Battle of Hydaspes

Source: Frank Martini. Cartographer, Department of History, United States Military Academy, Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

Background

Geography has always been central to planning and conduct of battles. Ancient and modern wars have been fought across natural features and obstacles with rivers always playing a prime role. As the name denotes Punjab i.e. ‘land of five rivers’ which was a part of pre divided India and modern day Pakistan became evidence to a great war that has rarely been talked about. It was on the banks of one of the water bodies running through Punjab that the battle of Hydaspes was fought.

In Northeast India, smaller principalities and republics gradually merged with the Magadhan Empire. However, the Northwestern India presented a different story 6th century B.C. Several small principalities like Madras, Kambojas, and Gandharas fought with each other. There was no organised kingdom like Magadha to unify and organise them together. The area was fertile and rich in natural resources and thus attracted the attention of the neighbours. The geographic conditions were equally favourable as the region could be easily penetrated through the passes in the Hindu Kush.

The Achaemenian rulers of Iran took advantage of the political disunity. The Iranian ruler Darius penetrated Northwest India in 516 BC and annexed Punjab, west of the Indus and Sindh.

In the 4th century BC, the Greeks and the Iranians fought for the supremacy of the world. The Greeks destroyed the Iranian empire under the capable leadership of Alexander of Macedonia. He conquered not only Asia Minor and Iraq, but also Iran. Tempted by India’s description by Herodotus and other Greek writers, along with his own quest for geographical inquiry and natural history, he marched to India.

Condition of India

The political conditions of Northwest India were perfect for his plans. The area was parcelled out into many independent monarchies and tribal republics. Two well-known rulers were: Ambhi, the prince of Taxila and Porus whose kingdom lay between the Jhelum and the Chenab. However, they could not put up a giant front and the Khyber Pass remained unguarded.

The Battle

After conquering Iran, Alexander commenced his invasion of Indian grounds through the Khyber Pass. The primary Greek column entered the Khyber Pass, but a smaller force under the personal command of Alexander, went through the northern route. They took the fortress of Aornos (modern day Pir Sar) along the way as that was a mythologically significant place for the Greeks.

Source: By Charles Le Brun ,Public domain, via Wikimedia Commons

It took Alexander five months to reach the Indus. Ambhi, the ruler of Taxila, readily submitted to the invader. He increased the strength of Alexander’s army by entering into an alliance with him and also replenished his treasure. They combined their forces against the king of Hydaspes, king Porus, who had disobeyed Alexander’s command for him to surrender, and was preparing for war.

The camp of Alexander was fixed in the vicinity of the town of Jhelum at the right bank of the river while that of Porus was set up on the south bank to repel any crossing. The depth and the swift current of Jhelum could be fatal for the attacking force.

The Indian forces were arranged with cavalry on both flanks and chariots on their fronts while their centre comprised of infantry with war elephants that were stationed every fifty feet in front of them. The Indian war elephants were heavily armoured and carried on their backs a trio of archers and javelin man.

Porus discarded the usual traditions of Indian kings fighting from a chariot and was mounted atop his tallest war elephant. Since Porus’ disposition was strongest in the centre, Alexander decided to attack with his cavalry on the flanks first. The Macedonian infantry was in the ratio of 1 : 5 against the Indian infantry but the latter was at significant disadvantage due to the lack of armour and the long reach of their opponent’s weapons. The slippery ground proved to be a thorn in the path for heavy armour piercing bows as they missed the target.

The war elephants advanced against the Macedonian cavalry but were confronted by the Macedonian phalanx. The powerful animals carved heavy losses among the Macedonian foot soldiers, wounding many men with steel clad tusks and heaving some of them into air before dropping them to the ground. They also trampled and disorganised the dense lines of the soldiers.

However, the Macedonian infantry resisted the attack bravely, with the light infantry, tossing javelins at the elephant’s eyes and mahouts while the heavy infantry attempted to injure the elephants with the two-sided axes.

Finally, the Macedonian infantry advanced upon the confused enemy mass while the Macedonian cavalry charged from the rear putting the entire Paurava army in rout.

Aftermath

After the battle, king Porus was brought before Alexander and was asked how he wished to be treated to which Porus replied, “treat me as a king would treat another king”. Impressed by his bravery and wit, Alexander allowed him to retain his lands as a Satrap (Greek governor). He also instituted Porus as his representative. After the battle, Alexander founded two cities in this region, one at the spot of the battle called Nicaea (victory in Greek) to commemorate his success and one on the other side of the Hydaspes called Alexandria Bucephalus, to honour his faithful horse, which died soon after this battle.

The army of Alexander approached the boundaries of the Nanda Empire in 326 B.C. However, his army refused to accompany him. The Greek soldiers had grown war weary and diseased. The hot climate of India and ten years of continuous campaigning had made them terribly home sick. Despite the repeated appeals by Alexander for their advance, the Greek soldiers refused to budge. Alexander lamented, “I am trying to raise the hearts that are disloyal and crushed with craven fears.” The king who had never known defeat at the hands of his enemies had to accept defeat from his own men. His dream of an eastern empire remained unfulfilled.

He remained in India for 19 months (326-5 B.C.) of continual battle. However, most of the conquered states were restored to their ruler who submitted to his authority. He also founded a number of cities to maintain his power in this area.

Effects of Alexander’s invasion

• Alexander’s invasion provided the first occasion when ancient Europe came into close contact with ancient South Asia.
• Direct contact was established between India and Greece in various fields. Also, four district routes by land and sea opened, paving the way for Greek merchants and craftsman.
• A number of cities sprang up on the northwestern part of India, the most important being Alexandria in the Kabul region, Boukephala on the Jhelum, and Alexandria in Sindh.
• Alexander’s historians left valuable geographical accounts and clearly dated records which enable us to establish India’s chronology for subsequent events. His historians also provide us with important information about the social and economic conditions of the time like the sati system, the sale of girls in marketplaces by poor parents, and the fire breed of oxen in Southwest India.
• Alexander’s invasion paved the way for the expansion of the Maurya Empire in the Northwestern area by destroying the small states.
• Militarily the battle was significant for extensive preparation for battle in terms of strategy, tactics, and contingencies. It influenced the campaigning philosophy of even the Mauryan empire, where Kautilya learnt and taught Chandragupta Maurya the war tactics. He maintained a standing army and the chariot corps played a marginal role in Mauryan military infrastructure.

The battle across the Hydaspes enjoys pride of place as a watershed event for a multitude of reasons. From the advent of the Greek culture into India to underlining the weaknesses of the empire and introduction of armoury and war techniques, it was significant as it opened the doors of the Indian Subcontinent to Greek socio-cultural influences, including Greco Buddhist art. His pardoning of Porus glorified his image as a compassionate and empathetic ruler, which allowed the Indian folk to admire and accept Greek culture for a long time. His invasion also opened the doors for future invaders who shaped the Indian history and enriched its culture.