Dilemma at Pakistan’s National Museum: save it or trash it?

One example of many is the looting of some 395 rare artifacts that had been seized in 2012 as they were underway to Faisalabad, Pakistan. The experts claim that they belong to the Gandhara Civilization (see: Old Buddhist complex discovered in Pakistan) and may have originated from Taxila and Mehrgarh both in modern Pakistan. 

Looting and smuggling is of all times and happens everywhere – unfortunately! We praise ourselves when the police track down the culprits and their precious cargo in order to return it either to its initial finding place or to the nearby museum where, we assume, the unique artifacts will be taken care of. 

[Picture from Archaeology News Network]

Sadly, in the present case, such a straightforward assumption is far from reality as it involves the National Museum of Karachi. It has transpired recently that hundreds of artifacts and dozens of archaeological sites have been seriously neglected by the country’s authorities responsible for the preservation of antiquities. Among these objects are five sculptures of Buddha heads, three of them standing four feet tall and two about three feet. Instead of being carefully studied, cataloged and stored away, they have been found on top of a pile of garbage at said Museum of Karachi. 

This clearly illustrates the incompetence and carelessness of the government officials in place. Lying there in plain sight for many months, exposed to wind and weather, there is no excuse for such negligence! Antiquity robbers and looters are pointed with the finger and highly condemned, whereas government officials are able to get away with such a crime – because it is a crime! 

It has been reported by museum employees who want to remain anonymous that rare treasures from the Indus Valley and similar civilizations have also found their way to the museum’s dump site. The director, however, claims that a total 100,000 objects in stone, wood, metal and even paper are carefully checked and stored; adding that every single piece inside and outside the museum building has been carefully recorded. The museum’s most valuable piece is the statue of the King Priest from Mohenjo-daro, and which the Director says is safely stored away. It is rarely on display, although copies may be shown. 

Whatever is happening in Karachi remains obscure, to say the least, but there is no smoke without a fire and I find it extremely upsetting when our heritage is mistreated in such a manner!

The complex site of Taxila

Until now, I pictured Taxila as one big city as it is in modern times. What threw me off was that ancient sources talked about the three ancient cities of Bhir, Sirkap as well as Sirsukh instead of Taxila. Meanwhile, modern archaeology has established that Taxila is composed of 18 separate sites of great cultural value. This demanded a closer and more in-depth study of the matter. 

From the 6^th century BC onward, the city of Taxila was known by the Persian Achaemenid kings, who turned it into an important hub on their Royal Road from Persepolis to Central Asia. For Alexander, Taxila was the first major city he encountered on this way into India. It also was the residence of King Taxiles, who came to meet him while he was still in Sogdiana. He had promised to join his forces to those of Alexander but he died before they could meet. True to his father’s word, Omphis (also called Mophis or Ambhi) received Alexander in Taxila (see: Alexander crossing the Indus at Ohind). 

We will recall that Omphis had provided supplies to Hephaistion and the Macedonians as they were bridging the Indus River. When both kings met outside the city, Omphis  handed his fifty-six elephants over to Alexander, together with an impressive herd of livestock including 3,000 bulls dressed up for sacrifices. 

The site of Bhir is actually the place where this meeting took place in 326 BC since Omphis’ palace stood on top of a mound that carried that name. This same location was later occupied by Chandragupta Maurya (see: Was Chandragupta inspired by Alexander?) and his grandson, Asoka. As the latter introduced Buddhism in the Gandhara region, the first Buddhist monastery was erected at this very spot at some time in the 3^rd century BC. By the 2^nd century AD, this construction was replaced by the Dharmarajika Stupa, remains of which still are visible. 

With Alexander, Greek knowledge and science reached Taxila. Here, philosophers and the like met and developed science, mathematics and astronomy. 

Sirkap emerged at a later date. After Alexander’s conquest, the eastern part of his empire was ruled by the Seleucid kings till about 250 BC. By then, power was taken over by the self-proclaimed King Diodotus I of Bactria, who laid the foundations of what became the Greco-Bactrian Empire. These Bactrian Greeks advanced into the Gandhara region and erected their well-planned city of Sirkap as part of Taxila. For the next five hundred years, Greek remained the lingua franca and the influence of Greek art and beliefs lived on (see: Unique Hellenistic heritage in Pakistan). 

This link is confirmed by the Greek philosopher Apollonius of Tyana (15-100 AD) who described Taxila as being rich with Greek type of constructions. This happened in the 1^st century AD and it is generally accepted that he was talking about Sirkap.

As a result of the heavy traffic on the Silk Road that connected Central Asia to China, business flourished while the population mingled with the Scythians, the Parthians and later the Kushans. Besides silk and other precious goods, Buddhism also spread steadily in the wake of Buddhist monks travelling to China, Korea and Japan. It was under the Kushan emperors that a new form of art blossomed blending classical Greek expression with local art forms. This became known as the Gandhara Art, which produced the most remarkable statues of Buddha and Bodhisattvas (see: Indo-Greek art or the influence of Hellenism on Buddhist art). 

