Re: Who won, Alexander the Great or Porus?
If you want to evaluate the question more throughout. You have to go to the sources:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alexand...historiography
Like i said before my hypothesis is based on how he reacted to the unwillingness of his men to continue before he reached India.
Ja Mata Tosainu Sama.
Re: Who won, Alexander the Great or Porus?
The only sources are Greek or western. We have no Indian sources of the battle or the aftermath.
There was an Indo-Greek culture and kingdom. It is apparent at the very least some understanding was reached.
Western sources say that Alexander made Porus a Client King and enlarged his lands.
This seems the basis for the argument. If he lost why leave him as a king and give him more lands.
That seems to be the big sticking point in modern arguments.
It was not the end of the campaign of course as the army continued south securing borders before returning west.
There would be little need of that had he met with defeat. Obviously they were cementing gains not abandoning the area to a victorious enemy or doubtful friend.
Education: that which reveals to the wise,
and conceals from the stupid,
the vast limits of their knowledge.
Mark Twain
Re: Who won, Alexander the Great or Porus?
To add, they genuinely thought they would reach the Ocean (as in the end of the world's land) in a matter of days...Originally Posted by Fisherking
It is a matter of debate how much of the mutiny is true, face-saving propaganda or whatever. Any sound military commander would've realised that his position in India couldn't be maintained with the available resources. (local Brahmins were also raising revolts in basically every single village)
The march in the desert was supposed to be the quickest way out. Especially because the land army was to meet up with the fleet, but they didn't failed to do so. Or at least that is how the history that has come down to us goes...
Still Alexandros had to resort to shows of leadership by refusing water, which doesn't seem to imply punishment, but real logistical troubles. Unless it is yet another face-saving episode...
Moreover back in Babylonia, plans were being made for naval and amphibious operations, due to the new gathered geographical informations. So a possible "Indian re-match" might've been on the eventual new campaigns...
As for who won and all their possible labels, tactical/political/strategic and blah blah blah. To me that's all moot XD
Last edited by Arjos; 01-17-2014 at 10:49.
Re: Who won, Alexander the Great or Porus?
Supposedly, Alex was bruiting a Western campaign at the time of his death. Not sure of it, of course.
It is certainly possible that we have not heard "the whole story" of Porus and Alexander....but it strikes me as difficult to get that many 1000s of Greeks, Persians, and Macedonians to all "play along" with the official story. Not to say that there wasn't some "off the record" deal-making involved (seems likely) but that something of the "official" story had to ring true or we would have counter-accounts to deal with. Especially as we know the successors vied for prestige with one another following Alex's death -- a believable alternative story about how they "stayed true in India when others drew back" would have been used.
"The only way that has ever been discovered to have a lot of people cooperate together voluntarily is through the free market. And that's why it's so essential to preserving individual freedom.” -- Milton Friedman
"The urge to save humanity is almost always a false front for the urge to rule." -- H. L. Mencken
Re: Who won, Alexander the Great or Porus?
Sounds to me like there are only two choices, either accept the Greek (biassed, but not necessarily lying) accounts, or speculate. I wondered if the Indian patriotic point of view I've seen on the web had any firm basis, but it looks like it is biassed speculation (but not necessarily wrong).
Doesn't matter too much I guess. Alexander withdrew regardless of what happened at the battle.
Last edited by Brandy Blue; 01-17-2014 at 23:28.
In those simple times there was a great wonder and mystery in life. Man walked in fear and solemnity, with Heaven very close above his head, and Hell below his very feet. God's visible hand was everywhere, in the rainbow and the comet, in the thunder and the wind. The Devil too raged openly upon the earth; he skulked behind the hedge-rows in the gloaming; he laughed loudly in the night-time; he clawed the dying sinner, pounced on the unbaptized babe, and twisted the limbs of the epileptic. A foul fiend slunk ever by a man's side and whispered villainies in his ear, while above him there hovered an angel of grace . . .
Arthur Conan Doyle
Re: Who won, Alexander the Great or Porus?
If alexander could win that battle, all India would be part of macedon empire, like Anatolia, Iran and Afghanistan. So, my vote goes to Porus.
Re: Who won, Alexander the Great or Porus?
Beating one king in one battle would not necessarily secure Porus' kingdom for Alexander, still less all of India. Do you really think that richer and more powerful kings further into India would have lined up and tamely paid Alexander homage just like that? For that matter, did Alexander conquer all of Persia in a single battle? No.
But hey, your vote belongs to you. Who am I to tell you how to use it?
Last edited by Brandy Blue; 01-18-2014 at 00:58.
In those simple times there was a great wonder and mystery in life. Man walked in fear and solemnity, with Heaven very close above his head, and Hell below his very feet. God's visible hand was everywhere, in the rainbow and the comet, in the thunder and the wind. The Devil too raged openly upon the earth; he skulked behind the hedge-rows in the gloaming; he laughed loudly in the night-time; he clawed the dying sinner, pounced on the unbaptized babe, and twisted the limbs of the epileptic. A foul fiend slunk ever by a man's side and whispered villainies in his ear, while above him there hovered an angel of grace . . .
Arthur Conan Doyle
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks