→War
(There are many issues with this article, first all the data of war and result not in series, everything scrambled like garbage .... I will arrange everything in sequence , and some important Greecian historian statement also missing which I will copy from ''Treaty of Indus'' article......) |
(→War) Tags: Mobile edit Mobile web edit |
||
| Line 47: | Line 47: | ||
It is unknown if there was in fact a [[pitched battle]].{{sfn|Kosmin|2014|p=33–34}} Military historian John D. Grainger has argued that Seleucus, upon crossing the Indus, "would find himself in a trap, with a large river at his back and a hostile continent before him," and consequently could not have advanced much farther than the Indus. According to Grainger, the details of the conflict are unclear, but the outcome clearly must have been "a decisive Indian victory," with Chandragupta driving back Seleucus' forces as far as the [[Hindu Kush]] and consequently gaining large territories in modern-day Afghanistan.{{sfn|Grainger|2014|pp=108–110}} Wheatley and Heckel suggest that the degree of friendly Maurya-Seleucid relations established after the war implies that the hostilities were probably "neither prolonged nor grievous".{{sfn|Wheatley|Heckel|2011|p=296}} | It is unknown if there was in fact a [[pitched battle]].{{sfn|Kosmin|2014|p=33–34}} Military historian John D. Grainger has argued that Seleucus, upon crossing the Indus, "would find himself in a trap, with a large river at his back and a hostile continent before him," and consequently could not have advanced much farther than the Indus. According to Grainger, the details of the conflict are unclear, but the outcome clearly must have been "a decisive Indian victory," with Chandragupta driving back Seleucus' forces as far as the [[Hindu Kush]] and consequently gaining large territories in modern-day Afghanistan.{{sfn|Grainger|2014|pp=108–110}} Wheatley and Heckel suggest that the degree of friendly Maurya-Seleucid relations established after the war implies that the hostilities were probably "neither prolonged nor grievous".{{sfn|Wheatley|Heckel|2011|p=296}} | ||
==Marriage alliance== | |||
[[File:Mauryan head from Sarnath.jpg|thumb|upright|Figure of a foreigner, found in [[Sarnath]], 3rd century BCE.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Bachhofer |first1=Ludwig |title=Early Indian Sculpture Vol. I |date=1929 |publisher=The Pegasus Press |location=Paris |pages=239–240 |url=https://indianculture.gov.in/rarebooks/early-indian-sculpture-vol-i |language=en}}</ref> This is a probable member of the West Asian [[Pahlava]] or [[Saka]] elite in the [[Gangetic plain]]s during the Mauryan period.<ref name="Gupta 122">Page 122: About the [[Masarh lion]]: "This particular example of a foreign model gets added support from the male heads of foreigners from Patna city and Sarnath since they also prove beyond doubt that a section of the elite in the Gangetic Basin was of foreign origin. However, as noted earlier, this is an example of the late Mauryan period since this is not the type adopted in any Ashoka pillar. We are, therefore, visualizing a historical situation in India in which the West Asian influence on Indian art was felt more in the late Mauryan than in the early Mauryan period. The term West Asia in this context stands for Iran and Afghanistan, where the Sakas and Pahlavas had their base-camps for eastward movement. The prelude to future inroads of the Indo-Bactrians in India had after all started in the second century B.C."... in {{cite book |last1=Gupta |first1=Swarajya Prakash |author-link=Swaraj Prakash Gupta|title=The Roots of Indian Art: A Detailed Study of the Formative Period of Indian Art and Architecture, Third and Second Centuries B.C., Mauryan and Late Mauryan |year=1980 |publisher=B.R. Publishing Corporation |isbn=978-0-391-02172-3 |pages=88, 122 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0lDqAAAAMAAJ |language=en}}.</ref><ref name="Gupta 318">According to Gupta [[:File:Mauryan head from Sarnath.jpg|this is]] a non-Indian face of a foreigner with a conical hat: "If there are a few faces which are nonIndian, such as one head from Sarnath with conical cap ( Bachhofer, Vol . I, Pl . 13 ), they are due to the presence of the foreigners their costumes, tastes and liking for portrait art and not their art styles." in {{cite book |last1=Gupta |first1=Swarajya Prakash |author-link=Swaraj Prakash Gupta|title=The Roots of Indian Art: A Detailed Study of the Formative Period of Indian Art and Architecture, Third and Second Centuries B.C., Mauryan and Late Mauryan |year=1980 |publisher=B.R. Publishing Corporation |isbn=978-0-391-02172-3 |page=318 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0lDqAAAAMAAJ |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title=Annual Report 1907-08 |date=1911 |page=55 |url=https://archive.org/details/in.ernet.dli.2015.35434/page/n101/mode/2up}}</ref>]] | |||
