Wednesday, September 18, 2024

Daniel

 

We can read about the life of Daniel in his own writings in the book of Daniel and also in Ezekiel 14:14, 20 and 28:3. There are some striking similarities between the life of Daniel and that of Jacob’s son Joseph. Both of them prospered in foreign lands after interpreting dreams for their rulers, and both were elevated to high office as a result of their faithfulness to God.

After Nebuchadnezzar, king of Babylon, besieged Jerusalem, he chose noble men from Israel’s royal household who were handsome and showed an aptitude for learning, to be trained in the ways of the Babylonians. After their three years’ training, they would be put into the king’s service (Daniel 1:1-6). Daniel, whose name means “God is my judge,” and his three countrymen from Judea were chosen and given new names. Daniel became “Belteshazzar,” while Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah became “Shadrach," "Meshach," and "Abednego.” The Babylonians most likely gave them new names that were completely disassociated with their Hebrew roots to hasten Daniel and his friends’ assimilation into the Babylonian culture.

Daniel and his compatriots proved to be the wisest of all the trainees, and, at the end of their training, they entered the service of King Nebuchadnezzar. Daniel’s first sign of faithfulness to God was when he and his three friends rejected the rich food and wine from the king’s table, because they deemed it a defilement, and became vegetarians. As their health improved, they were permitted to continue with their chosen diet. In their education, the four men from Judah became knowledgeable in all Babylonian matters, and Daniel was given by God the ability to understand dreams and visions of all kinds (Daniel 1:17).

In the second year of his reign, Nebuchadnezzar was troubled with a dream that he could not interpret. Beyond interpretation, Nebuchadnezzar commanded his magicians, enchanters, sorcerers, and astrologers to also describe his dream. These men were willing to try to interpret the dream if Nebuchadnezzar first told them what it was, but they said that revealing the dream itself was an impossible task for humans. The king decreed that all the wise men, including Daniel and his companions, must be put to death. However, after Daniel sought God in prayer, the mystery of the king’s dream was revealed to Daniel, and he was taken to the king to interpret it. Daniel immediately attributed his ability to interpret dreams to the one true God (Daniel 2:28). The key feature of the dream was that one day there will be a kingdom set up by God that will last forever, and that God’s kingdom will destroy all previous, man-made kingdoms (Daniel 2:44-45). For his wisdom, Daniel was honored by King Nebuchadnezzar and placed in authority over all the wise men of Babylon. At Daniel’s request, his three countrymen were also placed in positions of authority as administrators of Babylon.

Later, King Nebuchadnezzar had another dream, and again Daniel was able to interpret it. The king acknowledged that Daniel had the spirit of his holy God within him (Daniel 4:9). Daniel’s interpretation of the dream was correct. After experiencing a period of insanity, Nebuchadnezzar was restored to health, and he praised and honored Daniel’s God as the Most High (Daniel 4:34-37).

Nebuchadnezzar’s son, Belshazzar, became the new king, and during a banquet he ordered the gold and silver goblets that had been stolen from the holy temple in Jerusalem to be brought out for use. In response to the defilement of such holy items, Belshazzar sees a hand writing on the wall. His astrologers are unable to assist him in its translation, and so Daniel is called upon to interpret the writing (Daniel 5:13-16). As a reward for interpreting the writing, Daniel is promoted by King Belshazzar to the third highest position in the Babylonian kingdom (verse 29). That night, as Daniel had prophesied, the king was slain in battle, and his kingdom was taken over by the Persian Cyrus the Great, and Darius the Mede was made king.

Under the new ruler, Daniel excelled in his duties as one of the administrators to such a degree that King Darius was contemplating making him head over all the kingdom (Daniel 6:1-3). This infuriated the other administrators so much that they looked for a way to bring Daniel down. They could find no wrongdoing on Daniel’s part, so they focused on the matter of Daniel’s religion. Using flattery, the administrators coaxed Darius into issuing a decree forbidding prayers to any god other than the king for the next thirty days. The penalty for disobedience was to be thrown into a den of lions. Daniel disobeyed the edict, of course, and continued to pray openly to the true God. As Daniel made no attempt to hide his activity, he was seen praying and arrested. With much regret the king gave the order for Daniel to be thrown into the lions’ den, but not without a prayer that Daniel’s God would rescue him (Daniel 6:16). The next day, when Daniel was found alive and well, he told the king that God had sent an angel to shut the lions’ mouths and so he had remained unharmed. This miracle resulted in King Darius sending out a decree that all his subjects were to worship the God of Daniel. Daniel continued to prosper throughout King Darius’ reign.

Daniel is also well known for the prophetic dreams and visions God gave him, recorded in the book of Daniel. Daniel’s prophecies cover a broad range of human history, as he predicted the rise and fall of the Greek and Roman Empires and the rise of a powerful king who “will do as he pleases. He will exalt and magnify himself above every god and will say unheard-of things against the God of gods” (Daniel 11:36). Daniel’s “seventy weeks” prophecy spoke of a Messiah who would be killed (Daniel 9:24–27). We saw this prophecy fulfilled with Jesus. The remainder of the prophecy—the seventieth week—will be fulfilled in the end times. Daniel had other apocalyptic visions as well, and understanding his prophecies is important to eschatology.

Daniel exercised great integrity and, in doing so, received the respect and affection of the powerful rulers he served. However, his honesty and loyalty to his masters never led him to compromise his faith in the one true God. Rather than it being an obstacle to his success, Daniel’s continual devotion to God brought him the admiration of the unbelievers in his circle. When delivering his interpretations, he was quick to give God the credit for his ability to do so (Daniel 2:28).

Daniel’s integrity as a man of God gained him favor with the secular world, yet he refused to compromise his faith in God. Even under the intimidation of kings and rulers, Daniel remained steadfast in his commitment to God. Daniel also teaches us that, no matter whom we are dealing with, no matter what their status is, we are to treat them with compassion. See how concerned he was when delivering the interpretation to Nebuchadnezzar’s second dream (Daniel 4:19). As Christians, we are called to obey the rulers and authorities that God has put in place, treating them with respect and compassion; however, as we see from Daniel’s example, obeying God’s law must always take precedence over obeying men (Romans 13:1–7; Acts 5:29).

As a result of his devotion, Daniel found favor with man and with God (Daniel 9:20-23). Notice also in those verses what the angel Gabriel told Daniel about how swiftly the answer to his prayer was dispatched. This shows us how ready the Lord is to hear the prayers of His people. Daniel’s strength lay in his devotion to prayer and is a lesson for us all. It is not just in the bad times but on a daily basis that we must come to God in prayer.



