What if the Indo-Greek Kingdom Survived

also there would have been a lot of greek settlments in the kingdom mostly around the indo-gangetic plain and strategic geographic areas
Also, I dont undestand one thing, why would Kabul Valley and Western parts of Sindh and Punjab be lost to Ummayds, of Indo Greeks are United, they can easily beat of the Ummayds, in OTL, three Squabbling Indian states banded together to beat the Ummayd, Indo Greeks will give them a much harder time

Kabul and Kandahar were the centers of powers for greek, they will not lose it for any reason, as it is valuable to them culturally, historically and geopolitically
 
Also, I dont undestand one thing, why would Kabul Valley and Western parts of Sindh and Punjab be lost to Ummayds, of Indo Greeks are United, they can easily beat of the Ummayds, in OTL, three Squabbling Indian states banded together to beat the Ummayd, Indo Greeks will give them a much harder time

Kabul and Kandahar were the centers of powers for greek, they will not lose it for any reason, as it is valuable to them culturally, historically and geopolitically

Actually i didnt know about this so i just used the OTL ummayad caliphate borders for the map Thanks for the feedback
 
Actually i didnt know about this so i just used the OTL ummayad caliphate borders for the map Thanks for the feedback
Yes, You can modify but remember, Afghanistan was conquered and converted to Islam by Mahmud of Ghazni, much later after Initial arab conquests, around 10 century ce, as such in this Hypothetical TL, It will remain a Part of Indo Greek kingdoms along with Parts like Sindh, Western Punjab and Kashmir
 
Appart form that, The Sassnid Empire would SERIOUSLY have a problem with this empire, I imagine

The date of the map is 730 A.D so the sassanian empires and the caliphate still exists

How do you get from the first century CE Indo-Greeks (not a term that the actual historical people ever used to describe themselves, to my knowledge) to a world where the Sassanians Empire and Islam still emerge on schedule?

The main threat to these people, apart from every other state on the Indo-Gangetic plain, is going to be constant invasions from steppe peoples crossing through modern-day Afghanistan and invading the Indus river valley as they tended to do. The specific invasions may be mixed up by the butterfly effect but sooner or later they'll have to contend with this. The whole history of this part of the world is marked by continual waves of outside influence and settlement. To change that and ensure a continuous regime lasting the better part of a millennia, you basically have to change how Central Asia works.
 
How do you get from the first century CE Indo-Greeks (not a term that the actual historical people ever used to describe themselves, to my knowledge) to a world where the Sassanians Empire and Islam still emerge on schedule?

The main threat to these people, apart from every other state on the Indo-Gangetic plain, is going to be constant invasions from steppe peoples crossing through modern-day Afghanistan and invading the Indus river valley as they tended to do. The specific invasions may be mixed up by the butterfly effect but sooner or later they'll have to contend with this. The whole history of this part of the world is marked by continual waves of outside influence and settlement. To change that and ensure a continuous regime lasting the better part of a millennia, you basically have to change how Central Asia works.
Thats the thing, India has had the capability to easily repel any central asian invasions due to its massive population and revenue base, but only when its united

If its divided, it is Much easier to invade and conquer large parts of India, if Indo Greeks are united for a large time period, they can repel off any central asian invasion
 
If its divided, it is Much easier to invade and conquer large parts of India, if Indo Greeks are united for a large time period, they can repel off any central asian invasion

That's a huge "if" - given that almost every, if not every, premodern state in human history went through periods of disunity, disorder, etc.

But even if ASBs are holding together the state and ensuring a perfect continuity of governance, plenty of unified states have suffered losses against steppe nomads.
 
That's a huge "if" - given that almost every, if not every, premodern state in human history went through periods of disunity, disorder, etc.

