#BATTLE OF HYDASPES

[ernestdescalsartwok]

SCYTHIAN-WOMEN-ART-PAINTINGS-WARRIORS-BATTLE OF THE HYDASPES-ALEXANDER THE GREAT-SLAVIC BEAUTY-ERNEST DESCALS-ARTIST-PAINTER por Ernest Descals Por Flickr: SCYTHIAN-WOMEN-ART-PAINTINGS-WARRIORS-BATTLE OF THE HYDASPES-ALEXANDER THE GREAT-SLAVIC BEAUTY-ERNEST DESCALS-ARTIST-PAINTER- At last ALEXANDER THE GREAT was able to face the Scythian warriors in the battle of the Hydaspes, true Amazons who had that kind of wild beauty typical of the Slavs of the steppes. Painting by the artist painter Ernest Descals with watercolors, seeking the expression of determination. Por fin ALEJANDRO MAGNO pudo enfrentarse a las guerreras escitas en la batalla del Hidaspes, verdaderas amazonas que tenían esta clase de belleza salvaje propia de las eslavas de las estepas. Pintura del artista pintor Ernest Descals con acuarelas, buscando la expresión de la decisión.

[lux-vitae]

The Phalanx Attacking the Centre in the Battle of the Hydaspes by André Castaigne (c. 1898-99)

[whencyclopedia]

The Hyphasis Mutiny

The so-called Hyphasis Mutiny was a conflict between Alexander the Great (356-323 BCE) and his army following their victory at the river Hydaspes in 326 BCE. Alexander voiced plans for further conquests in the Indian subcontinent, however, when his men reached the river Hyphasis, there was an open revolt. The mutiny ended with Alexander giving in to his men's wishes and turning back; he did not venture further into the Indian subcontinent as he intended. Over the years, historians have examined the importance of this moment of tension between a king and his army. This includes the issue of whether the term “mutiny” can truly apply to this incident.

The Indian Campaign

When Alexander marched across the Hindu Kush to India in 327 BC, the denizens of Bazira feared for their lives, fled to the Aornos Rock, reputed to be impregnable so that not even Heracles was able to capture it. Alexander had difficulty getting to the rock and started building a mound, then gained a foothold on a hill. When the Indians noticed the Macedonians closing in, they surrendered. Alexander placed a garrison on the abandoned portion of the Aornos Rock.

The city of Nysa asked Alexander to recognize their freedom and independence, which Alexander granted and made allies of them, acquiring 300 horsemen. He also had a base in Taxila, after promising to help Taxiles against his enemy, King Porus. Alexander met Porus at the Battle of Hydaspes in 326 BCE, which included war elephants. After the battle, Porus was allowed to continue ruling his kingdom and became an ally of Alexander, and Alexander continued to march further into India.

Continue reading...

[jeannereames]

Shows or movies based on historic figures and events are hard to pull off if the goals are to be both entertaining and somewhat true to history. If we accept that some inaccuracies can't be avoided in order to appeal to audiences what would you consider cornerstones and pillars about Alexander and his history that can't/shouldn't be touched in order to paint a somewhat realistic picture in media based on him and his life?

How to Make a Responsible Movie or Documentary about Alexander

I saved this to answer around the time of the Netflix release. For me, there are four crucial areas, so I’ll break it down that way. Also. I recognize that the LENGTH of a production has somewhat to do with what can be covered.

But, first of all…what story is one telling? The story arc determines where the focus lies. Even documentaries have a story. It’s what provides coherence. Is it a political tale? A military one? Or personal? Also, what interpretation to take, not only for Alexander but those around him. Alexander is hugely controversial. It’s impossible to make everyone happy. So don't try. Pick an audience; aim for that audience.

MILITARY:

Alexander had preternatural tactical skills. His strategy wasn’t as good, however, especially when younger. Tactics can be a genius gift (seeing patterns), but strategy requires experience and knowledge of the opposition. The further into his campaign, the more experience he gained, but the cultures became increasingly unfamiliar. He had ups and downs. He was able to get out of Baktria finally by marrying Roxana. That was strategy, not tactics. He beat Poros, then made a friend of him; that’s strategy. Yet he failed to understand the depth of the commitment to freedom among the autonomous tribes south along the Indus, which resulted in a bloody trek south. And his earlier decision to burn Persepolis meant he’d never fully reconcile the Persian elite.

