Frataraka
Frataraka ( Prtkr')
Etymology & Epigraphy
Frataraka :“leader, governor, forerunner” (fratara- ; Av. fratara- “fore-, former”; BSogd. prtr; cf. OInd. pratarám, Gk. proteros; Brandenstein and Mayrhofer, p. 119), ancient Persian title, is an epithet or title of Series of Rulers in Persis from 3th BC till mid 2nd BC prior to Parhtian conquest of West Asia and Iran. further details of this fascinating title we can add very detailed explanations of P.Naster , A.Panaino and P.O.Skjaervo respectively as below: In contrast with the later coinage bearing the legend MLK;, the earlier four1)-4) (I series) have PRTRK; ZY ;LHY; (or ;LH), which has recently been Subjected to critical treatment by P. Naster( note 3),of various readings and interpretations of PRTRK;, he has taken up fratakara 'fire-maker', fratadara 'fireguardian,fire-holder' and frataraka 'governor' so as to attain the conclusion thatthe former two are too much tinted with religious color for a designation of the political authority, and has hesitatingly proposed a new interpretation of fratakara, affiliating frata- with πρωτοζ and kara- with OP. kara- 'army; people',i. e. 'premier a l'armee, chef d'armee'. He has further stated that a third reading and interpretation frataraka 'superior; governor' is acceptable in the light of PRTRK/PRTTRK; 'superior; governor' in the Elephantine papyri, but at the same time he seems to have gone too far in saying that a sovereign or prince of Persis would have called himself neither one of frataraka, fratadara, fratakara and fratakara, so that it will be always exaggarated and imprudent to employ in the history political, religious, artistic and numismatic of Persis the expressions in any way improper such as: dynasty of the frataraka or of the fratadara, temple of the fratadara, and other analogous. The connection of Armenian hrat 'fire' with Iranian *frata- dates as far back as to F. Justi and has found many defenders in the 'Fratadara'-theory. But 'the old affiliation of *frata- with Arm. hrat《fire》is to be rejected, because against the supposed affiliation comes the linguistic data that *pur- 'πυρ, fire, Feuer' has been preserved nowhere in the Indo-Iranian domain, If one insist that *frata- itself is the only instance, man may refer to the facts that, on the one hand, the Iranians from the ancient times have expressed 'fire' with atar- with one exception Dastaγni-having-aγni-'fire' in its second member: Av. atar-; OP. and OM. *atar-, *atarbanu-, *atarbarzana- - *atarvanus-; Parth. 'trw, 'trwn, etc.(9); MP. 'twly, 'twl'n, etc.(10); BPahl. 'ths (NP. at as), 'twr (NP. adar), and that, on the other, ;TRPRT (Cowley No. 66, Fragment No. 7, 1.3) would lead to such a nonsense as *Atar-frata- 'Fire-fire'. As for *fratakara ' chef d'armee', proposed hesitatingly by Naster, OIr. *frata- 'primus' is theoretically unacceptable and sachlich 'chef d'armee' is too narrow for a designation of political authority. ;TRPR) above cited may be interpreted as *Atarfrata- 'who loves Fire (-god)'; Φραταφερνηζ(Arrianos: Anabasis III, 8, 4), as *Fratafarnah- 'who loves farnak'; Φραταγουνη(15)(Herod. VII 224), as *Fratagauna- f. 'who loves colour'. *frata- in these forms is to be regarded as another form of frita- (frina-), ppp. of fra(y)- 'love'. For frita- and *f ratato fra(y)-, see mita- and mata-, ppp. of Av. ma(y)- 'measure'. But even if my *frata- may be recognized as such, *Frata-kara- 'who loves the army-people'.
prtrk’ ZY ’LHY’ [Frataraka i bagan]. The problem actually raised by the identification of these ’LHY’ (i.e. bayan or better bagan) The reading of the heterogram ’LHY’ (or ALHYA) needs a brief discussion; notwithstanding some attempts of reading it as yazadan (or yazdan; see, e.g., Koch 1988, pp. 85, 88, who proposes a completely different interpreting of the legend [B GDH W dt KR’ ZY ’LHY’ = andar xwarrah ud dad harw ^ yazdan “unter (mit) dem Xvar™nah und dem Gesetz (Recht) eines jeden der Götter (= aller Götter)”], which has been discussed and criticized by Wiesehöfer 1994, pp. 114–5), the current reading bagan (or bayan) seems to be supported by that of bay = ORHYA, bayan = ORHYAn (in MPI) and of bag = ALH and bagan = ALHYN in the Parthian version of the Sasanian Inscriptions (see Gignoux 1972, pp. 19, 45; cf. Back 1978, p. 14). As far as I know only M.-L. Chaumont (1958, p. 157) read ’LX’ (sic) = bag “dieu” on the coins of the Fratarakas. I do not understand why M. Boyce and Fr. Grenet (1991, p. 111, n. 229a) criticize Humbach’s (1988, pp. 102–3, and n. 33) reading ’lhy’ (elahayya, better ’ælahayya, see Ito 1976, p. 52) considering it a mistake and instead preferring ’lhy. On the coins of Bagdad and of Wadfradad we find only ’LHY’, while, according to Ito (1976, p. 47), on those of Wahbarz and of Ardaπ^r ’LH is attested. In its turn ’LHY’ appears as a plural form (the sg. should have been ’LH’), while the other forms seem to represent the result of an abbreviated orthography as suggested by Ito (1976, p. 53); see now Alram 1986, p. 165-9 who gives only forms with a complete script. See also Bailey 1989, p. 403; Wiesehöfer 1994, p. 104. Skjærvø (1997, p. 102) remarks that here “Aramaic he has already been replaced by h≥eth internally in ’lhy’ (with h≥eth) for ’lh°y’ (with he; see Skjærvø 1993, 186)”. Briefly tracing a history of the problem. it was Humbach (1988, pp. 101-3) who assumed that bayan on