SnIPeR Xr
FULL MEMBER
- Joined
- Aug 16, 2010
- Messages
- 188
- Reaction score
- 0
Did Ancient Pakistanis Defeated The Mighty Alexander The Great.,Time to re-write Pakistan's history.
Year : 326 BCE
Location : Banks of River Jehlum (Hydaspes)
Adversaries: Mighty Roman Army with all the resources one can imagine, the same army which trampled the persians, against a tiny princely state between Jehlum and Chenab, ruled by King which goes down in history by name Porus.
Personalities: A young and ambitious but demunitive Alexander who never tasted a defeated in battlefield , against a 7 feet tall King, who was known to be proud man.
Here is the initial verbal exchange between the two:
http://history-of-macedonia.com/wordpress/...reat-and-porus/
King Poros to Alexander, who plunders cities:I instruct you to withdraw. What can you, a mere man, achieve against a god? Is it because you have destroyed the good fortune of others by meeting weaker men in battle that you think yourself more mighty than me? But I am invincible: not only am I the king of men, but even of godswhen Dionysus (who they say is a god) came here, we used own power to drive him away. So not only do I advise you. but also I instruct you, to set off for Greece with all speed. I am not going to be frightened by your battle with Darius or by all the good fortune you had in the face of the weakness uf the other nations. But vou think von are more mighty. So set off for Greece. Because if we had needed Greece, we would have subjected it long before Xerxes; but as it is, we have paid no attention to it- because it is a useless nation, and there is nothing among them worth the regard of a kingeveryone desires what is better.
Alexender to his troops:
Comrades-in-arms, do not be upset again at the letter of Poross that 1 have read out. Remember what Darius wrote too- It is a fact that the only state of mind barbarians have is obtuseness. Like the animals under themtigers, lions, elephants, which exult in their courage but are easily hunted thanks to mans naturethe kings of the barbarians too exult in the numbers ol their armies but are easily defeated by the intelligence of the Greeks.
Alexander, to King Poros, greetings: You have made us even more eager to be spurred on to battle against you by saying that Greece has nothing worth the regard of a king but that you have everythinglands and cities. And i know that every man desires to seize what is better rather than to keep what is worse. Since, then, WE Greeks do not have thesethings and you barbarians possess them, we desire what is better and wish to have them from you. You write to me that you are king of gods and of all men even to the extent of having more power than the god. But i am engaging in war with a loudmouthed man and an absolute barbarian, not with a god. The whole world could not stand up to a god in full armorthe rumble of thunder, the flash of lightning, or the anger of the bolt. So the nations I have defeated in war cause you no astonishment and neither do boastful words on your part make me a coward.
Our history, yes the Pakistani history as we teach to our young minds tell us the though the ancient Pakistani, A Panjabi from ancient lands that lie between Jehlum and Chanab river, fought tooth and nail with the armies of Alexender but eventually lost and brought in Chains infront of Alexander, who being impressed by his bravery spared his life and gave him back his kingdom.
I would say what a load of tosh and mockery of our ancient history it has been, and non other but us (just like in the case of IVC) teaching our kids the wrong version of history. Fools we are.
The version of history which is being told to the rest of world was written by someone after nearly 300 years of Alexender's death. And ofcourse it was written by a Roman. Unbiased source?? My arse.
Here is what now people are coming to realise of actual events that unfolded on the banks of Jehlum.
1) Alexander and his armies only manage to come in the heartlands of ancient Pakistan when the ruler of Texilla Ambi, in his sheer anamosity and hatred for Porus, made a pack with Alexdener to destroy Porus in partnership. Ambi allowed Alexander the safe passage via Taxilla to reach river Jehlum. (This problem of trachery run deeps and still exist in modern day Pakistanis)
2) The depictions by Curtius, Justin, Diodorus, Arrian and Plutarch are quite consistent and reliable in concluding that Alexander was defeated by Porus and had to make a treaty with him to
save his and his soldiers` lives. He was a broken man at his return from his mis-adventures.
3) Mr E.A.W. Badge has included an account of "The Life and Exploits of Alexander" where he writes inter alia the following:
"In the battle of Jhelum a large majority of Alexander`s cavalry was killed. Alexander realized that if he were to continue fighting he would be completely ruined. He requested Porus to stop fighting. Porus was true to traditions and did not kill the surrendered enemy. After this both signed treaty, Alexander then helped him in annexing other territories to his kingdom".
Mr Badge further writes that the soldiers of Alexander were grief-stricken and they began to bewail the loss of their compatriots. They threw off their weapons. They expressed their strong desire to
surrender. They had no desire to fight. Alexander asked them to give up fighting and himself said,
"Porus, please pardon me. I have realized your bravery and strength. Now I cannot bear these agonies. WIth a sad heart I am planning to put an end to my life. I do not desire that my soldiers should also be ruined like me. I am that culprit who has thrust them into the jaw of death. It
does not become a king to thrust his soldiers into the jaws of death."
