| 
            
            Braveheart Porus
             
             
            
            Alexander unhorses Porus. British Library Collection 
            
            Jagjit Puri 
            puts together various accounts by Greek and Indian historians in an 
            effort to answer who emerged victorious in the battle between 
            Alexander and Porus 
            
            Punjab 
            has a distinctive culture that distinguishes it from the living 
            patterns of other places. Its indigenous traits gradually mixed with 
            those brought by invaders and resulted in a vibrant language, 
            lifestyle and civic society that make the region unique. It was 
            the only region where the ever-advancing army of Alexander the great 
            found one of its toughest resistances when it met with the army of 
            Porus. The morale of Alexander’s army was completely shattered by a 
            singular act of brave men of Porus, who tied themselves with their 
            chariots so not have any choice of deserting. Alexander could thus 
            go only as far as the river Hyphasis (modern Beas). At this point 
            his army, it is generally believed, rebelled and refused to go 
            further. Most 
            historians agree that it was the brave fight put up in Punjab by 
            Porus’ army that disheartened Alexander’s army. 
            However, there are no known early records of this battle in the 
            Indian history. Most of the accounts are by Greek historians like 
            Juslin, Plutarch, Diodoros, Curtius and Arrian. Most of 
            these accounts are believed to be subjective by modern Indian 
            historians, as many believe that Alexander was not real victor of 
            this battle. So who 
            really won the battle of Hydaspes (Jhelum 
            as called by ancient Greek historians) in 325 B.C.? Was it Alexander 
            the Great, or was it Porus or Raja Puru as he was known in his 
            kingdom. 
            According to the authors of Cast and Tribes of Northern India 
            (P-1839) Manu had four sons and one daughter. Manu’s daughter’s name 
            was Ila. Her fifth descendant was Puru who is credited with starting 
            Puru Vansh. The Purus ruled over a territory near Taksila. They were 
            independent and kind kings. Porus, is the most renowned descendent 
            of the Purus in history, known for his epic battle against Alexander 
            the Great. But 
            several ethnic groups in the Indian subcontinent have tried to claim 
            Porus as their own ancestor. Many academicians believe that he was a 
            Yadava or Yaduvanshi king. Col James Tod was the proponent of this 
            view (Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, pp 283), which was 
            also held by Ishwari Prashad, another renowned historian. While 
            experts may differ over the dynasty of everyone agrees he was a 
            great warrior. Thus accounts of Greek historians that he was 
            defeated are greeted with scepticism. This is 
            an account recorded by Arrian, a Greek historian. "The 
            Alexander-Porus’ battle has 30,000 foot soldiers and 4,000 cavalry 
            taking part, while       300 chariots and 200 elephants were also 
            used (Arrian, The Campaigns of Alexander, 275). As many as 20,000 of 
            the Indian soldiers and 3000 of the cavalry were killed in this 
            battle (Arrian 279)." But in 
            the few hours that the battle was fought, it would have been 
            impossible for the Greek Army to slaughter sheep in those numbers 
            much less soldiers of Porus. The Greeks were also not in possession 
            of an incendiary device allowing them to kill such large number of 
            soldiers in the estimated hours the battle took place. Without 
            doubt, Arrian’s account is not trustworthy. There are several 
            similar descriptions of the Battle of Jhelum, all authored by Greeks 
            historians. (See the Invasion of India by Alexander the Great as 
            described by Arrian, Q Curtius, Diodoros, Plutarch and Justin, first 
            published in 1896, reprinted by Infuse Publications, 1992.) There 
            is no comprehensive Indian narration of this massive bloody 
            conflict. Alexander, according to Greek sources, was finally able to 
            defeat Porus by resorting to a cunning manoeuvre, involving a 
            surprise crossing of the river. The light-armed Macedonian cavalry, 
            mounted on horses, created panic among the slow-moving ranks of 
            Porus’ army riding elephants. The chaotic elephants proceeded to 
            stampede their own infantry. The 6.7-feet tall and handsome Porus 
            was captured. He had received nine grievous wounds and could barely 
            stand, but when brought before Alexander and asked what treatment he 
            expected, Porus declared boldly: "As a king should treat a king." 
            Impressed by his valour, Alexander let Porus retain his possessions. 
            Let us now re-evaluate the battle between Porus and Alexander, which 
            is popularly known as the Battle of Jhelum. 
            Historian Buddha Prakash has analysed the inconsistencies between 
            the accounts given by Juslin, Plutarch, Diodoros, Curtius and Arrian. 
            He has observed, "The accounts of the Greek writers about the end of 
            the battle are full of confusion and contradictions. What is clear 
            from these accounts is that Alexander and Porus made peace and 
            became friends. From the unanimous remarks of these authors that 
            Porus was reinstated in his state and the territories conquered by 
            Alexander in India [That is territories other than those ruled by 
            Porus] were added to his dominion. (Buddha Prakash, Political and 
            Social Movements in Ancient Punjab (1976) 171, 310). The 
            author further points out that it is evident from Arrian’s narrative 
            that Alexander took the initiative in opening talk with Porus, who 
            was reluctant to have any talks with Alexander he rebuffed his 
            envoys and emissaries many times. But Alexander showed so much 
            perseverance that ultimately, through the instrumentality of an old 
            friend, Porus agreed to meet him. He zealously preserved his dignity 
            and status in his talk with Alexander. The outcome of the peace 
            parleys was an enlargement of the kingdom of Porus by the surrender 
            of a large chunk of territory by Alexander". (Buddha Prakash, 
            Porus 678). These 
            facts emerge from most historical accounts. 1. Alexander encountered 
            stiff resistance; 2. Porus retained his kingdom and remained its 
            king after the battle. In fact, Alexander even ceded some territory 
            to him. But a 
            few questions remain unanswered. Why was a defeated king (Porus) was 
            given an even larger kingdom after his defeat by Alexander? Did 
            Porus have some singular advantage, despite being taken prisoner, as 
            narrated? 
             
            
            Alexander the Great Bust. 
            
            British
            
            
            Museum Also 
            after the confrontation with Porus the invading army was so 
            overwhelmed by the courage of the Porus’ army that it finally 
            dictated Alexander’s retreat from Indus. An account by Greek 
            historian Plutarch confirms this view. He writes:- As for 
            the Macedonians, however, their struggle with Porus blunted their 
            courage and stayed   their further advance into India. For having 
            had all they could do to repulse an enemy who mustered only twenty 
            thousand infantry and two thousand horse, they violently opposed 
            Alexander when he insisted on crossing the river Ganges also, the 
            width of which, as they learned, was thirty-two furlongs, its depth 
            a hundred fathoms, while its banks on the further side were covered 
            with multitudes of men-at-arms and horsemen and elephants. 
            —Plutarch, Vita Alexandri, 62. While 
            both Porus and Alexander have been acknowledged as great warriors in 
            history but who emerged victorious in the battle of Jhelum remains 
            unanswered. |