Daniel was likely from an upper-class family in Jerusalem, according to the historian Josephus (Antiquities 10.188).  As such, he was taken to Babylon among a group of nobles and royal family members, as Isaiah prophesied to King Hezekiah: 

“Some of your descendants, your own flesh and blood who will be born to you, will be taken away, and they will become eunuchs in the palace of the king of Babylon.”  (Isaiah 39:7; see also Daniel 1:3)

Along with his three close friends (Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego), Daniel initially served as a trainee in the court of the king who had captured him.

He was then given leading governmental posts under that same King Nebuchadnezzar, and later kings Belshazzar, Cyrus, and Darius.

The chief official in Babylon gave Daniel the name of Belteshazzar, which means “Beltis, protect the king.”

Daniel: Natural Talent + Divine Inspiration = Great Wisdom

Daniel is described as one of the  “young men without any physical defect, handsome, showing aptitude for every kind of learning, well informed, quick to understand, and qualified to serve in the king’s palace”  (Daniel 1:4).

To Daniel and his three friends,  “God gave knowledge and understanding of all kinds of literature and learning.”  (Daniel 1:17)

And that gave them great favour with the king.

“In every matter of wisdom and understanding about which the king questioned them, he found them ten times better than all the magicians and enchanters in his whole kingdom.”  (Daniel 1:19–20)

Yet, it was Daniel who could understand and decipher visions and dreams when no one else in all of Babylon could.

Daniel gained a reputation first as an interpreter of other men’s visions (Daniel 2–5);  then of his own, in which he predicted the future triumph of the Messianic Kingdom (Daniel 7–12).

Several of the visions and dreams Daniel interpreted and the knowledge told to him concern end-time events that are unfolding before us in these last days.

In fact, Yeshua (Jesus) acknowledged Daniel’s end-time prophecies twice in Matthew 24:15 and Mark 13:14.

With all of Daniel’s stunning insight, one might think Daniel would be called a prophet among the Jewish People, but that is not so.

In Christian Bibles, Daniel is honoured as the fourth of the so-called “greater” prophets (rather than placed among the “minor” prophets).

The original Hebrew Bible (Tanakh) is comprised of the Torah (first five books of Moses), Nevi’im (Prophets) and Ketuv’im (Writings).  Together they are known as the T’N’K or Tanakh.

The Book of Daniel is found in the Writings (Ketuv’im) along with the books of Esther, Psalms, Proverbs, and other “non-prophetic” books. Therefore, the book of Daniel is not found in the Prophets (Nevi’im) section, and Daniel himself is not considered a prophet in Judaism.

This is because the Jewish definition of a Biblical prophet is one who had direct communication with God.  Daniel, on the other hand, received divine inspiration by the Holy Spirit (Ruach HaKodesh).  He never actually saw or heard God.

We see this kind of inspiration in both the books of Daniel and Esther.  In fact, in the Book of Esther, the name of God is not even mentioned.

The Jewish heroes of these two books are placed in a pagan kingdom where the Lord does not speak or appear to them the way He does with Isaiah, Jeremiah, and Zechariah; for instance—audibly, visibly, tangibly.

Nevertheless, the men of Babylon clearly saw God’s sovereignty and power in Daniel’s life.  They even told the king:

“There is a man in your kingdom in whom is the Spirit of the Holy God”  (Daniel 5:11).

While prophets also had the Ruach (Spirit) of God with them, the sages say that God’s Spirit gave Daniel a depth of insight and revelation uncommon to prophets.

In this way, Daniel is considered to be a sage.  And in the Talmud we read that “a sage is superior to a prophet”  (Bava Batra 12a).


According to the Rabbis of the Talmud, Daniel was endowed with such an incredible gift of wisdom, that if one were to weigh his wisdom against that of all the wise men of the gentile nations, Daniel’s would outweigh them all (Talmud, Yoma 77a).

As it is written:  “The people who know their God shall be strong and do great exploits”  (Daniel 11:32).

Perhaps Daniel’s divinely inspired wisdom helped him to live a long life, while almost every prophet was killed by the people.

Daniel consistently kept his date with his beloved Lord.  Three times a day, he turned toward Jerusalem to pray (Daniel 6:10–11,16), even though his life was in danger for doing so.

A synagogue’s bima (pulpit) and the aron kodesh (holy ark) that holds the Sefer (Torah scrolls) also faces Jerusalem, just as King Solomon expected people to do when they pray (1 Kings 8:35–36).

As Believers, we can learn a great deal from Daniel’s amazing prayer of repentance and supplication on behalf of his people, his nation, and the Holy City of Jerusalem.

Daniel knew from reading the scrolls of Jeremiah that Israel’s exile in Babylon would last 70 years, and that day was drawing very close (Jeremiah 29:10).

Did Daniel start packing?  Did he alert his Jewish People in Babylon that they would soon return to Israel?  No.  Instead of taking the prophecy for granted, he prayed to God for that promise of restoration to happen.

In many ways, Daniel’s prayer in chapter 9 can be a model prayer for all who seek God to restore their own wayward people and land.

Daniel first came to God humbly  “in prayer and petition, in fasting, and in sackcloth and ashes.”  (verse 3)

He then confessed the sins of the people of Israel that put them in exile.  (verses 5–16)

He affirmed God’s righteousness in judging those sins with exile.

Then Daniel did what Moses and the psalmist often did but many of us often don’t do.  Daniel appealed to God’s reputation as the reason for restoring His people to His city of Jerusalem:

“Lord, forgive!  Lord, hear and act!  For your sake, my God, do not delay, because your city and your people bear your Name.”  (verse 19)

Imagine if God did not restore His people to the very city where He has placed His name—Jerusalem.  Surely, the nations would say, “Where is their God?”  (Psalms 79:10 and 115:2)

And because of Yeshua the Messiah, the Gentiles (non-Jews) are now also God’s “chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, God’s special possession, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light.”  (1 Peter 2:9)


God’s reputation is at stake when we fall, fail, or wander off.  Yet, He is ever-willing to see us prosper and succeed in the calling He gave to us as His special possession.


But we need to come to Him as Daniel did:  humbly, confessing our sins, acknowledging God’s sovereign rule over our lives, and appealing to His own righteous reputation, not to any righteousness of our own.


For we are made to glorify Him and only Him.


Daniel: A Man of Uncompromising Faith

Sometimes having great wisdom is not enough to stay alive in a hostile territory.  In fact, thousands of martyrs have died over the centuries standing up for God.


But Daniel and his three friends had a unique favour and calling on their lives while living in a pagan culture that did not accept Jewish practices, nor the God of Israel.


How did they handle it?


Daniel obeyed God, putting his trust in Him at all times.

Daniel’s legacy has remained strong for over two millennia.  Eight copies of Daniel were found among the Dead Sea Scrolls, which are a testament to Daniel’s popularity in ancient times.


The last mention of Daniel himself is in the third year of Cyrus (Daniel 10:1).


