Why Did Alexander The Great Run Away From India?

Alexander the Great, was a military genius who conquered most of the world during his time. However, western historians have distorted this information to make him appear more impressive than he was. Alexander’s last campaign - In India - is shrouded in myth. What really happened?

[@AtharvVarshney]

I don't know why we study akhbar, and other Mughal when we have such rich history. King purushottam(porus) and the mauryas were the greatest kingdoms in india of all times. NCERTs do not teach such rich and prosperous history. This should definitely be changed.

[@AtharvVarshney]

​@@arpitjain5744 Yes, we do study about Ashoka in class 6th, but we only study the top cream part(1 chapter), not depth. But we study mughals and delhi sultans in depth(3 chapters).

[@ashwindeva7111]

@@AtharvVarshney do you have lessons about pandyas and cholas

[@sunilraj1404]

In earlier times after independence our central education ministers are only muslims who preferred there kings only and published in school books but not hindu kings...so we get very small information about hindu kings

[@AtharvVarshney]

@@sunilraj1404 absolutely correct. 💯💯

[@lazy_wolf_unofficial]

@@ashwindeva7111 can't tell about NCERT, but in oure bengal syllabus, I've studied Chola, Chalukya, Pandya and Rashtrakut. Well to most students, History was boring as hell.

[@justtzortz2010]

here in greece we love and respect india for its great culture and history. greetings my indian brothers

[@vyshzzzz]

❤

[@Krisdeva]

Looking forward to the revival of great Hellenistic culture of Greece

[@RaseYourProbs]

Just admit alexander lost and we're good 😂

[@aroravinay1986]

As per i know about history Porus actual name was King Purushotam from Puru clan And yes their elephants were not less than big weapons they were trained to kill their enemies with their strong trunks which are covered by spiked shields

[@greatkaafir7478]

चंद्रवंशी महाराजा ययाति के पुत्र पुरु के वंशज पुरु,पौर,पौरववंशी वंशी क्षत्रिय कहलाते हैं,इस वंश के महाराजा मतिनार सूर्यवंशी सम्राट मान्धाता के नाना थे,महाराजा पुरु से एक शाखा कुरु वंश की चली,इनसे चन्द्रवंश की अन्य शाखाएँ भी चली,एक शाखा बाद तक पुरु या पौरव वंशी कहलाती रही... गोत्र--भारद्वाज प्रवर तीन--भारद्वाज,ब्रह्स्पतय,अंगिरस वेद--यजुर्वेद शाखा--वाजसनेयी नदी--महेंद्र तनया(सतलुज) वृक्ष--वट छत्र--मणिक मुक्त स्वर्ण छत्र ध्वजा--लाल झंडे पर चंद्रमा का चिन्ह शस्त्र--खडग परम्परा--विजयादशमी को खडग पूजन होता है शाखाएँ--हरिद्वार क्षत्रिय राजपूत,कटोच राजपूत,पुरी(खत्री) गद्दी एवं राज्य--प्रतिष्ठानपुर,पंजाब आदि वर्तमान निवास--पाकिस्तान,पंजाब,आजमगढ़ एवं बहुत कम संख्या में बुलंदशहर,मेरठ में भी मिलते हैं,पंजाब और यूपी में कहीं कहीं मिलने वाले भारद्वाज राजपूत भी संभवत: पुरु अथवा पौरववंशी राजपूत ही हैं. प्रसिद्ध पुरु अथवा पौरवंशी--विश्वविजेता यवन सिकन्दर को हराने वाले वीर पुरुवंशी राजा परमानन्द अथवा पुरुषोत्तम

[@greatkaafir7478]

