APION

5:23 PM | BY ZeroDivide EDIT
His Political Activity.
A Greek grammarian and sophist of Alexandria, noted for his bitter hatred of the Jews; born in the Great Oasis of Egypt between 20 and 30 B.C., died probably at Rome between 45 and 48. As Joel ("Angriffe des Heidenthums," etc., p. 8) points out, his name, derived from the Egyptian bull-god Apis, indicates his Egyptian origin. He was surnamed also Pleistonikides, or son of Pleistonikes (Suidas, and in his epitaph in "Corpus Inscript. Græc." iii., addenda 4742b), "the man of many victories"; also Mochthos ("the industrious one"). Apion himself claimed to have been born in Alexandria (see Willrich, "Juden und Griechen vor d. Makkabäischen Erhebung," p. 172), but it seems that he was only brought thither when very young, and educated in the house of Didymus the Great, the grammarian (born 63 B.C., died about 1). He was a pupil of the centenarian Euphranor, while Apollonius, son of Archibius, was his pupil rather than his teacher. When Theon, head of the Homeric grammar school at Alexandria, died, Apion succeeded him in that position, preferring, however, the fanciful etymological method of Didymus and the allegorical one of Krates to the rigid traditional system of Aristarchus. But it was chiefly as an itinerant lecturer on Homer that he gained his great popularity (Seneca, "Epistolä," lxxxviii.). In this capacity he traveled through Greece and Italy, first during the reign of Tiberius, who, disdaining his unscholarly manner, called him the "World's Drum" (cymbalum mundi). In Rome his charlatan methods (vitium ostentationis, Gellius, "Noctes Atticä," v. 14) failed to impress the people favorably. It was in the tumultuous and excitable city of Alexandria, chiefly under Caligula, that his opportunity for using his superficial knowledge to advantage came to him. He utilized both tongue and pen in appealing to the prejudices of the populace, and sedulously fanned the flame of discord during the conflict that broke out between the Jews and Jew-haters in Alexandria, upon Caligula's imperial decree to have his image set up and worshiped by the Jews as well as the rest of the people. Apion labored against the Jews with growing success, and his fellow citizens appointed him at the head of the delegation to the emperor Caligula in the year 40 topresent the formal charge of disloyalty against the Jews of Alexandria. It was a foregone conclusion that he would defeat Philo (the philosopher), the head of the Jewish delegation (Josephus, "Ant." xviii. 8, § 1). After this he seems to have settled down in Rome, and opened a school there, numbering Pliny among his disciples. He probably died there, suffering, as Josephus narrates, from an ugly disease to remedy which he vainly resorted to circumcision, the operation he had so often derided in his writings (Josephus, "Contra Ap." ii. 14).
Claim of Universal Knowledge. Apion was a man of great versatility of intellect, superficially familiar with all branches of knowledge (περιεργότατōς γραμματικῶυ, Julius Africanus). He lectured on the Pyramids and on Pythagoras, on the virtues and vices of Sappho and Anacreon, on the birthplace of Homer as well as on Lais, the noted courtezan. He loved to dwell on the miraculous things in natural science, whereof he eagerly accumulated facts to illustrate all sorts of mythological and superstitious views. He was also a magnetic orator who knew how to appeal to the imagination of the people. Of his extreme vanity both Josephus and Pliny the Elder give ample proofs. He held out the promise of glorious immortality to any one to whom he should inscribe a work of his. "Thus," says Pliny, "speaks one who is the trumpet of his own fame rather than that of the world, as Tiberius called him" (Pliny, preface 25). Again, after enumerating the remarkable men the Greeks produced, he proclaims Alexandria happy in possessing a citizen like himself (Josephus, "Contra Ap." ii. 13). More serious is that trait of his character for which he was called a "Cretan," as synonymous with impostor (see Von Gutschmid, "Kleinere Schriften," iv. 357). He pretended (Pliny, "Historia Naturalis," xxx. 6) to have raised up Homer's shade from the dead by the help of some magic plant, and to have received from it