SCYTHIA. story of the Servile War of Whips belongs to this period. SCYTHIA 941 When the approach of Darius becomes threatening, the Geloni, Budini, and Sauromatae join with the Scythians in resisting it; the Agathyrsi, Neuri, Androphagi, Melanchlaeni, and Tauri reserving themselves for the defence of their own territory if attacked (iv. 119). To the three constituents of the confederacy there are three kings, Scopasis, Ianthyrs us, and Taxacis, each with an allotted district to defend. This was done by destroying the grass and tillage, driving off the flocks and herds, and corrupting (we can scarcely translate σvyxoù by Thucydides mentions the Getae and Scythians poisoning) the wells. The points whereon attack was anticipated were the frontiers of the Danube and the Don. These they laid waste, having sent their but once (ii. 96), and that together. The great The first alliance that Sitalces, king of Thrace, effects against own wives and children northwards. brunt of the war fell upon the Budini, whose Perdiccas of Macedon includes the Getae beyond Wooden City was burnt. Darius then moved south- Mount Haemus, and, in the direction of the Euxine ward and westward, pressing the other two divi- sea, the Getae who were conterminous (8μopo) with sions upon the countries of the Melanchlaeni, Neuri, the Scythians, and whose armour was Scythian men (irrоToğóra); whereas the Dii and the mounand Agathyrsi. The latter warn the Medes against (8μóσKevoL). They were each archers and horseencroaching on the frontier. Idanthyrsus answers enigmatically to a defiance of Darius. Scopasis tam-taineers of Rhodope wore daggers. According to Ovid pers with the Ionians who have the custody of the (Trist. v. 7. 19), the occupants of the level country The Medes suffer from do so too :bridge over the Danube. dearth, and determine to retreat across the Danube. The Scythians reach the passage before them, and require the Ionians to give it up. And now appears, for the first time, the great name of Miltiades, who is one of the commanders of the guard of the bridge. He advises that the Scythians should be conciliated, Darius weakened. A half-measure is adopted, by which the Scythians are taught to distrust the Ionians, and the Medes escape into Thrace -so ending the Scythian invasion of Darius. (Herod. iv. 120-142.) Criticism of the Herodotean Accounts.-The The Agathyrsi were in Transylvania, on the "Dextera non segnis fixo dare vulnera cultro, Quem vinctum lateri barbara omnis habet." THE SCYTHIANS OF THE MACEDONIAN PERIOD. -Passing over the notices of Xenophon, which apply to Thrace Proper rather than to the parts north of Mount Haemus, and which tell us nothing concerning the countries beyond the Danube, — passing, also, over the notices of a war in which and in which he crossed Mount Haemus into the Philip king of Macedon was engaged against Atheas, -we come to the passage of the Danube by Alexcountry of the Triballi, where he received a wound, ander. In the face of an enemy, and without a bridge, did the future conqueror of Persia cross the river, defeat the Getae on its northern bank, destroy a town, an invasion of Scythia in a geographical sense only; and return. (Arrian, Anab. i. 2-7.) This was still it was a passage of the Danube. The Getae of Alexander may have been descendants of the Sigynnes When Alexander was on the Danube the famous of Herodotus. They were not, eo nomine, Scythians. embassy of the Galatae reached him. They had heard of his fame, and came to visit him. They were men of enormous stature, and feared only that the heavens should fall. This disappointed Alexunder, who expected that they would fear him. Much has been written concerning the embassy as Wherever there is a Halicz or Galacz in if it came from Gaul. Yet this is by no means nemodern geography, there may have been a Galat-ian cessary. man or Carman-ia, there may have been a German locality in ancient; just as, wherever there is a KerThe roots G-l-t and or Germani of the West. one, and that without any connection with the Galli tongues to in the Sarmatian and Turk tongues K-ron-n, are simply significant geographical terms which the Getic and Scythian may most probably be referred. Such is the present writer's opinion respecting the origin of the statements that carry certain Galatae as far as the Lower Danube, and make the Basternae, and even the occupants of the