09-28-2008, 02:41 PM
The Yavana references seem to be very important to date the epics, Panini etc. The word is treated as an established equivalent of Greeks, referring to Ionians. And it is given as a Sanskrit loan word from another language preferably through the Achaemenid Persian form Yauna.
F. Brighenti, based upon A.K. Narain, came with 3 items to conjecture a presence of Greeks in Bactria:
1. deportation of Ionians
2. deportation of Milesians
3. presence of Greek coins (Athenian owls)
He cited A.K. Narain and T. McEvilley who both refer to The History of Herodotus, chapter vi. But, I checked chapter vi of Herodotus at http://ebooks. adelaide. edu.au/h/ herodotus/ h4/book6. html, which says something different about the so-called [deduced] Ionian and Milesian deportation to Bactria issue. I have consulted the translations of Rawlinson (and Macaulay):
I. Ionian issue
From A.K. Narain, _The Indo-Greeks_ , Oxford, Claredon Press, 1957:
"There is evidence to show that the Greeks of various city-states in Asia Minor were sometimes threatened by the Persians with exile to the far eastern portions of the Achaemenid empire [fn. 4: Herodotus VI. 9] and were actually settled in those areas [fn. 5: Besides the colonies of the Thracians (?) at Nysa and of the Branchidae in Sogdiana, we know from Herodotus, IV. 204, that a colony of Libyans from Barca was settled in Bactria]" (p. 3).
This is what Herodotus has to say in chapter VI:
"After this the Ionians inquired of him for what reason he had so strongly urged Aristagoras to revolt from the king, thereby doing their nation so ill a service. In reply, he took good care not to disclose to them the real cause, but told them that King Darius had intended to remove the Phoenicians from their own country, and place them in Ionia, while he planted the Ionians in Phoenicia, and that it was for this reason he sent Aristagoras the order. Now it was not true that the king had entertained any such intention, but Histiaeus succeeded hereby in arousing the fears of the Ionians."
NOTE: Here Herodotus only mentions an intended threat. But it clearly says too: `Now it was not true that the king had entertained any such intention'. Besides, the false intention at this place is about deportation to Phoenicia and not far eastern portions!
"Hold forth to them the promise that, if they submit, no harm shall happen to them on account of their rebellion; their temples shall not be burnt, nor any of their private buildings; neither shall they be treated with greater harshness than before the outbreak. But if they refuse to yield, and determine to try the chance of a battle, threaten them with the fate which shall assuredly overtake them in that case. Tell them, when they are vanquished in fight, they shall be enslaved; their boys shall be made eunuchs, and their maidens transported to Bactra; while their country shall be delivered into the hands of foreigners."
Thus spake the Persians."
NOTE: The text speaks here about a massacre of males, except boys becoming eunuchs. And the threat here is about girls to be sent to Bactria.
"And now their generals made good all the threats wherewith they had menaced the Ionians before the battle. For no sooner did they get possession of the towns than they choose out all the best favoured boys and made them eunuchs, while the most beautiful of the girls they tore from their homes and sent as presents to the king, at the same time burning the cities themselves, with their temples. Thus
were the Ionians for the third time reduced to slavery; once by the Lydians, and a second, and now a third time, by the Persians."
NOTE: The girls are sent to the king, not to Bactria. No mention anywhere about males to be sent to Bactria.
"At this time the Persians did no more hurt to the Ionians; but on the contrary, before the year was out, they carried into effect the following measures, which were greatly to their advantage. Artaphernes, satrap of Sardis, summoned deputies from all the Ionian cities, and forced them to enter into agreements with one another, not to harass each other by force of arms, but to settle their disputes by reference. He likewise took the measurement of their whole country in parasangsâsuch is the name which the Persians give to a distance of thirty furlongsâand settled the tributes which the several cities were to pay, at a rate that has continued unaltered from the time when Artaphernes fixed it down to the present day. The rate was very nearly the same as that which had been paid before the revolt. Such were the peaceful dealings of the Persians with the Ionians."
â¦
When Mardonius, accompanied by this numerous host, reached Cilicia, he took ship and proceeded along shore with his fleet, while the land army marched under other leaders towards the Hellespont. In the course of his voyage along the coast of Asia he came to Ionia; and here I have a marvel to relate which will greatly surprise those Greeks who cannot believe that Otanes advised the seven conspirators to make Persia a commonwealth. Mardonius put down all the despots
throughout Ionia, and in lieu of them established democracies.
