Powered By Blogger

Monday, December 17, 2018

Coinage of Pratihara Empire

The Gurjara-Pratihara dynasty, also known as the Pratihara Empire, was an imperial power during the Late Classical period on the Indian subcontinent, that ruled much of Northern India from the mid-8th to the 11th century. They ruled first at Ujjain and later at Kannauj.

The origin of the dynasty and the meaning of the term "Gurjara" in its name is a topic of debate among historians. The rulers of this dynasty used the self-designation "Pratihara" for their clan, and never referred to themselves as Gurjaras. The Imperial Pratiharas could have emphasized their Kshatriya, instead of Gurjara, identity for political reasons. However, at local levels Pratiharas were not wary of projecting their tribal (Gurjara) identity.

Coins of Pratihara Empire, although all struck to a single weight standard, were carefully differentiated by name. However, it is quite uncertain whether the government issued the coins or whether they have been issued privately under official regulation during Pratihara rule.

They display several stages of evolution and reveal that they were issued over a long period, possibly 50 to 100 years. Inscriptional evidences support the existence of a well-regulated currency during the Pratihara rule. The coins of Pratihara Empire enjoyed extraordinary longevity in circulation. This longevity made them an important currency of the succeeding Rajput period.


The Gurjara government had a stable currency system dependent on the agricultural revenue system and the military department, matched by the concurrent needs of both local and export traders for a medium of exchange. The monetary system was rational and there was a standard coinage metrology during the life of the kingdom. However, there is no practical way of estimating the absolute volume of money in the Gurjara dominions. Still, by comparing the rates of recapture in modern Uttar Pradesh versus those of earlier and later periods, a sense of scale for the relative volume of money can be achieved. The survival rate for coins belonging to AD 600-1000 period is appropriate for the lapsed time. Hence, it is concluded that the volume of exchange transactions during this era was comparable to that of other periods in north Indian history, and probably higher than that of the Gupta era.


The distribution of the successive Gurjara drammas shows that these coins did not circulate in the regions of Kathiawad-Malwa of southern Rajasthan. Much of this region was administered by feudatory dynasties acknowledging Gurjara-Pratihara supremacy. The variety of Indo-Sassanian style drammas, which were found in the regions were different from the major currency of the Ganga basin. In Marwar, the coins were broad, thin and generally closer in fabric to the Hun prototypes. The coins on average contained 0.65 g of silver, an amount somewhat lower than the Vinayakapala Dramma. Although the Gurjaras controlled the seaports of Gujarat, their dramma coinage from the Gangetic plains did not circulate in this area where a high-value feudatory coinage was well established, and where foreign currencies were encountered. Further, Gurjara coinage was not a unified fiduciary coinage.

In Gujarat, the feudatory silver coinage was also based on the Indo-Sassanian prototype, although the coins were not as wide and thin as the Marwar coins. In this period, their minimum precious metal content was 3.27 g, which was considerably in excess of the value of coins of Marwar or the Ganga basin. Their stable silver content encouraged their use far beyond coastal Gujarat. This coinage survived the passing of the issuing dynasty, as indeed the passing of the imperial money-forms of the Pratiharas.

Historians believe that after the Gupta period, Gurjara Pratiharas came to India from the central Asian region and settled in Rajasthan. Gradually, they gained political importance.


The bardic tradition of Rajasthan claims that the Gurjara Pratiharas, Chalukyas, Parmaras, and Chahmanas were born out of a yajna done at Mount Abu. Therefore, these four dynasties are also known as agnikulas(fire-clans).
The four dynasties of Rajputs were created for the protection of the country from external aggressions.
The literary meaning of Pratihara is ‘door keeper.’ It is believed that their ancestor Lakshmana served as a door keeper to his brother Rama. Therefore, they were called as Pratihara.

The geographical name of Gujarat is supposed to be derived from Gurjara.



The Gurjara-Pratiharas of North India were one of the first four patrilineal clans of the caste group referred to as the Rajputs.

Although their significance has largely been overlooked by historians and students of history, their influence on art and culture and their political sway over the major part of North India from the 9th to the 11th century cannot be ignored. One of the most debated subjects in relation to the Gurjara-Pratiharas is their origin and identity, a topic that has, over the years, acquired racial, colonial and nationalistic tinge. Study of the archaeological sources, however, reveal that the Gurjara-Pratiharas probably rose from a varied background and not from the “sacrificial fire altar” as their court historians claim and their contribution to art, especially temple art and architecture was a motif of legitimation of power.