These expressions of `Alexander, The Great!` do not indicate from any stretch of imagination his victory over Porus? Can such words be uttered by a `World Conquerer"?
4) Alexnder is known to be a cruel man in history. He was neither a noble man nor did
he have a heart of gold. He had meted out very cruel and harsh treatment to his earlier enemies. Basus of Bactria fought tooth and nail with Alexander to defend the freedom of his motherland. When he was brought before Alexander as a prisoner, Alexander ordered his servants to whip
him and then cut off his nose and ears. He then killed him. Many Persian generals were killed by him.
The murder of Kalasthenese, nephew of Aristotle, was committed by Alexander because he criticised Alexander for foolishly imitating the Persian emperors. Alexander also murdered his friend Clytus in anger. His father`s trusted lieutenant Parmenian was also murdered by Alexander.
Considering above, its foolish to assume that Alexander just handover the lands of a "defeated" king and actually help him expand his rule. These are more of less, conditions imposed by Porus on Alexander until the later was given a safe passage down the indus towards the arabian sea, the easiest route back home for Alexander and his armies.
5) Alexander died of injuries later, sustained during this epic battle.
6) The events that followed this battle, clearly showed that the acts of Roman army was of one with tails firmly tucked between their legs and of a defeated army. They only stuck to the indus in their retreat, did not follow the same path where they came from i.e. Afghanistan, their path to Arabian sea without venturing out on lands. Thoughout their journey down indus, they were picked off. I was watching a documentary long time ago in which a historian was tracing the track of so called "victorious Alexander army". They were showing the skeleton of the Roman army Littered around the coast of Pakistan, which btw can still be found. They presented those as the ones died of "thrust" and "hunger". That is laughable. how can a victorious army die of hunger and thrist?? It more like a case of being "picked off" what remained of it.
Conclusion: When are we going to owe something which well and truely belong to us?? Google the name Porus and you will find how indians are highjacking him as a "indian king". When are we going to set the record straight. In hollywood, they glorified insignificant Scot as braveheart, made movie on highly exaggarated spartans, yet here we got a King of a small state, brought down the mighty and egoistic Alexander "The Great" to his knees. No movies for him, yet the people who share the same blood dont even owe him. Shame really.
Year : 326 BCE
Location : Banks of River Jehlum (Hydaspes)
Adversaries: Mighty Roman Army with all the resources one can imagine, the same army which trampled the persians, against a tiny princely state between Jehlum and Chenab, ruled by King which goes down in history by name Porus.
Personalities: A young and ambitious but demunitive Alexander who never tasted a defeated in battlefield , against a 7 feet tall King, who was known to be proud man.
Here is the initial verbal exchange between the two:
http://history-of-macedonia.com/wordpress/...reat-and-porus/
King Poros to Alexander, who plunders cities:I instruct you to withdraw. What can you, a mere man, achieve against a god? Is it because you have destroyed the good fortune of others by meeting weaker men in battle that you think yourself more mighty than me? But I am invincible: not only am I the king of men, but even of godswhen Dionysus (who they say is a god) came here, we used own power to drive him away. So not only do I advise you. but also I instruct you, to set off for Greece with all speed. I am not going to be frightened by your battle with Darius or by all the good fortune you had in the face of the weakness uf the other nations. But vou think von are more mighty. So set off for Greece. Because if we had needed Greece, we would have subjected it long before Xerxes; but as it is, we have paid no attention to it- because it is a useless nation, and there is nothing among them worth the regard of a kingeveryone desires what is better.
Alexender to his troops:
Comrades-in-arms, do not be upset again at the letter of Poross that 1 have read out. Remember what Darius wrote too- It is a fact that the only state of mind barbarians have is obtuseness. Like the animals under themtigers, lions, elephants, which exult in their courage but are easily hunted thanks to mans naturethe kings of the barbarians too exult in the numbers ol their armies but are easily defeated by the intelligence of the Greeks.
Alexander, to King Poros, greetings: You have made us even more eager to be spurred on to battle against you by saying that Greece has nothing worth the regard of a king but that you have everythinglands and cities. And i know that every man desires to seize what is better rather than to keep what is worse. Since, then, WE Greeks do not have thesethings and you barbarians possess them, we desire what is better and wish to have them from you. You write to me that you are king of gods and of all men even to the extent of having more power than the god. But i am engaging in war with a loudmouthed man and an absolute barbarian, not with a god. The whole world could not stand up to a god in full armorthe rumble of thunder, the flash of lightning, or the anger of the bolt. So the nations I have defeated in war cause you no astonishment and neither do boastful words on your part make me a coward.