Tanais, Germans - not to mention the Caramanians of Asia Minor and Carmanians of Persia. In the present instance, however, the statement of Strabo is very | Panticapaean potentates. Eumelus lost bis life by specific. It is to the effect that the ambassadors to being thrown out of a four-wheeled wagon-and-four Alexander were KéλToi Tepì tòv ’Adplav (vii. p. 301), with a tent on it. and that Ptolemy was the authority. Nevertheless, Ptolemy may have written гaλáraι, and such Galatae may have been the Galatae of the Olbian Inscription. [See infra and SCIRI.] The next Macedonian who crossed the Danube was Lysimachus, who crossed it only to re-cross it in his retreat, and who owed his life to the generosity of a Getic prince Dromichaetes. This was about B. C. 312. Our next authorities (fragmentary and insufficient) for the descendants of the Herodotean Scythians are the occupants of the Greek towns of the Euxine. Even those to the south of the Danube, Callatis, Apollonia, &c., had some Scythians in the neighhood, sometimes as enemies, sometimes as protectors,-sometimes as protectors against other barbarians, sometimes as protectors of Greeks against Greeks, as was the case during the Scythian and Thracian wars of Lysimachus. The chief frontagers, however, were Getae. Between Olbia, to the north of the Danube (=Olbiopolis of Herodotus), and the native tribes of its neighbourhood, the relations are illustrated by the inscription already noticed. (Böckh, Inscr. Graec. no. 2058.) It records a vote of public gratitude to Protogenes, and indicates the troubles in which he helped his fellow-citizens. The chief of those arose from the pressure of the barbarians around, by name Saudaratae, Thisametae, Sciri [see SCIRI], Galatae, and Scythae. The date of this inscription is uncertain; but we may see the import of the observations on the word Galatae when we find the assumption that they were Gauls of Gallia used as an instrument of criticism:-"The date of the above inscription not spceified; the terror inspired by the Gauls, even to other barbarians, seems to suit the second century B. C. better than it suits a later period." (Grote, Hist. of Greece, vol. xii. p. 644, note.) What, however, if the Galatae of Wallachia were as little Galli as the Cermanians of Persia are Germans, or as Galacz is the same as Calais? The present writer wholly disconnects them, and ignores the whole system of hypothetical migrations by which the identity is supported. SCYTHIANS OF THE MITHRIDATIC PERIOD, ETC. - The Scythians pressed on Parysades IV., who called in Mithridates, who was conquered by Rome. The name now becomes of rare occurrence, subordinate to that of the Sarmatae, Daci, Thracians, &c. In fact, instead of being the nearest neighbours to Greece, the Scythae were now the most distant enemies of Rome. In the confederacy of the Dacian Boerebistes, in the reign of Augustus, there were Scythian elements. So there were in the wars against the Thracian Rhescuporis and the Roxolani. So there were in the war conducted by J. Plautius in the reign of Vespasian, as shown by the following inscription: REGIBUS BASTERNARUM ET RHOXOLANORUM FILIOS DACORUM... EREPTOS REMISIT... SCYTHARUM Quoque rege a CHERSONESI QUE EST ULTRA BORYSTHENEM OBSIDIONE SUMMOTO. (Grut. p. 453; Böckh, vol. ii. pt. 1. p. 82; Zeuss, s. v. Skythen.) Though the history of the Scythians, eo nomine, be fragmentary, the history of more than one Scythian population under a change of name is both prominent and important. In the article HUNNI reasons are given for believing that the descendants of the Herodotean Agathyrsi, of Scythian blood, were no unimportant element in the Dacian nationality. After the foundation of Constantinople the Scythian nations appear with specific histories and names, Hun, Avar, &c. The continuity of the history of the name of the Herodotean Scythians within the Herodotean area is of great importance; as is the explanation of names like Galatae and Germani; as also is the considera. tion of the sources whence the nomenclature and information of the different authorities is derived. It is important, because, when we find one name disappearing from history, and another appearing, there is (according to, at least, the current criticism) a presumption in favour of a change of population. Sometimes this presumption is heightened into what is called a proof; yet the