http://herodot.glossa.dk/analog.html
The Scythian Myth of Origin
'More exciting is the fact that Spartan institutions and traditions may also elucidate Herodotos' Scythian version of the myth of origin (Hdt. 4.5-7). We hear about three brothers Lipoxais, Arpoxais und Kolaxais the sons of Targitaos, himself the son of Zeus and the river Borysthenes. One day, some golden objects fell from the sky: "a plough and a yoke, a battle-axe and a cup" (...). The older brothers could not touch the objects, but the youngest brother succeeded in grabbing the golden gifts and as a result was announced king of the Scythians. The oldest brother, Lipoxais, became the forefather of the Auchatai, the middle brother, Arpoxais, the forefather of the Katiaroi and the Traspies, and the youngest brother, Kolaxais, the forefather of the kings, which were called Paralatai. However, the territory was too large and was therefore divided into three parts, which Kolaxais distributed to his three sons.
Georges Dumézil, who had a keen interest in Scythian and Ossetic cultures, tried of course to analyse this myth according to his celebrated model of the three functions. Even if one does not accept this model as a comprehensive key to all Indo-European ideology in the mother culture(s) and in the single cultures, it is hard not to accept its presence in our case. Hence, he relates the golden cup to the first function of the priest, the golden battle-axe to the second function of the warrior, and, finally, the golden plough and the golden yoke, which are really one thing, to the third function of the provider (similar gifts are presented by the Central Asiatic Scythians in Quintus Curtius 7.8.18-19 jugum boum et aratrum, sagitta, hasta, patera).
The names Auchatai, Katiaroi, Traspies and Paralatai do not appear again in Herodotos, and they are almost never mentioned in later ethnographical literature. There is thus good reason to doubt that they were living ethnonyms in the age of Herodotos. Nevertheless, Holzer identifies them with the Skythai geôrgoi ("Farmer Scythians"), the Skythai nomads ("Nomad Scythians"), and the Skythai basile:ioi ("King Scythians") mentioned in the geographical excursus (Hdt. 4.17-20). They correspond perfectly to Dumézil's tripartite scheme. However, as Dumézil has pointed out, the genç of the myths cannot be geographically distinct groups since all tribes had of course providers and warriors among them, and the regional division is moreover covered by the second triad represented by the sons of Kolaxais, which would otherwise be superfluous. At the time of the Persian invasion, Herodotos speaks about three Scythian realms under the kings Skopasis, Idanthyrsos and Taxakis (Hdt. 4.120). Apparently, one of the kings, probably the one who seized the largest realm, was considered the Great King of the Scythians. Nothing supports that these three kingdoms are identical with the three economically different kinds of Scythians.
Grantovskij has suggested, also on the basis of Dumézil's system, that the Katiaroi/Traspies, the Auchatai and the Paralatai were social classes with qualities corresponding to the three functions i.e., commoners, priests and warriors respectively. This is confirmed, he says, by Lucian, Scythes 1, where it is said of Anacharsis that he does not belong to the royal family (...) or the ones who wear felt caps (...), but to the common people called eight-footed (...) because they possessed only one carriage and two oxen. It may however be disputed whether the felt cap is a sign of the priest, as it seems to be a common garment of the Scythian warriors. Dumézil argues that the Auchatai, the Katiaroi, the Traspies and the Paralatai cannot be social classes, either, since the Scythians did not have a specialised priest caste like the Indian Brahmans. The transsexual diviners called Enarees (Hdt. 1.105.4, 4.67.2) or Anarieis (Hipp., Aer. 22.1) are not a separate class, but isolated gifted individuals. Instead, Herodotos' gene: are human types existing everywhere, an ideal model that has nothing to do with real Scythian society. There was certainly a social diversity in Scythian society, which could be and probably was conceived in the framework of the tripartite structure. The question is, however, if proper castes existed.'
cf
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/11978
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/12538
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/cybalist/message/14185
etc
Torsten