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

[Rafi]

It is reported that Sisygambis the mother of Darius died of grief, when Alexander died, and referred to Alexander as her son, so if he was an actor - he most have been a brilliant one.

 

[niaz]

Hon Joe Shearer,

I am also passionate about history especially that of Iran, Afghanistan and India, I am however humbled by your scholarship. Your account of Alexander’s battle with Porus is awesome. I look forward to reading additional posts by you detailing factual accounts of the historical battles. I have visited the place where Alexander suposed to have crossed Jhelum. The place where Alexander's horse Bucephalus was buried in now known as 'Phalia'.

BTW I do know the difference between Medes, Parthians, Soghdians, Achmanids, Sassanians, Ashkannians (Arsacids), Scythians, Hephtahlites (White Huns) etc. However I would not wish to bore the readers with my little knowledge.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Hon Joe Shearer,

I am also passionate about history especially that of Iran, Afghanistan and India, I am however humbled by your scholarship. Your account of Alexander’s battle with Porus is awesome. I look forward to reading additional posts by you detailing factual accounts of the historical battles. I have visited the place where Alexander suposed to have crossed Jhelum. The place where Alexander's horse Bucephalus was buried in now known as 'Phalia'.

BTW I do know the difference between Medes, Parthians, Soghdians, Achmanids, Sassanians, Ashkannians (Arsacids), Scythians, Hephtahlites (White Huns) etc. However I would not wish to bore the readers with my little knowledge.

Dear Sir,

I am really pleased to read your comment, as your opinion must count with all serious contributors and influence their contributions. It is kind of you to say that you appreciated it so keenly, but we must all defer to your superior knowledge in the ultimate analysis, and I shall take your remarks as a spur to greater effort. This is the finest compliment that I have received.

It is my hope to work on the ten selected battles as selected by some of our best contributors in just such a fashion, so that readers may get to read the original accounts of the battles, and the subject freed from some of the wilder sorts of speculation that seems to be so alarmingly frequent nowadays.

If you would throw some light on these racial variations, it would be very illuminating; most of us, for instance, do not understand that the Medes were the older, perhaps nobler portion of the Iranian nation, or that the Pahlava were rulers of broad sections of India, and are by some accounts considered to be the ancestors of the south Indian Pallava dynasty, or the differences between Sogdian, or Saka, or Sacae, or Scythian and Persian, even though the former spoke east Iranian, or the possibility that the Parama Kamboja of the Mahabharata epic became over time a part of the Scythian confederation. Some of the errors made are egregious; your comments will be instructive and may lead to further investigation by our readers, which can only improve the general tone of discussion.

Please do write and help us out. It is with confidence that I state that it is impossible any will find your comments boring.

With respectful regards,

 

[Joe Shearer]

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.

This unpleasant task is in response to your comment, and the second, pleasant portion is in partial expansion of posts 59 and 61.

Among his acts of terror are the following:

• The razing of Thebes, and the sale of perhaps 8,000 of her citizens as slaves (an act especially shocking to Greeks, because of the position occupied by Thebes in Grecian culture and history)
• The massacre of 8,000 fighting men at the fall of Tyre, and the sale of most of the survivors, men, women and children, as slaves
• A similar massacre at Gaza
• A similar massacre at Cyropolis
• The setting afire of the royal palace of Persepolis (the story that the whole city was put to the torch may have been untrue)
• The massacre at Massaga of the Indian mercenaries who had surrendered and were camped outside the town
• The razing of 'Sangala', capital of the Cathaeans, part of the Aratta
• Three incidents of slaughter of defeated troops in the campaign against the Malli (?Mahlavas) culminating in a fourth massacre when Alexander was injured storming a town

This does not include individual executions or even murders; the killing of Parmenion after his son Philotas was executed must count as murder, as must the killing of Cleitus the Black at Maracanda (Samarkand).

But there were good deeds as well. These will not bear listing; it is difficult to list a non-massacre, for instance. But his treatment of Darius' captured family, including his wife and mother, was considerate; after the Battle of Issus,
Darius' chariot and bow were captured, and his splendidly appointed tent gave the Macedonians their first glimpse of Oriental luxury.'This, I believe, is being a king', said Alexander, as he sat down to Darius' table; and it was not entirely sarcastic. As he dined, he heard the wailing of women, and learned that it was Darius' mother, wife and two daughters, who had been captured and were weeping for his death. He sent Leonnatus to tell them that Darius was not dead, and that they were quite safe; they would have the same rank and treatment as heretofore. He himself never set eyes on Darius' wife, nor allowed her beauty to be alluded to before him; but he showed kindness to Darius' mother Sisygambis, and ultimately married one of the daughters. Later writers never tired of embroidering the theme of Alexander's treatment of these ladies; their praise of what he did throws a dry light on what he was supposed to do.

