of the fourth century BCE (Naveh and Shaked 2012). Among the Greek sources, the reports relating to pre‐Achaemenid Bactria by Ctesias and Xenophon are controversial, while Herodotus knew little more than the earlier geographer Hecataeus. Similarly, the historicity of the presence in Bactria and Sogdiana of Mediterranean communities like the Barceans cited by Herodotus (4.204), or the Branchidae by Curtius Rufus (7.5.28–35), cannot be confirmed by any archeological site. Besides rare non‐dated “Persian” short inscriptions (Kandahar and Ai Khanum), most of the texts related to the Achaemenid presence belong to the later Aramaic tradition (inscriptions of Ashoka and later evidences from Bactria, Parthia, Margiana, and Chorasmia). The administration illustrated by the Graeco‐Bactrian inscriptions of Ai Khanum and Graeco‐Bactrian parchments recently discovered to the north of the Hindukush must be partly considered as the Hellenistic heir of the Achaemenid financial and fiscal system. The glyptics, however, is practically not represented (Francfort 2013).
From a literary point of view, the analysis of the Achaemenid past of the region relies mainly on the Graeco‐Roman sources relating to Alexander and his successors (Briant 2020; Rapin 2018).
Cities and Archeological Settlements
The field studies are rather scarce for fixing the precise hierarchy, nature, and evolution of the archeological sites (Figure 23.1). Besides the capitals of the satrapies, the territory comprised several large cities, probably at the head of the hyparchies, as well as regional castles, not to mention the villages or isolated settlements.
Figure 23.1 Map of the eastern part of Central Asia at the moment of the fall of the Achaemenid Empire and route of Alexander the Great in 330–327 BCE according to the most recent researches.
The capitals mentioned by the classical texts have been only partly excavated: Gorgan (in Hyrcania; Zadracarta was Sari in Tapuria), Merv (Erk‐kala, founded during the early Iron Age, later named Antiochia of Margiana, while Alexandria of Margiana was possibly more to the south in the region of Kushka), Herat (Artacoana/Alexandria in Aria), Begram (Kapisa in Paropamisadai), Balkh (Bactra in Bactria), Samarkand‐Afrasiab (Maracanda or Zariaspa in Sogdiana), and Nur‐tepe near Kurkat (Cyropolis or Cyreschata in Scythia‐Ustrushana, between Zaamin/Alexandria Eskhate? and Khojent/Antiochia Scythica). The capital of Oxiana (near which Alexander probably founded his Alexandria Oxiane) was somewhere in the center of the Sherabad‐darya district, not far from Sherabad, Talashkan‐tepe, or Jandavlat‐tepe (Rapin 2018).
Though their status is not precisely established, several large cities centered on the main oases, on crossroads and strategical positions, were probably the heads of the Achaemenid hyparchies. Besides Bactra, the south of the Oxus was controlled by cities such as Altyn Dilyar, Cheshme‐Shafa (infra), and Kohna Qala (“Ville ronde”) near Ai Khanum (*Oskobara/Eucratidia) along the “Ochus” river/Darya‐i Panj. Mentioned by the Bactrian parchments and the classical sources, Khulm/Tashkurgane (Khulmi), Qunduz (Varnu/Aornos), Drapsaka in the region of Surkh‐kotal, and Hulbuk (Cholbisina) have still to be explored. In Sogdiana, two cities controlled the Kashka‐darya valley: Kiš/Nautaca near Shahr‐i Sabz (sites of Uzunkyr, Padayatak‐tepe, and Sangir‐tepe) and Nikhšapaya/Xenippa near Karshi (site of Erkurgan). Other cities are represented by Koktepe (probably ancient Gava and Gabai, capital of Sogdiana until Cyrus), Kyzyl‐tepe (Gazaba? in Paretacene), Bandykhan, etc. North‐west of Termez (later Antiochia Tharmata), sites like Shor‐tepe (Tarmantis?) near Kampyr‐tepe (later Pandokheion) controlled the principal ford on the Oxus. The situation of Chorasmia differs since its Achaemenid sites developed later.
A Sogdian City from the Iron Age to the Hellenistic Period
The reconstitution of the political, social, and economic institutions relies on rare excavated sites (Figure 23.2). The study is mainly limited to military features represented by a citadel and large lines of fortifications (Afrasiab, Erkurgan, Uzunkyr, Koktepe, etc.), which not only englobed the proper monumental quarters but in times of danger had to shelter also the population of the region and the herds (these sites must be distinguished from the temporary fortresses or “rocks” occupied by the last Achaemenid Sogdian governors who opposed Alexander near the Iron Gates: Rapin 2018). The later Hellenistic cities like Ai Khanum reflected the same urban guidelines.
Figure 23.2 General plan of Koktepe/Gava (Sogdiana). Koktepe II (last pre‐Achaemenid period): A and B) large monuments (A: sanctuary; A2: altar?). Koktepe III (Achaemenid period): C: central sacred platform; D: southeastern platform. Koktepe IV (early Hellenistic period); E: fortification; F: barracks.
Mirroring the best explored Achaemenid cities to the south of the Oxus (Altyn 10 in Bactria with its close parallel of Dahan‐i Ghulaman in Seistan), the site of Koktepe provides an example of long‐term urban development of the northern areas, in both agricultural and nomadic contexts (Rapin and Isamiddinov 2013).
Since the artifacts do not usually provide easy benchmarks in absolute chronology, the analysis relies on the stratigraphy, mainly on the changes which affected monumental architecture of fortifications, palaces, and sanctuaries during the successive political transitions. Established on a natural plateau near the Bulungur canal to the north of Samarkand, the earliest urban settlement of Koktepe appeared in the Yaz I agricultural context. It is not clear whether the city was fortified like the similar sites of Chust and Dalverzin‐tepe in Ferghana, but its regional importance was enhanced by the presence of apparently “official” monuments and a dense habitat. After it was abandoned, the site was devoted to pastoral activities for a couple of centuries.
Before the Achaemenids, Koktepe (Koktepe II period) appears as the major settlement of the Zeravshan, probably under the name of Gava, one of the cities mentioned in the early Avestan geography. Two large fortified courtyards appear on the plateau, one of religious function and the other, later complemented by a row of large rooms, grouping probably political, administrative, and economic functions. These buildings sheltered the primitive institutions of a “proto‐urban” organization in the context of a regional power which probably emanated from the sedentarization of the Scythians and evolved into a first stage of the Sogdian state. A thick fortification several kilometers long around the plateau must probably be attributed to this period (rather than to the Achaemenids who later, probably under Darius I, fortified Afrasiab itself on a length of more than 5.5 km). It is not excluded that the other oases followed a parallel process, for instance in the Kashka‐darya (ancient Kiš) and along the Kopet Dagh (fortification program of El’ken‐depe III, “Median” architecture of Ulug‐depe I: Lecomte 2013).
From an archeological point of view, the transition toward the Achaemenids is rarely attested. Some sites are then abandoned (for example, Ulug‐depe). At Koktepe the transition occurred apparently through a drastic change of architectural patterns marked by the erection of two platform buildings, the southeastern one having been built a little later than the central one (Koktepe III architectural phase). This renewal of the symbols of authority coincides probably with the takeover of the region by Cyrus and Darius I. At the end of the Achaemenid period, however, Koktepe was no more than a regional fortress (known by the historian
