Did Chandragupta Maurya Really Defeat Seleucus Nicator?

In this video, I analyze the different claims concerning the interaction between Chandragupta Maurya and Seleucus Nicator.
Reference:-
1. Age of the Nandas and Mauryas by K. A. Nilakanta Sastri
2. The Greeks in India by George Woodcock
3. The Greek Experience of India by Richard Stoneman
4. Two Notes on Seleucid History: 1. Seleucus' 500 Elephants, 2. Tarmita by W. W. Tarn
5. Political History of Ancient India, From the Accession of Parikshit to the Extinction of the Gupta Dynasty by Hem Chandra Raychaudh
6. The Indo-Greeks by A. K. Narain
Spotify
open.spotify.c...
Follow me on Twitter
/ jayvtweets
Follow me on Goodreads
/ jay-vardhan
Maps are made by me and are subject to copyright.
Images are sourced from :-
commons.wikime...

[@Shubhamkumar-fr9hl]

Most Underrated emperors of india 1) Samrat Chandragupt Maurya 2) Samrat Samudragupt 3) Samrat Chandragupt Vikramaditya

[@kashutosh9132]

and Samrat Ashok btwn,you know for whom we use samrat title

[@Shubhamkumar-fr9hl]

@@kashutosh9132 ashok is not underrated

[@kashutosh9132]

@@Shubhamkumar-fr9hl *Samrat Ashok He is

[@Shubhamkumar-fr9hl]

@@kashutosh9132 bro ashok ko sb jante h books me bhot mention h unka kitne log Samudragupt aur Chandragupta 2(vikramaditya) ko jante h?

[@kashutosh9132]

@@Shubhamkumar-fr9hl Ok Btwn samrat Chandragupta maurya is well known as well(from what I have observed)

[@marvelloustraveller3559]

Chandragupta was very underrated emperor. Everyone gave credit to chanakya for all his achievements.

[@Lmao69]

Because he was the mastermind behind almost everything?

[@tathagatquandaliusganesh1082]

@theindiansocialistno he created a state socialist state which was the Mauryan empire

[@charvaka5705]

@theindiansocialist Chanakya followed a strict policy of no interference with the matter of businessmen, likewise if any businessmen tried to influence the politics of the state, they were quickly crushed.

[@charvaka5705]

@theindiansocialist of course. That how govts. used to function. In the Arthashastra he has also mentioned about the duties of an emperor and if an emperor underperforms he deserves to be deposed.

[@shubhamdubey9561]

Because it was chankaya who built army under his supervision

[@VenkatachalapathiSR-dg5jg]

I am delighted to hear your lecture Very fine My memories go to the past

[@agnelomascarenhas8990]

Thank you for the topic. There should have been mentioned the context - sucession conflicts among the diadotus? in West Asia. Bloody warfare involving West Asia, Egypt, Greece/Macedonia. In that context, a matrimonial alliance that secured the Eastern border made sense.

[@RamKrishna-hf6dd]

It's diadochi

[@josephmanno4514]

I always wondered if it hadn't gone a bit differently than what you may be implying, Jay. Seleukos, knowing what faced him in the West with Antigonos, likely would not have offered full-scale battle to Chandragupta. It seems entirely possible that after a series of maneuvers and small skirmishes, in which Chandragupta's forces got the best of Seleukos', the latter's situation would have been shown as untenable. So while I agree that it's blatantly obvious Chandragupta "won," in that he definitely got the best of the deal, by far, I don't think it could have been in the wake of a major pitched battle (such as later at Issus) during which tens of thousands died on each side. Momma Seleukos didn't raise no fools, and I wager that, after having gotten a really good look at what he was facing, Seleukos probably found excellent reason to sit with Chandragupta and work something out. I mean, wouldn't you? Otherwise, the sound whuppin' Chandragupta might well have laid on him would likely have seen events in the West work out differently. So, Chandragupta likely defeated Seleukos in a series of small-scale clashes ... but I think there's serious reason to doubt a major, massive battle took place.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Yes, I agree with you.

[@rajiburrahman8176]

If selucas & chandragupta had very much enemity or very big battle between them, why would Chandragupt supply/sell/handover crucial military equipment to a powerful enemy. I don’t think they fought any large battle.