this kind of coinage had to be explained as a pluralis maiestatis (used in the place of bay “god”) with reference to the Parthian king to whom the Fratarakas were subject (and consequently prtrk’ ZY ’LHY’ would mean «‘Statthalter der Götter’ im Sinne von ‘Statthalter Gottes’»). Wiesehöfer (1994, p. 136) prudently suggested to the contrary that the present use of bayan could have been possibly based on the pattern of the royal title Theos assumed by Antiochus III (223-187). Thus the Fratarakas would strictly follow an Hellenistic pattern8 by accepting a sort of (nominal) subordination to the Seleucid kings with reference to their very title of bayan = theos in order to legitimize their own local power. The impact of the Hellenistic model has been expressly assumed by M. Boyce and Fr. Grenet (1991, pp. 110-11) who state: «the honorific which these dynasts gave themselves there, “of the gods” (Aramaic zy ’l’hy),
There is no way to determine the legends are intended as Aramics or MP ? on Other hands Aramic HE has already been replaced by heth internally in ‘lhy’ not ORHYAn ( parth ALHYN)br not bre ( Parthian BRY) the legends are therefore most safely classified as Irano-Aramic rather than early MP *( Skjaervo 1995 313-315)Or the one ahead of /by gods .Resemble darius I claim that Ahuramazda mad me king one king of ( among over) many. Shows Frataraka was not title of dynasty but an epithet stating priority of the king among others of divine descent .and title looks a hybrid of Achaemenid King of kings and Seleucid and Arsacids titles of second half of 2nd bc. Connecting king with divinity as was like Seleucid Demetrius II as he called himself king-God and Phraates II call him Theopater as whose father is God. Humbach claimed ‘lhy’ is the plural of majesty for singular Bay god like sasanian MP ORHYA=bay only assumption, and this equality of ORHYA(n)=Bag(an) used for kings not Gods.
Summary
there are many Controversies and Debates about the origin and also datings and Sequnces of Rulers. first Bunch GF Hill (first one to catalog and study them and he opted same as herzfeld to early 3th BC dating) but Alram and historian Wiesehofer all pointed to late dating of them iconographically epigraphically and also semaless continuation of their coinage from first series to second and so on. they argued they ruled by late 2nd BC and ended by mid 2nd Bc after Parthian conquered Persia.
Some scholars such as Museler, Sarkhosh Curtis, Hoover and some how Engles and now Mahdi Ahrabi all believe they have started ruling by 3th BC, and there are plenty of evidence produced by researchers pointing to it. First, there are couple of hoards discovered by Herzfeld since 1930's till now showing existence of Frataraka coins with Seleucus I victories and trophy coins which were issued by him 305-301 BC and if we take the circulation average 20 yeasrs we reach to 285-280 BC and that year coincides with his death and being replaced by his co regent and his son Antiochus I. there were no other coins from other Seleucid rulers discovered with Frataraka hoards suggesting the Frataraka got semi independent and started to strike their coins instead.(actually there were some scarce Alexnader the great and Seleucus I and his co ruler in Persia Antiochus I in Some parts of Persia and some hoards discovered in 1930's and 1960-70's contain coins of them with some Frataraka rulers indicating many interpretations which still is open to conclude). there are other evidences as well. The quite numbers of undertype of Seleucus I on coins of Frataraka rulers also point out to their closeness to first Seleucid king and some early Seleucid influences both in iconography and typology of their coins shows they were ruling Persis in earlier than 2nd BC. The names of some Greek and Macedonian satrap mentioned as late as 222 BC with name Alexandros brother of melon upper satrap befor accession of Antiochus III.
Mahdi TF Ahrabi
See also
References
Alram, M " Nomina propria Iranica in nummis ". 1986
Boyce M & Grenet F. “A History of Zoroastrianism VO: 3 E.J Brill Leiden Publications, 1991, PP110-113
Brandenstein W & Mayrhofer M. "Handbuch des Altpersischen," Wiesbaden, 1964.
Cowley, A.E "Aramaic Papyri of the Fifth Century B.C"., Oxford, 1923.
Curtis, V S "The Frataraka Coins of Persis: Bridging the Gap between Achaemenid and Sasanian Persia" in World of Achaemenid Persia; history, art and society in Iran and the ancient Near East; Edited; 379-396, I. B. Tauris, London; 2010
Klose, D.O. & Müseler W. "Die Münzen aus Persepolis von Alexander dem Großen zu den Sasaniden".(Munich, 2008).
Naster P. “Note G’epigraphie Monetaire De Perside Fratakara,Fratakara,Fratadara” Leiden 1968, PP 74–77
Panaino A. "The Bagan of the Frataraka: Gods or divine kings? "in: C.G. Cereti at al. (ed. s), Religious themes and texts of pre-islamic Iran and Central, Asia, Wiesbaden 2003, pp. 265-288
Skjaervo P.O, ” The Joy of the Cup”. Bulletin of Asia institute ,1997 P 102
Wiesehöfer, J. “PRTRK, RB HYLʾ und MRʾ,” in H. Sancisi-Weerdenburg and A. Kuhrt, eds., Achaemenid History VI. Asia Minor and Egypt: Old Cultures in a New Empire, Leiden, 1991, pp. 305–9.
Wiesehöfer, J. "Die 'dunklen Jahrhunderte' der Persis. Untersuchungen zu Geschichte und Kultur von Fārs". in frühhellenistischer Zeit (330-140 v.Chr.) (Zetemata, 90), München 1994
Wiesehöfer J. "Frataraka Iranica online". 2000,