So, too, was his relationship with Ada. He next entered Caria, where he was welcomed by Ada, Idrieus' widow and sister of the former dynast and satrap Mausolus. She had been dispossessed of her authority by her brother Pixodarus; she adoped Alexander as her son and put her fortress of Alinda into his hands....Alexander restored her to her satrapy.

 

[indushek]

Interesting inputs; my interim responses in blue below.

Yes you are right Mr. Austerlitz had mentioned this site, i didn't try to look at that time. I was just googling and came upon this site.

Thanks for the info that Mr. Jonathan Webb is the one running the site.

Joe we have a history farther than 326 BC ur reply seems to say that just because it was so long ago we should discount this missing of records.

I have read up a little as said by you on Rajtarangini, this book while listing out about the history of kings of kashmir does so in a haphazard way it seems as said by some historians which is mentioned on the wiki page.

Well you have provided from authentic sources the details of this battle, so what is your take on alexanders magnanimity toward's Porus??

In addition to this i would also like to share with you a pdf file i found on web ofcourse written by a professor of history in some Isaeli or American university, a lady, wher she makes the point that some of the Greek historians were into utopian writing. Which makes them not so authoritative what do u have to say about this??

 

[Joe Shearer]

Interesting points; let's look at them in detail.

Yes you are right Mr. Austerlitz had mentioned this site, i didn't try to look at that time. I was just googling and came upon this site.

As I mentioned, I, too, went to that site under duress, and did not look it up the first time.
More to the point, did you see any differences between Tarn and the web-site?

Thanks for the info that Mr. Jonathan Webb is the one running the site.

Joe we have a history farther than 326 BC ur reply seems to say that just because it was so long ago we should discount this missing of records.

Umm, difficult question to answer.

We have been in existence much further back than 326 BC, no doubt about that. Unfortunately, we have no recorded history. Please check for yourself. What we have done, along with western scholars who linked events to western time-points, was to reconstruct our history from literary, epigraphic and archaeological sources, sometimes from fascinating linguistic and grammatical sources. This is more accurately called proto-history.

There are several meanings of the term proto-history; I am using it in the sense of the several river cultures in India having achieved literacy, but before written history started.

So, I am discounting nothing; nothing exists to discount.

Please do not hesitate to correct me if you think I am wrong. I will be happy to respond in detail. However, please stick to facts, not to circumstantial evidence (...Surely we would have....we must have by that date....It cannot be that we didn't.... and all that kind of thing).



I have read up a little as said by you on Rajtarangini, this book while listing out about the history of kings of kashmir does so in a haphazard way it seems as said by some historians which is mentioned on the wiki page.

It is sad but true; that's as good as it gets.

Well you have provided from authentic sources the details of this battle, so what is your take on alexanders magnanimity toward's Porus??

We will certainly discuss my views on these subjects at some time not too far in future; just now, it is important to see what others said. What, in your opinion, did Tarn say? And Arrian? (By the time you are ready to look at Arrian, most of his account should be up).

In addition to this i would also like to share with you a pdf file i found on web ofcourse written by a professor of history in some Isaeli or American university, a lady, wher she makes the point that some of the Greek historians were into utopian writing. Which makes them not so authoritative what do u have to say about this??I completely agree. As it happens, we have no options, no alternatives; what can we do other than look at what exists, however utopian it is?

Incidentally, we need to discriminate between different accounts. Not all Greek historians were utopian, or wrote history according to a pre-determined idea of what should happen at the end.

 

[Joe Shearer]

From this chapter on, I have to thank a benefactrice who found an online source, and that source has been copied for this extract, and will be copied for as many more chapters as is relevant and available. My sincere thanks; I hope I am permitted to acknowledge her help formally.

