Answers for Milinda

[Faeelin]

This should read:

The People of Ta-Yaun are a fairly civilized people, and are settled on the land. They farm wheat, and make wine from grapes. The people of this land love wine greatly, and the wealthy store enough wine in their cellars to last them for decades. The land contains sixty thousand families, and the people are most peculiar. Their eyes are sunken deep into their head, and they grow bushy beards and grease their hair with the oil of grapes [6], which they also use to clean themselves. They are quarrelsome, but honorable, and keen merchants.

 

[G.Bone]

It's a good post and I like the voice that you've adopted through the character Zhang Qiang

 

[Faeelin]

Shendu, it seems to me, is like another world. It is peopled by a vast host of people, some of whom differ from one another as much as we differ from the Wu-Han [10]. There are men who seem to be little better than animals, who live in marshes and eat raw fish. There are other men who refuse to put animals to death, and live without houses in the forests. They refuse to eat corn, and the only food they eat is wild rice. When one of them sickens, he goes off into the forest to die alone [11].


But not all of the Shendu live like that. Their soil is fertile and bursts forth with crops in abundance. The Shendu also possess a great deal of gold, and collect much of it from rivers. But recently the Yaun have begun to mine it, tearing it from the Earth in vast mining complexes. From the lands south of Shendu come large pearls, as big the hand of a man, as well as gems and rubies that sparkle like fire …


The animals of Shendu are truly fantastic, and I do not wonder that you disbelieve me when I tell you of them. Dragons live in the rivers of Shendu, and have been known to pretty upon people. There are also small creatures that act like men, monkeys, and they are covered with fur and have long tails. There are birds with brightly colored plumage that fly through the forests of India, and I am told that they can be taught to speak the tongues of man…

But these were but some of the wonders of Shendu. I came, in due course, to the capital of Shendu, the city of Pataliputra. It sits at the confluence of two rivers, and is surrounded by a mighty wall. It is home fifty thousand families, and is a city of splendor and magnificence. The palace of the King is surrounded by shady groves and parks, in which the king kept tame birds and other animals, including a large gray horse with one horn. There is even an artificial lake, filled with enormous fish. No one may catch them, I am told, save for the king’s sons. ..

The King, Milinda, is considered by many to be a just and vigorous king. He has campaigned against the peoples to the east, and like all of the Yaun and Shendu, is most covetous of the goods of China. He is well versed in the wisdom of his people, and it was unfortunate that we had to converse through interpreters. But he agreed that it would be beneficial to open a route directly between Shendu and Shu, so that such commerce would not remain in the hands of Barbarians….

The final building I saw before leaving was a temple of the Yaun, built by their last King, Dimmita. It was a large temple open to the air, with its roof supported by stone columns. The temple contained paintings and statues of the gods of the Yaun, who were displayed doing all the things that gods are wont to do. But there were several friezes that I found perplexing, for they portrayed the gods celebrating the birth of an infant, and doing homage to him. When I asked who the infant was, my guide merely told me that he was the Buddha, the saviour of mankind.


[10] Barbarians in what is today southern Manchuria.

[11] Zhang is describing Indian ascetics, here.

 

[Hendryk]

The animals of Shendu are truly fantastic, and I do not wonder that you disbelieve me when I tell you of them. Dragons live in the rivers of Shendu, and have been known to pretty upon people. There are also small creatures that act like men, monkeys, and they are covered with fur and have long tails. There are birds with brightly colored plumage that fly through the forests of India, and I am told that they can be taught to speak the tongues of man…

Mmh, I don't think Zhang Qiang would have been so amazed by Indian crocodiles. There is a species of alligator living in the lower Yangzi basin (practically disappeared in the wild by now, although thousands are bred in captivity in the hope of eventual repopulation), so saurians weren't unknown to the Chinese. As for monkeys, some are found in the mountainous areas of Southwestern China, although I'm not sure whether the mischievous "Monkey King" was already part of Chinese folklore in the early Han dynasty. Parrots, however, may have indeed surprised him.

 

[Thande]

Wasn't the Monkey King imported from the Hindu Hanuman? Or was it the other way around?

 

[Faeelin]

Mmh, I don't think Zhang Qiang would have been so amazed by Indian crocodiles. There is a species of alligator living in the lower Yangzi basin (practically disappeared in the wild by now, although thousands are bred in captivity in the hope of eventual repopulation), so saurians weren't unknown to the Chinese. As for monkeys, some are found in the mountainous areas of Southwestern China, although I'm not sure whether the mischievous "Monkey King" was already part of Chinese folklore in the early Han dynasty. Parrots, however, may have indeed surprised him.

True, but Zhang isn't from Southwest China; he has more experience dealing with the Han, so the monkeys would be odd to him.

Probably right about the crocodiles though.

 

[Faeelin]

Wasn't the Monkey King imported from the Hindu Hanuman? Or was it the other way around?

No idea. I'd have to check on it.

