Translation of Saka names

**The Persian Cataphract** · 09-13-2008, 15:37

These were reconstructions of terms such as Achaemenids (Xwaehaex) which was derived from the Old Persian "Hakhâmanîshîyâ" (The letter X in context of Iranic languages are usually pronounced "-Kh"), and from there follows the linguistic theorems of reconstruction, either using Ossetian, Khotanese Saka or PIE as peripheries of reference.

One problem is that these words come from a preview coming from some years ago, so it's a bit difficult to track down the original scholarship of Angadil and Jurchen_Fury (JF wrote the text in question; the man possesses considerable skills as far as linguistics are concerned, but it's been a long time since); this was presumably before we had acquired a substantial amount of data on Khotanese Saka. I am willing to bet that much of the previous scholarship was based upon the findings of J.P. Mallory and that of the late Janos Harmatta and William Tarn.

There is one occasion where the Persians truly extended beyond the river Jaxartes deep into the lands of the "Haoma-drinking Scythians", and this occasion took place during the campaigns of Darius I The Great. This can be alluded by "300 years ago", and a certain "duke" of a city called Mjuwk of Dzin. If we make a rather simplistic abstraction of this name, we'd end up with "Mogha". This is an interesting finding, because in the time between the first centuries BCE and CE, we come across the so-called Taxila copper-plate, otherwise known as the "Moga-inscriptions"; written on the orders of a fellow known as the founder of the Indo-Scythian hegemony, Maues (Gr. ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΣ ΒΑΣΙΛΕΩΝ ΜΕΓΑΛΟΥ ΜΑΥΟΥ). In the plate, which was written in the Kharoshthi script, his name is referred to as "Moga". One might get tempted to throw in the Kamboja into the general picture as these areas were part of their original habitat, but for this time, let us exclude them for the sake of keeping this simple.

What is then this "Dzin"? It might be difficult to tell, but at the same time we are given another clue; Tsyuw. This is a "Scythianized" projection of the Xiyu-states which were located at the western mouth of the Tarim Basin. This is further alluded by the mention of the "Togar", which could be none other than the Tocharians of the Graeco-Roman classical fame (Tokharioi/Tocharii). It must be noted that the text features plenty of improvized Chinese manipulated to sound like as if they were spoken by a Saka (D'ad-Ngiwat-Tieg; this is an earlier reference to the Da Yuezhi who are identifiable as the Tocharians as a whole, according to J.P. Mallory), which of course is deployed excellenty as a narration technique (Albeit hard to track down ultimately). With respect to that "Mjuwk" is clearly Indo-European, in that we find Iranic cognates to the name, "Dzin" must therefore reference to something else than "Chi'n" (China).

Dzin... Honestly? The only thing which pops up in my head is the Tajik city of Dushanbe, which granted, is located comfortably close to the geography relevant to the topic, but I can't say for sure. Now there are some archaeological findings that places Dushanbe as a historical site as far back as the 5th century BCE, probably a Soghdian village or outpost, but this is conjecture spread as thinly as a playing card, if intellectual honesty may be allowed. However it may be reinforced by the military doctrines left to us by Darius I The Great in the Bâgâstânâ/Behistun and Naqsh-î-Rustam inscriptions, where the defeat of his enemies are enumerated.

Therefore, this "Moga" which may have been Darius' lieutenant (Darius had, according to the Behistun inscription several generals dedicated to the task of quashing rebellions following the Gaumâta/Smerdis/"False Smerdis" conspiracy), who acted as the extended arm of the Achaemenids, therefore the allusion to "Mjuwk" ruling the "four corners of the world", and this is yet another Achaemenid concept, presumably coined by the Persian ruler, Cyrus II The Great in his Babylonian cylinder commemorating the capture of Babylon.

Let's see what else we can throw into the mix...

