Empires of the Silk Road: A History of Central Eurasia From the Bronze Age to the Present Read Online Free PDF

unknown. It could have been a taboo avoidance of the founder’s name or perhaps a scribal mistake that was repeated from one inscription to another, a real possibility because the texts consist in large part of verbatim repetitions of each other. See further Beckwith (2005b).
    18. The Avars’ Chinese name, variously written Jou-jan, Ju-ju, Juan-juan (or Rouran, etc.), has not yet been identified with an otherwise known ethnonym, and their language has also not been identified. As for the controversy over the identification of the Jou-jan with the Avars, the Byzantine Greeks called the new arrivals from the east ’‘Aβα ‘Avars’ from their first contact with them, and the Türk knew them as their former overlords—they were annoyed with the Avars for retaining the title
kaghan
‘emperor’ even after the Türk victory. In his discussion of the “pseudo-Avar” problem, Pohl (1988: 34) rightly notes that the Avars certainly contained peoples belonging to several different ethnolinguistic groups, so that attempts to identify them with one or another specific eastern people are misguided. However, a key point, the significance of which seems not to have been fully appreciated, is that the Avars bore the title
kaghan.
The title is not known to have been used outside of the Eastern Steppe and North China before the Türk defeat of the Avars and pursuit of them across Eurasia, so the Avar ruling clan must be equatable with the Jou-jan ruling clan or one or more legitimate heirs of it. As they are the leaders of the people who settled in Pannonia and became famous in Western sources as Avars, I have referred to them as Avars throughout. On the controversy, see Dobrovits (2004). Careful study of the Jou-jan names in the Chinese sources could shed light on the ethnolinguistic affinities of the Jou-jan; until that is done, speculation on the subject is premature.
    19. The Sasanid comitatus and its members are referred to under several names, the most important of which are
gyânawspâr
(New Persian
jânsipâr)
‘those who sacrifice their lives’ and
adiyârân
(or
adyâwarân
or
yârân;
New Persian
ayyârân)
‘friends, helpers, assistants’. They were an elite corps of fierce mounted warriors, highly skilled archers and swordsmen who were distinguished by their closeness to their ruler and by golden articles of adornment—bracelets, belts, and earrings are especially mentioned—that marked their rank. These strong, valorous, warlike men were the friends of their lord who sat near him in the royal hall during banquets and audiences. The Persian comitatus was “a community of free warriors who, through a ceremonial oath, voluntarily took upon themselves to remain faithful to a lord and constitute his subordinates and followers. To belong to this group was an advantage and brought with it prestige and dignity; on the other hand the increase in numbers would increase the prestige of the lord. The necessary condition for the formation of such a group was the fame of the lord as a successful warrior, probably also his noble descent, and a rich material base. The lord and his men formed a well-equipped, ever war-ready elite-group among the mass of free warriors capable of bearing arms” (Zakeri 1995: 87). This description is practically the definition of the classical comitatus. However, de la Vaissière (2005a: 143–144) states categorically that the Sasanids did not have
châkars
or
ghulâms.
Literally speaking, he is right—the references cited by Zakeri in support of their existence
under those names
in Sasanid times are anachronistic, and Zakeri’s discussion sometimes leaves much to be desired. Nevertheless, the evidence from contemporaneous sources on the Sasanids, and before them the Achaemenids, is certainly there, and it is quite clear: the Persians most certainly did have the comitatus. That means they did have the warriors who were members of this elite guard corps, so the relevant source references, despite