greece, the final frontier? 139
of special interest to the problem at hand, for they give us an idea of
the manner in which typically Indian concepts were rendered in Greek
from an early date.^27 For instance, dhama (same as Sanskrit dharma) is
rendered as eusébeia, which has the connotation of “piety”.
- The Indo-Greeks
That already in the time of Aoka, Buddhism started to take root
among the Greeks in the East and West remains thus an unproven
probability, but there are indications that it did so under Graeco-
Bactrian and Indo-Greek rule. In that period, a name similar to that
of the afore-mentioned Dhammarakkhita is met with, when in the
reign of Duhagmai, in the middle of the second century or the
early rst century BC,^28 monks from all over the world were present at
the inauguration of the great stpa at Anurdhapura. From Alasanda,
city of the Yonas or Greeks, came Mahdhammarakkhita with 30,000
monks, we are told by the Mahvasa^ chronicle.^29 This number is cer-
tainly greatly exaggerated, but even if in reality only three Greek monks
came, the case is interesting. The question is, where was Alasanda?
Some researchers have maintained that it was Alexandria in Egypt.^30
In apparent support of the presence in Egypt of Buddhism in these
early times, the archaeologist W. M. Flinders Petrie interpreted certain
signs on a Ptolemaeic gravestone from Denderah as Buddhistic sym-
bols.^31 He was, however, not followed in this by his fellow-workers and
his interpretation is seldom taken seriously nowadays.^32 In view of the
early date, Alasanda is more likely one of the other Alexandrias closer
to India, possibly Alexandria-among-the-Arachosians (i.e., present-
day Kandahar), or Alexandria-under-the-Caucasus near present-day
Bagrm, both in Afghanistan.^33 Anticipating the discussion below on
the spread of Buddhism to Parthia, it is also interesting to notice that
(^27) Filliozat 1963, pp. 4–6; Schlumberger & Benveniste 1969, pp. 195, 197–200;
Norman 1972. 28
Lamotte 1958, p. 397 gives 104–80 BC as the regnal years of Duhagmai, but
divergent datings are met with, ranging from 161–137 to 101–77 BC. 29
Mahvasa 29.39 (Geiger & Bode 1912, p. 194); cf. Lévi 1891, pp. 210–211.
(^30) Lévi 1934–1937, pp. 159–164.
(^31) Flinders Petrie 1900, p. 54.
(^32) Cf. F. Ll. Grif th in Flinders Petrie 1900, p. 54; cf. also the criticism by Salomon
1991, p. 736, n. 33.
(^33) Lévi 1891, p. 211.