CHAPTER II
In India
Did St. Thomas, one of Twelve Apostles of Christ, really come to the
India of today? This is the first question to be examined in
connection with the tradition of St. Thomas.
One of the earliest works to refer to St Thomas as the Apostle
who evangelized the India of today is the Syriac work entitled ‘The
Doctrine of the Apostles’14, which, according to critics, dates from
the second century A.D. Here are the passages:
(1) ‘After death of the Apostles, there were Guides and Rulers
in the Churches; and whatever the Apostles communicated to them,
and they had received from them, they taught to the multitudes.
They, again, at their deaths also committed and delivered to their
disciples after them everything which they had received from the
Apostles; also what James had written from Jerusalem and Simon
from the City of Rome, and John from Ephesus and Mark from the
great Alexandria, and Andrew from Phrygia and Luke from
Macedonia and Judas Thomas from India, that the epistles of an
Apostle might be received and read in the churches in every place,
like those Triumphs of their Acts which Luke wrote, are read, that
by this the Apostles might he known…’
‘India and all its own countries and those bordering on it, even
to the farthest sea, received the Apostles’ Hand of Priesthood from
Judas Thomas, who was Guide and Ruler in the Church which he
built there and ministered there.’
It is interesting to note that St. Thomas, as did some of the
other Apostles, wrote from India letters which were read in the
various churches where they were received. What do the words
20
‘India and all its own countries’ mean? Is the word ‘India’ here used
as a name including many neighbouring countries also? Or,
perhaps, in the sense of the sub-continent of India having many
regions or provinces ? Whatever it may mean, it is scarcely possible
to exclude the India of today for the following reasons.
India of today was quite known to the writer of the work
mentioned. For, there was commerce between India and countries
like Persia. Chaldea, Palestine, Asia Minor and even Italy (Rome).
Northern India was particularly known to the Greek world since the
invasion of Alexander. After the rediscovery of the monsoon winds
even S. India became well known to the west. It is part of history
that trade in teak, ebony, sandalwood and other things was
flourishing at this time between India and some of these countries.
The Red Sea route linked India with Arabia, Judaea and Egypt.
Indian ships plied between western and Indian ports with cargoes
of gold, ivory, silver and precious stones. It is, well known that
Romans had trade with India, one proof of which is the discovery
of the many Roman coins in several places in India even in recent
years. It would be rather naïve to think today that India was
unknown in the west. And so it is in no way unreasonable to believe
that the India mentioned in this early work is definitely the India of
today.
(2) Second reason can be the following:—One of the source
books for the life and mission of St. Thomas the Apostle is the
work called: ‘The Acts of St. Thomas’ which dates probably from
early 3rd century.15
It is understood to be an apocryphal work; but serious scholars
seem to favour the historical foundation for the main statements
made in the work, as for example, the travel of the Apostle to the
Indus Valley, reference to names which sound similar to historical
potentates of Northern India, e.g., Gondophares.
It is known that apocryphal, legendary writings take their
origin around certain historical events, which in the course of the
development of the work get mixed-up and even lost to some extent
21
amid the highly exaggerated, even fantastic details, stories and
narrative embellishments. Even if we set aside these details, we
may still consider the main outlines of the work. We may for
instance, consider the following extracts from these Acts:
(a) ‘When the Apostles had been for a time in Jerusalem, they
divided the countries among them in order that each one might
preach in the region which fell to him; and India fell to the lot of
Judas Thomas.’ What may be considered here is not so much the
fact of the lots being cast as the fact of India being mentioned.
(b) The Acts say that Thomas was not willing to accept the
same decision and said: ‘I am a Hebrew; how can I teach the
Indians?’ It is perhaps quite unlikely that an Apostle would have
refused to go on his mission as soon as it became known to him.
For out purpose that is not what we should worry about. What is
to be noted is rather the fact that ‘Indians’ are mentioned in the
narrative. We may say the same with regard to what follows in the
Acts narrative. The Apostle says stubbornly: ‘Whithersoever Thou
wilt, O Lord, send me: only to India I will not go....’