But even if ASBs are holding together the state and ensuring a perfect continuity of governance, plenty of unified states have suffered losses against steppe nomads.
India has been united three times against central asian nomads, Guptas, Delhi Sultanate and Mughal, and all those three times it was able to beat back and repel any such invasion from Steppe nomads,

I agree, Indo Greeks can fracture, but as long they are united, they can beat back the any Nomadic invasion
 
To be clear, my opinion on the matter is that the Islamic innovation in Arabia will not occur wherein a surviving Kingdom of India under the dynasty of Menander remains. Matters would be changed immensely in this scenario due to a divergent Arsacid confederacy, likely no Sassanid revolt and a differentiated Roman Empire and Yuezhi-Scythian invasion trend. As such, situations in Arabia are changed mildly, but with mild changes comes significant divergences. Arab conquests of the region however are nevertheless plausible, it is not far fetched in the slightest to imagine an Arab conquest of Iran in a scenario without Islam. However, to the point of the Indian kingdom.

First, we must get our terms correct. The Indo-Greek kingdom, was referred to, as I understand and from coinage, as the 'Kingdom of India' or the Kingdom of the Indus. This is divergent from the Kingdom of Bactria to its northwest in Central Asia. This Indian kingdom was referred to as such due to its situated position along the Indus river. It was however divided into seemingly two separate realms that were roughly united. Namely, the Kingdom of Arachosia and India. Arachosia being the areas east of Drangiana. Arachosia as a unit, would have included much of Drangiana, Paropamisade along the east of the Arius river and also Gedrosia, that being Baluchistan. India, the main political unit, would have included from Gandhara southward to the end of the Indus river into the ocean. This Indian section was the most important of the two and was the crown jewel of the monarchs of the respective regions.

I am not sure that the poster had a POD in mind, I assume it would be between 145-120 BCE, the critical three decades of the Indian kingdom's period.

Menander I (155-130 BCE) was the ultimate Indian kingdom of the Greeks in the region. His reign began during the reign of similarly fantastic kings, such as Mithridates I (171-132 BCE) or his formal name Arsaces V and Eucratides I (171-145 BCE) of the Bactrian kingdom. Menander I was an energetic and phenomenal king, whose skill in battle was matched and exceeded by his ability to rule. During his reign, he was opposed on either side by enemies, namely in the northwest by Eucratides I of Bactria who in 163 BCE, was made a vassal state of the Arsacids and proceeded to invade India and engage them aggressively on behalf of their overlords and in the southeast by Pushyamitra Shunga (185-149 BCE) of the Shunga empie, a successor of the Magadhi state of the Maurya.

Menander I was in his early rule, preoccupied from 153-149 BCE with a major war with the Shunga. In said war, Menander I was able to defeat the Shunga and pushed deep into the Gangetic plain, capturing Pataliputra and subjugating the region and in theory, the Shunga. However, Eucratides I pushed into Arachosia around the year 149 BCE, forcing Menander I back to the west to stifle the Bactrian incursion. This was seemingly a massive success, as the Bactrians were defeated soundly and fled by the year 148 BCE. Menander I then seems to have extended his influence across the Gujarat and other areas. His coinage becomes predominant across northern South Asia, implying a general Indian hegemony over South Asia and dominance of his realm over the rival Shunga. In 145 BCE, the first rumblings of trouble occurred. Scythian nomads, pushed south into Bactria Eucratides I was defeated decisively in 145-144 BCE and seemingly slew in the conflict. His realm was taken in a tide by the Scythians who divided up Bactria among themselves and pushed both west, east and south. North of them, was the Yuezhi, who were more slowly crossing the Kashmir region and acting as possible overlords or as partners with the Scythian tribes that conquered the Bactrians. According to Chinese sources, the Scythians decimated the Bactrians and subjugated them and then challenged in battle the Arsacids, or the Anxi.

Menander I seems to have had problems with this new situation, for in between the years 142-139 BCE, a certain Zoilos I rose to power in Arachosia as a rebel against Menander I and was possibly sponsored by the Scythians or representative of refugee Greeks from Bactria capturing the state in Arachosia and acting as enemies of India and of the Scythians, in that case, sponsored by the Arsadcid king, Mithridates I. Menander I was unable to resolve the issue with Zoilos I and perished around 130 BCE leaving the throne to a young Strabo I.