[@stxfdt1240]

@@rajiburrahman8176 no one asked for your opinion

[@kaiza9184]

@@stxfdt1240No one asked for your existence

[@zzzzz653]

While we cannot speculate on the scale of the battle since we have so little info available on it, what we do know is that it was Seleucus who came for the battle in order to gain back those territories east of Indus, which had been conquered by Chandragupta. So I would expect him to have come prepared. Secondly, Seleucus did not win any territory east of the Indus but on the contrary ceded a very large chunk of his territory west of the Indus to Chandragupta. It would be an evidence of some exceptional diplomatic skills of Indians if they could have managed to extract so much from Seleucus based on just some small skirmishes.

[@igormalic743]

Omg I always had this question istg 😭😭😭😭 finally getting answered 😌😌✨

[@Varsh413]

Great video!

[@rebasingh258]

It appears that you have done good research.

[@saikatbiswas10]

Very interesting vedio. Sir, I have something to share.[and a question] There is a place in WEST BENGAL, named CHQNDRAKETUGARH, situated 10,12 km away from my home. It is said that this site is 2,500 years old and was an important trade centre. But my doubt is why this site is mentioned so little in literature and texts of Ancient India or Bengal? And what happened to the kingdom of GANDARIDAI, described by PTOLEMY. [Maybe this was a part of that kingdom]. Your divine perception [if possible, a vedio] is highly valuable on this topic.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

about your first question I don't know why it has not been mentioned in our texts. About video, will try to do one either here or on the second channel.

[@saikatbiswas10]

@@JayVardhanSingh 🙏🏽🙏🏽🙏🏽

[@-rate6326]

@@JayVardhanSingh it might have been mentioned in our texts but those texts didn't survive.

[@joshivivek8379]

We have scholars like panini in 4BCE writing Sanskrit grammar, it is strange that Indian scholars in 3BCE and afterwards didn't even mention Alexander, Selecuous Nicator

[@rajiburrahman8176]

Bcoz Alexnder presence wasn’t much in India.

[@gravewalker34]

Panini was in 5th century or before bce. Around the time of kurush and darius.

[@anoop61284]

​@@rajiburrahman8176 samudragupt was emperor of India still you won't find much written on him. Infact you can write everything ever written on samudragupt on 1 single A4 sheet. Indians didn't record their history properly

[@Shubhamkumar-fr9hl]

​@@anoop61284yes, Thatswhy our Legendary emperors like samrat samudragupta and his son samrat Chandragupt vikramaditya is so underrated, Alexandre k jeevan pr bhot bndo ne likha(including his courtiers) aur julius caeser etc pr bhi bhot kuch likha gya isiliye vo log itne famous huye,just think agar ek page description se samrat samudragupta aur chandragupta vikramaditya legendary bn gye to agar inpr puri book likhi jaati to kya hota😂😂😂

[@theskull4666]

​@@Shubhamkumar-fr9hli think the records where burned by mughals in nalanda and taxila

[@kraut1982]

Pretty much the beginning of western approved Indian History- Conquest by Alexander.

[@Narimann]

Let it be what it is - Country specific. No one should claim history heritage of other country. That's the agreement after ww2. Jews suffered because someone claimed others history as his own 🙏

[@randomturd1415]

Yup. Greek and Chinese way of writing history was alot more accurate, and detailed than the Indian one. Hard to swallow but the truth. Indians mostly didn't even write history. There's tons of literature, plays, religious prose, commentaries, but little historiography, and that pales in detail compared to Greek/Chinese historiography

[@stxfdt1240]

@@randomturd1415 pfft

[@alkapremlokre2988]

​@@randomturd1415mate greeks have a habit of over exaggerating stuff , you know that , right ?

[@raginisingh2251]

V.V. informative video

[@ayushkumarsingh3029]

I personally think that Chandragupta won victory because there is no reason selecus surrenderd modern day balochistan and modern Afghanistan minus herat and balkh .500 elephants or any number ia not a big deal , because india have abundance of elephants.

[@templer987]

The info on this event is Pretty sparse. It is clear however that it wasn't one tactical victory but rather a prolonged war that stretched for two years. Around the same time selucus was also involved in war with other diadochis(successors). Chandragupta seems to have got an upper hand over selucus and both not wanting to prolong the war decided to settle on a treaty. Chandragupta received better out of the deal. And maintained a stable relationship with selucids in coming days. Chandragupta gained northwest territories and parts of Afghanistan not in it's entirety. Considering significant portion of Afghanistan was still ruled by selucus's successors. Other territories were ceded to Mauryan empire.

