The Early History of India, from 600 B.C. to the Muhammadan Conquest, including the Invasion of Alexander the Great c13: Contents of Plate of Indian Coins and Medals (2) in the British Museum

The Early History of India, from 600 B.C. to the Muhammadan Conquest, including the Invasion of Alexander the Great c13

Language: English

Contents of Plate of Indian Coins and Medals (2) in the British Museum

c13.1

c13.2

[Figure: 1

c13.3

*Indian Coins and Medals (2)*]

c13.4

army, and orders to fortify posts and maintain communications. The king himself, taking a force of picked troops, largely composed of cavalry, invaded the country of a nation called Glausai or Glaukanikoi, adjacent to the dominions of Pōros. Thirty-seven considerable towns and a multitude of villages, having readily submitted, were added to the extensive territory administered by Pōros. The king of the lower hills, who is called Abisares by the Greek writers, finding resistance hopeless, again tendered his submission. Another Pōros, nephew of the defeated monarch, and ruler of a tract called Gandaris, sent envoys promising allegiance to the invincible invader, and sundry independent tribes (τῶν αὐτονόμων Ἰνδῶν) followed the example of these princes.

c13.5

Alexander, moving in a direction more easterly than before, crossed the Akesinēs (Chināb) at a point not specified, but certainly near the foot of the hills. The passage of the river, although unopposed, was difficult by reason of the rapid current of the flooded stream, which was 3,000 yards (15 *stadia*) in width, and of the large and jagged rocks with which the channel was bestrewn, and on which many of the boats were wrecked.¹

c13.6

¹ These particulars given by Arrian (v. 20) clearly prove that the Akesinēs was crossed near the foot of the hill, some 25 or 30 miles above Wazirābād, where McCrindle places the crossing. The Chināb has changed its course very considerably, and lower down has wandered over a bed about 30 miles in breadth (Raverty, *op. cit.*, 343).

c13.7

The king, having made adequate arrangements for supplies, reinforcements, and the maintenance of communications, continued his advance eastwards, probably passing close to the ancient fortress of Siālkōt. The Hydraōtes (Rāvī) river having been crossed without difficulty, Hephaistion was sent back in order to reduce to obedience the younger Pōros, who had revolted owing to feelings of resentment at the excessive favour shown to his uncle and enemy.

c13.8

Alexander selected as the adversaries worthy of his steel the more important confederacy of independent tribes² which was headed by the Kathaioi, who dwelt upon the left or eastern side of the Hydraōtes, and enjoyed the highest reputation for skill in the art of war. Their neighbours, the Oxydrakai, who occupied the basin of the Hyphasis, and the Malloi, who were settled along the lower course of the Hydraōtes below Lahore, and were also famous as brave warriors, intended to join the tribal league, but had not actually done so at this time. The Kathaioi were now supported only by minor clans, their immediate neighbours, and the terrible fate which awaited the Malloi was postponed for a brief space.¹

c13.9

² On the autonomous tribes see *post*, p. 302, and note on p. 98.

c13.10

¹ For the correct location of the clans see the author's paper entitled 'The Position of the Autonomous Tribes of the Panjāb conquered by Alexander the Great' (*J. R. A. S.*, Oct., 1903). See the map, reprinted from that paper, with a slight alteration of the suggested position of the altars.

c13.11

On the second day after the passage of the Hydraōtes, Alexander received the capitulation of a town named Pimprama, belonging to a clan called Adraïstai by Arrian ; and, after a day's rest, proceeded to invest Sangala, which the Kathaioi and the allied tribes had selected as their main stronghold. The tribes protected their camp, lying under the shelter of a low hill, by a triple row of wagons, and offered a determined resistance.

c13.12

Meanwhile, the elder Pōros arrived with a reinforcement for the besiegers of five thousand troops, elephants, and a siege train; but before any breach in the city wall had been effected, the Macedonians stormed the place by escalade, and routed the allies, who lost many thousands killed. Alexander's loss in killed was less than a hundred, but twelve hundred of his men were wounded—an unusually large proportion.