पुरुवंश की शाखा हरिद्वार क्षत्रिय--------- गोत्र--भार्गव,प्रवर तीन--भार्गव,निलोहित,रोहित यह पुरु वंश की उपशाखा है,पृथ्वीराज चौहान के समय इस वंश के आदि पुरुष राव हंसराम पंजाब से अपने परिवार के साथ हरिद्वार आकर बसे थे,उस समय यहाँ राजा चन्द्रपुंडीर पृथ्वीराज चौहान के सामंत के रूप में शासन कर रहे थे,इन्होने राव हंसराम को जागीर प्रदान की और हरिद्वार में पुरु वंश की शाखा का विस्तार होने लगा,बाद में इस इलाके में तुर्कों का दबाव होने के कारण पुरुवंशी क्षत्रिय यहाँ से पलायन कर पूर्वी क्षेत्र में चले गए और आजकल यूपी के आजमगढ़ के आसपास मिलते हैं,हरिद्वार से आने के कारण इन्हें हरिद्वार क्षत्रिय राजपूत वंश कहा जाने लगा..... पाकिस्तान के पंजाब क्षेत्र में कई मुस्लिम राजपूत वंश जो खुद को चन्द्रवंशी बताते हैं उन वंशो का अस्तित्व भारत के हिन्दू चंद्रवंशी राजपूतो में नहीं मिलता है,न ही अलग से 36 वंशो की किसी भी सूची में इनका नाम मिलता है.चूंकि सिकन्दर के हमले के समय पुरुवंश का शासन पंजाब और भारत के सीमावर्ती क्षेत्र में था इसलिए हो सकता है ये पुरुवंशी क्षत्रियों के ही वंशज हों.....

[@koteswararaobondada7325]

Yes I studied in history books.

[@abhimanyuvarmma7955]

@@greatkaafir7478 Actually Alexander is also a brother of porus , as Alexander is also the descendant of Yayathi Do you know who were greeks The name 'greeks' were applied by British Their original name was hellenes They believed they were descendants of king ,warrior hellene or ionos In torah, In old testament bible they are described as descendents of Javan son of Japheth Do you know why in india sanskrit and pali ,greeks described as Yona Or Yavana It is because they were Descendants of Yavana son of Yayathi Both indians (sanskrit,modern sanskrit descendant languages Indo Aryan languages pali,magadhi prakrith,Ardhamagadhi,sinhalese, nepali,hindi,rajasthani,etc) Indo iranian persian,scythian(saka),khotanese(wester nsaka?),etc Anatolian hittite ,luwian,palaic Hellenic ,greek lydian Ancient greek Latin rome, germmanic all are indo european religion ,language,culture,descended from same ethnic,race group Same food habits etc same attire Just look greek and roman and compare indian kings same Kshatriya in old perisan Xsayasya that became shah Adam daryavaush adam xshyayasya xhyasaya vasraka xyasyaxhyasyanam Jupiter, zeuspiter , dyouspithr (dyovpitah ,indra ,) Zeuspiter (sky father ,zeus ,dyaous ,meaning sky Piter ,pater, pitah ,-meaning father. King of theois ,theoi is devas Zeuspiter,dyauspithr And titan is none other than daityaha Daityan , Understand Greeks and indians are same , siblings, brothers and sisters Aryan, Just look at alexander and many indian kings( ancient) example Ajathashatru (Aryan) Ancient indians and Hellenes were aryans,nature worshippers, Vegetarians, Great philosphers , did not harmed our world and environment,scientific technologies, astonomy, astrology Calendar, Gods Uranus -varunaha. God if truth , faith,the seas and oceans,god of water Etc Agni ,-ugnis Unis -ekam

[@LoneWolf-tk9em]

@@abhimanyuvarmma7955 Abrahmic religions destroyed the whole world & rewrote history on their own 😠 their next target is to brainwash Indian history & eradicate Hinduism

[@professorchronicler]

As a student I want to know more about ancient and Vedic India . So, it would be nice if you could share more information on other social media platforms like Instagram and Facebook.

[@kanishkgarg9313]

Dude if you can type that much for a comment, you can type that much to search it on google yourself😂

[@manvendrasingh238]

Talk to your education minister

[@supernovabristol9468]

Please Watch - Surya Putra Karn on KZbin. All episodes.... 100 times (no kidding) and you'll get a fair idea of ancient *Bhaarat* 💪 🇮🇳 🚩 🕉️ 🚩 🕉️

[@akashtripathi6400]

Padh lena bhai apne free time me usme zyada mza hai

[@sreehari3127]

Google and test books won't give much information, we will have to find real information and connect all those to learn our history

[@Vikas-uf4ql]

I hate how Greece historians completely changed the history.. Alexander was very ruthless, king he Never leave his enemies alive.. This show Porus The Great defeated Alexander..