(c) There is mention, in this narrative, of one Gundophar who
is called the King of India. We may set aside all the stories around
this personage; but there does not seem to be enough reason to set
aside the very existence of the king himself. Till the middle of the
19th century even the existence of such a king was considered
legendary. However, a large number of coins discovered in Kabul,
Kandahar, and in the western and southern Punjab, bear the name
of Gondophares. According to investigations made by scholars one
may reasonably say that the period of this Gondophares of the
coins is between 20 to 45 A.D. and his kingdom lay round about
Peshawar. Dr. Fleet, one of the scholars concludes: ‘There is an
actual basis for the tradition in historical reality’ and St. Thomas
did ‘visit the courts of two kings reigning there, of whom one was
Gunduphara - the Gondophares of the Takht-i-Bahi inscription* and
*This inscription was discovered about 1857 (now in the Lahore Museum). It
speaks of ‘the great king Gundaphara...’ It was discovered in Takht-i-Bahi (northeast
of Peshawar) — hence its name.
22
the coins’- who was evidently the ruler of ‘an extensive territory
which included as a part of it much more of India than simply a
portion of the Peshawar district’.16
Fathers of the Church
(3) We go to further proofs. St. Ephrem in the 4th century, has
many references, in his famous hymns17 to St. Thomas the Apostle
and India.
(a) The devil is made to say in one of these hymns, about St.
Thomas: ‘The Apostle whom I slew in India.’
(b) In another hymn addressed to St. Thomas he sings:
‘Blessed art thou, whom the great King sent
That India to His One begotten thou shouldst espouse.’
(c) In these, hymns St. Ephrem clearly says that Thomas the
Apostle suffered martyrdom in India, that he was buried there, that
he worked miracles in India.
(d) Referring to the translation of his remains to Edessa, he
says that Edessa became the blessed city by possessing the greatest
pearl India could yield, and so on and so forth.
This testimony of St. Ephrem is to be considered not merely
as that of an individual, but of the whole church of Edessa, where
these hymns were widely used. These hymns embodied the local
tradition and facts which were of common knowledge among the
peoples. If the tradition were not based on truth, it is difficult to
conceive how it could have been incorporated in the Liturgy itself.
(4) St. Gregory Nazianzan (4th century A.D.) writes: ‘Were
not the Apostles strangers amidst the many nations over which they
spread themselves that the Gospel might penetrate into all parts..
What had Paul in common with the Gentiles, Luke with Achaia,
Andrew with Epirus, John with Ephesus. Thomas with India, Mark
with Italy?’18
(5) St. Ambrose (4th century A.D.) says: ‘Even those
kingdoms which were shut out by rugged mountains became
accessible to the Apostles, as India to Thomas, Persia to
Matthew.’19
(6) St. Jerome (4th century A.D.) writes: ‘Our Lord, the Son
of God, was indeed at one and the same time with the Apostles
during the forty days, and with the angels, and in the Father and in
the uttermost ends of the ocean. He dwelt in all places: with
Thomas in India, with Peter in Rome...’20
(7) St. Gaudentius, Bishop of Brescia (5th century A.D.) in a
sermon speaks about the relics of his Church (viz. those of St.
Thomas, John the Baptist, Andrew and Luke) and says: ‘We
possess here the relics of these four who, having preached the
kingdom of God and his righteousness were put to death by
unbelieving and perverse men ...John at Sebastena, a town of the
province of Palestine, Thomas among the Indians...’ 21
(8) St. Paulinus of Nola (5th century A.D.) writes: ‘So God,
bestowing his holy gifts on all lands, sent his Apostles to the great
cities of the world Parthia receives Matthew, India receives
Thomas...’22
(9) St. John Chrysostom (4th-5th century A.D.) does not refer
to St. Thomas but says that an Apostle preached the gospel in India.
He also says: ‘We do not know where many of the Apostles were
buried, but, he asserts, we know where the sepulchres of Peter,
Paul, John and Thomas are situated.’23
(10) St. Gregory, Bishop of Tours (6th century A.D.) writes:
‘Thomas the Apostle is staled to have suffered in India.’24
(11) The Venerable Bede (8th century A.D.) writes: ‘The
Apostles of Christ... received their allotted charges in distinct parts
of the world. Peter receives Rome; Andrew Achaia; James Spain;
Thomas India.’25
(12) Ancient Martyrologies both of the Latin Church as well
as the Oriental Churches connect always St. Thomas the Apostle
with India.
(a) The Hieronymian Martyrology has this entry: On the 21st
Dec. the Natdlis, (i.e. birthday to heaven) of St. Thomas the Apostle
in India.
(b) The Martyrology of Bede has this entry: On the 3rd July,
the translation of the remains of St. Thomas the Apostle to Edessa
from India.