presumption itself is unreal. For one real change of name referrible to an actual change of population there are ten where the A second Olbia in respect to its Helleno-Scythic change has been merely one in respect to the sources relations, was Bosporus, or Panticapaeum, a Greek whence the information was derived, and the chansettlement which lasted from B. C. 480 till the reignnels through which it came. This is what occurs of Mithridates. [PANTICAPAEUM.] From Bosporus there was a great trade with Athens in corn, hides, and Scythian slaves,-Scythes, as the name of a slave, occurring as early as the time of Theognis, and earlier in the Athenian drama than those of Davus and Geta (Dacian and Getic) which belong to the New Comedy,-Scythes and Scythaena being found in the Old. The political relations were those of independent municipalities; sometimes sovereign, sometimes protected. The archons of Bosporus paid tribute to the Scythian princes of their neighbourhood, when they were powerful and united: took it, when the Scythians were weak and disunited. Under this latter category came the details of the division of the Maeotae, viz., Sindi, Toraeti, Dandarii, Thetes, &c. Of these, Parysades I. (a Scythic rather than a Greek name) was king, being only archon of his native town. In the civil wars, too, of Bosporus, the Scythians took a part; nor were there wanting examples of Scythian manners even in the case of the when the same country of Deutschland is called Germany by an Englishman, Allemagne in France, Lamagna in Italy. This we know to be nominal. We ought at least to ask whether it may not be so in ancient history—and that not once or twice, but always-before we assume hypothetical movements and migrations. Now in the case of Scythia we can see our way to great nominal and but slight real changes. We see the sources of information changed from Greek to Latin, and the channels from Getic and Macedonian to Dacian. If so, the occupants of Hungary, the Principalities, and South-western Russia under the Caesars may be the descendants of the occupants of the same districts in the time of Herodotus. That there are some differences is not only likely but admitted,—differences in the way of admixture of blood, modification of nationality, changes of frontier, differences of the kind that time always effects, even in a stationary condition of nations. It is only denied that any wholesale change can be proved, or even reasonably supposed. Who can be shown to have eliminated any definite Scythian population from any definite Scythian occupancy? With the Greeks and Romans the negative evidence is nearly conclusive to the fact that no such elimination ever took place. That the Barbarians might have displaced each other is admitted; but there is no trustworthy evidence to their having done so in any single instance. All opinions in favour of such changes rest upon either the loose statements of insufficiently-informed writers, or the supposed necessity of accounting for the appearance and change of certain names by means of certain appearance and changes of population. The bearings of this will appear in the notice of the Ethnology of Scythia. They appear also under HUNNI. Of the SACAE, eo nomine, the history is obscure. In one sense, indeed, it is a nonentity. There is no classical historian of the Sacae. How far the ethnologist can infer them is a question which will be treated in the sequel. Of the history of the populations akin to the Sacae, the details are important; but then it is a history of the Massagetae, Parthi, &c., a history full of critical preliminaries and points of inference rather than testimony. The Scythia of all the authors between Herodotus and Ptolemy means merely the country of the Scythae, the Scythae being such northern nations as, without being, eo nomine, Sarmatian, were Hamaxobii and Hippemolgi; their habits of milking their mares and travelling in tented wagons being their most genuine characteristic. These it was which determined the views of even Strabo, whose extension of Germania and Galatia (already noticed) | left him no room for a Scythia or even a Sarmatia; Sarmatia, which is to Ptolemy as Germania was to Strabo: for the Sarmatia of Ptolemy leaves no room in Europe for a Scythia; indeed, it cuts deeply into Asiatic Scythia, the only SCYTHIA OF PTOLEMY.