[@-_--vx5hz]

There aren't even any Indian sources that say porus won 💀

[@bpt3486]

@@-_--vx5hz because taxila and all are burned

[@throbbingfellow1136]

Are you joking? Alexander left the majority of his foes in Persia alive to continue on ruling their provinces in his stead instead of Darius’. The people he killed with extreme prejudice were traitors, either of this agreement or his original army.

[@ConmouZ]

Porus lost from Alexander by the way.

[@ttbrokers]

​@@ConmouZ your stupid knowledge says 😅😅😅😅

[@soumyadipbanerjee9027]

Alexander feared the mighty huge elephant cavalry of Gangaridai emperors ie the Nanda emperors. He already fought Porus and severed some loss due to Porus's elephant cavalry. While Porus's cavalry wasn't so big as of Gangaridai. He knew if he dares to enter the area near Ganga Rarh he and his army would be crushed by Gangaridai emperor and their elephants

[@gaudiyawarriors87]

The ancient civilization of Bengal named *Gangariddhi* , it had an elephant cavalry of 50000 active _Dantis_ . Alexander with his Massidonian army feared to hear about the military power of Gangariddhi (Bengal) & never dared to move forward.

[@isituationdac574]

He escaped from Shah Rukh Khan

[@chandanpakhira2520]

@@isituationdac574 don't distrrout history.srk in Ashoka was mere a film and ashok was the king in India in 260 BC 100 yrs later

[@pragyankhare1223]

Bro i don't think Alexander ever came to India if he had visited India where was his reference in Indian ancient text even no description of battle of hydespus even though the biggest university of ancient times was near thearby There are two conclusion of this Either he hadn't came to India Or is get defeated by a small kingdom king raja porus 🤷‍♂️🤷‍♂️ So ancient people doesn't gave him much attention

[@chandanpakhira2520]

@@pragyankhare1223 the news that Alexander the Great king of land earth was popularised by Western historian and his colleagues in that invasion like Justinian Plutarch .there are thousand accounts brother proves the great Alexander postponed Indian invasion due to super military power of local samrats.his general selecus had to permit his daughter marriage with chandragupt after heavy loss in war.

[@skfamemonster]

Also I want to add : The battle started with the War Cry:- Alexander ( sikandar) = In The Name Of Zeus ATTACK! PORUS ( Raja Purushottam) :- HAR HAR MAHADEV!! 🔱 Then the battle began! It was 8 hour battle fought between them and during the battle it was also raining.And alaxander lost. Also go search about Nanda, maurya and chola empire. 💪🔱 Our history was so Rich with brave Warriors!!

[@nostradamus522]

Think his name was A Leh si andër ( Aleksander ) Think that was in a documentary mention. He was born like a dream. His name make only in Albanian language full sense.

[@govindsridhar6270]

His name sikandar seems to be like skandar (lord subramanya)

[@skfamemonster]

@@govindsridhar6270 umm no. Actually it's persian word. When Alexander conquered persia. The persian people called him sikandar. Means 'warrior'.

[@govindsridhar6270]

@@skfamemonster anyway skandar is a warrior lord of Hinduism

[@skfamemonster]

@@govindsridhar6270 let me correct you here.. What you refering to is 'Skanda' which is our Lord kartikeya ( Lord of war) son of Lord shiva. But this is ' Sikandar' which is persian / arabic origin. Which is also means warrior. And there's one more that is 'Skandar' this means helper or defender and origin is islamic.

[@nermainmerl6108]

Why would they say that Alexander died from illness and not from a wound in battle? It was his dream to die in battle, he was always on the frontlines. Greek impact in India lasted until the 1500s AD. Alexander pulled back because his army mutinied. No one would follow him further. They started under the premise of revenging Persia for the attack on Greece and liberating Greeks who in their eyes were ruled by barbarians. In fact, when Alexander talked with Anaxarchus, he told him that there are infinite worlds and he wept because he was not yet a ruler of one. Maybe in his eyes, Persia had conquered the world but when he conquered Persia he discovered that there are so many territories yet to conquer. But his army? What did they get from following him thus far? Finally, there were many celebrations after winning a battle and capturing a city, I don't understand where you came up with that they didn't. Persepolis was literally sacked after weeks or months after capturing it during a celebration, where his soldiers got too drunk and started looting.