The first century Jewish writer Josephus reported that Daniel’s body lay in a tower in Parthia, Iran, alongside the bodies of the kings of the Medes and Persians.


Later Jewish authorities said he was buried in Susa, Iran and that near his house were hidden the vessels from the Temple of Solomon.

Wherever Daniel’s true burial plot may be, his legacy of faithfulness to his God lives on.


May we be ever-learning, ever-faithful, and ever-prayerful in these days as Daniel was in his.


The Book of Daniel has some of the most incredible prophecies.  Today we ask that you consider sponsoring our Bible Editorial team in their editorial work of the Book of Daniel for the Messianic Prophecy Bible Project.

Nomadic and barbaric tribes of Steppes




The people who lived in Steppes were overwhelmingly horsemen. Many were at least semi-nomadic with herds of livestock. Nomadism explains why there were waves of occupants. These Steppe people, Central Eurasians, traveled to and mated with people in the peripheral civilizations. Herodotus is one of our main literary sources for the Steppe tribes, but he isn't terribly reliable. The people of the ancient Near East recorded dramatic encounters with the people of the Steppe. Archaeologists and anthropologists have supplied more information about the Steppes people, based on tombs and artifacts

.Nomadic peoples dwelling on the Eurasian steppes have historically played a major role in shaping the civilizations of the Near East. On three occasions, nomads quitting their ancestral grasslands for the Near East have changed the course of civilization. Their gateway has been Transoxiana (Arabic Mawarannahr), the lands between the Oxus (Amu Darya) and south of the Jaxartes (Syr Darya) Rivers that today comprise Uzbekistan, western Tajikistan, southern Kazakhstan, Turkmenistan and Kyrgyzstan. This region sustained irrigated agriculture and cities from early Antiquity, but also its grasslands offered pastures for the herds and flocks of nomads. On three occasions, nomadic peoples of the Eurasian steppes crossed the Jaxartes River and entered the Near East. In so doing, they defined the modern Middle East.

The first of these nomadic migrations occurred in the late third millennium BCE, when Indo-Aryan speaking nomads, likely members of the Sintashta Culture, migrated from their homeland between the Ural and Volga Rivers into Transoxiana, then home to the agriculturalists of the Bactria-Margiane Archaeological Complex (also sometimes referred to as the Oxus Culture). These pastoralists brought the modern horse and light chariot that revolutionized warfare across Eurasia in the Late Bronze Age.

The Indo-Aryans, from ca. 1500 BCE, crossed the Hindu Kush into the Indus valley, known in cuneiform texts as Meluuha, and defined the cultural and religious foundations of Hindu India. Centuries later, their Iranian-speaking kinsman, Medes and Persians, followed the route of the later Silk Road across Iran to settle, respectively, in northwestern Iran around Ecbatana (today Hamadan), and in southwestern Iran, Persia (today Fars). Cyrus the Great (559–530 BCE) conquered a vast Persian Empire from the Aegean to the Hindu Kush. The Great Kings of Persia depended on Iranian horse archers, the invincible light cavalry of steppe nomads since the early Iron Age (ca. 1000–700 BCE). Cyrus’ heirs extended the empire from the Nile to the Indus, founding the greatest ancient empire prior to Rome. Iran has ever since been a premier political and cultural power in the Near East. The Iranians, conscious of their imperial heritage, still view themselves as the masters of the Near East.

Later Iranian monarchs of the Arsacid (247 BCE–224 CE) and Sassanid (224–651 CE) dynasties strove to control the lands of Transoxiana, and to guard against the nomadic peoples north of the Jaxartes River. Repeatedly, nomadic peoples — Tocharians, Hephthalites, and Gök Turks — crossed the Jaxartes and wrested Transoxiana from Iranian control. Even so, these lands remained homes to fabled caravan cities, notably Bukhara and Samarkand, and the populations, while embracing many faiths, speaking the eastern Iranian tongue Sogdian — the language of commerce along the Silk Road as late as the eleventh century.


With the Muslim conquest of Iran, the Arab governors of Khorosan (the eastern Iranian plateau), mastered Transoxiana between 673 and 754 and so they succeeded to the task of defending the Jaxartes frontier against nomadic Turkish tribes which had rapidly spread across the Eurasian steppes since the sixth century. As the Caliphate fragmented after the death of al-Amin (809–813), emirs of Iranian or Turkish origin carved out regional states as deputies of the Sunni Abbasid Caliph of Baghdad. They depended on armies of slave soldiers (mamluks) obtained in trade with Turkish tribes on the Eurasian steppes.

With the Muslim conquest of Iran, the Arab governors of Khorosan (the eastern Iranian plateau), mastered Transoxiana between 673 and 754 and so they succeeded to the task of defending the Jaxartes frontier against nomadic Turkish tribes which had rapidly spread across the Eurasian steppes since the sixth century. As the Caliphate fragmented after the death of al-Amin (809–813), emirs of Iranian or Turkish origin carved out regional states as deputies of the Sunni Abbasid Caliph of Baghdad. They depended on armies of slave soldiers (mamluks) obtained in trade with Turkish tribes on the Eurasian steppes.

Finally, the Mongols were the nomads who had the most dramatic impact on the Near East. Many scholars still consider the campaigns of Genghis Khan in 1219–1222 and his grandson Hulagu in 1255–1260 as catastrophic for the civilization of eastern Islam. The large-scale massacres of populations and destruction of cities were without precedent. Hulagu destroyed the strongholds in northern Iran of the Nizarites, known popularly as Assassins, but he also sacked Baghdad and executed the Abbasid Caliph al-Musta’sim Billah in 1258. These Mongol invasions had two long-term consequences.

First, thousands of Iranians and Turks fled west from Transoxiana. Foremost was the Persian poet and mystic Jalal al-din Rumi (1207–1273), the Mevlana, who relocated to Konya and founded the order of the Deverishes who were so vital in converting the Byzantine populations of Asia Minor to Islam. The Mongols also tipped the linguistic balance from eastern Iranian to Turkish languages in Transoxiana. Second, the destruction of Baghdad by Hulagu in 1258 shifted the political and cultural axis of Sunni Islam to Cairo, and, after 1453, to Constantinople (Istanbul), still the two great centers of the Islamic world to this day. Meanwhile, Hulagu and his heirs ruled as the Ilkhans over the western ulus of the four nations of the Mongol Empire comprising Iraq, Iran and Transoxiana The Ilkhans eventually embraced Islam and the high Persian culture of eastern Islam, but the Ilkhanate fragmented in the mid-fourteenth century. Although Tamerlane (1370–1405) briefly aspired to reunite the Mongol Empire, his empire also fragmented upon his death.

