question: it bothers me a bit when scholars refer to tribes as Scythians, Sarmatians, etc. given that these are (afaik) Greek terms that don't seem likely to be related to the terms these groups had for themselves. Is it pretty much always the case that those names (or even the terms that more local neighbors used for them) are entirely lost to history? To what extent is this just scholars going along with the established academic norm?
It’s a complicated mix. The peoples of the steppe were not a particularly literary people, and so almost everything we know is either based on archaeological or based on sources, largely a mix of Greek (and later Roman,) Persian, or Chinese, with a few other ones. In many cases, though, even the terms Scythian, Sarmatians, and so on are a somewhat iffy, more a broad designation. Indeed, even Greeks as far back as Herodotus used it as more an ethno-cultural label rather than a specific tribe, much in the way folks use, well, Greek despite various city-states being divided and so on, or for that matter the way German was an ethno-cultural designation long before it was a state.
Indeed, that bleeds off into a topic that is interesting that I may need to do a post on, about how the term nation is not the same as a government or state, and indeed that’s why the term nation-state exists, yet there has been an intentional conflation of the two over time, but I digress.
Saka was the term the Persians used for the Scythian tribes, either in general or nearest to them, it’s not entirely clear. That term has versions in Greek, Latin, Persian (obviously,) and also Chinese, and may be linked to an endonym but it’s hard to say.
It’s not until we get groups like the Alans that true endonyms seem to return, though that may hint, actually, at what they may have called themselves. You see, Alan derives from Arya or Aryan, from whence we also get Iranian and Iranic. Though the term is, unfortunately, associated with Nazi rhetoric in a lot of folks mind, it is a legitimate self-designation and applies to the various steppe peoples and their descendants, including the Persians and some groups in India as well.
Notable, though, on the topic of academic norms, post WW2 there was a lessening of the use of Aryan due to its connotations.
In most cases, though, it’s simply a matter of working with what we have, to designate specific groups. It’s a step above, say, the use of things like ‘Corded Ware culture’ or ‘Timber Grave culture’ because we lack really any other designation for the group. It also gets into specifics.
It’s also a bit better than my personal pet peeve of the use of Wales and Welsh, over Cymry or other terms, because of the origin of the term Wales. In many ways, use of Wales or Welsh is comparable to the use of the term ‘Indian’ or ‘American Indian’ in the US, seeing as both were invaded by the Brits and pushed off their land.