[@Blastizor]

HE FUCKING LOST TO PORUS HAHAHAHAHAHAHAH

[@shortfusedynamite5166]

Perfect response to this video

[@riichobamin7612]

He didn't run away. His supply lines were stretched quite thin and his soldiers were home sick.

[@oomz1975]

He saw the trained elephants & shit himself.

[@throbbingfellow1136]

@@oomz1975You can believe that if it helps you sleep at night.

[@PotatoEngineer]

And all this happened in India all of sudden, ask yourself :)

[@samarthtiwari3355]

​@PotatoEngineer ..... It did? What's your point lol

[@vr2crossquake705]

@@oomz1975He saw the trained elephants that he made run over their own troops in like combat. If anything he found an epiphany. He marched and conquered the whole Achaemenid empire and more and people think he would’ve faltered. He may not have been able to support a full campaign but the amount of glazing they’re giving to largely inferior armies who weren’t as battle tested as Alexander’s Macedonian troops is insanity

[@doggos7083]

Porus was not a powerful king but A King of a small Tribe in the borders of India who defeated Alexander.

[@MorallyDubiousFrog]

There is 0 evidence that Porus won. Every historical account of the battle between Porus and Alexander ends with Alexander victorious.

[@doggos7083]

@@MorallyDubiousFrog Then you have only read the history written by the west only and you haven't updated your knowledge since then. We had also read about Alexander's victory when we were in school, when we were kids but later got to know that's not the case at all.

[@MorallyDubiousFrog]

@@doggos7083 Can you name a single source or account that says Alexander lost?

[@AmanPrakashSingh49]

​@@MorallyDubiousFroggo read persian and chinese records then kid

[@MorallyDubiousFrog]

@@AmanPrakashSingh49 Name a single one that says Alexander lost.

[@aritradutt1843]

I always had the same question in mind while I studied history in school. This seems a fairly reasonable explanation. Returning defeated enemy’s kingdom is probably the shittiest story.

[@tylerdurden3722]

Yeah. It's a shtty story. The same with all the places in Greece. They were defeated but allowed to rule themselves. Also, all the places in Anatolia...also defeated and allowed to rule themselves. Apparently the Persians did the same. They conquered places and allowed the conquered to rule themselves. So existence of the Persian empure is also is shitty story. The Mongols also. Most of the places they conquered were allowed to rule themselves only sending taxes...just like Alexander and the Persians. Rome also, they had tons of client-kings that were allowed to rule themselves. Rome didn't exist because this is a shitty story of regions being allowed rule themselves as long as they pay taxes. All of this history is a shitty story. In other words, the Mongol empire never existed, because conquering people and letting them rule themselves as long as they pay taxes is a shitty story. The Persian Empire also didn't exist for the same reason. Porus' kingdom was inside Persian territory...he was paying taxes to the local Persian Satrap. Which means that Porus and kingdom, being part of the Persian empire, also didn't exist.

[@aritradutt1843]

@@tylerdurden3722 I understand that the logic is hurtful and that's why you are spewing your frustration in a mocking way; but the reality is Porus never paid any tax or anything to Alexandar as per the history, and that's what makes it really shitty and not the other examples you brought in.

[@chirag1134]

@@tylerdurden3722 Hi Are u Muslim 😅

[@ranvijayrao4209]

@@aritradutt1843 because Alexander died in India

[@Miguelangelflix]

@@aritradutt1843 jo jeeta wohi sikander... aab yeh bhi kya macedonian language hay??? Nothing can change the fact that alexander have defeated porus on battlefield...

[@vp100]

The crazy part is that Takshashila (one of the largest universities in the world at that time) was so close to all of these battles but no one really wrote about this big event in Indian History. It could have been destroyed by the Mughal invaders but there were not even copies. The great Chanakya from Takshashila was the only one that wrote about Alexander. Also, there is not much clarity from the Greece side either of what happened. It's just the western world that started pushing the idea of Alex defeating Porus just like they did with the Indus migration theory. There is no firm answer to what happened. Most Greece historians believe that Alexander lost to porus, most Indians believe Porus lost to alexander but he was allowed to rule his kingdom because alexander was impressed by his bravery. Some theories also say it was Chanakya and Chandragupta who had something with Alexander getting sick. I mean it was Chankaya's purpose to stop Alexander which led to Chanakya being insulted in patliputra and him vowing to create a united India.