The emergence of temples in Indic religions was an outcome of the Indo-Greek rule, that was established as a result of a series of invasions in the north west around 200 BCES

The first temple structures archaeologically found in the subcontinent, thus, were Indo-Greek in nature, mostly located in the area around Sindh (modern day-Pakistan) and it is likely that the concept of a place of worship emerged from the Graeco-Persian influence. Around 300 CE, the concept of Panchayatna Puja mandala appeared in the religious scenario, where a quincunx pattern of worship was employed for the purpose of prayer in Hinduism.

This pattern was subsequently adopted in Hindu Temple architecture, with one of the first such specimens appearing in the temple architecture of the
Gurjara-Pratiharas around the 8th century

While investigating into the temple architecture of the dynasty throuh the archaeological and literary evidence, the author found a definitive pattern and the possible utilitarian motive of large scale construction of these structures under the aegis of the Pratiharas.


This work is a result of the analysis of the available sources and attempts to explain how structures supposedly  built for religious purposes acted as a political tool for negotiating identity and wielding  power.


Rulers of Gurjara Pratiharas – 650 to 1036 AD.


1. Dadda I-II-III                                 650 – 750 AD
2. Nagabhata I                                    750 – 780 AD
3. Vatsaraja                                        780 – 800 AD
4. Nagabhata II                                  800 – 833 AD
5. Ramabhadra                                   833 – 836 AD
6. Mihira Bhoja I                                836 – 890 AD
7. Mahendrapala I                              890 – 910 AD
8. Bhoj II                                             910 – 913 AD
9. Mahipala I                                      913 – 944 AD
10. Mahendrapala II                          944 – 948 AD
11. Devpala                                         948 – 954 AD
12. Vinaykpala                                    954 – 955 AD
13. Mahipala II                                   955 – 956 AD
14. Vijaypala II                                   956 – 960 AD
15. Rajapala                                        960 – 1018 AD
16. Trilochanpala                                1018 – 1027 AD
17. Jasapala (Yashpala)                     1024 – 1036 AD


Harichandra is said to have laid the foundation of this dynasty in the 6th century. He created a small kingdom at Bhinmal near about 550 A.D. after the fall of Gupta Empire. The Harichandra line of Gurjara-Pratiharas established the state of Marwar, based at Mandore near modern Jodhpur, which grew to dominate Rajasthan. The Pratihara rulers of Marwar also built the temple-city of Osian.



Development of the Indo-Sassanian drachms into "Gadhaiya Paisa" types






To fully understand these coins, you would need to know the history of the Achaemenid, Persian and Sasanian empires, the early history of Islam, and the history of the Zoroastrian religion. This page doesn't aim to teach those subjects, but will say just enough to put the coins into context.



The Fire Altar and Persis



Zoroaster, or Zarathustra, or Zarthosht, was the prophet who began the religion of Zoroastrianism, of which the fire altar is an important symbol. It represents the enduring energy of the creator, Ahura Mazda, and is the focus (but not the object) of prayer.

Achaemenes, or Haxamanis, founded the first Persian empire in around 700 BCE. Zoroaster probably lived about 100 years later, and Zoroastrianism eventually became the State religion. The Achaemenid empire was conquered by Alexander the Great, and his successor Seleucus I Nicator founded the Seleucid dynasty there around 300 BCE. However, this was soon conquered by the ascendant Parthians, who claimed cultural descent from the Achaemenids, and used the same Pahlavi script. Perhaps in part because of this, they allowed a small part of what is now southern Iran to survive as the semi-independent kingdom of Persis. This kingdom had been a distinct principality since the 8th century BCE and was even able to retain control during parts of the Seleucid period. It was the centre of Persian culture and of Zoroastrianism, and it was where fire altars began to appear on coins.

Many of the names on this page come in two versions. One is a westernised Persian name, the other is a westernised Greek name. Often the two are equally valid, because the Persian ruling class was Greek in origin during the Alexander and Seleucid period.







                                A silver hemidrachm of Ardashir II of Persis, c. 50-1 BCE. 15mm, 2.0 grammes.


The kings of Persis are not well known, and nor is the order of succession. Their names appear quite differently depending whether you read Greek or Persian sources. This coin is of Darev or Darius the second. The portrait on the obverse shows heavy Parthian influence. The reverse shows the king holding a sceptre over a fire altar. The script is Aramaic rather than Greek or Pahlavi, perhaps to emphasise their apartness from the Greek Seleucids.