c13.13

Sangala was razed to the ground, as a punishment for the stout resistance of its defenders.²

c13.14

² Much nonsense has been written about the site of Sangala (Σάγγαλα), which was quite distinct from the Sākala of Hindu writers and of Hiuen Tsang. The assumption that the two towns were identical led Cunningham to identify Alexander's Sangala with a petty mound called 'Sangala Tibba' in the Jhang District. Mr. C. J. Rodgers conclusively proved this identification to be erroneous (*Report on Sangala Tibba*, News Press, Lahore, 1906; *Proc. A. S. B.* 1896, p. 81). The position of Sangala, which was razed to the ground, cannot be determined with precision, but it was in the Gurdāspur District. Sākala, the capital of Mihirakula, is represented by the modern Siālkot, N. lat. 32° 30′, E. long. 74° 32′ (Fleet, ‘Sakala,’ *Actes du xivᵉ Congrès des Orientalistes*, tome I).

c13.15

Yet another river, the Hyphasis (Bias), lay in the path of the royal adventurer, who advanced to its bank, and prepared to cross, being determined to subdue the nations beyond. These were reputed to be clans of brave agriculturists, enjoying an admirable system of aristocratic government, and occupying a fertile territory well supplied with elephants of superior size and courage.

c13.16

Alexander, having noticed that his troops no longer followed him with their wonted alacrity, and were indisposed to proceed to more distant adventures, sought to rouse their enthusiasm by an eloquent address, in which he recited the glories of their wondrous conquests from the Hellespont to the Hyphasis, and promised them the dominion and riches of all Asia. But his glowing words fell on unwilling ears, and were received with painful silence, which remained unbroken for a long time.

c13.17

At last Koinos, the trusted cavalry general, who had led the charge in the battle with Pōros, summoned up courage to reply, and argued the expediency of fixing some limit to the toils and dangers of the army. He urged his sovereign to remember that out of the Greeks and Macedonians who had crossed the Hellespont eight years earlier, some had been invalided home, some were unwilling exiles in newly founded cities, some were disabled by wounds, and others, the most numerous, had perished by the sword or disease.

c13.18

Few indeed were those left to follow the standards; and they were weary wretches, shattered in health, ragged, ill-armed, and despondent. He concluded his oration by saying:

c13.19

'Moderation in the midst of success, O king! is the noblest of virtues, for, although, being at the head of so brave an army, you have naught to dread from mortal foes, yet the visitations of the Deity cannot be foreseen or guarded against by man.'¹

c13.20

¹ The address of Koinos, which is given in full by Arrian, seems to me to be in substance a genuine report of a real speech, and not merely an appropriate invention of the historian.

c13.21

The words of Koinos were greeted with loud applause, which left no doubt about the temper of the men. Alexander, deeply mortified, and unwilling to yield, retired within his tent; but emerged on the third day, convinced that further advance was impracticable. The soothsayers judiciously discovered that the omens were unfavourable for the passage of the river, and Alexander, with a heavy heart, gave orders for retreat, in September, 326 B.C.

c13.22

To mark the farthest point of his advance, he erected twelve huge altars, built of squared stone, and each fifty cubits in height, dedicated to the twelve great gods. Although the army had not passed the river, these massive memorials are alleged by Pliny to have been erected on the farther, i.e. northern, bank, where they long remained to excite the wonder and veneration of both natives and foreigners.¹ They probably stood at the point where the Biās flows from east to west between Indaura in the Kāngrā and Mirthal in the Gurdāspur district, close to the foot of the hills. The cutting back of the northern bank, which has extended for about five miles, has swept away all traces of the buildings.²

c13.23

¹ ‘Ad Hypasin . . . qui fuit Alexandri itinerum terminus, exsuperato tamen amne, arisque in adversa ripa dicatis’ (Pliny, *Hist. Nat.*, Bk. vi, ch. 17).

c13.24

² Vigne, *A Personal Narrative of a Visit to Ghazni, Kabul and Afghanistan* (1843), p. 11. Mr. H. L. Shuttleworth, I.C.S., informs me by letter dated Feb. 15, 1914, that he has examined the course of the Biās for 50 miles from the point where it leaves the hills to Mukerian ferry, and after considering all possible sites for the altars has come to the conclusion given in the text. He further states in a letter dated May 19, 1914, that no inscription or other material relic connects the Greeks with any of the three sites in Kāngrā and Mandi associated by tradition with Sikandar, who probably may be Sikandar Lodi as suggested by Moorcroft, and not Alexander the Great as supposed by Vigne. It is also to be remembered that Sultān Sikandar, the fierce iconoclastic king of Kashmīr, reigned from 1394–1420, and gave people good cause to remember him.

