According to Encyclopedia Britannica, “since the late 20th century, a growing number of scholars have rejected both the Aryan invasion hypothesis and the use of the term Aryan as a racial designation, suggesting that the Sanskrit term arya (“noble” or “distinguished”), the linguistic root of the word, was actually a social rather than an ethnic epithet.”
Encyclopedia Britannica: “All Parthian kings after Arsaces I used Arsaces as their throne name; and, with the rare exceptions of usurpers and contestants for the throne, all are so designated on their coins and in official documents. By historians, they are generally called by their personal names. The Arsacid dynasty maintained itself, although not in unbroken succession, until its overthrow by Ardashīr in A.D. 224. During the time of the Parthian empire, the Arsacids claimed descent from Artaxerxes II, probably to legitimize their rule over Achaemenid territories.
George Rawlinson (1812-1902) in his The Sixth Great Oriental Monarchy (Parthian) highlighted some interesting details about the Arsacids:
“First, there was a strong conviction on the part of those who came in contact with the Parthians, that they were Scyths; and secondly, it was believed that their name meant ‘exiles.’ Hence it was necessary to suppose that they had migrated into their country from some portion of the tract known as Scythia. The important conviction of the ancient writers, which remains after their stories are sifted, is the Scythic character of the Parthian people. On this point, Strabo, Justin, and Arrian are agreed. The manners of the Parthians had, they tell us, much that was Scythic in them. Their language was half-Scythic, half-Median. They armed themselves in the Scythic fashion. They were, in fact, Scyths in descent, in habits, in character.
[Another] version says that the Arsaces, whom all represent as the first king, was in reality a Scythian, who at the head of a body of Parnian Dahas, nomads inhabiting the valley of the Attrek (Ochus), invaded Parthia, soon after the establishment of Bactrian independence, and succeeded in making himself master of it. With this account, which Strabo seems to prefer, agrees tolerably well that of Justin, who says that ‘Arsaces, having been long accustomed to live by robbery and rapine, attacked the Parthians with a predatory band, killed their satrap, Andragoras, and seized the supreme authority.’ As there was in all probability a close ethnic connection between the Daha and the Parthians, it would be likely enough that the latter might accept for king a chieftain of the former, who had boldly entered their country, challenged the Greek satrap to an encounter, and by defeating and killing him, freed them — at any rate for the time — from the Greek yoke.
One of these was a family conclave (concilium domesticum), or assembly of the full-grown males of the Royal House; the other was a Senate comprising both the spiritual and the temporal chiefs of the nation, the Sophi, or ‘ Wise Men,’ and the Magi, or ‘Priests.’
The actual devotion of the Parthians was offered to the Sun and Moon, to deities who were supposed to preside over the royal house, and to ancestral idols which each family possessed, and conveyed with it from place to place with every change of habitation. The Sun was saluted at his rising, was worshipped in temples, under the name of Mithra, with sacrifices and offerings; had statues erected in his honour, and was usually associated with the lesser luminary… The main worship, however, of the great mass of the people, even when they were of the royal stock, was concentrated upon ancestral images, which had a place sacred to them in each house, and received the constant adoration of the household. In the early times of the empire the Magi were held in high repute, and most of the peculiar tenets and rites of the Magian religion were professed and followed by the Parthians. Elemental worship was practised. Fire was, no doubt, held sacred, and there was an especial reverence for rivers.
Ammianus says, that among the titles assumed by the Parthian monarchs was that of ‘Brother of the Sun and Moon.’ It appears that something of a divine character was regarded as attaching to the race. (Amm. Marc, xxiii. 6)
In the civil contentions, which occur so frequently throughout the later history, combatants abstained from lifting their hands knowingly against an Arsacid, to kill or wound one being looked upon as sacrilege.
After his death a monarch seems generally to have been the object of a qualified worship; statues were erected to him in the temples, where (apparently) they were luminaries.”
Where did the Parthians came from originally? >
‘Royal Scythia, Greece, Kyiv Rus‘ book takes a new perpective on the origin of the Scythians.