                              A silver hemidrachm of Darev II of Persis, c. 100-1 BCE. 14mm, 2.2 grammes

This is Ardashir II (Persian) or Artaxerxes II (Greek). This crown is less Parthian, and is more like the Sasanian ones, which came later. This coin is clearer than the previous one, but neither of them match the splendid earlier Persis coins from the Seleucid period which show a much more elaborate fire altar. Unfortunately, those coins are also very expensive to buy. Both of the coins shown here are from the later Parthian period.

The Sasanian Empire

The last king of Persis, Ardeshir or Artaxerxes V, revolted successfully against the Parthians and established the Sasanian empire, becoming Ardashir I of Eranshahr (as it was then called). The name "Sasanid" or "Sassanid" was invented by later historians, based on the name of Ardashir's paternal grandfather Sasan. Sasanian coins were distinctive, showing the royal headdress in detail on one side, and a fire altar with attendants on the other.


                         A billon tetradrachm of the Sasanian Ardashir I, 224-241 CE. 26mm, 9.6 grammes


This rough coin with a corroded surface is a billon tetradrachm of the successful Ardashir. These coins can't have been as useful as the silver drachms shown below, because they were only produced for about 50 years. Their make-up was mostly copper – hence the corrosion. Unlike the drachms, there are only a few glints of silver to be seen on this coin as you turn it in the light. The coin shows Ardashir in a Parthian-style crown, and on the reverse is a fire altar on a short column, with elaborate side supports, and without any attendants.


                                 A silver drachm of the Sasanian Shapur I, 241-272 CE. 27mm, 4.4 grammes.


This rough coin with a corroded surface is a billon tetradrachm of the successful Ardashir. These coins can't have been as useful as the silver drachms shown below, because they were only produced for about 50 years. Their make-up was mostly copper – hence the corrosion. Unlike the drachms, there are only a few glints of silver to be seen on this coin as you turn it in the light. The coin shows Ardashir in a Parthian-style crown, and on the reverse is a fire altar on a short column, with elaborate side supports, and without any attendants.


                              A silver drachm of the Sasanian Shapur II, 309-379 CE. 23mm, 3.9 grammes.


50 years later, a similar coin, this time showing the bust of Ahura Mazda in the flames. This shows that the flames represent the energy and fire of the creator. The attendants are still richly dressed in royal style, but this time they are focused more on the altar than on showing off!


                              A silver drachm of the Sasanian Khushrou I, 550 CE.  30mm, 4.0 grammes.


200 years after the last coin, the altar and attendants are becoming more stylised, and the king's portrait is also somewhat less realistic. The coins are thinner, and have a wide rim which is less regular in outline. The thin flan the coins were struch from sometimes led to a lack of detail in the centre of the coin, where there was just not enough metal to fill the hollows in the die.

There is no standard spelling of Sasanian names in European scripts. They are all attempts to indicate the pronunciation. For example, in the name I have spelled "Khushrou," the "Kh" is pronounced something like "ch" in the Scottish word "loch."
The standard reference on these coins is Robert Göbl's "Sasanian Numismatics." In that book, he uses diacritical marks – macrons and háčeks – to indicate pronunciation, like this: Ardašēr, Šāpūr, Xusrō. Because these marks are not so easy to do in most word processors, you often see these spellings reproduced without the diacritical marks, e.g. Sapur, Xusro.


Kushanshahs


The Sasanid empire was large and powerful, and exercised some of its control through vassal states in Bactria and Gandhara, often referred to as Kushanshahs (kings or kingdoms of Kushan). They were allowed their own coinage under Sasanid patronage.



A bronze coin of Hormazd I Kushanshah in the name of Kavad, 276-300 CE. KOBAD on obverse. 16mm, 2.8 grammes.

This coin was minted in Gandhara (eastern Afghanistan and north-west Pakistan) by the Kushanshah Hormazd I, and it is thought that Kavad is the name of one of his governors. This was shortly after the time of the first Sasanian coin above. It is quite crude, and the style of the fire altar is very different to the silver coins, but similar to the billon tetradrachm. This coin shows Zoroastrian influence spreading into the Indian subcontinent – an area where religious history usually focuses on Buddhism, Hinduism and Islam.
                    A bronze coin of Peroz II (Bactrian) Kushanshah, c. 300-325 CE. 14mm, 2.1 grammes.


