The discussion on the pages of the "Bulletin of Ancient History" within the framework of the round table "Sarmatians in the first century AD: the latest discoveries" will touch upon a private but important question about the tribal affiliation of the Sarmatian allies of Pharasmanus of Iberia in the war with the Parthians in 35 AD.(1) The identification of these Sarmatians is important for reconstructing the ethno-political situation in Eastern Europe of the first century AD and for attributing numerous archaeological sites, including those discovered in the last one or two decades that have caused a real discussion. In 35 AD, the Sarmatians became embroiled in the struggle between Rome and Parthia for Armenia, an eternal bone of contention between the two powers. After the death of the Roman vassal Zeno (Artashes, Artaxias III, c. 18-34), the Parthian king Artabanus II (11-38) tried to establish his eldest son Arsaces on the vacated Armenian throne. At the same time, Artabanus demanded that Rome return the treasury of its unsuccessful rival Vonon in the struggle for the Parthian throne, which was left in Syria at the time, and restore "the borders of the Achaemenids and Macedonians (i.e., Seleucids)" (Tas. Ann. 6.31.12; Dio Cass. 58.26.1). In response, the emperor Tiberius (14-37) nominated Mithridates, the brother of King Pharasmanus of Iberia, as a candidate for the Armenian throne, and in every possible way encouraged his protege to take decisive actions. Mithridates organized the assassination of Arsaces and, with the assistance of Pharasmanus ' troops, captured the capital of Armenia, Artaxata. Artabanus sent another son, Orodes, to replace Arsaces, reinforcing his claim with military force. Farasman had to turn to his Albanian neighbors for help and summon the tribes of the Trans-Caucasian Sarmatians (2). With their help, the Parthians were defeated and left Armenia, which remained with Mithridates (Tas. Ann. 6. 32-37). Who were these barbarians conscripted by ... Read more