 

[Faeelin]

“India has many huge mountains which abound in fruit trees of every kind and has many vast plains of great fertility…. And while the soil bears on its surface all kinds of fruit, it has also underground numerous veins of all sorts of metals, for it contains much gold and silver and copper and iron in no small quanity….”-Diodorus, Greek Historian

When Demetrius II died in 165 BC, his death was mourned by all of his subjects. The cities of his empire vied for his ashes, and as the cities could not agree which among them should have the honor of building a stupa to contain his ashes, it was agreed that they would divide the ashes amongst them[1]. He was mourned by all of his subjects, and it would be written in the years to come that “Dimita” had achieved the status of an arhat before he had died, and had achieved nirvana.

His successor, King Menander, was also one of the wisest of the Greek kings. He would lead campaigns that would subdue Kalinga, and by the time that Menander died in 130 BC his empire would stretch as far as the Empire of Asoka the great.

Things were not as well for Bactria, however. Under King Apollo, brother of Menander, it faced a grave threat from the barbarians of Central Asia. Since the days of Alexander men had looked north uneasily, inspired by fears of the Cimmerians of old. By 160 BC, it appeared as if the barbarians were preparing to strike at Bactria.

In 165 BC, the great tribe the Yuezhi were driven out of their pastures in central Asia and began moving south, and came into contact and allied with various bands of the Scthians, known as the Saka in Indian sources and the Su or Sok in Chinese sources. Over the next several decades they would overrun much south of the Jaxartes (which empties into the Aral sea) and threaten the heart of Bactria. Apollo’s reign would be spent struggling against the barbarian tribes, and they continued to be a threat until the 120’s.

For Parthia, however, the situation was much worse. Parthia of OTL was barely capable of resisting the Sacae; Phraates Iii, who died in 128 BC, and Artabanus II, who died in 124 BC, both died facing them. In this TL, the Parthians are overwhelmed by the Sacae, who go so far as to threaten Media.

Bactria itself does not escape the ravages of the Saka and Yuezhi, but it does suffer less than OTL. Ferghana survives as a province of the Bactrian kingdom, despite the raids. The Yuezhi and the Saka are diverted to the lands bordering the Aral and Caspian Seas, and by 140 BC the worst is over for the Bactrians.

Why does Bactria do better than OTL? As discussed earlier, King Menander did not attack the Bactrians as the OTL Menander did; it is ruled by his brother, after all, instead of a rival king. Instead, India is a source of men and gold to help defeat and bribe the nomads; in fact, payment of gold and other gifts is partly responsible for their earlier attack on Parthia.

Bactria is also more prosperous, not divided into a variety of quarreling statelets that had just suffered a horrendous civil war. There was no Parthian occupation, as there was in OTL in the reign of the Parthian king Mithridates I. Combined with a weakened Parthia, the Bactrians have the ability to weather the storm, whereas the Parthians do not.

But what was truly important was the economic expansion that took place in India in the reign of Menander, and continued under his successors.

India in this period was one of the most economically dynamic parts of the world, and the Mauryan Era and the period after saw “a phenomenal development of industry as well as inland and foreign trade” [2].

It is in this period that Indian mercantile contacts with China begin, and the first Indian settlements are founded in Further India [3], as merchants increasingly come to trade and stay on for years. Textiles of Bengal, Assam, and Pandya, the woolens of Nepal, the gems of Ceylon, and the ores of Mathara are traded across the subcontinent, and indigo, ivory, and pearls find their way to the markets of the Mediterranean. This expansion is due to a variety of reasons, some present OTL, and some not, and each shall be discussed in turn.

India in this era experienced a general population rise in OTL; not only was land improved, but more forest and wasteland was being tamed. Documents attest that the land belonged to whomever first cultivated it, new dams and canals were built across India [4]. This increased agricultural prosperity fed into the development of a rising mercantile community, which was also stimulated by the development of contacts with the Mediterranean Sea. Rising demand for Indian goods such as cotton, and for spices from the East, encouraged Indian traders to increase contact with the islands of Further India.

This period also saw an increase in the minting of coins, despite the collapse of the Mauryan Empire. Greek influence and their commercial activity stimulated the development of more sophisticated coins, which became common throughout the region [4].

This led to a series of dramatic changes in India in this period. One of the most important aspects was the rise of the shreni, who are the rough equivalent of guilds. There is, however, one important difference. The shreni are more in line with associations of merchants who worked together, rather than being an organization of workers in the medieval sense of a guild. Like the medieval guilds, the shreni controlled many aspects of their members lives. The shrenis determined the prices that goods could be sold for, and had their own court system for their members.

These guilds were generally headed by leaders, the jyeshthas, who negotiated with other guilds and with officials of the state in necessity; and the leaders of these guilds were (in theory) supposed to be accountable to the members of the guild [5].

These guilds were very active in the social life of ancient India, and fulfilled many of the same social roles that medieval European guilds did. Members of the guild carried banners and insignia during festivals, and the guilds frequently made offerings to Buddhist stupas, and gave money to the destitute and to widows of guild members.

