Page:History of India Vol 2.djvu/248

 210 INDO- GREEK AND INDO - PARTHIAN DYNASTIES to identify this city. But the scene oi; the martyrdom is anonymous in the earlier versions of the tale, and Kalamina should be regarded as a place in fairyland, which it is vain to try to locate on a map. The same observation applies to the attempts at the identification of the port variously called Sandaruk, Andrapolis, and so forth. The whole story is pure mythology, and the geog- raphy is as mythical as the tale itself. Its interest in the eyes of the historian of India is confined to the fact that it proves that the real Indian king, Gondophares, was remembered two centuries after his death, and was associated in popular belief with the apostolic mission to the Parthians. Inasmuch as Gondophares was cer- tainly a Parthian prince, it is reasonable to believe that a Christian mission actually visited the Indo-Parthians of the northwestern frontier during his reign, whether or not that mission was conducted by St. Thomas in person. The traditional association of the name of the apostle with that of King Gondophares is in no way at variance with the chronology of the reign of the latter. The alleged connection of the apostle with Southern India and with the shrine near Madras dubbed San Thome by the Portuguese stands on a different footing. The story of the southern mission of St. Thomas first makes its appearance in Marco Polo's work in the thir- teenth century, and has no support in either probability or ancient tradition. It may be dismissed without hesi- tation as a late invention o,f the local Nestorian Chris- tians, concocted as a proof of their orthodox descent.