Strabo I (130-109 BCE) was a boy upon his ascent seemingly, as such he inherited a massive sprawling domain covering the largest population in the world aside fro the Han Dynasty. It was too massive for the child to operate and without the skill of Menander, the state began to falter. Fractions occurred immediately. Shunga resurgence resumed under Vasumitra Shunga (131-124 BCE) who recaptured most of the Gangetic Plain from the Indian kingdom and defeated the Indian state along the Indus, setting their border at the eastern bend of the Indus. In the west and south, the Indian state continued to fracture, Zoilos I remained the ruler of Gedorsia and western Arachosia, but a second Greek took rebellion by the name of Lycias. Lycias would capture the region of eastern Arachosia and southern Ariana for himself and challenged Zoilos I and Strabo I for supremacy. Strabo I was ruling in a precarious situation as his state was limited to the Indus Valley and was pressed on all sides by the Scythians to the northwest, the rebel Greek states to the west and the Shunga to the east.

While India was declining, the Arsacid empire, the preeminent power in the region at the time was fresh off massive conquests. Mithridates I had thrust his people into a position of ultimate power by defeating the Seleucids in Mesopotamia and subjugating Bactria. The Arsacids had plans for an invasion of Syria, Anatolia, Egypt and so forth. The dream then, may have been the recreation of Alexander's empire, certainly. The Arsacids had proven their mettle by destroying all near them and creating a new hegemony. Yet, the Arsacids wherein 133 BCE, faced with a new threat from the east.

In the year 174-162 BCE, wars between the Xiongnu and the renowned Yuezhi state led to the flight of the Yuezhi from their home in eastern Tocharia and the Gansu in 161 BCE. These Yuezhi supposedly, as per the opinion of many scholars, possessed as sort of enormous renown across the steppe region as power lords and prestigious warriors/merchants. Their names may have been mentioned in the texts of Indian epics and their name according to Han records, sent the Scythians into flight just at their mention. Han officials were dumbfounded whence they learned of the defeat of the Yuezhi by the Xiongnu, so perplexed were they that the Han submitted to tribute to the Xiongnu due to recognition that the Xiongnu must be unbeatable to have defeated the Yuezhi, who to them were the greatest of the barbarians in war and wealth.

The idea, is that whence the Yuezhi appeared in Western Asia after passing the Kashmir range, bypassing the Indian kingdom, which had lost the Kashmirs to the Scythians some decades earlier, the Arsacids changed their course. Hearing of the arrival of such a prestigious foe, Mithridates I called off his invasion of Syria and moved east. There he died of old age, luckily, the Yuezhi were not yet interested in the Arsacisds and instead were ranging in northern Bactria. In the reign of young Phraates II or formally Arsaces VI (132-127 BCE), the Arsacids defeated a resurgent Selecuid invasion of Mesopotamia in 129 BCE, and with said victory, Phraates II, now perhaps 19, made a call to mimic the greatness of his father and to defeat the renowned Yuezhi and restore the Bactrian vassal.

Phraates II pushed east through his northern lands and into the steppes north of Parthia, where the Yuezhi were ranging. There, the Arsacids, were soundly defeated and the young king was slain by the Yuezhi, who decisively broke the Arsacid army into pieces. Artabanus I, the uncle of Phraates II and the brother of Mithridates I ascended to the throne as Arsaces VII (127-124 BCE) and vowed to avenge his nephew. The Yuezhi for their part, alongside a horde of Scythian subordinates, invaded the Arsacid realm. Yuezhi forces attacked the ceremonial burial grounds of the Arsacid kings and defaced the burials, destroying the bodies and tombs and then burning the city, then afterwards, the Yuezhi froced their way southward capturing more and more land, annexing all of Parthia and pushing into Media before returning to Parthia in 125 BCE. They were followed by Artabanus I who engaged them in battle and as his nephew before him, was slain in battle and the Arsacids were defeated and totally routed by the Yuezhi.

As a result, the Arsacid royalty abandoned their capitol city of Ectbatana and fled into Mesopotamia, while the Yuezhi raided across Media, gathering loot and tribute from the Arsacids and the Arsacid vassals across the region which suffered under the Yuezhi invasion. This was all completed by 123 BCE, a prior Arsacid hegemony was replaced by a Scytho-Yuezho dominion across the region and the Indian kingdom of Strabo I, was barely able to stand on its two feet. This is what doomed the Indian kingdom.