CHAPTER X. ALEXANDER AND PORUS AT THE HVDASPES.​

ALEXANDER therefore spread a report that he would wait for that season of the year, if his passage was obstructed at the present time ; but yet all the tune he was waiting in ambush to see whether by rapidity of movement he could steal a passage anywhere without being observed. But he perceived that it was impossible for him to cross at the place where Porus himself had encamped near the bank of the Hydaspes, not only on account of the multitude of his elephants, but also because a large army, and that, too, arranged in order of battle and splendidly accoutred, was ready to attack his men as they emerged from the water. Moreover he thought that his horses would refuse even to mount the opposite bank, because the elephants would at once fall upon them and frighten them both by their aspect and trumpeting; nor even before that would they remain upon the inflated hides during the passage of the river; but when they looked across and saw the elephants on the other side they would become frantic and leap into the water. He therefore resolved to steal a crossing by the following manoeuvre —In the night he led most of his cavalry along the bank in various directions, making a clamour and raising the battle-cry in honour of Enyalius.’ Every kind of noise was raised, as if they were making all the preparations necessary for crossing the river. Porus also marched along the river at the head of his elephants opposite the places where the clamour was heard, and Alexander thus gradually got him into the habit of leading his men along opposite the noise. But when this occurred frequently, and there was merely a clamour and a raising of the battle cry, Porus no longer continued to move about to meet the expected advance of the cavalry; but perceiving that his fear had been groundless, he kept his position in the camp. However he posted his scouts at many places along the bank. When Alexander had brought it about that the mind of Porus no longer entertained any fear of his nocturnal attempts, he devised the following stratagem.

 

[Joe Shearer]

CHAPTER XI. ALEXANDER’S STRATAGEM TO GET ACROSS.
​

THERE was in the bank of the Hydaspes, a projecting point, where the river makes a remarkable bend. It was densely covered by a grove of all sorts of trees; and over against it in the river was a woody island without a foot-track, on account of its being uninhabited. Perceiving that this island was right in front of the projecting point, and that both the spots were woody and adapted to conceal his attempt to cross the river, he resolved to convey his army over at this place. The projecting point and island were 150 stades distant from his great camp. Along the whole of the bank, he posted sentries, separated as far as was consistent with keeping each other in sight, and easily hearing when any order should be sent along from any quarter. From all sides also during many nights clamours were raised and fires were burnt. But when he had made up his mind to undertake the passage of the river, he openly prepared his measures for crossing opposite the camp. Cratetus had been left behind at the camp with his own division of cavalry, and the horsemen from the Arachotians and Parapamisadians, as well as the brigades of Alcetas and Polysperchon from the phalanx of the Macedonian infantry, together with the chiefs of the Indians dwelling this side of the Hyphasis, who had with them 5,000 men. He gave Craterus orders not to cross the river before Porus moved off with his forces against them, or before he ascertained that Porus was in flight and that they were victorious.’ “If however,” said he, “Porus should take only a part of his army and march against me, and leave the other part with the elephants in his camp, in that case do thou also remain in thy present position. But if he leads all his elephants with him against me, and a part of the rest of his army is left behind in the camp, then do thou cross the river with all speed. For it is the elephants alone,” said he, “which render it impossible for the horses to land on the other bank. The rest of the army can easily cross.”

 

[Joe Shearer]

CHAPTER XII. PASSAGE OF THE HYDASPES.​

Such were the injunctions laid upon Craterus. Between the island and the great camp where Alexander had left this general, he posted Meleager, Attalus, and Gorgias, with the Grecian mercenaries, cavalry and infantry, giving them instructions to cross in detachments, breaking up the army as soon as they saw the Indians already involved in battle. He then picked the select body-guard called the Companions, as well as the cavalry regiments of Hephaestion, Perdiccas, and Demetrius, the cavalry from Bactria, Sogdiana, and Scythia, and the Daan horse-archers; and from the phalanx of infantry the shield-bearing guards, the brigades of Clitus and Coenus, with the archers and Agrianians, and made a secret march, keeping far away from the bank of the river, in order not to be seen marching towards the island and headland, from which he had determined to cross. There the skins were filled in the night with the hay which had been procured long before, and they were tightly stitched up. In the night a furious storm of rain occurred, on account of which his preparations and attempt to cross were still less observed, since the claps of thunder and the storm drowned with their din the clatter of the weapons and the noise which arose from the orders given by the officers. Most of the vessels, the thirty-oared galleys included with the rest, had been cut in pieces by his order and conveyed to this place, where they had been secretly fixed together again and hidden in the wood. At the approach of daylight, both the wind and the rain calmed down; and the rest of the army went over opposite the island, the cavalry mounting upon the skins, and as many of the foot soldiers as the boats would receive getting into them. They went so secretly that they were not observed by the sentinels posted by Porus, before they had already got beyond the island and were only a little way from the other bank.

 

[niaz]

Yes you are right Mr. Austerlitz had mentioned this site, i didn't try to look at that time. I was just googling and came upon this site.

Thanks for the info that Mr. Jonathan Webb is the one running the site.

Joe we have a history farther than 326 BC ur reply seems to say that just because it was so long ago we should discount this missing of records.