One of the oldest Stupas is the so-called Round Stupa from the 1^st century AD. The largest sanctuary is the Apsidal Temple; measuring 70x40m with a square nave and several rooms used by the Buddhist monks. It also presented a building in an apsidal shape – hence its name. It may have been decorated by a Greek artist but the earthquake of 30 AD destroyed most of the building. 

Of particular interest in the Double-Headed Eagle Stupa which displayed pilasters of Greek design with Corinthian columns. It has a strange combination of a Greek temple and a Hindu shrine. The ensemble is crowned with a double-headed eagle as originally found in Babylon. The theory is that the idea spread to Scythia and was introduced to the Punjab by the Saka rulers. 

The large Dharmarajika Stupa already mentioned in Bhir, was situated not far from Sirkap. It was built with the sole purpose of housing relics of the Buddha and was surrounded by several monastic buildings. 

The most recent city is Sirsukh, which was founded by the Kushans after 80 AD. King Kanishka had decided to abandon Sirkap and to build his own new city in a typical Central Asian style. The city was surrounded by a strong fortification wall that was almost five kilometers long and more than six meters thick. Its particularity was that the face of these walls was covered with diaper or diamond shaped masonry. Until now, the city proper could not be investigated properly because today it is buried deep underneath the low richly irrigated land. Sirsukh was completely destroyed by the Huns who invaded the Punjab around 500 AD.

Indo-Greek blacksmith discovered in Pakistan

Peshawar is the first city in Pakistan that Hephaistion and Perdiccas reached with about half the Macedonians as they proceeded east from the Khyber Pass to build a bridge over the Indus River. Alexander, with the other half of his troops, marched north along the Kunar/Chitral River to take the Aornos Rock (modern Pir Sar).

[Picture from the Archaeology News Network - Credit : Dawn]

It is close to Peshawar that Pakistani archaeologists found the remains of iron workshops, dating them to the 2^nd century BC, a period known as the Indo-Greek. They base their statement on tools retrieved from the site, like iron melting pots, molds, trowels, knives, and drills that were used to make bows and arrows, daggers, and swords. The archaeologists have also unearthed remains of furnaces and grinding stones, all leading to the labeling of the site as a blacksmith.

Excavations have also revealed coins from the Indo-Greek period, but without further details. It would have been interesting, however, to know, for instance, the name of the king(s) depicted on these coins in order to narrow down the time frame.

Anyway, it is great to gather every bit of information about the Indo-Greek period since so little is available due to the fact that this empire has not been subject to systematic excavations.

Punjab, Land of Five Rivers

One close look at the map will make you realize that Punjab is an enormous alluvial plain that counts far more than the five main rivers. Situated at the foot of the Himalayas, it covers a surface of over 50,000 square kilometers. Its watershed is fed by snow and glacial meltwater from the world’s highest peaks, like the Karakorum, the Hindu Kush, and the Himalayan Mountains.

The Achaemenids had only conquered the lands west of the Indus, meaning that once Alexander crossed this mighty river, he entered uncharted territory. Modern historians do not spend much time following the king’s march further east and his countless river crossings but instead focus on battlefields, sieges, and other ruthless fights. However, each and every crossing, including the numerous tributaries, is an enormous logistic enterprise. It makes you wonder how many of these rivers, streams, and waterways the Macedonians had to cross by any means available. That alone is a gigantic task!

After taking the Aornos Rock, Alexander headed for the Indus River, where Hephaistion had worked hard to build a pontoon bridge across the river as well as a fleet partly new and partly reassembling the elements which had been carried along. The crossing of the Indus took place at Ohind, modern Hund, in north-western Pakistan (see: Alexander crossing the Indus at Ohind).

Once his troops reached the opposite bank, Alexander headed for the capital Taxila at the junction of the major trade routes from Bactria, Kashmir, and the Ganges valley. This was the realm of Omphis, the son of King Taxiles, who had visited Alexander while he was still in Bactria and died before he arrived in India. Besides sending provisions to Hephaistion during the construction works, King Omphis welcomed Alexander with 200 silver talents, 3,000 oxen, 10,000 sheep, 30 elephants, and 700 Indian cavalry and 5.000 infantry.

The next river Alexander had to tackle was the Hydaspes (modern Jhelum), where the famous battle against King Porus took place (see: The Battle of the Hydaspes and the genius of Alexander), a masterpiece and a genius enterprise that was never surpassed.

As casually mentioned by Arrian, Alexander marched on through the populous region, taking some thirty-seven towns and many villages as the natives surrendered without much protest. Their lands were graciously handed over to King Porus.

The next obstacle was the Acesines River (modern Chenab) which was so broad and swift that Ptolemy found it necessary to mention it in his biography used by Arrian. It is hard to simply imagine a three kilometers wide river and how much one could see of the opposite bank. The Macedonians used boats to get across, but navigation among the rocks was a true challenge, and many were broken up, and the men were swept away by the current. The floats for the baggage and horses fared much better as they were far more shallow than the boats, but the trip was nevertheless one more logistic challenge.