information about the poet's place of birth and parentage, which he was not permitted to disclose; to have received from Kteson, an inhabitant of Ithaca, during his stay there, an exact description of Penelope's suitors' game of draughts (Athenæus, i. 16); to have heard from Egyptian sages the true account of Moses and the Exodus, an account which he simply copied from Manetho (Josephus, ib. ii. 2); to have been an eye-witness of the scene at the Circus Maximus when the lion recognized Androclus as his benefactor (Gellius, l.c. vi. 4); and of the scene at Puteoli when the dolphin displayed love for a youth (Gellius, l.c. vii. 8). It is almost inconceivable how Von Gutschmid (l.c. p. 360) can defend Apion against the charges of charlatanism made by Lehrs. Trustworthy contemporaries like Pliny the Elder, Seneca, Gellius, and Athenæus represent him exactly as does Josephus, as a man upon whose statements little reliance can be placed. In the "Clementine Homilies" (iv. 8 et seq., v. 5 et seq.) he is introduced both as a believer in magic—if not a fraudulent practitioner of the art —and a defender of Greek mythology.
His Egyptian History. Apion was a voluminous writer, but few of his writings have been preserved except what is found in the quotations of Josephus, his adversary. He wrote a treatise on the Latin language, and was one of the first to compose a glossary on Homer, probably, as Von Gutschmid says, embodied in the "Lexicon Homericon" of his disciple Apollonius, and hence in the "Etymologicon." He wrote a eulogy on Alexander the Great, as Gutschmid supposes, in recognition of the honor of citizenship conferred upon him by the Alexandrians. Another book of his bore the title "On Homer as a Magician," wherein he treated of the superstitious side of Homeric life, such as the magic plant μῶλυ, Circe and Hades, in a manner in keeping with the taste of his age. Apion was the author of "comments" on Homer and on Aristophanes, and also wrote a discourse on Apicius, the gourmet. But his chief work was on Egyptian history, written in close imitation of Manetho's work of the same title, "Ægyptiaca," and embodying the contents of Manetho's other works, the one on the ancient life and worship of the Egyptians, and the other on their theology.
Type of an Anti-Semitic. It was divided into five books, the first three corresponding with the three of Manetho's books, the other two books with two other works of Manetho, and presented in popular style whatever seemed to be marvelous and interesting to a credulous age. While collecting his stories thus from the most dubious sources in Egyptian history, he assumes to speak with the authority of one who has made personal researches regarding the things which he relates, and on the very spot where they occurred. It appears that he made it his especial object to explain animal-worship and other religious practises of the Egyptians by observations of the marvels of nature, and so he wrote a special work on the study of nature and its forms, wherein he also follows Manetho's example and adopts his pantheistic view. As has been clearly shown by Schürer ("Gesch. d. Jüdischen Volkes," iii. 408), it was in the third book of his "Ægyptiaca" (and not in a special book against the Jews, as was erroneously assumed by the Church fathers, and asserted ever since) that those slanders were made by Apion against the Jews which found their way to Tacitus ("History," v. 1-5) and many other writers in Rome, and against which Josephus wrote the second part of his splendid apologetic work, known by the title "Contra Apionem." In the polemical portion of his book, Apion repeated whatever Manetho, Apollonius Molo, Posidonius, Chæremon, and Lysimachus had ever written against the Jews. He first attacks them from the point of view of an Egyptian. He reiterates with considerable embellishment the slanderous tale told by Manetho, of the Jewish people having been led out of Egypt, a horde of lepers, blind and lame. He pretends to have heard from the ancient men of Egypt that Moses was of the city of Heliopolis, the city of the sun, and that is why he taught his people to offer prayers toward the rising sun. To account for the origin of the Sabbath, he tells a story current among the people of the time (if not invented by him) as follows: When the 110,000 lepers (this is the number also given by Lysimachus), expelled from Egypt, had traveled for six days, they developed buboes in their groins, and so they rested on the seventh day for their recuperation. The name for this malady being Sabbo in the Egyptian language, they called the day of rest Sabbath (Josephus, "Contra Ap." ii. 2-3).