We may have reached the conclusion of "Dzin" being "China" if the reconstruction read "Zhin", but it does not; Dzin on the other hand emphasizes a brief pause, which may be read "D'zin", and from blossom into "Dusan"/"Dushan"/"Duzan". Eventually, in New Persian, the form of "Dushanbe" literally means "Monday" (In the sense of "Second day", following "First day"/Sunday and "Day"/Saturday in the modern Iranian calendar)

Let's get a bit relaxed and have some fun with the subject: In Middle Persian/Pahlavîg... This one is going to make anyone laugh out loud but "du/dôg/dô" (Two) - "san/shan" (Hemp) - ba/be (Plural marker for preceeding noun; think English -s suffix) exactly means "Two hemps". We are talking hemp, maybe as in the plant itself: Sahdanag means precisely "Seed of hemp" which of course is a cognate to "shan/san". We are talking about Cannabis. Ganja. Reefer. Weed.

Why is this so interesting? Well, besides the fact that Afghanistan today produces tons of this good shit, and besides that Tadjikistan (Where Dushanbe is located as its capital city) apparently is a gigantic drug disposal site in Central Asia, right to the north of this area, the Saka Haumavarga presumably roamed; their very titular name designates consumption of ephedra, a plant otherwise known as "Haumâ/Haomâ" which is an entoxicating, hallucinogen beverage, which is mentioned in Avestan sources such as the hymns of Zoroaster (Gâthâs). This is what we'd call historical irony. It is quite likely that Dzin might be a reconstruction of this dwelling of "Two hemps".

The legacy of Scythians frolicking in fermented beverages and drugs is not only restricted to the "Eastern Scythians"; we meet such patterns in the Scythic allies of the Pontic ruler, Mithridates VI Eupator, where Scythian sages would prepare the famed herbal mixtures (As he was desensitizing himself against poisons, a concept we today know as mithridatism). The nomads clearly knew how to have fun.

Pure coincidence? Maybe. Dushanbe is a modern name, and my connotation of it to "Dzin" is loose, solely based on the few archaeological remains found in the vicinity of the city and the utter convenience of its location as a Soghdian outpost. It goes however to show that with a few clues, you can with some inquisition reach certain approximations, reductions and from there a conclusion which does not deviate from the established parameters.

I hope this helped answering your question.

**Tollheit** · 09-13-2008, 16:07

Thank you very much, TPC. This is most fascinating.

I had figured out Togar/Ngiwat-tieg, but was on the wrong track with Xwaehaex because I made the rash connection silk -> China, and I didn't stand a chance regarding Mjuwk and Dzin.

**totalwarwarrior** · 01-13-2009, 23:20

Togar definitely equals Tokharians. Ngiwat-tieg definitely equals Yuezhi. However, Yuezhi cannot be identified with the Tokharians as a whole because while the Yuezhi may be Tokharian, not all Tokharians were Yuezhi.

It seems pretty clear to me that the author of the Saka Rauka introduction used those terms to refer to ancient China during the Spring and Autumn and Warring States Period. Xwaehaex, Dzin, and Tsyuw all seem to be based on [a] modern reconstruction[s] of Old Chinese/Middle Chinese (c. 600 BC/600 AD) pronunciations of Huaxia, Qin, and Zhou.

Xwaehaex = Huaxia, the term for the ancestors of modern Chinese, Dzin = Qin, name of a Warring State, the one that would eventually unify the Central Plains, and Tsyuw = Zhou, name of the most powerful feudal kingdom that was ruling the Central Plains at the time. Mjuwk is likewise Mu, and "over 300 years ago, their duke, Mjuwk of Dzin, defeated our ancestors and allies in battle and took our grazing grounds" most likely refers to Duke Mu of Qin's campaign against the Western Rong peoples in 623 BC (over 300 years ago, meaning either early 6th or late 7th century BC using EB's 272 BC start date). In fact, the author's use of "Central Plains" at the end of the introduction seems to suggest that the area is none other than the "Central Plains" of China.