So, it’s super important to emphasize his crazy-mad tactical gifts in all forms of combat, from pitched battles to skirmishes to sieges. Nobody in history ever equaled him except maybe Subatai, Genghis Khan’s leading general. In the end, I think that’s a lot of Alexander’s eternal fascination. He fought somewhere north of 250 battles, and lost none (where he was physically present).

But HOW to show that? What battles to put on screen? Oliver Stone combined three into one + Hydaspes because he had only 2-3.5 hours (depending on which cut you watch). The Netflix series is going to show all four of the major pitched battles…or at least all 3 for the 6-episode first part. They had circa 4.5 hours to play with, but they cut out other things, like Tyre.

Another issue, from the filming/storytelling point-of-view is how to distinguish Issos from Gaugamela for the casual viewer. They’re virtually identical in tactics (and players on the field). So it made a fair bit of sense to me for Stone to conflate them. In a documentary, it’s more important to separate them, largely to discuss the fall-out.

Some v. important clashes weren’t the Big Four. Among these, the sieges of Halikarnassos and Tyre are probably the most impressive. But the Aornos Rock in India was another amazing piece. I’d also include the bridging of the Indus River to illustrate the astonishing engineering employed. Again, if I had to pick between Halikarnassos and Tyre, I’d pick Tyre. I was a bit baffled by Netflix’s decision to show Halikarnassos instead, but I think it owed to an early error in the scripts, where they had Memnon die there. I corrected that, but they’d already mapped out the beats of the episodes, so they just kept Halikarnassos. That’s fine; it was a major operation, just not his most famous siege.

Last, I really wish somebody, someday, will do something with his Balkan campaigns. What he did in Thrace and Illyria, at just 21, showed his iron backbone and quick thinking. It’d make a great “and the military genius is born” set-up, drama wise. But you could use the Sogdian Rock to show the clever streak, at least (“Find men who can fly” … “I did; look up.” Ha) Plus it has the advantage of being where he (maybe) found Roxana.

Last, he fought extremely well--wasn't just good at tactics. Being a good general doesn’t necessarily mean one’s a good fighter. He was. Almost frighteningly brave, so show that too.

RELIGIOUS:

Ya gotta deal with the “Did he really think he was a god?” thing, and the whole trip to Siwah. I obviously don’t think he believed he was a god; it’s one of the things I disliked about the Netflix show’s approach, but they were dead-set on it. I DO think he came to believe he was somehow of divine descent, but of course, that’s not the same as most moderns understand it, as I’ve explained elsewhere. It made him a hero, not a god on a level with Zeus, and to ME, that’s an important distinction that Netflix (and to some degree Stone) rode roughshod over.

But I’d like to see more inclusion of sacrifice and/or omen-reading—religion in general. Cutting the Gordion Knot (omens!). His visit to Troy (Netflix tackled that one). A really cool thing would be to make more of the lunar eclipse before Gaugamela. Again, Netflix touched on that, but it’s one of those chance events that might actually have affected a battle’s outcome, given how seriously the ancient near east took sky omens. (A solar eclipse once halted a battle.) The Persians were freaked out. Even his massacre of the Branchidai in Sogdiana was driven by religion, not military goals. Pick a couple and underscore them.

I give Stone big props for the sacrifice before the Granikos/Issos/Gaugamela battle. It was so well-done, I’ve actually shown it in my classes to demonstrate what a battlefield sphagia sacrifice would look like.

Alexander was deeply religious. Show it.

POLITICAL:

Ah, for ME the most interesting stuff surrounding Alexander occurs at the political level. Here’s where the triumph story of his military victories all went south. He knew how to win battles. He was less good at managing what he’d conquered.

In terms of a story arc, the whole period up to Gaugamela is really the “rise” of the story. Post-Gaugamela, things began to collapse. And I would pin the turn on PERSEPOLIS. Yes, burning it sent home a message of “Mission accomplished.” But he was selective about it. Areas built by Darius I were spared, Xerxes’ were destroyed: a damnio memoriae.

