Harmatta János: Studies on the History of the Sarmatians - Magyar-görög tanulmányok 30. (1950)
The Western Sarmatians in South Russia from the Third to the First Century B. C.
4 be Kai fewpTia«; éTii|ue\oú)ievoi- toútou? <pach Kai Trapá tóv ’'iffrpov oíkcív, éq>’ éKÓrepa TtoXXáKiq. év be tt) peaoYaía Badiápvai pév . . . ‘PwEoXavoi b’aprn- KiÓTaroi xá peiaEu toü Tavaibo? Kai toö Bopucrbévouc; vegópevoi Tiebía. Strabo thus enumerates four Sarmatian tribes: the Iazyges, Royal Sarmatians, Urgi and Roxolani and according to his description, their location on the whole might be conjectured thus: the Iazyges, the Urgi and Royal Sarmatians between the Dnieper and the Danube, furthermore, according to Strabo’s description, the southernmost part was occupied by the Iazyges, and the Urgi took up the northern position .while the Royal Sarmatians were in the center between the two former tribes. The fourth tribe, the Roxolani, lived cast of these between the Dnieper and the Don. Thus a certain plan in the sites of these tribes is to be observed: in the center is the royal tribe surrounded as it were by a protective ring formed by the other tribes. It is certainly no coincidence that among these Sarmatians, one “royal” tribe can be found. In the tribal unions of nomadic peoples two main types may be distinguished: in the first, tribes live side by side, loosely connected and at the most cooperate more closely in times of danger. In the other case all tribes are under the leadership of one of the tribes and are closely and cooperatively united under its power. A strong central power and strict military organization often give to these nomadic tribal unions an impressive power which renders possible the establishment of empires of vast extent. The varied character of nomadic tribal unions had been observed already by the Byzantines, e. g. Leo the Wise makes a clear distinction between “the idle nomadic” Scythians, i. e. nomad peoples “living under many chiefs” and the Scythians “under strong leadership” (XVIII 42: TroXúapxá Te Kai aTTpápiuova, vopabiKwq ibc; értÍTrav ßioövxa ^ (aovapxoúpeva). The tribe heading the tribal union in accordance with its position considers itself high above the others. So it follows, according to the description of Herodotus, that the Persians hold themselves to be by far the most eminent of men, and the farther the other peoples live from them, the meaner grade they occupy in Persian estimation (I 134). It is again Herodotus who reports (IV 20) that the leading Scythian tribe also regards the other Scythians as its slaves. In accordance with this domineering spirit based on a strongly stratified society, this leading tribe is called “royal Scythians” (see Herodotus IV 22, 56, 59). That this connotation is not solely a Greek invention is probable also on the strength of the above mentioned data; it seems, however, that there is direct evidence in one of Strabo’s reports of such nomenclat ures being rooted in the social attitude and linguistic usage of Iranian nomads. Strabo, when dealing with the origin of Arsaces and of the Parni, gives the name of the Daliian tribe living beyond the Maeotis: qpaoi bé xoóq nápvou«; Aáa$ pexaváffxaq eivai ck toiv ímép Trjq Mauímboq Aaúuv, oög Zavbíouc; i*l Hapíous KaXoümv (IX 9, 3). According to Vasmer’s view the tribal name Zdvbioi was based on the fact of the “royal” Scythians having lived on the same place prior to these. It originated from the Iranian word xs y nt“dominating” and refers to the linguistic matter of the Sarmatians.10Vasmer, 10 10 M. Vasmek, Untersuchungen über die aeltesten Wohnsitze der Slaven, I: Die Iranier in Südrussland, Leipzig, 1923. p. 45.