How do the Saka Rauka relate to all this? According to one source, the Sai/"Sak" (which are equated to be the Saka Rauka) were the descendants of the Yunxing (surname Yun) tribe of the Rong (a general name for the non-Hua peoples living to the west of the Qin state) peoples. The Yunxing Zhi Rong were one of the tribes who were mentioned as sometimes participating in the politics of the Qin and Jin states in the northwest frontier of the Central Plains during the early part of the Spring and Autumn Period. It is possible that in 623 BC, when Duke Mu of Qin acquired 12 new states from the Western Rong and extended Qin territory for over 1,000 li (~252 miles), the Yunxing Zhi Rong, i.e. Saka Rauka, were among the many Rong tribes displaced by Duke Mu of Qin.

Note that since the Rong was a general name for the peoples to the west of China, the "Rong" were most likely not ethnically/racially/linguistically/culturally/politically homogeneous nor united as a whole. Although the Yunxing tribe of the Rong peoples were probably the Saka Rauka, this does not at all mean that most or all of the Rong tribes were Saka/Indo-Iranian/Tokharian/"Indo-European". The peoples who were categorized as Rong by the ancient Chinese probably included many individual Qiang (proto-Tibetan) tribes, several Indo-Iranian (this would include Saka tribes as well as settled Indo-Iranians) tribes, and perhaps even a few Tokharians.

This might be what Jurchen Fury was artfully referring to in the Saka Rauka introduction. If it is, then he has done his research well.

Also Persian Cataphract, "Xiyu", at least according to my understanding, means "Western Regions". Xiyu was a very, very general term applied to all the regions west of the Yumen Pass (on the western border of modern Gansu province), and usually meant not only the Tarim Basin but most of Central Asia as known to China. This would include much of Asia and Europe, even the Roman empire itself (known in the Han shu as Daqin guo)!

I suspect the rest of EB probably used Xiyu as a temporary placeholder for the province name of settlement Sulek since Yuezhi Yabgu was inappropriate; using Xiyu also doesn't seem to be logical according to Jurchen Fury's constant use of Old or Middle Chinese phonetic renderings since Xiyu is clearly Mandarin and modern-day at that too. Middle Chinese for Xiyu might be something like "Sej-hwik" (according to Baxter's reconstruction).

**Subotan** · 01-13-2009, 23:30

On a related note, why is there an Eleutheroi province called Saka Yabgu, inhabited by "Saka" at the start of the game? I'm mildly puzzled.

**Ibrahim** · 01-13-2009, 23:59

Originally Posted by Subotan

On a related note, why is there an Eleutheroi province called Saka Yabgu, inhabited by "Saka" at the start of the game? I'm mildly puzzled.

IIRC there was more that one type of saka-the saka you play are the saka-rauka.

I might be off, but that's what I'm seeing.

**The Persian Cataphract** · 01-14-2009, 01:21

Originally Posted by totalwarwarrior

Togar definitely equals Tokharians. Ngiwat-tieg definitely equals Yuezhi. However, Yuezhi cannot be identified with the Tokharians as a whole because while the Yuezhi may be Tokharian, not all Tokharians were Yuezhi.

It seems pretty clear to me that the author of the Saka Rauka introduction used those terms to refer to ancient China during the Spring and Autumn and Warring States Period. Xwaehaex, Dzin, and Tsyuw all seem to be based on [a] modern reconstruction[s] of Old Chinese/Middle Chinese (c. 600 BC/600 AD) pronunciations of Huaxia, Qin, and Zhou.

Xwaehaex = Huaxia, the term for the ancestors of modern Chinese, Dzin = Qin, name of a Warring State, the one that would eventually unify the Central Plains, and Tsyuw = Zhou, name of the most powerful feudal kingdom that was ruling the Central Plains at the time. Mjuwk is likewise Mu, and "over 300 years ago, their duke, Mjuwk of Dzin, defeated our ancestors and allies in battle and took our grazing grounds" most likely refers to Duke Mu of Qin's campaign against the Western Rong peoples in 623 BC (over 300 years ago, meaning either early 6th or late 7th century BC using EB's 272 BC start date). In fact, the author's use of "Central Plains" at the end of the introduction seems to suggest that the area is none other than the "Central Plains" of China.

