The Origins of the Greco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek Kingdoms and Their Place in Modern Research

When Alexander the Great decisively defeated the Persian king Darius III at Gaugamela in 331 BCE, Darius fled further east. Bessus, the satrap of Bactria and one of Darius’ commanders during the battle of Gaugamela, however, took Darius captive and shortly after murdered him. Bactria, roughly corresponding to modern-day Afghanistan, was a rugged region controlled by quasi-autonomous warlords and chiefs. It was renowned for its wealth, formidable cavalry and rich mineral deposits. After disposing of Darius, Bessus proclaimed himself the new Persian king, adopting the name of Artaxerxes V. He resisted Alexander for a while, but his own men eventually grew tired of him and handed him over to Alexander, who ordered his brutal execution. Yet even after Bessus’ death, resistance continued as warlords entrenched themselves in impregnable mountain fortresses, (significantly hindering the Macedonian advance.) Alexander faced some of the most challenging moments of his campaign while trying to subdue Bactria and neighboring Sogdiana, with the warlord Spitamenes seen as one of the most tenacious adversaries of Alexander. 

After eventually subduing Bactria and leaving a sizeable force there to keep control, Alexander crossed the Hindu Kush, leading to his famous but hard-fought victory at the Hydaspes (326 BCE) against the local king Porus. However, growing discontent and homesickness among his troops forced Alexander to begin the march westwards. Alexander would never see Macedonia again, however, as he died in Babylon in 323 BCE. 

While the achievements of Alexander the Great are widely known, what followed after his death is far less familiar to the general public. His vast empire quickly became the target of competing ambitions, as his generals and advisors sought to carve out realms of their own. After decades of political intrigue, betrayal, and warfare, three major kingdoms emerged. The largest of these was the Seleucid Empire, which stretched from the eastern Mediterranean all the way to the Hindu Kush mountains, thereby including Bactria. This empire ruled over a wide array of ethnic groups and religious traditions, and local satraps in distant provinces often enjoyed a significant degreeof autonomy. Such was also the case in Bactria, and with its geographical distance from the Seleucid heartland and its wealth, it isn’t surprising that Seleucid rule would be challenged.

Around 250 BCE, Bactria broke away from its Seleucid overlords, with the former satrap Diodotus I becoming its first king. This marked the beginning of an independent Bactrian kingdom, ruled by a Greco-Macedonian elite, whose later conquests led to the formation of at least one Indo-Greek kingdom. The main distinction between the Bactrian and Indo-Greek kingdoms is geographical, with the Indo-Greek territories situated south of the Hindu Kush. While the evidence points to Bactria itself being invaded and subjugated by nomadic tribes around 130 BCE, some Indo-Greek kingdoms appear to have persisted till around the beginning of the Common Era, but by then their power had greatly diminished.

Unfortunately, much about the Bactrian and Indo-Greek kingdoms remains poorly understood. This is a shame, as what we do know points to unique civilizations with a great deal of diversity in terms of ethnicity, religion, and culture. Several factors contribute to our limited knowledge. First and foremost, written sources on these kingdoms are extremely scarce. The few we have briefly mention a handful of kings and provide some essential foundations for our understanding, but overall, the historical record is severely lacking.

Secondly, the political situation in the region today has greatly hindered archaeological excavations. We are fortunate that some sites have been explored—Ai Khanoum being the best-known example. But even here, there’s a bitter aftertaste: renewed instability in Afghanistan eventually forced archaeologists to abandon the site, leaving it vulnerable to widespread looting and illegal digging. As a result, countless artefacts have made their way illegally onto the art market, or worse, have been melted down and lost forever.

Thirdly, since there are so little written sources, Bactria has received far less attention from scholars than let’s say the Mediterranean. Fortunately, there is change in this regard, and the last decades have seen incredible progress in our understanding of these kingdoms. This is largely dependent on the one source type that we do have in abundance: the coinage left behind by the dozens of kings that ruled over the Bactrian and Indo-Greek kingdoms. The coinage of these kingdoms stands out for several reasons. Not only is it often of exceptional artistic quality (and has it become valued as a collectible), but it also displays a remarkable degree of experimentation, not seen anywhere else in the ancient world. Many cointypes are excellent examples of the interactions between the different ethnicities, cultures and religions that were present in these regions. Indo-Greek coinage is also remarkable in its use of bilingual inscriptions, with one side having a legend in Greek, while the other side used a legend in Brahmi or Kharosthi script.

With more and more types and kings being identified over the years, scholars have been able to establish a chronology, an achievement which demonstrates the potential of numismatic source material. However, much uncertainty remains, an unfortunate consequence of the lack of other sources with which to link the results from numismatic research. Still, much insight has been gained. However, the tireless work of scholars such as Frank Holt, Osmund Bopearachchi, Rachel Mairs and Simon Glenn have sometimes failed to reach beyond an academic audience. Even with their advancements, the amount of wrong information given on Wikipedia articles, videos from historical YouTube channels or even academic works that are not specifically focused on Bactria, remains staggering. This is largely the result from persisting narratives found in older works. Before the study of the Bactrian and Indo-Greek kingdoms became what it is today, its study often lost itself in narratives bordering on fantasy. This is a direct result of the scarcity of sources, making it tempting to extract as much information as possible from the available material. However, this approach carries the risk of overinterpretation, forcing the sources to answer questions they simply cannot address. 