The Hydraotes River (modern Ravi) was another major river on Alexander’s path, and as he marched through these lands, most Indian tribes surrendered without resistance. Those who refused were, of course, taken by force. Sangala was such an exception (see: The siege of Sangala). The tribes nearby the city had sought and found refuge inside its strong walls. Eventually, Sangala was taken by an assault in which up to 17,000 Indians were killed while over 70,000 were taken prisoner.

[Map from Wikimedia by Apuldram - Own work, CC BY-SA 3.0]

The last of the five major rivers was the Hyphasis River (modern Beas). Here, the Macedonians bluntly refused to follow Alexander anywhere closer to the edge of the world despite his eloquent and fiery speech. This was a severe blow to the king’s ego and pride, but he issued the order to retreat after three days.

Obviously, Alexander withdrew in style, and after building twelve altars (see: Alexander erected twelve altars on the banks of the Hyphasis) to thank the gods for having led him so far as conqueror and leaving an impressive memorial to his own accomplishments, he turned around having to cross the Hyphasis, Hydraotes, and Acesines once again. He sailed down the Hydaspes to ultimately reach the Indus River.

Some scholars consider Alexander’s experience in Punjab as useless and a waste of time, but it is hard to believe that he would do anything without reason. He would not endanger the life of his Macedonians lightly, and he certainly would not have invested nine months of this life on a sole whim. Judging Alexander’s conduct with today’s eyes is impossible. Besides, we only have sparse historical documentation to support his decision-making.

The edge of the world was not reached

After the Battle of the Hydaspes, Alexander proceeded deeper into Punjab, literally meaning The Land of Five Rivers. He had already made it across the Indus and the Hydaspes. However, there were still the Acesines River (modern Chenab), the Hydraotes River (modern Ravi), and the Hyphasis River (modern Beas) to tackle.

We know he had excellent scouting parties and always relied on local people's knowledge. Still, I can't help wondering if the messages were interpreted or understood correctly here in India.

The idea first occurred when Alexander was confronted with the monsoon rains, which he had underestimated as transpires from historical sources. Rain was, of course, not going to stop him, but these rains were far heavier and more disruptive than anything he knew or expected. The fact that the monsoons were seasonal recurrences escaped the attention of Alexander – or, to say the least, he did not take the matter as seriously as he should. We know that Nearchus was marooned in Pattala for several weeks before having the favorable winds to set sail and meet up with Alexander along the coast of the Gedrosian Desert is one such surprising timing mistake. This is very much unlike Alexander, and the question should be asked whether he really knew or understood the phenomena.

Crossing Punjab, a succession of five mighty rivers swollen by the melting snows from the Himalayas may have been tuned down by the interpreters, the locals, or both. Alexander did not give it the attention required, which cannot be ascribed to negligence. It could be explained that after witnessing countless rivers, among which the Nile, the Euphrates, and Tigris, and the Oxus and the Jaxartes – all major fast-flowing rivers in their own right – it was hard to imagine anything more threatening. Indeed, what could be worse? For instance, in Punjab, he had to deal with a succession of five such mighty and extremely wide rivers. For example, it can be noted that at the points where the army crossed these wild waters, the Indus was about 500 meters wide and the Acesines nearly 3,000 meters!

The Macedonians, by now, were seasoned troops functioning according to a well-oiled discipline whether they were on the march, fighting off some enemy, setting up camp, or crossing a river. They just did it, inspired and encouraged by their king. But eight years of constant warfare had scarred the souls of even the most faithful troops.

The Hyphasis River was one river too many, and the Macedonians stopped in their tracks, bluntly refusing to continue. As usual, Alexander fell back on his excellent oratory skills and tried to rekindle his men's enthusiasm by reminding them of the past glories since the day they had left Greece and all the riches they had accumulated since. They were now so close to the world's edge, and soon all of Asia would be theirs. To Alexander's amazement, his words fell on barren ground and were blown away by the wind. A painful and deadly silence followed his fiery speech.

[Picture from Alexander movie by Oliver Stone]

Coenus, who lately had led the significant cavalry charge at the Hydaspes, was pushed forward by the troops to formulate their resentment. He appropriately reminded his king that many soldiers who had come across the Hellespont eight years ago had been sent home as invalids. Others no longer fit for service had been left behind in newly founded cities. Others still had died in combat or from disease, and the survivors were often in shattered health as they all were marked by years of battle wounds and scars.

In fact, I think that the Macedonian spirit died on the killing ground along the Hydaspes. It had been such an outrageous carnage for so little profit as there were no grand cities to be plundered like previously in Persia. Besides, Alexander had given Porus his empire back, depriving his men of the incentive to face the next challenge or engage in another battle. The continuous downpour of the monsoon rains and the fanatical resistance of the Indians cannot have improved their mood. The army squarely refused to march on and demanded to return home. Coenus' words were received with loud applause, a sign of their far-reaching power.

