975: 115ff.), and H.S. Nyberg (1938: 314ff.). For further references, see Gnoli, ‘Avestan ’, in the Encyclopaedia Iranica. 7 H.S. Nyberg 1938. 8 D. Monchi-Zadeh 1975. 9 H. Humbach 1960: 36ff. 10 Gh. Gnoli 1980. 11 In doing so I follow Gnoli’s argument (1980) against a predominant mythological explanation of Avestan geography; this does not mean however that I concur with his identifications. 12 As in the case of Atlantis, most Europeans are still likely to locate that mythic land somewhere in the Atlantic Ocean, far in the west, although no one would actually set out to go there. THE SIXTEEN LANDS OF VIDÊVDÂT 1 51

It is the purpose of the present article to shed some light on the location, or (at the time of final composition) imagined location of some of the names in the list, including Airyân¢m Vaêjah (No. 1) and Xn¢nta (No. 9), and subsequently to try to place the list in an historical context and elaborate upon the significance of the list in a wider perspective.

2. The list Below follows the list of names in the sequence in which the various districts are named (Vid. I,2-19): 1. Airyân¢m Vaêjah 9. Xn¢nta, land of the Vehrkânas 2. Sugdian Gava 10. Haraxvaitî 3. Mouru 11. Haêtumant 4. Bâxdî 12. Ragâ 5. Nisâya 13. Caxra 6. Harôiva 14. Var¢na 7. Vaêk¢r¢ta 15. Hapta.h¢ndu 8. Urvâ 16. Upa-Aodaêshu-Ra∞hayâ A number of the above mentioned lands can relatively easily be identified. Gava (No. 2) is referred to in the text as the land of the Sugdas. This means that it can be located in or near ancient and medieval .13 The heartland of Sogdia has traditionally been the district around modern , the Marakanda of the classical authors.14 This was almost certainly the case during the Achaemenid period, for it was at Marakanda (mod- ern Samarkand) that found the Sogdian basileia (, Anab. Alex. III.30.6).15 Yet, the particular name of Gava may be compared to that of Gabae.16 This place is mentioned by Arrian (Anab. Alex. IV 17.4) in his biography of as the rallying point of and his troops for invading Sogdia in 328 B.C. The “Sogdian stronghold” of Gava was located close to the land of the . Con- sequently its most likely location was somewhere in the west of ancient Sogdia, close to the Kara Kum desert where the Massagetae used to live.17 If Gava and Gabae refer to an identical place, then the present text appears to refer to a situation whereby the centre of Sogdia was regarded to lie, not at Samarkand, but further to the west, perhaps at or near Bukhârâ. The hypothesis that Gava/Gabae and Sogdia may originally have been different districts seems supported by a passage in the Avestan Mihr (X 14), which gives the sequence “Gava, Sogdia and Choresmia”.18 The name of Mouru (No. 3) is comparable to that of ancient , the land in the delta of the modern Murghâb river. Its early rise as an agricultural centre and a cross- roads of caravan tracks is amply demonstrated in written records and archaeological remains.19 13 See Bailey 1932. For further remarks, see Gnoli 1980: 121ff. 14 Compare Vogelsang 1992: 72-74 for a brief historical geography of Sogdia. 15 Curtius (VII 6.10) tells that the Sogdian capital was surrounded by a wall of seventy stadia (some 13 kilometres) length; the ruins of modern Afrâsiyâb, the ancient site of Marakanda, cover an area of c. 220 ha (cf. Pugachenkova and Rtveladze, Enc. Ir., s.v. ‘Afrâsiâb’). 16 Compare Humbach 1961: 69. Curtius (VIII 4,1) however, reads Gazaba. See also Humbach 1961: 69. 17 Von Schwarz 1906; Vogelsang 1992: 232. 18 This translation differs from that given by Gershevitch (1959: 80-81). 19 Sarianidi 1998; Vogelsang 1992: 56-58. 52 WILLEM VOGELSANG

The name of Baxdi (No. 4) (in the text described as ¢r¢dwô.drafsha, ‘[with] uplifted banner’20) may be identified with the district of ancient Bactra, around modern in North Afghânistân. The name of Bactra/Bâxdî originally referred to the river (modern Balkhâb) that flows down the Hindu mountains northwards towards the Amu Daryâ. The name of ¢r¢dwô.drafsha itself can be linked to a town called Drapsaka, located in North Afghânistân, which was occupied by Alexander before he marched upon the town of Bactra (cf. e.g. Arrian, Anab. Alex. III 29.1). Drapsaka is commonly identified with ,21 but there are no compelling reasons to do so. It may well have been located much closer to Balkh, in the same oasis where so many large settlements have recently been unearthed.22 It should be pointed out that archaeological activities at Balkh have to date been unsuccessful in locating pre-Alexandrian levels, while other sites in the , for instance Altin Dilyar (a circular, fortified settlement with a diameter of 1 km), have yielded clear evidence of (pre-)Achaemenid-period occupation.23 Nisâya (No. 5) is reported in the text as being located between Mouru (no. 3) and Baxdi (No. 4). This probably means that it lay along one of the routes connecting the two. The most likely location may be the Early Islamic district of Juzjân, along the Shiberghân river.24 Harôiva (No. 6) can be identified with ancient Areia. The centre of this region stretched in a narrow band along the banks of the Hari Rud river, West Afghânistân. The modern centre of this area is Herât, West Afghânistân, an important staging post along an ancient route leading from north to south, passing between the deserts of the modern Irân/Afghânistân border to the west, and the Central Afghan Mountains () to the east.25 The name of Haraxvaitî (No. 10) can be related to that of the Achaemenid dahyu (enclave) of Harauvatish (), ancient .26 The well-watered Kandahâr oasis, in the centre of ancient Arachosia, is almost unavoidable for anyone travelling through that part of the world, hemmed in as it is by mountains to the north and deserts to the south. Apart from this strategic location, the Kandahâr area is marked by its high agricultural production.27 This is caused by the presence of many rivers that, not far west of Kandahâr, flow together into the Arghandâb, which itself joins the Helmand (the ancient Etymandros) some 150 kilometres further to the west, at the ancient site of Qal’a- i Bust.

