What's new

The Battle of the Hydaspes: A Mystery in the Mists of Time

Interesting inputs; my interim responses in blue below.

I think i found this video on youtube from a site called the art of battle

http://img35.imageshack.us/img35/4044/7261.mp4

It is a graphic representation of the battle.

This site was first mentioned to me (it may have been mentioned by others earlier) by Austerlitz, who is most authoritative on these subjects of battle and warfare; I did not look it up immediately, but hurried to do so after receiving painful (and unnecessary) corporal punishment at the hands of Alternative. Jonathan Webb is not a poster, he is the person running the site and creating the animations.

I dare not say this outright, but perhaps you could now compare Webb's account and Tarn's and identify the discrepancies (they exist).


One of the poster with name Jonathan Webb says that the following are the authoritarian books on this which are

# Diodorus Siculus (90-30 BC). Bibliotheca Historica.
# Quintus Curtius Rufus (60-70 AD). Historiae Alexandri Magni.
# Plutarch (75 AD). The Life of Alexander the Great, Parallel Lives.
# Arrian (early 2nd c. AD).

All present and accounted for; there are, in fact, four more who are being presented.

If it is the general wish that I confine myself to the top four, I can do so.


I mean not one India source, a turning point in the history of this country and no one even thought of writing a authoritative account of it!!!!

This was 326 BC. Would you like to help us to understand by informing us what was going on in India at that time?

Sorry but i am not much knowledged on posting videos and photos

i tried but it seems the video doesn't show

may be this could work or this

<video snipped for sake of economy>

Just to remind you: differences, if any?

<video snipped for sake of economy>

According to our family tradition it was the Persian horse archers who carried the day for Alexander - the Punjabi's could not cope with their mobility.

Tarn's account of the battle (other accounts will be available shortly for a deeper comparison) partly agrees and partly disagrees.

Regarding it being a family legend, you will notice that my basic point in uploading these excerts with a considerable expenditure of effort was to promote the use of authoritative historical sources rather than either 'legends' or 'perspectives'. However, whether you do so or not is your personal decision. :-)


You wound, like Parthians, while you fly,
And kill with a retreating eye.
&#8212;Samuel Butler

Did you notice that Alexander's archers were neither Persians, nor, strictly speaking, Parthians? Who they were ought to be mentioned clearly somewhere. If not, please let me know and I can cite the passage concerned.
 
A general question to readers: what is the difference between Iranians and
  • Medes
  • Persians
  • Sogdians, or Sogdianians (more correctly)
  • Parthians

You might, just for the heck of it, include Pahlavas, Scythians or Saka or Sacae, and Parama Kamboja.
 
A general question to readers: what is the difference between Iranians and
  • Medes
  • Persians
  • Sogdians, or Sogdianians (more correctly)
  • Parthians

You might, just for the heck of it, include Pahlavas, Scythians or Saka or Sacae, and Parama Kamboja.

What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;
 
What's in a name? That which we call a rose
By any other name would smell as sweet;

Yes, yes, you've read the play by Shakespeare and remember an apt quotation from it. Are you seriously saying that whether you are called a serious student or a credulous lame-brain makes no difference to you? These things matter to me, but I suppose we are all different!

By the way, a little looking into the names listed would have broadened your mental horizons a bit; provided, of course, that isn't an objectionable transition.
 
THE BATTLE FIELD AND THE DISPOSITION OF THE TWO ARMIES

The river was not yet at its full size, but the rains would soon begin; and Porus with his army, including many elephants, held the farther bank. Alexander had the flotilla from the Indus brought across in sections, and made ostentatious preparations for crossing to hold Porus' attention, though he knew that the cavalry could not cross in the face of the elephants. Under cover of these preparations he reconnoitred the bank, and selected a place 18 miles above{1} Jhelum, at the great bend of the river, where was a wooded island in mid-stream. The rains had begun, and there was need of haste. The boats were brought to the selected point and put together; meanwhile Alexander made numerous feints at crossing elsewhere, keeping Porus perpetually on the move; the Indian finally grew weary of meeting threats that never materialised. Shortly after the summer solstice, Alexander joined his flotilla by a wide detour, leaving Craterus at Jhelum with his hipparchy, two battalions of the phalanx (those of Alcetas and Polyperchon), and the Indian contingents from Gandhara, who, however, took no part in the battle; his orders were not to cross unless Porus were defeated or the elephants withdrawn from the bank. To guard against a surprise crossing, three battalions of the phalanx, those of Meleager, Attalus and Gorgias, were strung out along the bank between Jhelum and the crossing-point; their orders{2} were to cross in turn and join Alexander as he successively came level with them on his march towards Porus' camp. The following night was especially stormy.