Apion next assails the Jews from the point of view of an Alexandrian. He asks how these Jews, coming from Syria, could claim the name and title of Alexandrian citizens, and he upbraids them for not worshiping the same gods as the Egyptians, and specifically for not erecting images to the emperors as all the rest were content to do.
Tales About Jewish Worship. Finally, he derides the religion of the Jews by reiterating all sorts of ridiculous slanders concerning the Temple of Jerusalem. Thus he writes that when Antiochus Epiphanes entered the holy place, he found there an ass's head, made of gold and worth agreat deal of money. To make the fable still more interesting, he relates that when the Jews were at war with the Idumeans, a man by the name of Zabidus, a worshiper of Apollo, the god of the city of Dora, had come forth promising that he would deliver up the god into the hands of the Jews if they would come with him to the Temple and bring the whole multitude of the Jews with them. He then made a wooden instrument and put it around him, placing three rows of lamps therein, so that he appeared to the men in the distance like a walking star on earth; and while the people, affrighted by the sight, remained quiet and afar off, he went into the Temple, removed the golden head of an ass, and went in great haste back to the city of Dora ("Contra Ap." ii. 10). But as the worst of all calumnies, he lays the charge of human sacrifice upon the Jewish faith—a charge which despite all better knowledge of the fact has so often been repeated. He narrates the following story: "Antiochus found in the Temple a bed and a man lying upon it, with a small table before him laden with dainties, from the fish of the sea and the fowl of the land; the man, on being asked by the king the reason for his being there, told him amid sobs and tears that he was a Greek, who had been traveling through the land to earn his livelihood, when he was suddenly seized and brought to the Temple, and there locked up and fattened on those dainties before him. Wondering at these things, he learned upon inquiry that, according to a law of the Jews, they contrive each year at a certain time to capture a Greek foreigner, fatten him up, and then bring him to a certain forest, where they slay him with religious rites; then, tasting of his entrails, they take an oath upon the sacrifice to be at everlasting enmity with the Greeks, and afterward cast the carcass into a pit. And then the man implored Antiochus, out of reverence to the Greek gods, to rescue him from this peril, inasmuch as he was to be slain within a few days."
Hatred Against All Nations. Finally, as denoting their hatred of all non-Jews, he makes the statement that "the Jews swear by God, the Maker of heaven, earth, and sea, to bear no good-will to any foreigner, and particularly to none of the Greeks" ("Contra Ap." ii. 11). He ridicules the Jewish sacrifices, their abstention from swine's flesh, and the rite of circumcision (ib. ii. 14). As special proof that the Jews have neither good laws nor the right worship of God, Apion singles out the fact that they are never rulers of other nations, but always subjects; wherefore their own city (Jerusalem) had often suffered siege and misfortune. But while Rome was always destined to rule them, the Jews would not even submit to her dominion, notwithstanding her great magnanimity (ib. ii. 12). Nor, says Apion, have they ever produced among them any pronounced genius nor inventor of any kind, nor any one at all eminent for wisdom (ib. ii. 13).