Problem: Persepolis embodied Persia, and ATG essentially shat on it. Not a good look for the man who wanted to replace Darius III. That he also failed to capture and/or kill Darius created an additional problem for him. Finally, his lack of understanding of how politics worked in Baktria-Sogdiana resulted in an insurgency. Bessos was going to rebel, regardless. But Spitamanes might not have. Alexander created his own mess up there.

Another matter to look at is why he created a new title—King of Asia—instead of adopting the Persian title (King-of-Kings). I don’t think that was a “mistake.” He knew perfectly well the proper Persian title (Kshāyathiya)…and rejected it. He adopted some Persian protocol, but not all of it. After the summer of 330, he was essentially running two parallel courts, which seemed to satisfy neither the Persians nor his own men. (Kinda like docudramas are a hybrid that seems to annoy perhaps more than satisfy.)

So I’d like to see this handled with some nuance, but it’s intrinsically difficult to do—even while, if done well, it would be the most interesting part of an Alexander story, imo.

So, what events, what events…3-4 leap out after Alexander’s adoption of some Persian dress. The Philotas Affair, the Pages Conspiracy, the Death of Kleitos, the marriage to Roxana. I’d show it all, although I could also understand reducing the two conspiracies to one, for time, in which case, the Philotas Affair because it resulted in the fall of Parmenion. But the fact there were two, not just one, tells a story itself.

What about the proskynesis thing with Kallisthenes? I’ve come to disbelieve it ever happened, even though it’s symbolic of the whole problem. So, weirdly, I’m of two minds about showing it. OTOH, it won’t be in my own novels. But OTOH, I could easily see why a showrunner or director might want to include it. And it certainly appears in several of the histories, including Arrian.

Then we have the two indisciplines (mutinies)…one in India that made ATG turn around, and another at Opis. They’re really two different things as one was an officer’s rebellion, the other the soldiers themselves. But will viewers be able to distinguish between them? It’s like the Issos/Gaugamela problem, or for that matter, the two conspiracies. They’re similar enough to confuse the casual viewer. “Didn’t we already see that?”

But if they were narrowed to one, how to choose? The mutiny on the Hyphasis provides an explanation for why he turned back. But the Opis event was more dramatic. The man jumped down into the middle of a rioting crowd and started (essentially) knocking heads together! So if I had to pick…Opis. The other might could be mentioned in retrospect.

PERSONAL:

Here are five things I think really OUGHT to be shown, or that I have yet to be pleased by.

1) Philip isn’t an idiot and should get more than 10 minutes of screentime. Oh, and show Alexander did learn things from him. Stone had to make his movie a Daddy-Issues flick, and the Netflix thing did very little with Philip as they wanted to get to the Alexander-Darius face off (which was the meat of their story). But there’s a very interesting love/competition story there.

2) Olympias is not a bitch and was not involved in Phil’s murder, although I can see why that is catnip to most writers. She did kill Eurydike’s baby and (by extension) Eurydike. One of the historians in the Netflix story (Carolyn, unless I misremember) talked about the rivalry between the two wives, at least. But I think ATG planned to marry the widow and Olympias got rid of her to prevent it. Now THAT’S a story, no? But they were in too much of a hurry to get to Persia.

3) Alexander was not an only child! He had sisters (and a brother) with whom he was apparently close…and a cousin who was his real rival. To me, missing that cousin rivalry overlooks a juicy personal/political story! Too often all the focus winds up on Alexander-Olympias-Philip-Eurydike-Attalos, but man, a more subtle showrunner could do a lot with the Alexander-Amyntas rivalry. But he’s constantly cut out. I can’t think of a documentary that actually addresses Amyntas except in passing (if at all)l

4) Hephaistion’s importance is a must, but I’d like to see him treated as someone with a personality and authority of his own, besides just as ATG’s lover. At least Netflix Went There onscreen with the love-story part, but otherwise, the writers couldn’t figure out what to do with him. Neither Stone nor Netflix really portrayed him as his own person. I do understand why they can’t show the whole cast of characters. I had to do weeding myself in the novels, but I’m annoyed Netflix showed only Hephaistion and Ptolemy. Where’s Perdikkas (so important all along really, but certainly later)? Or Philotas, Kleitos, Krateros, Leonnatos, Lysimachos (later king of Thrace)? I think viewers could probably have handled at least another 5 people, especially if introduced gradually, not all at the beginning.

