the East), he gave up some provinces, and received a number of elephants in exchange. It is probable that the first kings of Bactria, on declaring themselves independent, took possession of what remained of Alexander's conquests in the Panjab.' (Dr. Swiney's coins confirm their domination there, as far as the presence of medals can do so.) 'At any rate, the third king, Euthydemus, in his treaty with Antiochus the Great, by which treaty his independence was acknowledged, gave up all his elephants. This proves two points: first, that Euthydemus had provinces, or at least subjects, in India proper; second, that his rule was not extensive, for the elephants were few in number; added to those given by Sophagasenus to Antiochus, they made but 150, whereas Seleucus received 400 from Chandragupta.

'Antiochus' expedition was brilliant, but it procured him little solid advantage beyond the acquisition of these war elephants. After his campaign against Euthydemus and Sophagasenus he repassed the Indus, and returned by way of Arachosia and Carmania to the western seat of his empire.' (Was it after this expedition that he struck the coin represented in figure 2, depicting the stern of a boat of the river Indus?)

'Euthydemus may have profited by the distance of Antiochus, and the decline of his strength, to deprive him of the provinces situated along the Lower Indus. It is certain that Demetrius reigned there, I think, first as governor in the name of his father; afterwards as an independent king. Demetrius did not succeed Euthydemus in Bactria: his absence, perhaps, allowed his competitor to supplant him. If Demetrius had not been in possession at the death of his father, with what force could he have conquered these vast provinces, when the army of Bactria was at the command of a rival? It is he, no doubt, who founded the city of Demetrias in Arachosia, the name of which is preserved in the geographical work of Isidorus.. Thence his dominions extended to the Delta of the Indus.

'Trogus Pompeius ascribes exploits in India to Apollodotus and Menander; Strabo also to the latter. Their conquests, then, must have been towards the Panjab, since they would have come into contact with Demetrius on the south; and there is no mention of war between the Bactrians and this king of India until the end of the reign of Eucratides. Strabo says expressly that Menander passed the Hyphases and penetrated to the Jamna. Εἵγε καὶ τον “Υπανιν διέβη προς ἕω, και μέχρι τοῦ Ισαμου προῆλθε. Lege Χασιν et Ιωμανου.

'This authorises our extending his kingdom to Mathurá or even Baitasor (where Colonel Tod's coin was found). The probability is, that it included the kingdom of Láhor; for since Strabo says that Menander was the first to penetrate so far, his predecessor's rule, of course, must have been more limited.'

Plutarch bears testimony to the excellent character of Menander as a sovereign:-'A certain king, Menander, who had reigned with justice over the Bactrians, having died in camp, the cities in common had the care of his funeral rites, but afterwards contended for his ashes; they at last divided his remains equally amongst them, and agreed that monuments to him should be

raised amongst them all."1 May not this singular passage have had its origin in a confused account of the monuments raised by the Buddhists to preserve the relics of their lawgiver, of which one at Manikyála seems to have been founded immediately after the Bactrian monarchy was overthrown, and while the communication of those countries with the West was still, perhaps, maintained.2 But to return to Schlegel's

epitome :

'We know nothing of Heliocles, if, indeed, he ever reigned in Bactria. But as Eucratidas was the first to assume the distinction of Great King,' it is natural to suppose that he aggrandized the empire. He may have conquered Ariana, which Strabo says belonged to Bactria.

'For the war between Eucratidas and Demetrius, king of India, we are reduced to the unsatisfactory notice of Justin, according to whom Demetrius was the aggressor. Eucratidas, at first besieged, and in great danger, saved himself by his valour, and finished by despoiling his adversary. In his retreat, after terminating this war, he was assassinated by his son. Bayer thinks that this Demetrius is the same who, in his youth, negociated the peace for his father Euthydemus with Antiochus. However, the great age to which he must have attained is a staggering objection. One may reconcile probabilities by supposing that a son of the same name had succeeded to Demetrius' throne.