The few excerpts preserved by Josephus exhibit systematic defamation of the Jew, and are all the more remarkable as they have been repeated almost in the same form, mutatis mutandis, throughout the anti-Semitic writings of the centuries, from Tacitus, who reechoed these charges in his "History," v. 2-5, down to these days. They comprise, first, aspersions cast upon the Jewish race; secondly, derogatory statements concerning their patriotism and loyalty as citizens; and, thirdly, malicious misrepresentations of their faith, their religious beliefs and rites—accusations originating in old pagan legends and made by a prejudiced multitude ever anew against the Jews, and for some time also against Christians (see Mueller, "Contra Apionem," pp. 258-260, 263-264; and articles on Ass Worship and Blood Accusations).
Refuted by Josephus. Apion, however, found a powerful antagonist in Josephus, who, with great skill and fine sarcasm, refuted every one of his statements. His work has become for both Jewish and Christian writers the model of a systematic defense of the faith. Josephus writes: "I had my doubts whether I should refute this demagogue, but as there are so many people who are more easily caught by superficial talk than by accurate knowledge and delight in denunciation more than in commendations. I thought it to be necessary not to let that man off without examination into his accusations; for, after all, people might wish to see a traducer like this once for all exposed to public contempt."
Clement and Apion. Quite characteristic is the portrait of Apion given in the "Clementine Homilies," v. 2-26 (written about the end of the third century), where Clement relates that he knew Apion to be a great hater of the Jews —one who had written many books against them, and indeed had made friendship with Simon Magus, the Jew-hater, in order to learn from him more against the Jews—and that when, therefore, Apion once called to see him while he was confined to his bed, he pretended that he was sick from love of a woman he could not have. Thereupon Apion, as one proficient with the art of healing, promised to put him in possession of his desired object within six days by the help of magic, and wrote a loveletter or philter, in which he dwelt on all the loves of Zeus and other gods, and showed that to the initiated, as well as to the gods, all illicit loves are permitted. Clement, pretending that he had actually sent the letter to his lady-love, wrote a fictitious reply, purporting to come from the woman, in which she ridiculed and severely censured the gods for their immoral conduct, and closed with the remark that she had learned from a certain Jew to understand and to do things pleasing to God, and not allow herself to be entrapped into adultery by any lying fables; she prayed that Clement too might be helped by God in the effort to be chaste. Apion was enraged upon hearing the letter read, and said: "Have I not reason to hate the Jews? Behold, some Jew has converted her and persuaded her to chastity, and she is no longer accessible to my persuasions. For these fellows, setting God before them as the universal inspector of men's actions, are extremely persistent in chastity, holding that the opposite can not be concealed from Him." Clement then told him that he was not in love with any woman at all, but that after a thorough examination of all other doctrines, he had adopted the doctrine of the unity of God taught him by a certain Jewish linen-merchant, whom he had been fortunate enough to meet in Rome. "Apion then with his unreasonable hatred of the Jews, neither knowing nor wishing to know what their faith was, and being senselessly angry, forthwith quitted Rome in silence."
Bibliography:
  • Schürer, Gesch. iii. 406-411;
  • Gutschmid, Kleinere Schriften, 1893, iv. 356-371;
  • Hausrath, Neutestamentliche Zeitgeschichte, ii. 187-195;
  • Reinach, Textes d'Auteurs Grecs et Romains Relatifs au Judaisme, 1895, pp. 125-134;
  • Lehrs, Quid Apio Homero Prœstiterit, etc., 1837, pp. 1-34;
  • J. G. Mueller, Des Flavius Josephus Schrift gegenden Apion, 1877;
  • Lightfoot, art. Apion, in Smith and Wace, Dictionary of Christian Biography;
  • Cohn, in Pauly-Wissowa, Realencyclopädie, art. Apion;
  • Willrich, Juden und Griechen vor der Makkabäischen Erhebung, 1895, pp. 172-176;
  • Frankel, in Monatsschrift, 1852, pp. 17, 41, 81, 121;
  • Joël, Angriffe d. Heidenthums gegen Juden und Christen;
  • Zipser, Des Flavius Josephus Werk: über das Hohe Alter, etc., ed. by Ad. Jellinek, 1871;
  • I. Levi, in Rev. Ét. Juives, xli. pp. 188-195.