The future of Iran rested with a new Turkish nomadic confederation, the Kızılbaşlar (“Red Turbans”), the warriors of the Safavid Shahs who turned Iran into an imperial Shi’ite in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. The Safavid Shahs proved the most dangerous foe to the Ottoman sultans, who united most of Sunni Islam, for mastery of the Near East and the historic Muslim capitals. The geopolitical and religious alignments ultimately wrought by the Mongol invasions, especially the Turkish-Iranian rivalry, have endured down to this day.


 



 

Hunas or Huna were a group of centra Asian tribes who, entered India through khyber pass at the end of the 5th or early 6th century. The Huna kingdom occupied areas as far as Eran and Kausambi greatly weakening the Gupta empire. In its farthest geographical extent in India, the territories controlled by the Hunas covered the region up to Malwa in central India. Their repeated invasions and war losses were the main reason for the decline of the Gupta Empire. The Hunas were ultimately defeated by Skandagupta the ruler of Gupta period.

The first Hun king of any importance was Toramana, who ruled northern India as far as Eran in central India. Toramana's son Mihirakula (A.D. 520) appears to have been more of the Hun as pictured by tradition. A Chinese pilgrim travelling in northern India at the time describes him as uncouth in manner and an iconoclast, especially in his hatred for Buddhism. Inscriptions from central India suggest that the Guptas were still making belated attempts to resist the Huns both by their own efforts and in collaboration with other local rulers.

In the A.D. mid 5th century, the Huns invaded Northwest India. In A.D. 460 they were repulsed by Skandagupta (454-467). The Gupta dynasty in India reigned in the Ganges basin with the Kushan empire occupied the area along the Indus. India knew the Huns as Hephthalite or Huna, the Sanskrit name. The Huns waited until 470 right after the death of Gupta ruler, Skandagupta, and entered the India from the Kabul valley after the conquest of Kushan. They mopped on along the Ganges and ruined every city and town. The noble capital, Pataliputra, was reduced in population to a village. They persecuted Buddhists and burned all the monasteries. Their conquest was accomplished with extreme ferocity and the Gupta regime was completely extinguished.

A number of tribes crossed the Hindu Kush and settled in India and Pakistan and added to South Asia’s cultural diversity. Among the Huns themselves, many converted to Hinduism and they were the ancestors of the great Rajput families of Rajasthan.

Together with the Huns came some other tribes of central Asian tribes and peoples, some of whom remained in northern India and others moved further to the south and the west. Among them were the Gurjaras, who rose to eminence a few centuries later. Some of the tribes who lived in Rajasthan fled from their homeland when they were displaced by the new tribes who became the ancestors of some of the Rajput families, and again were to dominate the history of the north in later centuries. The tide of Hun invasions had receded by the end of the sixth century, when the Turks and the Persians attacked them in Bactria, but as elsewhere the Huns had acted as a catalyst in the affairs of north India.

The Huns, a nomadic group that invaded parts of Europe and Asia during the 4th and 5th centuries, left a significant historical impact, including in India. The primary descendants of the Huns in India are associated with the Huna tribes, particularly the Alchon Huns, who settled in the region around the 5th century.

The Huns are best known for their fear-inspiring leader Attila, the Scourge of God.
These groups are often linked to the Maitraka dynasty in Gujarat and the Vardhana dynasty in northern India. Over time, they assimilated into local cultures and societies, leading to a blending of Hunnic and Indian identities. Some historians suggest that certain groups in northern and western India, such as the Rajputs, may have traces of Hunnic ancestry, although this is often debated.

In summary, the descendants of the Huns in India are primarily identified with the Huna tribes and their influence on various regional dynasties, leading to a complex interplay of cultures over the centuries.
Contrary to contemporary standards, Hunnish women mingled freely with strangers and widows even acted as leaders of local bands. Hardly a great nation, they battled amongst themselves as often as with outsiders and were as likely to fight for as against an enemy -- since such employment offered unaccustomed luxury.

Huns are referred to a cruel and a barbarian tribe, they were divided into 2 groups White Huns and Alchon Huns. White Huns were having their sway over European countries and caused much destruction in European countries. Hun tribes which attacked the countries of Asia were called Alchon Huns. They first of all attacked Persia and captured a large tracts of lands, caused much destruction. They brutally executed thousands of men and women took women and children captives molested women burnt houses, farms, villages everything that came in their way. They moved towards Afghanistan and captured Kandahar (Gandhar at that time) and did much destruction over there. They used most brutal methods of torturing like impaling skinning person alive committing mass rapes, putting children in iron chains. After capturing Kandahar they went on to attack Kashmir and more inside Punjab. They destroyed Kushan dynasty, killed Brahmins and Scholars, destroyed spiritual places, massacred thousands of people burnt houses, farms villages and plundered much of wealth. Cities after cities were destroyed and plundered by Huns. Libraries and Universities were destroyed spiritual books were burnt down, culture of thousands of years was destroyed. 

At that time largest ruling dynasty over India was Gupta empire. Emperor Kumargupta of Gupta empire was grown too much older and was not capable of fighting against such a barbarians in open battle. Two young princes Purugupta and Buddhagupta were not ready to fight against Huns as they were more concerned of their own lives. But Skandagupta who was son of second wife of Kumargupta took the challenge. Skandagupta gathered a strong army to fight against Hun invaders and he himself leaded an army from front. There was a fierce clash between Huns and army of Skandagupta. Army of Skandagupta heavily charged over Huns, soldiers of Skandagupta ruthlessly killed all the barbarians. Remaining fled from the battle to save their life. That is why Skandagupta is regarded as saviour of Ancient India.


 In the 5th century, two of the ancient world's superpowers - Rome and India - were threatened by massive migrations of nomadic peoples. But while the Western Roman Empire collapsed, the Gupta Empire managed to defeat them. How? The answer lies in the story of the shadowy figure known as Skanda-Gupta. 


Skanda-Gupta was a lowborn son of the Gupta emperor Kumara-Gupta, who faced off two deadly challenges and quite literally saved the empire. His actions, however, played out in a larger global context of political turmoil, economic fragmentation, and climate change. This episode recounts his tragic story, from his brilliant campaigns against the Huns to his ignominious death.



Cimmerians
The Cimmerians (Kimmerians) were Bronze Age communities of horsemen north of the Black Sea from the second millennium B.C. The Scythians drove them out in the 8th century. Cimmerians fought their way into Anatolia and the Near East. They controlled the central Zagros in the early to mid 7th century. In 695, they sacked Gordion, in Phrygia. With the Scythians, the Cimmerians attacked Assyria, repeatedly.

The Cimmerians or Kimmerians were ancient horse-riding nomads of Iranic origin. According to the Greek historian Herodotus, the Cimmerians lived in the north of the Caucasus and the Black Sea during the 8th and 7th centuries BC.