Deeply offended, Alexander withdrew to his tent, licking his wound, no doubt. The non-negotiable decision of his army seriously hurt his ego and pride. When he emerged from his quarters three days later, he gave the orders to retreat, much to his dismay. This happened in September 326 BC.

It makes me wonder how much, in the end, the Battle of the Hydaspes was a victory for Alexander. His men had given their all, and they had nothing more to offer except love for their king.

Crossing the Euphrates and Tigris Rivers

River crossings are generally considered mere accessory events in Alexander's campaign, but they are widely underestimated. On their way east, the Macedonians had to cross countless rivers, streams, and rivulets. Each of these, however, came with its own challenges: some were mere sandy flats while others were filled with rocks; some banks were steep and slippery while others were marshy and swampy; some streams were lazy water ribbons while others were torrential white waters; and some were hazardous while others were placid.

Over the years, Alexander crossed many significant rivers, among which the most important are the Danube, the Nile, the Euphrates and the Tigris, the Oxus and the Jaxartes, and finally, the Indus, including the entire Punjab, i.e., the Hydaspes (Jhelum), the Acesines (Chenab), the Hydraotes (Ravi), and the Hyphasis (Beas). This time, let us concentrate on the Euphrates and the Tigris, major barriers to Alexander's march through Mesopotamia.

In mid-July 331 BC, Alexander sent Hephaistion ahead to build two bridges over the Euphrates. Such crossing points were well-known in antiquity, and Alexander's intelligence must have provided the necessary information. The most amazing part of such expeditions is the logistics involved. It is said that Alexander transported his ships in separate elements from Phoenicia to be reassembled on the banks of the Euphrates. Even in a straight line from the eastern Mediterranean, let's say from Antioch-on-the-Orontes (Antakya) to Thapsacus (Carchemish), we are talking about a distance of more than 200 km, implying that he must have planned this colossal move early on, maybe even while he was still at Tyre. As always, his invaluable scouts did a thorough reconnaissance job, for Alexander could not take chances to expose Hephaistion and his advanced forces to enemy attacks on the way. Even more admirable is the timing of the entire operation since the bridges had to be completed by the time Alexander and the bulk of his army arrived. 

Hephaistion's forces included carpenters and engineers who directed the hauling of the ship's parts, but also enough soldiers to do the foraging and to withstand any unexpected attack by local tribes or those people still faithful to the Persians. The crossing point was near Thapsacus, where the river was about 800 meters wide. Unfortunately, the river banks are now flooded by yet another dam further upstream, and archaeologists can't investigate this in any way. 

Meanwhile, King Darius knew that Alexander had to cross the river. He sent his most experienced general, Mazaeus, with instructions to burn the crops ahead of the enemy route. Although the harvest had already taken place, this order was carried out, and little was left to burn. Besides, this policy had no effect since Alexander took a more northerly route which Darius had not expected.

We know that Mazaeus arrived on the eastern bank of the Euphrates and watched Hephaistion's construction progress for several days. Hephaistion stopped his operation short of the opposite river bank to avoid seeing the end of his bridges destroyed by Mazaeus. There was little else to do for Mazaeus but to wait, but when Alexander appeared with the bulk of his army, he turned around and left to further execute his orders of scorching the earth.

By now, it must have been mid-August, and soon the two bridges were completed. This means that Hephaistion accomplished his task in a maximum of six weeks times – speaking of engineering prowess! Of course, these were no bridges in the true sense of the word but boats and rafts tied together with ropes and chains. A walkway of planks was placed over the boats, and the passage was created to move the nearly 50,000 troops across, as well as the thousands of horses. It seems it took the army five days to cross the Euphrates.

Alexander led his troops further east, and on the road, he learned from spies that Darius was encamped on the Tigris River. As an army is most vulnerable when crossing a river, Alexander force-marched his troops and reached the Tigris two weeks later. Here he found no sign of Darius and nobody to stop his army. The obvious fording location has been pinned at Abu Dhahir, near the Persian Royal Road.

There was no need to build a floating bridge over the Tigris River since its waters were shallow, although fast-flowing and men could simply wade through. Well, this is the simple version that most historians like us to believe, but Diodorus tells an entirely different story. According to him, Mazaeus had decided that the river could not be crossed at the time because it ran too deep and its current was too swift. Consequently, the Persian general did not find it necessary to guard the crossing. So, when Alexander arrived at the ford, the water was above a man's breast, and the current swept away those who entered the river. At this stage, Alexander ordered all his men to lock arms with each other and "to construct a sort of bridge out of the compact union of their persons."