Following the destruction of the Arsacid power east of the Zagros, the Yuezhi resumed a relatively humble dominion over Bactria, Parthia, Sogdia and Ferghana, facing more their enemies to the east, especially the Wusun and the Xiongnu. To the south of the Yuezhi, Scythian warlords jostled for control. Strabo I perished in 109 BCE, in his death, he left a kingdom descending into shambles. Antialcidas had in 115 BCE, usurped the authority of Strabo I in the north, taking control as a local warlord in Taxila, while Strabo I ruled the southern section of the Indus and the eastern parts of the Indus, losing all of his western and northwestern parts between 115-112 BCE.

Lysias who had possibly defeated and destroyed Zoilos I in 121-119 BCE, was in turn conquered in 110 BCE by a Scythian horde, which asserted rule over Arachosia, Drangiana and Gedrosia. In India, the situation worsened even further. For after the death of Strabo I, his succession was that of four different pretenders. Antialcidas from Taxila, Heliokles from Peshawar and western Gandhara (the Scythian vassal), Polyxenos ruling the eastern Punjab (possibly a Shunga vassal?) and then the legitimate option, Demetrius III ruling the southern Indus valley. All of these claimants would battle for supremacy with the Scythain claimant gaining predominance, conquering most of the Punjab and subjugating Demetrius III.

However, this hegemony was more or less a Scythian induced hegemony, not a legitimate revival of Greek power in India. The Scythian warlord, Maues (98-57 BCE) would enforce Scythian hegemony over the fracturing (once again) Indian kingdom, conquering or vasalizing the entirety of it before invading the Shunga, defeating them and pushing as far east as Pataliputra, instigating a widespread Scythian surge into South Asia. Greek remnant states acted as vassals and local rulers in the Indus until the Gupta period thus.

Considering these facts, we should discuss how to fix the situation,as the reign of Strabo I is the most important thing to remedy here.
 
As none have come with a solution for my problem and discourse, I will attempt to do so and theorize a possible manner of recovery for India. Do forgive the double-post, as this is an interesting topic and under-covered on the board, the geopolitics in this period and region are extremely complex and much can be gleaned from an investigation on some theory regarding it.

As I mentioned, much of the issue is that the Indian state is by the late reign of Menander I, on the precipice of an unfolding geopolitical clash between multiple different entities. Let us list the partners at play here and then discuss somewhat after. This will all be at the ascent of Strabo I in the year 130 BCE, who is at least younger or equal to 15 years of age at the time of his ascent. In otl, Strabo I passed thus at the age of 36-37 (at the eldest), likely of foul play.

Leading Sates

1. India: Our star in this atl and the one that we must protect at all costs. In 130 BCE, it is a declining state, yet on paper the strongest country in South Asia. It commands a soft hegemony over the Ganges Riverway and a core territory over the Indus Valley and soft influence over the Gujarat and trade links across the South of the subcontinent. It however is faced with serious issues of rule. Strabo is too young to rule and is dominated by his mother and by varied government officials. The state likewise has no allies in 130 BCE, it is isolated diplomatically and facing threats to its hegemony. Still, as Menander I proved, India is not a fragile state, it can surely defeat its enemies if it can recover in time and implement a good foreign policy to outdo its foes on all sides. Their armies are a combination of Greek warriors borne from colonies, mounted warriors from the steppes, and a large number of locals readily adopted into the military of the Indian state. The Indian cosmological basis is upon the successorship of Alexander, 'to the ends of the Earth' and the creation of a great power in the lands of the east, resisting the steppe and the forces of reaction from the Magadhi.