It is also clear that such guilds could act as bankers, but the vast majority of moneylending was in the hands of the upper classes. The term for such bankers, setthi-gahapati, betrays their origins; a setthi is a banker or investor, and a gahapati is a landowner. The implication is clearly that the vast majority of the bankers in Ancient India were rich landowners. Northern India was also familiar with investment, and interest. Inscriptions from the 2nd Century BC include references to kings investing in businesses, stating for instance, with inscriptions recording donations to monasteries paid for by investments from businesses.

But these guilds failed to acquire political power in the states of India. Why this was the case is most perplexing, and sources have placed the blame on a variety of reasons: the kings, being tied up in the business of guilds, never compromised the guild’s interests, and so the issue never arose; which may be true for some kings, but it stretches credulity to say that was true for all of them. Other sources have blamed it on caste rules, which forbade intercourse; but that does not make sense if Buddhism was expanding in the subcontinent in this era, as was the case.

It seems likely that the ultimate cause was a variety of factors. Buddhism did not cause Indians to abandon all cultural norms, after all, anymore than it caused converts to do so in China or Japan. And most kings probably did take a strong interest in the activities of merchants and urban craftsmen.

There may very well be a third reason, and I admit that this is largely conjectural on my part. Ancient India was not composed entirely of kingdoms, anymore than the Hellenistic World was. There was an alternative: the Gana-Sangha, the city-state. These were clustered in the less hospitable lands of Central India and the Punjab, often in hilly areas that were less fertile than the lowland plains.

Gana-Sangha has a very interesting meaning. Gana refers to those who claim to be of equal status, and sangha refers to an assembly [6]. A great deal about them is still fairly controversial; they’ve been called everything from democracies to chiefdoms to republics, but the general consensus is that they were states in which power was vested in an upper class. To call them chiefdoms, IMO, is unfair, as man of them dominated fairly large areas [7]. The gana-sangha had two classes, the kshatriya rajakula, or the warriors and citizens, and the dasa-karmakara, the slaves and laborers.

Just because the were called the kshatriya, however, does not mean that the gana-sangha was composed entirely of warriors. One of the most important works on Indian political life in this era, the Arthasatra of Kautilya, who was a chancellor for the first Mauryan emperor, referenced two forms of gana-sangha, the ayudhiya-praya, dominated by a warrior elite, and the shreni-praya, dominated by merchants, craftsmen, and wealthy landowners. There could, of course, be a great deal of overlap between them, as was true in the Classical World as well.

The members of the “tribes” which made up the Gana-Sangha met in the capital scity, which was presided over by the head of the Gana-Sangha. Matters for discussion were placed before the assembly, and if a decision could not be reached unanimously, it was put to a vote.

It’s worth noting that Mahavira, one of the most important of the early followers of Jainism, and the Buddha, both grew up in gana-ganghas. Also worth noting is the hostility towards the gana-sanghas that occurs in brahmanical sources because they refused to perform the proper sacrifices, and they generally were sources of heterodox beliefs.

However, these gradually declined in the face of the might and power of the Madaghan and Mauryan Empire. They still existed in the time of Alexander’s invasion; Greek sources refer to autonomous cities in the Indus Delta, and as late as the Gupta period, in the 6th century AD, there are references to gana-sanghas in Central India. But over the next few centuries after that death of Alexander, and his devastation of the gana-sanghas of Northwest India, they gradually died out.

It strikes the casual observer that it is likely that there were many in the shenris within the Mauryan Empire who sought a status similar to the shenri-praya, and that both the guilds and the city-states were referred to by the same name is highly suggestive. It seems likely that the shreni did seek to gain political power; but, judging by their gradual elimination by the Mauryan and Madaghan Empires, they were unsuccessful in doing so. This would explain why there are so few references to the shreni gaining power in this era; the Mauryans and Madaghans were opposed to them.

A final comment on religion. There was an upsurge in this period in donations to Buddhist monasteries; and intriguingly, they came from all walks of life and all castes. Whereas the traditional Vedic sects refused donations from certain castes, in particular sudras [8]. However, sudras are listed as giving donations Buddhist monasteries; which means that some of them had the resources to make a donation. This reflects an upsurge in the prosperity of this class, as they grew to take advantage of the growing prosperity and expansion of trade.



Now that the economic and social situation has been explained, what’s changed?

That, unfortunately, is for another post. But I will give one hint of what is to come: Think about the view of the polis in the Hellenistic World, and how it would relate to the shreni.

[1] This is what was done for the Buddha as well, and for the King Menander of OTL.

[2] Age of the Nandas and Mauryas, edited by K. A. Nilakanta Sastri

[3] Indonesia

[4] Especially towards the end of the 1st century BC, when the Greeks “discovered” the monsoon route.

[5] There’s some debate over whether or not the position of jyeshtha was hereditary; while it often passed from father to son, this was not always the case. I’m going with the assumption that the title was usually passed from father to son, but that this was more a reflection of the fact that the leader was among the most successful artisans in his field, and his son would be as well.

[6] Romila Thapar. Éarly India: From the Origins to 1300 AD”. University of California Press, 2002.