This one comes from Bactria, a mountainous area to the west of Gandhara which now forms part of several countries, including Afghanistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, but mostly Tajikistan. It was struck for Peroz II Kushanshah. The style is better than that of the coin from Gandhara and shows the ruler wearing a distinctive horned headdress.
The reverse of the coin shows a figure, perhaps Mithra, emerging from the fire of the altar. The odd, extreme angle of the wrist holding the staff is typical of these coins.



Nezak Huns



                              A billon drachm of the Nezak Huns, 630-711 CE. 25mm, 3.4 grammes.


Here is a fire altar coin from the area that is now Afghanistan. This interesting and elaborate design, produced in Kabul, shows the king wearing a buffalo's head over a winged helm. The reverse shows a fire altar with wheels above the heads of the usual two attendants. The reverse of this particular coin is a mirror-image of the usual, with the control marks reversed and retrograde. This is probably an engraver's error.

You can find the makers of this coin referred to as Hunas, Indo-Hepthalites, Turco-Hepthalites, Nezak Huns or sometimes White Huns. "Nezak Malka," the legend on this coin, is probably a title, not the name of a king.


Kashmir Smast


In Gandhara, now the north of Pakistan, is the Kashmir Smast, a network of caves which formed the center of an independent kingdom in the 4th to 8th centuries CE.


                  A bronze Kushano-Sasanian unit from Kashmir Smast, c. 305 CE.  15mm, 3.3 grammes.


This intriguing coin shows a ruler wearing a horned headdress – probably representing bull's horns. It is smaller and thicker than the Nezak coin above, but weighs almost the same. The style of the portrait is similar to the Bactrian Kushanshah coin shown above, but in fact it has been identified as a type issued under the Sasanian Peroz II by the satrap Meze in the Indian, rather than Bactrian, Kushanshah area.


          A billon Nezak quarter unit from Kashmir Smast, perhaps 7th-8th century CE. 16mm, 1.0 grammes.


This much lighter coin is clearly a similar design to the larger Nezak coin in the previous section, and probably has the same origin, though from a different dynasty.

Both of these small coins were found in the Kashmir Smast caves. The idea of a cave kingdom that lasted several hundred years sounds impossibly romantic, but seems to be real enough!

Turco-Hepthalite Countermarks


Silver drachm of Khusro II with a Turco-Hephthalite countermark


A silver drachm of Khushrou II, 591-628 CE, with Turco-Hephthalite countermark dated around 650-700 CE.
33mm, 3.9 grammes.

 Some of the Sasanid coins were re-used by the Turco-Hepthalites.

Turco-Hephthalite countermark from a silver drachm of Khusro II
The Sasanid ruler Khushrou II was very expansionist. He re-conquered most of the territory of the old Achaemenid empire. However, he was assassinated in 628 CE, and the Sasanid empire never recovered from the resulting chaos. Coins of Khushrou II are easy to find, but this one is less common. It has a countermark showing that it was given approval to be used as currency by the later Turco-Hephthalites.


       Conquest by the Umayyad Caliphate

The Sasanian empire failed to withstand the spread of Islam, and fell to the Caliph Umar in a succession of battles in the mid 7th century CE. Persian culture was not completely repressed, despite some acts of destruction which resulted in a considerable emigration. The Zoroastrians were eventually accepted as "People of the Book" and a policy of tolerance was applied. Though, inevitably, within a couple of centuries most Persians became Islamic, and infused Persian cultural ideas into the Shi'a faith.



Silver hemidrachm of Sa'id bin Da'laj of Tabaristan


                       A silver hemidrachm of Sa'id bin Da'laj of Tabaristan, 772 CE. 23mm, 2.0 grammes.

Tabaristan – now the province of Mazandaran in northern Iran – remained independent of the Umayyads, and the mountainous regious were independent for some while after that. But their successors, the Abbasid Caliphate, controlled some areas. Here is a coin of an Abbasid governor, Sa'id bin Da'laj, struck by the Tabaristan mint. This coin shows that the Sasanian coin type was retained with little change, and Sa'id was apparently quite happy to depict a human face. However, the attendants on the reverse are here shown as stylised designs.


Silver hemidrachm of Sulaiman ben Mansur of Tabaristan with lozenge in place of head



A silver hemidrachm of Sulaiman ben Mansur of Tabaristan with a lozenge in place of the head, 136-138 CE.
24mm, 1.9 grammes.