Yet the most vivid and perilous report is given by Curtius. He mentions that Alexander cautiously sent a few of his cavalry to test the river. The water rose up to their horses' flanks and when they were mid-channel to their necks. "Tigris" in Persian means "arrow," and the river owes its name to its current running as fast as an arrow. Alexander ordered his troops in formation with the infantry in the center. The men had to carry their weapons above their heads as they waded through the river with great difficulty. Like in a battle formation, the cavalry was posted on either side where the horses upstream would break the strong current, and the cavalrymen downstream would catch those soldiers who lost footage and were swept away. Alexander directed the operation like on a battlefield, pointing his troops in this or that direction and encouraging them to move on. They all landed safely without any loss of life, only some material losses.

Once one dry land, Alexander gave his men a well-deserved rest. This was at the time of the moon eclipse that occurred on 20 September, and it has been recorded that Alexander sacrificed to the Sun, the Moon, and the Earth.

[Bottom picture is from World Archaeology]

The Hippodamian plan, not so Greek after all

Where does an idea originate? Who is the first to “invent” this or that concept? In our modern world, we often hear that the true inventor is not the one who claims the invention to be his, either because the initial creator did not have the means to promote his idea or because he simply didn’t protect it with a copyright.

In antiquity, copyright did not exist, of course, and ideas traveled back and forth in the baggage of the merchants or in the minds of the craftsmen sold as slaves or moved from their homeland for whatever reason.

The grid plan of city building is largely attributed to Hippodamus of Miletus, a Greek mathematician, meteorologist, philosopher, and physician from the 5^th century BC, who also was known as a town planner. He planned the building of many cities around the Mediterranean, the first of which could be the harbor of Piraeus. He also was involved in the reconstruction of Miletus after the Persian destruction, to be followed by the construction of cities like Olynthus and Pella in Greece. His ideal city would be inhabited by 10,000 male citizens, which would correspond to a total of 50,000 people including women, children, and slaves. It would typically have a large central area that soon became the agora, surrounded by neighborhoods of 240 m2 blocks of houses with an upper floor and separated by a wall, all facing south.

Digging a little further into history, it turns out the layout of Babylon was equally following the same grid plan with right-angle streets and the city must have looked very familiar to Alexander when he arrived there in 331 BC. Although Babylon is much older, the city was rebuilt by the Assyrians who made it the capital of their Neo-Babylonian Empire between 609 and 539 BC. King Nebuchadnezzar II, who reigned from 605 to 562 BC, added the famous ziggurat and the Ishtar Gate, one of the eight entries to the city. The Hanging Gardens, which counted among the Seven Wonders of the Ancient World, were also constructed by him. Based on the available descriptions of Babylon, the grid plan was already known in Asia over a century before Hippodamus claimed his “invention”.

Yet, there is more to the ancestry of the so-called ideal Greek city layout. We have to go back 4,500 years in time and all the way to the Indus Valley where cities like Mohenjo-Daro and Harappa were founded using the very same layout. These cities had a central agora, large public baths, a large central well, and many small wells serving individual houses or a cluster of houses; the sewage was led to drains running under the main streets and many houses had their own bathroom. Both cities were large settlements belonging to the Indus Valley Civilization and located on the banks of the now dried-up Ghaggar-Hakra River, west of the Indus River.

With the coming of Islam and the general decline of the Middle Ages, we in the West lost this marvelously well-organized city planning till it was revived in the 20^th century all over the globe, from Asia to the Americas. Pending whatever discoveries will be made in the future, for now, Hippodamus’ “invention” is just some two thousand years older than generally accepted.

[Picture of Mohenjo-Daro from Assignment Point]

Alexander crossing the Indus at Ohind

In spite of the continuous tribal wars in Pakistan, archaeologists seem to say that they were able to carry out excavations at the village of Hund (Ohind in antiquity) in the north-western region of Kyber-Pakhtunkhwa, in modern Pakistan – the “land of the five rivers”. It is said that Alexander the Great stayed at this village before moving to Taxila. This is a known fact, but I wonder how far there is truth to today’s excavation story (see this article published in The Statesman in March 2016), as it sounds rather vague.

The town of Hund (also known as Odabandapura) is where Alexander crossed the Indus River in 327 BC over a bridge built by Hephaistion, who, together with Perdiccas, was sent ahead with part of the army to subdue the lands on their route. They had marched from the Cophen River (modern Kabul River) through the Khyber Pass down to the Indus, taking Peucelaotis in the Peshawar Valley on the way. Hephaistion had constructed a fleet of thirty-oared galleys and a pontoon bridge of linked boats spanning the Indus River, which at this point is at least 400 to 500 meters wide. This operation is not to be underestimated, for although the bridge was constructed far upstream in the Punjab region, the river is fed by snow and glacial meltwater from the Karakorum, the Hindu Kush, and the Himalaya Mountains and its annual flow is known to be two times faster than that of the Nile or three times that of the Euphrates and the Tigris combined.

Alexander, together with Craterus and Coenus in the meantime, campaigned against the Aspasians and the Assacenes north of that road to consolidate their rear in order to avoid being cut off from their line of supplies. Both Macedonian units united near modern Hund, from where the entire army crossed the Indus River.