NOTE: Ionia still survived under Persian hegemony. Persian inscriptions always place Yaunas and Yauna Takbaras in the west! Nowhere a Yauna or Ionian Greek satrapy is placed in the east. Herodotus too doesn't state, that Ionian (girls) were deported to Bactria, which was really the case with the Lybians in iv.209,:
"The furthest point of Libya reached by this Persian host was the
city of Euesperides. The Barcaeans carried into slavery were sent
from Egypt to the king; and Darius assigned them a village in Bactria
for their dwelling-place. To this village they gave the name of
Barca, and it was to my time an inhabited place in Bactria."
The deportation of Ionian (girls) to Bactria is a myth, nowhere reported to be actually carried out as stated by Herodotus himself. Herodotus would have mentioned a Yauna (or Mileasian) deportation, as was the case with the Barcaeans, if it was a reality.
A.K. Narain's statement about Ionians is not based upon Herodotus, it is a mere (false) conjecture. Probably having in mind the equation or identification hat 'Yavana must always be a Ionian'.
I. Milesian issue
"The Achaemenians established settlements of Asiatic Greeks in Bactria. Among the Greeks settled in Bactria were the citizens of Miletus who were relocated after the destruction of that city for its fomenting the Ionian revolution in 499" (T. McEvilley, The Shape of Ancient Thought: Comparative Studies in Greek and Indian Philosophies, New York, Allworth Press, 2002, p. 8).
NOTE: Herodotus nowhere mentions their real deportation to Bactria in chapter VI. He rather says something different too here:
"I shall set down the portion which concerned the Argives when I come to that part of my History, mentioning at present only the passage in which the absent Milesians were spoken of. This passage was as follows:â
<i>Then shalt thou, Miletus, so oft the contriver of evil,
Be, thyself, to many a least and an excellent booty:
Then shall thy matrons wash the feet of long-haired masters-
Others shall then possess our lov'd Didymian temple.</i>
Such a fate now befell the Milesians; for the Persians, who wore their hair long, after killing most of the men, made the women and children slaves; and the sanctuary at Didyma, the oracle no less than the temple was plundered and burnt; of the riches whereof I have made frequent mention in other parts of my History.
Those of the Milesians whose lives were spared, being carried prisoners to Susa, received no ill treatment at the hands of King Darius, but were established by him in Ampe, a city on the shores of the Erythraean sea, near the spot where the Tigris flows into it.
Miletus itself, and the plain about the city, were kept by the Persians for themselves, while the hill-country was assigned to the Carians of Pedasus."
NOTE: Where does Herodotus say that the Milesians were sent to Bactria? They were sent to Susa and then to a southern city where the Tigris flows.
CONCLUSION: The whole deportation issue of Milesian or Ionian (girls) to Bactria is a false statement, not supported by Herodotus. He clearly notes that Barcaeans were given a village in Bactria after their own name. But nothing of that sort has been noted about Ionian or Mileasian Greeks!
There may have been some Greek traders or settlers in Bactria (connected with the The Athenian 'owls' silver coins), but that is unconnected with and far removed from Ionians or Greeks founding a Yavana Janapada (not in Bactria, but possibly in Kandahar). Neither Greek nor Persian sources (never place any satrap
Yauna in the east) do support this. And Indian sources give an indigenous origin to Yavanas.
The homonyms Yavana (Skt) and Yauna (P)-Ionia (Gk), etc. are unrelated. Paninian Bhasha or Laukika Sanskrit "yavana" goes back to Chandasa Sanskrit Javana. The Mahabharata still uses the old Vedic word javana.
Perhaps the next fantasy would be to treat the indigenousGlaukanoi as offsprings of one Ionian Greek named Glaukos settled in the Panjab.
Greeks entering Yavana Janapada took the Yavana identity, and were treated as Yavanas.
In a forthcoming posting, I will examine Javana (26x), Yavana (25x) and Yauna (1x) all three occurring in the Mahabharata. The surprising occurrence of the form Yauna coupled with Kamboja and Gandhara can be found in the late Shantiparva. The late form Yauna, from the older form Yavana (derived from archaic Javana), is the intermediate form leading to the Pali form Yona (attested in the Assalayana Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya, referring to the 5th-4th century BCE). The form Yona for Yavanas is never met with in the epics, the single late (Pkt) form Yauna which predates a further development into Yona only underlines that Yavana is never a loanword or a backformation from Persian Yauna, but simply an indigenous word, with a regular indigenous word development. The two words, Yavana (Skt) and Yauna (P), are unrelated.