Alexander had with him the agema of the Companions, the hipparchies of Hephaestion, Perdiccas, Coenus and Demetrius, and the horse-archers, nominaly 5,300 horse. Of infantry, he had the hypaspists, two battalions of the phalanx, those of Coenus (Antigenes) and Cleitus, the Agrianians, archers and javelin-men, somewhere about 10,000 men. Ptolemy's statement (if it be his) that he had under 6,000 foot is, for once, demonstrably wrong{3}; if taken from the Journal, it was given there simply with the object of minimising the effect of the enemy's elephants. In the morning, the force crossed to the island; but as soon as they left it, they were seen by Porus' scouts. They landed safely, only to find themselves on another island; with great difficulty, they waded ashore, and Alexander at once advanced downstream towards Porus' position, on the way defeating and killing Porus' son, who had been sent forward with 2,000 horse to reconnoitre. Porus himself, leaving a few elephants to prevent Craterus crossing, had followed, and drew up his army at right angles to the river; his left, however, did not rest on the river, but gave ample space for cavalry to manoeuvre. As Alexander was superior in cavalry, Porus' reason is obscure, unless it was to obtain drier ground for his archers. His centre was formed by 200 elephants; behind and between them the infantry were drawn up, with a body of infantry on each wing unprotected by elephants. His best infantry, the archers, carried huge bows capable of shooting a long arrow with great force; but one end of the bow had to be rested on the ground, and the slippery mud handicapped them badly. On either flank were his cavalry, some 3,000 - 4,000 altogether.




Footnotes:

1: Frontinus I, 4, 9 proves that the crossing was made above Porus' camp.
2: App. 6, p. 190. See this Appendix for the problems in Arrian's account of this battle.
3: App. 6, p. 192
 
Yes, yes, you've read the play by Shakespeare and remember an apt quotation from it. Are you seriously saying that whether you are called a serious student or a credulous lame-brain makes no difference to you? These things matter to me, but I suppose we are all different!

By the way, a little looking into the names listed would have broadened your mental horizons a bit; provided, of course, that isn't an objectionable transition.

My friend you need to relax and not get so riled up so easily, Regarding Iranian's they have the ability like the Chinese to assimilate myriad people in to their own civilization, a typical example is the Mongol conquerers - who within 1 or 2 generations were indistinguishable from native Persian's.
 
My friend you need to relax and not get so riled up so easily, Regarding Iranian's they have the ability like the Chinese to assimilate myriad people in to their own civilization, a typical example is the Mongol conquerers - who within 1 or 2 generations were indistinguishable from native Persian's.

For starters, I'm not your friend. We happen to be posting to a common thread on a common forum. That's all.

As far as the rest is concerned, since you are so deft with proverbs and quotations, here is one for you: you can take a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Knowledge and information can be presented to you in copious quantities; if you prefer to dwell in the warm glow of family legends, that's your choice.
 
For starters, I'm not your friend. We happen to be posting to a common thread on a common forum. That's all.

As far as the rest is concerned, since you are so deft with proverbs and quotations, here is one for you: you can take a horse to water, but you can't make him drink. Knowledge and information can be presented to you in copious quantities; if you prefer to dwell in the warm glow of family legends, that's your choice.

I would never consider a person like you, a friend - I was just being polite, social norms and all that. Regarding family legends, this comes from a village located very near to the actual scene of the battle. Which a historian like Michael Woods finds credible. You may have a bit of knowledge, but I fear the ego is much larger :) Cut the arrogance.

 
Last edited by a moderator:
I would never consider a person like you, a friend - I was just being polite, social norms and all that.

It might be more to the point to be true to yourself, rather than trying on niceties which sit awkwardly on you.

Regarding family legends, this comes from a village located very near to the actual scene of the battle.

If you had been paying attention, instead of demonstrating your remarkable ignorance, you might have noticed that a question of whether the battle was at Jhelum or at Jalalpur has been in dispute for over a century, because the topography at both places matches. So there is no evidence that this village of yours was anywhere nearer the battle than Jalalpur from Jhelum.

Which a historian like Michael Woods finds credible. You may have a bit of knowledge, but I fear the ego is much larger :) Cut the arrogance.

Since you obviously don't know what's going on, I've been quoting W. W. Tarn, a far greater historian than the BBC producer you hold in such reverence.

By the same token, it is not my knowledge that was on display, but the original text from Tarn, based on his reading of Arrian and the other authorities, who are also about to be put on display.

This whole exercise is precisely in order to puncture pretentious people like yourself who build whole edifices based on complete ignorance of the original sources and texts. Rather than watch a BBC documentary, you would be better advised to read Arrian.
 
Note from 'Joe Shearer':

These are now extracts from the originals, based on which Tarn put together his scholarly analysis. The first on display is Arrian.

Arrian (Flavius Arrianus), Greek historian and philosopher, was born about AD 96 and died about AD 180. The Roman Emperor Hadrian appointed him Governor (legatus) of Cappadocia. He served as such from AD 131 to AD 137 and distinguished himself in a military expedition against the Alani. He was Archon of Athens in AD 147-48. The most important work of Arrian is his Anabasis of Alexander, which describes the life of Alexander from his accession to his death. <...> Arrian himself says that he derived his information from the writings of Aristobulus of Cassandreia and Ptolemy, son of Lagus, who later became King of Egypt. As both of them accompanied Alexander, the Anabasis may be regarded almost as a contemporary account. <...> The extracts <...> are based on the English translation of McCrindle (I and II). Both the works have also been translated into English, in the Loeb Classical Library series, by E. I. Robson.

