So Alexander did not run away? I have great respect for the historical method and all GREEK sources agree that the Nandas were too mighty for Alexander. Here's one :Not necessarily speaking for others, but I believe it would be nice for all if this rubbish were not to contaminate yet another thread. There are plenty of other threads (mostly locked I'd imagine) for this stuff.
Thanks in advance.
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. For they were told that the kings of the Ganderites and Praesii were awaiting them with eighty thousand horsemen, two hundred thousand footmen, eight thousand chariots, and six thousand fighting elephants.
- Plutarch's lives
Here's another :
Gangaridai, a nation which possesses a vast force of the largest-sized elephants. Owing to this, their country has never been conquered by any foreign king: for all other nations dread the overwhelming number and strength of these animals. Thus Alexander the Macedonian, after conquering all Asia, did not make war upon the Gangaridai, as he did on all others; for when he had arrived with all his troops at the river Ganges, he abandoned as hopeless an invasion of the Gangaridai when he learned that they possessed four thousand elephants well trained and equipped for war.
You speak as if the Greeks were the only ones to consider a "combined arms" approach when both the Indians and Chinese had similar, older doctrines. Look up "Chaturanga-bala".
Eurocentric garbage is still garbage!