[@vp100]

@yitzhak shekkelsteingoldmanberg why?

[@ahirbhairavorai7793]

We Indians are living in the past , yes Takshashila was burnt but what is preventing India from creating a new and better Takshashila ?

[@jansi757]

Trsnslate to tamil

[@vp100]

@@ahirbhairavorai7793 not the same Indians, the colonization changed us and took our culture away, but the new generation is going in the right place

[@gkvikram]

Chanakya was Dhakshinpala came from modern day undivided Andra pradesh or from Dakshina bharat.He was not from Takshashila but a scholar strategist from south india

[@xristospapasotiriou1968]

Poros and his Indian army was a brave and noble opponent for the Greeks, as it immediately comes from the historic sources and in any possible detail you can imagine, mainly from the book " ΑΛΕΞΑΝΔΡΟΥ ΑΝΑΒΑΣΙΣ" of Arrianos the historian.

[@justicethedoggo3648]

Yeah Alexander's army was tired of fighting and did fear the going ahead but Alexander would have gone further he he didn't die back in Babylonia. He beated Porus and further also won against other territories while reaching the sea at arbian sea at Gujarat coasts

[@dynamitebsb4520]

​@JusticeTheDoggo he lost aginst the border indo aryan tribes...he wasn't able to penetrate...he tried to do so for a whole year unsuccessful. Only Europeans make him great, for us he's just alexander the Macedonian

[@justicethedoggo3648]

@A Y Macedonian According to HIS speech.

[@faristafari]

​@@justicethedoggo3648 the spartans, athenians, macedonians, thivaioi, thessaloi at these times were seperate city states under the same greek region where all citizens spoke ancient greek. They were fighting each other all the time but in the end Macedonia is Greek.

[@ΓιώργοςΠαρασκευόπουλος-ω4τ]

​@@dynamitebsb4520It's still crazy that he reached that far despite having his men being outnumbered and tired, not only that, but the mf was preparing to do an invasion to Rome and only got stopped, compared to other rulers where they got massively defeated and in turn lose all of their power, by literal plot convenience. He is called great because he had a good system in the back, spread the Greek culture while also not disturbing the other culture s and, I will repeat, NEEDED to get assassinated by PLOT.

[@PastaGuns]

Don't let this get copyrighted or taken down by KZbin, you're doing great work and btw, at that time there was no India, it was Akhand Bharat.

[@kushagrasrivastava6210]

Yes🔥

[@PastaGuns]

@@vincentcroft1473 there is accurate history. U dont want to read it is not my fault kid.

[@memerboi1213]

If it happens We will take down KZbin

[@thewill968]

There is no such thing as Bharat,it is Sindhu then and Sindhu now.Bharat is fake story from brahmins.

[@RepentJC]

Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ “For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son [Jesus Christ], that whoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.” - John 3:16 “Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest. Take my yoke upon you and learn from me, for I am gentle and humble in heart, and you will find rest for your souls. For my yoke is easy and my burden is light.” - Matthew 11:28-29 “He that believes on the Son has everlasting life: and he that believes not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God stays on him.” - John 3:36 Call upon the name of Jesus “And it shall come to pass, that whoever shall call on the name of the Lord shall be saved.” - Acts 2:21 “…Now is the day of salvation.” - 2 Corinthians 6:2 Confess Jesus as your Savior Advertisements REPORT THIS AD “That if you shall confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus, and shall believe in your heart that God has raised him from the dead, you shall be saved. For with the heart man believes to righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made to salvation.” - Romans 10:9-10

[@ahirbhairavorai7793]

Alexander came to India exhausted after fighting a lot of battles along the way from Greece to Central Asia. Along the way he suffered massive loss in soldiers, horses and mental health. He was exhausted. When he saw the Indian Infantry filled with Massive elephants it was just too much for him and his men. It was the first battle for Indian Kings and may be the 100th battle for Alexander, so I think Alexander just decided to go back. If it was the first battle for both kings (Indians and Alexander) then I have no doubt Alexander would have won due to his sheer military planning capabilities but it was wise decision by Alexander to pull back. This does not make Alexander a less King.