26
(c) The Roman Martyrology has two entries: (i) On the 21st
December, it; says: ‘At Calamina the “Natalis” of Blessed Thomas
Apostle who after preaching to the Parthians, Medes, Persians and
Hyrcanians came finally to India...’
(ii) On the 3rd July it has: ‘At Edessa in Mesopotamia the
translation of St. Thomas from India...’
(d) The Synaxarium (i.e. brief histories of Saints) of the
Church of Constantinople says that St. Thomas ‘preached to the
Parthians, the Medes, the Persians and the Indians... was put to
death by the King of the Indians’.
(e) The Greek Menologittm (i.e. Martyrology) says: ‘To St.
Thomas fell the country of the Indians where he preached Christ’.
(f) An Ethiopian Calendar calls St. Thomas the Apostle of
India.
(g) The Nestorian section of the Syrian Church preserves this
tradition of St. Thomas’ Apostolate in India. In the Canticle of the
Feast Day Office we read: ‘As Christ had anointed Peter to the high
priesthood of Rome, so thou O Thomas today among the Indians...’
Is it the India of Today ?
Many have asserted that the ‘India’ in the foregoing testimonies
is not the India of today. The name ‘India’ has been applied,
they say, to the neighbouring countries as well. This would mean
that the India of today was not sufficiently known to people in the
West and Middle East. Can this be accepted? Let us examine the
question. It seems quite puerile to say that India was not known in
the West in those days. We have abundant proof to show that India
was well known long before the Christian era.
1. In 517 B.C. Skylax of Karyanda, by order of Darius the
Persian Emperor, made a voyage to India and sailed down the River
Indus. He did not unfortunately record much information about the
country.26
2. Herodotus, the famous Greek historian, wrote a book on
India about 430 B.C. For him, ‘India is the farthest part of the
27
inhabited world towards the East.’ Though this information is
vague, still one can deduce from it, that the name could not be
applied to countries west of the present India.
3. From the time of Alexander the Great India was, as it were,
open to the countries west of India. It was in 326 B.C. that his army
crossed the Indus and entered India. His encounter with King Poros
there is historical. He conquered the territory that corresponds to
the modern Punjab. Thus he broke the great barrier, the empire of
Persia, which had separated people of the western countries,
including Greece from India and had prevented their direct
communications with it. Eminent scholars of those days like
Ptolemy, Aristobolus, Nearchus (the admiral of Alexander's fleet),
Onesikritus (the pilot of his fleet); Eumenes (the secretary of
Alexander), and others were all quite well informed writers and
gave to the western world correct information regarding India's
geographical position, her physical features and other matters.
What they say refers, no doubt, chiefly to the North-Western India,
but gives us a precise idea of the position of India. It is also clear
that it is of India of today—the India which produces rice, woolbearing
trees (cotton), cinnamon and spikenard and other aromatics.
Aristobulus writing about these commodities distinguishes India
from Arabia and Ethiopia.
4. After Alexander’s death Chandragupta Maurya the great
Indian King liberated the Punjab from Greek domination. There
was opposition from Seleukos Nicator, but finally a friendly
alliance was concluded between him and Chandragupta. Owing to
the friendly relations which ensued, and the good administration on
the Indian side, many Greeks, especially merchants, were attracted
to Pataliputra (Patna) the royal city. There the foreigners were well
received and the government itself made all arrangements for
entertaining foreign traders, as Strabo the historian records.
The same Seleukos, in 302 B.C., sent Megasthenes as
ambassador to Chandragupta. This Megesthenes wrote a history of
Indian affairs ‘that he might hand down to posterity a faithful
account of all that he had witnessed’. He has also defined the
boundaries of India.
28
5. During the reign of Bindusara, the son and successor of
Chandragupta, Deimachos was sent to India by the successor of
Seleukos. He, too, wrote a book.
6. It is known also that the Egyptian Ptolemies also fostered
good relations with India and sent embassies there. Thus Ptolemy
Philadelphus sent Dionysius as ambassador to Pataliputra ‘to put
the truth, as it is said, to the test by personal inspection’. He, too,
wrote a book on India.
7. Eratosthenes, the learned president of the great Alexandrian
library from 240-196 B.C. authored a book on India. He also
defines the boundaries of India; he says, for instance that ‘on the
West it is bounded by the river Indus’.
8. Arrian quoting both Megasthenes and Eratosthenes
describes also the boundaries of India. He speaks of Indus and
Ganges as the two largest rivers there. Speaking of Ganges he says
that it flows past Pataliputra (Patna). He describes the rainfall,
agricultural crops, the animals etc. Speaking of animals he says:
‘Nearly the same animals are bred in India as in Ethiopia and
Egypt’, clearly distinguishing India from Ethiopia and Egypt.