20 L. Dupree (1980: 105) refers to a special Nawruz festival at Mazâr-i Sharif, near ancient Balkh. It is called the “raising of the standard”. 21 Compare A.B. Bosworth 1980: 372; Brunt 1976: 504; Wirth 1985: 888. 22 Vogelsang 1992: 275-277. 23 Ball 1982: No. 38. 24 Vogelsang 1992: 59-61. Compare for instance the Nigaia of Ptolemy, located along the upper course of the Murghâb river (see also Nyberg 1938: 316). Geiger (1882: 31, n. 1) located Nisâya near mod- ern Maimana. 25 See Vogelsang 1992: 54-56. 26 For special studies of Arachosia from the point of view of Avestan studies, see Benveniste 1962 and Gnoli 1983. See also Vogelsang 1985, and idem 1992: 48-50. 27 Interesting is the character of A∞ra Mainyu’s curse: apparently it refers to the exposure of corpses (Benveniste 1962). Such a way of exposing the dead is recorded in other sources for the ancient Iranian world, but in those cases it is generally linked to the from the far north (Vogelsang 1992: 184, 230, 239). THE SIXTEEN LANDS OF VIDÊVDÂT 1 53

The name of the Haêtumant (No. 11) can be linked to that of the classical Etyman- dros river, the modern Helmand.28 This land must be located along that river, and most probably along its lower course, although the exact location remains to be discussed. This part of the world is now generally called Seistân. Interesting however is the absence in the list of the name of , or Zrangiana. This is the name used in Achaemenid sources and in the biographies of Alexander the Great to indicate the delta of the Hel- mand river. It has been remarked before, however, that Drangiana/Zrangiana was basi- cally a relatively small district around the (Early Islamic) settlement of , south of the modern hâmun of the Helmand and the Hârud rivers.29 The use of the name of the Haêtumant, in the present text, to indicate the lands of modern Seistân may indicate a dif- ferent heartland of the region.30 Around the beginning of our era such a shift of the polit- ical centre occurred when Drangiana formed part of Sakastan, ‘the land of the ’, the nucleus of which lay further upstream along the Helmand.31 However, the name of Zran- giana/Drangiana remained in use (compare the medieval name of the Seistâni capital, Zaranj). Whatever the case, the absence of the name of Drangiana in the list could well indicate that that name, at the time of composition of the text, was either unknown, or did only cover a minor area, not of sufficient importance to be included in the list. Another name that occurs in other sources is that of Hapta.h¢ndu (No. 15). The Vidêvdât passage tells us that this land is marked by “untimely heat”. In view of this addition various scholars32 have suggested a location of this land in the valley of the , probably identical to the land of Saptá Síndhavah, as known from sources.33 A∞ra Mainyu’s counter-creations, which apart from the “untimely heat” also included “untimely physical blemishes”,34 seem to indicate that this land, which in Indian sources often has an apparently mythical significance, here refers to an actual geographi- cal location, and should be linked to the name of Hindush, which was used by the Persian Achaemenids to indicate part of the Indus Valley. The use of the name of Hapta.h¢ndu for part of the Indus plains remains interesting, since it is not found in Achaemenid and Classical sources, which refer to Hindu and India.35 The reference to Hapta.h¢ndu thus reflects a different tradition, and perhaps a much older date of composition of the text than that of the Achaemenid texts.

28 This area may have been, as elaborately discussed by Gnoli in various studies, the focal point of another Avestan text, namely Yasht 19 (addressed to Khwar¢nah), in which the Haêtumant is described to flow into Lake Kansaoya (possibly one of the Seistâni lakes). For Seistân and its irrigation works, see also Christensen 1993. 29 Vogelsang 1992: 45. 30 The Achaemenid-period importance of Drangiana is shown by the finds at Dahana-i Ghulâmân (cf. Vogelsang 1992: 266-263). The architecture of the buildings and the ceramics unearthed at that site show a strong Western influence. A much older site, but located on the other site of the Helmand and the hâmun, is that of Sorkh Dâgh/Nâd-i Ali (idem: 263-267), where Western (read: Persian/Achaemenid) presence is far less obvious. 31 Daffinà 1967; Vogelsang 1992: 44-47. 32 As e.g. Monchi-Zadeh 1975: 130. 33 In the Iranian world a comparable name was later, at the time of Al-Biruni, linked to a region to the north of the Hindu Kush (compare Sircar 1971: 52). 34 Monchi-Zadeh (1975: 130) points out that these blemishes indicate the dark colour of the people. 35 See also Vogelsang 1988; compare the various references to Hindush in the so-called provincial lists and in the Fortification Tablets (cf. Vogelsang 1992: 165-169). 54 WILLEM VOGELSANG

So far the opinions of the various scholars who have studied the list generally agree. Major problems have arisen however, as to the identification of the other lands.

3. Xn¢nta

Xn¢nta (No. 9) is called the land of the V¢hrkânas (v¢hrkânô.sayana). The latter name is strongly reminiscent of that of the classical province of (OP: Varkâna-), to the southeast of the . Xn¢nta has therefore in the past com- monly been identified with Hyrcania.36 This traditional identification however, remains open to doubt, if only since the other names of the list, with the possible exception of Ragâ (No. 12), belong to the eastern parts of the Iranian world, east of the great deserts. And since the name of Xn¢nta precedes that of Haraxvaitî and Haêtumant, it is possible to conjecture, purely on the basis of the composition of the list, that the land of Xn¢nta should be located somewhere in southern Afghânistân.37 Support for such a location can be found in various sources. The name of the V¢hrkânas can be compared to that of (Elamite) Barrikana, a name which is listed in the so-called Persepolis Fortification Tablets38 from the time of the Achaemenid king Dar- ius (r. 522-486 B.C.). References in these Tablets indicate that the geographical name of Barrikana indicated an area which should somehow be linked to Arachosia, since travellers to and from these two areas often carry documents signed by the same offi- cials. In addition, the so-called Haoma utensils from Persepolis indicate that a district called () prkn was situated close to Arachosia.39 The identity of Barrikana with prkn seems certain; if Avestan V¢hrkâna and Elamite Barrikana (and Aramaic prkn) all reflect the same name, this would support a location of Xn¢nta somewhere in South Afghânistân. Another apparent version of this name is that of the Paricanians.40 , in his taxation list of the (Hist. III 89ff.), refers to two groups of people both called the Paricanians. The Paricanians of the tenth fiscal unit are linked to and the Orthocoryban- tians; those of the seventeenth unit are connected with the Asiatic Ethiopians. Since the Orthocorybantians of the tenth unit are probably identical with the Sakâ tigraxaudâ of the Achaemenid texts, and these Sakas were probably living to the east of the Caspian Sea, it is likely that the Paricanians of that unit were residing somewhere between ancient Media in West Irân and the steppes and deserts east of the Caspian, and thus not far distant from, if not actually within the ancient province of Hyrcania.41

