Professional Documents
Culture Documents
were the early migrants to the Chinese continent and may have taken at least three routes via two
entries of today's Yunnan and Guangxi-Guangdong provinces. Li Hui theory when projected to migration
to Liao-he River would be the non-stop migration of one branch of people dating back to 20,000 years or
earlier and ending up in Chinese Manchuria. They probably were the ancestor of Mongol. Other
theoretical assumptions are not in conformity of National geographic studies, so they were not discussed
here but the chart is present here.
The statement such as claiming that Tibetan people originated from Proto-Mongoloid is not consistent
with universal human migration model but it is in conformity of Chinese Political policy of claiming that
all Tibetans are Chinese. Instead all Chinese can be considered early Tibetans. The real science
reveals us that latter is most probably a true outcome. Altai man must have come through northern
route and may have created Proto Indo-European and Proto-Turks (Turanic) people, while interacting
with mongoloid people. The recent DNA studies showed that there were two separate paths taken by
the haplogroup O-N people towards East Asia and by the Q-R people towards the Caucasus, with the
later cross-mixing among the N and R people to form the ancestral group of Proto-Indo-Europeans. See
charts below for early haplogroup distributions.
Saka, Sacai, scythe, Scythian warriors, on the right is an archeological exhibits excavated from tomb
Rivers. Xiongnu then attacked Yuezhi who had numerical superiority but Yuezhi decided to flee than take
a stand and headed towards west to Ili River region but were surprised that Wusun along with simran
(Saka) tribes had already taken over the area. Their attack on Wusun was not successful, so they headed
south west. These started a chain reaction and massive movements of peoples and tribes that lived in
Central Asia with relative peace but one tribe dislodged the other tribes that affecting Indian
subcontinent who witnessed massive influx of the refugees. Craig Benjamin suggests another scenario
that counters the Chineses version: He says and this author agrees that in spite of numerically superior
force of 100,000 horse mounted archers and the fact that the migration seems to have been conducted in
an orderly fashion suggests something of a planned strategic relocation rather than a rout. Moreover,
Yuezhi choose not to fight Xiongnu Hun in spite of their previous historical success as per Chinese
chronicle but choose to fight Wusun He speculates with reasonable logic that The Yuezhi's original
intention was to move some 2000 kilometers to the northwest and resettle in the valley of the Ili River, a
region occupied by a group of Sakas called Wusun (Chinese text) that had fertility and water resources.
They had no intention, nor any idea, that this journey would only be the first stage of a migration that
ultimately would take them half away across Central Asia, until thirty years later they would find
themselves in relatively secure occupation of the fertile river valleys north of the Amu Darya, and
influential tribe in the former Greek kingdom of Bactria. This author questions the sentence used by
Benjamin as the Master of the Bactria, because they were not.
Sima Qian
Emperor Huangdi
Zang Qian
Early nomadic tribes of east and central Asia-barbarians per Chinese records:
The Xiongnu or Hsiung-nu was a confederation of nomadic tribes, as was Saka (Simran to Chinese),
who, according to ancient Chinese sources, inhabited the eastern Asian Steppe from the 3000 BC to the
late 1st century AD. Chinese sources report that Modu Chanyu, the supreme leader of this Hunnic group
founded the Xiongnu Empire in 209 BC. These Hunnic confederation can be traced to the ancient Yun
also called Xian-Yun, the barbarians for short. Yun is designated as a clan name living as a Barbarian
life. Chinese sources report that those Xian-Yun groups were forced into exile to the western Corridor of
China along with San-Miao people by ancient overlord Shun in the 3rd millennium BC. San-Miao people
are believed to the ancestors of present Tibeto-Burmese group. These nomadic groups comingled within
themselves, as well as with other groups to evolve into what ancient Chinese historians collectively
describe as the tribes of Jiang-Rong but retained Yun as an epithet. It is possible that Chinese named
them as such because of their prior knowledge of their cultures of roaming; wondering and attacking
settled sedentary communities. These sedentary communities of southern china south of the yellow river
were agriculturalist with urbanized civilization of cities with material culture and prosperous life as
compared to wondering nomadic group. Similar cases were noted with Fertile Crescent civilization of
Indus, Euphrates and Niles.
We never would have a very clear idea of what some of these ancient people look like that Chinese
historians had described, but with the recent archeological finds in China and elsewhere, we can
conclude that differences that evolved in physical characteristic were gradual and shuttle over long
period of time. We are showing below the archeological finds of prehistoric Hunnic and Turanic people. It
appears that differentiations were sharpened in last two millennia due to cross breeding and maturity of
gene mutations.
Xiongnu Huns
Mongolian Prince
There are clues that more northerly branch that evolved had more Caucasoid features than southerly
branch. Gonur Tepe is an archaeological site of about 55 hectares in Turkmenistan that was inhabited by
Scythian and other tribes of Indo-Iranians dating back to 2500 BC. The site was discovered by GreekRussian archaeologist Viktor Sarianidi. Sarianidi discovered a palace, a fortified mud-brick enclosure, and
temples with fire altars which he believes were dedicated to the Zoroastrian religion. He also found what
appears to be the boiler for the ritual drink soma, which is mentioned in the Rigveda and also in the
Avesta as Hoama. Sarianidi says he also found dishes with traces of cannabis, poppy and ephedrine.
According to Sarianidi, this discovery strengthens the theory that these were the ingredients of soma, an
elixir of offering to various Indo-Iranian Aryan Gods. Rigveda and sister Avesta have devoted number of
hymns to Soma.
