Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
part ii | states<br />
continents. The most obvious example <strong>of</strong> this was the Achaemenid kingdom, which<br />
included territories in <strong>Asia</strong>, Europe and Africa. This was how state-like entities<br />
evolved in the regions where they first emerged in the Near and Middle East.<br />
The process <strong>of</strong> the genesis and evolution <strong>of</strong> state entities in Transoxiana was<br />
considerably different, however. Nonetheless, for particular historical reasons, these<br />
territories were also part <strong>of</strong> the Achaemenid kingdom and the Seleucid kingdom at<br />
certain points.<br />
Transoxiana is a distinctive, historical, geographical and cultural area, whose<br />
civilisation flourished for many thousands <strong>of</strong> years thanks to two great rivers: the<br />
Amu Darya (ancient Oxus) and the Syr Darya (ancient Jaxartes). The states that<br />
emerged here differed from states in other parts <strong>of</strong> Central <strong>Asia</strong> in many ways, both<br />
in antiquity and in medieval times, even though they also shared some common<br />
features. Even within the territory <strong>of</strong> Transoxiana, the northern (Khorezm) and<br />
southern provinces (Bactria) were notably different from one another, especially in<br />
antiquity. They differed considerably in their ethnic composition and cultures, their<br />
languages and writing systems, as well as their polities. This situation stemmed from<br />
the cultural and genetic particularities <strong>of</strong> each region, and the rivalry between settled<br />
and nomadic peoples, the extent <strong>of</strong> which varied in different regions.<br />
The periodisation <strong>of</strong> the development <strong>of</strong> ancient statehood proposed here is<br />
based on selecting those features <strong>of</strong> statehood which are most characteristic and<br />
important for each period and which are new in comparison to the preceding period.<br />
It is based on the main findings <strong>of</strong> national and international research into the<br />
history and archaeology <strong>of</strong> Central <strong>Asia</strong>. Given the huge number <strong>of</strong> publications that<br />
in one way or another address these or other issues and problems <strong>of</strong> statehood, this<br />
author’s approach has been to reduce these to a minimum so as not to overload the<br />
main text.<br />
Periods in the development <strong>of</strong> early states<br />
With regard to the evolution <strong>of</strong> ancient statehood/early states in Transoxiana,<br />
it is possible to single out six main periods spanning the second half <strong>of</strong> the 2nd<br />
millennium BC to the second half <strong>of</strong> the 3rd or beginning <strong>of</strong> the 4th century AD, i.e.<br />
until the time <strong>of</strong> transition from ancient to medieval states.<br />
The emergence <strong>of</strong> early forms <strong>of</strong> statehood in this region took shape on the basis<br />
<strong>of</strong> the economic and cultural achievements <strong>of</strong> the settled farming civilisations, which<br />
had been developing in the territory <strong>of</strong> southern Uzbekistan since the late Bronze<br />
Age. The end <strong>of</strong> this process more or less coincided with the decline <strong>of</strong> the Kushan<br />
48