-The Scythia of Ptolemy is exclusively Asiatic, falling into, 1. The Scythia within the Imaus. 2. The Scythia beyond the Imaus. SCYTHIA INTRA IMAUM.-Bounded on the S. and E. by Sogdiana, Margiana, and the Sacae; on the W. by the Caspian and Sarmatia Asiatica; on the N. by a terra incognita; and on the E. by the northern prolongation of the Imaus. (Ptol. vi. 14.) Rivers. The Rhymmus, the Daix, the Jaxartes, the lastus, and the Polytimetus. Mountains. The eastern part of the Montes Hyperborei, the Montes Alani (observe the reappearance of this name), the Montes Rhymmici, the Mons Norossus, the MM. Aspisii, Tapyri, Syebi, Anarei,— all W. of the Imaus. Populations.-The Alani Scythae (on the confines of the terra incognita), the Suabeni, the Alanorsi, S. of whom the Saetiani, and Massaei, and Syebi; and (along the Imaus) the Tectosaces and (on the eastern head-waters of the Rha) the Rhobosci, S. of whom the Asmani; and then the Paniardi, S. of whom, along the river, the district called Canodipsas, S. of which the Coraxi; then the Orgasi, after whom, as far as the sea (i. e. the Caspian, in this chapter called Hyrcanian), the Erymmi, with the Asiotae on the E. of them, succeeded by the Aorsi; after whom the Jaxartae, a great nation along the river of the same name; then S. of the Saetiani, the Mologeni and Samnitae, as far as the MM. Rhymmici. Then, S. of the Massaei and MM. Alani, the Zaratae and Sasones; and further W. and as far as the MM. Rhymmici, the Tybiacae, succeeded by the Tabieni, S. of the Zaratae, and the Iastae and Machaetegi along the Mons Norossus; S. of whom the Norosbes and Norossi, and the Cachagae Scythae along the Jaxartae. On the W. of the MM. Aspisii, the Aspisii Scythae; on the E. the Galactophagi Scythae; E. of the MM. Tapuri and the Suebi, the Tapurei ; and above the MM. Anarei and the Mons Ascatancas, the Scythae Anarei, and the Ascatancae and Ariacae along the Jaxartes, S. of whom the Namastae; then the Sagaraucae, and, along the Oxus, the Rhibii, with their town Davaba. SCYTHIA EXTRA IMAUM was bounded by Scythia intra Imaum, the Sacae, the Terra Incognita, and the Seres. It contained the western part of MM. Auxacii, Casii and Emodi, with the source of the This is a geographical division, not an ethnological one. Scythae Alauni are especially recog-river Oechardus. (Ptol. vi. 15.) nised as a population of European Sarinatia. As Ptolemy's Sarmatia seems to have been formed out of an extension of the area of the Herodotean Sauromatae, his Scythia seems to have grown out of the eastern Scythae of the Herodotean Scythia, i. e. the Scythae of Orenburg. It did not grow out of the country of the Sacae, inasmuch as they are mentioned separately; even as the Jazyges of the Theiss were separated from the Sarmatians. The continuator, however, of the Herodotean account must make the Sacae Scythians. They may be disposed of first. THE SACAE OF PTOLEMY were bounded by the Sogdians on the west, the Scythians on the north, and the Seres on the east. They were nomads, without towns, and resident in woods and caves. The mountain-range of the Comedi ( Kwundŵr open) was in their country; so was the Stone Tower (Aldos Пúpyos). The populations were: 1, 2. The Caratae and Comari along the Jaxartes. 3. The Comedae, on the Comedian mountain. The Massagetae along the range of the Ascatancas 4. Its Populations were the Abii Scythae, the Hippophagi Scythae, the Chatae Scythae, the Charaunaei Scythae; the designation Scythae being applied to each. Districts.-The Auxacitis, the Casia ( Karía xúpa), the Achasa (ǹ 'Axáσa xúpa). Towns.-Auxacia, Issedon, Scythica, Chaurana, S eta. The remarks that applied to the Sarmatia Asiatica of Ptolemy apply here. Few names can be safely identified. Neither is it safe to say through what languages the information came. Some words suggest a Persian, some a Turk source, some are Mongol. Then the geography is obscure. That the range of Pamer was unduly prolonged northwards is evident [IMAUS]; this being an error of the geographer. The courses, however, of the Oxus and Jaxartes may themselves have changed. The prolongation of the Pamer range being carried in a northern and north-eastern direction, so as to include not only the drainages of the Oxus and Jaxartes, but that of the Balkash Luke as weil, gives N. being supposed to begin with the watershed of the | Irtish, Obi, and other rivers falling into the Arctic Ocean. Within the limits thus