According to new research published in China, Chinese have undergone the same experience as Indians
regarding distortion of their ancient history. These mistakes were made either due to ignorance of the
native language, misinterpretation of evidence or outright distortion through forgery just to acquire
publication rights for knowledge thirsty public of the west. There is enough blame to go around and
makes no sense in lamenting over the issues. On one hand they ruled the countries and made us aware
of our past not known to us through archeology (e.g. Harrapan cities). We ignored these ruins for
centuries and while professional archeologists still perform archeology in other part of world and fund
the expeditions. The events that took place in 18th century AD may have biased tone to twist the
conclusion in favor of one civilization at the expense of the others civilization but they can be corrected
and amended with sufficient research. Most of these incidents can be attributed to select few who
10
forged the history to make the names for them for commercial purposes and publishing. During 18th and
19th century AD, the colonial historians were in rush to bring this buried unknown knowledge that was
usually confined to Royal bards of the world like Grand historians of china and not available to general
public or institution of learning. Being ignorant of the local languages, they relied on local experts, who
turned out to be equally ignorant. In India, the creation of multiple eras by victorious kings added to the
confusion of chronology and names. The required archeological knowledge or numismatic evidence that
was lacking have now surfaced through new discoveries. The foreign travelers accounts that were
difficult to understand is now translated and placed in the public domain and phonetic difficulties are
resolved in most cases. The privileged Royal bards who were the custodians of the records of the history
often relied on information gathered without secondary verification from other sources. Early Indologists
and sinologists produced a distorted picture that was later debunked by new archeological discoveries
and genetic studies both in India and China. In case of China, the fallacious claims include the link of the
Rouran to Mongolian chief Genghis Khan and the link of Tuoba or Topa people to the Modern Turks. The
jade links to Yehzhi and Lulian mummies link to Tocharian that are all proven wrong.
Yuezhi may or may not 100 percent Indo-European or Tocharians as assumed by the earlier writers. See
the maps below- reconstructed based on Chinese accounts.
Marked the location of Xiongnu (Huns), Yuezhi small Yuezhi & direction of migration as per Chinese history
We dont know for sure that Tocharian people were the same as Turanic people. Mahabharata mentions
Turanic people closer to north of Hindukush mountains. As per the classical historians, the Yuezhi were
more or less equated to Tocharians based on Lulian Mummies that Stein discovered. The new map
above suggests that Big Yuezhi and Little Yuezhi probably may be of mixed ethnicities of mongoloid
tribes and IE people like white Epthalites or they may be of mixed mongoloid and Turkic origin. They
lived side by side with Xiongnu Huns for millennia without any conflicts or troubles. They also
intermarried with each others. As per the story documented in Chinese annals, Modu, the King of
Xiongnu, married Yuezhi princess and lived with them and was adopted as a son by Yuezhi chief. How
this could be possible, if there was not a close and trusting affinity?
We are not absolutely sure the reasons for the conflict between two tribes other than what is mentioned
in the Grand Historians chronicles. Early part of Yellow emperor story is more fictional but the history
become more definitive during Zhou dynasty period. The fight for the land grab for pastures and water
resources were the common disputes in the ancient history. In Prior history, Xiongnu were under Yuezhi
control and Yehzhi were numerically and militarily superior. Whatever the reasons were, or stories given
in the annals, the Yehzhi were attacked and father-in-law of Modu (Yehzhi chief) was killed who had
previously given him asylum. The motive behind power struggle is not given by the Chinese. The Yuezhi
had a formidable force of more than 100,000 bow-horsemen with prior experience of defeating the
Xiongnu tribes. They fled in a heft as per Grand historians of china or was it a planned strategy? Some
details are contradictory in the accounts given by Grand historians and definitely raise the question for
12
the real reason for the migration. Dr. Benjamin raises the same question and suggests that it was a pre
planned move to move away from the area they had occupied for centuries. Yehzhi thought that they
can move to Ili River valley where the plenty of water resources are available but when they moved
there, they found the tribe of Wusun occupying the same area. We are also told that Chinese
ambassador Zang Qian was asked to follow Yuezhis movements due to concerns by the Han emperor.
Yuezhi were thought to be as supplier of the Jades to Chinese emperor that is now established as a fake
story by the Chinese archeologists. Chinese ambassador was held captive by Xiongnu for 10 years and
fled with his Xiongnu wife to escape the captivity in search of Yehzhi tribe. He did not turn back but
continue going west. What was his real mission? Why spend time searching for so called barbarians? So,
entire gamut of relationships and motivation requires reexamination for the reasons cited above.
According to Grand Historian Sima Quin: "The Yuezhi originally lived in the area between the Qilian or
Heavenly Mountains (Tian Shan) and Dunhuang, but after they were defeated by the Xiongnu they
moved far away to the west, beyond Dayuan, where they attacked and conquered the people of Daxia
and set up the court of their king on the northern bank of the Gui River. A small number of their people
who were unable to make the journey west sought refuge among the Qiang barbarians in the Southern
Mountains, where they are known as the Lesser Yuezhi." There is something that does not make sense
in this account. Gui River is located in China and not in Bactria. The province name Daxia or Dacia existed
on Dane river further North West to Bactria, China. There were three Daxia. So, the question is what the
Chinese word Daxia means? Daxia was the equivalent to habitat of Yuezhi regardless of the
geography or it was a scribal error in Chinese records or translation. Daxia cannot be equated to Bactria,
if Gui River is mentioned along with it. So, if we assume Chinese Daxia for Yehzhi was their settlement
then there were three Daxia(homeland), One was the original at Gui River in china as per annals, second
was Bactria on Amu Darya and third one would be Daxia on River Dane which was later called Roman
Dacia. This may have impact on chronology as well as identification. Were Yuezhi mentioned by Chinese
were white Epthalites Huns of Gupta period?