This brings me to….

5) Alexander’s apparently very real affection for the people in his orbit, from personal physician (Philip) to childhood pedagogue (Lysimachos [not same as above]) to Aristotle to various other philosophers. He was so loyal to his friends, in fact, he initially jailed the people who brought word of Harpalos’ first flight.

He needed to be loved/appreciated and wanted to give back to people. Yes, generosity was expected of kings, and as a king (THE king), his generosity had to excel that of anybody else. But he seemed to genuinely enjoy giving presents. I think of him like that one friend who heard you say you liked that cute pair of “Hello, Kitty” socks…then 6 months later they’re your Christmas present from them. Some of his gifts were grandiose, but not always. I love the dish of little fish (probably smelts) that he sent to Hephaistion, presumably just because his friend liked smelts!

To me, point #5 would be easy to get in with a skilled scriptwriter, tucked into the corners of other scenes. It’d be fun to highlight the personal side. If we can believe Plutarch, he was a PRODIGIOUS letter-writer. Also, he loved to hunt, so that’s another thing. And he loved the theatre, and to watch sport. These would all be very humanizing details.

I think the biggest issue is that most of these documentaries/docudramas are done by people who don’t know squat about Alexander aside from a few things, before deciding to make a documentary/movie about him, or write a book. Their research is shallow, and even if they bring on the experts, they don’t always listen. Stone DID at least have a long fascination with ATG, but it caused him to try to throw in everything but the kitchen sink. It wasn't as bad of a film as some have made it out to be, just horribly bloated and for all his reading, he never understood the WORLDVIEW. I wrote about that some while back in my review.

The best documentary/movie would be told by an actual specialist who knew enough at the outset to craft a better, more complex story arc.

Or maybe I’m just biased because I tried to do that myself in my novels. 😂😂😂😂

[ariesgamesandminis]

New CGL Sized Hex Base & Restocks are in from Iron Wind Metals!

20-5089 Cizin Hover Tank (2) 20-5117 Kodiak II (Standard) 20-5140 Ostscout OTT-7J 20-5173 Scourge SCG-WF1 20-5187 Dominator 20-5204 Stormwolf Prime 20-5214 Jade Phoenix Prime 20-715 Jagatai Prime 20-785 Demolisher II Tank 20-885 Hermes II HER-2S 99-202 Large Flat Top Hex Base #2 99-207 Large Flat Top Hex Base #3 BT-008 Void Battle Armor BT-098 Visigoth Micro Fighter BT-104 Jagatai Micro Fighter BT-108 Tyre Micro Fighter BT-112 Sulla Micro Fighter BT-120 Sabutai Mech Scale Fighter BT-141 Hydaspes Micro Fighter BT-144 Lancer Micro Fighter BT-147 Zero Micro Fighter BT-148 Dagger Micro Fighter BT-149 Eisensturm Micro Fighter BT-152 Vandal Micro Fighter BT-168 Vulcan Micro Fighter BT-202 Rogue Bear Heavy Battle Armor BT-207 Delphyne ProtoMech BT-216 Archangel Dominus BT-239 Jump Support Infantry BT-245 Heavy Infantry - Firing BT-303 Vulture Mk III Prime BT-317 Thor II A BT-331 Phoenix Hawk LAM MK I PHX-HK1 (Mech) BT-364 Gabriel Hovercraft BT-368 Cecerops Protomech BT-369 Elemental Battle Armor (3) BT-372 Savannah Master Hovercraft BT-381 Basic Inner Sphere Battle Armor (3) BT-463 War Crow A BT-472 Wolverine WVR-7M / 7M2 / 7K FT-017 Scytha Mech Scale Fighter FT-019 Kirghiz Mech Scale Fighter 20-400D Puma "Adder" Prime Arm Sprue 20-456C Typhoon RAC Variant RAC Gun Sprue 20-727B Karnov UR Transport Rotor / Blade 20-864B Hatchetman Arm Sprue

[barbariankingdom]

Battle of Hydaspes

[wonderful-world-of-hetalia]

ok so my history ass really wants to talk about this but here’s this cool headcanon I have but let’s talk about The Horse Ever.