[7] And how important were the tribes of Rome to the Republic?


[8] The class of poorer artisans and menial laborers.

 

[G.Bone]

Good installment - very sweeping and yet capturing the region as a whole.

 

[Historico]

Great Job on the Latest instalment Faeelin, I like the Idea of going back and explaining the Social and Political state of the Graeco-Bactian Em[ire At this time. How is contact with mother Greece? and do the Bactrians still trade with the Medeterrainen Powers such as Rome,Egypt and Carthage?

 

[Faeelin]

Good installment - very sweeping and yet capturing the region as a whole.

Yes, but as stated, these were all the facets of OTL's india social structure during this period. I thought casual readers who had no clue what was going on in this era might be interested.

 

[Faeelin]

Great Job on the Latest instalment Faeelin, I like the Idea of going back and explaining the Social and Political state of the Graeco-Bactian Em[ire At this time. How is contact with mother Greece? and do the Bactrians still trade with the Medeterrainen Powers such as Rome,Egypt and Carthage?

Yes, extensive contact on overland routes, and the Monsoons are discovered in 150 BC, allowing direct trade between India and Egypt about a century ahead of OTL.

The survival of the Seleucids has kept a friendly Hellenistic state in the area, although how long it will last, I am not sure.

 

[Faeelin]

Economically, the conquest of India by Demetrius and his successor Menander leads to rapid advances in mining technology, and the expansion of gold mines in Karnataka and northern India. These technological advances are also applied to mining of nonprecious metals, and this leads to the expansion of India’s already famous ironworking industry [9]. This goes both ways, of course; by 100 BC, steel workers in Galatia and Pergamom are also learning how to make wootz steel, and using the crucible process which was learned by Greeks in India.

The reign of King Milinda saw other dramatic changes. The monsoons had been used for centuries by the Arabs to travel between India and the Red Sea. Between December and April, they could sail from Yemen to India, and between June and October, the Yemenis would return by sailing on the monsoon again.

However, King Demetrius, for all his willingness to adopt certain aspects of Indian culture, was still a Hellenistic king at heart, and like all Hellenes he could not help but compare himself to Alexander. It is no wonder, then, that in 165 BC, from ports in the Sind, a great expedition set sail in July, to do what Alexander had failed to do: to sail across the Indian Sea. Bedraggled and exhausted, the ships he sent out reached Egypt in the fall, and returned again the next year. For King Menander, it was a dramatic coup. Not only had he done what Alexander had failed to do, but he had established a route to trade with Egypt that bypassed the Arabs [10].

When the expedition sent out by Demetrius returned, it was accompanied by a ship of King Euergertes of Egypt, and over the next several decades a sizeable Greek community of sailors, with patronage from the kings in Pataliputra, would grow up in Patala, at the mouth of the Indus. It would fade into the population of the region by the 2nd century AD, but it was crucial for the introduction of a variety of sailing techniques to India, most notably the lateen sail [11]. From Patala, Greek merchants would work their way down the coast of India, and the Indians who copied their nautical techniques would soon enable them to reach survarna, the land of gold [12].

The Greeks also introduced their knowledge of astronomy to India, “and for this they must be reverenced like gods” [13]. The Greek ideas on astronomy are compiled in 120 BC in Sanskrit, in a work known as “Apollona Siddhanta”, or “Apollonius the Greek”. This astronomy was used largely to derive horoscopes, but most of India would end up adopting the Greek calendar, including its division of the week into seven days. Unlike the Greeks, however, the Indians had no trouble with the ideas of Aristarchus, for Surya, the Indian sun god, is readily acknowledged to be at the center of the heavens [14]

There is one last thing that should be mentioned, before this post is concluded, and it marks one of the most important differences between the Sungas and the heirs of Demetrius. Like Alexander before him, Demetrius established “free and independent cities” in his conquests. These cities were, of course, rather like the “free and independent” cities of the Seleucid Empire, subject to the imposition of taxes and the like, but they were otherwise left to govern themselves.

The manner in which they were governed varied, of course, but many of the cities were established as democracies. Citizenship of the polises was open only to those who were willing to acclimatize themselves to Greek ideals, but nevertheless it did offer a way for ambitious merchants and artisans to gain political power in their cities.

When the Hellenistic Kingdom of India fell in the 1st century AD, this would have dramatic consequences.


[9]”the Indians, inexperienced in the art of mining, do not even know their own resources but set about their business in too primitive a manner”, according to one Hellenistic author.

This can be contrasted with the fact that Alexander was presented with tribute that included the hundred talents of “white iron” that I’ve mentioned before, and probably meant steel, possibly the wootz steel for which India was famous.

The logical conclusion is that while India’s metallurgy tradition was rather advanced, its mining technology was not.

[10] This happened in OTL, when the Greek Hippalus sailed from Egypt, that was almost two centuries after the ATL discovery.