[@VinodKumar-xb5ud]

That pretty much explains everything!

[@ayushkumarsingh3029]

Can you please shade light on Gallaka and Navsari inscriptions of 8 th century. It gives very valuable information aginat the propaganda surrounding the origins of Pratihara Rajputs.

[@igormalic743]

What is the story of sandrocottus anyways?

[@Narimann]

Hold the tongue with hand & pronounce "Chandragupt". That's the story

[@igormalic743]

@@Narimann I'm sorry but you whooo? Thank goodness Greeks were not THIS stupid, not sayin they were not🥴

[@firstman9832]

@@Narimann 😂

[@gameruleworld.1889]

@@Narimann epic🤣🤣🤣

[@JayVardhanSingh]

have covered it in my video on Chandragupta

[@nomadicaryan]

sir also tell abouts Geopolitics after Battle of Sondani 528ce /533ce alchon hunic (Mihirakula) empire collapse & new power's emerged in same region Taank Kingdom 550 ce , Pushyabhuti dynasty 500 ce, Pratiharas of Mandavyapura 550 ce, Maukhari Kingdom 510 ce & what happened to Second Aulikara dynasty after 528 ce , how Aulikaras collapsed after (Yashodharman & Shiladitya)

[@nomadicaryan]

sir :- also tell about king Shalinder (409 AD) is " real or mythical " a ruler of the regions of Shalpur (Sialkot ) in 5th century AD. In the beginning of the Fifth century, there rule extending from Punjab to Malwa and Rajasthan.

[@badkididiaryarawat4595]

Good content

[@bhuvaneshsatam4614]

My question is that, if she was Helen, the so called daughter of Selucus, who married with Chandragupta, then did she give birth to the prince known to history ? Tv serial on Ashoka has taken so much dramatic liberty on this topic. In my opinion, if there is a Mauryan prince of indo-greek origin, then the theory of intercast marriage survives easily. As the western sources are silent on this topic, the prince bore by Helen, the theory of marriage collapses automatically.

[@bhuvaneshsatam4614]

@@vishalmaurya2961 I appreciate the findings you attached here, but My question remained unanswered, I think. Nowhere the name of the princess is mentioned. Then, from where is this name Helen came into picture? Most of the sources are not original. They are secondary and from the later Roman era and not from the earlier Greek era. The information about this treaty is too short. I wonder, how the great king Asoka, who inscribed a number of inscriptions across the nation, nowhere mentioned anything about his forefathers and remained silent upon his lineage. On the contrary, when we see the inscriptions of Satvahanas, we find the mention of their ancestry. Nagnika, Gotami, the Satvahanas queens did not forget to mention ancestral linkage. Bindusara, the father of the great Asoka, was born by the greek princess or indian princess, was my question. It is very difficult to find it now, as the original sources did not exist today!

[@bhuvaneshsatam4614]

@@vishalmaurya2961 Puranas are not authenticated source of history. Yes, you may get some outlines, but not the entire portrait. It is also agreed by historians that puranas were scripted in the Gupta era. The Gupta era is far away, say 1000 years after Chandragupta Maurya. Hence they are also considered as secondary evidence...Even they are not considered as the concrete source of evidence.

[@nostalgiaera4325]

The reason historians concluded that Chandragupta Maurya marries his daughter because it was a norm that time for the victor king to take a daughter of conquered king of he wanted not to kill him or subjugate him. Also, Seleucus had three daughters, Apama(named after his wife), Laodice(named after his mom) and Phila. It's recorded Phila married Antigonus Gonatas so it's either Apama or who is more famously known as Helen or Laodice was married to Chandragupta Maurya. There was also agreement of Jus Connubi meaning those people who had mixed marriages between Greeks and Indians were given state validation.This is the same thing Alexander did during Susa weddings. So there is no doubt that Chandra infact did marry one of his daughters.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Not sure where you've read this. We only know about Phila. About the other names you've mentioned, there's very little evidence. Especially about Apama and the fact that she was known as Helen. Do provide the reference from where you've read it. About Laodice, Tarn has argued that she was the mother of Eucratides. Also the term Jus Connubi is a Latin term, it is not mentioned in any source that I know of. There are some historians who argue that the intermarriage which is mentioned in Appian and Strabo seems to have been jus connubii. But Tarn explicitly rejects it.