36 See Monchi-Zadeh 1975: 124-126 and Gnoli, Encycl. . The identification with Hyrcania is said to be supported by the river name of the Xarindas (Ptol. 6.2.2), the Hyrcanian ethnic name of the Xrendoi (Ptol. 6.9.5); and the Chindrus listed by Pliny (N.H. 6.48; see Benveniste 1960: 38). 37 As done by Gnoli in an earlier article, see Gnoli 1977: Pl. 1, in which he identifies the region with modern Urgûn. See also the remarks by Morgenstiere, in Gnoli 1980: 235, note to page 39, line 5. 38 Vogelsang 1985: 82-87; idem 1992: 165-166. 39 See Bowman 1970. 40 Compare Bernard 1972. 41 See Vogelsang 1992: 203. For a recent discussion of conditions prevailing in the Kara Kum desert in the mid-first millennium B.C., see Koshelenko, Bader and Gaibov 1994. THE SIXTEEN LANDS OF VIDÊVDÂT 1 55

The location of the Paricanians of the seventeenth unit is determined by that of the Asiatic Ethiopians. The latter are mentioned again by Herodotus in his roster of Xerxes’ army (Hist. VII 61ff.). In this list, Herodotus states that the Asiatic Ethiopians were grouped together with the Indians, and furthermore that the Asiatic Ethiopians were equipped very much like the Indians. It may thus be concluded that the Asiatic Ethiopi- ans, and with them the Paricanians of the seventeenth fiscal unit, were living somewhere along the eastern fringes of the Iranian Plateau. Consequently, the name of the Paricani- ans was used by Western sources (Herodotus) for two apparently distinct peoples, one living in or near ancient Hyrcania, the other residing in the extreme east of the Iranian Plateau, not far from Arachosia. In conclusion, there is reason to assume that during the Achaemenid period there was a district located in or near ancient Arachosia which was called, in the Elamite sources Barrikana, and in Aramaic prkn. In classical sources the name of this district, and its people, was transmitted as that of the Paricanians. The Xn¢nta of the Vidêvdât, called the land of the V¢hrkânas, may therefore be located somewhere in the east of the Plateau, not far from the ancient centre of Kandahâr in Arachosia. Its identification with the name of Urgun, a place northeast of Kandahâr, thus remains a distinct possibility.42

4. Remaining lands

Vaêk¢r¢ta, called duzhakô.sayana (‘land of the porcupines’), is a name which has been linked to that of a deity from Gandhâra (the ancient region around Peshâwar and Taxila), who occurs in Indian texts (Skt. Vaik®tikâ).43 The Vidêvdât passage also tells us that Vaêk¢r¢ta was the land where the witch (parikâ) Xna∞qaiti met the legendary Iranian hero K¢r¢sâspa. It has been suggested that K¢r¢sâspa himself was linked to the Indo-Iran- ian borderlands, since in the Avesta (Yasht V 38 and XIX 41) reference is made to K¢r¢sâspa’s struggle with Gandarwa (compare Sanskrit Gandharvá-). The name of K¢r¢sâspa itself is known from Indian sources, compare the Krsâsva in the Indian epics and in the work of Pânini.44 The position of Vaêk¢r¢ta in the Indo-Iranian borderlands is therefore generally accepted. Such a location seems supported by the Pahlavi commen- tary to the text, which identifies the land of Vaêk¢r¢ta with Kâbul.45 It should be noted however, that the lands of Eastern Irân may long have felt the presence of an Indo- speaking population. Their alleged traces in the Avesta were discussed by T. Burrow,46 who speculated upon an Indo-Aryan substratum in Eastern Irân after the Iranian immigrations. The links discussed above may therefore not reflect geo- graphical relations, but historical links between an older, Indo-Aryan population and the cultural stratum of the later, Iranian immigrants. Another possibility, which should not be overlooked, is that the links refer back to the time before the Indo-Iranian migrations. In

42 See Morgenstierne 1979: 29. 43 As listed in the Mahâmâyûrî catalogue; see e.g. Lévi 1915: 65-69; Henning 1947-48: 52. 44 See Mayrhofer 1979, No. 216. 45 Compare perhaps the name of the settlement of Bagarda, mentioned by Ptolemy (VI 18.5) and located in the . This identification however, is contested by Humbach 1961: 70ff. 46 T. Burrow 1973. 56 WILLEM VOGELSANG other words, Vaêk¢r¢ta and K¢r¢sâspa need not necessarily be located in the borderlands, but may also be placed in lands further to the west, away from the plains of India. Thus, if the Pahlavi identification is rejected, there is no further evidence that would locate Vaêk¢r¢ta in the Indo-Iranian borderlands, close to Kâbul. Another location is equally possible. Urvâ (pouru.vastra) is located by Monchi-Zadeh in an area to the north of present Seistân, along the Urvadâ river listed in Yasht XIX 67.47 He does so on the basis of its identification of the Urvadâ river, one of the streams of the Helmand delta listed in Yasht XIX 66-67, with a northwestern affluent to the Seistan hâmun. Gnoli however, prefers a location of the land and river near present Kâbul, in accordance with the traditional loca- tion close to the Dasht-i Peshanseh, where, according to Iranian texts, K¢r¢sâspa offered to Ar¢dvî Sura Anahitâ (Yt. 5.37).48 It should be noted that Gnoli’s identification seems somewhat far-fetched. If Urvâ and the river Urvadâ are related, it follows from the text (Yasht 19) that the river and the district should be sought in South, and preferably in Southwest Afghânistân, and not in the Kâbul area. The Avesta contains two references to Urvâxshaya, K¢r¢sâspa’s brother ( X 11 and Yasht XV 28). The name Urvâxshaya may be translated as ‘king of Urvâ’. This would link Urvâ, via K¢r¢sâspa, to Vaêk¢r¢ta. However, this identification is far from cer- tain, although it would further link two consecutive names in the list.49 Vaêk¢r¢ta and Urvâ occupy the seventh and eighth places in the list. They are pre- ceded by a series of lands in the north, and they are followed by three lands that are located in or near modern South Afghânistân (Xn¢nta, Haraxvaitî, and Haêtumant). Bear- ing in mind the likelihood that Urvâ was a district in or near present-day South Afghânistân, as discussed above, and following the argument that there are no compelling reasons, apart from the Pahlavi commentary, to locate Vaêk¢r¢ta in or near the Kâbul val- ley, it can be suggested that Vaêk¢r¢ta and Urvâ should be identified with districts lying in the south or southwest. Their most likely location would be somewhere south of the Hari Rud (Areia) and north of the Helmand. Possible locations are the valleys along the Farâh Rud or some of the other rivers that flow into the delta from the northeast and east (compare the medieval district of Zamin Dâwar, along the Helmand north of Qal’a-i Bust). The district of Ragâ (No. 13) is normally associated with classical Rhages, present- day Ray, a southern suburb of Tehrân. However, as indicated by Gershevitch,50 such an identification is far from certain. W. Eilers has shown that the name of Ragâ, or variants thereof, is found elsewhere in Irân,51 and means “plain near the mountains”. Gnoli has suggested a location of Ragâ somewhere to the north of Seistân and Arachosia.52 The name occurs only once more in the Avesta, namely in Yasht XIX 18, where reference is