Beyond the preparations for the crossing, little is told about the traverse itself. The local king, Omphis, had provided supplies to the Macedonians working at the river, but he had not met any of them in person. Omphis (also called Mophis in some sources) was the son of Taxiles, whom Alexander had met whilst in Sogdiana. King Taxiles had promised to join his forces to those of Alexander in his upcoming Indian campaign. After his father’s death, Omphis had sent notice to Alexander inquiring whether he would approve him reigning in the interim at Taxila or if, on the contrary, he preferred to appoint a viceroy pending his arrival – a gesture that Alexander highly appreciated. For the time being, Omphis could continue to rule but should not yet carry the title of Taxiles, as was reserved for the king in power, till Alexander’s arrival.

When the Macedonian army reached Taxila, one of the smaller states in Punjab,  they were met by Omphis, pleased to come forth with his army and elephants. Watching the approach, Alexander became suspicious because the Indian king’s display looked as if he was ready for battle with his elephants distributed evenly between the formations of soldiers. To be on the safe side, Alexander immediately sounded the call to arms, and the entire army took their position with the cavalry deployed at the wings, all facing the foe in silence. Noticing this sudden change, Omphis realized the impact his approach had had on the Macedonians.

Omphis ordered his men to raise their lances and stop their advance. He himself moved forward to meet Alexander, escorted by only a few of his cavalry. Alexander followed suit, and when both men met face to face, it became immediately clear that this was a friendly meeting. The expression on their faces said it all, pending the arrival of an interpreter.

When the interpreter arrived, Alexander wanted to know why Omphis had mobilized his entire forces to meet him. The Indian responded that he had brought his army in order to place his men at Alexander’s disposal. On hearing this good news, both men shook hands as a token of friendship and fidelity. Omphis handed his fifty-six elephants over to Alexander, together with an impressive herd of livestock, including 3,000 bulls dressed up for sacrifices.

Then Alexander granted him the royal insignia together with the permission to bear his father’s name, Taxiles, as he was known henceforth by his people.

The newly appointed king hosted Alexander as his guest for three days, allowing the Macedonians a time of rest. On the fourth day, Taxiles announced the amount of grain he had provided to Hephaistion while building the bridge over the Indus and, at the same time, handed gold crowns to Alexander and each of his Friends, plus eighty talents of minted silver and a number of unspecified strange jungle beasts. Alexander was evidently delighted but returned all the gifts to Taxiles and, in addition, gave him 1,000 talents together with an array of gold and silver vessels and thirty of his steeds equipped as his own.

It is under these circumstances that King Taxiles joined his forces to those of Alexander as they headed further east to challenge Porus, who was waiting for them on the opposite bank of the Hydaspes River.

[Map of the Indus from Livius site]

The Battle of the Hydaspes and the genius of Alexander

This battle is by far the greatest battle Alexander ever fought, yet it is also the one generally overlooked by historians and indeed dwarfed by all previous similar confrontations. The Granicus was Alexander’s first test against the Persians, who had underestimated their adversary. At Issus, Darius appeared in person on the battlefield, but this was not the terrain he had chosen; listening to bad advice, he moved his army to find himself cornered in a far too small area for his massive number of men. Darius fled to save his bare life, meaning he had to challenge Alexander in another fight. This time, at Gaugamela, the terrain was exactly what Darius needed, but Alexander tricked him into opening his defensive lines and eventually charged straight at Darius. Again, the king fled and kept running until he was assassinated by one of his kin, Bessus, who promoted himself to be the new king.

At the Hydaspes River, things were entirely different. Alexander’s adversary was Porus, a powerful Indian ruler both in posture and command, who would not budge from his choice location and advantageous position on the east bank of the river Hydaspes.

I think Alexander liked the challenge of this type of battle, one army opposing the other, where he could deploy all his strategic skills. This had not happened since Gaugamela, as in Central Asia, he had to adapt his warfare tactics and convert them into a guerrilla war – a far cry from a glorious fight!

So, here we are in May 326 BC. After crossing the Indus River, Alexander moved east. At about 77 km away from the next major river, the Hydaspes (modern Jhelum River), he is informed that Porus has set up his massive line of defense on the opposite riverbank, ready to keep the advancing Macedonian army out of his territory.

Porus’ army must have looked very impressive from the onset. Ancient authors describe it as an enormous wall of 30,000 men/infantry interrupted at an equal distance by a towering elephant, of which there were at least 85, depending on the sources. Spread among the foot soldiers were powerful archers using 90cm high bows, able to shoot cumbersome, large arrows. Some 300 four-horse chariots and 3,000 cavalry completed the setting. Porus, dressed in silver and gold armor, sat on the largest elephant, looming over the entire army – enough to frighten any enemy. Besides, the river at this point was almost 800 meters wide, and at this time of year, an impetuous current without a real fording point despite some sandy islets. Ancient sources compare Porus’ army to a vast city wall (infantry) with intermittent towers (elephants).