CHAPTER VIII
March from the Indus to the Hydaspes

....When Alexander had crossed to the other side of the river Indus, he again offered sacrifice there, according to his custom. Then starting from the Indus, he arrived at Taxila, a large and prosperous city, in fact the largest of those situated between the rivers Indus and Hydaspes. He was received in a friendly manner by Taxiles, the governor of the city, and by the Indians of that place; and he added to their territory as much of the adjacent country as they asked for. Thither also came to him envoys from Abisares, king of the mountaineer Indians, the embassy including the brother of Abisares as well as other most notable men. Other envoys also came from Doxares, the chief of the province, bringing gift with them. <...> Having appointed Philip, son of Machatas, viceroy of the Indians of that district, he left a garrison in Taxila, as well as the soldiers who were invalided by sickness, and then marched towards the river Hydaspes. For he was informed that Porus, with the whole of his army, was on the other side of that river, having determiend either to prevent him from making the passage, or to attack him while crossing. When Alexander ascertained this, he sent Coenus, son of Polemocrates, back to the river Indus, with instructions to cut in pieces all the vessels which he had prepared for the passage of that river, and to bring them to the river Hydaspes. Coenus cut the vessels in pieces and conveyed them thither, the smaller ones being cut into two parts, and the thirty-oared galleys into three. The sections were conveyed upon waggons, as far as the bank of the Hydaspes, and there the vessels were fixed together again, and seen as a fleet upon that river. Alexander took the forces which he had when he arrived at Taxila, and the 5,000 Indians under the command of Taxiles and chiefs of that district, and marched toward the same river.
 
^^^^^^^

Whatever - who the hell do you think you are ??? You have an opinion - others have theirs, your no Zahi Hawass, that we have to take your opinion as fact, just cut the arrogance.

And Michael Wood is a eminent historian, and not simply a producer as you claim.
 
CHAPTER IX
Porus Obstructs Alexander's Passage

Alexander encamped on the bank of the Hydaspes, and Porus was seen with all his army and his large troop of elephants lining the opposite bank. He remained to guard the passage at the place where he saw Alexander had encamped; and sent guards to all the other parts of the river which more easily fordable, placing officers over each detachment, being resolved to obstruct the passage of the Macedonians. When Alexander saw this, he thought it advisable to move his army in various directions, to distract the attention of Porus, and render him uncertain what to do. Dividing his army into many parts, he himself led some of his troops now into one part of the land and now into another, at one time ravaging the enemy's property, at another looking out for a place where the river might appear easier for him to ford it. The rest of his troops he entrusted to his different generals, and sent them about in many directions. He also conveyed corn from all quarters into his camp from the land on his side of the Hydaspes, so that it might be evident to Porus that he had resolved to remain quiet near the bank until the water of the river subsided in the winter, and afforded him a passage in many places. As his vessels were sailing up and down the river, and skins were being filled with hay, and the whole bank appeared to be covered in one place with cavalry and in another with infantry, Porus was not allowed to keep at rest, or to bring his preparations together from all sides to any one point if he selected this as suitable for the defence of the passage. Besides, at this season all the Indian rivers were flowing with swollen and turbid waters and with rapid currents; for it was the time of the year when the sun is wont to turn towards the summer solstice. At this season incessant and heavy rain falls in India; and the snows on the Caucasus, whence most of the rivers have their sources, melt and swell their streams to a great degree. But in the winter they again subside, become small and clear, and are fordable in certain places, with the exceptions of the Indus, Ganges, and perhaps one or two others. At any rate the Hydaspes becomes fordable.
 
^^^^^^^

Whatever - who the hell do you think you are ??? You have an opinion - others have theirs, your no Zahi Hawass, that we have to take your opinion as fact, just cut the arrogance.

And Michael Wood is a eminent historian, and not simply a producer as you claim.

It is not I, ignoramus, it is an extract from a famous book on Alexander by a famous historian. Don't you even understand plain English sentences after quoting fancy-pants verses from Shakespeare?

These are not my opinions, these are extracts from historical texts. That's what I've been trying to drill into some thick skulls, and some thin ones covering a lot of ordure. So you don't have to endure my arrogance, we have to endure your ignorance and your defiant refusal to learn from the learned. Not I, Tarn and now Arrian.

Do you know how to use search engines? Then use Google for Michael Woods and for W. W. Tarn. After that, after you see the result, shut up.
 
The bolded part doesn't seem to fit with Joe's description of Alexander's history, in which he never showed the word generosity. So why only Porus??

Alexander's treatment of Darius family, specially of Darius's mother was extremely generous.
 
Alexander's treatment of Darius family, specially of Darius's mother was extremely generous.

But there is a history of slaughtering the entire population and their army by him too. I think it shows his quality in diplomacy. Whoever he treated well, were strong and the killing was not a solution.
 
Back
Top Bottom