2. The Shunga: The main South Asian rival to Indian dominance. Formerly, the Shunga were governors of the Maurya, but Pushyamitra Shunga slew the last Mauryan emperor Brimadratha Maurya in 185 BCE in a coup. The Shunga, were at their height in 180-165 BCE, however their dominance was based off a lack of competition and would soon be tested. Shunga forces were defeated by Menander I in 153-149 BCE, culminating in the Indian capture of Pataliputra and the ascent of an Indian hegemony in 149 BCE over the Ganges riverway. Shunga powers in 130 BCE thus, are primarily focused east and south of Pataliputra. Shunga rule thus comprised the Bengal delta and areas south of the Ganges which still owed some level of suzerainty to the Shunga. They are however surely a power to be reckoned with, as they possesses the ability to retake most of their lands rapidly. The Shunga possess a large army of warriors in the traditional Hindu style, they are literally the successor in mostly all ways to the later Mauryan state, except without Buddhist overtones. Their claim to authority is shrouded completely in the notion of Mauryan hegemony over the subcontinent.

3. The Arsacids: The supposed hegemony in the region. They rule Iran, Mesopotamia, Parthia and the lands of the Dahae comprising areas extending north into the Khwarezm. In 130 BCE, they are under the authority of king Phraates II or formally Arsaces VI, a boy of 15-16 years, yet one of high energy, hopes and aspirations. He is in 130 BCE, faced with an invasion from the Seleucid emperor Antiochus VII (138-129 BCE), who is ruling Syria and also possibly holding the city of Haran, which is being contested between he and the Arsacids. The Arsacids are still a nomadic styled entity as they would always be. An army of nomadic warriors with strict customs of nobility, aristocracy and warmaking. Their empire is more of a large confederation, containing a plethora of clients. Iran is covered in a series of autonomous free cities founded by the Seleucids, Dahae (a Sctyhian-like nomadic people)noble realms that is grazing land and sedentary subjects for them, a collection of mountain-folk vassals in the Mazandran, the Persian priest-kings of the Persia, and then the major Houses of Suren and Karen, the dominant non-Arsacid noble houses in the empire. In Mesopotamia, the Arsacids rule over dozens of small Greek vassals, including a Greek state in Elam. Within Babylonia itself, the area is ruled almost entirely by Greek governors and mayors, whose positions were maintained by the Arsacids as a means to maintain constancy in rule. Arsacid rulers thus reside in the capitol cities of Seleucius-Cteshipon and Ectbatana. The entire endeavor resembles more an army (literally and its tribal and aristocratic attachments to steppe life) controlling a collection of clients, tributaries and otherwise subjects.

Arsacid pride and victories may be its main downfall however. They are quite pompous and unwilling to accept the loss of Bactria. After they wage war with Antiochus VII, they will, if they survive that, will attempt to retake their vassal in Bactria and appoint a client there and uproot the Scythians. Additionally, to destroy the Scythians, requires one to also face the Yuezhi, who while unwilling to do war, are also a dangerous omen. Arsacid warriors are equipped well however, as peerless steppe warriors and masters of cataphract styles, they have successfully defeated the Seleucids and many other strong Hellenic and steppe foes before. Their cosmological basis, seems to be a combination of Alexander's empire and restoration of a universal rule akin to it and with the traditional Scythian way of acquiring vast subject states and gathering tribute from said sedentary peoples as a means to subsidize a life of war and grazing.

4. The Scythians and Yuezhi or the steppe problem.

Each of these are divided into factions, but generally can be grouped into two types:

Scythians: Set in flight by the Xiongnu, Yuezhi and Wusun, they are seeking new lands. The Scythian zones of influence include Southern Bactria, Aria, Drangiana, Gedrosia, Arachosia and the Kashmir mountain ranges. Their power is fairly great and they are backed by fearsome and large quantities of steppe warriors alongside likely a collection of newly subjugating vassals among the vanquished enemies. Currently though, they are divided between different warlords and most would agree, their warlords were approximately 4-5, with the most major being the Scythian warlords controlling Aria, Arachosia and Gedrosia. Their cosmological basis is one of adventurism, the Scythians at every turn, regardless of warlord, is seeking new areas of grazing and lands of conquest, blazing a path wherever they go. Their eyes are keenly set upon India and its wealth. In otl, they would have it in full.