It was immediately clear to Alexander that there was no way he could cross the river and attack Porus frontally and that he would have to develop a good strategy. At first, he tested his adversary, and for days in a row, he had Ptolemy move his army then upstream, then downstream, shouting and making as much noise as possible, threatening to cross the river. Porus, well-prepared to impede his opponent’s army from crossing, followed course, moving simultaneously up and downstream. After many days, nothing happened, and Porus’ attention relaxed. This was precisely what Alexander had hoped for, and while his men were moving back and forth, he explored the riverbank further inland and found a wooded island some 28 km upstream, just behind an angle in the Hydaspes River. At that point, the riverbank at his side also showed a depression just deep enough to hide his army, both foot and cavalry, from sight. In other words, an almost ideal place to cross the river in spate.

To fool his adversary further, Alexander directed his pavilion to be set up further downstream with his personal squadron standing guard and all his personal royal paraphernalia in sight. He went even as far as to dress his general Attalus in his own attire with the royal chlamys and all, so he would easily be confused with Alexander since he had the same build and appearance as his king – at least from a distance. Attalus was also instructed to make excursions to the edge of the river with the king’s entourage to this spot or that to give the impression that he was planning a crossing. What a stratagem!

By now, it all came down to choosing the right moment; clearly, the gods were on Alexander's side. After dark, he decided to make his move when a heavy thunderstorm broke loose at nightfall. Meanwhile, Ptolemy was still marching up and downstream with his troops, and Craterus was left behind to light as many fires and make as much noise as possible to create the impression that the entire army was still there. His instructions were to cross the river and join the battle only when he could see that the Macedonians had broken the Indian lines.

The night was pitch-dark, and the Macedonians could hardly see one another; they had to shout to stay in touch, but their voices were dwarfed by the wailing winds and the noise of thunder and lightning. Tempestuous rains drenched the soldiers, who were swamped by the downpour. Fortune definitely was on their side, for under these circumstances, their sounds were not carried over to the enemy lines. It is incredible how Alexander managed to keep his men together during such a spooky night. Despite the blacked-out heavens, he reached the depression near the crossing spot, probably by midnight or soon after. Alexander’s troops must have been exhausted after this horrific night march of nearly thirty kilometers, and the king allowed his men a rest. Just before dawn, when the rain stopped and the wind died a little, he signaled his forces to embark on the ships and the rafts made of inflated hides with wooden decking. The king launched his own vessel first (of course), and as Porus’ attention was still focused on Ptolemy's feign maneuvers, Alexander and his troops landed unnoticed on the wooded island. From here, Alexander and his men waded through the second part of the river, whose fast-flowing icy waters reached their armpits and submerged the horses to their necks. This action seemed to escape the enemy’s attention until Alexander landed on Porus’ side of the river. The cavalry was first to set foot on land, and Alexander immediately set off in the direction of Porus, instructing the infantry to follow as soon as they had safely crossed the river.

Porus, at first, assumed that his reinforcements were joining him, but his scouts soon discovered that their foe had managed to cross the river. The Indian ruler deployed 100 four-horse chariots and 4,000 cavalry commanded by his son. The force of the chariot is not to be underestimated because each vehicle was manned by six men, two of whom were archers posted on either side of the chariot and two bore shields, and the two remaining men were charioteers armed with javelins. That is at least what Curtius tells us, although we may wonder how he could fit that many men on the small carriage floor.

Fortune once again was at Alexander’s side because, after the recent heavy downpours, the sandy bank was slimy and totally impracticable for these vehicles, which soon became bogged down. Alexander immediately sent his available light infantry to attack them. A wild fight followed as the charioteers desperately tried to get some control over their vehicle, to no avail, and soon they were put out of action. Porus’ son, who had led the operation, was killed in the skirmish.

Unable to impede Alexander’s crossing of the Hydaspes, Porus now had to attack his adversary. He moved north in search of relatively dry sandy land where he could effectively post the majority of his elephants, his greatest weapon, in a massive battle formation. It was immediately clear to Alexander that the Indian formation was fundamentally defensive, allowing him plenty of time to wait for his infantry to catch up with him. After having crossed the second part of the Hydaspes, these men had to take on what was usually a day's march of nearly 30 km. They had already completed an equivalent march the previous night, followed by a rough river crossing. They must have been pretty exhausted by the time they rejoined their king. It was only sensible to allow them a rest before starting the battle. To conceal the presence of his 9,000 infantry and the strategy of his own deployment to Porus, he ordered his 5,300-strong cavalry to keep moving back and forth in front of the Macedonian army. The trick worked, just as Alexander expected.

We don’t know how much rest the army was given before commencing the battle, but Alexander certainly had plenty of time to study the enemy’s position. Porus had again arranged his elephant in the front line, some thirty meters apart, and his foot soldiers filled the gaps by standing in formation behind them. On either side, he has posted his cavalry, protected by the remaining chariots in front of them. Alexander, rightfully so, assumed that Porus would keep his front line together and march in a straight line. He decided to start by eliminating the Indian cavalry to enable the flanking attack he liked so much.

