The author addresses the Persian (”Iranian”) tamgas, where the Persian state is defined as of the epoch of Arshakids and Sasanids in their borders, not just the modern territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran. In that respect, the Persia is a territorial geographical phenomenon, as opposed to the cultural and linguistic ethnos of the Indo-Iranian provenance. The Indo-Iranian component in the Persian states were always a minority, sometimes a dominating minority, but mostly an inferior minority among other, predominantly non Indo-Iranian peoples. In the symbiotic relationship with all other peoples, the Indo-Iranians absorbed elements of culture, language, and traditions from all their neighbors. As an attentive review of the ”Persian Section” would show, the ”Persian” tamga is a borrowing, in most cases the tamga phenomenon is plainly associated with non Indo-Iranian peoples of the Persia, in a minority of cases the tamga phenomenon is associated with peoples that are not unequivocally classed as Indo-Iranians, and only in a limited number of instances the use of tamgas can be attributed to Indo-Iranians proper. Not only the Indo-Iranians were a minority among the Semitic, Dravidian, Türkic, Caucasus, and other peoples, but the territory inhabited by the Indo-Iranians was, and remains today, in spite of the pervasive forced ”Persinization”, a lesser part of the Persian lands. Any impression to the opposite, received from the contents of the Section 8, must be credited to the literary and doctrinal talents of the author.

If you see that the text and illustrations conflict at times, please do not despair, it could be a typo in the S.A.Yacenko publication, or a misunderstanding on the Translator's part. The tamgas are there, but the illustrations or callouts may be incorrect. A closer look at the maps from which the numbers for the images are cited would help to verify the connections and unconfuse the story.

The analysis brings multiple connections between ”Persian” tamgas and the tamgas of the Middle Asia. For hydrological and demographical situation in the Aral area see Tsvetsinskaya Amudarya Sarykamysh People. For demographical and ethnic situation in the Aral area see L.T.Yablonsky Ancient Chorasmia. For the Tochar anabasis, see C.Benjamin "Migration of Yueji through Sogdia". If you see that the text refers to ”Iranians”, or to their word an ”Iranian word”, do not despair. If this study had ”Türkic-lingual” in its title, it would probably never see the light of the day, and we would have never learnt that the Ahaemenids, Arshakids, Sasanids, Kangars, Sogdys, Horasmians/Horezmians, Sarmats and Alans had common clans and common clan tamgas, that the royal families of the Persians, Middle Asians, and Sarmatians belonged to the same clans, that the dynasties of the Bospor, Olbia, Bactria were intimately connected all the way up to the Chach by their royal bloodlines, and none of the enigmatic details of these fascinating popular and royal carousels. While the term ”Iranian” pervades the pages of the work as a scent of a dead cat in a high-rise, all the justifications for it are typically contained in these type publications  in a footnote 10 on page 13, or even may be hidden deeper in a comment to a footnote 13 on page 10. The radioactive potassium in the modern blood testing allows observing the bloodstreams and locate diversions, splits and clogs, and the tamgas allow us to see the origins, developments, relocations, activities and final resting places of the people who left for us these remarkable timestamps of their lives. The tracing inherently has an exceeding resolution for insights with increasing magnification, from a tribe level down to the clans, sub-clans, and in places literally down to individual extended families and historical personalities. One day we will find a mummified horse hide marked by a specific tamga with a little tail on it, and we will be able to visualize the extent of the possessions of that clan, extent of its travels, its necropolises, and its herds.

As with the signage traditions of our days, the deviations from traditional orientation of the tamga are irrelevant, like is irrelevant the orientation of a 5-point star on the US emblems, or a 6-point star of the Mogen Dovid, their significance is relayed exclusively by their form and not by the conditions of the object where they are placed. On the other hand, the relative orientation of modifier marks is significant, allowing, for example, to segregate the animals of a ”right hand” family from the ”left hand” family and other kins of the clan, and therefore the mirror images carry discerning connotations. At the same time, an ”assignment” of the tamga would be quite an aberration, like renaming ”McDougall” clan into ”Stuarts”, because every member of the society has his parents, and is destined to carry their tamga to his progeny. This aspect is especially pronounced in the societies where upbringing of the youngsters is traditionally a treasured right of their grandparents.

