The article discusses E.V. Rtveladze’ idea about two kingdoms in the ancient Chorasmia in the time of Alexander the Great. E.V. Rtveladze after analyzing the reports of Arrian and Curtius Rufus about the Chorasmian embassy to Alexander, came to the conclusion that the sources dealt with two different embassies: the first was headed by Pharasmanes, the king of the western (left bank) Chorasmia, and arrived in Bactria in winter or early spring of 328 BC; and the second was sent by Phrataphernes, the king of the eastern (right bank) Chorasmia, and visited Alexander in Marakanda in summer of the same year. The authors suggest this conclusion was wrong and different royal names can be best explained by the assumption that by the time the embassy was sent, the ruler of the unified Chorasmia was Phrataphernes, who died while his son (and possibly co-ruler) Pharasmanes was in Marakanda, and after that Alexander recognized the right of Pharasmanes to the title of king. The long-term existence of Chorasmia – it became independent to the end of the 5th century BC – played the main role in Alexander’s decision. Besides, material culture of Chorasmia does not give any reasons to suppose the existence of two different states there. In our opinion, these facts indicate the formation of a single centralized economic system throughout Chorasmia.