13
14
BAMBOO Annals:
Ma Feibai is a US based Chinese historian who has analyzed and studied The Records of the Grand
Historian and other related texts during the reign of the first emperor Qin Shi Huang better known as
Emperor Huangdi. Using Ma Feibai's analysis, she brought out discrepancy in the Grand historian version
when compared with other texts called Bamboo annals, that also details the history of legendary Yellow
emperor to prior dynasty of Zhou emperors (1050 B.C. - 256 B.C). One of the key reference books is "YiZhou-shu" old and new version, they are collectively called BAMBOO ANNALS. According to Ma Feibai,
these BAMBOOS annals differ from Grand historian accounts. The Bamboo Annals are also known as the
Ji Tomb Annals, as they were found there. BAMBOO begins with the legendary Yellow Emperor and
extends up to 299 BC, with the later centuries focusing on the history of the State of Wei during the
period of Warring States. It thus covers a similar period as Sima Qian's Records of the Grand Historian (91
BC) then comparison of history is made. The original may have been lost during the Song dynasty, but it
could have been the source material for Sima Qian of Qin dynasty.
The Guanzi is yet another Chinese history and philosophical text that is named for and traditionally
attributed to the 7th century BC philosopher, Guan Zong who served as Prime Minister to Duke Huan of
Qi. During his time, it is assumed that some volumes of Bamboo texts were lost, so he tried to improvise
it from others sources and memories. The mention of Jade trade by Yuezhi was one of story that was
repeated in Grand historian text. This fabled story has been proven inaccurate (assumed or forged) and
led to erroneous conclusion that Yuezhi controlled the Jade trades. This may have distorted their
historical geographical positions. This jade trade should have been credited to another tribe called YuShi people and not Yehzhi people. These are two different distinct clans living within so called
barbarian zone or later Xiongnus empire. This may also give rise to the false hypotheses of AryanTocharian civilization that had lived close to border of china near Tarim basins. The Lulian mummies with
red hair falsely strengthened that hypothesis. Other serial assumptions followed that suggested that
Tocharian Aryans probably transferred the iron technology and construction of chariots to the Chinese.
This is what earlier historians including Aurel Stein thought, reported and wrote and now Chinese
archeologist have proven that conclusions were erroneous.
discrepancy related to Yuezhi. During Muwangs reign, the Zhou Dynasty was at its peak, and Mu tried to
stamp out invaders in the western part of China and ultimately expand Zhous influence to the east. In
the height of his passion for conquests, he led an immense army against the Quanrong (Barbarian), who
inhabited the western part of China. His travels allowed him to contact many tribes and swayed them to
either join under the Zhou banner or be conquered in war with his army. He was able to resettle many
barbarians at the origin of the Jingshui and Weishui Rivers and they included tribes of five Rong groups
named as Yiqu, Yuzhi, Wuzhi, Xuyan and Penglu. The naming here contained some phonetics resembling
the Yuezhi people. See maps above. The Chinese wall construction began during Zhou dynasty period
along with warring states in bits and pieces to keep barbarians out but after conquest by Chinas Huangdi
Emperor, he connected all the segments of the Great Wall of China with additional fortification.
The archeologists in China performed additional testing for twenty years on the jade articles from the
Xia, Shang and Zhou tombs and found that none of the artifacts originated from Khotan of Silk Road. The
number of Jade articles included articles for ritual and oblation. The test also eliminated the source of
Jades from other major known Jade mines such as the Liaoning Xiuyan Jade mine in Manchuria and the
Nanyang Dushan Jade mine in Henan Province to rule out the other possibilities. Mt Kunlun, in ancient
China, meant for Mt Qilian Shan, with Kunlun meaning magnificent and heavenly, which the later Huns
also used it in their terminology (Qilian, a word meaning 'Heaven'.) The Book of Documents (Shujing or
Shu-king) is Classic of Chinese History, also known as the Shangshu. It is a collection of rhetorical prose
attributed to figures of ancient China, and served as the foundation of Chinese political philosophy for
over 2,000 years. Guan-zi statement contained a reference which was a misnomer related to the 'Yu-shi'
tribe and not Yuezhi tribe, a term that was erroneously speculated by number of Chinese and foreign
historians. This was an additional mistake of misunderstanding. However, it is recognized that due to
16
difficulty of Chinese languages, it is an easy mistake to make as Wang Guowei, another modern historian
made the same error due to close phonetic.
17
The above archeological and DNA studies debunk the supposed link of Tocharians or Yuezhi people to
jade and Lulian mummies. Yehzhi and Xiongnu at times were contenders as well as allies. Yehzhi people
indeed were the horse traders and brought horses from Khorasan. They traded it to Xiongnu, Zhou,
warring states and Quin Dynasties. The root of trouble appears to be Xiongnu got furious with Yehzhi
because they provided horses to Qin dynasty that enabled them to defeat Xiongnu nomads. Having
clarified these anomalies, we can now move to various central Asian tribes that resided around Bactria
and North West of India.
Fleeing Yuezhi and other tribes due to onslaught of Hunnic tribes Xiongnu-various routes
19
Suggested Map by author based on what Chinese Diplomat reported and Chinese historian recorded. This completes the
Chinese version of the story and recent update on archeology of Jades and DNA testing of Lulian mummies. Nova TV series
gives more details on mystery of Lulian Mummies. http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/nova/chinamum/taklamakan.html
20
The pictures below show the excavations of mysterious 3000-year-old mummies in China's western desert.
The last two pictures of Lulian mummies from Tarim basins clearly indicates Mongolian features
21
The dating from the Chinese prehistory, however, shows that the Qiangic San-Miao people arrived in
the Gansu Province in late Neolithic age of prehistory but were noticed by the Chinese during 7th century
BC, several centuries earlier than the Yuezhi people, irrespective of the ethnicity of Yuezhi people ( either
Indo-European or Mongoloid or mixed ancestry). In reality, the Chinese sources never found the
presence of Yuezhi people further North West in ancient China during Zhou dynasty period. Xiongnu
could have encountered the Yuezhi at the "Great Lake" ("da ze"), namely, the Juyan Lake. In the Juyan-ze
Lake area where the bamboo strips (slips) were discovered, with evidence of the existence of names of
the nine places, 80 years after the first Hunnic attack against the Yuezhi: K'ang (Samarkand), An
(Bukhara), Shih (Tashkent or Kishsh (Kassasa), Mi (Maymurgh or Penjikent), Ts'ao (Kaputana), Ho
(Kushanik, Kusanya), Mu (Murv, or Huoxun of Khwarezmia), and Su (Sudi, Bilinmemektedir). Here, the
significance of this information coming from Chinese source that the each clan was named after the place
they migrated to and records were left behind by the Chinese diplomat. No one knows who left that
information behind? If there were from Yuezhi or someone from Chinese ambassadors party who lost
these records but indicative of the names of various places that tribes took shelters.
general and also the leader of the Wusun country but fiduciary to Xiongnu. Wusun King won many
victories for the Xiongnu and the Wusun emerged as a powerful tribe.