When Alexander’s troops were rested, he moved his infantry to the center, facing Porus’ line and all his cavalry to the far right. His instructions were unambiguous. The infantry was to stay put till the Indians were thrown into confusion by the Macedonian cavalry. Coenus and Perdiccas, at the head of the Companion cavalry, should stay behind at their assigned place till Porus called his cavalry from his own right flank to support his left against Alexander.

The scene is set, and Alexander starts the attack by moving forward in an oblique line away from the trumpeting elephants. Porus’ cavalry followed suit, extending their lines to prevent a flanking attack. However, the Indian ruler soon realized he had to call for horse reinforcements from his right flank. This was precisely what Alexander had anticipated, and conforming to the king’s orders, Coenus and Perdiccas moved towards the empty cavalry spot of the enemy. They passed behind the Macedonian infantry, turned behind Porus’ aligned infantry, and fell on the enemy’s cavalry from behind, which by now was totally encircled. At this point, the only solution for Porus was to divide his cavalry into two; one group would face Alexander’s attack, and the other the Coenus/Perdiccas forces. Alexander’s timing was perfect, and he could launch his flanking attack, which was a total success. The Indian horsemen fell back into confusion on the elephants, who were called in to assist them. At this point, the solid straight line of defense broke down, automatically creating the opportunity for the Macedonian infantry to rush forward and join the action.

[Map from Frank Holt's book 'Alexander the Great and the Mystery of the Elephant Medallions' reproduced with the approval of the author, for which I am genuinely grateful]

One thing is certain: hell broke loose! Porus’ elephants were his greatest strength and probably Alexander’s greatest challenge. The Macedonian king quickly realized that his heavy infantry was ill-equipped to deal with these beasts, and he sent his light-armed troops to poke the elephants and their drivers with arrows and javelins. Curtius graphically describes how enraged elephants trampled the Macedonians and threw others over their heads. Despite a renewed attack by the Indian cavalry, they were no match for the Macedonians. Coenus had joined ranks with Alexander, and together they made successive attacks on the Indian cavalry and infantry. The elephants were forced back onto their own troops through the joint pressure of the Macedonian heavy infantry and the Companion Cavalry. As most of the mahouts had been killed, the cornered beasts trampled to death, both friend and foe. The wounded and bewildered animals could no longer be controlled; maddened by pain and fear, they spread death around them. The Indian cavalry was jammed by the elephants and, having no space to move, suffered severe losses also. The Macedonian infantry had enough room to maneuver and tried to deal with the maddened elephants at best, but the trapped Indians suffered severely.

Gradually, the elephants became exhausted, and their charges grew weaker. Alexander saw the time right to encircle what remained of the Indian army, signaling his infantry “to lock shields” and advance onto the enemy en masse. Those who could escape through a small gap in the cavalry line did so but were intercepted by Craterus, who, by now and according to his instructions, had crossed the Hydaspes with fresh troops and joined the fight. The entire battle must have been a grueling carnage!

Although Porus, still towering above the battlefield, had been wounded at least nine times and bled profusely, he kept fighting with undiminished verve until he collapsed. His mahout turned his master’s massive elephant and set in the flight, with Alexander evidently in close pursuit. At this point, Alexander’s horse was shot from under him; some assume this was how and when his dear Bucephalus died, while other sources tell us that his horse died from old age. In any case, Alexander lost some time in his pursuit as he had to mount another horse.

Alexander sent a messenger to Porus asking for his surrender, which he proudly refused. The following events seem to come from some tale about a fearless knight. Flights of missiles of all kinds were hurled toward the Indians and their mighty king, who started to collapse and slid down his mount. His mahout, thinking Porus wanted to dismount, directed the elephant to crouch down on its knees, and automatically, all the other elephants did the same. Thinking that Porus had died, Alexander ordered his body to be stripped. However, as soon as the Macedonians approached, the elephant moved to stand guard over his rider and menaced whoever dared to approach. He then picked up his noble king and put him back on its back. Once again, the Macedonians attacked in full force with an overwhelming amount of missiles until the elephant fell. Porus was laid in a chariot.

Soon word spread that the Indian king was dead, and his army started to flee. For Alexander, the fight was over; he clearly was victorious and sounded his troops' recall. As he went over to Porus and saw him move his eyelids, he could not help but ask why he had not surrendered when offered. According to some sources, Porus seems to have answered that he considered that there was nobody as strong as him: “though I knew my own power, I had not yet tested yours.” When asked how he should be treated, Porus responded with the known phrase “as a king.” He evidently won Alexander over not by compassion but by respect. Alexander had Porus’ wounds cared for, and when he recovered against all odds, Alexander restored his kingdom to him and also extended his territory.

[The two action pictures are evidently from Oliver Stone's movie Alexander]