47 For the relationship between Urvâ and Urvadâ, see Markwart 1938: 22f. and Benveniste 1960: 36- 37. Urvâ (Vid. 1,10) and Urvadâ (from *urvaca, according to Benveniste; Yasht 19, 67) are both described as pouru-vastra. 48 Gnoli 1967: 69-71; 1980: 26ff. 49 Compare Boyce 1975: 97, n. 85. 50 Gershevitch 1964: 36ff. 51 Eilers 1954: 300-301. 52 Gnoli 1967: 69ff. and idem 1980: 23-26; 64-66. THE SIXTEEN LANDS OF VIDÊVDÂT 1 57 made to “Zarathustrian Raga”, the only land where Zarathustra is the ratu (‘judge’). It remains to be seen whether the two Ragâ’s are identical. Var¢na (No. 14), called ‘four-eared’ (caqru.goasa), has tentatively been identified with modern Buner northeast of Peshâwar,53 or a district near Bannu.54 The name has been compared to the Varnu of the Indian sources,55 or the Aornos of the Alexander biographies.56 It was the birthplace of the Iranian hero Qraetaona (Vid. 1), and also the place where he sacrificed (Yasht V 33). In this case, again, some care seems warranted. The name of Aornos as found in the Alexander biographies is not only used for the famous mountain fortress taken in 326 B.C. by Alexander the Great, and probably to be identified with the Pirsar Spur in Buner,57 but also for a town in (Arrian, Anab. Alex. III 29.1).58 Consequently the name Aornos probably reflects an Iranian name that was used for various settlements or fortresses. If there was a Var¢na in Buner, there may therefore also have been a Var¢na elsewhere. However, the two ‘plagues’ of Angra Mainyu (‘untimely physical blemishes’ and ‘non-Aryan rulers’) would indicate a location along the fringes of the Iranian world, and close to the Indus valley, since the ‘untimely physical blemishes’ are also one of the plagues of Hapta.h¢ndu (see below). Caxra (no. 13) is located by Gnoli and Monchi-Zadeh somewhere to the south of Kâbul. The name is often linked to that of Carx, a place located in the Logar valley south of Kâbul.59 The same place was already known to Ibn Battuta.60 The identification may be correct, but again, there is no certainty. The heat of Hapta.h¢ndu (No. 15) seems opposed to the cold of the following, and last land of the list (No. 16), Upa-Aodaêsu-Ra∞haya, which, if the translation is correct,61 was located high in the mountains. The same region is also mentioned elsewhere in the Avesta, namely in Yasht XII 18, where it is opposed to the land at the mouth (?) of the Ra∞hâ, and, in slightly altered form, in Yasht X 104.62 In both cases the name is used to denote a land which is situated along the fringes of the (known) world. This point, plus the place of the name in the list, would indicate a more mythical, rather than a geograph- ical identification of the place.63 However, as referred to above, the composer of the text, and his audience, are likely to have had some idea of the location of this land. They also knew its cold climate. In the Eastern Iranian context this would mean a location some- where in the far north, or high in the mountains.

53 Gnoli 1980: 47-50; Henning 1947: 52-53. 54 S. Lévi 1915: 73; Monchi-Zadeh 1975: 127-130. In Yasht 5.33 it is said that Thraêtaona sacrificed at ‘four-eared’ Var¢na. In the present passage (Vid. I 14), it is said of the land yim ca/ru.goas¢m yahmâi zay- ata .raêtaona, ‘in which four-eared (land) Thraetaona was born’. In this respect reference should be made to a place (oppidum) called Tetragonis, also referred to as Cartana oppidum sub Caucaso (Plinius, NH VI 92; see Monchi-Zadeh 1975: 129-130). 55 e.g. Pânini; Henning 1947-48: 52-53. 56 Spiegel 1898: 716. 57 Compare Stein 1929. 58 Compare the people of the Ouarnoi of Ptolemy (VI 11.6), located in Bactria (see Humbach 1960). 59 Darmesteter 1892-1893, II: 13, note 36; cf. Gnoli 1980: 42ff. 60 Monchi-Zadeh 1975: 126. 61 Bartholomae 1904: 42: “an der Quelle der R.” See however Gnoli 1980: 51, n. 220. 62 See again Gnoli 1980: 51, n. 220, for another translation. 63 Compare Kellens 1979: 709ff. 58 WILLEM VOGELSANG

The location of the above lands (Nos. 12-16) therefore remains a moot point. No. 14 (Var¢na) and 15 (Hapta.h¢ndu) can be placed with some degree of certainty to the east of the Afghan mountains, while no. 13 (Caxra) may be identical with a place called Carx from south of modern Kâbul.

5. The arrangement of the list

Leaving aside for the moment the location of Airyân¢m Vaêjah, the general arrange- ment of the list is relatively evident. The list describes the lands which are located to the north, west, south and east of the mountains of modern Afghânistân. The list starts with a series of lands that stretch from the north (ancient Sogdia) to the south (Areia). This line of lands is bounded on the west by the Kyzyl Kum, Karakum, and Dasht-i Kavir deserts; to the east lie the mountains of the Altai and the Hindu Kush (Afghânistân). Interestingly, ancient Choresmia, south of the and along the delta of the river (the classical Oxus) is not included. It lies on the other (western) side of the Kyzyl Kum desert. There is also no reference to ancient Parthia, which constitutes the main link between these lands and Western Irân. From Areia (modern Herât), the main routes of communication lead south and southeast towards South Afghânistân. The Vidêvdât list enumerates a number of lands that were located in that part of the world: nos. 9-11 (Xn¢nta; Haraxvaitî; Haêtumant) for certain, most probably also no. 8 (Urvâ), and, consequently, also no. 7 (Vaêk¢r¢ta). The above lands are bounded to the west by the Dasht-i Lut desert, to the south by the Registân and Dasht-i Margo deserts, and to the north by the mountains of Central Afghânistân. Finally, it may be conjectured that most, if not all of the remaining names in the list (nos. 12-16) cover the eastern flanks of the Afghan Mountains and adjacent areas, bounded to the east by the Indus Valley (No. 15) and, perhaps, the mountains of the Hindu Kush and Karakorum to the far north and northeast (No. 16).

