Lands of Asia layouts (Eng) 26.11.21

part ii | states
hierarchically below the title ‘king’ as represented by MLK’, starting in the second
half of the 2nd century BC, i.e. after the collapse of the Graeco-Bactrian kingdom and
after the establishment of rulers of Yuezhi origin.
This situation continued throughout antiquity until the early medieval period, i.e.
up to the 4th century AD. Only rulers of two regions in Transoxiana in antiquity had
a title of the highest rank. These were the rulers of Khorezm, referred to on coins as
MLK’ – ‘King’, and the rulers of Bactria-Tokharistan, which was a part of the Kushan
state. The elevated status of these kings meant that their titles were comparable only
with those found in the most significant states of the ancient world – China, Parthia
and Rome.
As regards Kangju, this apparently confederative state did not have a single
confederate mint producing a uniform coinage, and so we have no idea of what title
or status its ruler possessed.
It should be noted that the Chinese textual sources mention five Kangju
possessions. However, there are doubts over their locations, including the claim
that some of them were supposedly located within Sogdia, Bukhara and Khorezm.
The same Chinese sources claim that rulers from the ‘house of Zhaowu’, i.e. of
Yuezhi origin, were the heads of these possessions. It is possible that the view of the
archaeologist A.N. Bernshtam, who placed these possessions along the Syr Darya,
is more reliable. It would seem that the south-eastern edge of this state was Chach
and the north-western one the lower reaches of the Syr Darya. Coins of this period
from different regions of Transoxiana and their titles suggest a high degree of political
independence for these dominion-states. This is particularly the case with Khorezm,
whose ruler bore a royal title.
If we construct a hierarchical ladder for the ancient states of Transoxiana, its
highest point undoubtedly belongs to the Kushan kingdom (the state of the Great
Yuezhi). On the rung below was the Khorezmian kingdom, and on the lower rungs
dominions (but not kingdoms!) like Bukhara, Samarkand, Kesh and Chach.
The linguistic roots of the titulature of the ancient states and possessions of
Transoxiana varied, depending on different circumstances, notably the political
domination of particular states, and on cultural traditions. Aramaic, Greek, Old and
Middle Persian, Indian, Saka-Khotanese, Bactrian and Sogdian were all used for these
titles, illustrating how varied the historical process of the formation of states and
dominions in Transoxiana was, and how many different ethnic groups were involved
in them during the stages of their development.
68