Yuezhi: Set in flight by the Xiongnu in 164 BCE, they are seeking new lands to reside and rule. The Yuezhi is less the name of a people and more so a name of the royal caste of the particular Tocharian realm of the Qin and late Zhou period ruling much of the Tarim Basin and western Gansu in a desert network empire. It was unique among the steppe warriors as a people whose trade was less in grazing and more in the transit of goods from the west to China, especially their secret trade of jade. According to Han sources, when the Yuezhi arrived into Bactria, they possessed in excess of 72,000 horse archers and then corresponding women and elderly who were carried along with them. The Yuezhi by this point had lost at least 9/10 of its people due to the migration, most having joined the Xiongnu, fled to Tibet or remained in the Altai mountains among the Wusun.

They are perhaps the most renowned group in the steppe. According to Craig Benjamin, the Yuezhi were possibly the most well known and established of the major steppe royal castes in Central Asia, as such, their arrival was momentous for the entirety of the region. Han diplomats were assured, that if the Han could make contact with the Yuezhi and offer them the ability to return home, the Yeuzhi and Han together could eradicate the Xiongnu. This was not to be however, the Yuezhi were unwilling to return east. Instead, the Yuezhi explicitly made clear, they had no reason to avenge issues with the Xiongnu or the Wusun and that they have found a more peaceful region; this was shortly prior to the Yuezhi being attacked by the Arsacids, that disturbed their seemingly peaceful and neutral tone until then. Regardless, in 130 BCE, the Yuezhi are residing in Northern Bactria and Ferghana, where they are undertaking a rebuilding process of their clan and fortunes.


In my view, critical to this scenario, is that Strabo I be able to make shrewd geopoltical alliances and thus take advantage of his enemies. For this to work, he needs to accept for the time being, the Shunga pushing into his lands in 129 -128 BCE. If the Shunga are permitted to gain hegemony, he can allow a perception to develop wherein the Shunga are viewed as an aggressive power. With this, Strabo I attempts to gain an alliance with Simuka of the Satahavan kingdom in the Deccan. The Satahavana are in a recovery phase at the moment and will be able to, as they did in otl, diminish the power of Magadhi states. At the very least, an alliance with them will force the Shunga into possible two front situations, wherein they will be outnumbered.

Turning west, I would suggest that Strabo I focus upon taking an anti-Scythian and yet also an anti-Arsacid approach. The goal here, is to play as a potential ally for the Yuezhi. If the Yuezhi can do as they did in otl, this would/could be a boon for the Indian state as it allows the Indian kingdom to assist the Yuezhi in the steppe and also break the Scythians with attacks from the east and north consecutively.
 
Last edited:
#John7755_يوحنا You forget about https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Satavahana_dynasty which mainly oppose I do Greek kingdom in the south.
And around 153 BC https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gautamiputra_Satakarni attack western strap(Gujrat) and sindh looted them which destroy Greek dominance in south, seeing weakness in Greek kingdom shunga expand towards west.
That was way after the fall of the last Indo-Greek kingdom. The last realm of the Indo-Greeks was in North Eastern Punjab and fell to Indo-Sythians in 10 AD...
 
On the Wikipedia you linked to, the king who conducted the major raid into Sind reigned somewhere from 60-130ish AD.

As far as I know, the Satahavana attempted to break Kushan hegemony in the Indus and the Gangetic plain, after consecutive Kusho-Scythian invasions of the Satahavana for loot and groomings of conquest. Near the end of the Kushan hegemonic authority, the Satahavan managed a major rescinding of Kushan power in the Marathi and upper Deccan during the reign of Vasudeva I. This was the preclude to the decline of Kushan power in Hindustan as the sole power. It was not long after that Chandragupta I (319-335 CE) was able to rescind Kushan rule over the Ganges and re-form and independent Magadhi in the face of Kushan power, which was on the rapid decline. Kushan fortunes would continue to deteriorate under Samudragupta, who managed to capture Mathura from the Kushans and push them into an ever smaller kingdom. The Kushan rulers of Kujula's line however would only face its true end with the conquest of their lands by the Kidara Neo-Kushans, who were likewise battled by the Gupta pushing into the Punjab.

But as far as I know, the Satahavana were not yet engaging the Indus Valley and Gangetic states in open war, in 155-139 BCE. They were a strong country, but it was their early years in my view. Their height would come in their counters against the Kushanshahs and their satrapies in the early III century CE.
 
Top