'The existence of the parricide of Eucratidas is well established; but his name is unknown, and it is uncertain whether he enjoyed the fruits of his crime. King Eucratidas II., therefore, in Bayer's catalogue, rests only on a double conjecture. 'Thus end the Bactrian kings hitherto known. The later history of the dynasty is enveloped in darkness yet thicker than the rest. Justin attributes its destruction to the Parthians; the author of the summary of Trogus Pompeius to the Scythians; both quoting the same authority. It appears, then, that both these nations took part in it, but that the Scythians remained in possession.

'In a fragment of Diodorus, or rather in an extract by Photius, it is said that one of the Arsacidæ (no doubt the sixth, Mithridates I.) penetrated as far as India and seized the kingdom of Porus, i.e., the country between the Hydaspes and the Acesines. Bayer says, with reason, that the Greeks, wherever they allude to India, imagine a Porus ;-but in this case the historian seems justified, for we see that the Bactrians possessed not only that province, but even beyond it. By Bayer's calculation, Mithridates I., king of Parthia, must have survived Eucratidas by seven years, but these dates are purely conjectural. At any rate, it is after Eucratidas' death that these conquests must have been made the war between him and Demetrius would not have taken place had the Parthians occupied the intervening provinces. Eucratidas was assassinated when in the height of his power :-it is, then, after his death,

1 Major Tod on Bactrian Medals, 'Transactions of the Royal Asiatic Society,' i. 330. 2 See page 39.

that the decline of the empire commenced. M. de Guignes, from the Chinese historians, fixes the epoch of its destruction in the year 125, B.C. The king or kings who may have reigned in the interim are yet unknown-perhaps they may be brought to light by Colonel Tod's discoveries.'

The above condensed and critical sketch of the later Bactrian kings contains all that is known of them, and leaves us to fill up blanks only as fresh matter may be elicited through the labours of the antiquarian in this fruitful field. Schlegel felt pride in adding two cognomens to his two kings; Dr. Swiney's coins have already increased their Majesties' titles; giving to Menander the common appellation 'saviour;' and to his predecessor, in addition to the same title, the respectable appellation of 'Philopator,' 'loving son.' This latter title is of more consequence than might at first be suspected, for, unless his father were of kingly dignity, he would not have been mentioned: and it is more than probable that his son succeeded him peaceably. But we have no knowledge who the father was, since Demetrius is the only recorded son of Euthydemus. We may suppose him, to be sure, to have been a brother-perhaps a younger one, a favorite-'a gift of the gods,' as his name implies; and this might account for the mission of the rightful heir to a distant province: but it is wrong to hazard conjectures upon points of such remote diplomacy!

FIGS. 6 and 7.-Two square copper coins resembling in form Fig. 7 of Plate II. Weight, 102 and 121 grains.

OBVERSE.-A figure, apparently female, holding a cornucopia on the left arm; the other indistinct; legend in parallel lines, and evidently Greek, but only partially legible: the word BANIAENE commences both of them.

REVERSE.-The Indian bull wit hits hump, encircled with the unknown character. Below, on both coins, the letter or a symbol of that form.

One of these coins was found at Machwarra, a small town near the Satlaj river, between Ludiána and Rúpar; the other in the bázár at Bussy, on the road from thence to Simla. Dr. Swiney considers them to be not only similar, but of the same die. It is not possible to do more than ascribe them to the Bactrian dynasty generally.

[These are now known to be coins of Philoxenes. See pl. xv. fig. 2.]

FIG. 8.-This small copper coin, from the neighbourhood of Saháranpúr, is classed among the Bactrian coins by Dr. Swiney, from the similarity of its monogram to that of fig. 4. The legend also appears Greek: the obverse has a warrior with a bow (?) and the reverse a lion, panther, or singh, which connects it with one class of the Hindú coins.

FIGS. 9, 10.-I have introduced these two of Dr. Swiney's Bactrian-horsemen, or Eucratides,' coins,' because the head is in better preservation than usual, and a letter or two more of the legend can be added to the scanty list hitherto elicited; thus, on fig. 9, we have

THP META...and on the other META BACIAETC, the great king,' quasi Mahá Rájá. As far as the specimens hitherto discovered can prove it, the nominative seems to be used in all the coins of this type, instead of the genitive, as is usual on Greek medals; the terminations are also corrupted; all which circumstances tend to pronounce these coins to belong to the last princes of the race, as conjectured in ascribing them to Eucratides.