The English rendition of the extensive citation of the work is much simplified, with many details omitted and much reduced references, but with an eye to preserving the logic, facts, and evidence. The citation brings forward the author's comparisons, to allow for easy visual collation of the evidence. A reader should be aware that absolutely none of the dating was performed even with rudimentary scientific instrumentation, and with the exception of the dated coinage, all other dates are within the accuracy of educated opinions, which at times significantly differ, and time to time abruptly change. Any posting's comments notwithstanding, this work is a first major overview of the accumulated research, and we all should be limitlessly grateful for the titanic work performed by the author in researching, assembling and mapping the data, and for many of his insights that lay the ground for the future researchers. The author also notably deviates from the cleansed lexicon that came to use in the Russian academical works of the Soviet period by using Türkic terminology, integral to the Russian language, for the authentic Türkic phenomena, including the very term ”tamga”.

Mini-Glossary of the Türkic ethnic names of the period

Tamgas of Persia are studied very unilaterally. (Here Persia is the Persian state in the epoch of Arshakids and Sasanids in their borders, not the modern territory of the Islamic Republic of Iran). The attention of the researchers, as a rule, concentrated on the Sasanid ”monograms” of the aristocracy (see above). The tamga collections on stones and bricks of the structures in the Ahaemenid centers were also published: Persepolis, Pasargadae, Behistun, Susa and Sardy, and also were published the tamgas on the Ahaemenid seals, which first of all were studied by John Boardman (Herzfeld). They have many common features with the later Sarmatian and with the synchronous Middle Asian types (fig. 32, а).

A whole series of ”nishan” tamgas is known on the Ahaemenid coins. On silver sikles (sickles? =coins - Translator's Note) sometimes are visible additional markings, made in various satrapies. Those are simple tamgas (swastika in a clockwise direction; cross with rounded ends; arch; ”letter E”, etc.). In one of the versions, they were made by official representatives of the satraps (Commonality with the Middle Asian types clearly points to Ahaemenids preserving the existing local hierarchy in the subjugated territories. In the absence of alternate sources, tamgas are a unique tool that allows such detailed insight).

Of a special interest is the Parthian tamga ”encyclopedia” on a relief with shooting archer infantry on a fragment of a cliff in the mountains near the settlement Kir (southeast from Firuzabad in Southern Iran) (fig. 33, е). Here are perfunctorily depicted not less than 31 types of tamgas (probably of the Sassanian time), a part of which is was found several times (No 2-4, 10, 12, 15). They are arranged in certain order, along the edges of a frame of the old relief and in a vertical line in the center. Probably, even later there in empty space (and partially within large tamgas) were drawn a hunter with two spears, one more pedestrian phallic character and at least than five animals. More than 1/3 of the Kir type tamgas have exact match in the tamgas of other ancient ”Iranian” (quotation marks are mine - Translator's Note) ethnoses (No 1, 4, 6-8, 10-15, 26, 31). Probably, the tamgas were etched during the following Sasanid dynasty (during the Arshakids' times, the official cult image would unlikely be despoiled with perfunctorily executed carvings) (Less unlikely then the graffiti on modern memorials and national monuments, including freeways and high-rises, since we are way more enlightened and more regimented).

