Indian Antiquary Vol 60

Author(s): Richard Carnac Temple, Charles E A W Oldham, S Krishnaswami Aiyangar, Devadatta Ramkrishna Bhandarka
Publisher: Swati Publications

Page 94

78
THE INDIAN ANTIQUARY
[ APRIL, 1931
after time we are vividly reminded of how slender in obecurity, and after his decendo . somewhat -or porhaps even non-existent--are those found. prolonged period of feebleness and anarchy set in. ations upon which are built up our present ideas This would rather lead us to the conclusion that concerning the older periods of the history of India. Mithradates, during the last part of his reign, bad
Even a scholar who, like the present writer, can not the power to prevent an energetic upetart claim no particular familiarity with these Kharosthi participating in the conquest of Wostern India from documents, cannot escape feeling struck by the assuming the title of Great King. On the other utter uncertainty of a great number of Professor hand, if Professor Konow's suggestion concerning an Konow's readings. An authority like Professor era beginning in 84-83 D.c. be correct, Maues would Rapson 1 has demonstrated how inscriptions which have used this title in the year 6-5 B.C. at a period are really corner-stones of Konow's historical when the Parthian empire had triumphed at Cartha and chronological system contain but slender bits and had, at any rate, held its own very well both of those words and sentences which have here been against Antony and Octavian. This argumentation got out of them. And we shall allow ourselves in leads to no tangible results, but it is apt to prove the the following paragraphs to point out a few further utter fancifulness of Professor Konuw's assumptions. passages where we feel beset with the gra vest | Professor Rapson has already suggested that doubts. It is, however, sufficient to emphasize the era of the year 78 is one which commemorates now that a very great part of the historically im. the foundation of an independent kingdom in portant inscriptions perhaps contain only & more Seistên about 150 B.C., and that thus the year or less minute part of those facts which the present 78 would mean something like 72 B.C. This is interpretation has elicited from them."
undoubtedly possible; and the Macedonian name Upon these frail foundations Professor Konow
of the month (Panemos) undoubtedly proves this has in his two first chapters, viz., 'Historical In- era to be of a Western origin. Still I do not feel troduction (p. xiii ff.) and 'The Eras used in quite satisfied that this is the case. Kharopthi Inscriptions (p. lxxxii ff.) erected & re
We admittedly never hear of an era founded by splendent historical and chronological superstructure,
Demetrius, the son of Euthydemus, just a little & veritable gandharvanagara. His chronology has
As we hear of a Seistân or an old Saka 'one. But been partly calculated in collaboration with Dr.
there always remains the possibility that Demetrius van Wiik and was known from several papers in the instituted a new ern to commemorate his conquest Acta Orientalia; but, in spite of the great learning
of India.' If such were the case, why should not And industry oxhibited by his collaborator, not Buch an era have continued to be used in Northmany scholars with a smattoring of historical sense Western India even after the extinction of the line will feel convinced by these calculations, the un
of Demetrius? Why should it not have been still certainty of which is, besides, sometimes admitted
tised even during the reign of the Great King, even by their inventors. Of the five oras made Maues or Moga? Now, the regnal years of use of by Professor Konow, two, viz., the Vikrama
Demetrius &re admittedly somewhat uncertain, and the sako, have the immense advantage of
86 are even those of his Indian conquests. But being really existent; though it must be admitted
Aeguming the later ones to fall somewhere between that the explanations of their origin furnished by
180-170 B.C., the year 78 of such an ers would fall the learned editor aro more than doubtful. Of
somewhere about 100-90 B.O. That Maues Wag the three others, the old Śaka era' (84-83 B.C.) perhaps succeeded by Azes (I), and that this Azee and & Parthian' era originating in 7 B.C., and founded the Vikrama era of 68 B.O. Beems not founded by Azes, are the results of the purest fancy; ungesumable. And in that cage Maues would prothe third, beginning in 128-129 A.D., is said to bably have left the stage about 60 3.0. Assuming be the era of Kanishka' and is most probably just that the years 100 or 90 B.O. fell within the limita as nebulous as both the others.
of his reign, it would have been a fairly, though not The existence of the old Saka era' (84-83 B.C.) enormously, long one. And we know nothing that regts upon two suggestions : (1) Maves (Moga, would expressly contradict such an assumption. etc.), who originated from Seistar., did not assume But I shall always willingly admit that this, like tho title "Great King' (maharayasa malam tasa the suggestions criticised here, remains sheer Mogana, Taxila copperplate of year 78, etc.), before hypothesis. the decease of Mithradates II of Persia in 88 We shall not enter further upon the utterly B.0. ; (2) this era records the conquest of Western entangled historical problems dealt with in the India by the Sakes. The first of these assumptions introduction, as we do not feel entitled to form any is now endorsed by Professor Rapeon, while the definite opinion upon them. Besides such a disoussecond meets with his disapproval. Personally, I sion would exceed the limits of a review like this. scarcely feel inclined to accept as undisputed even We shall content ourselves by making the following the first of Professor Konow's suggestions.
few scattered remarks on passages that seem more The later years of Mithradates IT Are wrapped or less doubtful and in need of emendation, 1 JRAS, 1930, p. 187 ff. 9 Op. JRAS, 1930, p. 192; cp. also CHI, I, p. 569 ff. 3 Co. OHI, 1, p. 570.