This will have its consequences for dating Panini, based upon this Yavana issue, after the Persian conquest of Gandhara and assuming that the Persians gave the Indians the word Yavana.
F. Brighenti, based upon A.K. Narain, came with 3 items to conjecture a presence of Greeks in Bactria:
1. deportation of Ionians
2. deportation of Milesians
3. presence of Greek coins (Athenian owls)
He cited A.K. Narain and T. McEvilley who both refer to The History of Herodotus, chapter vi. But, I checked chapter vi of Herodotus at http://ebooks. adelaide. edu.au/h/ herodotus/ h4/book6. html, which says something different about the so-called [deduced] Ionian and Milesian deportation to Bactria issue. I have consulted the translations of Rawlinson (and Macaulay):
I. Ionian issue
From A.K. Narain, _The Indo-Greeks_ , Oxford, Claredon Press, 1957:
"There is evidence to show that the Greeks of various city-states in Asia Minor were sometimes threatened by the Persians with exile to the far eastern portions of the Achaemenid empire [fn. 4: Herodotus VI. 9] and were actually settled in those areas [fn. 5: Besides the colonies of the Thracians (?) at Nysa and of the Branchidae in Sogdiana, we know from Herodotus, IV. 204, that a colony of Libyans from Barca was settled in Bactria]" (p. 3).
This is what Herodotus has to say in chapter VI:
"After this the Ionians inquired of him for what reason he had so strongly urged Aristagoras to revolt from the king, thereby doing their nation so ill a service. In reply, he took good care not to disclose to them the real cause, but told them that King Darius had intended to remove the Phoenicians from their own country, and place them in Ionia, while he planted the Ionians in Phoenicia, and that it was for this reason he sent Aristagoras the order. Now it was not true that the king had entertained any such intention, but Histiaeus succeeded hereby in arousing the fears of the Ionians."
NOTE: Here Herodotus only mentions an intended threat. But it clearly says too: `Now it was not true that the king had entertained any such intention'. Besides, the false intention at this place is about deportation to Phoenicia and not far eastern portions!
"Hold forth to them the promise that, if they submit, no harm shall happen to them on account of their rebellion; their temples shall not be burnt, nor any of their private buildings; neither shall they be treated with greater harshness than before the outbreak. But if they refuse to yield, and determine to try the chance of a battle, threaten them with the fate which shall assuredly overtake them in that case. Tell them, when they are vanquished in fight, they shall be enslaved; their boys shall be made eunuchs, and their maidens transported to Bactra; while their country shall be delivered into the hands of foreigners."
Thus spake the Persians."
NOTE: The text speaks here about a massacre of males, except boys becoming eunuchs. And the threat here is about girls to be sent to Bactria.
"And now their generals made good all the threats wherewith they had menaced the Ionians before the battle. For no sooner did they get possession of the towns than they choose out all the best favoured boys and made them eunuchs, while the most beautiful of the girls they tore from their homes and sent as presents to the king, at the same time burning the cities themselves, with their temples. Thus
were the Ionians for the third time reduced to slavery; once by the Lydians, and a second, and now a third time, by the Persians."
NOTE: The girls are sent to the king, not to Bactria. No mention anywhere about males to be sent to Bactria.
"At this time the Persians did no more hurt to the Ionians; but on the contrary, before the year was out, they carried into effect the following measures, which were greatly to their advantage. Artaphernes, satrap of Sardis, summoned deputies from all the Ionian cities, and forced them to enter into agreements with one another, not to harass each other by force of arms, but to settle their disputes by reference. He likewise took the measurement of their whole country in parasangsâsuch is the name which the Persians give to a distance of thirty furlongsâand settled the tributes which the several cities were to pay, at a rate that has continued unaltered from the time when Artaphernes fixed it down to the present day. The rate was very nearly the same as that which had been paid before the revolt. Such were the peaceful dealings of the Persians with the Ionians."
â¦
When Mardonius, accompanied by this numerous host, reached Cilicia, he took ship and proceeded along shore with his fleet, while the land army marched under other leaders towards the Hellespont. In the course of his voyage along the coast of Asia he came to Ionia; and here I have a marvel to relate which will greatly surprise those Greeks who cannot believe that Otanes advised the seven conspirators to make Persia a commonwealth. Mardonius put down all the despots
throughout Ionia, and in lieu of them established democracies.