Filiki Eteria or (Secret) Society of Friends

4:02 PM | BY ZeroDivide EDIT
Filiki Eteria
Filiki Eteria flag.svg
MottoFreedom or Death
Formation1814
PurposePreparation of the Greek War of Independence
Location
Key people
Emmanuil Xanthos (founder)
Nikolaos Skoufas (founder)
Athanasios Tsakalov (founder)
Alexander Ypsilantis (leader)
Alexandros Mavrokordatos
Theodoros Kolokotronis
Anthimos Gazis
Germanos III of Old Patras
Emmanouel Pappas
Filiki Eteria or Society of Friends (GreekΦιλική Εταιρεία or Εταιρεία των Φιλικών) was a secret 19th-century organization whose purpose was to overthrow the Ottoman rule ofGreece and establish an independent Greek state.[1] Society members were mainly young Phanariot Greeks from Russia and local chieftains from Greece. One of its leaders wasAlexander Ypsilantis.[2] The Society initiated the Greek War of Independence in the spring of 1821.[3]

Translations and transliterations[edit]

The direct translation of the word "Filiki" is "Friendly" and the direct translation of the word "Eteria" is "Society" (also "Company" or "Association"). The name of Filiki Eteria has been transliterated in numerous publications with combinations of FilikiFilikePhilikiPhilike with EteriaEtairiaEtaireiaEtereiaHetairia.

Foundation[edit]

House of Filiki Eteria on Greek Square in Odessa
In the context of ardent desire for independence from Turkish occupation, and with the explicit influence of similar secret societies elsewhere in Europe, three Greeks came together in 1814 in Odessa to decide the constitution for a secret organization in freemasonic fashion. Its purpose was to unite all Greeks in an armed organization to overthrow Turkish rule. The three founders were Nikolaos Skoufas from the Arta province, Emmanuil Xanthos from Patmos andAthanasios Tsakalov from Ioannina.[1] Soon after they initiated a fourth member, Panagiotis Anagnostopoulos from Andritsaina.
Passport of the Filiki Eteria, bearing its insignia and written in its coded alphabet.
Skoufas liaised with Konstantinos Rados who was initiated into Carbonarism. Xanthos was initiated into a Freemasonic Lodge at Lefkada ("Society of Free Builders of Saint Mavra"), while Tsakalov was a founding member of the Hellenoglosso Xenodocheio (Greek: Ελληνόγλωσσο Ξενοδοχείο, meaning Greek-speaking Hotel) an earlier but unsuccessful society for the liberation of Greece.[4]
At the start, between 1814 and 1816, there were roughly twenty members. During 1817, the society initiated members from the diaspora Greeks of Russia and the Danubian Principalities of Moldavia and Wallachia. The lord (hospodar) of Moldavia Michael Soutzos himself, became a member.[5] Massive initiations began only in 1818 and by early 1821, when the Society had expanded to almost all regions of Greece and throughout Greek communities abroad, the membership numbered in thousands.[6] Among its members were tradesmen, clergy, Russian consuls, Ottoman officials from Phanar andSerbs one of them the revolutionary Karageorge.[6][7] Members included primary instigators of the revolution, notably Theodoros KolokotronisOdysseas AndroutsosDimitris Plapoutas and the metropolitan bishop Germanos of Patras.

Hierarchy and initiation[edit]

The Oath of Initiation into the Society, painting by Dionysios Tsokos, 1849.
The Great Oath of the Filiki Eteria, written on a monument at Kolonaki, Athens.
A stamp of Filiki Eteria
Filiki Eteria was strongly influenced by Carbonarism and Freemasonry.[4] The team of leaders was called the "Invisible Authority" (Αόρατος Αρχή) and from the start it was shrouded in mystery, secrecy and glamour. It was generally believed that a lot of important personalities were members, not only eminent Greeks, but also notable foreigners such as the Tsar of Russia Alexander I. The reality was that initially, the Invisible Authority comprised only the three founders. From 1815 until 1818, five more were added to the Invisible Authority, and after the death of Skoufas' another three more. In 1818, the Invisible Authority was renamed to the "Authority of Twelve Apostles" and each Apostle shouldered the responsibility of a separate region.
The organisational structure was pyramid-like with the "Invisible Authority" coordinating from the top. No one knew or had the right to ask who created the organisation. Commands were unquestionably carried out and members did not have the right to make decisions. Members of the society came together in what was called a "Temple" with four levels of initiation: a) Brothers(αδελφοποιητοί) or Vlamides (βλάμηδες), b) the Recommended (συστημένοι), γ) the Priests (ιερείς) and d) the Shepherds (ποιμένες).[8] The Priests were charged with the duty of initiation.[9]
When the Priest approached a new member, it was first to make sure of his patriotism and catechize him in the aims of society; the last stage was to put him under the lengthy principal oath, called the Great Oath (Μέγας Όρκος).[9] Much of the essence of it was contained in its conclusion:[8]
When the above was administered the Priest then uttered the words of acceptance of the novice as a new member:[9]
Afterwards the initiated were considered neophyte members of the society, with all the rights and obligations of his rank. The Priest immediately had the obligation to reveal all the marks of recognition between the Vlamides or BrothersVlamides and Recommended were unaware of the revolutionary aims of the organisation. They only knew that there existed a society that tried hard for the general good of the nation, which included in its ranks important personalities. This myth was propagated deliberately, in order to stimulate the morale of members and also to make proselytism easier.