This interesting hemidrachm was minted by the only ruler of Tabaristan to heed the Islamic prohibition against depicting the human form, as far as the coinage was concerned. Not only are the two attendants on the reverse still the same stylised columns, but the face on the obverse has been replaced with a neutral lozenge bearing the Arabic word "bakh," meaning "excellent." The shoulders, robes and crown are still in place, which gives a very odd effect.



Bukhara in Sogdiana

Bukhara fals with fire altar tamgha

                                             A bronze fals of Bukhara, 766 CE.     21mm, 1.8 grammes.

This bronze coin is an Abbasid fals from Bukhara in Sogdiana, currently part of Uzbekistan. Bukhara used a tamgha, or typical symbol, to indicate the origin of the coin. Sogdiana was rich in Persian cultural history, having been an eastern province of Achaemenid Persia, and so the tamgha chosen for this coin was a fire altar, placed on its side so as to fit in with the design of the coin.

Fire altar tamgha from a fals of Bukhara.    To the left of the coin is the tamgha turned the right way up.


A silver drachm from Bukhara with a stylised fire altar




                                        A silver drachm from Bukhara, 775-785 CE.  25mm, 2.7 grammes


Bukhara was on the silk road to China that was first established by Alexander the Great, so had increasing Chinese influence. But at the time of these two coins it was under the control of the Abbasid dynasty, the successor to the Umayyads. Even so, as with Tabaristan, their silver coins were in the old Sasanian tradition.
This silver drachm. issued by the Caliph al-Mahdi, has an obverse based on coins of the Sasanian Vahran V, and the reverse has a stylised fire altar with attendants, and with the bust of Ahura Mazda among the flames.

Fire Altars in India

When the Umayyad Caliphate conquered Persia, many Zoroastrians fled, migrating into India and mostly ending up in Gujarat, which lies on the west coast, south of modern Pakistan.



Silver coin of the Pratiharas with a fire altar reverse

                          A silver drachm of the Pratiharas of Rajasthan, 780-980 CE. 23mm, 3.7 grammes.

This Pratihara coin comes from the area of Rajasthan in northern India, and clearly shows a Sasanian-style fire altar with stylised attendants. (Though, I have also seen it said that the coin's style is wrong for the Pratiharas, and this coin type is from a later issue of unknown provenance.)



Silver coin of the Palas of Bengal



                               A silver drachm of the Palas of Bengal, after 853 CE. 18mm, 4.0 grammes.

The Buddhist Pala dynasty ruled Bengal in the ninth century. This coin is much more stylised, and the design was much larger than the flan of the coin, making it even harder to make out. The obverse of this one shows the area behind the head, with the circle of dots marking the edge of the design visible to the left, and a stylised hair tie at the top. The reverse is the left side of the fire altar, with one dot of flame visible, and the main part of the visible design is what remains of an attendant.


Silver coin of the Saindhavas of Saurashtra with a fire altar reverse

                         A silver drachm of the Saindhavas of Saurashtra, 800-950 CE. 18mm, 4.1 grammes.


This coin is from the Saindhavas dynasty, who were eventually conquered in 915 CE by the Abhiras dynasty, who owed alleigance to the Pratiharas. The bust and fire altar are crudely done, but stylised in a different way from either of the two coins above. You will see below that this type of styling continued for some while. 



                                  Silver coin of the Chaulukyas of Gujarat with a fire altar reverse


                               A silver drachm of the Chaulukyas of Gujarat, 900-950 CE.  17mm, 4.0 grammes.


The design of these coins from Gujarat is said to derive from silver drachms of the Sasanian king Peroz, whose coins were brought into Northern India by invading Huns in the 6th Century. That sounds very specific – why not coins of Khushru II, for example? Perhaps because Peroz is said to have paid a heavy ransom to the Hepthalites for the return of his son, in the 5th century CE, and the coins of that ransom could well have been the inspiration for this type.

                                          


Silver coin of the Chaulukyas of Gujarat with a fire altar reverse


                       A silver drachm of the Chaulukyas of Gujarat, 1030-1120 CE. 15mm, 4.0 grammes



But the inspiration was probably second or third-hand, via Hephthalite types like those shown above. Very stylised designs like this were most likely purely imitative, and didn't indicate that Zoroastrianism was a state religion. This example shows the further development of stylisation. Look how the eye, nostril, lips and chin are shown as a row of dots, which is continued decoratively below and round the head. This coin also has a "sun and moon" design above the head.