6. Airyân¢m Vaêjah

The land of Airyân¢m Vaêjah (No. 1), which is described in the text as a land of extreme cold, has often been identified with ancient Choresmia. This identification dates back to Wilhelm Geiger and J. Markwart.64 Such was also the opinion, among others, of E. Benveniste and A. Christensen, who identified the Airyân¢m Vaêjah of the list with the Xvâriz¢m of Yt. 10.14.65 The concept of Choresmia being the original ‘homestead of the Aryans’ is linked to the so-called Choresmian Hypothesis of Henning.66 For the greater part on the basis of information provided by Herodotus (Hist. III 117), and by a fragment from the work of Hecataeus (apud Athenaeus, II 70.B frag. 292; Jacoby, FGrHist I, p. 38), Henning came to the conclusion that prior to the Achaemenid conquest of the East,

64 W. Geiger 1884: 334 and Grundriss 2: 389, and J. Markwart 1901: 118, 155. 65 Benveniste 1934 and Christensen 1943. See also Boyce 1975: 144f.; 275f.; Gershevitch 1959: 14ff.; Markwart 1901: 155; Monchi-Zadeh 1975: 115-116; Nyberg 1938: 326-7; Pugachenkova 1995: 6. 66 Henning 1942. THE SIXTEEN LANDS OF VIDÊVDÂT 1 59 around 550-530 B.C., the Choresmians, from south of the Aral Sea, dominated the lands of Areia and Margiana. Without going into details, it can be argued that Henning’s hypothesis, which has dominated the field of for so long, should be discounted, mainly because it is based on extremely flimsy sources.67 There is therefore no reason to suggest that the Airyân¢m Vaêjah of the Avesta should be identified with ancient Choresmia. Another identification of the Airyân¢m Vaêjah of the Vidêvdât was brought forward by Gnoli.68 He suggested a location in or near modern Seistân. However, in view of the described climatological characteristics of the land (it is described in the Vidêvdât text as being extremely cold with very long winters), it should be conceded that a northern loca- tion seems more logical. Yet, some doubts may be cast on the actual existence of this land. The name itself, ‘expanse of the Aryans (Iranians)’, has perhaps a more legendary meaning, indicating a land far away whence the composer of the text thought that his people ultimately derived. It may however, also be suggested that the name in this passage indicates a real geo- graphical entity. As the lands nos. 2-6 are located along a line roughly stretching from north (Sogdia) to south (the Herât area), it could be surmised that the first name of the list refers to a land to the north of Sogdia. The importance of Sogdia, situated along the Zarafshân river, was based on the pro- ductivity of the soil, and above all on its location at the southwestern entrance to, or exit of, the strategic thoroughfare of Ush(t)rûsana, leading northeast across the mountains to the banks of the Syr Daryâ, near Khodjend. This route constituted, as to a large degree it still does today, one of the few relatively easily traversable passes between the Eurasian steppes to the north and the lands of ancient Eastern Irân to the south. Along this route Alexander the Great marched from Marakanda to the Syr Daryâ (compare Arrian, Anab. Alex. III 30 6ff). There he founded the settlement of Alexandria Eskhata (idem IV 3-4). According to the biographers, this settlement lay not far from the place where , the founder of the Persian Achaemenid Empire, more than two hundred years before had founded another fortress, the Kyropolis of the ancient authors (idem IV 3).69 For many northern invaders, therefore, including the Mongols under Djenghiz Khân in the early thirteenth, and the in the late fifteenth century, the district of Sogdia was the first of the Eastern Iranian lands which they occupied. It was also the first district of Eastern Irân annexed by the Russians in the nineteenth century: the fall of Chimkent in 1855 and that of 1865, both towns being located along the Syr Daryâ north of the passes, were followed by the defeat of the Emir of Bukhârâ in 1868, whereby Samarkand, immediately south of the passes, was ceded to the Tsarist armies. The logical conclusion is that the people among whom the Vidêvdât list was com- posed believed that they derived from beyond ancient Sogdia, as already suggested by Geiger.70 If this is the case, the time and place of composition of this text become all the

67 See also Frye 1963: 38. 68 Gnoli 1967: 87f. and esp. 1980. 69 Compare Benveniste 1943-1945. 70 Geiger 1882: 31f. Some support for this identification of Airyân¢m Vaêjah is provided by later Iran- ian texts, in which the land of Gopatastân (compare the Gava of the Sogdians) is said to border on Erân-Vej (cf. Monchi-Zadeh 140, n. 9). However, see also Gnoli 1980: 121ff. 60 WILLEM VOGELSANG more important. It would mean that at some time in Eastern Iranian history the Eastern Iranian people, or at least some of them, believed that all the lands north and south of the Hindu Kush mountains formed part of the Iranian ‘koine’, and that their ethnic ori- gin lay in the far north, north of the Ush(t)rûsana passes and north of the Syr Daryâ river. The question remains whether all references to Airyân¢m Vaêjah in the Avesta should be related to the lands along, and north of the banks of the Syr Daryâ. References to Airyân¢m Vaêjah occur, apart from Videvdât 1, in (Hom Yasht) Y. IX 14; in (Ohrmazd Yasht) Yt I 21; in (Ardvîsûr Yasht) Yt V 17, 104 and, in a similar context, in (Râm Yasht) Yt XV 2, and in Vidêvdât 2.20f. In most cases (Yt. V 17, 104; Yt. XV 2; Vid. 1.2; 2.20f.), the name is described as ‘Airyân¢m Vaêjah of the Good Daityâ’. The name of the Daityâ refers to a river (cf. Bartholomae 730: see also Yt V 112; IX 29; XVII 61; Vid. 19.2). From the passages listed above it is clear that Airyân¢m Vaêjah was the land where Zarathustra was thought to have preached, and where many of the early legends took place. Consequently, at some time in their history many Iranians from East- ern Irân living north, west, south and east of the Afghan Mountains, regarded the lands north of ancient Sogdia, and north of the Syr Daryâ river, as their homeland and that of Zarathustra.

7. The geography of Vidêvdât 1 and the Mihr Yasht

The Vidêvdât list thus seems to start with a series of lands stretching almost due north-south from the legendary ‘expanse of the Aryans’ to the Herât district. South of Herât the line continues into an enumeration of various lands in present-day South Afghânistân, followed by a number of lands which were located southeast of the moun- tains. The list thus includes lands, as stated earlier, that are located in a wide circle around the Hindu Kush mountain chain. Such an orientation stands in marked contrast to that of another list in the Avesta, included in the Mihr Yasht (Yasht X 14). Here the following text is found: “where nav- igable rivers rush wide with a swell towards Parutian Ishkata, Haraivian Margu, Sogdian Gava, and ”.71 Irrespective of the translation itself,72 the names of Haraiva, Margu, Gava, Sugda and Choresmia all refer to Iranian lands that lie west and northwest of the mountains of Central Afghânistân. The identification of Paruta and Ishkata poses problems: the first may be compared to that of the Paroutoi or Parautoi listed by Ptolemy (VI 17.3). He locates them in the western part of the Afghan mountains.73 As for Ishkata, this name also occurs elsewhere in the Avesta (Yasna X 11 and Yasht XIX 3). In these instances it occurs in the phrase ishkata upâiri.saêna. Since upâiri.saêna probably refers to the Hindu Kush or adjacent mountain chains (compare the classical Paropamisadae, ‘[land] beyond the Uparaesanna’, for the districts near Kâbul, south of

71 Translation Gershevitch 1959: 81. 72 It would be more remunerative to translate the enumeration as a series of separate names, see Gnoli, Encycl. Ir. ‘Avestan Geography’. 73 The name may also bear a relationship with the Aparytai listed by Herodotus (Hist. III 91) in con- nection with three other ethnic groups located southeast of the Hindu Kush. THE SIXTEEN LANDS OF VIDÊVDÂT 1 61 the mountains),74 the name of Ishkata should probably be linked to a district north of the mountains, or perhaps in the Bâmiyân valley.75 The list in the Mihr Yasht thus refers to a far more restricted part of the Iranian world than that in the Vidêvdât. The Afghan mountains do no longer form the point of focus.