India-Greek-Roman missing Links [Origin of Greek and Roman Philosophy]

10:33 AM | BY ZeroDivide EDIT

The inhabited world according to Herodotus
Key Words:

MAKE TIMELINE:

Achaemenid [Indus Valley was already fabled for its gold]

Darius I appointed the Greek Scylax of Caryanda to explore the Indian Ocean from the mouth of the Indus to Suez.

Scylax provides an account of the voyage in his book PeriplousHecataeus of Miletus (500 BC) and Herodotus (483–431 BC) also wrote about the Indus Satrapy of the Persians.

Buddhism and the Roman world

Zarmanochegas

Christianity

Gnosticism



In ancient Greek geography, the basin of the Indus River (essentially corresponding to the territory of modern Pakistan) was on the extreme eastern fringe of theknown world. The first Greek geographer to describe India was Herodotus (5th century BC), who calls it ἡ Ἰνδική χώρη hē Indikē chōrē, after Hinduš, the Old Persian name of the river and the associated satrapy of the Achaemenid EmpireDarius the Great had conquered this territory in 516 BC, and during the 5th century BC, Greek knowledge of India was entirely received by contact to the Persian empire (according to Herodotus 4.44, via Scylax of Caryanda, a Greek explorer who sailed down the length of the Indus in the service of Darius). The Greeks (or Persians) were not aware of the geography of India (or Asia in general) east of the Indus basin. Herodotus in 4.40 is explicit about India being on the eastern fringe of the inhabitable world,
"As far as India, Asia is an inhabited land; but thereafter, all to the east is desolation, nor can anyone say what kind of land is there." (trans. A. D. Godley 1920)
In book 3 (3.89-97), Herodotus gives some account of the peoples of India; he describes them as being very diverse, and makes reference to their dietary habits, some eating raw fish, others eating raw meat, and yet others practicing vegetarianism. He also mentions their dark skin colour.
"The tribes of Indians are numerous, and they do not all speak the same language—some are wandering tribes, others not. They who dwell in the marshes along the river live on raw fish, which they take in boats made of reeds, each formed out of a single joint. These Indians wear a dress of sedge, which they cut in the river and bruise; afterwards they weave it into mats, and wear it as we wear a breast-plate. Eastward of these Indians are another tribe, called Padaeans, who are wanderers, and live on raw flesh. [...] There is another set of Indians whose customs are very different. They refuse to put any live animal to death, they sow no corn, and have no dwelling-houses. Vegetables are their only food. [...] All the tribes which I have mentioned live together like the brute beasts: they have also all the same tint of skin, which approaches that of the Ethiopians. [...] Besides these, there are Indians of another tribe, who border on the city of Caspatyrus, and the country of Pactyica; these people dwell northward of all the rest of the Indians, and follow nearly the same mode of life as the Bactrians. They are more warlike than any of the other tribes, and from them the men are sent forth who go to procure the gold. For it is in this part of India that the sandy desert lies. Here, in this desert, there live amid the sand great ants, in size somewhat less than dogs, but bigger than foxes. [...]" (trans. Rawlinson)
In 3.38, Herodotus mentions the Indian tribe of the Callatiae for their practice of funerary cannibalism; in a striking illustration of cultural relativism, he points out that this people is just as dismayed at the notion of the Greeks practicing cremation as the Greeks are at that of eating their dead parents. In book 7 (7.65,70,86,187) and in 8.113 Herodotus describes the Indian infantry and cavalry employed in Xerxes' army.
Only after the conquests of Alexander the Great and the emergence of the Indo-Greek kingdoms did the Mediterranean world acquire some first-hand knowledge about the region (conversely, Indians also became aware of the existence of the Greeks during this period, naming them Yavana in Sanskrit). By the 3rd century BC, Eratosthenes recognized "India" as terminating in a peninsula (reflecting a first grasp of the geography of theIndian Subcontinent) instead of just placing it generically at the far eastern end of "Asia". Eratosthenes was also the first Greek author to postulate an island Taprobane at the far south of India, later becoming a name of Sri Lanka. European knowledge of the geography of India did not become much better resolved until the end of Antiquity, and remained at this stage throughout the Middle Ages, only becoming more detailed with the beginning of the Age of Sail in the 15th century.