Zhetysu (Kazakh) means seven rivers"; also transcribed as Zhetysu, Jetisu, Jetisu, Jati-su, Jetty-su is a
historical name of a part of Central Asia, corresponding to the South-Eastern part of modern Kazakhstan.
It owes its name, meaning "seven rivers" (literally "seven waters") in Kazakh, to the rivers which flow
from the south-east into Lake Balkhash. See maps below:
Lake Balkash or Black water lake, Ili River and valley and Gansu province of china
Victor Henry Mair is an American sinologist and professor of Chinese history at the University of
Pennsylvania. Victor Mair Compared the word Wusun with Sanskrit Asva (horse), asvin (mare) and
Lithuanian asva (mare). The name would thus mean the horse people. Hence he put forward the
hypothesis that the Wusun used a centum-like language within the Indo-European language family. The
word Wusun comes from Chinese hieroglyphs and phonetically Wusun sounded probably more like
Osun or Asvin or Asva in Sanskrit and in Greek as Asii. The Sabha Parava of the Indian epic
Mahabharata that relates to historical events refers to various northwest tribes as Bahlikas, Daradas,
Kambojas, Dasyus, Lohas, Parama Kambojas, Uttara (Northern) Kuru and Rishikas and Parama Rishikas.
The latter four tribes are by implication placed north of the Hindukush in Central Asia. In his
Mahabhasya, Patanjali refers to the Arshika which are said to be same as the Rishikas. Kasika on Paini
(IV.2.132) also mentions the Arshika and connects them with the Rishikas. The Sanskrit tribal name
Rishikas has Arshika as its adjective form, the Prakrit form is Isi and Isika or Asi and Asika. These all refers
to people involved with horse breeding, training, riding and fighting. Wusun could be Rishikas or Asika or
Uttra Kuru tribe broadly defined by Herodotus as the Scythian (generic term of for saka people). All these
central Asian tribes dwelt in the central Asian steppe in the comparatively infertile regions. Their
movements extended along with the territories south of Caspian Sea, Chorasmia, Sogdiana, Khwarizmi,
Samarkand, and Afghanistan. Around 107 BC, a Han princess married to the Usun (Wusun) Hunmo
composed a song that called the Wusun country is a Sky (Tian) country, and in China the Wusun horses
(Usun ma) were called heavenly horses (Tian ma). Ptolemy (VI, 14, 177 AD) knew one of the Osman tribe,
23
located east of the Volga River. They can be Turanian or Turkic tribes well documented by Nikitin
Afanasy Nikitin (See my paper on Academia)
While there was definite description about the Wusun, there were no such description of Yuezhi and any
later adoption is not accepted by the Chinese archeologist. The alternative historical accounts validate
an important characteristic of the ancient Yuezhi peoples trade profession and that was being the
supplier of horses to Quin and Zhou emperors and not Jade supplier as originally stipulated. The horse
played an important role in warfare and Yuezhi played an intermediary brokerage role in transporting
horses to Chinese emperors. They played most important role between importing horses from SakaKamboja people and selling them to Chinese and others. They became an important military supplier and
that is why Chinese diplomat were sent either to reestablish the trade contacts or find alternate supply
routes after Yehzhi moved. That seems like a plausible explanation and reason for his mission. Otherwise
why worry about two barbarians nomads fighting among themselves from Chinese perspective? It
appears that Yehzhi were more like Wusun Saka or ancestor of Tartar or Turkic people and split the clans
like Vedic people did on moon and sun worship.
history. In his books 41 and 42, he makes the following references regarding the Greek kingdom of
Bactria.
"In Bactrianis autem rebus ut a Diodoto rege constitutum imperium est: deinde quo regnante Scythicae
gentes, Saraucae et Asiani, Bactra occupavere et Sogdianos." Latin from Trogus' Prologue, Book 41
"The report on the history of the Bactrians, first speaks of king Diodotos by whom this realm was
founded. Next, under which Scythian tribes' rulers namely the Saraucae and the Asiani Baktra and the
country of the Sogdians were occupied. Which of the ruler of either of Scythian tribes of Saraucae and
Asiani occupied Bactria and the land of the Sogdians?" Trogus rhetorical question is answered in his
own words where he is suggesting indirectly, Bactria was already leveled and was defeated by one of the
Saka and Asiani tribes but not sure who was the most responsible. According to him both sides were
involved in occupying Bactria. Saraucae means Saka and Asiani means may mean sub clans of SakaKamboja known for horses. This is based on this authors interpretation taking into account Indian
sources. The two additional tribes mentioned by Strabo are not mentioned by Trogus.
The second reference comes from Strabo himself, an Ionian Greek historian (63 BC-24 AD) who mentions
the fall of Bactria in his book called Strabo's Geography 11.8.2. It reads in Greek:
"|
T A
A C K"
This translates literally as follows:
"But the best known of the nomads are those who took away Baktriane from the Greeks; the Asioi and
the Pasianoi, and the Tacharoi and the Sakaraukai, who originally came from the other side of the
Jaxartou [River] that adjoins that of the Sakai and the Sogdoanou and was occupied by the Saki." Here,
he implies that Bactria has already fallen but the occupiers are Asioi, Pasianoi, Tacharoi (Tocharians) and
Sakaraukai (Saka) who came from east side of Amu Darya (Jaxartou) from the direction of Sogdiana.
