THE GREEKS IN THE PUNJAB (ANCIENT INDIA)

BY

W. H. MORELAND, C.S.I., C.I.E. 

AND

ATUL CHANDRA CHATTERJEE

G.C.I.E., K. C.S.I.

NOTHING is known of the circumstances in which the vice- royalty of Taxila became separated from the Maurya em- pire, or of the political conditions which supervened; but it may be inferred that no strong kingdom emerged in this region, for, half a century after Asoka's death, the Punjab was being conquered, or absorbed, piecemeal by the Greeks of Bactria. It will be recalled that, in the settlement made between Chandragupta and Seleucus I, Afghanistan south of the Hindu Kush passed to the former, while Bactria was retained by the latter. Half a century later, Bactria became an independent kingdom, expanded largely in area, and increased in power. Very soon after 200 B.C. the Bactrian Greeks were masters of nearly the whole of Afghanistan, and of a large part of the Punjab; but while Demetrius, the reigning king, was in India, Bactria itself was seized (175 B.C.) by a rebel named Eucratides, who in his turn came south, and the Punjab was divided into two Greek kingdoms, separated by the Jhelum. The country east of this river was ruled by the house of Demetrius with the capital at Sakala, the modern Sialkot ; to the west, the house of Eucratides was established in the Kabul valley and in Gandhāra, the name then given to the region which stretches from the Jhelum westward into Afghanistan.. These two kingdoms survived for about a century, when they fell into the hands of nomad invaders, and Hellenic power disap- peared from India. Their limits towards the south are uncertain; according to a Greek historian, Sind, and even Kathiawar, were conquered, but it is doubtful whether these countries were held for any length of time, and Hellenic rule was probably confined mainly to the Punjab.

NOMAD MIGRATIONS

The southward move of the Greek power is closely con- nected with one of the outstanding events in the history of the world, the migration of the nomad hordes from High Asia, which was destined to change the history of Europe. The westward track followed by the hordes was well north of the Hindu Kush, and Bactria lay on its southern flank. It is probable, though not certain, that when the Greeks first moved in the direction of Kabul, the danger from the north and east was already realised; but, in any case, there is no doubt that Eucratides was driven out of Bactria by the pressure of the Parthians on the west and the Sakas 1 on the north. Records which have been preserved in China show that about 165 B.C. the Huns were pressing from the east on another horde named the Yueh-chi; the latter in turn pressed on the Sakas, and drove them in the direction of Bactria; and the Greeks, unable to resist the Sakas, and confronted on the west with the Parthian power in Khoräsän, could find security only to the south of the Hindu Kush.

The details of the Greek dynasties in the Punjab have been reconstructed mainly from their coins, some of which are marvels of artistic work, particularly in the matter of portraiture; but, with one exception, the individual rulers left no definite mark on the history of India. They seem to have played their part as Indian kings, so far as war and diplomacy are concerned; their conquests, or raids, towards the seaboard have already been mentioned; and according to tradition one of them marched victoriously down the Gangetic plain to the neighbourhoood of Patna, but was com- pelled to return by dangers nearer home. A more precise record of the period is a stone column at Besnagar, the inscription on which shows that it was erected in honour of Krishna by Heliodorus of Taxila, ambassador from Antial- cidas, a king who was reigning about the year 100 B.C. The Greeks had thus diplomatic relations with the Sunga dynasty at this time, while the fact that one of them described him- self as a follower of Vishnu is suggestive of the processes of assimilation which must have been at work, though we have no precise knowledge of their operation.

The one Greek ruler who has left a name in India is Menander, King of Sialkot, who appears in Buddhist litera- ture as Milinda. In a famous text, known as the' Questions of Milinda,' he is presented as a vigorous controversialist, who first criticised, and then accepted, the doctrines of his Buddhist interlocutor. The description 2 given of him in this work is enthusiastic: as in wisdom, so in strength of body, swiftness, and valour there was found none equal to Milinda in all India. He was rich too, mighty in wealth and prosperity, and the number of his armed hosts knew no end.' Language such as this is obviously subject to a high rate of discount, but the fact that it was used may indicate that Menander was, if not actually a Buddhist, at least favourably inclined towards that discipline, and that, like the ambas- sador in Malwa, he had come under the influence of Indian teaching.

GREEK AND INDIAN CULTURE

Direct contact between India and the culture of inde- pendent Greek states extended over a period which practi- cally coincides with that of the Maurya and Sunga dynasties, and it is natural to ask what India gained from it. The new methods of coinage, and the introduction of western styles in sculpture, have already been mentioned. The monuments which have survived from the second and first centuries B.C. show clear traces of the eastward spread of Perso-Hellenistic influence, which can be observed in the remains found at Bharhut, Buddh Gaya (in Bihār), Sanchi (near the modern Bhopal) and elsewhere; as time went on, the quality of the workmanship was maintained, but the foreign forms were transmuted, and the result was, not a mere borrowing from abroad, but a synthesis producing, in Sir John Marshall's words,' essentially a national art, having its root in the heart and in the faith of the people, and giving eloquent expressionto their spiritual beliefs and to their deep and intuitive sympathy with nature.' 3

Outside the domain of art, there are grounds for holding that India may have learned something in the region of science, as the term was then understood, but there is little or no sign of influence in literature4, politics or religion. The Indian texts which deal with medicine, astronomy, and astrology show clear evidence of Greek influence, and in particular the art of casting horoscopes, which was exten- sively practised right into the British period, and is not yet extinct, was characterised by Greek methods, and employed Greek technical terms. The uncertainties regarding the dates of these texts make it impossible to say precisely when the influences in question operated, and some of them at least must be attributed to later contacts with Alexandria, but it is possible that others date from this period of direct contact.

In philosophy there are some obvious similarities between principles developed by Greek and Indian thinkers, and it has sometimes been suggested that these denote actual borrowing by one side or the other, but there is no evidence of the process, and the facts can be explained sufficiently by the hypothesis of parallel development: Greeks and Indians alike were thinking over problems which must present themselves to anyone who tries to think at all, and it is no matter for surprise that both should on occasion reach similar results from consideration of similar data. We can- not entirely exclude the possibility that a wandering philo- sopher, whether from the East or from the West, may have dropped seeds which germinated in congenial soil, but it is unnecessary to assume that there was anything like sys- tematic mutual study, which differences of language would have rendered very difficult. Apart from this uncertainty, there is nothing to suggest that the Greeks learned much from India beyond the knowledge of concrete facts, and the occasional legends, which have been preserved by their historians.

Reference

1 The Sakas are sometimes spoken of as Scythians, but the latter name is ambiguous, being applied indifferently to the nomads of Europe and of Asia; it is therefore more convenient to adhere to the term Saka, which occurs in Indian literature.

2 Milindapanha, tr. T. W. Rhys Davids, in Sacred Books of the East, xxxv, pp. 6, 7.

3 Camb. Hist., i. 644.

4 Some scholars have attributed the origin of the Indian drama to Greek influences, but the relation is disputed; the question is discussed in Dr. A. A. Macdonell's India's Past, pp. 98 ff.