See also[edit]

References[edit]


Herodotus The History of the Persian Wars: A Description of India
External links
[edit]

Achaemenid invasion of Indus valley is the Achaemenid military conquests of territories of South Asia west of Indus river in 6th century BC, consisting mainly of modern-day Pakistan.[1] Achaemenid penetration into the modern Pakistan occurred in stages, starting from northern parts of Indus river and moving southward.[2]The Persian empires considered the Indus river as their eastern most boundary.

Historical background[edit]

The important communities in the region were the people of Punjab, the Kambojas and Sindhis. Punjab consisted of Taksas of Gandhara, the Madras and Kathas (Kathaioi) on Akesines, the Mallas on Hydraotis and the Tugras on Hesidros. In the first half of the sixth century, these several small principalities fought against one another. This region did not have any powerful state to wield the warring communities into one organized kingdom. The area was wealthy, and could be entered through the passes of the Hindu Kush. The Achaemenids took advantage of the political disunity and penetrated into the region.
Gandhara/Taxila in Punjab was conquered by Achaemenid empire in 518 BC.[3] During this time, Pushkarasakti, a contemporary of King Bimbisara (558–491 BC) of Magadha empire of Haryanka dynasty, was the king of Gandhara. Pushkarasakti was engaged in power struggles against his local rivals. Achaemenids under Darius penetrated to the region in 516 BC, and annexed other parts of Punjab west toIndus river and Sindh.
The upper Indus region, comprising Gandhara and Kamboja, formed the 7th, Gandhara satrapy of the Achaemenid Empire (including Sattagydians, Dadicae, Aparytae), while the lower and middle Indus, respectively comprising Sindh and Sauvira, constituted the 20th satrapy (called Indian/Sindh/Hinduš Satrapy).[4]
The conquered area was the most fertile and populous region of the Achaemenid Empire. Indus Valley was already fabled for its gold; the province was able to supply gold dust equal in value to the very large amount of 4680 silver talents. The Persian writers brought the Kharoshthi script to South Asia during these period. Under the Persian rule, a system of centralized administration with a bureaucratic system was introduced in the region and scholars such as Pāṇini and Kautilya lived in the environment. A certain amount of Indus Valley people were recruited to the Persian army in that time, and Achaemenid rulerXerxes employed them in his wars against the Greeks.
By about 380 BC, the Persian hold on the region was weakening, but the area continued to be a part of the Achaemenid Empire until Alexander's invasion.[5]
The ancient Greeks also had some knowledge of the area. Darius I appointed the Greek Scylax of Caryanda to explore the Indian Ocean from the mouth of the Indus to Suez. Scylax provides an account of the voyage in his book PeriplousHecataeus of Miletus (500 BC) and Herodotus (483–431 BC) also wrote about the Indus Satrapy of the Persians.

