The Invasion of India by Alexander the Great as described by Arrian, Q. Curtius, Diodoros, Plutarch and Justin: Being Translations of such portions of the Works of these and other Classical Authors as describe Alexander's Campaigns in Afghanistan, the Panjâb, Sindh, Gedrosia and KarmaniaMcCrindle, John Watson
History
The Invasion of India by Alexander the Great as described by Arrian, Q. Curtius, Diodoros, Plutarch and Justin: Being Translations of such portions of the Works of these and other Classical Authors as describe Alexander's Campaigns in Afghanistan, the Panjâb, Sindh, Gedrosia and Karmania
McCrindle, John Watson
Alexander, the Great, 356 B.C.-323 B.C.; India -- History -- To 324 B.C. -- Sources
It was early in the year 326 B.C. that Alexander, fresh from the conquest
of the fierce tribes of northern Afghânistân, led his army over into the
plains of India by a bridge of boats, with which he had spanned the Indus
a little below its junction with the Kabul river.[1] He remained in the
country not more than twenty months all told, yet in that brief space he
reduced the Panjâb as far as the Satlej, and the whole of the spacious
valley of the lower Indus, downwards to the ocean itself. He would even
have penetrated to the Ganges had his army consented to follow him, and,
in the opinion of Sandrokottos, would have succeeded in adding to his
empire the vast regions through which that river flows. The rapidity
with which he achieved his actual conquests in the country appears all
the more surprising when we take into account that at every stage of
his advance he encountered a most determined resistance. The people
were not only of a most martial temperament, but were at the same time
inured to arms; and had they but been united and led by such a capable
commander as Pôros, the Macedonian army was doomed to utter destruction.
Alexander, with all his matchless strategy, could not have averted such
a catastrophe; for what is the record of his Indian campaigns? We find
that the toughest of all his battles was that which he fought on the
banks of the Hydaspes against Pôros; that he had hot work in overcoming
the resistance of the Kathaians before the walls of Sangala; that he
was wounded near to death in his assault upon the Mallian stronghold;
and that in the valley of the Indus he could only overpower the
opposition instigated by the Brahmans by means of wholesale massacres
and executions. It may hence be safely inferred that if Alexander had
found India united in arms to withstand his aggression, the star of his
good fortune would have culminated with his passage of the Indus. But
he found, on the contrary, the political condition of the country when
he entered it eminently favourable to his designs. The regions of the
Indus and its great tributary streams were then divided into separate
states—some under kingly and others under republican governments, but
all alike prevented by their mutual jealousies and feuds from acting
in concert against a common enemy, and therefore all the more easy to
overcome. Alexander, in pursuance of his usual policy, sought to secure
the permanence of his Indian conquests by founding cities,[2] which he
strongly fortified and garrisoned with large bodies of troops to overawe
and hold in subjection the tribes in their neighbourhood. The system of
government also which he established was the same as that which he had
provided for his other subject provinces, the civil administration being
entrusted to native chiefs, while the executive and military authority
was wielded by Macedonian officers.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account