Nono, not Poland’s Horse. Sorry Feliks and the rest of my blood kindred.

So this is Alexander the Great and his horse, Bucephalus (literally meaning Ox-Head)

According to legend, Bucephalus basically was impossible to tame and Alexander was just “alright, I got this” and basically was the only one who tamed this majestic beast. But basically for much of Alexander’s life, Bucephalus was basically his beloved son on four legs who went into countless battles with Alexander. Unfortunately, Bucephalus was killed in the Battle of Hydaspes (somewhere around modern-day Punjab) and Alexander was really, really distraught to see his beloved hoof son slain in battle. However, Alexander literally made a city where Bucephalus is slain in honor of his beloved horse.

You might be asking “Cheebs! What the FUCK does this have to do with Hetalia?!”

Oh, you’re getting to the Good Part, my friend.

So Ancient Rome (before being Christianized) and Ancient Greece basically had the same gods, right? (Only difference being renamed, like Zeus = Jupiter, Hermes = Mercury, etc). But Alexander’s conquest basically laid the seeds to the beginnings of the Roman Empire.

So we got Ancient Rome in his youth, when the Gods basically called upon him, seeing this young Rome as the one chosen to be the very personification of the young republic and beyond. Jupiter, basically being the King of the Roman Gods (basically Roman Zeus) was the one who basically bestowed a resurrected Bucephalus to Rome himself, for the gods see him as a worthy successor to Alexander to lead the newly-established Republic (and soon, Empire)

Rome’s Bucephalus was just like Alexander’s Bucephalus personality-wise. Rome knew about Alexander’s conquest, but he did eventually tame Bucephalus and basically the two were inseparable, even when Rome had to abandon his own gods who bestowed his best friend and comrade-in-arms. For those years Rome and Bucephalus rode together in battle, from the siege of Carthage, the fight against his greatest enemy, Germania, and many, many internal conflicts. However...

The death of Bucephalus was also the death of Rome, just like the day Bucephalus died at the Battle of Hydaspes. Unlike Alexander, Rome basically died alongside his long-time friend during the day his empire fell, knowing that he will at least die alongside his best friend and longtime comrade his former gods bestowed upon him.

In much of the stuff I work with, whenever I draw Rome, I always have to draw Bucephalus alongside him (see below)

Bucephalus basically is like the one cat who only likes one person (Rome) and hates everyone else, mostly jealousy. Someone not Rome trying to mount Bucephalus? Prepare to get some broken bones! Rome is talking to someone else? “FATHER, WHY DO YOU NOT GIVE ME ATTENTION???”

But nonetheless, Bucephalus and Rome are quite literally best friends!

[essaytime]

Battle of. Let me.

MARATHON THERMOPYLAE SALAMIS LEUCRA GRANIKOS SIEGE OF TYRE ISSOS GAUGAMELA HYDASPES CANNAE ZAMA SIEGE OF CARTHAGE SIEGE OF CORINTH GERGOVIA ALESIA PHARSALUS PHILIPPI SIEGE OF PERUSIA ACTIUM MILVIAN BRIDGE AD DECIMUM TRICAMARUM ALL OF THE SEVERAL POITIERS BATTLES CEDYNIA GŁOGÓW LEGNICA PŁOWCE GRUNWALD WIŁKOMIERZ COURTRAI AZINCOURT VITKOVA HORA NEMECKY BROD DOMAZLICE LIPANY VARNA CONSTANTINOPLE 1453 MOHACS NOVARA PAVIA ORSZA OBERTYN THE HOLY BATORY TRINITY (POŁOCK + WIELKIE ŁUKI + PSKÓW) KIRCHOLM OLIWA KŁUSZYN BIAŁA GÓRA (I FORGOT WHAT IT IS IN CZECH) CECORA CHOCIM NO. 1 KORSUŃ ŻÓŁTE WODY BATOH BERESTECZKO/BERESTECZEK (I forgot) CHOCIM NO.2 VIENNA RACŁAWICE MACIEJOWICE

