Talk:Polyxenios

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class on the quality scale. (add comments)
	This article is maintained by the Indian history workgroup.
More information about this article... ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.

This article has been automatically assessed as Stub-Class by WikiProject India because it uses a stub template. If you agree with the assessment, please remove {{WP India}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page. If you disagree with the assessment, please change it by editing the class parameter of the {{WP India}} template, removing {{WP India}}'s auto=yes parameter from this talk page, and removing the stub template from the article.

Hi - PHG and others!

Bopearachi in "Monnaies Greco-Bactriennes.." gives the 3 mintmarks of Polyxenos as identical with those of Heliokles II and Straton I, his very likely relative (table, p 94). On the table on p453, he gives the realm of Straton I and Heliocles II as Gandhara and Punjab.

However, Polyxenos is in the same table said to have ruled elsewhere: Paropamisadae and Arachosia! No explanation is given in the brief chapter of the king (p 99) and the logical flaw is obvious: Polyxenos kingdom must by and large have formed a part of the more important kings', whose mintmarks he shared!

IMHO, the only possible solution is that the table on p 453 is not correct here; the name of Polyxenos collides with another minor king, Demetrios III to the east of his kingdom. I doubt that Bopearachi has any means of deciding the reigns of the latter, since he has left only one unique mintmark (nr 117). He possibly only meant that table as a crude overview. If you disagree, please tell me so and I can change Polyxenos back! --Sponsianus 00:42, 5 August 2005 (UTC)