Why Alexander did not invade India?

Yes they say that he had heard of a much larger empire in the Ganges-Yamuna area, (Nandas). Also it is said when he told some holymen of his plan to conquer India they laughed, because of the vastness.

With Porus (Paurava) the battle was fierce, and so hearing about a larger army coupled with the Monsoon season, meant at the Beas river in Punjab, the army mutineered, as they were to exausted to go on.

 

A few comments:

 

- The medallion shows Alexander not "falling down" but pursuing a defeated enemy.

- Medallions were issued to celebrate great victories, not defeats...

- If Alexander was defeated, he would certainly not be able to wander in India for 6 more months, defeating everyone who refused to surrender and going all the way to the Indian ocean where he build a fleet.

 

Still I'll be interested to hear if there're Indian primary sourses that indicate otherwise.

 

 

- Medallions could be used also for monetary transactions, same as coins. So it was something in between a coin and a medallion as we know it today.

- They had significand propadanda value. This one depicts Alexander with thunderbolds in his hand. A clear reference to Zeus and his attempt to consolidate power by trying to impose his deification. The same pattern (Alexander vs. elephant) has been found in mosaics, so it must have been known and popular at the time.

- Bosworth (in Alexander and the East) said:"In a manner unique to ancient coinage he (Alexander) was sending a message to people who could never hope to witness an Indian army in the flesh. These were the outlandish and formidable forces which he had faced in battle and crushed. Five years might have elapsed since the Persian grand army was humiliated at Gaugamela, but his army had lost none of its frightful efficiency. The victory over Porus was proof, and the coinage ensured that its implications were not lost."

- Holt mentions: "I hold in my hand one of the rarest treasures thought by some to have come from the merchants� saddlebags, donated nearly 100 years ago to the British Museum by Sir Augustus Wollaston Franks. Many of the best numismatic minds of the past century have tackled this mystery. The first was Percy Gardner in 1887, whose identification of the standing figure has never since been challenged. Gardner recognized immediately the superhuman figure of Alexander the Great wielding the thunderbolt of his �divine father,� Zeus. But the elephant battle proved more baffling. In 1911, Barclay Head suggested that the Indian prince Taxiles, an ally of the Greeks, designed this medal to show his own heroic part in Alexander�s Battle of the Hydaspes River."

 

Many of these medallions were found around Susa, in Iran.

 

well, not really, just modern-day Pakistan and a bit more...

 

 

 

On the issue of why Alexander the Great didnt cross the Hyphasis river (modern border of Pakistan with india) there are many reasons some of which have already been touched on:

 

1) Alexander and has troops had been on such a long campaign away from home, family and many of them were quite aged at this point, you have to remember that life expectancy in those days wasnt as high as it is today!

 

2) Alexander had fulfilled his intention of defeating the Persian empire (which at the time included all of modern day Pakistan), infact, the Pakistani provinces of Panjab and SIndh(just as in modern times) where the richest satraps of the Persian empire and it wouldve have been foolish for Alexander not to have absorbed them into his new hellenic kingdom from a cultural and economic point of view.  Furthermore, the Hyphasis river was a natural eastern border which had existed for quite some time and Greeks built on Persian experience in the region.

 

3) Detailed Persian maps didnt extend past Pakistan -the Hyphasis river (which represented the easternmost point of the Persian empire), and thus gangetic/southern India were in essence off the map and were uncharted regions. 

 

4) the people(s) east of the Panjab where considered to be another culture and were never considered part of the Persian/middle eastern/ central Asian or meditaranean cultural sphere.  Their customs, beliefs amongst other things were considered foreign and many people didnt know too much about them!

 

6)  information/rumors had arrived, that political turmoil in Greece/Macedonia was threatening Alexander's and his proxy dependents rule to the throne.

 

7)  The military force had been spread out to thin, and Alexander wanted to consolidate his new empire.

 

8) local folklore in the indus region may have further 'psyched' out the Greek forces by telling them tales of the paganistic rituals/sterotypes held of the gangetic indians which included demon worshiping, human sacrifices, manipulative/scheming peoples and were often protrayed as an sub-human, evil dark & demonic race with mutated body forms with dysfigured faces.

 

9) The battle on the Hydapses (near the modern city of Jhelum in Pakistan), was a major turning point, in that it was the first time, considerable resistance was offered, though victorious, the battle must have left an indelable mark on Alexander and that of his troops.  Furthermore, King Poros was estimated to be close to 7ft tall and the Greeks were impressed with his military prowness and charisma, later keeping him on to rule the region afterwards.  In that battle, the regiments acclaimed mascot, Bucephala was killed, which may have been interpreted as a 'bad omen'

 

10) Another turning point was the battle near the modern Pakistani city of Multan, where Alexander was severely wounded by an arrow. 

 

So, without any first hand account of the inner workings of Alexanders camp, one will never truly know the real reason behind Alexander's military route and advances.(the same analogy can be applied to why he took certain routes through turkey, Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan etc..) so there will always be speculations.   I think its save to say that a number of the aforementioned factors played a part in his decision vis-a-vis the route he took.