Satrap (Persian: ساتراپ) was the name given to the governors of the provinces of ancient Median and Persian empires, including the Achaemenid Empire and in several of their heirs, such as the Sassanid Empire and the Hellenistic empires.
Satrap is derived from the Old Persian xšaθrapāvā ("protector of the province"), from xšaθra ("realm" or "province") and pāvā ("protector"). In Biblical Hebrew, the word is spelled אֲחַשְׁדַּרְפָּן ahashdarpān (only in the plural אֲחַשְׁדַּרְפְּנִים ahashdarpenim). In Greek, the word was rendered as σατράπης, satrápēs, and was romanized as satrapes, from the Old Persian xšaθrapā(van)). In modern Persian this would have naturally evolved to شهربان (shahrban). "Sharban" , translated from the Farsi, means "keeper of the town";(ﺷﻬﺮ "shar", meaning "town", ﺑﺍﻦ "ban" meaning "keeper"). There is a link, via Sanskrit, to the warrior class of India, the kshatriya.
The word satrap is also often used in modern literature to refer to world leaders or governors who are heavily influenced by larger world superpowers or hegemonies and act as their surrogates.
Medo-Persian satraps
The first large scale use of satrapies, or provinces, originates from the conception of the first Persian Empire under Cyrus the Great, beginning at around 530 BC. However, Provincial organization originated during the Median era from at least 648 BC.
Up to the time of the conquest of Media by Cyrus the Great, Median emperors ruled their conquered territories as provinces, through client kings and governors. The chief difference was that in Persian culture the concept of kingship was indivisible from divinity: divine authority validated the divine right of kings. The twenty satraps established by Cyrus were never kings, but viceroys ruling in the king's name, although in political reality many grabbed any chance to carve themselves an independent power base. Darius I gave the satrapies a definitive organization, increased their number to twenty-three and fixed their annual tribute (Behistun inscription).
The satrap was the head of the administration of his province, and found himself surrounded by an all-but-royal court; he collected the taxes, controlled the local officials and the subject tribes and cities, and was the supreme judge of the province before whose "chair" (Nehemiah 3:7) every civil and criminal case could be brought. He was responsible for the safety of the roads (cf. Xenophon), and had to put down brigands and rebels.
He was assisted by a council of Persians, to which also provincials were admitted; and was controlled by a royal secretary and by emissaries of the king, especially the "eye of the king" who made an annual inspection and exercised permanent control.
There were further checks on the power of each satrap: besides his secretarial scribe, his chief financial official (Old Persian ganzabara) and the general in charge of the regular army of his province and of the fortresses were independent of him and reported directly to the shah, periodically, in person. But the satrap was allowed to have troops in his own service.
The great satrapies (provinces) were often divided into smaller districts, the governors of which were also called satraps and (by Greco-Roman authors) also hyparchs (actually Hyparkhos in Greek, 'vice-regents'). The distribution of the great satrapies was changed repeatedly, and often two of them were given to the same man.
As the provinces were the result of consecutive conquests (the homeland had a special status, exempt from provincial tribute), both primary and sub-satrapies were often defined by former states and/or ethno-religious identity. One of the keys to the Achaemenid success (as with most enduring great empires) was their open attitude to the culture and religion of the conquered people, so ironically the Persian culture was the one most affected as the Great King endeavoured to melt elements from all his subjects into a new imperial style, especially at his capital Persepolis.
Whenever central authority in the empire weakened, the satrap often enjoyed practical independence, especially as it became customary to appoint him also as general-in-chief of the army district, contrary to the original rule. "When his office became hereditary, the threat to the central authority could not be ignored" (Olmstead). Rebellions of satraps became frequent from the middle of the 5th century. The great usurper Darius I struggled with widespread rebellions in the satrapies, and under Artaxerxes II occasionally the greater part of Asia Minor and Syria was in open rebellion.
The last great rebellions were put down by Artaxerxes III.
The term "Satrap" is found in the Old Testament (of the Holy Bible) in the books of Esther (3:12, 8:9 and 9:3), Ezra (8:36)and most commonly in Daniel (3:2,3:3,3:27,6:1,6:2,6:3).
Hellenistic satraps
The satrapic administration and title were retained—even for Greco-Macedonian incumbents—by Alexander the Great, who conquered the empire and even enlarged it, and by his successors, the diadochi (and their dynasties) who carved it up, especially in the Seleucid empire, where the satrap generally was designated as strategos; but their provinces were much smaller than under the Persians. They would ultimately be replaced by conquering empires, especially the Romans.
Parthian and Sassanian satraps
In the Parthian Empire, the king's power rested on the support of noble families who ruled large estates, and supplied soldiers and tribute to the king. City-states within the empire enjoyed a degree of self-government, and paid tribute to the king. Administration of the Sassanid Empire was considerably more centralized than that of the Parthian Empire; the semi-independent kingdoms and self-governing city states of the Parthian Empire was replaced with a system of "royal cities" which served as the seats of centrally appointed governors called shahrabs as well as the location of military garrisons. Shahrabs ruled both the city and the surrounding rural districts.
Satraps today
By analogy, the word satrap is also used anachronistically for various governors, especially in the Orient, whose real title is etymologically independent, such as the shaknu and bel pihati in the earlier Assyrian (and consecutive [New] Babylonian?) empire, about the first of such size west of the Far East, which rather seems the model for the provincial concept.
It is also used in modern times to refer (usually derogatively) to the loyal, subservient lieutenants or clients of some powerful figure (with equal imprecision also styled mogul, tycoon, or the like), in politics or business.
In the Hungarian language a slightly changed version of the word, satrafa refers to old women, often mothers-in-law, who always quarrel and try to force their will on others.