[11] Okay, I admit that this might be a bit of a gimme. It’s true that despite the sizeable Greco-Roman presence in western India, India did not pick up the lateen sail for several more centuries. But in OTL, the sailors who reached western India were traders, who had no interest in giving away the secrets of their trade. In the ATL they are settlers, who are specifically given privileges so that the kingdom has their knowledge.

[12] Southeast Asia, notably Sumatra and Cambodia.

[13] This is an OTL quote from the Sanskrit work the Gargi Samhita, and the text mentioned is based on a work attributed to Paul of Alexandria.

[14] It’s always nice when things are convenient like this, aren’t they?

There will be a post on Indian astronomy and its interactions with Hellenistic astronomy later.

 

[Faeelin]

''Go forth., O Bhikkhus, on your journey, for the welfare of the many, for the happiness of the many, out of compassion for the world, for the good, the benefit, the bliss of gods and men, proclaim the Dhamma, the doctrine; preach a life of holiness, perfect and pure.''- The Buddha

“In the life of an individual man, virtue is the sole good; such things as health, happiness, possessions, are of no account. Since virtue resides in the will, everything really good or bad in a man’s life depends only upon himself. He may be poor, but what of it? He can still be virtuous. He may be sentenced to death, but he can die nobly, like Socrates. Other men have power only over externals; virtue, which alone is truly good, rests entirely with the individual. Therefore every man has perfect freedom, provided he emancipates himself from mundane desires”- Zeno of Citium


Panaetius dipped his bread into honey and ate it as he thought about the question that had been vexing him. He looked out over the sea, at the busy harbor of Rhodes, and absently brushed a few crumbs out of his beard. He smiled contentedly as he looked out across the sea, and wished briefly that Rhodes had rebuilt the Colossus. Even now, it was an impressive sight; but to see it soaring into the heavens, as it once had done?

That would have been a sight to see. But, for some reason, the universe had not willed for it to remain standing. Panaetius shrugged, and walked to Acropolis. It was along the way that his life would be changed forever.
He walked on his own to the temple, as was his custom. He may have been a priest of Poseidon, but he wasn’t an old cripple, to need a litter bearer to carry him about the city. When he reached the Acropolis, however, he stopped short.

There was a crowd of people, standing and listening to a speaker. This was nothing new; Rhodes was famous for its rhetoric and orators. The speaker, however, was new. He was a man dressed in yellow flowing robes, and speaking in a loud, if heavily accented voice.

“This is what should be done
By one who is skilled in goodness,
And who knows the path of peace:
Let them be able and upright,
Straightforward and gentle in speech.”

”Humble and not conceited,
Contented and easily satisfied.
Unburdened with duties and frugal in their ways.
Peaceful and calm, and wise and skillful,
Not proud and demanding in nature.
Let them not do the slightest thing
That the wise would later reprove.
Wishing: In gladness and in safety,
May all beings be at ease.”

”Whatever living beings there may be;
Whether they are weak or strong, omitting none,
The great or the mighty, medium, short or small,
The seen and the unseen,
Those living near and far away,
Those born and to-be-born,
May all beings be at ease![1]”

“Thus,” said the man in yellow, “said the Blessed One, when he spoke on kindness.”

Panaetius was intrigued, and wished like hearing what the man had to say, but decided against it. After all, he had his duties to attend to, and he doubted the gods would be happy if he dallied to listen to an orator.

He ended up discussing the speaker with a worshipper, Akakios, at the temple. “Did you see that speaker on the Acropolis today?” he asked casually, after they finished discussing an offering for the temple.

Akakios nodded. “He’s one of those Indian philosophers. Or a priest.” Akakios shrugged. “Perhaps a bit of both. I’ve seen them before, in my travels to Egypt and Cilicia, but I never really listened to them before.” Akakios hesitated for a moment, and at last said, “He was…. impressive.”
Panaetius snorted. “I’m disappointed in you, Akakios. I thought I knew you better than to get mixed up in those eastern cults. Next thing you know you’ll be running off to get circumcised like one of the Jews. ”

“No, no,” protested Akakios. “It wasn’t like that at all. You would like him, I think. He spoke about the importance of moderation, and the importance of living a balanced life. He condemned the excesses of the wealthy, and laughed at the idea that suffering brings you a benefit.” He paused. “I’d listen to him again, actually. Besides,” he added, “he was a Greek from Bactria. It’s not like he was a barbarian.”

Panaetius shrugged. “Perhaps,” he said, “I will listen to him some time.”

Some time, as often happened, did not come until several months later, when Pantaelus saw the Bactrian preaching again. He had heard gossip about the Bactrian and his followers in the meantime. They had bought a small building in a respectable, but by no means wealthy area in Rhodes, and preached throughout the city. Pantaelus had ignored it as just another trend, but Akakios was convinced otherwise.

“Mark my words, Panaetius,” he told him one day. “I think you should go talk with their leader, Sophocles.”

Panaetius scowled. “They let women in, I hear.”

Akakios laughed. “There are women at the temple to Athena,” he pointed out.

“What about that foolishness about being born again after you die?” demanded Pantaelus. “As if we could be born again after we die?”