8. Focal point and time of composition

Above I described the arrangement of the sixteen lands in a huge circle surrounding the mountains of Afghânistân. This point should be related to the apparent familiarity of the composer of the text with the lands of South and East Afghânistân. While in this part of the Iranian world the composer names a number of obscure districts that otherwise remain unknown, his series of lands mentioned at the beginning of the list (nos. 1-6) is remarkable by the mentioning of merely the most famous lands (bar Nisâya), such as Sogdia, Margiana, Bactria, and Areia. There is no mention of other districts such as the Kashka Daryâ area south of Samarkand and Bukhârâ; the valleys along the Kafirnigan, Vakhsh, and other rivers descending from the north into the Amu Daryâ. And there is no mention, as discussed above, of Choresmia. This would indicate that the composer was better acquainted with South and East Afghânistân than with the North. At the same time some geographical names linked to South and East Afghânistân in Achaemenid and classical sources are lacking: Anauon, mentioned by Isidore of Charax (Parthian Stations No. 16) who wrote in the Augustan era, and located by him between Herât and Seistân;76 Drangiana, located in or near Seistân and known to the Achaemenids as Dranka or Zranka, and by the Sassanians and Early Islamic geographers as Zarank/Zaranj (see above); Sattagydia or Thatagush, a district close to Arachosia, listed in the Achaemenid provincial lists and in Herodotus’ Historiae, and inhabited by people with ‘Indian’ links;77 the Paropamisadae, a district around Kâbul, listed in the Behistun text of the Achaemenid king Darius, and in classical sources;78 Gandhâra (district around Peshâwar and Taxila, listed in Achaemenid, classical and Indian sources). In fact, it is hard to recognise in the Vidêvdât list the picture of South and East Afghânistân which is presented to us by Achaemenid and Classical sources. Yet, the Vidêvdât list seems to be fairly detailed about this area. As regards the name of Gandhâra, the following observations should be made. Firstly, in the Old Persian version of the of Darius (c. 520 B.C.), ref- erence is made to the dahyu of Gandâra, while in the Elamite and Akkadian versions of the same text the name of (Akk.) Pa-ar-ú-pa-ra-e-sa-an-na is used. It has been shown that Gandâra reflects the Indian name of the region, while the name of the Paruparae- sanna indicates an Iranian name, given by people from north of the Hindu Kush.79 What

74 Vogelsang 1992: 51. See also Bartholomae 1904: 398, who refers to passages in the (compare Monchi-Zadeh 1975: 128). 75 As suggested by Grenet 1993. 76 See Walser 1985: 152-153. 77 Compare Vogelsang 1992: 201-202. 78 Idem 51. 79 Compare Witzel 1980: 117, n. 104. 62 WILLEM VOGELSANG is important is the presence of two names to indicate more or less the same region. Nei- ther of these names occur in the Vidêvdât list. It is hardly likely that the composer of the Vidêvdât list could simply ignore this part of the Iranian world; the plains of Kâbul and the valley of the Kâbul/Landai river between the Khyber Pass and Attock have always been of prime importance. It could thus be surmised that the list was drawn up before the two names became widely adopted, and that this district is ‘covered’ by another name in the list (Ragâ; Caxra; Var¢na). All of the above observations would indicate a date for the composition of the Vidêvdât list which would antedate, for a considerable time, the arrival in Eastern Irân of the Persian Achaemenids (C. 550 B.C.). This observation is sup- ported by the absence in the list of any reference to the or Persian Achaemenids, who became the dominant powers on the Plateau by the late seventh century B.C. The same observations, combined with what was said as regards the Mihr Yasht, would indicate that the geographical names contained in the Mihr Yasht would reflect a time which predates the composition of the Vidêvdât list, since no mention is made of the lands south and east of the Hindu Kush. In addition, the Mihr Yasht does not contain any reference to Bactra. Indeed, the name of Bactra, in whatever form, is curiously lacking from the Avesta, apart from the two passages in Vidêvdât 1. The absence of Bactra seems to contradict the ancient and modern claims for Bactrian dominance in worldly and reli- gious affairs in Old Irân. Such claims certainly apply to Bactra for the Achaemenid period, when it was the seat of an important , often someone closely related to the royal family.80 The importance of the city and district continued to be felt for centuries. It could be suggested, on this basis, that the pertinent passage of the Mihr Yasht was com- posed in a time that the fame and importance of Bactra was still (relatively) limited. In fact, the same seems to apply to Marakanda, the Sogdian capital from the Achaemenid period and later. Its absence in the Vidêvdât and the Mihr Yasht, as opposed to the list- ing of ‘Sogdian Gava’, could indicate a time of composition preceding the foundation of the huge settlement known today as Afrâsyâb,81 sometime in the second quarter of the first millennium B.C.