c13.25

The judicious Arrian simply records that :—

c13.26

‘Alexander divided the army into brigades, which he ordered to prepare twelve altars equal in height to the loftiest military towers, while exceeding them in breadth; to serve both as thank-offerings to the gods who had led him so far on the path of conquest, and as a memorial of his achievements. When the altars had been constructed, he

c13.27

offered sacrifice upon them with the customary rites, and celebrated gymnastics and equestrian games.'

c13.28

The structures thus solemnly dedicated were well designed to serve their double purpose; and constituted a dignified and worthy monument of the piety and labours of the world's greatest general. Their significance was fully appreciated by the Indian powers which had been compelled to bend before the Macedonian storm. We are told that Chandragupta Maurya, the first emperor of India, who succeeded to the lordship of Alexander's conquests, and his successors for centuries afterwards, continued to venerate the altars, and were in the habit of crossing the river to offer sacrifice upon them.¹

c13.29

¹ 'Αλέξανδρος μὲν οὖν Ἡρακλέα τιμῶν καὶ πάλιν Ἀλέξανδρον Ἀνδρόκοττος, ἑαυτοὺς εἰς τὸ τιμᾶσθαι προῆγον ἀπὸ τῶν ὁμοίων. 'Thus Alexander, honouring Hercules, and Androkottos [*scil.* Chandragupta] again honouring Alexander, got themselves honoured on the same ground' (Plutarch, *cir.* 90 A. D., 'How One can Praise oneself without exciting Envy', § 10, in *Morals*, ed. Teubner, and Shilleto's trans.). The same author, in his *Life of Alexander*, ch. lxii, states that 'he also erected altars for the gods which the kings of the Praisiai [*scil.* Magadha] even to the present day hold in veneration, crossing the river (i. e. from south to north) to offer sacrifices upon them in the Hellenic fashion'. Arrian, Curtius, and Diodorus agree that there were twelve altars. Curtius deposes to the 'squared stone', and Diodorus to the height of 50 cubits. Philostratus gives a different account, as follows:— 'And having crossed the Hydraōtes and passed by several tribes (ἔθνη), they approached the Hyphasis; and 30 stades away from this river they came on altars bearing this inscription: "To Father Ammon and Heracles his brother, and to Athena Providence and to Zeus of Olympus and the Cabeiri of Samothrace and to the Indian Sun and to the Delphian Apollo". 'And they say there was also a brass column (στήλην) dedicated, and inscribed as follows: "Here Alexander stopped". 'The altars we may attribute to Alexander, who so honoured the boundaries of his empire; but I suppose the tablet was put up by the Indians dwelling on the other side of the Hyphasis, to their own glory for having stayed Alexander from any further advance' (*Apollonius of Tyana*, Bk. II, 43). Prof. Phillimore erroneously translates the plurals βωμοῖς and βωμούς as 'an altar', and renders στήλην as 'memorial tablet'.

c13.30

But, if Curtius and Diodorus are to be believed, the noble simplicity of the monumental altars was marred by a ridiculous addition designed to gratify the king's childish vanity. The tale is given in its fullest form by Diodorus, who gravely informs us that after the completion of the altars, Alexander caused an encampment to be made thrice the size of that actually occupied by his army, encircled by a trench 50 feet wide and 40 feet deep, as well as by a rampart of extraordinary dimensions. 'He further', the story continues, 'ordered quarters to be constructed as for foot-soldiers, each containing two beds 4 cubits in length for each man; and besides this, two stalls of twice the ordinary size for each horseman. Whatever else was to be left behind was directed to be likewise proportionately increased in size.' We are asked to believe that these silly proceedings were intended to convince the country people that the invaders had been men of more than ordinary strength and stature.¹

c13.31

¹ Diodorus, xvii, 95; Curtius, ix, 3.

c13.32

It is incredible that Alexander could have been guilty of such senseless folly, and the legend may be rejected without hesitation as being probably based on distorted versions of tales told by travellers who had seen the altars.