CIMMERIANS sĭ mĭr’ ĭ ənz (Gr. Κιμμήριοι). The Gr. name of a people possibly referred to in the OT under the name Gomer (Gen 10:2, 3; Ezek 38:6). Gomer (Gen 10:2, 3) was the oldest son of Japheth and father of Ashkenaz, Riphath and Togarmah. The people called Gomer are allied with the people of Togarmah in the army of Gog (Ezek 38). This people may have been the same as that bearing the name Gimirrai in Assyrian inscrs. of the 8th cent. b.c. and following. Their homeland was in the Ukraine, from where they migrated southward into ancient Urarṭu (modern E Turkey) and became foes of the Assyrians. The name Gomer is also borne by the daughter of Diblaim. She became the wife of Hosea the prophet (Hos 1:3) and bore him three sons.

The Cimmerians lived on the steppes north of the Black Sea until they were driven from their homeland by the Scythians, who had themselves been driven from their own homeland in Central Asia by the nomadic Massagetae.


The Cimmerians fled, passing the Caucasus on the side of the Black Sea, and reached Anatolia. There, they raided the prosperous kingdoms of Phrygia and Lydia, until they were finally defeated by King Alyattes of Lydia (r. 610–560 BC), who went on to conquer all the lands west of the River Halys.


The Scythians pursued the Cimmerians, passing the Caucasus on the side of the Caspian sea, reaching Iran. When the Scythians found out that the Cimmerians had taken another route, they decided to attack the Median kingdom ruled by Cyaxares (r. 625–585 BC) instead. The Scythians ruled the region for 28 years, conducting raids as far as Palestine, until they were finally defeated by Cyaxares, who reclaimed his throne and went on to conquer all the lands east of the River Halys.


This is the story that Herodotus tells us about the Cimmerians and the Scythians (Hdt. 1.103–106 and 4.11–12). It is a remarkably detailed account, certainly when one considers that the events took place at least two centuries before Herodotus’ own time. Before the discovery of Akkadian cuneiform sources, it was generally accepted as true.


This attitude was strengthened when the Akkadian cuneiform sources confirmed the presence of Cimmerians (Gimirri) and Scythians (Ishkuza) south of the Caucasus. Classicists have been interpreting the Akkadian cuneiform sources on the Cimmerians and the Scythians through the lens of Herodotus ever since.


Similarly, archaeologists have tried to find evidence for the Cimmerian and Scythian migrations as described by Herodotus.However, there are some problems with Herodotus’ account that cannot be overlooked.


The archaeological record

First of all, Herodotus claims that there was a thriving Cimmerian culture north of the Black Sea before the arrival of the Scythians. This has led archaeologists to apply the name “Thraco-Cimmerian” to a distinct type of material culture that existed north of the Black Sea and along the banks of the Danube in the ninth to seventh centuries BC.


This material culture consist mostly of luxurious grave goods, including bronze weapons, bronze horse bridles, and bronze jewelry. The cultures most often associated with these “Thraco-Cimmerian” finds are the Chernogorivka culture and the Novocherkassk culture. At first glance, these cultures appear to be good candidates for a Cimmerian homeland. The problem, however, is that no “Thraco-Cimmerian” finds have been found south of the Caucasus.


There is also still some discussion on the question of a Scythian migration from Central Asia. Those who support this hypothesis point out that the first examples of Scythian art have been found in Southern Siberia around 900 BC, reaching the area north of the Black Sea no earlier than the eighth century BC. Those who oppose this hypothesis claim that Scythian art developed naturally from the Chernogorivka and Novocherassk cultures.

Scythian material culture, like “Thraco-Cimmerian” culture, consists mostly of richly decorated grave goods like weapons and horse gear. Unique to Scythian material culture, however, are its lavish use of gold and its impressive animal figurines. Unlike “Thraco-Cimmerian” material culture, Scythian art has, in fact, been attested in the region just south of the Caucasus and in northeastern Anatolia.


The presence of Scythian material culture and the absence of so-called “Thraco-Cimmerian” material culture south of the Caucasus has some interesting implications. First of all, it seems that the Scythian material culture found south of the Caucasus represents not only the Scythians proper, but also the Cimmerians. This, in turn, implies that the Cimmerians were closely related to the Scythians, possibly even a subgroup.


Furthermore, it also implies that the “Thraco-Cimmerian” material culture is not Cimmerian at all. This makes a Cimmerian homeland north of the Black Sea less plausible, unless we assume that the Cimmerians adopted Scythian art styles before migrating to Anatolia.


The route of the Cimmerians

In addition to the lack of “Thraco-Cimmerian” finds south of the Caucasus, there are some practical problems with the Cimmerian migration as described by Herodotus.


Firstly, in order for the Cimmerians to reach the Caucasus, they must have travelled in an easterly direction. This, however, would be quite illogical if the Scythians, who were attacking them, came from the east themselves. Secondly, the notion that the Cimmerians passed the Caucasus on the side of the Black Sea is problematic, as the terrain there is rugged and the coastal plain is very narrow. Although such a migration cannot be ruled out, the Scythian migration on the side of the Caspian Sea makes much more sense, in spite of what Herodotus himself claims (Hdt. 1.104). The coastal plain along the Caspian Sea is much wider.


A final problem with the route described by Herodotus is that Assyrian sources from the reign of Sargon II (r. 721-705 BC) mention the Gimirri (i.e. Cimmerians) as living near Uishdish, a Mannaean kingdom near Lake Urmia. From there, they attacked the kingdom of Urartu somewhere between 720 and 714 BC.


In order to reconcile this information with Herodotus’ account, one has to assume that the Cimmerians travelled from Colchis all the way to Lake Urmia, traversing the entire kingdom of Urartu before attacking the same kingdom from the southeast. Even if we assume that the nomadic Cimmerians were highly mobile, this is still unlikely. If they came from north of the Caucasus, they most likely travelled along the Caspian shore.


What do the Assyrian sources say?

Oracle texts from the reign of Esarhaddon (r. 681-669 BC) again mention the Gimirri among the people of the Zagros region, along with the Mannaeans and the Medes. It is around this time the Gimirri start raiding regions further from their “home” near Lake Urmia.


In 679 BC, they attacked Cilicia and, in 676 BC, they turned to Phrygia. Finally, in the second half of the seventh century BC, they started to raid Lydia. These Anatolian activities of the Cimmerians have understandably become the focus of Herodotus’ account, but initially their main zone of activity appears to have been the northern Zagros.


The same oracle texts also mention the Ishkuza (i.e. Scythians). They state that Esarhaddon forged an alliance with Bartatua, king of the Ishkuza, probably in an attempt to counter the threat of Gimirri, Mannaean, and Median attacks. This Bartatua is known as “Protothyes” in the work of Herodotus.


The son of this Protothyes – Madyes – is said to have conquered the Medes and to have ruled Asia for 28 years, but there is no contemporary evidence for these claims. Perhaps the Ishkuza conducted raids against the Medes, who at that time were little more than a loose confederation of tribes. This may have given rise to the notion of a 28 year Scythian reign.