Coin of the Vaghelas of Gujarat with a fire altar reverse

                         A bronze drachm of the Vaghelas of Gujarat, 1210-1300 CE.  14mm, 4.6 grammes.


This is a very three-dimensional coin, much different from the flat and thin Sasanian drachms. The design is so stylised here that casual observers don't recognise the head and fire altar motifs at all. But the coin type over several hundred years remained quite consistent, and if you follow the series, the meaning of the design is clear.


Bronze coin of Gujarat with a fire altar reverse


                         A bronze drachm of Gujarat, c. 1300 CE.   11x15mm across, 4mm thick, 3.9 grammes


In the next example of this series, the nose has become completely detached from the head, which is now just a dumbbell-like abstract shape within a semi-circle of dots, with more ornate patterns around. The fire altar is still distinguishable on the reverse. The shape of the coin is irregular and the reverse is quite concave, so it's possible that the reverse die was domed in shape. Like the Pala example, none of these last four show the whole design on any one coin.


Finally, a coin which shows the purity of the design making way for something more informative. The curves to the left of the head are a Brahmi "Ja" symbol. To the right of the head, hard to make out, are an inverted triangle and another sun and moon symbol. The shaft of the fire altar on the reverse has written on it "Sri Omkara," which indicates that it was minted by the Omkara Mandhata Monastery in Malwa.



Silver coin of the Paramaras of Malwa with a fire altar reverse



                                  A billon drachm of the Paramaras of Malwa, 1150-1300 CE.  13mm, 4.1 grammes.

     

Friday, December 7, 2018

Indo-Greek coinage

The Indo-Greek coins are very important source of ancient Indian history. The term “Indo-Greek” is generally used because these kingdoms were almost always separated from Bactria and thus differed politically from the Greco-Bactrian kingdom. Their rule extended over a vast part of central Asia and north western South Asia. It included the modern areas of Afghanistan, north western part of Pakistan, the Indian provinces of Kashmir and Punjab. There were several dynasties and over 40 rulers of the Indo-Greek lineage who ruled over this extended time period. And surprisingly the main sources of information about the rule of these numerous kings are the numismatic evidences.




These kingdoms, in which there were already some Greek settlers called Yavanas or Yona (They are refered to a community in Indian texts and history under western countries along with Sindhu, Madra, Kekeya, Gandhara and Kamboja as per the descriptions in the epic Mahabharata), took more and more Indian characteristics, becoming truly unique political entities with a mix of Greek and Indian culture, at least for the ruling elites. Indo-Greek kingdoms timeline is very approximate. Between 190 BCE and circa 165 BCE, Greek possessions in India were divided between several Euthydemid kings which fought among themselves and their Greco-Bactrian neighbors. These kingdoms extended to Western Punjab and had Indians of Sunga dynasty as neighbors.

South Asia, and more precisely the modern state of India has experienced the incursion of several tribes throughout its history. Many of the famous military generals of the world had made their mark in the territories of South Asia. The Greek military genius Alexander also attacked north western India albeit without much success. The invasion of Alexander took place in the year of 326 BCE. However, he succeeded in establishing several Greek colonies. He left some of his military generals and soldiers to occupy and rule his Indian and Central Asian conquests. These Greek generals came to be known as Indo-Greeks in the history. They ruled roughly during the period between mid-3rd century BCE when Diodotus I established an independent kingdom to early 1st century BCE when they were overwhelmed by the Parthians and the Shakas.

The Indo-Greek coins inaugurated a new phase in the history of South Asian coinage. These coins carried elaborate details about their issuing authority. The name, the issuing year of the coin and a portrait of the reigning monarch was die-struck very precisely on the metal pieces.
We can identify elaborate measures of coin circulation in the Indo-Greek territory. The coins circulated in the north of the Hindu Kush Mountains were mainly made of gold, silver, copper and nickel. They were struck according to Attic weight standard. The obverse of the coins carried the portrait of the issuing monarch. The reverse of the coin was marked by the depiction of Greek gods and goddesses. The name of the monarch and his royal titles were also mentioned in the reverse in Greek.