Akakios smiled. “Good question. Why don’t you ask them about such foolishness, rather than pestering me?”

Pantaelus felt the heat rush to his face, and scolded himself. He should have better control of his temper than he did. “Maybe I will.”

“Why not?” asked Akakios. “You’re the one who always preaches to me and everyone else about a life of moderation and decency.” Akakios smirked. “Maybe you’ll become a Buddhist while you’re there.”

“I think I have a better chance of becoming a Jew,” replied Panaetius. “But it can’t hurt.”



The next day, Panaetius walked into the Buddhist temple, and looked around cautiously. It seemed respectable enough; a bit plain, but it was a new temple. Panaetius noticed that there was an artisan painting a picture of a man sitting beneath a tree while monsters attacked him. Panaetius stared at the painting for a while, as he noticed that the man seemed to be seeing through the monsters, as if they were beneath his contempt.

“That,” said a voice behind him, “is the Enlightened One when he defeated Death.”

Panaetius turned around to see the Bactrian, who was wearing, as usual, a yellow robe. “I greet you. I am Sophocles of Alexandria of the Caucasus[2].”

Panaetius looked at Sophocles, and nodded. He seemed like a decent enough man, and Panaetius hadn’t heard any scandals about him, the way he had about the priests of Demeter. “I greet you, Sophocles of Alexandria. I am Panaetius.”

“Ah,” replied Sophocles as his eyes lit up. “You are one of the priests of Poseidon, are you not?”

“Yes,” said Panaetius. “But I am also a stoic.”

“Ah,” said Sophocles. He nodded. “Then you view apatheia as the ultimate goal, do you not?”

Panaetius nodded. “What other reason could there be for a philosopher, than to allay that which causes disturbance in life?”

“Let me tell you,” said Sopochles, “of the Enlightened One, and his discovery of nirvana.”

“Nirvana?” asked Panaetius, as a monk brought in wine.

Sophocles took a sip of wine. “The Enlightened One, the Buddha, discovered the Fourth Truths. He discovered that suffering is found everywhere in existence. But he then discovered the source of suffering, which is caused by a craving for sensual pleasure.”

Panaetius smiled. “I would venture that you do not approve of the Epicureans, then.”

Sophocles sniffed. “They are fools. Well intentioned, perhaps, but fools. They feel there there is no life beyond this one, and so they indulge in sensual pleasures. But what will that bring them, at the end of life? If they are right, they will merely have spent a life achieving nothing, as, they claim, most lives amount to. And if they are wrong….” Sophocles shrugged. “I digress.”

“He then asked what the cause of suffering is. The Buddha determined that this is the craving for sensual pleasure. The third truth was that when this craving was stopped, suffering would stop.” He looked at Panaetius, who was listening intently. “And, finally, the Buddha reached the fourth truth. To end suffering, one must follow the Holy Eightfold Path, and only then may one reach nirvana.”

The two spent the next hour discussing the Holy Eightfold Path, and the Threefold Training. At long last, Panaetius rose from his seat, and dipped his head in respect to Sophocles. “You have given me much to think on,” he said. “But I must ponder what we have discussed before I can converse more with you.”

“Of course,” said Sophocles. “How else could one achieve enlightenment, if not by meditating?”

Panaetius returned to the Buddhist temple [3] a week later, and sat down with Sophocles once again. “I have thought much upon your philosophy,” he said. “But I see several problems.”

For once, noticed Panaetius with a glint of mischief, Sophocles calm exterior seemed to vanish. “What do you mean?”


“Let us work through the steps by which you claim suffering arises. To begin with, you assume that aging and dying depend on people being reborn, correct?”

Sophocles nodded cautiously. “I suspect a trap here,” he said ruefully, “but yes.”

“What is your basis for assuming that soul can be reborn?” inquired Panaetius [4].

Sophocles thought for a moment. “You would agree that everything could come from opposites, wouldn’t you? That is, that one can only sleep if one was awake, and one can only die if one was die.”

Panaetius smiled. “No, I wouldn’t. You won’t get me to start letting you recite the Phaedo to me. Socrates started from the assumption that the soul existed before death. Yet what was his claim for that?”


Sophocles thought for a moment, and nodded. “Yes,” he said, “I see your point. However….”

To be continued.


[1] The Metta Sutta

[2] This is actually in Bactria. I know, I know. The Greeks under Alexander called the Hindu Kush the Caucasus, and for the city the name stuck.

[3] Of course, it’s technically a stupa, but at this point Panaetius views it as a temple.

[4] Of course, reincarnation isn’t necessarily a radical idea, in the Classical Greek context; witness the Phaedo.

 

[G.Bone]

Interesting piece. I like the description of the city-

 

[Faeelin]

Sophocles thought for a moment, and nodded. “Yes,” he said, “I see your point. However….”

Sophocles picked an olive from a bowl and ate it, thinking as he chewed. “Tell me,” he said when he finished, “what you consider the soul to be.”

“The soul,” said Panaetius, is nothing more than the pneuma, the vital, warm breath which permeates the world.” He gestured. “It is in everything around us, of course, from a blade of grass to a newborn.”

