The Greeks in Bactria and India c10.s3.211

c10.s3.211

A reconstruction of the main lines of the story can now be attempted. A too swift conquest may have its drawbacks, as Alexander himself had found in Bactria-Sogdiana; and though Eucratides had mastered the country, the Euthydemid party, which was probably favoured by the native Bactrians, had only been scotched, not destroyed. Justin’s statement that ‘the son’ who killed Eucratides was joint-king with his father shows that he was a king, and as such should have left his mark on the coinage. It is just possible that we may be dealing with some unknown prince who has left no trace; but it is best to keep to what is known, and we do know a son, and only one, who had been made joint-king, *socius regni*, with his father, Demetrius’ son Demetrius II, who was governing Bactria as his father’s joint-king when Eucratides came (p. 201). If then a name has fallen out of Justin’s text after *filio* it is that of Demetrius; if on the other hand, as is perhaps more probable, the mistake is due to Justin's own confusion, he has previously been talking of Demetrius and Eucratides together and has attributed ‘the son’ to the wrong man. I shall assume therefore, with all necessary reservations, that the son in question was not someone unknown but was Demetrius II, and that he had not perished with his father but had escaped to the hills and there rallied his party. One thing which Justin does bring out clearly is the intense hatred of ‘the son’ for his ‘enemy’ Eucratides. The family loyalty of the Euthydemids has already been alluded to (p. 166), and as Eucratides had been exterminating the family, the hatred felt for him by the survivor was only too natural. There is a hatred which will move Acheron itself for vengeance; and Demetrius II, unable to deal with Eucratides without external help, turned to the one quarter open to him, Mithridates I of Parthia.