[@rajeshmanoharan4560]

If he had a sheer capability of military planning then he should've planned in advance about the oncoming losses that he would get through in wars on his way.. He was too much confident about his troops which resulted in backing off from Indian kings. This ofcourse doesn't make him a less king but he wasn't really that great as well..

[@theRatPackwasthebest]

@@rajeshmanoharan4560 I mean.. it's about his speed, and remember he died very young.

[@rajeshmanoharan4560]

@@theRatPackwasthebest that doesn't make any credit to his success.. We've never lived in those era and haven't seen what happened at that point of time.. Its all about the stories narrated about them in history in which half of the stories can be fictional too.. To celebrate the character called "Alexander" they would've exaggerated a few stories and who knows it..

[@jknjhh9225]

I don't think that alexander would win even if it was his first battle. One of the reasons is elephants if alexanders army don't know what a elephant is then they will run away the movement they see a elephant army,I hope you understand and there are a lot of explanations about how alexander ran of from india considering those i don't think even if it was his first battle he would have been destroyed

[@jknjhh9225]

@Angela Bronckhurst Even the army of 334 won't touch thte indian resistance imo because no human army at that time would last against the army of thousands of elephants who were trained to kill,Plus alexanders army don't had any training in how to fight a elephant probably they were even saw elephants for the first time in india and there are other reasons aswell.

[@whydama]

Two points: Philip II is to be read as Philip the second not Philip two Alexander's invasion led to the establishment of Bactrian Greek state, this had a huge impact on India during late Antiquity

[@onlythewise1]

after uk leave India, India got worse they lie to keep face

[@gregjones3660]

Go on…

[@whydama]

@@gregjones3660 Some.people theorize that Punjabis are a mix of Greek and Indians. They used this to explain the DNA link between Greeks, Iranians and Punjabis.

[@gregjones3660]

@@whydama And Punjabis are the people of the Bactrian Greek state?

[@whydama]

@@gregjones3660 Bactria occupied almost all of the Punjab region. Modern Punjabis might be a result of intermarriage among Indians and Bactrian Greeks.

[@souravsantra8292]

Old greek historians mentioned the name of gangaridai Dynasty of Bengal.....

[@Lmao69]

Because he would have attacked india again, Alexander was a wicked, insane conqueror, no one can trust him

[@souravsantra8292]

@@Lmao69 কে তোমাকে বলেছে ওকে বিশ্বাস করতে। আমার কমেন্টের সাথে ওকে বিশ্বাসের কথা আসে কি করে? আর এই সব কথা গুলো মানে " ইউকেট" যে তুমি বললে। খুব আপেক্ষিক। মিনিংলেস বলতে পারো।

[@Lmao69]

@@souravsantra8292 ami jani tomar "Bengali pride" Jege utheche, amio bangali kintu ami eisob kichu bolbo na.

[@souravsantra8292]

@@Lmao69 না ভাই আমার বাঙালি প্রাইড জেগে ওঠেনি। ওটা চির কালই ছিল আছে আর থাকবেও। কেন তুমি বাঙালি হয়ে বাঙালি হিসাবে গর্বিত নও? আর আমি বুঝলাম না তুমি কি না বলার কথা বলছো?

[@souravsantra8292]

আমি এখানে একটা ঐতিহাসিক তথ্যের কথা বলেছি।এটা সাথে তোমার কিছু বলার বা না বলার কি আছে?

[@DevaEkoNaaraayanah]

Jo Jeetaa Vahi Sikander Nahi JO jeetaa Vahi "Porus" !

[@nik4bros]

Porus nai jeeta

[@kapilsurve8638]

@@nik4bros porus hi jeeta

[@_inspireverse___]

@@nik4bros abe lodu agar porus hara hota to alexander pure hindustan pe kabja nhi kar leta jabki alexander duniya jeetne hi nikla tha

[@kapilsurve8638]

@Gurpreet Chahal uh really huh ? Kaha se padhi yeh illogical baat 😂

[@ajayk1432]

@Gurpreet Chahal in battle yes but in Alexander's heart porus won the battle as he haven't seen a man waging war against his army ...