LODI CASTIGLIONE ARCOLE MARENGO AUSTERLITZ TRAFALGAR JENA PRUSSISCH-EYLAU WAGRAM BORODINO BEREZYNA LEIPZIG LIGNY-

✨️W A T E R L O O✨️

and afterwards nothing. Not that I don't know anything, but because later military history is boring as hell

Anyway this is all I remember right now. I forgot some Belisarius and I'm sad about it.

APOLOGIES

Any battle at all except Waterloo. Reblog if you can think of one!

[karagin22]

Battle of the Hydaspes aka Battle of Jhelum

[ananta2024]

More Watch : https://tinyurl.com/34dxkn3c Viral Vedio Today Battle of Hydaspes, Porus defeated the general in the battle Watch Now :https://tinyurl.com/4x5dxftm #viralbareng #sharadpawar #love #JesusisLord #Rosie #Davido #Wizkid #SteveBannon #Mandela #Flash #Wordle #RII7E_Or_NONE #BringBack #SeunghanRosie #Wizkid

[ernestdescalsartwok]

BATALLA-HIDASPES-ARTE-PÌNTURA-ALEJANDRO MAGNO-ELEFANTES-REY-POROS-INDIA-PAKISTAN-ACUARELAS-PINTOR-ERNEST DESCALS por Ernest Descals Por Flickr: BATALLA-HIDASPES-ARTE-PÌNTURA-ALEJANDRO MAGNO-ELEFANTES-REY-POROS-INDIA-PAKISTAN-ACUARELAS-PINTOR-ERNEST DESCALS- Acuarelas que priman el movimiento y la atmósfera, la BATALLA del HIDASPES, elefantes del Rey Poros contra la Caballería Macedonia de ALEJANDRO MAGNO, llegando a los límites del mundo para ampliar el nuevo Imperio conquistado, en su afán, el Rey de Macedonia y nuevo Gran Rey de Persia luchó en las tierras de Pakistán y la India. Pintura con acuarela sobre papel del artista pintor Ernest Descals, historia y Arte se fusionan.

[ihavedonenothingright]

— Alexander the Great in 326 BCE after the Battle of Hydaspes.

Bucephalus is dead.

[whencyclopedia]

Diodorus Siculus' Account of the Life of Semiramis

Semiramis is the semi-divine Warrior-Queen of Assyria, whose reign is most clearly documented by the Greek historian Diodorus Siculus (l. 90-30 BCE) in his great work Bibliotheca Historica ("Historical Library") written over thirty years, most probably between 60-30 BCE. Diodorus drew on the works of earlier authors, such as Ctesias of Cnidus (l. c. 5th century BCE).

Ctesias (whose works only exist now in fragments) was ridiculed for inaccuracy by other ancient writers, but his accounts are treated as reliable by Diodorus who cites him without reservation.

While modern historians are divided on whether an historical personage named Semiramis ever lived, Diodorus presents her life as a straightforward biographical account of the reign of a great Assyrian queen. As there is only one known queen in the history of Assyria, the regent Sammu-Ramat (r. 811-806 BCE), Semiramis has been identified with her since the 19th century, when archaeological excavations began to uncover Assyrian cities and decipher ancient Mesopotamian inscriptions.

Diodorus' Storytelling

Diodorus does not concern himself with when, or even if, such a queen lived and devotes his energies instead to telling the epic tale of an intelligent, beautiful, and clever queen who rose from humble beginnings to rule all of Mesopotamia, Anatolia, and Central Asia. It seems clear that he borrowed certain events in Semiramis' life from other tales, whether historical or mythical, but this does not seem to have concerned him as long as the story was a good one.