“The pneuma is the active force, which acts upon the passive elements of earth and water. Just because the body, made of earth of water, “ continued Sophocles.

“But,” asked Sophocles, “if it is in everything, how is it that not everything talks and acts like men?”

“Because,” replied Panaetius, “life only arises when the pneuma of things has a certain property that makes it unique [5].”

“Forgive me, Panaetius,” said Sophocles. “I must be ignorant, for I see a problem that I can not resolve. If pneuma is the active element, and the other elements are passive, what gives pneuma the properties it requires to be altered for different things?”

“Well,” said Panaetius, “it is because, err, ah,” Panaetius felt his face heat as he continued thinking, “

“And,” asked Sophocles, “you hold that both pneuma and the passive elements are matter. Yet I cannot make a tree and a rock occupy the same space, can I?” Sophocles picked up a fig and an olive, and said, “or could you make this fig and olive occupy the same space?”

Panaetius smiled at the question of Sophocles, as it finally gave him a chance to recover. “Of course I could not,” he said smugly. “But pneuma and passive matter do not occupy the same space. They blend together. They are blended together so thoroughly that the pneuma and the earth and water produce a new blend. Therefore,” continued Panaetius, “it is the amount of pneuma, in proportion to the other elements, that is responsible for the variation in properties that cause differences to occur between things.”

“Thus,” he concluded, “there is more pneuma in a man than in a dog, and more in a dog than a plant.”

“I see,” said Sophocles. He took a sip of wine, and asked another question. “You would agree, would you not, that pneuma has different properties based on how it is organized in a mixture?”

Panaetius nodded. “At the most basic form, pneuma is merely responsible for the cohesion between the passive elements. This state of cohesion is, of course, the hexis. In mixtures with more pneuma, the pneuma is more active, and there is an organic character to the mixture. It can grow and reproduce, and this form of pnuema is the phusis. The next most highly organized form of pneuma is the soul, the psyche which only animals, men, and gods possess. And, finally, there is logos, reason. This is the most organized form of pneuma.”

Sophocles nodded. “Tell me, Panaetius, have you ever see gold turn to lead? Or have you seen wine turn to water?”

“Of course not,” asked Panaetius.

“Then does it not follow,” asked Sophocles, “that forms of matter tend to stay as the form that they are? That is, that wine does not turn to water, and gold does not turn to lead?”

“Of course,” said Panaetius. His face let up, as he grasped the significance. “You mean to say that logos seeks to remain as logos, and does not revert to hexis willingly?”

“Exactly,” said Sophocles. He smiled. “Which would mean that when a person’s physical body died, their logos would seek a new, empty body, would it not?”

Panaetius blinked. “Of course!” he said. “But that does not mean they are the same person that they once were. I am afraid I do not think reincarnation can be true.”

“Perhaps,” said Sophocles, who smiled. “Tell me, Panaetius,” said Sophocles. “Could a lamp last the whole night?”

“Yes,” replied Panaetius, who was beginning to grasp what was occurring.

“But at the end of the night, the flame is not the same as it was at dusk, is it?” asked Sophocles. “But are they not connected? Or, if I turn milk into butter, does that mean that milk and butter are the same thing? Of course not!” exclaimed Sophocles. “But butter was produced from milk.”

“Just so,” said Sophocles, “must one understand the idea of a series of concurrent lives.”

Panaetius looked at Sophocles with a newfound respect. “But tell me, sir, what the Buddha taught that was so important? Should it not follow that it is natural for logos to be transmitted from one body to another?”

Sophocles gestured. “You would now agree that aging and dying depend on rebirth, would you not? Or, at the very least,” said Sophocles as he caught himself, “that it is most natural for logos to be transferred from one body to another. Would you agree that this process depends on a desire on the part of the logos to fulfill a vessel?”

When Panaetius nodded, Sophocles continued. “This must occur because the logos enjoys the feelings it has when it is in a body, correct?”

Panaetius raised his hand. “Wait a second,” he said. “Why does this happen?”
“Because,” said Sophocles, “left on its own, the logos of an ordinary person must surely decay into the hexis without the interaction between it and the passive elements. The logos seeks to maintain its organized state, and thus seeks to enter a body again.”

“But Chrysippus [6] held that the logos of the wise last forever. Do you dispute this?” asked Panaetius.

“Not at all,” said Sophocles. “This is what the Buddha said!” exclaimed Sophocles. “When ignorance ceases, the logos is no longer afraid of not being in a body, and therefore it does not enter one. It therefore remains as logos, independent of a body, for eternity.”

”Ultimately, however,” said Sophocles, “beings must suffer. The Buddha spread his word in order to ensure that no one must suffer any longer.”

Panaetius’s eyes lit up as he comprehended all that had been said. He was silent for a few minutes, as it all sank in. After a silence, he shouted one word.

“Eureka!”

Thoughts?


[5] The Greek word is tonos, which has often been translated as tension. But given that the Stoics saw the pneumas of different things possessing different properties, I think properties is a better word to put here.