How do the Saka Rauka relate to all this? According to one source, the Sai/"Sak" (which are equated to be the Saka Rauka) were the descendants of the Yunxing (surname Yun) tribe of the Rong (a general name for the non-Hua peoples living to the west of the Qin state) peoples. The Yunxing Zhi Rong were one of the tribes who were mentioned as sometimes participating in the politics of the Qin and Jin states in the northwest frontier of the Central Plains during the early part of the Spring and Autumn Period. It is possible that in 623 BC, when Duke Mu of Qin acquired 12 new states from the Western Rong and extended Qin territory for over 1,000 li (~252 miles), the Yunxing Zhi Rong, i.e. Saka Rauka, were among the many Rong tribes displaced by Duke Mu of Qin.

Note that since the Rong was a general name for the peoples to the west of China, the "Rong" were most likely not ethnically/racially/linguistically/culturally/politically homogeneous nor united as a whole. Although the Yunxing tribe of the Rong peoples were probably the Saka Rauka, this does not at all mean that most or all of the Rong tribes were Saka/Indo-Iranian/Tokharian/"Indo-European". The peoples who were categorized as Rong by the ancient Chinese probably included many individual Qiang (proto-Tibetan) tribes, several Indo-Iranian (this would include Saka tribes as well as settled Indo-Iranians) tribes, and perhaps even a few Tokharians.

This might be what Jurchen Fury was artfully referring to in the Saka Rauka introduction. If it is, then he has done his research well.

Also Persian Cataphract, "Xiyu", at least according to my understanding, means "Western Regions". Xiyu was a very, very general term applied to all the regions west of the Yumen Pass (on the western border of modern Gansu province), and usually meant not only the Tarim Basin but most of Central Asia as known to China. This would include much of Asia and Europe, even the Roman empire itself (known in the Han shu as Daqin guo)!

I suspect the rest of EB probably used Xiyu as a temporary placeholder for the province name of settlement Sulek since Yuezhi Yabgu was inappropriate; using Xiyu also doesn't seem to be logical according to Jurchen Fury's constant use of Old or Middle Chinese phonetic renderings since Xiyu is clearly Mandarin and modern-day at that too. Middle Chinese for Xiyu might be something like "Sej-hwik" (according to Baxter's reconstruction).

Wow. Awesome read from top to bottom. Well spoken

Considering JF's specialty in Chinese literati (And all relevant scholastics), I have a gut-feeling that this outline is more likely, given that I have only whimsically dabbled in patches of similarities, in the cases of "Mjuwk" and "Dzin". I also agree on the issue on the Yuezhi-Togar debacle, however given my natural reliance upon Greek sources, it could easily become a matter of semantics, though there are clear parallels to the affiliations between the Pârnîg (The tribe which would become the royal clan of the Arsacidae) and the Dahae (The "super-tribe" or confederacy to which the aforementioned tribe initially belonged and lead).

Welcome to the forums

**totalwarwarrior** · 01-14-2009, 01:53

Hi Persian Cataphract,

Thanks for the reply and welcome.

Regarding the Yuezhi-Togar connection, although not all Togars/Tokharians were Yuezhi, the Togar nomads mentioned in the intro were Yuezhi since the Yuezhi were nomads, and there were settled Togars (like the Togars living in the oases of the Tarim Basin) to distinguish from. So Togar nomads = Ngiwat-tieg = Yuezhi.

**spanakoryzo** · 01-14-2009, 17:06

Unfortunately,I have nothing to add this post due to my poor knowledge of aryan and chinese historical context.I would like though to thank both TPC and totalwarrior for a truly educating thread.Once again (TPC especially in the long run) forum members have delivered.Thank you gentlemen!