[@silencemeviolateme6076]

He didn't run away from India. He conquered the western bank of the Indus and set up a vassal state in land on the eastern bank.

[@jknjhh9225]

He had defeated 1 or 2 small nations but when it came to porus he was defeated miserably

[@silencemeviolateme6076]

@@jknjhh9225 Credited to have been a legendary warrior with exceptional skills, Porus unsuccessfully fought against Alexander the Great in the Battle of the Hydaspes (326 BC).[2] In the aftermath, an impressed Alexander not only reinstated him as his satrap but also granted him dominion over lands to the south-east extending until the Hyphasis (Beas).[3][4] Porus reportedly died sometime between 321 and 315 BC.[5]

[@jknjhh9225]

@@silencemeviolateme6076 That is clearly a made up story lol,You didn't even saw the video dude

[@silencemeviolateme6076]

@@jknjhh9225 all we know about porus we know from Greek sources. Most bigots don't like Alexander.

[@jknjhh9225]

@@silencemeviolateme6076 Greek sources were just lying . It's not because “Bigots” don't like alexander it's just that they are stating the truth. I don't need to explain anything you can just watch this video and understand why alexanders victory is illogical.

[@mikekenney8362]

“When the myth becomes truth, print the myth.” Some speculation is included here as if it were documented fact, but in general the myth of Alexander’s invincibility is subject to question. He withdrew from India, and he was a long way from home entwined in unfathomable intrigue…and elephants.

[@patrickgrant6389]

Yeah because his men didn't want to go on if he had the power the force 40 thousands men to fight he would of he was planing to conquer indian if he didn't die before he started indian would of got a spanking India fell to a island nation with 10percent of the India population and couldn't do shit

[@GamerOne_me]

Naah he and he troops were exhausted as well as afraid to face Indian King Where more than 300,000 soldiers and 1000 elephants waiting him to cross sindh If he did he will be dead meat Alexander has only 30k soldiers And they are good warriors But Indians are gaint warriors 6.5 to 7 feet height

[@Chhhottaaadonn]

​@@GamerOne_me😂😂 fake historian His army captured so many weak parts of the world but they decided to leave the richest nation 😂 Porus was a nobody I ln India his kingdom was nothing compared to magdha empire and other 16 empire in India

[@GamerOne_me]

@@Chhhottaaadonncomedy is you call you self historian 🤣🤣 Persian is big empire at that time Alexander won there And they themselves said he was badly injured in the battle at the Indian borders And what you exactly trying to prove

[@Chhhottaaadonn]

@@GamerOne_me lol bigger doesn't mean stronger you idiots you have never read a single book 😂😂 Mostly white historian try to potray thier kings stronger Persian were easily crushed by Muslims Plus Alexander was having hard time with with a small king like porus who is not even mentioned in Indian record In 305 bc the army of Alexander returned with his commander Selcus nictor founder of selucid empire And were DEFEATED by the mauryan Greeks got thier ass kicked by Mauryans Nandas Shungas During the invasion of Alexander ( not so great) there were 16 kingdoms in India And porus was just a local ruler with weak military And magdha empire had 200k soldiers 3k war elephant 20k Calvary 2k chariots Alexander only won the battle because of help from the king of takshashila who was enemy of porus

[@Sunny12-23]

I remember reading somewhere that Gen. Zhokov, a Soviet general said that the description of Alexander's army's return from India matches that of a retreating army. Question: why would a victorious army retreat? Zhukov ends his statement by saying that he knew what a retreating army looked like. Apparently as a young officer he was part of the Soviet regiment that chased the Nazi army back to Berlin.

[@AmirHamza-km7ug]

Seriously? Why would you make a historical judgment just from a Soviet General's quote? That doesn't make sense.

[@ojomohemeka4087]

Read your history very well and gather your facts very well before you start saying what you don't know

[@Sunny12-23]

@@ojomohemeka4087 You are an expert on Alexander's campaign in India ? Why don't you share your sources ? I shared mine. You can check Gen Zhokov's statement on internet unless of course you are living in a country that has censored all but "official " narrative.