I have read up a little as said by you on Rajtarangini, this book while listing out about the history of kings of kashmir does so in a haphazard way it seems as said by some historians which is mentioned on the wiki page.

Well you have provided from authentic sources the details of this battle, so what is your take on alexanders magnanimity toward's Porus??

In addition to this i would also like to share with you a pdf file i found on web ofcourse written by a professor of history in some Isaeli or American university, a lady, wher she makes the point that some of the Greek historians were into utopian writing. Which makes them not so authoritative what do u have to say about this??

Hon Indushek,

I have the honour of owning a copy of the English translation of Kalhana’s Rajatarangini by R.S Pundit (son in law of Pundit Moti Lal Nehru). It is a heavy read but none the less fascinating.

One must realize that most of material is based on very old oral tradition and therefore not as well organized as in modern history books. Nevertheless any serious study of ancient subcontinent history would remain incomplete without reference to this magnificent book.

 

[indushek]

Hon Indushek,

I have the honour of owning a copy of the English translation of Kalhana’s Rajatarangini by R.S Pundit (son in law of Pundit Moti Lal Nehru). It is a heavy read but none the less fascinating.

One must realize that most of material is based on very old oral tradition and therefore not as well organized as in modern history books. Nevertheless any serious study of ancient subcontinent history would remain incomplete without reference to this magnificent book.

Sir,

To be truthful to masters like you and Joe i am but an infant, with no knowledge whatsoever of even acknowledgable standards on history. What i have known is what i have read in my class room studies (that too for passing exams or when i found wiki some 6 years back to pass my time in office and read up on some matters i thought interesting!!!!)

All i am trying here is to read the excellent and fascinating accounts provided by Joe and trying to read some available material on Internet as my office time permits, this is the reason i am replying lately to your post, excuse me for this.

Actually i heard of Rajtarangini some time back but never took the interest of reading about it, with you and Joe around in this thread i am sure to get some excellent knowledge for which i will be very thankful.

Yours sincerely,

 

[indushek]

Interesting points; let's look at them in detail.

Joe forgive me for my argumentative talk, as a person without knowledge (not even a drop of urs no doubt ) i am but left with this only.

I want to ask you why doesn't our puranas be considered as a source of history?? accepted they don't give exact time lines and aren't that accurate with personages and places.

What makes the western historians so authoritative and ours less??

I am truthful i by chance stumbled on that pdf file while searching for material on battle of hydaspes , if not i would never have known about this characteristic of Greek writers.

Eagerly awaiting for your views and sir niaz's further on this battle.

 

[BATMAN]

On what technical grounds are we repeatedly terming historical events of this thread in Indian context and stating Porus as Indian????

 

[Alternative]

Joe forgive me for my argumentative talk, as a person without knowledge (not even a drop of urs no doubt ) i am but left with this only.

I want to ask you why doesn't our puranas be considered as a source of history?? accepted they don't give exact time lines and aren't that accurate with personages and places.

What makes the western historians so authoritative and ours less??

Above two question can be answered (my personal views only) on two lines;
First, simplistic, answer is in your first question, no exact timelines (million of years), personages,places. what left? account of happenings, that too, steeped in myth, folklore etc. so the 'history' is lost some where........Answer to second question is, adherence to accepted principles.

Anthropological Answer, I will quote from Frederick Jackson Turner;
"Each age tries to form its own conception of the past. Each age writes the history of the past anew with reference to the conditions uppermost in its own time."
In Ancient India, religion(s) was deeply entrenched in all walks of life, so much so, it preceded,interceded, superseded etc. not only in sciences and arts but in mundane things of every day life.
Puranas, bore testimony to the conditions of that time. Taking it as a source is ones own choosing.
It is a matter of opinion only, ans to second question.

 

[Joe Shearer]

Above two question can be answered (my personal views only) on two lines;
First, simplistic, answer is in your first question, no exact timelines (million of years), personages,places. what left? account of happenings, that too, steeped in myth, folklore etc. so the 'history' is lost some where........Answer to second question is, adherence to accepted principles.

Anthropological Answer, I will quote from Frederick Jackson Turner;
"Each age tries to form its own conception of the past. Each age writes the history of the past anew with reference to the conditions uppermost in its own time."
In Ancient India, religion(s) was deeply entrenched in all walks of life, so much so, it preceded,interceded, superseded etc. not only in sciences and arts but in mundane things of every day life.
Puranas, bore testimony to the conditions of that time. Taking it as a source is ones own choosing.
It is a matter of opinion only, ans to second question.

In an extension of Alternative's answers, which I agree with totally, I invite you to feel free to cite the Puranas on the subject of the battle of the Hydaspes. Be our guest.