Theories on the Scythian invasion of India and their relation to the Yu-chi advance into Bactria
By Robert Bracey
The classical description of the Yu-chi invasion of Bactria runs something like this: The Yu-chi push across the Jaxartes and Oxus into Bactria, displacing in the process those nomadic peoples who had lived on the north side of the two rivers and in Bactria itself. This group was driven across Bactria sacking the cities of the Greeks and into Persia on the western side. Here, the Persians defeated the Saca or Scythian groups who then turned south. They passed through Arachosia and the easy mountain passes in the area (the more northerly Kabul pass being held by a powerful Greek kingdom) and invaded the lower Indus valley from where they were to conquer Taxila and Kabul and the whole Indus region, to which they give the name Skythia used by Greek writers . Once there they fall under the suzerainty of the Persian kings, who found an Indo-Persian dynasty in the late first century BC, early first century AD which collapses when the Kushans invade northern India.
This great Scythic Wave is to be found expressed most ably in several of the Cambridge histories however the alternative view is quite startlingly that it never happened at all. That in fact no Scythian wave occurred and that the kingdom of Maues and his successors in India did not become Parthian but had always been Parthian. This is essentially the view put forward by Tarn (and followed in my general overview) who dismisses the alternative as nothing more than a confusion of a passage of Strabo.
Here I will set out the major features of the two arguments, and some f the evidence upon which they are based. I do this for two reasons, firstly because I lack Tarns reputation and confidence to so glibly disregard the opinions of a great many fine historians, secondly because though I disagree with it I think the Scythian wave idea has some merit and is worth discussing.
On Tarns point before continuing the section of Strabo 11.8.4 which does indeed follow immediately after his mention of the conquest of Bactria does describe a Scythian invasion of the region. However it makes clear reference to Cyrus the great and cannot be taken as following sequentially on from the conquest of Bactria, it is a digression covering events from hundreds of years earlier.
The principal argument against the advance of a Scythian wave is one constructed from silence. The literary sources for the period are quite consistent, both Chinese and Western, that it was Yu-chi (or in Greek writings the Tochari and the Assi) who took Bactria away from the Greeks. Neither mentions a large horde of nomadic horsemen driven ahead of the invaders and into northern India.
The coins minted by the Scythians in northern India do bear Scythian names, but they cannot be easily distinguished from those coins bearing Parthian names, and in fact they overlap and have a commonality of style which makes it very difficult to see them as anything other than a single family.
Again this is an argument by silence, because we have no evidence at all that the Scythians were pushed ahead of the Yu-chi we assume that they were not, that in fact they were an extension of Parthian military power into the region, and that the the Indian terms Saca and Pahlava (Scythian and Parthian) are interchangeable, which seems likely.
On a more positive note it becomes easier to explain one feature which was always something of an anomaly on the older model. Despite advancing completely across Bactria in front of the Yu-chi, having to turn south when they reached Parthia, pass through Arachosia before conquering the Indus valley then back up to Taxila, and along the route having time to produce some superb works of art from material looted from the Greek cities, the first coins these people minted were in Taxila.
This has always been a bit of a puzzle for those who accept the Scythian wave model, but if instead these people came from Parthia, striking into the Indus region to avoid the Yu-chi and then conquering Taxila. Presumably a coordinated invasion to seize the Greek territories then the art would be Yu-chi and the coins would make a lot more sense, minted as they are in the regions seized by the invaders.
Historians however are an inventive lot and there are some alternatives. The possibility that the group crossed the mountains north of Taxila has been ruled out as too difficult, the famous hanging pass, far too dangerous to move a large number of people through.
Narain instead points out that it is only the coins of the very early Maues that occur in Taxila, and centered around it. Those of the kings who follow on behind are shifted back down the route to the Arachosia and Indus valley region. He suggests then that Maues, who has proved an elusive figure is a mercenary captain who manages to seize power from within.
This shifts the coins back along the route taken but still doesn't explain why they don't occur in Bactria. Coins were being minted beyond the Jaxartes river before the invasion, and a large number of these anonymous coins are collected in the British museum. It seems unlikely that they stopped minting when they crossed through Bactria and then started again with a quite highly developed coinage in India, and likewise unlikely that they continued minting but we have failed to recover any of the coinage.
Not that this explanation comes without a price. The Yu-chi were not the original natives of Sogdia, or probably even of Ferghana. However archaeological work clearly shows that both Bactria and Sogdia contained large nomadic populations well in advance of the Yu-chi migration. Significant enough that at Gaugamela, Arrian states that Darius was able to draw 2000 mailed horsemen from the regions. The Greeks conquered Bactria but they never succeeded in gaining control of Sogdia. At the start of the second century BC a large number of nomads are causing trouble on this border but do not invade.
These large nomadic populations did exist, so where did they go when the Yu-chi arrived ? The logical explanation that they were displaced ahead of the Yu-chi as a wave of Scythian invaders, and that they became the saca's of India is unacceptable for the reasons mentioned above. An alternative is that they were simply absorbed by the Yu-chi, and that the nomadic hordes, noted for their amorphous nature simply merged together. The only supporting evidence that can be offered is the division of Bactria into 5 sections, possibly some of which represent a certain level of autonomy for these new members of the Yu-chi and the commonality of this practice among the nomadic hordes. The Hsiung-nu certainly practiced this form of tribal confederacy, bring defeated enemies such as the Wu-Sun into an alliance with them, and likewise in the west the Alans were absorbed within other groups.
explanation has enough evidence to make it completely convincing. In fact
the evidence in places is slightly contradictory, our archaeology shows
clearly nomads that our literary evidence does not appear to admit.
Personally I feel a wave of invaders pushed ahead of the Yu-chi should
have created more impact, and without a great deal more evidence of that
impact I am inclined to believe that the famous Indo-Saca kings are really
Extracted From/Source: Keele University
Please note: CAIS has the privilege to publish the above article originating from the above-mentioned source, for educational purposes only (Read Only). This article has been published in accordance with the author(s) / source' copyright-policy -- therefore, the ownership and copyright of this page-file remain with the author(s) / source. For any other purposes, you must obtain a written permission from the copyright owner concerned. (Please refer to CAIS Copyright Policy).