Chandragupta and [[Seleucus I Nicator|Seleucus]] concluded a peace treaty and a marriage alliance in 303 BCE. Chandragupta received vast territories and in a return gave Seleucus 500 [[war elephant]]s,{{sfn|R. C. Majumdar|2003|p=105}}<ref>Ancient India, (Kachroo, p.196)</ref><ref>''The Imperial Gazetteer of India'' (Hunter, p.167)</ref><ref>''The evolution of man and society'' (Darlington, p.223)</ref><ref>W. W. Tarn (1940). "Two Notes on Seleucid History: 1. Seleucus' 500 Elephants, 2. Tarmita", ''The Journal of Hellenic Studies'' '''60''', p. 84–94.</ref> a military asset which would play a decisive role at the [[Battle of Ipsus]] in 301 BCE.{{sfn|Kosmin|2014|p=37}} In addition to this treaty, Seleucus dispatched an ambassador, [[Megasthenes]], to Chandragupta, and later [[Deimakos]] to his son [[Bindusara]], at the Mauryan court at [[Pataliputra]] (modern [[Patna]] in [[Bihar state|Bihar]]). Later, [[Ptolemy II Philadelphus]], the ruler of [[Ptolemaic Egypt]] and contemporary of [[Ashoka]], is also recorded by [[Pliny the Elder]] as having sent an ambassador named [[Dionysius (ambassador)|Dionysius]] to the Mauryan court.<ref name="perseus.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de">{{cite web|url=http://perseus.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/cgi-bin/ptext?lookup=Plin.+Nat.+6.21 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20130728023626/http://perseus.mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de/cgi-bin/ptext?lookup=Plin.%2BNat.%2B6.21 |url-status=dead |archive-date=28 July 2013 |title=Pliny the Elder, The Natural History (eds. John Bostock, H. T. Riley) }}</ref>{{better source needed|date=August 2016}} | |||
Mainstream scholarship asserts that Chandragupta received vast territory west of the Indus, including the [[Hindu Kush]], modern-day Afghanistan, and the [[Balochistan, Pakistan|Balochistan]] province of Pakistan.<ref>[[Vincent Arthur Smith|Vincent A. Smith]] (1998). ''Ashoka''. Asian Educational Services. {{ISBN|81-206-1303-1}}.</ref><ref>[[Walter Eugene Clark]] (1919). "The Importance of Hellenism from the Point of View of Indic-Philology", ''Classical Philology'' '''14''' (4), pp. 297–313.</ref> Archaeologically, concrete indications of Mauryan rule, such as the inscriptions of the [[Edicts of Ashoka]], are known as far as [[Kandahar]] in southern Afghanistan. | |||
{{blockquote|He (Seleucus) crossed the Indus and waged war with Sandrocottus [Maurya], king of the Indians, who dwelt on the banks of that stream, until they came to an understanding with each other and contracted a marriage relationship. | [[Appian]]| ''History of Rome'', The Syrian Wars [https://www.livius.org/ap-ark/appian/appian_syriaca_11.html 55]}} | |||
{{blockquote|After having made a treaty with him (Sandrakotos) and put in order the Orient situation, Seleucos went to war against [[Antigonus I Monophthalmus|Antigonus]].|[[Junianus Justinus]]|''Historiarum Philippicarum, libri XLIV'', [http://www.forumromanum.org/literature/justin/trad15.html XV.4.15]}} | |||
The treaty on "[[Epigamia]]" implies lawful marriage between Greeks and Indians was recognized at the State level, although it is unclear whether it occurred among dynastic rulers or common people, or both.{{citation needed|date=July 2009}} | |||
Indian source Bhavishya Purana also mentioned about Chandrgupta marriage: | |||
<blockquote> | |||
śakyāsihāduddhasiṁhaḥ piturarddha kṛtaṁ padam॥ | |||
candraguptastasya sutaḥ paurasādhi pateḥ sutām। | |||
sulūvasya tathodvahya yāvanī baudhatatparaḥ।। | |||
ṣaṣṭhivarṣa kṛtaṁ rājyaṁ bindusārastatobhavat। | |||
pitṛstulyaṁ kṛtaṁ rājyamaśokastanayo'bhavat ।। | |||
(Bhavishya Purana - Pratisarga Parva 1: Chapter 6, Verse 43,44)<ref>{{Cite book|url=http://archive.org/details/NHJr_bhavishya-maha-puran-1959-khem-raj-shri-krishna-lal-shri-venkateshwar-steam-press-mumbai|title=Bhavishya Maha Puran, 1959 Khem Raj Shri Krishna Lal, Shri Venkateshwar Steam Press, Mumbai|last=Khem Raj Shri Krishna Lal|first=Shri Venkateshwar Steam Press}}</ref> | |||
Translation: The descendants of Shakyasingh became Lord Buddha, who ruled for half of his father's time. Chandragupta, a descendant of Buddha, married the Buddhist daughter of the Greek ruler Seleucus, and he ruled for sixty years. After him, Bindusara, ruled, and eventually, Ashoka emerged as a significant ruler, continuing the lineage of Bindusara. | |||
</blockquote> | |||
== Consequences == | == Consequences == | ||