A tentative reconstruction

Considering these objections to Herodotus’ account, let us now try to reconstruct the real course of events.


First of all, it seems that the Cimmerians (Gimirri) and the Scythians (Ishkuza) were closely related. We may count them both among the “Scythic peoples”. The Gimirri were probably the first among these Scythic peoples to venture south of the Caucasus around 720 BC, arriving in Uishdish after passing the Caucasus on the side of the Caspian Sea. Around 680 BC they were followed by the Ishkuza.


In the 670s BC, king Esarhaddon of Assyria formed an alliance with king Bartatua of the Ishkuza, probably with the intent of keeping the tribes from the Zagros region in check. Bartatua then started raiding the Zagros region, targeting both the Gimirri and the Medes.


As a result, the Gimirri fled to Anatolia, where they continued to raid Phyrgia and Lydia. This is where the notion that the Scythians had driven the Cimmerians from their homeland may have originated.


Meanwhile, the Medes continued to fight Bartatua and his son Madyes, until they gained the upper hand under the leadership of Cyaxares.


The Cimmerian homeland

The question then remains how Herodotus came to conclude that the steppes north of the Black Sea were the original homeland of the Cimmerians. He even claimed that certain monuments and landmarks were named after them. Although there is no conclusive answer, several factors may have played a role.


The Cimmerians most likely did come from north of the Caucasus, although their specific place of origin probably differs from the one mentioned by Herodotus. The notion that the Cimmerians took the western route around the Caucasus may simply be the result of Herodotus’ wish to impose some kind of geographical symmetry on history:


The Cimmerians took the western route around the Caucasus, raided the lands west of the River Halys and were defeated by King Alyattes of Lydia, who thus established his hegemony over the lands west of the Halys.

The Scythians took the eastern route around the Caucasus, raided the lands east of the River Halys and were defeated by King Cyaxares of Media, who thus established his hegemony over the lands east of the River Halys.

A similar desire to impose symmetry can be seen when Herodotus wrongly claims that the courses of the Nile and the Danube run parallel to each other.



Kushan describes one branch of the Yuezhi, an Indo-European group driven from northwestern China in 176–160 B.C. The Yuezhi reached Bactria (northwest Afghanistan and Tajikistan) around 135 B.C., moved south into Gandhara, and established a capital near Kabul.The Kushan kingdom was formed by Kujula Kadphises in c. 50 BC. He extended his territory to the mouth of the Indus so he could use the sea route for trade and thereby bypass the Parthians. The Kushans spread Buddhism to Parthia, Central Asia, and China. The Kushan Empire reached its peak under its 5th ruler, Buddhist King Kanishka, c. 150 A.D
.The Kushans, who ruled the Kushan Empire, came to India from Central Asia, as part of the Yuezhi tribe: 
Origin
The Kushans were a branch of the Yuezhi, a confederation of Indo-European people who lived in northwest China. 
Migration
The Xiongnu drove the Yuezhi west in 176–160 B.C., and they reached Bactria (northwest Afghanistan and Tajikistan) around 135 B.C. 
Movement to India
Under pressure from other tribes, the Kushans moved eastwards towards India in the 1st century AD, defeating the Parthians and the Sakas. 
Empire
The Kushan Empire spanned much of modern-day Afghanistan, Pakistan, and northern India. The empire extended from Khorasan in central Asia to Varanasi in Uttar Pradesh. 


Who were the Kushans?
The Kushans, also known as the Kuei-Shang, were a great Yueh-chi (tribes) principality. Kadphises I unified these five regions into the Kushan Empire during the first century CE. The Kushan movement in India dates all the way back to Kadphises I’s rule in the first century after Christ.

Kushan Empire
The Yuezhi built a syncretic empire in the Bactrian provinces in the early first century, the Kushan State. Inscriptions from the Kushan Emperor Kanishka the Great have been found at Saketa and Sarnath in Varanasi (Benares), where the empire spanned much of modern-day Afghanistan, Pakistan, and northern India.

Origin of the Kushan Empire 
The Kushanas are one of the five branches of the Yuezhi tribe that lived along the Chinese border or in Central Asia
In Chinese sources, they are referred to as Guishuang
They finally surpassed the other Yuezhi tribes in power
In the first century AD, they advanced eastward towards India, conquering the Parthians and Sakas
Kushan Empire – Ruler Kujula Kadphises or Kadphises I [AD 30 – AD 80]
The Kushan Empire in India was founded by Kujula Kadphises, the first Yuezhi chief
He established his supremacy over Kabul, Kandahar and Afghanistan
His son Vima Taktu or Sadashkana (AD 80-AD 95), who expanded the kingdom into northwest India, succeeded him
Kushan Empire – Ruler Vima Kadphises [AD 95 – AD 127]
He was the son of Vima Taktu and the father of Kanishka, according to an inscription discovered at Rabatak, Afghanistan
He had a significant amount of gold coins on his hands
As evidenced by the coins he issued, he was a Shiva devotee
Huge quantities of Roman gold coins discovered during this time period demonstrate India’s affluence at the time, as well as the rising trade with the Romans
Kanishka of Kushan Dynasty [127 AD – 150 AD]
He is often regarded as the greatest Kushan ruler and a renowned king of ancient India
Son of Vima Kadphises
Afghanistan, parts of Sindhu, Parthia, Punjab, Kashmir, parts of Magadha (including Pataliputra), Malwa, Benaras, maybe parts of Bengal, Khotan, Kashgar, and Yarkhand were all part of his realm (last three in modern China). Gandhara, Peshawar, Oudh, Pataliputra, Kashmir, and Mathura were all part of his kingdom. Parts of Uzbekistan and Tajikistan were included in his empire
Peshawar, then known as Purushpura, was his primary capital
He is reported to have brought the Buddhist monk Ashvaghosha with him to Peshawar after capturing Pataliputra
Parsva, Ashvaghosha, Vasumitra, Nagarjuna, Charaka, and Mathara were among the scholars in his court. He also favoured Agesilaus, a Greek engineer
At Kundalvana in Kashmir, Kanishka assembled the fourth Buddhist Council
Although he was religiously tolerant, he was a Buddhist supporter. His coins feature deities from India, Greece, and Zoroastrianism
He was also an art and architecture patron. Under his leadership, the Gandhara School of art flourished
He was also a major proponent of the Mahayana school of Buddhism, which he was greatly responsible for spreading throughout China
He died in an unknown manner
Significance of the Kushan Empire’s achievements
During this time, Sanskrit literature began to emerge. Sanskrit was used to conduct the fourth Buddhist council
The first Sanskrit dramatist is thought to be Ashvoghosha
Three separate art schools developed during this time: the Gandhara School in northwest India, the Amaravati School in Andhra Pradesh, and the Mathura School in the Ganges valley
India and China, as well as India and the Roman Empire, flourished in trade
The Kushanas ruled over significant swaths of the Silk Road, allowing Buddhism to spread throughout China. Buddhism began to expand to Korea and Japan about this time as well
Under the sponsorship of the Kushana rulers, many towers, Chaityas, towns, and exquisite sculptures were created
To begin with, the Kushanas were foreign invaders, yet their methods and culture were totally Indianized
The Kushana period in Indian history is regarded to have been a perfect predecessor to the Guptas’ golden age
Culture and Religion
We have no records of the Kushan Empire’s history in its own language, despite the fact that philosophy, art, and science flourished inside its confines. Zoroastrians, one of the world’s oldest monotheistic religions, founded by the Prophet Zoroaster about 3,500 years ago in ancient Iran, are said to have been the majority religion of the Kushans. Kushan culture combined elements of Buddhism and the Greek civilisation of the Hellenistic kingdoms. Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, and perhaps Saivism, a Hindu offshoot, were among the several religions practised by Kushan rulers.