This is little bit more detailed but not sufficient to give us the reasons for fall. Using Indian sources we
can easily say Asioi and Pasianoi may equate to Kamboja and Param Kambojas, and they also fit into
general categorization of the term Scythians.
Here the indications are that the confederacy was formed under the leadership of Asioi of Saka but it
included Tocharians and who all came from Sogdiana and took away Bactria. The general; information
from strobe is little more specific but not precisely clear in terms of identification of various tribes except
Saka and Tocharian. The classical historians informs us that the Asii, Osii, Ossii, Asoi, Asioi, Asini or
Aseni were an ancient Indo-Iranian people of Central Asia. During the 2nd and 1st Centuries BC, using
above mentioned classical and contemporary Greek and Roman sources, they were one of the peoples
held to be responsible for the downfall of the Greco-Bactrian Kingdom. Historians are confused with their
exact identity and their clans and they equate them either with Yuezhi, Tocharians, Issedones, Wusun
and/or Alans.
25
26
Steppe Nomad warriors with their expertise using horse to fight and travel at great distance
Bactria of history was known to various civilizations with some variations. Greek called it Bactra, Persian
called it Bakhtar or Balkh, Indian called it Bakhdi and its citizens were called Bahlica while Chinese called
it Ta-Hsia or Daxia. It was located in North of Afghanistan near Mazar-I-Sheriff. It is a mountainous
region with a moderate climate. Modern authors have often used the name in a confusing ways, as the
designation of all the countries of Central Asia. All archeological evidence points towards Bactria being
the either a homeland or pass through place of various Indo-Iranian tribes of the history who either
moved south-west into Iran, or towards South in Afghanistan to North Pakistan and North-Western India
around 4000-2000 BC. The exact dates are not precise as the meaning of the word Aryans is still hotly
debated. However, you find many Indian surnames bearing the name Arya. In Behistan inscription,
Darius-1 called him a Kuru Arya. In Jainism, the first five head preachers (equivalent to Pope) bore the
title of Arya while the later ones only carried the title of Acharya (equivalent to head of priestly clan). It
appears that in early history of India, the personal names chosen were either derived from Gotra, place
of their origin or somebodys Putra with an epithet of Arya for Vedic tribes and now that have
disappeared in naming convention.
The Scythian (generic term of Herodotus) included many similar Indo-Iranian tribes such as Jats (Gete),
Maha Jats (Massagate), Druhyus, Parthians and numerous Turkish (Tatar) tribes of central Asia. Due to
their nomadic existence and horse breeding and fighting ability they remain part and parcel of IndoIranian culture and language. These central Asian tribes dwelt in the central Asian steppe in the
comparatively infertile regions. Their movements extended along with the territories to south of Caspian
Sea, Chorasmia, Sogdiana, Khwarizmi, Samarkand, and Afghanistan.
Greco-Bactrian Kingdom was the easternmost part of the Hellenistic world, covering Bactria and
Sogdiana in Central Asia from 250 to 125 BC. It was centered on the north of present-day Afghanistan.
27
The spacious Asiatic dominion consolidated by the genius of Macedonian and his successor appointee
Seleukios Nicator passed in the year 262 or 261 B.C. into the hands of his grandson Antiochos who is
described by classical historian as a drunken sensualist. This worthless prince occupied the throne for
fifteen or sixteen years, but toward the close of his reign his empire suffered two grievous losses by the
revolt of the Bactrians, under the leadership of Diodotos-I, and of the Parthians, under that of Arsakes.
The loss of Bactria was a grievous blow to Macedonian Greeks. Dr. Ranjit Pal, a historian, friend and a
fellow at The Bhanadarkar Oriental Research has analyzed the corresponding events and declared that
Diodotos I was none other than Asoka the Great ancient India and this author has strong suspicion that
his identification is correct for the following reasons.
1. After Antiochos Nicator ouster, Bactria fell back into Indian hands that were snatched away by
Achemenians under military pressure several centuries earlier.
2. Bimbisara Maurya then paramount ruler of India had appointed Asoka as a governor of Northwest that
covered Bactria and Afghanistan (Asoka was called by many names Dev-Dutta, Piyadasi etc.). Greek
classical historians only knew him as Deodotus-1, the governor of Greek satrapy.
3. The dates more or less coincide with Bactrian version (short and long chronology) vs. Asokas historical
dates from classical historical text.
4. Bindusara, an Indo-Greek and son of Chandra Gupta Maurya appointed Asoka as the Governor of
Northeast (Bactria, Afghanistan). His quality as a statesman and warrior General was ideal for controlling
the rogue elements of Northwest. Bindusara dispatched him with several regiments of the Mauryan
army. His elder brother felt that there was growing resentments against Greeks by the warlike saka
tribes. As the news reached that Asokas armies are coming in, the revolting Saka militias welcomed him
and the uprising ended without a fight. The province revolted once more during the rule of Asoka, but
this time the uprising was crushed with an iron fist.
5. Justinian wrote that third Syrian war with Seleucid was a disaster for Seleucid ruling Bactria Diodotos,
the governor of the thousand cities of Bactria (Latin: Theodotus, mille urbium Bactrianarum praefectus),
defected and proclaimed himself the king; all the other people of the Orient followed his example and
seceded from the Macedonians. (Justin, XLI, 4) Diodotos-I reigned Bactria from 250240 BC, at the same
time Asoka reigned. The dates in the text may overlap or vary slightly. The Greek sources like Justinian
and Strabo says that Diodotos, the satrap of Bactria (and probably the surrounding provinces) founded
the Indo-Greek-Bactrian Kingdom when he seceded from the Seleucid Empire around 250 BC and became
King Diodotos-I of Bactria. In 247 BC, the Ptolemaic empire (Egypt) captured the Seleucid capital of
Antioch in west Asia. The resulting power vacuum encouraged the satrap of Parthia to proclaim him as
an independent from the Seleucids, and declaring himself the king. Greek satrap of Bactria was defeated
and killed by Arsaces of Parthia, leading to the rise of a Parthian Empire. This cut Bactria off from contact
with the Greek world and perhaps all contact with the east as well.