Our history, yes the Pakistani history as we teach to our young minds tell us the though the ancient Pakistani, A Panjabi from ancient lands that lie between Jehlum and Chanab river, fought tooth and nail with the armies of Alexender but eventually lost and brought in Chains infront of Alexander, who being impressed by his bravery spared his life and gave him back his kingdom.
I would say what a load of tosh and mockery of our ancient history it has been, and non other but us (just like in the case of IVC) teaching our kids the wrong version of history. Fools we are.
The version of history which is being told to the rest of world was written by someone after nearly 300 years of Alexender's death. And ofcourse it was written by a Roman. Unbiased source?? My arse.
Here is what now people are coming to realise of actual events that unfolded on the banks of Jehlum.
1) Alexander and his armies only manage to come in the heartlands of ancient Pakistan when the ruler of Texilla Ambi, in his sheer anamosity and hatred for Porus, made a pack with Alexdener to destroy Porus in partnership. Ambi allowed Alexander the safe passage via Taxilla to reach river Jehlum. (This problem of trachery run deeps and still exist in modern day Pakistanis)
2) The depictions by Curtius, Justin, Diodorus, Arrian and Plutarch are quite consistent and reliable in concluding that Alexander was defeated by Porus and had to make a treaty with him to
save his and his soldiers` lives. He was a broken man at his return from his mis-adventures.
3) Mr E.A.W. Badge has included an account of "The Life and Exploits of Alexander" where he writes inter alia the following:
"In the battle of Jhelum a large majority of Alexander`s cavalry was killed. Alexander realized that if he were to continue fighting he would be completely ruined. He requested Porus to stop fighting. Porus was true to traditions and did not kill the surrendered enemy. After this both signed treaty, Alexander then helped him in annexing other territories to his kingdom".
Mr Badge further writes that the soldiers of Alexander were grief-stricken and they began to bewail the loss of their compatriots. They threw off their weapons. They expressed their strong desire to
surrender. They had no desire to fight. Alexander asked them to give up fighting and himself said,
"Porus, please pardon me. I have realized your bravery and strength. Now I cannot bear these agonies. WIth a sad heart I am planning to put an end to my life. I do not desire that my soldiers should also be ruined like me. I am that culprit who has thrust them into the jaw of death. It
does not become a king to thrust his soldiers into the jaws of death."
These expressions of `Alexander, The Great!` do not indicate from any stretch of imagination his victory over Porus? Can such words be uttered by a `World Conquerer"?
4) Alexnder is known to be a cruel man in history. He was neither a noble man nor did
he have a heart of gold. He had meted out very cruel and harsh treatment to his earlier enemies. Basus of Bactria fought tooth and nail with Alexander to defend the freedom of his motherland. When he was brought before Alexander as a prisoner, Alexander ordered his servants to whip
him and then cut off his nose and ears. He then killed him. Many Persian generals were killed by him.
The murder of Kalasthenese, nephew of Aristotle, was committed by Alexander because he criticised Alexander for foolishly imitating the Persian emperors. Alexander also murdered his friend Clytus in anger. His father`s trusted lieutenant Parmenian was also murdered by Alexander.
Considering above, its foolish to assume that Alexander just handover the lands of a "defeated" king and actually help him expand his rule. These are more of less, conditions imposed by Porus on Alexander until the later was given a safe passage down the indus towards the arabian sea, the easiest route back home for Alexander and his armies.
5) Alexander died of injuries later, sustained during this epic battle.
6) The events that followed this battle, clearly showed that the acts of Roman army was of one with tails firmly tucked between their legs and of a defeated army. They only stuck to the indus in their retreat, did not follow the same path where they came from i.e. Afghanistan, their path to Arabian sea without venturing out on lands. Thoughout their journey down indus, they were picked off. I was watching a documentary long time ago in which a historian was tracing the track of so called "victorious Alexander army". They were showing the skeleton of the Roman army Littered around the coast of Pakistan, which btw can still be found. They presented those as the ones died of "thrust" and "hunger". That is laughable. how can a victorious army die of hunger and thrist?? It more like a case of being "picked off" what remained of it.
Conclusion: When are we going to owe something which well and truely belong to us?? Google the name Porus and you will find how indians are highjacking him as a "indian king". When are we going to set the record straight. In hollywood, they glorified insignificant Scot as braveheart, made movie on highly exaggarated spartans, yet here we got a King of a small state, brought down the mighty and egoistic Alexander "The Great" to his knees. No movies for him, yet the people who share the same blood dont even owe him. Shame really.