Kushan Decline 
After Emperor Vasudeva I’s death in 225, the Kushan Empire was split in two. Afghanistan’s western Kushans were rapidly overrun by the Persian Sassanid Empire. As a result of their defeat by the Persians in 248 CE, they were replaced by Persian vassals known as the Indo-Sassanids, who gave up their foreign policy independence in exchange for full autonomy and in some cases, formal tribute.

The eastern Kushan kingdom was based in the Punjab. The Yaudheyas and other local dynasties ruled over their kingdoms on the Gangetic Plain around 270 CE. The Gupta Empire, commanded by Samudragupta, conquered them in the mid-fourth century. The Kushan and Sassanian kingdoms were subsequently overthrown by the Hepthalites, an Indo-European population from the north.

Conclusion
The empire of the Kushanas played a crucial role in civilising the world. Indian civilisation spread across Central and Eastern Asia as a result. China, India, Persia and Mesopotamia all had thriving commercial relations with the Roman Empire. As a result of the Kushans’ influence, Buddhism spread throughout central and eastern Asia and China as well as the development of Gandhara and Mathura schools of painting.

The Kushan Empire was a syncretic empire, founded by the Yuezhi tribal chief, Kujula Kadphises (30 CE – c. 80 CE) in the early 1st century CE. Yuezhi’s ancestral home was on the Chinese frontier but they were forced to move to Central Asia by the Chinese monarch. Kujula Kadphises unites the five principalities of Yuezhi into a powerful monarchy and took possession of Kabul making him the master of the Indian borderland. His successor Vima Kadphises is credited with the conquest of the Indian interior, at least as far as Varanasi.[1] He became a convert to Saivism and proclaimed himself as Mahisvara on his coins. However, the Kushan Empire reached its zenith under the next ruler, Kanishka (78 CE – 101 CE)[2], the son and successor of Vima Kadphises. The Kushan Empire under Kaniska encompasses much of the modern-day territory of Uzbekistan, Tajikistan, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Northern India, at least as far as Sarnath and Patliputa. To rule his vast empire effectively, he established two capitals, one at Purushapura (Peshawar) and another at Mathura.[3]

The Kushans brought ideas of kingship and administration from Central Asia and China and tried them on Indian soil. But it is to be remember that Kushans from Vima Kadphises onwards in the course of their Indianisation also get well-versed in the Indian science of polity and adopted the general administrative machinery described in it. The Kushan kings, some of whom are shown on their coins as holding a sceptre (danda), might have been considered the chief upholder of law and justice as in the Indian tradition the king was made the upholder and administrator of Dharma or Law since the Vedic times.

The house of the Imperial Kushan was the first royal dynasty to inaugurate the practice of adopting grandiloquent titles and propagate the idea of divine kingship in India. They occasionally practised the dual hereditary rule, in which two monarchs governed at the same time. To administer remotely located regions of their empire, they set up the Satrap system of government, which divided the empire into different provinces called satrapies that were each run by a Satrap. Thus, Kushan political organisation did not possess that rigid centralisation that characterised the Mauryan administration. Inscriptions and coins which form the chief source of Kushan polity do not indicate numerous state officials. The functions of the Kushan emperor, suggest that he did not merely reign, but ruled almost as an absolute monarch. He was the head of the administration—civil and also judicial. [4]

 




The Parthians were a nomadic tribe that ruled the Parthian Empire in modern-day Iran for nearly 500 years: 
Origin
The Parthians were originally a nomadic tribe called the Parni, who were thought to be part of the Scythians. 
Empire
The Parthian Empire lasted from 247 BCE to 224 CE, and was centered in modern-day Iran. The empire stretched from the Mediterranean to India and China, and was governed by a small Parthian aristocracy. 
Trade
The Parthians controlled most of the trade routes between Asia and the Greco-Roman world, which made them very wealthy. They taxed caravans that traveled the silk road, carrying Roman goods like fine glassware. 
Archery
The Parthians were known for their archery skill, the "Parthian shot", which involved discharging arrows while in retreat. The term "Parthian shot" is still used today to describe a cutting remark made by someone who is leaving. 
Name
The name Parthian comes from the word parthava, which is related to the word parsa, from which the name Persia comes. Parthava also means champion or strong man. 


Parthia is an ancient land corresponding roughly to the modern region of Khorāsān in Iran.
The Parthians ruled from 247 BCE to 224 CE, creating a vast empire that stretched from the Mediterranean in the west to India and China in the east.
East of the Caspian Sea there emerged from the steppe of Central Asia a nomadic Scythian tribe called the Parni.
Later called the Parthians and taking over the Seleucid Empire and fending off the Romans, they established themselves as a superpower in their own right.
The Parthian Empire was founded by Arsaces I of Parthia, when he rebelled against the Seleucid Empire
The Parthian kingdom had its reach from Turkey to eastern Iran.
The largest of these sub-kingdoms, the Indo Parthian kingdom, located west of the Parthian homeland, was founded in the late 1st century BC by the first of several kings named Gondophares, who was a Scythian (Saka) king
Their first capital city was Taxila in present- day South Central Pakistan. Later they shifted their capital city between Kabul and Peshawar.
History

Gondophares at around 20–10 BC, made conquests in the former Indo-Scythian kingdom, perhaps after the death of the important ruler Azes.
Gondophares became the ruler of areas comprising Arachosia, Seistan, Sindh, Punjab, and the Kabul valley.
After the death of Gondophares I, the empire started to fragment.
Later, the name or title Gondophares was adapted by Sarpedones, who become Gondophares II and was possibly son of the first Gondophares.
After a short reign, Sarpedones seems to have been succeeded by Orthagnes, who became Gondophares III Gadana
Despite many successors, the Indo-Parthians never regained the position of Gondophares I; as from the middle of the 1st century AD the Kushans under Kujula Kadphises began absorbing the northern Indian part of the kingdom.