6. Asoka ruled Northwestern part of India as a governor (satrap) from 277-268 BC and whole empire from
268-232 BC. This is based on traditional chronology. Justinian further wrote: Diodotos-I was succeeded
by his son, Diodotos II (Dashrath of Indian text), who allied himself with the Parthian Arsaces in his fight
against Seleucus II, At a later time, he fought against Seleucus from west Asia, who came to punish the
28
rebels, and but Arsaces prevailed: the Parthians celebrated this day as the one that marked the beginning
of their freedom. (Justin, XLI, 4). So Strabos comment on Pasianoi may refer to Parthian.
7. from Indian sources, after the death of Asoka, Mauryan empire fragmented and Dashrath who had the
responsibility and probably was known as Diodotos II, saw the rise of rebellion and ultimately the tribal
attack on the capitals and the kingdom succeeded resulting into five regions according Chinese sources.
Witnessing further disintegration of Mauryan Empire, Kujula Kaphdise took control of Kabul and
extended south and emerged as sovereign of ancient India.
Kamboja:
In Khorasan region of central Asia, Indian texts inform us that the Kambojas people were famous in
ancient history for their excellent breed of horses and also being remarkable horsemen for training,
breeding and communicating with horses to obey the commands. They were located in the Uttarapatha
or north-west of India near or above the country of Afghanistan. They formed the military (sanghas)
cavalry and formed the independent corporations to manage their commercial, political and military
affairs. The Kamboja cavalry offered their military services to other nations for monies. There are
numerous references to Kamboja, having been requisitioned as cavalry troopers in ancient wars by
outside nations including the war with Alexander, the Great. It was on account of their supreme position
in control, breeding, training of horses, they were the fore bearers of (Ashva) culture and the ancient
Kambojas were also known as Asvakas, Asii, Asiani etc, (horsemen). Their clans in the Kunar and Swat
valleys have been referred to as Assakenoi and Aspasioi in classical writings, and Ashvakayanas and
Ashvayanas in Pinis Ashtadhyayi.
K. P. Jaiswal, an Indologists wrote:
The Kambojas were famous for their horses and as cavalry-men (asva-Yuddha-Kusalah), Asvakas,
'horsemen', were the term popularly applied to them... The Asvakas inhabited Eastern Afghanistan, and
were included within the more general term of Kambojas. Etienne LaMotte wrote: Elsewhere,
Kamboja is regularly mentioned as "the country of horses" (Asvanam, Ayatanam), and it was perhaps
this well-established reputation that won for the horse breeders of Bajaur and Swat the designation
Aspasioi (from the Old Pali aspa) and Assakenoi (from the Sanskrit Asva "horse").
An Indian historian and Sanskrit scholar Vedveer Arya opines that Kambojas were the original
inhabitants on the banks of Kabul River, Called Cophes by classical historian. He also states that Kubha
was the Vedic (Sanskrit} name and those who were born on the banks of Kubha or Kumbha river were
called as Kubhaja or Kumbhoja. After MH war, Kambhoja may have become fiduciary to Yavanas. The
word Yavanas refers to ancient Ionian Greeks who aligned themselves with Achemenians in war with
Macedonians and that made Alexander very furious. Ancient Bactria then was ruled by Bahlikas who
became fiduciaries of Achemenians kings. The Yavanas (Greeks) may have followed.
It still remains a disputed matter and perhaps the bone of contention that how much and what exact
role Yuezhi themselves had played or in conjunction with others allies in leveling Bactria if the
surrounding tribes had already done the most of the job as described by contemporary Greco-Roman
sources. But, they did help out their fellow traders in return to earn their hospitality for settlement of
their people. We know from the history that all the surrounding tribes resented the dominance of the
29
Macedonian Greeks. The Persians the proud people were just waiting for the opportunity to strike the
blow to avenge the defeat they had suffered few centuries earlier at the hands of Macedonians and
subsequent misrules of Seleucids.
After they destroyed the state of Bactria (Daxia) (From Hou Hanshu text-chapter 88 and
96a) based on report by Chinese ambassador Zhang Qian:
Originally, Daxia had (Bactria) no Central overlord or chief, (presumably after fragmentation of Mauryan
Empire and death of Asoka) and minor chiefs were frequently established in the major towns of kingdom
of Bactria. The Ambassador reported The inhabitants are militarily weak and afraid of fighting, with the
result that when the Yuezhi migrated there, they acted and make them look like all their subjects. They
were asked to provide supplies for Han envoys Zhang Qian and his parties. There are five major Xihou
(Provinces or major city-state). The first is entitled the Xihou of Xiumi (Wakhan) and the seat of
government is at the town of Hemo, it is distant by 2,841 li from the seat of the Protector General and
7,802 li from the Yang Barrier. The second Xihou is of Shuangmi (Chitral) and the seat of government is
at the town of Shuangmi (Chitral); it is distant by 3,741 li from the seat of the Protector General and
7,782 li from the Yang Barrier. The third is entitled the Xihou of Guishuang (Kushan or Kassana or
Kassa), and the seat of government is at the town of Huzao; it is distant by 5,940 li from the seat of the
Protector General and 7,982 li from the Yang Barrier. The fourth is entitled the Xihou of Bidun (Baidun),
30
and the seat of government is at the town of Bomao (Bamiyan); it is at distance by 5,962 li from the
seat of the Protector General and 8,202 li from the Yang Barrier. The fifth is entitled the Xihou of Gaofu
(Kabul), and with the seat of government is at the town of Gaofu (Kabul), it is distant by 6,041 li from the
seat of the Protector General and 9,238 li from the Yang Barrier. All the five Xihou are subject to the Da
Yuezhi. As much as possible, the author have identified some of the old Chinese names of the places in
Afghanistan as listed by the Chinese ambassador, however some names of cities have changed with
Islamic invasion or passage of history and cannot be exactly pin pointed in the map.
