Who won the battle of the Hydaspes, Alexander or Porus??

#1
Battle of hydaspes (326 BCE) was a battle between Alexander the Great and king porus of Paurava which was on the banks of river Jhelum (Greeks know this
river as Hydaspes) in the Punjab region of Indian subcontinent.

As according to the question that who won the battle of hydaspes.So the answer to the question is that many resources say that alexandar won the battle
but many other also claim that porus won the battle, because after this battle of Hydaspes no other invasion into India was conducted by Alexander. And Alexanders army were not in the postion to face another battle.

According to the resouces which claim that Alexander won the battle in these resources it was mentioned that the resistance put up by King Porus and his men won the respect of Alexander, who asked Porus to become one of his governor. And porus was appointed as
plenipotentiary after Battle of Hydaspes.
 

Attachments

tomar

Ad Honoris
Jan 2011
13,113
#3
No reliable sources have anything other than Alexander winning. There are some folk traditions coming from Muslim Punjabi folk poetry, thousands of years later, which say otherwise. But that's it.
What are those "reliable sources" that claim Alexander's victory..... Could it just be that they are a tiny bit biased ?

Are those the same sources that consistently have the greeks facing million men armies and defeating them ?
 
Jun 2012
7,121
Malaysia
#4
All ancient Greek warriors were supermen. They were virtually Kryptonians. All their opponents were just outclassed by them. Of course they beat Porus. After all, they whupped pretty well everybody else on the planet. Even when they were fighting a not so small army with not a few elephants many, many thousands of miles away from home.

There could have been no other outcome, right? Right.

And only Greek sources are 'reliable'. Simply because someone made the effort to put stuff down in writing. The authenticity or otherwise of their 'records' notwithstanding. All others are all hopeless bunkum. Simply because they are just oral tradition. Of course.

And if their modern descendants started playing hockey & cricket, they'd be whupping both India & Pakistan within couple of months too. Because they are progeny of ancient Greek warriors.
 
Last edited:
Mar 2013
918
Breakdancing on the Moon.
#6
Actually the current modern belief is that the Persians were tolerant, multicultural and anti-slavery, and that Alexander was a power-hungry egotistical maniac.
What are those "reliable sources" that claim Alexander's victory..... Could it just be that they are a tiny bit biased ?

Are those the same sources that consistently have the greeks facing million men armies and defeating them ?
All ancient Greek warriors were supermen. Of course they beat Porus. After all, they whupped pretty well everybody else on the planet. Even when they were fighting an army with elephants many, many thousands of miles away from home.

There could have been no other outcome, right? Right.

And only Greek sources are reliable. All others are hopeless bunkum. Of course.
Feel free to adduce other sources. Oh wait, you can't.

Unlike you guys (and 90% of this subforum, it seems), historians aren't in the business of national myth building or living vicariously due to some weird inferioty complex.

The sources we have have been raked over again and again. All the kinds of things you would expect, quellenkritik, quellenforschung etc etc...all done. There is no single alternative to Alexander winning.
 
Likes: Tulius
Nov 2008
1,278
England
#7
What are those "reliable sources" that claim Alexander's victory..... Could it just be that they are a tiny bit biased ?
The sources that we have derive mainly from memoirs written by Alexander`s officers who witnessed and took part in the battle near the Jhelum. They are all fairly consistent, and there is no good reason to doubt that the Macedonian king did not win the fight. Of all his victories, the Battle of the Hydaspes was Alexander`s finest, displaying his superb generalship.
 
Mar 2013
918
Breakdancing on the Moon.
#8
At worst (for the Macedonians), it was at least a tactical victory for Alexander.
Was it though? I mean, ok, he reached the boundaries of the Persian Empire, maybe a little bit beyond, and proved himself at least equal to Darius - but what was the overall cost?

It's not as if the Indians were a well known people whom beating would render Alexander much cred (comparisons with Dionysos and Herakles aside). His troops were rightly fed up with being so far from home, and that may even be where he got the illness that killed him.
 
Nov 2011
4,688
Ohio, USA
#9
Was it though? I mean, ok, he reached the boundaries of the Persian Empire, maybe a little bit beyond, and proved himself at least equal to Darius - but what was the overall cost?

It's not as if the Indians were a well known people whom beating would render Alexander much cred (comparisons with Dionysos and Herakles aside). His troops were rightly fed up with being so far from home, and that may even be where he got the illness that killed him.
Yes, but this is bearing on whether or not the Hydaspes was a STRATEGIC victory, which I agree is debatable. What I don’t believe is debatable though is that it was a TACTICAL victory. There’s a difference.
 
Likes: Kotromanic

Similar History Discussions