740 Lassen on the History traced [No. 104. 



cides against Parthia^ whether it were under a son of Eukra- 

 tides, or a successor of this king. As El^Tnais and Persis alone 

 are mentioned^ and not Drangiana and Arachosia, the inference 

 may be admitted^ that the two latter empires were already oc- 

 cupied by the Parthians.* 



One datum only for the more early Bactrian history, may still 

 be derived from extant authors, the accession of Eukratides. 



According to Justin, Eukratides ascended the throne at the 

 same time with Arsaces VI. ; but the statements and opinions 

 on this very point are unfortunately very uncertain. Bayer upon 

 his investigations places the commencement of the reign of both 

 about 181 B. c. 



According to Visconti, Mithridates' accession occurred 165 

 B. c. (Bayer p. 86, Vise. Iconogr. iii. 70) Here are indeed to 

 be found reasons for the probability only of the fact, and they 

 apparently are in Bayer's favour. We perhaps fall into the less 

 error of the two by adopting the medium between both dates, 

 175 B. c.f The first expeditions against India under Euthy- 

 demos, his death, the foundation of an independent king- 

 dom by his son Demetrios, the expulsion of the Euthyde- 

 mides from Bactria, either by Eukratides, or by a predecessor 

 of his, all those events must be assigned to the years 200 



* Bayer (p. 90) has thoroughly re%dewed a diificult passage of Orosius 

 referring to this place. 



t Mithridates' accession must not be placed too far down, as he died 

 at an advanced age "gloriosa senectute,"anditis hkely ascended the throne 

 early. Another reason for the determination of the foregoing date, is 

 that the war of Demetrios with Eukratides, must not be fixed at too late 

 a time. The former, was at the conclusion of a peace between his father 

 and Antiochus, a youth, about 20 years old. If he now fought in the 

 55th year of his age with Eukratides for the possession of Bactria, this war 

 happened 30 years after, 200 b. c. or 170. If our conjecture were correct, 

 that Antimachos could only have acquired his empire in Drangiana and 

 in its neighbourhood after the overthrow of Demetrios, this would be 

 another confirmatory reason. It is not necessary to bring him in direct 

 parallel with Antiochus IV. ; yet the commencement of his reign cannot be 

 traced to a later period than 164, but rather to an earlier one; M. R. 

 R. adopted the year 1 70. 