See also[edit]

References[edit]

  1. Jump up^ On the basis of the dating of the Bisotun (q.v.) inscription, such conquests can be dated to around 518 BC (Vogelsang, 1987, pp. 187-88; Briant, 1996, p. 153)
  2. Jump up^ (Fussman, 1993, p. 84). This is inferred from the fact that Gandhara (OPers. Gandāra) is already mentioned at Bisotun, while the toponym Hinduš (Sindh) is added only in later inscriptions.
  3. Jump up^ Marshall, John (1975) [1951]. Taxila: Volume I. Delhi: Motilal Banarsidass. pp. 83.
  4. Jump up^ The inscription on Darius' tomb at Naqsh-i-Rustam near Persepolis records GADĀRA (Gandāra) along with HINDUSH (Hənduš, Sindh) in the list of satrapies.
  5. Jump up^ The hypothesis that the region had already become independent by the end of the reign of Darius I or during the reign of Artaxerxes II (Chattopadhyaya, 1974, pp. 25-26) appears to be contradicted by Ctesias’s reference to gifts received from the kings of India and by the fact that even Darius III still had some Indian units in his army (Briant, 1996, pp. 699, 774). At the time of the arrival of the Alexander'sMacedonian army in Indus Valley, there is no mention of officers of the Persian kings in India; but this does not mean (Dittmann, 1984, p. 185) that the Achaemenids had no power there. Other data indicate that they still exercised control over the area, although in ways that differed from those of Darius I’s time (Briant, 1996, pp. 776-78).

External links[edit]



Gymnosophists (Greek γυμνοσοφισταίgymnosophistai, i.e. "naked philosophers" or "naked sophists")[1][2] is the name given by the Greeks to certain ancient Indian philosophers who pursued asceticism to the point of regarding food and clothing as detrimental to purity of thought (sadhus or yogis) and also even naked priests from Ethiopia.[2]

Ancient accounts[edit]

The term is first used by Plutarch in the 1st century CE, when describing an encounter by Alexander the Great with ten gymnosophists near the banks of the Indus river in India - now in Pakistan.
He (Alexander) captured ten of the Gymnosophists who had done most to get Sabbas to revolt, and had made the most trouble for the Macedonians. These philosophers were reputed to be clever and concise in answering questions, and Alexander therefore put difficult questions to them, declaring that he would put to death him who first made an incorrect answer, and then the rest, in an order determined in like manner; and he commanded one of them, the oldest, to be the judge in the contest. The first one, accordingly, being asked which, in his opinion, were more numerous, the living or the dead, said that the living were, since the dead no longer existed. The second, being asked whether the earth or the sea produced larger animals, said the earth did, since the sea was but a part of the earth. The third, being asked what animal was the most cunning, said: "That which up to this time man has not discovered." The fourth, when asked why he had induced Sabbas to revolt, replied: "Because I wished him either to live nobly or to die nobly." The fifth, being asked which, in his opinion, was older, day or night, replied: "Day, by one day"; and he added, upon the king expressing amazement, that hard questions must have hard answers. Passing on, then, to the sixth, Alexander asked how a man could be most loved; "If," said the philosopher, "he is most powerful, and yet does not inspire fear." Of the three remaining, he who was asked how one might become a god instead of man, replied: "By doing something which a man cannot do"; the one who was asked which was the stronger, life or death, answered: "Life, since it supports so many ills." And the last, asked how long it were well for a man to live, answered: "Until he does not regard death as better than life." So, then, turning to the judge, Alexander bade him give his opinion. The judge declared that they had answered one worse than another. "Well, then," said Alexander, "thou shalt die first for giving such a verdict." "That cannot be, O King," said the judge, "unless thou falsely saidst that thou wouldst put to death first him who answered worst." These philosophers, then, he dismissed with gifts...
—Plutarch, Life of Alexander, "The parallel lives", 64-65.[3]
Diogenes Laertius (ix. 61 and 63) refers to them, and reports that Pyrrho of Elis, the founder of pure scepticism, came under the influence of the Gymnosophists while travelling to India with Alexander, and on his return to Elis, imitated their habits of life; however, the extent of their influence is not described.