The coins which were circulated in the south of the Hindu Kush bear more Indian touch. They were mostly made of silver and copper. Most of these coins are of round shape, while some of them are square. These coins were struck according to Indian weight standard. They bear the royal portrait on the obverse. But their reverse was marked by Indian religious symbols rather than Greek. These type of coins also carried bilingual and bi-script inscriptions using the Greek and Prakrit languages; and Greek and Kharosthi or Brahmi porn scripts.
The Indo-Greek coins have been found in large numbers in the modern Afghanistan. The largest number of coins was discovered from Gardez. This hoard is known as the Mir Zakah hoard. It yielded 13,083 coins. Among these large number of coins 2,757 were Indo-Greek coins. Other major finds are the hoard found at Khisht Tepe near Qunduz and the coins found during excavations at the city of Ai-Khanoum.

Out of 42 Indo-Greek kings who ruled, about 34 kings are known only through their coins. Coins of such kings as Menander depicted them slowly progressing from their teenage to old age, which also indicated their long reigns. The high standard of coinage set by the Indo-Greeks worked as a model for several other Indian dynasties for a very long period of time. The representation of Indian religious figures and symbols in the Indo-Greek coins has a greater significance for the cultural history of South Asia. This illustrated the syncretism of the Indo-Greek rulers. A sort of cultural and religious fusion between India and Greece can be traced from these coins.

The last Indo-Greek king Strato II ended his rule circa 10 BCE, vanquished by the Indo-Saka king Rajuvula.

The Indo-Greek kings and kingdoms are absent in the Greek imagination, because of the estrangement from the Greek world and the cut of political links due to Parthian and Sakas presence between India and Greece. However these kingdoms appear to have strongly influenced their Indian subject and Indian or nomad neighbors, as the nature of Indian art from the period, as well as the mention of the Yonas in Asoka's edicts suggest.

Challenges in Analyzing Indo-Greek Kings and their coinage

The principal problem that occurs in the study of Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek kingdoms is the number of their kings. More than 32 kings in not really more than 250 years.

A lack of information is a common problem for historians of the Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek kingdoms.

Most of what we know about those kings is through numismatics. Although Greek and Roman literature speaks of about 6 Greco-Bactrian kings, coins number more than 32 kings.

It is suggested that some Bactrian kings could have been co-opted. 


There is proof of fighting between Greco-Bactrian kings soon after they conquered Indian territories in the Punjab. After this we have several kings who issued only monolingual coins (Greek), and others who issued almost only bilingual ones. This shows a geographical frontline between those kingdoms somewhere in the Hindukush, some ruling over the Bactrian territories and the others over the Indian ones. A deep study of the coin legends shows that it seems Greco-Bactrian kings, at least at some point, used titles a different way than other Hellenistic kingdoms. In the memorial coinage of Agathokles (where on the obverse the king is commemorated and on the reverse is Agathokles himself), posthumous titles are added to kings. One of them, Theos (meaning "the God") is added to Euthydemos I, who is called like this in his coins, and to Diodotos I, whom we know that he let his son Diodotos II take part of kingship during his reign.

This, added to a somewhat intriguing title of a later queen, Agathokleia "Theotropos", which can be put in parallel with the usual "Epitropos" title meaning "regent", lets Widemann think about a designation of superiority by the kings who take the title Theos. They were always the ones who made monolingual coins and ruled in Bactria, meanwhile the others, called Sôter ("Saviour") or Dikaios ("The Just"), are always issuing bilingual coins. Note that, since Eucratides' usurpation c. 170 BC, this system no longer applies.







Commemorative coin of Euthydemos from Agathokles of Bactria

Agathokles of Bactria. Circa 185-170 BC. AR Tetradrachm. 

Commemorative issue struck for Euthydemos I. 
Obverse: diademed head of Euthydemos I right. EYΘYΔEMOY ΘEOY (= "of Euthydemos the God") 


Reverse: Herakles seated left on rock, holding in his right hand a club set on rocks beside his knee; monogram to right of rock. BAΣIΛEYONTOΣ ΔIKAIOY AΓAΘOKΛEOYΣ (="Agathocles ruling in a rightfull way")

Holding a large kingdom, with a good half being populated by non-Greeks, with both parts of this kingdom separated by the strong Hindukush mountains, knowing that civil war is just to an end, is a pretty hard thing. All of those can be the reason of a co-opted system, with a king of Bactria ruling nominally all of the kingdom but in fact just the part West and North of the Hindukush, and a co-opted king ruling East of it, but with the Bactrian king having the precedence over the Indo-Greek one. Other parallels exist in ancient times: First we have the obvious diarchies and tetrachies of the Romans, with the idea of several kings for the same state. We also have the "epistrategoi" of late Ptolemaic Egypt, in which those men had such great power on a specific province that they only answered directly to the king himself.