An example of this in the text below is Semiramis' invasion of India, which is very similar to that of Alexander the Great. In 327 BCE, Alexander invaded India with his army, and one of his greatest challenges at the Battle of the Hydaspes River (also known as The Battle of Jhelum) in 326 BCE was the war elephants of King Porus of Paurava. Diodorus, in his account of Semiramis' invasion, could not realistically give her army elephants and so, it is thought, he added in the story of the make-believe elephants to even the odds on the field and make for a better tale. Diodorus' addition of the fake elephants, however, is an example of what makes his works so interesting to read: he never seems to have allowed the truth to get in the way of a good story.

Continue reading...

[jeannereames]

This question usually comes up framed as “did Alexander know about China?” - but what I really want to ask is: how aware was Alexander of what was to the East of his conquests?

He reached India, so he must have known that there were kingdoms / civilizations / countries that form what we presently call India as well. Was he aware of say, Tibet? Or Southeast Asia? I’m fairly certain Alexander and China didn’t know about each other, but if Alexander initially wanted to expand to the east, what did he know about it?

How Much Did Alexander Know about the East?

I suspect this changed as he moved east. The wall of the Himalayas is pretty steep. I'm not sure the route that would become the Silk Road was really open yet; it dates to the first century BCE. Alexander did encounter silk, but I believe it was in India. Silk starts popping up in the West after Alexander, although, again, some limited silk coming via Persia (via India) is older.

That said, when the army hit Marakanda/Samarkand, which was ON the later Silk Road, it's entirely possible that he'd have heard something. I doubt it would have been very clear, however.

It's really in India that he'd have heard more. After the Battle of the Hydaspes, the army hung out in Poros's lands for a bit. That's where he heard enough about the extremely warlike nations further into India--as did the army--that led to the indiscipline at the Hyphasis. In fact, some scholars have suggested Alexander actually *staged* the indiscipline, to give him an excuse to turn around. He knew he didn't have enough troops to take on the kingdoms in central India.

How much he heard about China beyond that, I don't know. It would depend on how much was known in the Punjab region.

But certainly, Alexander's army returned with a lot more information about Central Asia, and further east, than had been known before.

Strabo's Geography (Roller has the complete collection translated) is probably the best place to look. He used a number of the now-lost Alexander historians, when writing, and even evaluates the reliability of these.

[ebelal56-blog]

Alexander the Great: The Final Stand

Join us on a historical journey with Alexander the Great as we explore his final stand. In this kings and generals documentary, we dive into the epic tale of one of the most legendary figures in ancient Grecian history. I stand at the precipice of history, a conqueror, a dreamer, a man whose name will echo through the ages. I, Alexander, have carved my path through the heart of empires, from the sun-baked plains of Persia to the lush valleys of Punjab. The Achaemenid Empire fell before me like a house of cards, its once-mighty walls crumbling under the weight of my ambition. I tasted victory at Gaugamela, the thrill of triumph coursing through my veins as I gazed upon the remnants of Darius’ forces, scattered like leaves in the wind. But here, at the banks of the Hydaspes, I find myself face to face with Porus, a king as fierce as the storms that rage across the skies. His elephants tower over my men, a living wall of muscle and might, yet I am undeterred. I have faced the fiercest warriors, crossed deserts and mountains, and still, I press on. The thrill of battle is intoxicating, the promise of glory beckoning me forward. Yet, as the clash of steel fills the air, I sense a tremor beneath my feet, a whisper of dissent among my ranks. My soldiers, weary from the endless march, their spirits frayed like old cloth, they look to me with eyes that once sparkled with the fire of conquest. Now, they speak of home, of the familiar comforts left behind, and I feel the weight of their longing. I am their leader, their king, yet I am also a man, and I understand their fears. The dream of India, of further conquests, begins to fade like the evening sun. I am forced to turn back, to abandon the vision that once burned so brightly in my heart. The world I sought to conquer slips through my fingers like sand, and I am left with the haunting echo of what might have been.

[rohanscornernz]

Who was Alexander’s horse?

#Alexanderthegreat #greekhistory #buchepalus June 326 B.C. Death of Buchepalus – Alexander the Great’s Horse Although Alexander won the Battle of Hydaspes and defeated Porus, he lost his horse #buchepalus. He could not sustain the injuries and lost his life.This horse had accompanied him through all his conquests and Alexander was deeply saddened by the loss of his beloved horse.Follow for more…