101

The royal tamgas of Arshakids (fig. 33, b/1-6) and Sasanids (fig. 33, с/7-13) on the coins and formal stone reliefs deserve a close attention. During both dynasties they had a simple enough form. It is indicative that the majority of Arshakids, as well as the first two Sasanids, had frequently a (blank) circle in the center of the tamga. Sometimes on different objects belonging to the same Shakhanshah (headdress, horse covercloth, coins), we see different tamgas (two at Artaban IV; fig. 33, b/6, and similar fig. 18/6; three at Artashir I: fig. 33, c/a-c.) (One would think that these objects can be inherited and belong to the previous rulers, especially if they signify heredity, real or coveted)

In some cases tamgas can tell us about relationship or political connections with the nobility of the other countries (how can a scholar confuse political dominance with linguistic affiliation? Especially coming from an empire where а majority, being politically ”Russian”, if at all, spоke Russian language as a foreign language?). The tamgas of Vologez III (111-146) (fig. 33/5 ) during that time is known only in Bactria (fig. 28/77 ), but in Sarmatia it is represented in the nearest to the Parthia area populated then by the Sarmatians in the Kuban area still at the turn of our era (fig. 4/1а ).

The tamga of the Parthian ruler Vologez IV (No 6: Sellwood, 1971, 279, pl. 84/131) was well-known only in the Horesm (fig. 27/71 ), and approximately during reign of Vologez IV was well-known in Bactria (Dalverzintep - fig. 28/97 ), and among the late tamgas in the Bait 3 in the Usturt (these appear to be completely different tamgas).

The tamga on the coins of the last Parthian king Artaban IV (Sellwood, 1971, 301, pl. 91, iii) is identical to the tamgas on the coins Indo-Saka king Gondofar (ca. 20-55 AD). A rarest type tamga of the one of courtiers of the first Sasanid ruler of Persia, Artashir I (225-240) (fig. 33/8 ) approximately one and a half centuries prior to his accession was noted on the gold objects of the highest nobility of the W. Ukrainan Aorses (fig. 5/82 ), and is not known from anywhere more (these appear to be related but different tamgas).

And another rare type of tamgas of one of the last Sasanids, Husrau II (fig. 33/12 ) is earlier represented only in one point of the world, in the ancient Turanian Aftasiab (Samarkand) in the 6th century BC (fig. 27/130 shown upside down).

To speak about ”simple coincidence” in all above situations is hardly possible. In case of the existence of earlier prototypes in the territories neighboring Persia and populated with related peoples, some connections may be considered (marriages between nobility, benevolence?) . In the case of the likeness of this or that late-Parthian royal tamga with the synchronous tamgas on neighboring countries, Horesm and Bactria (the last obviously belonging to ordinary clans because they are marked on bricks, produced by the local residents in the construction of the fortresses in their labor obligations: see section 1.8, and on the kitchen ceramics of ordinary inhabitants) (”obvious” may be too rush a judgment; in marriage the spouse had her own hereditary tamga, passed only directly within her clan; benevolence such as adoption may include a bestowal of a tamga, but that would be an extraordinary isolated event; a use of the master's tamga on bricks and kitchen ceramics may have been simply required for logistical purposes), the concurrence of the tamga types allows assumption of a common ancient heritage. The noted tamga of a clan of one of the courtiers of the first Sasanids (with the type that could develop still in the Parthian time) can truly reflect the kinship with the Sarmatian nobility (taking into account that the Aorsian or Alanian clan brought it to Sarmatia in the mid of the 1st century AD from their initial territories in the Northern Caucasus).
102