We also have the problem of the Saka invasions in the Ganges area. Bopearachchi talks about a Saka invasion c. 70 BC which led to the rule of the mighty Maues at Taxila. Nevertheless, there is no proof of such an invasion.

Maues is a special case: First he is the only Saka ruler to represent himself by a bust on his coin, the others showing themselves on a horse, like mounted warriors. 
Second, there is a rare coinage of him with a certain queen Machènè (she is on the observe with the Greek legend, and he is on the reverse with the kharosthi legend). Machènè seems to be a Greek name, and the character which is at the obverse is usually the most important. If they were married, or if she was regent, they would be on the same side of the coin, like all others did, even Indo-Greek ones (see Calliope/Hermaios, or Agathokleia/Strato for example). So there is probably something different here.

Widemann's thesis is that Maues was the chief of the Sakas settled in the Indo-Greek kingdom. This is highly possible: We have proof that Bactrian kings used Sakas to contain other invaders; many of them probably became somewhat Hellenized and went south to Punjab with their Greek rulers when they abandoned Bactria to the Yuezhei. The kind of representation that is found on Maues' coins supports this argument. Maybe Maues took an important place in a moment of crisis, such as being a vice-regent. We have a certain Telephos, an Indo-Greek king by his name at least, who called himself "son of Maues". Maybe he was the son of Machènè, and as queen she looked for the protection of the Sakas and so found Maues in a time of weakness? We must not forget that in Macedonia, Antigonos Doson, being the vice-regent for Philip, appears in an inscription with the title of king, although Philip gave him no title.

We know far too little to say what is right or wrong, but what is certain is that Maues was not a "Saka invader" from the North of the Hindukush. His coins show him like an Hellenized Saka, probably one of those settled in Indo-Greek Patalene or Surastene.

Following Bopearachchi, there was an almost-consensus that the last Indo-Greek kingdom survived in the Eastern Punjab until c. 10 AD, under the rule of Strato II or III. Nevertheless, taking one hypothesis of Bopearachchi in another way, there are some indications that could show us that there still existed one Indo-Greek kingdom around Alexandria Kapisa (Alexandria of the "Caucasus") until c. 15/20 AD.

The problem is related of the "Hermaios" coinage. Many coins bearing this name have been discovered, but the chronological field of those coins is really too large for only one king. In ancient times, kings never put a number after their name when they were not the first to take the name. For example, Ptolemaios XI issued "Ptolemaiou Basileôs", without any number. Even knowing this, Bopearachchi chose to put some of the "Hermaios coins" in a "barbarous imitations" section, due to their poor style and their belonging to the Hindukush area in the very late 1st century BC, because that is the only really plausible solution that works with his theory on the Saka invasion c. 70 BC.
Nevertheless, the Sakas who settled into independent kingdoms in India in the 1st century BC seemed to have always made coins with their own representations and names. Even the Sakas of Seistan, West of the Hindukush, had at this time their own coinage, so why imitate the series of an Indo-Greek king? In the same way, there is coinage of Hermaios (at the obverse in Greek legend), but with a reverse of the koushan Kujula Kadphises (in Kharosthi).

Coin-of-both-hermaios-and-kujula-kadphises

AE tetradrachm
c. first half of 1st. Century
Weight:7.29 gm., Diam:22 mm., Die axis: 10h
Hermaios-style diademed bust right
Greek legend around: BAΣIΛEΩΣ ΣTHPOΣΣV EPMAIOV /
Hercules standing facing, holding club and lion skin
Kharoshti legend around:
Kujula Kasasa Kushana Yavugasa Dhramathidasa
Ref:  MAC 2844.


More than seeing a simple imitation of a local currency, there is more probably an indication of a diplomatic message to the Greeks: a King named Hermaios allied himself with Kujula, or Kujula claimed to be in the succession of the Greek rulers of this area by minting this coin. Here we are dealing with the least known part of the Indo-Greek history, so for now it is impossible to say why this coin was minted, but what seems rather possible is the existence of several kings named Hermaios ruling an Indo-Greek kingdom centred around Alexandria Kapisa in the Hindukush at most until the invasion of Gondophares II c. 20 AD.
So here are three theses that could, if proven correct, change many of our views on Bactrian history and even also on Indian and Indo-Saka history. The co-opted system of rulership would make those Indo-Greek kingdoms even more exceptional and interesting to study, showing an example of how to deal with the problem of ruling two very different and separate areas in ancient times.