According to the above description, the five Xihou were in fact were not created or run by the Yuezhi
people, but they were already there in the state of (second) Daxia (Bactria) prior to their arrival. As
stated in paragraph above, there were no sovereign rulers left to run the country. Greco-Roman sources
agree with the Chinese records. It appears that Greek had already abandoned the rule and left Bactria
and tribes had taken over. After the loss of central authority, the rebellious tribes resurfaced and Bactria
became a boiling caldron. This was well before Yuezhis appearance and their arrival as allies to the local
rebellious group probably speeded the process. Yehzhi was able to provide more manpower (fighters) to
finish the job that was almost done or nearly done.
As a result, each provinces-state carried out its own affairs in its own way and was ruled by a so-called
local chief. The Yuezhi did not alter the system of local Chiefs, but made them allies, so they can
expand their area of influence and receive favors. In a situation like that, it may appear that Yuezhi were
securing influence to settle their people than looking for further conflicts or warfare. There were no
hopes to rule battle tested fearsome tribes of Saka, Kamboja, Parthians that resided in Bactria with their
expertise in hit and run Guerilla warfare tactics. Herodotus aptly described in his book, how Darius-I,
mighty Persian emperor lost his life against Saka queen. They were bound to put up a serious fight, if
they consider Yehzhi came to rule over them in the same way they felt about Greeks. There were no
signs of conflict and their earlier friendship and commercial relationship in trading of horses prevail to
receive settlement rights. As to the use of title of Xihou or province chief, it resembles too much of
Chinese model of five Rongs as described earlier. If this hypothesis is true, the statement in the Hou
Hanshu (chapter 88), that they divided their country in five Xihou is untrue. The Da Yuezhi stayed in
Balkh for a while and crossed Amu Darya and went west to find the peaceful abode.
From this, we see that the Hou Hanshu (chapter 88), repeats exactly the previous historical record in a
mistaken way or due to scribal errors when it mentions the origin of the Guishuang but the
formulation is ambiguous due to its ignorance of the facts, and therefore clarification is needed of the
statement Fan woo Xihou jie shu Da Yuezhi, means all the five Xihou are subject to the Da Yuezhi,
shu means Master. Does this mean five Xihou were in western china as per the above migration map
where they are all spread out geographically including little Yuezhi or their new distribution in new
Daxia(Bactria)? Xihou would be one of the minor chiefs of the Daxia state not the ruler of kingdom.
Since the predecessor of the Kushan Dynasty was considered to be with Chinese pronunciation of
Guishuang with Indian equivalent of Kassasa or Kassana? The so-called tale of Daxia occurs first in
the Shiji (chapter 123), in which it is recorded:
31
Daxia is at a distance of more than two thousand li southwest of Dayuan on the south bank of the Gui
River. The Gui River is a river in the Guangxi Zhuang Autonomous Region of China, and a tributary of the
Xi Jiang. It is formed in Pingle by the confluence of the Li River and Lipu River and flows southeast,
merging with the Xun Jiang to form the Xi at Wuzhou. This description of Daxia is in total contrast with
ambassadors account; this leads us to believe that Daxia is more equivalent to homeland or settlement.
So, the geography in Chinese text that modern historians rely on was misunderstood. Gui River is in
China and not in Bactria.
The additional details are provided by ambassador himself: The people of Daxia are expert traders. The
population of Daxia may amount to more than a million. Their capital is called Lanshi (Zariaspa, Balkh),
and it has markets for the sale of all sorts of merchandise. Southeast of this state is the state of Shendu
(Hindu, Sindhu). These were the observations of Zhang Qian during his first mission to the Western
Regions as an envoy of Han (ca. 130129 B.C.).The state of Dayuan was located in the present Ferghana.
This exactly pinpoint where state of second Chinese Daxia (Bactria) was and that was north of India in
modern day Afghanistan and Turkmenistan- the kingdom of Bactria. There were no barbarians, just
people-civilized and religious.
From here, it appears that colonial historians made a connection of Kushan to Yuezhi in error. Chinese
archeologist have proved that none of the jades come from Khotan and similar sounding tribe was
responsible for supplying Jade, Yuezhi only supplied the war horses as an intermediary broker and they
had commercial contacts with the tribes of Bactria. The red hair of Lulian mummies were also related to
different groups of nomads who called themselves Linzi, resembling Proto-Uighur people of mixed
ancestry of Mongols and Turks who have the red hairs. Indo-European Tocharian peoples language is an
extinct language and part of Centum group (Latin group) that is suggestive that they moved to far west
over the route and for reasons unknown their language was terminated. If they settled in South or
central Asia, they would be part of satem group and not centum group as shown by language tree. But if
they moved west after enjoying the hospitality and crossed Dane river then they became part of Roman
Dacia and occupied a place in Centum Language tree.