These communications between the western world and India
became less frequent in the period which immediately preceded the
Christian era. It was due to the new Parthian Empire which grew
up at that time; this empire became a sort of barrier between the
two.
But it was only for a short period. Just then Rome was
developing its trade for the precious goods of the East and was
actually fast becoming a big trade centre. But the defeat of the
Romans (Crassus and Antony) by the Parthians proved a big setback.
Hence all the rich trade that flowed to Rome had to pay its
tolls to the Parthian Empire. This forced the Romans to think of a
sea route to the East - especially to India. The Arabs could realise
easily that this would mean the ruin of their trade. And so they were
on the look-out. Every possible obstacle was erected for the
Romans, but incidents favoured the Roman ambition.
‘Some of the Arab-African peoples of the markets of Somaliland,
carrying on a traffic of very long standing with Indians of
29
Cambay in Indian, African and Arabian shipping centred at the
Gape of Spices (Cape Guardafui) began to unite themselves into an
island kingdom — the Axumite Kingdom of Abyssinia — with
Axume (or Axum) as the future royal seat and Adulis in the Red
Sea as the main port. With the Arabians and the now free Somali
they held several trade secrets and perhaps persuaded the Indians
not to go nearer to Egypt than Ocelis at Bab-el-Mandeb, even in the
time of Augustus. King Juba recorded a ‘promontorium Indorum’
on the Egyptian coasts of the Red Sea, near the confines of
Ethiopia; Pliny’s sole mention of Barygaza, the chief centre of this
commerce on the Indian side is to say that some held it to bean
Ethiopian town ‘on the seashore beyond; and the monolith at Axum
is Buddhist in its inspiration. Hence arose that confusion between
Ethiopia and India which caused writers, chiefly of a later age
when Rome’s trade had once more fallen into Axumite-Ethiopian
control, constantly to locate India and Indians in the regions of
south-east Arabia and the East Coast of Africa where so much
Indian trade was centred.’27 In course of time this new kingdom of
Axum, smarting under the treatment of its former neighbours in
Arabia courted Roman alliance. The old trading posts of Guardafui,
formerly under Arab control, were now free because of the quarrels
of their overlords. This helped the Romans to put their own vessels
to sea and to set sail for India. Hence, about 5 A.D., Strabo could
write: ‘....I found that about 120 ships sail from Myos-Hormos to
India.’28
9. Already at the time of Augustus, the Pandian King of
Madurai had sent an embassy to the Roman Emperor as is known
from Strabo. Pliny in his detailed description of the route from
Alexandria to India, clearly mentions ‘a city known as Madeira’
(obviously Madura). He speaks specially of the pepper trade and
remarks: ‘pepper has nothing in it that can plead as a
recommendation to either fruit or berry; its only desirable quality
is in a certain pungency; and yet it is for this that we import it all
the way from India.’ He continues: ‘..In no year does India drain
our (Roman) empire of less than 550, millions of sestarces, giving
back her own wares in exchange which are sold among us at fully
100 times their prime cost... ’29
30
Pliny’s testimony is enough to show the extent of trade
between the India of today and explain for the presence of the vast
number of Roman coins found in South India. This active trade,
however, was not only with the South India, but extended also to
the north, chief port there being Barygdza (Broach) on the Narmada
River.
Not only with coastal towns, but with towns in the interior the
Roman trade flourished.
This flourishing trade went on till the time of Nero. After him
there was a lull; but during the time of Hadrian the demand for the
Indian goods rose high again.
The sack of Rome by the Goths in 410 A.D. again caused a lull
in the trade, but later it revived. Cosmas Indicopleustes mentions a
number of commercial marts in India. The trade went on, until, in
641 A.D., Alexandria was captured by Muslims and there began the
Muslim domination in the East, and the links between the West and
India were broken once more. Since their domination tasted for
centuries it is not surprising that people in the West gradually forgot
about India and its position. It is not, then, surprising that in the
15th century a new venture was necessary to find a route to India!
10. It is also known that in the early centuries of the Christian
era philosophers like Apollonius of Tyana, Metrodorus, Meropius,
Frumentius and others frequented the towns of India.
Over against all this background, it is inadmissible that India
was not known. Therefore, the India mentioned by the writers
cannot but be the India of today.