9. Immigrations from the north

In the preceding paragraphs I have tried to indicate that the composer and audience of the Vidêvdât list regarded most of the lands surrounding the Hindu Kush mountains as part of their ‘Aryan’ koine, and that they also held the opinion that their original home- land was located in the far north, along or beyond the modern Syr Daryâ. I have also attempted to show that the time of composition of the list should be dated before the rise of the Persian Achaemenid Empire, before the mid-sixth century B.C. These observations carry some important consequences for the study of Eastern Irân during the first half of the first millennium B.C. Firstly, it means that much of Eastern Irân was populated by people who shared a common religious background; secondly, that these people were aware of the supposed fact that sometime in their history they had immigrated from the north; thirdly, that 80 Vogelsang 1992: 125. 81 Compare Vogelsang 1992: 287. THE SIXTEEN LANDS OF VIDÊVDÂT 1 63 somehow their world was confined to the lands east of the great Iranian deserts (Kara Kum; Dasht-i Kavir; Dasht-i Lut), and north of the Dasht-i Margo and Registân deserts south of the ; fourthly, that they were more interested in the lands east of the Plateau (borderlands, Indus plains), than in those to the west or south. All these obser- vations would indicate, as pointed out earlier, that the composer and his audience lived close to the Indo-Iranian borderlands and had little or no contacts with the lands of West Irân. If we try to put the above observations into an historical context, we are led to look for a situation in which an ‘Aryan’, or Iranian group of people would move from north of Sogdia into Eastern Irân, and in particular towards South Afghânistân, and settle there while maintaining links with their fellow-Aryans in the rest of Eastern Irân, and becom- ing acquainted with the Indus Valley. All this should have occurred before the rise of the Persian Achaemenid Empire. The situation we are looking for is reminiscent of the Scythian immigration into Drangiana sometime in the late second century B.C. These Scythians, or Sakas as they were called, subsequently lent their name to the region (Sakastân, Seistân). They also spread far beyond Seistân proper; in fact, it is likely that they quickly moved east, past Kandahâr in ancient Arachosia, and hence northeast towards the Kâbul Valley, or east towards the Indus plains. In the Early Islamic period (and probably already in the Sas- sanian period if not earlier), the name of Seistân was applied to most of South and South- east Afghânistân, sometimes even including the Kâbul valley in the far northeast, and the Pishin and Quetta plains to the east. However, as stated above, the Vidêvdât list clearly belongs to a period before the second century B.C. This leads us to another wave of immigrants into Eastern Irân, which must have arrived long before the mid-first millennium B.C. Historically it is possible to distinguish two such waves of immigration, in whatever form, in the second and early first millennia B.C. The first of these was the immigration of the Indo-Aryans and - ans, which started probably as early as the first half of the second millennium B.C.; and secondly the spread of Scythian, or Scythian-related culture, from beyond the Syr Daryâ and via ancient Sogdia, across much of the Iranian Plateau in the first half of the first mil- lennium B.C.82 The last development is related to the people who were responsible for the spread of Scythic attributes (clothing, weapons) into Irân and , and who in the became known as the Cimmerians or the Scythians. They arrived in the Near East sometime before the late eighth century B.C. when Assyrian annals refer to Cimmerian attacks on the Urartians.83 By the end of the sixth century B.C., as we know from the Persepolis reliefs, most of the lands of Eastern Irân (including Choresmia, Sogdia, Bactria, Areia, Drangiana, and Arachosia) were populated, or at least dominated, by peo- ple wearing Scythic costume almost identical to the clothes worn by the Scythians from north of the , or by the Scythians living beyond Bactria and Sogdia (the Sakâ Haumavargâ, etc.). In fact, most of North Irân (Media, Armenia, Parthia), and of modern

82 Compare Vogelsang 1992. 83 Compare Salvini 1995; Vogelsang 1992. 64 WILLEM VOGELSANG

East (Cappadocia) was also dominated by people wearing Scythic costume, in marked contrast to the costume of the and Elamites from Southwest Irân. In fact, Herodotus (Hist. VII 66) tells us that also the contingents in the Persian army from south of the Hindu Kush mountains (Gandhâra) were dressed and equipped like the Bactrians (read: the Scythians). Thus, if we are trying to find a fairly homogeneous group of people living on all sides of the Afghan Mountains, still remembering their origins in the steppes of Central , and living at a time when the Persian Achaemenid Empire had not yet spread its influence to the East (c. 550 B.C.), then the bearers of Scythian culture, who probably constituted the dominant class among, or above their equally Iranian subjects who had arrived here much earlier, may be the ones we are looking for.

10. Zarathustra

The above remarks do not necessarily mean that Zarathustra was one of the ances- tors of the Scythian immigrants that swept across Irân in the early first millennium B.C. Perhaps that is even unlikely, since there is no evidence whatsoever that the Scythians from the Eurasian steppes were Zoroastrians. What it does mean, is that the composer of the Vidêvdât list and his audience identified their own history, or that of their (Scythic) rulers, with that of the man who had revealed the they had adopted. To them, Zarathustra used to live and work in the lands far to the north whence according to Scythian legends they, or their rulers, had originated. This notion of a northern origin does not stand alone. Herodotus tells a number of stories about the origins of the Scythians of the Near East and those from north of the Black Sea (Herodotus IV 5ff.). These stories probably reflect legends of the Scythians themselves. There are frequent references to their eastern origin, far away in the steppes of .84 These stories tell about migrations forced upon them by their neigh- bours, who in turn were compelled to migrate by their neighbours. Herodotus also tells about the burial of Scythian kings, from north of the Black Sea, in lands to the east (Herodotus IV 71ff.). If the Scythians from the Black Sea area transmitted stories about their eastern origin, there is no reason to assume that the Scythians that arrived in Eastern Irân did not remember their place of origin. To them, Airyân¢m Vaêjah was their home- land, far in the north, beyond the banks of the Syr Daryâ. Whatever the case, by the first half of the first millennium B.C. the Scythian rulers of Eastern Irân, or at least some of them, had adopted Zoroastrianism. By the same time other Scythians had migrated to the west, where they became known as the Scythians and the Cimmerians. The opening up of the Iranian world, as brought about by the Scythian migrations, may well have contributed to the spread of the religion of Zarathustra to the west. Traces of Zoroastrianism, as found in the classical period in Cappadocia and lands further west, thus may date back to a period much older than the Persian Achaemenid

84 Compare the story of Aristeas (Herodotus IV 13). In this account, which according to Herodotus is based on a poem by Aristeas from Proconnesus, it is said that the Cimmerians were driven out of (and into the Near East) by the Scythians; in their turn the Scythians had been pushed out by the Issedones, while initially the Issedones had been pressed from their homeland by the Arimaspians. THE SIXTEEN LANDS OF VIDÊVDÂT 1 65 empire. The Scythians, in short, probably contributed far more to Near Eastern culture than cavalry tactics, short swords, and bashlyqs.