[6] A famous Stoic philosopher who preceded Panaetius.

 

[Susano]

“Not at all,” said Sophocles. “This is what the Buddha said!” exclaimed Sophocles.

Oops. That slipped past me in my first reading, heh.
Might correct this repetition in any case, heh.

 

[Faeelin]

Oops. That slipped past me in my first reading, heh.
Might correct this repetition in any case, heh.

I might, or I might not.

I am, as always, grateful for the comments of the 20+ people who read that post.

 

[DominusNovus]

No news is good news, my friend.

 

[Faeelin]

"Carthage Ought to Survive: Pt. 1"

With the defeat of Seleucus IV, the situation in the east seemed to settle down for a while. Rome’s relationship with the Greek city-states was “essentially parental in nature, with the Greeks playing the part of quarrelsome, feckless, undisciplined children”[1]. But like all children, the Greeks grew tired of Rome’s parental interference.

Disputes arose constantly. Athens and Oropus argued over the collection of tolls. Rhodes fought Cretan pirates. And above all, Sparta broke from the Achaean League over a territorial dispute with Megalopolis.

The matter reached a head in 149 BC, when both Sparta and the Achaean League sent delegates to Rome. The Spartans claimed that the League had no right to become involved in its dispute, and the Achaeans naturally claimed otherwise. Rome endorsed the League, and this encouraged the League to act arrogantly towards Sparta. In 148 BC ambassadors were in Rome yet again, and the Romans decided to send a Roman commission to solve the dispute, which arrived in a year and a half.

When the Roman commission arrived, they decided that Sparta, Corinth, Argos, and other cities were to be freed from the League. This understandably upset many Greeks, and the Roman commissioners were actually attacked. The Senate’s response was actually quite mild, and they asked that those responsible for the attack be punished, and told the Achaeans to avoid further attacks on Rome and Sparta.

By this point, however, the situation within the League had changed. The strategos of the League in 147/146, Critolaus, who fired up the Achaeans for a war. However, it was a war that was to be directed against Sparta, not against Rome.

The Romans, for their part, are not looking for a fight with Achaea. The war in Spain, begun in 155 BC, is still raging on, and Rome is beginning to be worried about Carthage and Numidia. After Hnnibal’s death Masinissa, the King of Numidia, had gained territory at the expense of Carthage, who realized that their only hope of resisting Masinissa was to rearm.

Understandably, the sight of their former arch-rival Carthage rearming made many Romans nervous, who in 152 BC sent a delegation to Carthage. When it returned in 151 BC, with alarming reports of a Carthage that was building a great military once again, ostensibly to defeat the Numidians who supposedly ravaging their farms, attacking their cities, and so forth, Cato and his followers argued that Rome must go to war. This measure was ultimately defeated, but in 150 BC Carthage attacked Numidia after a series of provocations. This gave Rome the excuse it needed, and Rome declared war.

The Romans laid siege to Carthage; and, err, waited. And waited. The Carthaginians, not being the sort of people to like being enslaved and exterminated, held out stubbornly, tying down crucial Roman assets for three years.

There is one man, however, who has been waiting for a chance like this. He is Seleucus IV, and in 148 BC, when the Romans are tied down in Spain and Carthage, he invades Egypt. Euergetes had died in 151 BC, and his son Ptolemy was only a mere boy, with his regents fighting amongst one another. His progress was like a lightning bolt, and by 147 BC Alexandria itself has fallen.

This is combined with yet another Macedonian revolt, which is barely defeated by Lucius Mummius, the governor of Macedonia. Scipio Aemilius was dispatched to Egypt, leaving the campaign on Carthage to a subordinate.

You thought things were bad now? Well, as the saying goes, you ain’t seen nothing yet. Some of you may remember the Roman attempts to subdue kingdom of Pergamum, and their installation of Attalus as king around 150 BC. He is overthrown by an army of the pretender Aristonicus, son of the rightful king Eumenes. Aristonicus is supported by Seleucid gold and Galatian troops, and is, naturally, an enemy of the Romans.

But I digress. It is now important to return to the events in Achaea. The commander of the Achaeans, Critolaus, went to attack the city of Heracleia. But the Roman Senate, suspicious that the Achaeans might be intriguing with Seleucus IV, attacked the Achaeans, and an army under the Roman Metellus attacked the Achaeans near Thermopylae. In a substantial divergence from OTL, however, the Achaeans receive reinforcements from Aristonicus, and force Metellus to withdraw.

The Roman defeat inspires a wave of war fever in Greece. Boeotia, Euobeoea, and Phocis defected to the League, and twelve thousand slaves are carefully selected and freed to fight in the League’s army.

Therefore, a rough list of Rome’s enemies in 146 BC includes: the Seleucids, Carthage, the Celtiberians, the Achaeans, and Pergamum. Even Rhodes joins, in 145 BC, simply because it is furious at the Romans for trying to undercut their economy by establishing Delos as a free port.

[1] Alexander to Actium.


So, any thoughts on who will win this?