The Greeks in Bactria and India c10.s1.45

c10.s1.45

Of the second generation after Euthydemus we are now moderately well informed; and there are good portraits of Demetrius’ four sons, though not done by X—call them ‘school of X’. It has never been doubted that Euthydemus II, on the ordinary rules of nomenclature, must be the eldest son of Demetrius, and this is now certain, for a comparison of his face³ with that of Agathocles⁴ would alone suffice to prove that they were brothers; Agathocles’ face is practically that of Euthydemus II a few years older. But the new coin of Agathocles’ pedigree series acquired in 1934 by the British Museum, which bears the head of Demetrius,⁵ proves conclusively that Agathocles, already known to be a grandson of Euthydemus, was a son of Demetrius (App. 3). Of the two extant portraits on Pantaleon’s rare coinage one is extremely like Euthydemus II,¹ though the face on the other is rather heavier.² But Pantaleon, the rarity of whose coins points to a very brief reign, cannot be separated from Agathocles, as except for one series of Agathocles their coinages are practically identical; Pantaleon therefore is another brother, and as the coins show that one must have taken the other’s place and as Agathocles was king when Eucratides arrived (Chap. v), it must have been he who took Pantaleon’s place, and Pantaleon was therefore the elder. The fourth brother is Demetrius II.³ His features have no very great resemblance to those of the other three brothers; it has been supposed that he was a son of Demetrius because his rare Bactrian coinage belongs to that period and because, on the rules of nomenclature, Demetrius’ second son should have been named after himself. This can now be confirmed. The Bactrian coins of Demetrius II bear the legend Βασιλέως Δημητρίου, ‘Of King Demetrius’, and are distinguished by a peculiar treatment of the floating ends of the diadem.⁴ In 1923 Mr Whitehead published a unique bilingual tetradrachm,⁵ now in the British Museum, which shows on the obverse the head of a young prince, wearing the same flat kausia as Antimachus wears, and with the ends of the diadem (as he pointed out) treated in the same way as those on the Bactrian tetradrachms of Demetrius II. The head has usually been called Demetrius;⁶ but though the coin was struck in India and though one cannot rely upon portraits struck in India, the coin is good as Graeco-Indian coins go and the face does not bear the least resemblance to the well-known features of Demetrius, beside being far too young; it is to me quite certain that it can only be meant for Demetrius II,⁷ apart from the diadem ends, which are really conclusive. The coin then was struck by Demetrius II, and the type, which is not one of Demetrius’ types, is his own; but the legend ‘Of King Demetrius the Invincible’ is Demetrius’ legend, as is proved by the new ‘Demetrius’ coin in Agathocles’ series (p. 76 n. 5). Demetrius II then struck this coin on behalf of Demetrius, putting on Demetrius’ name and legend but his own head and type;¹ he was therefore at the time Demetrius’ sub-king,² that is (from the ages) his son, as the names imply. I shall return to this coin and what it means; I only want here to get the relationships.