FIG. 14 is a small coin supposed to have Greek characters, but undecypherable.

FIGS. 16, 17, 18, are drawings of three small copper coins procured by Lieutenant Burnes at Manikyála, which differ in some particulars from those already made public, and are on that account, rather than as leading to any fresh observation, now inserted. Fig. 16 belongs, from the side figure of the female stooping, and the monogram or symbol, to the Kanishka group. Fig. 18, a man sitting, dressed in the Bráhmanical dhoti, accords so far with No. 1 of Mr. Wilson's plate, a gold coin dug out of the tope at Manikyála by General Ventura. Fig. 17 is of a novel type, but the coin was in too imperfect a state to permit an accurate development of the figures.

1 See plate ii., and p. 36.

HINDU COINS.

From the coins of Bactria a transition is easily traced through the dark period of the Indo-Scythian or Buddhist dynasty, (to which numerous coins have been allotted upon such degree of internal evidence as their appearance affords,) to the coins of the Hindú princes of Central India, Andhra, Rájputána, Kanauj, Indraprastha, and perhaps Magadhá or Bahár. I have, on a former occasion, ventured to doubt whether any native coin, properly so called, had circulation in India anterior to the

1

Je ne

1 Page 4 suprâ, and 'Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,' I. 394. [I annex extracts from an elaborate note of Burnouf's bearing on this subject. "Or il fallait, pour obtenir les faveurs de Vâsavadattâ, donner cinq cents Puranas. demande pas. un seul Kârchâpana." Introd. 147. (Note.)—“Il importe, en premier lieu, de remarquer que le Purâna dont il est parlé dans le texte, est une monnaie de poids, c'est-à-dire une monnaie appartenante à un système purement indien, et antérieur, conséquemment, à l'influence qu'a exercée dans l'Inde le système monétaire des Grecs de la Bactriane. Or dans le système auquel appartient le Purâna, qui est un poids d'argent, l'unité est le Raktikâ, c'est-à-dire le poids d'une graine rouge de Gundja ou de l'Abrus precatorius. On comprend qu'on

arriverait à un résultat beaucoup plus élevé, s'il s'agissait d'un poids d'or; mais l'emploi du mot Purâna nous interdit absolument cette supposition, puisque le Purana est positivement donné pour un poids d'argent. Quoi qu'il en soit,

les termes de Mâcha' et de 'Machaka' appartiennent, comme celui de 'Raktika,' à ce système de poids fournis par la nature, et très-problablement fort ancien, qui caractérise les époques de civilisation encore peu avancée; car le Mâcha est un haricot de l'espèce dite Phaseolus radiatus. Le texte de notre légende parle encore d'une autre monnaie, le Kârchapana, qui est, suivant Colebrooke (Asiatic Researches,' v. 93) égal à 80 Raktikâs de cuivre, c'est-à-dire à 175 grains troy anglais, ou, suivant Wilson, à 176 grains. Quoique le Kârchâpana puisse être aussi bien un poids d'or et d'argent que de cuivre, l'ensemble du texte me semble prouver qu'il y faut voir un Kârchapana de cuivre, car la courtisane veut certainement dire qu'elle ne demande pas même à Upagupta, la plus petite somme."-Introduction à l'histoire du Buddhisme indien, p. 597. Professor Wilson enters into the question more fully. His summary is necessarily of the highest value in the citation of Hindú authorities, thought he numismatic and other evidence might, perhaps, have warranted a more decisive expression of opinion in favor of the antiquity of Indian coinages.] "Doubts have been entertained of the existence of a native Indian currency prior to the introduction of the art of coining by the Greeks of Bactria (Prinsep: Journal of the Asiatic Society of Bengal,' i. 384, suprâ cit.) and certainly there are strong grounds for admitting the probability that the fabrication of money in India originated with them. There are some considerations, however, which militate against it. That the want of a specific denomination of money is not incompatible with a metallic medium of exchange, we know from the practice of the Chinese and IndoChinese nations to the present day, amongst whom certain weights of gold and silver, sometimes bearing a stamped attestation of their standard value, take the place of coined money. This may have been the case also with the Hindus; and as the different tables, which are given in their law-books, of the several values of gold