NOTE: Ionia still survived under Persian hegemony. Persian inscriptions always place Yaunas and Yauna Takbaras in the west! Nowhere a Yauna or Ionian Greek satrapy is placed in the east. Herodotus too doesn't state, that Ionian (girls) were deported to Bactria, which was really the case with the Lybians in iv.209,:
"The furthest point of Libya reached by this Persian host was the
city of Euesperides. The Barcaeans carried into slavery were sent
from Egypt to the king; and Darius assigned them a village in Bactria
for their dwelling-place. To this village they gave the name of
Barca, and it was to my time an inhabited place in Bactria."
The deportation of Ionian (girls) to Bactria is a myth, nowhere reported to be actually carried out as stated by Herodotus himself. Herodotus would have mentioned a Yauna (or Mileasian) deportation, as was the case with the Barcaeans, if it was a reality.
A.K. Narain's statement about Ionians is not based upon Herodotus, it is a mere (false) conjecture. Probably having in mind the equation or identification hat 'Yavana must always be a Ionian'.
I. Milesian issue
"The Achaemenians established settlements of Asiatic Greeks in Bactria. Among the Greeks settled in Bactria were the citizens of Miletus who were relocated after the destruction of that city for its fomenting the Ionian revolution in 499" (T. McEvilley, The Shape of Ancient Thought: Comparative Studies in Greek and Indian Philosophies, New York, Allworth Press, 2002, p. 8).
NOTE: Herodotus nowhere mentions their real deportation to Bactria in chapter VI. He rather says something different too here:
"I shall set down the portion which concerned the Argives when I come to that part of my History, mentioning at present only the passage in which the absent Milesians were spoken of. This passage was as follows:â
<i>Then shalt thou, Miletus, so oft the contriver of evil,
Be, thyself, to many a least and an excellent booty:
Then shall thy matrons wash the feet of long-haired masters-
Others shall then possess our lov'd Didymian temple.</i>
Such a fate now befell the Milesians; for the Persians, who wore their hair long, after killing most of the men, made the women and children slaves; and the sanctuary at Didyma, the oracle no less than the temple was plundered and burnt; of the riches whereof I have made frequent mention in other parts of my History.
Those of the Milesians whose lives were spared, being carried prisoners to Susa, received no ill treatment at the hands of King Darius, but were established by him in Ampe, a city on the shores of the Erythraean sea, near the spot where the Tigris flows into it.
Miletus itself, and the plain about the city, were kept by the Persians for themselves, while the hill-country was assigned to the Carians of Pedasus."
NOTE: Where does Herodotus say that the Milesians were sent to Bactria? They were sent to Susa and then to a southern city where the Tigris flows.
CONCLUSION: The whole deportation issue of Milesian or Ionian (girls) to Bactria is a false statement, not supported by Herodotus. He clearly notes that Barcaeans were given a village in Bactria after their own name. But nothing of that sort has been noted about Ionian or Mileasian Greeks!
There may have been some Greek traders or settlers in Bactria (connected with the The Athenian 'owls' silver coins), but that is unconnected with and far removed from Ionians or Greeks founding a Yavana Janapada (not in Bactria, but possibly in Kandahar). Neither Greek nor Persian sources (never place any satrap
Yauna in the east) do support this. And Indian sources give an indigenous origin to Yavanas.
The homonyms Yavana (Skt) and Yauna (P)-Ionia (Gk), etc. are unrelated. Paninian Bhasha or Laukika Sanskrit "yavana" goes back to Chandasa Sanskrit Javana. The Mahabharata still uses the old Vedic word javana.
Perhaps the next fantasy would be to treat the indigenousGlaukanoi as offsprings of one Ionian Greek named Glaukos settled in the Panjab.
Greeks entering Yavana Janapada took the Yavana identity, and were treated as Yavanas.
In a forthcoming posting, I will examine Javana (26x), Yavana (25x) and Yauna (1x) all three occurring in the Mahabharata. The surprising occurrence of the form Yauna coupled with Kamboja and Gandhara can be found in the late Shantiparva. The late form Yauna, from the older form Yavana (derived from archaic Javana), is the intermediate form leading to the Pali form Yona (attested in the Assalayana Sutta of the Majjhima Nikaya, referring to the 5th-4th century BCE). The form Yona for Yavanas is never met with in the epics, the single late (Pkt) form Yauna which predates a further development into Yona only underlines that Yavana is never a loanword or a backformation from Persian Yauna, but simply an indigenous word, with a regular indigenous word development. The two words, Yavana (Skt) and Yauna (P), are unrelated.
This will have its consequences for dating Panini, based upon this Yavana issue, after the Persian conquest of Gandhara and assuming that the Persians gave the Indians the word Yavana.