described we may place the Nor-osbi and Nor-ossi, on the eastern edge, i. e. in the parts where at the present moment the lakes distinguished by the name Nor occur. It should be added, however, that the syllable is generally final, as in Koko-nor, &c. Still it is a prominent element in compound names, and indicates Mongol occupancy. The Byltae may be placed in Bulti-stan, i. e. the country of the Bulti-Little | Tibet, the gloss being Persian. In Ascatancas (the Greek spelling is the more convenient Aσka-тά у к-αS), we have the Turkish -taghmountain just as it actually occurs in numberless compounds. Karait is a name of common application, chiefly to members of the Mongol family. Mass-agetae is a term full of difficulty. Can it have arisen out of the common name Mus-tag? In Scythia extra Imaum, the Casia and Achassa (x@pa) may be made one and identified with the Cesii of Pliny. The most reasonable explanations of these names is to be found in the suggestion of Major Cunningham's valuable work on Ladak (p. 4), where the Achassa Regio Ladakh, and the Chatae, and Chauronae Scythae Chang-thang and Khor respectively. Roughly speaking, we may say that the country of the Sacae was formed by an irregular tract of land on the head-waters of the Oxus and the watershed between it and the Jaxartes, a tract which included a portion of the drainage of the Indus. It is only a portion of this that could give the recognised conditions of Scythian life, viz. steppes and pasturages. These might be founded on the great table land of Pamer, but not in the mountain districts. These, however, were necessary for "residences in woods and caves"; at the same time, the population that occupied them might be pastoral rather than agricultural. Still they would not be of the Scythian type. Nor is it likely that the Sacae of Ptolemy were so. They were not, indeed, the Sacae of Herodotus, except in part, i. e. on the desert of the Persian frontier. They were rather the mountaineers of Kaferistan, Wakhan, Shugnan, Roshan, Astor, Hunz-Nagor, and Little Tibet, partly Persian, partly Bhot (or Tibetan), in respect to their ethnology. The Scythians beyond the Imaus.-These must be divided between Ladakh, Tibet, Chinese Tartary, and Mongolia in respect to their geography. Phy. sically they come within the conditions of a Scythian occupancy; except where they are true mountaineers. Ethnologically they may be distributed between the Mongol, Bhot, and Turk families—the Turks being those of Chinese Tartary. The Turcoman districts of the Oxus, Khiva, the Kirghiz country, Ferghana, Tashkend, with the parts about the Balkash, give us the Scythia within the Imaus. It coincides chiefly with Independent Tartary, with the addition of a small portion of Mongolia and southern Siberia. Its conditions are generally Scythian. In the upper part, however, of the Jaxartes, the districts are agricultural at present; nine-tenths of this area is Turk, part of the population being Nomades, part industrial and agricultural. It is used, however, but rarely. It really existed only in books of geography. Every division of the Scythian name was known under its specific designation. ETHNOLOGY.-If any name of antiquity be an ethnological, rather than a geographical, term, that name is Scythia. Ptolemy alone applies it to an area, irrespective of the races of its occupants. With every earlier writer it means a number of populations connected by certain ethnological characteris tics. These were physical and moral-physical, as when Hippocrates describes the Scythian physiognomy; moral, as when their nomadic habits, as Hamaxobii and Hippemolgi, are put forward as distinctive. Of language as a test less notice is taken; though (by Herodotus at least) it is by no means overlooked. The division between Scythian and non-Scythian is always kept in view by him. Of the non-Scythic populations, the Sauromatae were one; hence the ethnology of Scythia involves that of Sarmatia, both being here treated together. In respect to them, there is no little discrepancy of opinion amongst modern investigators. The first question respecting them, however, has been answered unanimously. Are they represented by any of the existing divisions of mankind, or are they extinct? It is not likely that such vast families as each is admitted to have been has died out. Assuming, then, the present existence of the congeners