The Indo-Parthian Kingdom (Gondophares)

Coins and an inscription prove Gondophares was real, though a Christian legend made him famous. This section covers his name, the king before him and his lands.

1.1 What does his name mean?

“Gondophares” is the Greek form of a Persian name, Vindapharna. It means “the winner of glory”. Historians call the name Pahlava, which is the Indian word for Parthian.

The Parthians were a people of Iran. So the name tells you where his family came from. It does not tell you that he ruled Iran.

1.2 Whom did he follow?

Coins show that the king before him was Azes II. Azes II was a Saka king. The Sakas were nomadic people, also called Scythians.

So Gondophares did not build a state from nothing. After Azes II died, the kingdoms of Taxila and Arachosia were joined under him. Arachosia was a land to the west.

1.3 What land did he rule?

His coins and the digs show that he held Arachosia in the west and the Taxila region in the north-west. One historian adds that he seems to have conquered Sind. Another says he took the Kabul valley and drove out Hermaeus, the last Greek prince there.

This is why he is called an Indo-Parthian king. He was a Parthian by name who ruled lands in both Iran’s east and north-west India.

• Arachosia and Seistan: the west of his realm.
• Kabul valley: taken from the last Greek prince.
• Taxila and the Punjab: the north-west of the subcontinent.

For a long time, Gondophares was known only from a legend. Three kinds of evidence changed that. They are his coins, an inscription and the names of governors on coins.

2.1 What do the coins show?

Explorers found large numbers of his coins in the Kabul valley and other ancient sites. Many of his coin designs continue those of the kings before him. This shows he inherited both Pahlava and Saka lands.

His coins are also widespread, from Afghanistan to the Punjab. A king who strikes coins over such a wide area clearly held real power.

2.2 What does the Takht-i-Bahi inscription say?

An inscription was found at Takht-i-Bahi, north-east of Peshawar. It names the great king Gondophares. It is dated in the 26th year of his reign and also in year 103 of an era.

The text does not say which era. Historians must work that out. Their answer decides the date of the king.

2.3 How do historians turn year 103 into a date?

The usual reading is that year 103 counts in the Vikrama era. Year 1 of that era falls in 57 BCE. So year 103 is 46 CE.

That makes 46 CE his 26th year. Counting back 25 years gives about 20 CE for his first year. Using 58 BCE for the era gives 45 CE and 19 CE. This is why books say about 19 or 20 CE to about 45 or 46 CE.

2.4 Is the date settled?

No. There are two doubts. Learn them, because exam writers like them.

• A different era: R. D. Banerji read year 103 as the Saka era, which gives 181 CE. Other scholars rejected this. The Taxila layers show Gondophares came before the Kushan king Kadphises I.
• A different king: One scholar argues the king in the inscription may be a later king with the same name. Others note that several kings may have been called Gondophares.

So the standard dates are the usual answer. They are a reading of the evidence, not a proof.

2.5 How do coins fix the order of kings?

A strategos was a military governor. His name often appears on coins beside the king’s name. The same governor can serve more than one king.

Aspavarman is on coins of both Azes II and Gondophares. His nephew Sasas is on coins of Gondophares and his successor Pacores. Linked names like these work like a chain. They show who came after whom.

The legend is the most famous story about Gondophares. This section explains what it says and what it cannot prove.

3.1 What is the Acts of Thomas?

The Acts of Judas Thomas is an apocryphal Christian text. Apocryphal means outside the official scripture. The oldest version, in Syriac, is thought to date from before the middle of the third century CE.

That is about two hundred years after the king lived. So the story was written long after the events.

3.2 What happens in the story?

A merchant buys Thomas as a skilled carpenter. The king asks him to build a palace. Thomas gives the money to the poor instead. The king has him and the merchant bound and put in prison.

Then the king’s brother, Gad, falls ill and dies. Angels show him a heavenly palace that Thomas built through good works. Gad is restored to life. In the story, both Gad and the king are converted.

3.3 What does the legend prove?

It proves less than people think. The story names the king as Gudnaphar. This shows that a real Indian king was remembered in the West. It gives him no date.

Historians doubt the tale itself. One historian calls the whole story pure mythology. Another says the visit may be doubted, but the story shows the king’s fame had reached the West.

Even so, one historian thinks it is fair to believe a Christian mission reached the north-west in his reign. Whether Thomas led it is a separate question.

4.1 Who ruled after him?

The realm broke up. His nephew Abdagases took the western Punjab. Other rulers held the lands in Afghanistan. Some historians name Pacores as his direct successor.

So there was no single heir. Several rulers shared his lands.

4.2 How did Indo-Parthian rule end?

The empire was already weak in his own reign. Governors used high titles and obeyed him only in name. The Indo-Parthians lost the north-west to the Kushans.

Historians place the end of Pahlava rule in India between 45 and 64 CE. One account says Kujula Kadphises and Hermaeus took the Kabul valley and Taxila about 50 or 60 CE. Small Parthian chiefs lasted longer in the Indus delta.

4.3 What about the Jandial temple?

Jandial is a temple site near Taxila. Its builders are not named. The excavator said, “we can only surmise” which faith it served.

He thought it Zoroastrian, because it had no images of gods. That is a guess, not a fact. It does not show a Christian mission.

4.4 What are the exam traps?

• Legend or proof: the Acts of Thomas did not prove he existed. The coins and the inscription did.
• Breakaway: he did not break away from the Parthians. He followed Azes II.
• Exact dates: the dates depend on reading the era.
• Capital: do not say Taxila was his capital. Say his lands included Taxila.