1840.] from Bactrian and Indo- Scythian coins. 737 



In these countries this could have only taken place on the great 

 lake of the Drangians. Both kings first assume the title vi/c>?^opoc, 

 and are founders of empires by successful wars ; chronology there- 

 fore admitting^ (on this hereafter,) we may justly attribute to 

 Antimachos the foundation of the Drangian, and to Antialkides 

 that of the Arachosio-Cabulian empires ; the foundation of the 

 Indian empire must then belong to a third king. 



If there were only one Eukratides, the coins with Cabulian le- 

 gends, and the title of great king, must be ascribed to the for- 

 tunate, though short, epoch of his life, when his reign extended 

 to the Hydaspes. I say short, because he fell by the hand of 

 his son at the very moment of his return. If there were two 

 Eukratides, those coins belong to the second. 



We have before this, doubted the existence of Eukratides II, 

 as far as it was inferred from the coins. We have now to exa- 

 mine the passages of authors adduced in his favour. According 

 to Bayer^s assertion, Eukratides is spoken of in a way unsuited 

 to the victorious king of this name ; he thinks, that the son 

 had put to death his father, because he protected the Parthians, 

 who assisted him against Demetrius. But all that we learn 

 concerning the relations of both empires, never shows a friendly, 

 but on the contrary an entirely hostile intercourse. We will 

 not lose our time in conjectures as to the motives of that crime. 



The passages which are said to afford the argument mentioned, 

 are the following : — Strabo xi, 9, 2. a^eiXovro (the Parthians) 

 Se Koi rric BaKvpiavrig fikpoq j3ia<7a^£VOt rovq ^KvBai;, Kai hri 

 TTporepov Tovg ir^pi ^vKpari^av. 



This passage must be explained by the statement, above men- 

 tioned, that the Parthians had deprived Eukratides of two of the 

 Bactrian Satrapies, Turiva and the Aspiones ; they afterwards took 

 from the Scythians either this or another northern part of the 

 Bactrian empire ; they took it therefore from the very same Scy- 

 thians, who under Eu thy demos already threatened an irruption 

 into Bactria, and who must afterwards have found an opportu- 

 nity of invading this country. Why might not Mithridates VI. 

 have availed himself of the siege of Eukratides by Demetrios, in 

 order to subdue the Turanian Satrapies ? Beyond this passage 