Zang Quin, Chinese ambassador also confirms that the main group of Yuezhi group travelled west of Amu
Darya to what was later Roman Dacia (Alans). This is Daxia number # 3, which leads author to believe
that perhaps Daxia meant homeland of Yuezhi people. They settled and mixed there with sarmatians and
other tribes and got absorbed as their language show no continuation to modern times and became part
of Latin group. The elderly, young (little Yuezhi) could have stayed in new Bactrian kingdom and
historians had named them perhaps Kidarites. Jaina historians suggest that King Kanishka assisted many
migrants to settle in Arbuda valley where Rajput clans sprang up. We can say also say that settled Yuezhi,
Kushan, Kamboja and Sakas also comingled. Their principality of Guishang near Kubha (Kabul) was more
powerful and they emerged as a ruling class. Indians during the medieval period called them as Tak-Sak
Rajputs of Turanian or Tocharian and Saka origin. They established their empire from Kumbha (Kabul)
and extended themselves to Vindhya Mountain. Otto Maenchen-Helfen equates Sanskrit Kubha to Kusha
town (Chinese-Kueishuangni).He also agrees with this author that Kushanas and Tocharians have long
disappeared from India and Turkestan. We believe they live in west to the present day. The two
sarmatians nations with who the Greeks on the shores of the Black sea were in relation since the middle
of 1st century BC were the Siroci and the Aorsi. The region inhabitated by Aorsi became later part of Alan
32
realms. Arosi, the numerous tribes could not have simply disappeared. Later only Alans were mentioned
where one would expect Aorsi, As the Alans having gradually subdued the bordering tribes by repeated
victories and united them to themselves and comprehended them under their own name.
Just after the demise of Kushan kingdoms and its fiduciaries, the Tak-Sak Rajput emerged in the Indian
history. With the collapse of Gupta, they took more prominent role during Rajput age. Anangpal Tomar
was the first ruler of Delhi. Turki-shahi dynasty ruled from Kabul. According to James Tod, Toor, Tur,
Tomar were descendants of this new Rajput clan that emerged out of turmoil and massive churning of
the population from central Asia and this created Thirty Six Royal Races of Rajput of Central Asian origin.
After disintegration of Mauryan and Gupta Empire, so called Kshatriya class had vanished from the
history. The legend of Agnikula with Brahmin help resurrected this fighting race to assume their role as
Kshatriya of Vedic age did with the condition they followed Hinduism and they did. They have fulfilled
their mission with dexterities and sincerities. During the Vedic period they were considered Vrtya
Kshatriya because they did not follow Vedic religion, so they became degraded Kshatriya.
Rabatak inscription of Kushanas was written on a rock in the Bactrian language and the Greek script,
which was found in 1993 AD at the site of Rabatak, near Surkh Kotal in Afghanistan. The inscription gives
detailed clues of the genealogy of the Kushan dynasty. Professor Nicholas Sims-Williams along with Prof.
B.N. Mukherji and another review by Mr. Veer Arya, a Sanskrit and language expert of India confirms
that ancestor of Kujula had his name as . Last two scholars agree and this author agrees with them that in
spite of difference that exists with the first reading the ancestor of Kushan was a person named
Saddakshina. That is a Vedic- kamboj name confirmed through ancient text of Mahabharata. It is not
33
uncommon to use the same name that found in Vedic text and therefore they were Vedic Aryans as
Nicholas-Sims suggests. In conclusion, Kushans and Yuezhi were not the same people.
7, Kushan from the evidence supplied by Chinese and Indian sources were the native of Kabul valley,
probably originated from kamboj-saka tribe. Their religion, inscription and artifacts further reinforce
their nationality. They were Indians of ancient India. Under them, the Silk Road trade between east and
west blossomed during Kushan rules. Chinese sources do not mention the religion of Yuezhi but in
Kushan household their hereditary religion was Buddhism which they promoted along the Silk Road to
china. All these information and corroborative evidence leads author to conclude that Kushans were
Buddhist Indians from Afghanistan with little or no relationship to china.
8. In Yuezhi group, those who decided to settle in the subcontinent adapted Satem group languages and
those who crossed Amu darya to Dan River to mix with Sarmatians, Alans at Black sea became part of
Centum Group. Attila the Hun rose form one of the groups to avenge Roman attacks on Dacia and
brought Roman Empire to its knee. Kassasa, Kassana still remains the caste-gotra of Indian people. Attila,
the Hun as per sources was a leader of the Hunnic Empire, a tribal confederation consisting of Huns,
Ostrogoth, and Alans among others, on the territory of Central and Eastern Europe. The question is
where they came from originally?
9. This is one of the key reasons some Slavic groups shows many ancient genes of central Asia and
subcontinent in their DNA profile is because of great churning of people.
Kushan coins(Bactrian-Kharoshthi)script
References
1. The Migration of the Yuezhi through Sogdiana - Transoxiana Eran ud Aneran by Dr. Craig Benjamin
http://www.transoxiana.org/Eran/Articles/benjamin.html
2. Records of the Grand Historian by Sima Qian Han Dynasty II (Revised edition), by B. Watson,
35
14. http://dnareunion.genebase.com/article.php?type=start&page=5
15. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kambojas
16. http://pages.ucsd.edu/~dkjordan/chin/Faashean/Faashean02.html Record of Buddhist Kingdom by
Faxien
17. http://www.jatland.com/home/File:EpicIndia.jpg Epic India
17. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_the_Mahabharata_tribes list of Mahabharata tribes
18. http://www.imperialchina.org/Hun-Qiang-Yuezhi.jpg Hun-Qiang-Yuezhi
19. http://www.imperialchina.org/Barbarians.htm Barbarians
20.
https://www.academia.edu/4660423/Early_Hunic_Invaders_of_Central_Asia_that_influenced_the_histo
ry_of_India_China_And_Eurasia_the_Erection_of_Great_Wall_and_Dark_Period_of_Indian_History By
Bipin Shah
21. Origin of the Kushans, Sino-Platonic Papers, 212 (July 2011), http://jewsandjoes.com/indo-saka-sacaescythian.html
22. the Yueh_Chih problem reexamined, the journal of American Oriental Society, Vol. 65, N0. 2 1945
publication
23. The chronology of Kushans by Vedveer Arya,
https://www.academia.edu/28222312/The_chronology_of_Kushanas
36
24. A new Non Jonesian history of the world, by Dr. Ranjit Pal http://www.ranajitpal.com/
37