The works of Tarn and Narain are the most well-known examples of this issue. While their work was important and should be understood in the context of their time, it contains many claims without sufficient evidence, often presented as facts. Without the right background knowledge, it’s easy to overlook this. As a result, incorrect or unverifiable claims still circulate. A clear example is in the reconstruction of royal family trees or conflicts. The only kings we can connect with relative certainty are Diodotus I and Diodotus II, and Euthydemus I and Demetrius I, with their familial connection confirmed by literary and/or epigraphic evidence. Despite this, Wikipedia pages, historical videos, and even recent academic literature, claim family relations between dozens of kings, often relying on the influential but outdated works of Tarn and Narain. Kings are labeled as fathers, sons, or uncles, despite a lack of conclusive evidence. Sometimes even queens of whose existence there is not a single piece of evidence are fabricated to make the conjectural family trees fit. The same thing can be said of supposed conflicts between different kings, with Holt fittingly describing the fantastical reconstructions of Tarn as follows: “He argued chronological points down to specific years, seasons and even months, and he traced the movements of armies and generals across Central and South Asia as if he had captured their campaign maps.” (Holt 2012, p.71)

While studying Bactrian and Indo-Greek history comes with many challenges, there is also plenty of reason for optimism. Despite the difficulties, our understanding continues to grow, and today we have a much clearer picture of these kingdoms than we could have imagined just a few decades ago. Evidence has shed light on conflicts between different kings, revealed how various cultures and religions interacted, and significantly expanded our understanding of the political system in recent years. This progress is thanks to meticulous research by historians and numismatists, who use valuable but highly technical methods. However, for those looking to learn more about Bactrian and Indo-Greek history, this can make the literature difficult to access, as the research is often presented in a complex, academic format.

Therefore, this article is the first in a series of short pieces aimed at introducing the Bactrian and Indo-Greek kingdoms. The goal is to make their history more accessible to a wider audience while maintaining scientific accuracy. Come along as we uncover the secrets of these mysterious and captivating kingdoms!

Harald Blot

Harald Blot graduated with a degree in History from Ghent University, Belgium. His research centers on the Hellenistic period, with a particular emphasis on numismatics and the Bactrian and Indo-Greek kingdoms. His master’s thesis made contributions to the understanding of these kingdoms’ chronology, political landscape, cultural and religious interactions, and monetary experimentation, also highlighting how these diverse aspects are interconnected. Currently, two articles based on his master’s thesis are in the process of being published in academic journals. He has also submitted a PhD proposal with the aim of continuing his research on the Bactrian and Indo-Greek kingdoms. In addition, Harald runs an Instagram channel called CoinsCulturesandConquests, where he shares book recommendations, informative posts, and showcases various fascinating coins.

Sources and literature: 

• Bopearachchi, O., Monnaies gréco-bactriennes et indo-grecques: catalogue raisonné, 1991, Paris. 
• Coloru, O., “The quest for Bactra: scholarship on the Graeco-Bactrian kingdom from its origins to the end of colonialism”, The Graeco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek world, ed. R. Mairs, 2021 New York, pp. 127-41.
• Glenn, S., Money and power in Hellenistic Bactria, 2020, New York. 
• Glenn, S., “History from coins: the role of numismatics in the study of the Graeco- Bactrian and Indo-Greek worlds”, The Graeco-Bactrian and Indo-Greek world, ed. R. Mairs, 2021, New York, pp. 467-86.
• Holt, F., Thundering Zeus: the making of Hellenistic Bactria, 1999, Berkeley. 
• Holt, F., Into the land of bones: Alexander the Great in Afghanistan, 2005, Berkeley. 
• Holt, F., Lost world of the golden king: in search of ancient Afghanistan, 2012, Berkeley.
• Hoover, O., Handbook of coins of Baktria and ancient India: including Sogdiana, Margiana, Areia, and the Indo-Greek, Indo-Scythian, and native Indian states south of the Hindu Kush, 2013, Lancaster. 
• Mairs, R., The Hellenistic Far East: archaeology, language, and identity in Greek Central Asia, 2016 Berkeley. 
• Narain, A., The Indo-Greeks, 1957, Oxford. 
• Senior, R., “The Indo-Greek and Indo-Scythian king sequences in the second and first centuries BC”,  Journal of Oriental Numismatic History, Vol. 179, 2004, pp. 33-56. 
• Tarn, W., The Greeks in Bactria and India, 1938, Cambridge.
• Thonemann, P., The Hellenistic world: using coins as sources, 2015, Cambridge.