[@anirudh177]

We do not know of any Helena being married to Chandragupta. All of our primary sources only talk about a marriage agreement, no detail on it is given and it is not even specified if Seleukos’s daughter was being given away, it could have been multiple marriages between officers of both sides (Like Alexander did at Susa), or it might have been other memebers of the royal dynasties, or maybe a daughter like your question suggests, but we cannot be sure about it, all we know is that there was some sort of marriage agreement, nothing more, no names of the bride or bridegroom. "Alexander took these away from the Arians and established settlements of his own, but Seleucus Nicator gave them to Sandrocottus, upon terms of intermarriage and of receiving in exchange five hundred elephants." - Geographica by Strabo (15.2.9) "He crossed the Indus and waged war with Sandrocottus, king of the Indians, who dwelt on the banks of that stream, until they came to an understanding with each other and contracted a marriage relationship." - The Roman History by Appian (Chapter 9, Section 55)

[@Satyam1010-N]

​@@JayVardhanSingh I feel irts western new agr people did to find a link as yavans were lile 2nd class people etc .

[@templer987]

I'm not aware of such practice where defeated rulers have to hand over there daughter to the victors in marriage. It was common to maintain a relationship between two kingdom to strengthen the knot through marriage alliance.

[@rimi6334]

and why Chandragupta maurya gave Elephants to Seleucus

[@abhisheksaxena500]

doesn't kedos mean care or concern?

[@kartheeque]

There are some who raise doubts about identification of Sandrocottos with Chandragupta Maurya and say that Chandra Gupta should be the one and we have to back date all events in Indian history. What is your opinion on it? Can you make a video on this too?

[@jibran4794]

Its a stupid doubt based on nothing but name-similarity and would not hold up if you compare all the sources, carbon dating of all the edicts of Ashoka, and the coins minted in Seleucus' name in India as a sign of mutual respect between Seleucids and Mauryans.

[@kraut1982]

Hey Jay, Can you please share information about any epigraphic evidence or coins from the earliest Greek conquest Or Chandragupta Maurya era?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

I don't think there's any epigraphic evidence. About Greek coins, this book may be of some use to you archive.org/details/cu31924022932382

[@kraut1982]

Took most of the day to read the resource you shared then I forgot to thank you. 🙏🏼 Considering how the Mauryan kings took inspiration from Achaemenid art and had relations with Greeks who already had great quality coins by then, the Mauryan coins are quite underwhelming even disappointing. From what I seen so far the Maurya coins look very basic with 5 punch marks. Wish I could go back in time and tell them that review 😂. Thanks again!

[@PulakitBharti]

Some History books(even NCERTs) show a larger area in the west under Ashoka, than the Area under Chandragupta. Can you throw some light on the sources for such claims? Thanks in Advance, Great Job.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

four provinces of Seleucus came under the control of Chandragupta so it was based on this evidence that history books claim the region in the Northwest as part of his kingdom.

[@templer987]

​@@JayVardhanSingh was the entirety of Afghanistan ceded to Chandragupta or only parts of it

[@surojeetchatterji9966]

@@templer987 Whole Afghanistan & half Iran was under ChandraGupt Mauryan. Gandhar art of Afghanistan evolved from peace deal between selucid empire & Mauryan empire.

[@templer987]

@@surojeetchatterji9966 no I found out that only a one province gandhara was ceded and a small area of Iran

[@Playerone1287]

​@@surojeetchatterji9966half Saudi Arab bhi bol deta

[@Lmao69]

Were the nanda empire and the Gangaridai empire of bengal same?

[@IX-SINCHANCHATTERJEE]

Maybe no.... Diodorus claimed that The kingdom of Agrames ( A Nanda ruler , possibly Dhanananda ) stretched from Prasii ( Magadha ) to Gangaridai ( Bengal )

[@ayush7745]

I had read somewhere that aria was not part of the territories of chandragupta isn't it true?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

some scholars argue that some portions of it was under the control of Chandragupta. But there's no way to know for sure.