of both the Sarmatae and the Scythae, in what family or class are they to be found? The Scythae were of the Turk, the Sarmatae of the Slavono-Lithuanic stock. The evidence of this, along with an exposition of the chief differences of opinion, will now be given, Scythia being dealt with first. Premising that Turk means all the populations whose language is akin to that of the Ottomans of Constantinople, and that it comprises the Turcomans, the Independent Tartars, the Uzbeks, the Turks of Chinese Tartary, and even the Yakuts of the Lena, along with several other tribes of less importance, we may examine the à priori probabilities of the Scythae having been, in this extended sense, Turks. The situs of the nations of South-western Russia, &c., at the beginning of the proper historical period, is a presumption in favour of their being so. Of these the best to begin with are the Cumanians (12th century) of Volhynia. That they were Turk we know from special statements, and from samples of their language compared with that of the Kirghiz of Independent Tartary. There is no proof of their being new comers, however much the doctrine of their recent emigration may have been gratuitously assumed. The Uzes were what the Cumanians were; and before the Uzes, the Patzinaks (10th century) of Bessarabia and the Danubian Principalities were what the Uzes were. Earlier than the Patzinaks, the Chazars ruled in Kherson and Taurida (7th and 8th centuries) like the Patzinaks, in the same category with definitely known Cumanians and Uzes. These four populations are all described by writers who knew the true Turks accurately, and, knowing them, may be relied on. This knowledge, however, dates only from the reign of Justinian [TURCAE]. From the reign, then, of Justinian to the 10th century (the date of the break-up of the Cumanians), the Herodotean Scythia was Turk-Turk without evidence of the occupation being recent. The Avars precede the Chazars, the Huns the = Avars, the Alani the Huns. [HUNNI; AVARES]. | -get- in words like Massa-get-ac, &c., is supposed to The migrations that make the latter, at least, re- Goth German. Then there are certain names cent occupants being entirely hypothetical. The which are Scythian and Persian, the Persian being evidence of the Huns being in the same category as Indo-European. In the extreme form of this hythe Avars, and the Avars being Turk, is conclusive. pothesis the Sacae Saxons, and the Yuche of the The same applies to the Alani-a population which Chinese authors - Goths. brings us to the period of the later classics. The conditions of a population which should, at one and the same time, front Persia and send an offset round the Caspian into Southern Russia, &c., are best satisfied by the present exclusively Turk area of Independent Tartary. Passing from the presumptuous to the special evidence, we find that the few facts of which we are in possession all point in the same direction. Physical Appearance. This is that of the Kirghiz and Uzbeks exactly, though not that of the Ottomans of Rumelia, who are of mixed blood. Allowing for the change effected by Mahomet, the same remark applies to their Manners, which are those of the Kirghiz and Turcomans. Language. The Scythian glosses have not been satisfactorily explained, i. e. Temerinda, Arimaspi, and Exampaeus have yet to receive a derivation that any one but the inventor of it will adinit. The oior-, however, in Oior-pata is exactly the er, aer, man, &c., a term found through all the Turk dialects. It should be added, however, that it is Latin and Keltic as well (vir, fear, gwr). Still it is Turk, and that unequivocally. The evidence, then, of the Scythae being Turk consists in a series of small particulars agreeing with the à priori probabilities rather than in any definite point of evidence. Add to this the fact that no other class gives us the same result with an equally small amount of hypothesis in the way of migration and change. This will be seen in a review of the opposite doctrines, all of which imply an unnecessary amount of unproven changes. The Mongol Hypothesis.