The Parthian Empire
The word "Parthia" is originally traced to an inscription recorded in 520 BCE by the Achaemenian King Darius I, who referred to "Parthava," a land corresponding approximately with Khorasan in modern Iran. Later the term would come to refer to an empire, the beginnings of which would be established in this same area in 247 BCE. The origins of the Parthian Empire are not clear to historians, though tradition tells us that the first emperor was named Arsaces I, a former governor under the Bactrian Greeks. It is believed that sometime in the last decades of the third century BCE, Arsaces took up arms against his Greek monarch and established his own kingdom of Parthia. Arsaces and his successors consolidated their control over lands south of the Caspian Sea, and through a number of military campaigns, began to build an empire.

By the end of the second century BCE, the Parthians controlled all of the Iranian Plateau, the Tigris-Euphrates river valley, and much of Syria. They established their first treaty in 92 BCE with their future rivals, the Romans, in an effort to defeat their common enemy, the Seleucids. As the Seleucids weakened, the Parthians absorbed much of their territory. By the middle of the first century BCE, the Parthian Empire was at its zenith, both stable and strong.

Aristocrats appointed as regents by the Parthian throne ruled the empire on the local level. In the first few centuries of their empire, this Parthian ruling class continued to observe many aspects of Hellenistic culture that had characterized the upper levels of society under the Greco-Bactrian kings. Greek inscriptions and Greek-style portraiture mark early Parthian coins, bearing witness to this "Hellenophilic" stage of the Parthian Empire. Later, the Parthian kings began to redefine themselves as the direct heirs of the Achaemenian Empire; Mithridates II (123-87 BCE) is believe to be the first Parthian ruler to use the old Achaemenian title "King of Kings" on his coins, rather than the corresponding Greek title. From this time on, Parthian culture developed as a synthesis of Greek and Achaemenian culture, with local Iranian patterns gradually supplanting Hellenistic elements.

The Parthians controlled the overland trade routes between Asia and the Mediterranean, a position that brought great financial prosperity. Parthian merchants became very wealthy as resellers of Central Asian and Chinese wares, particularly silk. Parthian crafts and products were also widely traded, with textiles and woven fabrics in particularly high demand.

It appears that various religions were practiced in Parthia with minimal conflict, though Zoroastrianism gained increasing importance over the centuries. Buddhism was practiced in the easternmost reaches of the Parthian Empire, and Parthian religious scholars are known to have undertaken missions to China in order to study with Han-era Buddhist teachers.1

Beginning in the first century BCE, the Romans and Parthians engaged in a series of indecisive wars that lasted for almost three hundred years. They fought primarily over Syria, Mesopotamia and Armenia, with the lands passing first to Roman hands, and then back to the Parthians in successive battles. Since this did more to deplete resources on both sides than to achieve any lasting results, the resulting stalemate gave way to almost a century of peace.

In 114 CE, Roman forces once again pushed into Parthia, and in the ensuing campaigns, Rome was able to permanently retake territories that had earlier passed back and forth between them and Parthia. The Parthians were able to avoid complete defeat and held onto much of the Iranian plateau, but the end of the second century saw a weakening of the central Parthian power base. By the time of the last war with Rome in 195, a number of regents had became wealthy and powerful enough to defy the central authority of the throne, and refused to supply taxes and soldiers. In 224, internal rebellion led by the king of Pars grew into civil war. The last Parthian king, Artabanus V, was killed in battle by Parsian king Ardashir I, who went on to reunite Iran under the new Sassanian Empire.

Archaeology and sources

The city of Taxila is thought to have been a capital of the Indo-Parthians.
The nearby temple of Jandial is usually interpreted as a Zoroastrian fire temple from the period of the Indo-Parthians.
The Periplus of the Erythraean Sea is a surviving 1st century guide to the routes commonly being used for navigating the Arabian Sea.
It describes the presence of Parthian kings fighting with each other in the area of Sindh, a region traditionally known at that time as “Scythia” due to the previous rule of the Indo-Scythians.
Further, an inscription from Takht-i-Bahi bears two dates, one in the regnal year 26 of the Maharaja Guduvhara (thought to be a Gondophares)
Main Indo-Parthian Rulers Period
Gondophares I c. 19 – 46
Gondophares II Sarpedones first years AD – c. 20 AD
Abdagases I first years AD – mid-1st century AD
Gondophares III Gudana, previously Orthagnes c. 20 AD – 30 AD
Gondophares IV Sases mid-1st century AD
Ubouzanes late-1st century AD
Pacores late 1st century AD


The Scythians

The Scythians (Sakans to the Persians) lived in the Steppes, from the 7th to the 3rd century B.C., displacing the Cimmerians in the area of Ukraine. Scythians and Medes may have attacked Urartu in the 7th century. Herodotus says the language and culture of the Scythians were like that of nomadic Iranian tribes. He also says Amazons mated with Scythians to produce the Sarmatians. At the end of the fourth century, the Scythians crossed the Tanais or Don River, settling down between it and the Volga. Herodotus called the Goths Scythians.



Sarmatians
The Sarmatians (Sauromatians) were a nomadic Iranian tribe related to the Scythians. They lived on the plains between the Black and Caspian Sea, separated from the Scythians by the Don River. Tombs show they moved west into the Scythian territory by the mid-third century. They demanded tribute from Greek towns on the Black Sea, but sometimes allied with the Greeks in fighting the Scythians.

The Scythians (Sakans to the Persians) lived in the Steppes, from the 7th to the 3rd century B.C., displacing the Cimmerians in the area of Ukraine. Scythians and Medes may have attacked Urartu in the 7th century. Herodotus says the language and culture of the Scythians were like that of nomadic Iranian tribes. He also says Amazons mated with Scythians to produce the Sarmatians. At the end of the fourth century, the Scythians crossed the Tanais or Don River, settling down between it and the Volga. Herodotus called the Goths Scythians.

07
of 07
Xiongnu and Yuezhi of Mongolia
The Chinese pushed the nomadic Xiongnu (Hsiung-nu) back across the Yellow River and into the Gobi desert in the 3rd century B.C. and then built the Great Wall to keep them out. It is not known where the Xiongnu came from, but they went to the Altai Mountains and Lake Balkash, where the nomadic Indo-Iranian Yuezhi lived. The two groups of nomads fought, with the Xiongnu triumphant. The Yuezhi migrated to the Oxus valley. Meanwhile, the Xiongnu went back to harass the Chinese in about 200 B.C. By 121 B.C. the Chinese had successfully pushed them back into Mongolia and so the Xiongnu went back to raid the Oxus Valley from 73 and 44 B.C., and the cycle began again.