[@akk7791]

Nice

[@gravewalker34]

We don't have to call Alexander the great. Chandragupta the great would be nice. 🙏

[@mtarkes]

Chandragupta sounds like Alexander reincarnated as Indian. How is it possible that he conquered so much in so little time?

[@ChevyChase301]

The nanda empire like the empire of Persians was a huge bureaucratic tributary administration but unlike the Persian empire sources do not describe it as benevolent. These (biased pro mauryan sources) claim that the nanda empire was corrupt. Chandra Gupta came up in taxila which was host to an unpopular Greek colonist class. Chandragupta overthrew the Greeks. Added them and the Persians and bactrians in the land (likely leftovers from Achaemenid empire) many claim it was this multicultural army under chandragupta and chanakya that conquered the nanda and expelled seleucus

[@giridharm5598]

Selecus nicator took those elephants to Greece, but when winter came all this elephants died

[@ChevyChase301]

Not true seleucus took them to Europe where he was killed and his elephants taken by Ptolemy keraunos who gave them to Pyrrhus who invaded Rome with them!

[@jasbirsingh2243]

Can you tell if the tales of Vikram and betal were written in gupta era? Was vikram a Gupta king?

[@gokulrenjith2738]

Gigachad Chandragupta 🔥

[@divybansal2886]

You mentioned that there could be an agreement of marriage b/w Indians and Greeks. So who could be those Indians that married the Greeks? People from Punjab, Afghanistan, Haryana?

[@JayVardhanSingh]

yes, if the intermarriage happened than it would be from these regions.

[@mahanirvaantantra]

There are some bihari castes also where we can see the greeko roman genes. Especially in the magadh region.

[@comrade4659]

@@mahanirvaantantra bruh 😆😆

[@samarchaudhary2855]

Hindi mein bolkar mujhe samajh mein Aati

[@BhagyalaxmiKumari-vb4ub]

How could epigamia be established without dynasties practicing it first? 😂🤣 Why would anyone care for marriages between their populations? Kuch bhi 😂

[@AnshumanMohapatra-jl6hy]

Means if a foreign king defeats an Indian one then it is true in all aspects but if it is the opposite then all sorts of debate starts

[@BhagyalaxmiKumari-vb4ub]

Dude your whole video is completely basic and it answers nothing. Have you even read primary sources 😂

[@DevilAsur]

Why do we Indians prefer foreign historian accounts when we have our historian accounts

[@JayVardhanSingh]

Watch the video before commenting. We use western sources here because there're no Indian sources available.

[@DevilAsur]

@@JayVardhanSingh then why say that there are 3 outcome generally believed according to Indian sources and then discuss those sources and put rebuttal using foreign author account. If there is no Indian source why mentioned them in you video Just say that there is no Indian source on this outcome.

[@JayVardhanSingh]

There's a difference between sources and history books. Watch the video again, I've explicitly said in the beginning that I will analyse the claims that are made in the History books.

[@DevilAsur]

@@JayVardhanSingh 👍 I also have a suggestion for you to consider start using a little bit of animation/graphics it would look attractive. For reference I'm sure you have watched Kings and General on KZbin. I loved Indian history, the content is rich but visuals are poor. One more suggestions start making the video on battle tactics used in wars

[@PriceyTomato]

@@DevilAsur There are no indian sources of Porus for instance. But look him up on KZbin, just type "PORUS" & you'll find 100s of shorts and video showing Porus as the victor of battle of Hydaspes. While there are 0 account of it in Indian sources. And the only source we have are greek sources or roman sources post roman take over of greeks. So if the outcome is a victory in the foreign sources such armchair historians sell it hard. But refuse to believe if the the Indian king is defeated in the same source. At what point do we consider any source as stories from history. It is with empirical evidences. Kandahar Main article: Kandahar Greek Edicts of Ashoka Old Kandahar, Afghanistan. End of Major Rock Edict 13 and beginning of Major Rock Edict 14 (in Greek). So mauryan Empire was spread across eastern Afghanistan according to this evidence. Though the edicts are 50 years after Chandragupta. It possible that the event may have a different sequence. If we presume chandragupta lost, then we can say it's Ashoka who won the war with the seleucids. But as a matter of fact mauryan kingdom had influence over the eastern border of Afghanistan by 250 BCE.

[@MegaTang1234]

Excellent video!