-This is Niebuhr's, developed in his Researches into the History of the Scythians, &c.; and also Neumann's, in his Hellenen im Skythenlande. It accounts for the manners and physiognomy, as well as the present doctrine; but not for anything else. It violates the rule against the unnecessary multiplication of causes, by bringing from a distant area, like Mongolia, what lies nearer, i. e. in Tartary. With Niebuhr the doctrine of fresh migrations to account for the Turks of the Byzantine period, and of the extirpation of the older Scythians, takes its maximum development, the least allowance being made for changes of name. "This" (the time of Lysimachus) "is the last mention of the Scythian nation in the region of the Ister; and, at this time, there could only be a remnant of it in Budzack" (p. 63). The Finn Hypothesis.-This is got at by making the Scythians what the Huns were, and the Huns what the Magyars were-the Magyars being Finn. It arises out of a wrong notion of the name, Hungary, and fails to account for the difference between the Scythians and the nations to their north. The Circassian Hypothesis.-This assumes an extension of the more limited area of the northern occupants of Caucasus in the direction of Russia and Hungary. Such an extension is, in itself, probable. It fails, however, to explain any one fact in the descriptions of Scythia, though valid for some of the older populations. The Indo-European Hypothesis. — This doctrine takes many forms, and rests on many bases. The = If the Scythians were intruders from Independent Tartary, whom did they displace? Not the Sarmatians, who were themselves intruders. The earlier occupants were in part congeners of the Northern Caucasians. They were chiefly, however, Ugrians or Finns; congeners of the Mordvins, Tsheremess, and Tshuwashes of Penza, Saratov, Kazan, &c.: Dacia, Thrace, and Sarmatia being the original occupancies of the Sarmatae. If so, the ethnographical history of the Herodo tean Scythia runs thus :-there was an original occupancy of Ugrians; there was an intrusion from the NE. by the Scythians of Independent Tartary, and there was intrusion from the SW. by the Sarmatians of Dacia. The duration of the Scythian or Turk occupancy was from the times anterior to Herodotus to the extinction of the Cumanians in the 14th century. Of internal changes there was plenty; but of any second migration from Asia (with the exception of that of the Avars) there is no evidence. Such is the history of the Scythae. With The Sacae were, perhaps, less exclusively Turk, though Turk in the main. Some of them were, probably, Mongols. The Sacae Amyrgii may have been Ugrians; the researches of Norris upon the second of the arrow-headed alphabets having led him to the opinion that there was at least one invasion of Persia analogous to the Magyar invasion of Hungary, i. e. effected by members of the Ugrian stock, probably from Orenburg or Kazan. them the root m-rd man. History gives us no time when the Turks of the Persian frontier, the Sacae, were not pressing southwards. Sacastene (= Segestan) was one of their occupancies; Carmania probably another. The Parthians were of the Scythian stock; and it is difficult to believe that, word for word, Persia is not the same as Parthia. The history, however, of the Turk stock is one thing; the history of the Scythian name another. It is submitted, however, that the two should be connected. This being done, the doctrine of the recent diffusion of the Turks is a doctrine that applies to the name only. There were Turk invasions of Hungary, Turk invasions of Persia, Turk invasions of China, Assyria, Asia Minor, and even north-eastern Africa, from the earliest period of history. And there were Sarmatian invasions in the opposite direction, invasions which have ended in making Scythia Slavonic, and which (in the mind of the present writer) began by making parts of Asia Median. Lest this be taken for an exaggeration of the Turk influence in the world's history, let it be remembered that it is only a question of date, and that the present view only claims for the Turk conquests the place in the antehistorical that they are known to have had in the historical period. With the exception of the Mongol invasions of the 13th century and the Magyar occupancy of Hungary, every conquest in Southern Asia and Europe, froin the North, has been effected by members of the stock under notice. [See SARMATIA; VENEDI; FENNI; SITONES; TURCAE.] [R. G. L.] SCYTHI'NI («voioí, Xen. Anab. iv. 7. § 18; ZKOÚOOL, Diod. xiv. 29; Σkvenvoí, Steph. B. s. v.), an Asiatic people dwelling on the borders of Armenia, between the rivers Harpasus on the E. and |