Thread by @abhilegend000

This thread will be for thoughts on history from me. I've been asked routinely for this, so here it is. First, I'll share the history of Alexander/King Porus fight and was it really the defeat of Porus as thought popularly?

Before we begin, let's establish a few facts which are unanimous.

1. No greek records of the battle survived to this day. We only find the mention of such works from later greek historians.This includes the Indica of Megasthenes which is only known from references in later works

It is writers like Strabo, Diodorus, Plutarch and a few others who mention it. Curiously none of them have anything about Mauryas.
2.Several historians have suggested that Sandrocottos of the Greek records could have been Samudragupta of the later Gupta dynasty.

3. Alexander's Indian chronology rests on the correctness of this linguistic similarity between Sandrakottos and Chandragupta (Maurya). Ashoka’s inscriptions don’t mention Alexander even though other kings are mentioned by name.

4. Important to note that Ashoka’s date, as well as the dates of his inscriptions are deduced from this Greek Synchronism and not based on any scientific grounds like radiocarbon tests.

In conclusion, it is based on only "foreign historians" account that this battle is remembered today. Because "goras" are always right!!

No Indian record of this battle exists from contemporary literature! Not a single, it is never mentioned.

Now let's establish how correct these later historians were.

Strabo (c. 65 BC — c. 24 AD) writes: “Generally speaking, the men who hitherto have written on the affairs of India were a set of liars. Deimachus holds the first place in the list, Megasthenes comes next….

Of this we became the more convinced whilst writing the history of Alexander. No faith whatever can be placed in Deimachus and Megasthenes.”

On the other hand, we have ample record of that time, mainly Arthashastra of Acharya Kautilya. While it mentioned nothing of Alexander, it does note invasions by others like the Scythians (Shaka), Huns (Huna), Persians (Parasika), Parthians (Prithu-Parthava) and others.

The word ‘Yavana’ (Yona in Prakrit) is fairly common in the late ancient age, but does not always mean the Greeks (or Ionians) much less Macedonians.

The first mention of Alexander in an Indian work is found in Banabhatta’s Harshacarita written a thousand years after Alexander’s lifetime. In this Bana refers to an Alikasundara and his campaign against a country ruled by women (stree-rajya) or ‘Amazons’.

Now, let's examine the battle from greeks' point of view. There are five records of this battle from greeks. Anabasis of Alexander, written by the Greek historian Arrianos of Nikomedia, Universal History by the Greek historian Diodoros Sikeliotes,

Life of Alexander the Great by the Greek biographer Ploutarchos and Epitome of the Philippic History of Pompeius Trogus by the Roman historian Marcus Iunianus Iustinus Frontinus. These sources, in turn, rely on earlier sources that have since been lost.

There were coins minted by Alexander over victory on Porus. Silver victory coin of Alexander, minted in Babylon at some point between c. 324 and c. 322 BC, depicting a Makedonian warrior on horseback and two Indian warriors on the back of an elephant

There is undeniable greek influences on ancient Indian culture. Alexander himself either founded or renamed two cities on the banks of the Hydaspes River, Boukephala and Nikaia. An entire genre of Greco-Buddhist exists in the region. Example attached

1.0Arrianos describes Porus’s surrender in his Anabasis of Alexander book five, chapter eighteen, as translated by E. J. Chinnock.
2. Alexander's conquest in asia from wikimedia

Now, here is the twist. Alexander was a master of propaganda, possibly the first such ruler. Alexander minted coins with his own face on them—something few Greek monarchs had ever done before. Heck, his successors kept minting his face on coins long after he was dead.

1. Coin of Alexander the Great dating between c. 333 and c. 327 BC, depicting Alexander’s face on the obverse, minted during his reign
2. Statue of Alexander from the Istanbul Archaeological Museum, dating to fourth century BC, within a few decades of Alexander’s death

1. Depiction of Alexander defeating a group of Persians from the Alexander's Sarcophagus, dating to within a few decades of Alexander’s death

He had Kallisthenes of Olynthos, follow him around everywhere and write a detailed account of all his deeds and accomplishments.

Kallisthenes, of course, portrayed Alexander extremely positively and praised him in almost godlike terms.

Multiple of Alexander’s generals later went on to write accounts of Alexander’s campaigns as well, which likewise portrayed him in a strongly positive light,.

Here's how Plutarch describes the "victory":

“This last combat with Porus took off the edge of the Macedonians’ courage and stayed their further progress in India….

Alexander not only offered to Porus to govern his own kingdom as satrap under himself but gave him also the additional territory of various independent tribes whom he had subdued.”
I mean, who gives additional territories to a defeated king, much less an egotist like Alexander?

Now comes an unbiased party's view, Marshal Georgy Zhukov of Russia. According to Zhukov, Alexander in his Indian campaign had fared far worse than Napoleon in Russia. You can read his account here.

rbth.com/blogs/2013/05/…

In his epic, The Life ‘ Exploits of Alexander,a series of translations of the Ethiopic histories of Alexander, E.A.W. Budge, says the same.
According to Budge, in the Battle of Hydaspes the Indians destroyed the majority of Alexander’s cavalry

Realising that if he were to continue fighting he would be completely ruined, the Macedonian requested Puru to stop fighting."

Anyway, Zhukov's view holds correct as he was trying to withdraw, Alexander nearly lost his life in a battle near Mulasthana, and managed to escape thanks to the bravery of his friend Peucestas who sacrificed his life to save Alexander.

Alexander and what was left of his army beat a hasty retreat towards Babylon through Sind only to be decimated. The ‘world conqueror’ died in Babylon, a shadow of his previous self. Alexander's conquest of India is eerily similar to Napolean's conquest of Russia.

In the end, if you like western validation, Alexander defeated Porus. If you don't, its very questionable if such a battle even occurred (lack of records from contemporary literature) and even if it occurred, it was not a victory by any means.

@threadreaderapp unroll

@threadreaderapp unroll