In the Spanish language the word sátrapa carries not only the aforementioned ancient historical meaning, but in modern usage it also applies to people who abuse power or authority. It can refer as well to those living in luxurious and ostentatious conditions or to individuals who act astutely and even disloyally.
The title is also used by the College of Pataphysics as Transcending Satrap for certain of its members, among which were counted such peoples as Marcel Duchamp, Jean Baudrillard and the Marx brothers.
References
A. T. Olmstead, History of the Persian Empire, 1948
Pauly-Wissowa (comprehensive encyclopaedia on Antiquity; in German)
Robert Dick Wilson. The Book of Daniel: A Discussion of the Historical Questions, 1917. Available on home.earthlink.net
Rüdiger Schmitt, "Der Titel 'Satrap'", in Studies Palmer ed. Meid (1976), 373–390.
This article incorporates text from the Encyclopædia Britannica Eleventh Edition, a publication now in the public domain.
Satrafa szavunk makedón-hellénisztikus közvetítéssel juthatott a parthus, illetve a magyar nyelvbe
Szatrapa, satraphV: az óperzsa ékiratokban khsatrapávan, vagyis «ország ura, védője»; tartományok kormányzójának perzsa elnevezése; a római szerzők a praetor (Cic. fin. 5, 30) vagy praefectus (Nep. Dat. 2. Jsut. 5, 1) szóval fordítják. A s. tartományának birói, közigazgatási és hadi ügyeit intézte, sőt pénzt is verhetett; másrészt azonban a király titkos kémek által ellenőrizte legfőbb emberét. Xen. Cyr. 8, 6, 16 skk. Hdt. 3, 89 skk. 128. Az első, a ki a perzsa birodalmat satrapiákra osztotta, Darius király vala. Kr. e. 515-ben. Kezdetben 20 satrapia volt, de később számuk változott. Hdt. 3, 89. v. ö. Duncker, Geschichte des Alterthums, 4. köt. 4. kiad. 534 skk. Justi, Gesch. des alten Persiens 57–58 lap. (A Pecz-féle Ókori Lexikon nyomán)
Parthika c. elveszett művében Arrianosz is arról számol be, hogy idegen földről intézett támadást a dinasztiaalapító a makedón uralom alatt álló parthus tartomány ellen. Történeti munkájának ezeket a részleteit Phótiosz1 és Georgiosz szünkellosz2 kivonataiból ismerjük. Mint az előbbi krónikás meséli: „Arszakész és Tiridatész fivérek voltak, Phriapitésznek, Arszakész fiának a leszármazottai. Phereklész, akit Antiokhosz Theosz emelt országuk szatrapájául, durván megsértette egyiküket, mire … tanácsba hívtak öt férfit, és a segítségükkel megölték az inzultálót. Aztán fellázították népüket a makedónok ellen, és létrehozták a saját kormányzatukat.” Szünkellosz szövege annyiban tér el ettől, hogy a perzsa Artaxerxész állítólagos lemenőinek mondja a testvéreket, Parthüaia helytartója pedig nála Agathoklész.
1Bibliotheca LVIII
2 Wilhelm Dindorf szerk.: Corpus Scriptorum Historiae Byzantinae XIII; Weber, Bonn, 1829, 539–540.
Valahol hever itt a hátam mögött egy komoly tanulmány a kiskohókról, ha jól emlékszem a DV szponzorálta még anno. Sem a címére sem szerkesztőjére nem emlékszem.)
Iustinus szerint (XII, 4, 12) a Nagy Sándor által a parthusok élére kinevezett perzsa helytartótól származtatták magukat az Arszakidák:
„Parthis deinde domitis praefectus his statuitur ex nobilibus Persarum Andragoras; inde postea originem Parthorum reges habuere.”
„Majd miután megfékezték a parthusokat, azoknak a perzsa nemesek közül származó Andragoras lett a helytartójuk. A parthusok későbbi királyai tőle származtatták magukat.”
Őstörténeti írásokban az a lényeg kik mily célból írják mai időkben a mondani valójukat?
Igen átfűti az írásokat valamely cél, ami nem biztos, hogy jellemző adott népcsoportra.
A Magyarokról semmi régi dolgot nem írtak le, ami akár igaz lehet csak találgatások vagy a Hunokról.
Kik írták papok?
Parthia és Sagartia a Méd-Perzsa Birodalom tartományainak sorában
Később a rómaiak is eltanulták tőlük
A pikkelypáncél részlete
Mithra vadászik
Harci mén vértje Durából
Dura (Európosz), "keresztyén ház", baptisterium
Sőt zsinagóga is
Nemcsak Mithra-szentély volt Durában, hanem Bél-templom is
Mithra megfékezi és leöli a bikát
Parthika c. elveszett művében Arrianosz is arról számol be, hogy idegen földről intézett támadást a dinasztiaalapító a makedón uralom alatt álló parthus tartomány ellen. Történeti munkájának ezeket a részleteit Phótiosz1 és Georgiosz szünkellosz2 kivonataiból ismerjük. Mint az előbbi krónikás meséli: „Arszakész és Tiridatész fivérek voltak, Phriapitésznek, Arszakész fiának a leszármazottai. Phereklész, akit Antiokhosz Theosz emelt országuk szatrapájául, durván megsértette egyiküket, mire … tanácsba hívtak öt férfit, és a segítségükkel megölték az inzultálót. Aztán fellázították népüket a makedónok ellen, és létrehozták a saját kormányzatukat.” Szünkellosz szövege annyiban tér el ettől, hogy a perzsa Artaxerxész állítólagos lemenőinek mondja a testvéreket, Parthüaia helytartója pedig nála Agathoklész. 