References

Bailey, H.W., ‘Iranian Studies’, BSOS 4, 1932, pp. 945-955. Ball, W., Archaeological Gazetteer of / Catalogue des sites archéologiques d’Afghanistan (avec la collaboration de Jean-Claude Gardin). Paris 1982. Barthold, W., down to the Mongol Invasion. London 1968. (revised edition) Idem, An Historical Geography of Iran (translated by S. Soucek), Princeton 1984. Benveniste, E., ‘L’Erân-vâz et l’origine légendaire des iraniens’, BSOAS 7, 1933-5, pp. 269ff. Idem, ‘Que signifie Vidêvdât?’, in: M. Boyce and I. Gershevitch (eds.), W.B. Henning Memorial Volume. London 1970. pp. 37-42. Idem, Coutumes funéraires de l’arachosie ancienne, in: A Locust’s Leg: Studies in Honour of S.H. Taqizadeh. London 1962. pp. 39-43. Bongard-Levin, G.M., and E.A. Grantovskij, De la Scythie à l’Inde. Enigmes de l’histoire des anciens Aryens. French translation by Ph. Gignoux, Paris, 1981. Bowman, R.A., Aramaic Ritual texts from Persepolis. Chicago 1970 Burrow, T., The proto-Indoaryans, JRAS 1973, pp. 123-140. Christensen, A., Le premier chapitre du et l’histoire primitive des tribus iraniennes. Copenhagen 1943. Christensen, P., The Decline of Iranshahr. Irrigation and Environments in the History of the Mid- dle East, 500 B.C. to A.D. 1500. Copenhagen 1993. Dupree, L., Afghanistan. Princeton 1980 (first edition, 1973). Geiger, W., Die Pehleviversion des ersten Capitels des Vendidâd; herausgegeben nebst dem Ver- such einer ersten Übersetzung und Erklärung. Erlangen 1877. Idem, Ostiranische Kultur im Altertum, Erlangen 1882 Idem, ‘Vaterland und Zeitalter des Awesta und seiner Kultur’, Sitzungsberichte der königlichen bayerischen Akademie der Wissenschaften 1884, 2, pp. 315-385. Idem, and E. Kuhn, Grundriss der Iranischen Philologie. 2 Vols. Strassburg 1895-1901. Gershevitch, I., The Avestan Hymn to . Cambridge 1959. Idem, Zoroastrer’s own contribution, JNES XXIII, 1, 1964, pp. 12-38. Idem, ‘Old ’, in: Handbuch der Orientalistik, I.4.2.1. Leiden 1968. pp. 1-30. Gnoli, G. ‘Ariane. Postilla ad Airyô.sayana’, RSO 41, 1966, pp. 329-334. Idem, Richerche storiche sul Sîstân antico. Rome 1967. Idem, ‘More on the Sistanic hypothesis’, East and West 27, 1977, pp. 309-320 Idem, ’s Time and Homeland. Naples 1980. Idem, ‘Ragha la Zoroastriana. Papers in honour of Professor . Leiden 1985, pp. 226ff. Idem, De Zoroastre à . Quatre leçons au Collège de France. Paris 1985. Idem, ‘Avestan geography’, Encycl. Iran. Grenet, F., ‘Bâmiyân and the Mihr Yasht’, Bulletin of the Asia Institute 7, 1993, pp. 87-94. Grötzbach, E., Afghanistan. Eine geographische Landeskunde. Darmstadt 1990. Henning, W.B., ‘An astronomical chapter of the Bundahishn’, JRAS, 1942, pp. 229-250. Idem, ‘Two Manichaean magical texts, with an excursus on the Parthian -êndêh’, BSOAS 12, 1947-1948, pp. 39-66. Herzfeld, E., ‘Zarathustra. Teil V. Awestische Topographie’. AMI 2, 1930, pp. Idem, Zoroaster and his World. Princeton 1947. 66 WILLEM VOGELSANG

Humbach, H., ‘Die awestische Länderliste’, Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ostasiens 4, 1960, pp. 34-46. Idem, ‘Ptolemaios-Studien’, Wiener Zeitschrift für die Kunde Süd- und Ostasiens 5, 1961, pp. 68- 74. Idem, ‘Al-Bîrûnî und die sieben Strome des Awesta’, Bulletin of the Iranian Culture Foundation 1, 2, 1973, pp. 47-52. Jackson, A.V.W., Zoroastrian Studies. New York 1928. Kellens, J., ‘Les bras de Mithra’, in: U. Bianchi (ed.), Mysteria Mithrae. Leiden 1979. pp. 710- 713. Koshelenko, G.A., A.N. Bader and V.A. Gaibov, Archaeological Studies in , Ancient Civilizations from to , Vol. I, No. 3, 1994, pp. 273-288. Le Strange, G., The Lands of the Eastern Caliphate. Mesopotamia, Persia and Central Asia from the Moslem Conquest to the Time of . Cambridge 1905. Lévi, S., ‘Le catalogue géographique des Yaksa dans la Mahâmâyûrî’, JA 5, 1915, 67ff. Lommel, H., ‘Rasâ’, ZII 4, 1926, pp. 194-206. Markwart (Marquart), J., Êrânshahr nach der geographie des Ps. Moses Xorenac’i. Berlin 1901. Idem, Wehrot und Arang. Untersuchungen zur mythischen und geschichtlichen Landeskunde von Ostiran. (H.H. Schaeder, ed.) Leiden 1938 Mayrhofer, M., Die Arier im Vorderen Orient, ein Mythos?. Vienna 1974. Mole, M., ‘La structure du premier chapitre du Videvdat’, JA 229, 1951, pp. 283-298 Monchi-Zadeh, D., Topografisch-historische Studien zum iranischen Nationalepos. Wiesbaden 1975. Morgenstierne, G., The linguistic stratification of Afghanistan, Afghan Studies 2, 1979, pp. 23-33. Nyberg, H.S., Die Religionen des alten Iran. German edition translated by H.H. Schaeder. Leipzig 1938. Reprint Osnabrück 1966. Oettinger, Norbert, Untersuchungen zur avestischen Sprache am Beispiel des Ardvîsûr-Yast. unpublished ms. Pugachenkova, G.A., The antiquities of in the light of investigations in (1985-1990), Ancient Civilizations from Scythia to Siberia II, no. 1, 1995, pp. 1-38. Salvini, M., Geschichte und Kultur der Urartäer. Darmstadt 1995. Sarianidi, V., Margiana and Protozoroastrism. Athens 1998 Schwarz, F. von, Alexanders des Grossen Feldzüge in Turkestan. Stuttgart 1906. Sircar, D.C., Studies in the Geography of Ancient and . Delhi 1971. Skjaervo, P.O., Hymnic composition in the Avesta, Die Sprache 36, 2, 1994, pp. 199-243. Stein, A., ‘Afghanistan in Avestic geography’, Indian Antiquary 15, 1886, pp. 21-23 Idem, On some river names in the Rgveda, JRAS 1917, pp. 91-99. Tomaschek, W., ‘Cartana’. PW. Vogelsang, W.J., ‘Indian antics. A reply to P. Bernard’, Studia Iranica 17, 2, pp. 253-258. Idem, The Rise and Organisation of the Achaemenid Empire. The Eastern Iranian Evidence. Lei- den 1992. Walser, G., Die Route des Isidorus von Charax durch Iran, AMI, N.F. 18, 1985, pp. 145-156. Wikander, S., Vayu (Quaestiones Indo-Iranicae 1). Lund 1941. Witzel, M., ‘Early Eastern Iran and the Atharvaveda’, Persica 9, 1980, pp. 86-128.

Top View