An original feature of the Parthian time is the manner to display the large royal nishan tamga on the right side of the two types of the  headdress, a conical and hemispherical form. In one case on a conical cap a tamgas is shown in a row of seven schematical images of a world tree (seal of ”anbarkat” Vakhuden-Shapur). Such a ”tiara”, bestowed by shahanshah, gave a ”right to participate at the royal table, a voice at the meetings with the king, and opinion in the councils” (Amm. Marc. Res gestae. XVIII. 5-6). Are known priestly headdress where a large clan tamga is placed in a usual place on the right side, and a small simple tamga (probably, an additional tamga of a separate family) is placed on the forehead (fig. 14/а ) (conical vs. hemispherical are hallmarks of the Türkic vs. Persian; the Türks in service of the royalty, as equestrian and military leaders, was a common affair; the small insignia does not appear to be a tamga, and may signify something else). One of the most impressing scenes with a series of tamgas on the caps of the courtiers is the relief of the second Sasanid shahanshah Shapur I with his retinue in the Naksh-i Radzhab. Not less interesting is the relief in Firuzabad with a scene of a victory by Artashir I over the Parthian Artaban IV, where the tamgas of the fighting rulers decorate a horsecloth in continuous lines (fig. 33, b/6 and с/7a ), and also decorate the headdresses of the courtiers galloping behind Artashir (the galloping courtiers may be Kangar riders in Persian service, Persians generically called them "angareion", per Herodotus 8.98. Having a royal tamga on the uniform may signify an official position in royal service, akin to the main usage of the tamgas for horse branding, where tamga does not belong to the horse, but designates its owner. The same may apply to any object, including bricks and kitchen ceramics. But to call a continuous decoration  "tamga" is dubitable).

A second person following shahinshah has both on his headdress, and on the horsecloth an original tamga (fig. 14/о ), which on the later battlefield relief of Hormizd II in Naksh-i Rustam belongs to an opponent who is falling from a horse (a loose usage of the term "tamga" is not helpful, decorations and/or insignia may be many and artistically various, vs. tamgas being specific and uniform. A monogram may be artistic and fanciful, and used for decoration, it does not have its own independent spirit. Tamga does, and must be treated with reverence).

Starting with the Parthian Orod I (80-77 BC), such tamgas sometimes were depicted on a headdress of the ruler. For the Sasanids, this Parthian tradition is already known from Artashir I; the later tamgas is depicted for another shahanshah on a dish from the Red Glade with scene of bear hunt)..

A detailed analysis of the aristocratic ”monograms” (Shahanshah's tamgas were much simpler in design!) was repeatedly provided in the literature (last report see: Gyselen, 1995, fig. 1-7). However, to take these tamgas, after the prevailing today in the science version of E.Hertsfeld (see Introduction), the monograms proper from the letters of the name of the carrier, in my opinion, is baseless. The fact is that they almost never contain letters of the Pehlevi alphabet, and are easily ”disassembled” into two-three component elements, which almost in all cases are identical with the common tamgas of the other ”Iranian” (quotation marks are mine - Translator's Note) peoples of that time (fig. 33, а).

Fig. 33. Tamgas of Parthian (b) and Sassanian (a, c-e, d, 31-35) Persia and Hellenistic Margiana (d, 1-30)

In the case of the two components, it is possible to presume a formation of the new type by joining the tamgas of two aristocratic (parental?) clans (see Section 1.3 and 1.5). The three-component tamgas are found much less frequently. It is possible to presume that they may have arisen from the ”double” tamgas by the next division of a noble clan. In any case it is necessary to possess uncontrollable imagination to see, after many celebrated Iranists, in such tamgas any realistic images of the tips of the Zoroastrian temples or banners, or a symbology for complex titles, etc. (see Introduction).
103

On the bricks of the fortresses in the northeastern fringes of the state (in the Southern Turkmenia) are known tamgas of the builders. In all cases the tamgas obviously belong to the clans of the local residents forced to the construction (see Section 1). The earliest tamgas are associated with the ancient inhabitants of the Margiana in the 3rd century BC, i.e. with the period of Seleukids rule. They are in the Merv fortresses: Gyaur-kala and Erk-kala (fig. 33, d/1-30). To the later time belong the small fortresses in Akdepe (fig. 33/31,35), near the settlement Keshi (fig. 33, d/32-34). At the same time, naturally, each collection is very specific. If, on the construction of both fortresses in the populous area of Merv was used  the labor of a large number of different clans (the exploration work documented approximately 15 tamgas in each; while only two common types were found, and four different letters were used to serve as tamgas), for the small fortifications in the Keshi and Akdepe were documented only three types in each.

Very few publications were made for the tamgas on ceramics; they cover the territory of Mesopotamia during the Parthian time..