[@AreebMAdil]

He wasnt a young officer that was part of the soviet regiment that chased the nazis back to berlin, He led the full invasion and was the mastermind of Bagration and other Soviet Masterpieces

[@leonidjoseph5483]

not an young officer but a marshal of the Soviet Union. commander of the 1st Belorussian Front consisting of 9lakh men 17000 guns and 3000 armoured vehicles.

[@jytte-hilden]

This video, trying to explain how it was actually Porus who won the battle of the Hydaspes, is pretty much the equivalent of a four year old, covered in chocolate, trying to explain how it was actually a bunch of ninjas that broke in and ate all the cookies.

[@hyperionzii5889]

You really suggest a lot of bias points. Indian forces were not superior in tactics or weapons. He didn't flee from fear of Indian armies, Alexander did not flee due to facing brave armies for the first time lol. He had fought brave armies at every step. Poor supply lines, and over extended campaign led to moral losses. Moral loss is devastating in any time period, revolt is a deep threat. Also a sheer lack of interest from other Maradonian nobles mixed with sickness made each battle in India a dangerous rolling of dice. Elephants are clumsy beasts, slow and easy to out maneuver, with a tendency to kill many from their own armies. Horses are far better in war scenario's. India faced an already waning Macedonian army who had been led to places they did not want to be. When they clashed with large, well led India forces, moral plummeted as the lands they took were unwanted by Alexanders generals. His army had no chance of victory in India. Even though he out maneuvered his enemies with superior battle tactics. It was a doomed campaign from day one. He needed to return his men home, recoup and rebuild. Then strike. India would have fallen without issue if he had returned to his strongholds for respite and resupply before attacking in force. Alex lost more men on the march home then he did in India. And how do you know what was written long ago was distorted? lol were you there?

[@AmanPrakashSingh49]

Ok let's assume he won that battle and wanted to conquer lol how would you ho further with an upcoming empire of nanda and vikram with nanda about 2 lakh soldiers aand infantry and 2000 elephants not vikram's army was eve larger how would you a victorious king ( self proclaimed) win another battle of an army like of nandas when he couldn't even defeat porus with an army of 30k soldiers infantry and 200 war elephants what a joke. 😂

[@anshulchouhan1482]

porus and all indian soldiers were consider very taller than greeks . greek account says that indian king puru was around 7 feet and roman travellers wrote that indians are much more taller than all there asian counterparts and taller than greeks . this says alot about that time as at that time india was top of the world in wealth ,education everything . and we had no invadors or no food scarcity as this land had never been until the british and mughal invasion which made indians looks like what they are now

[@hyperionzii5889]

@@AmanPrakashSingh49 the joke is your facts. India was far from united. He was allied with powerful Indian tribes. Thats how genius. Easy to see youve never served in the military or studied warfare when you make a moot point like that.

[@AmanPrakashSingh49]

​@@hyperionzii5889 I think this comment of yours answers your baseless unbiased assumption in itself if you are objective enough to understand it. (Oh sorry sorry literate enough to understand it ). I never said anything about INDIA being UNITED. I just said How come your World Renowned Victor (self proclaimed obviously) would have possisbly think to win INDIA when He couldn't even defeat a TRIBAL LORD.( in that time PORUS was nothing more than a TRIBAL LORD even though he was a king cause there were many empires in INDIA like NANDA, VIKRAMADIYA"S and many more infront of them he was simply like a rock infront of a mountain. Do your research on this I mean you are a military man afterall so research on this a little if you are capable of knowledge that is). My MOOT POINT to that comment was simple " How can Someone possibly expect to believe that a self proclaimed victor who killed thousands if not millions of kings even after surrendered, being looted with their pride, their wealth suddenly felt manly by seeing an Indian Tribal Lord that he left him alive battling whom he got killed his favourite horse and didn't even cared to take the wealth the looted treasure ( If he was able to win that is) of that SAME nation to fight which he LOST THOUSANDS OF HIS SILDIERS. How Believable. and he just left that country. As I said the question answers in itself if you are literate enough, knowledgeable enough to understand it.

[@xristospapasotiriou1968]

Alexander the Great did not run away from India. On the contrary he established the hellenic kingdom of Bactria in Northwestern India. His indian campaign was absolutely victorious despite the exhaustion of the greek army.

[@ishita_04]

Title : Why did Alexander the great run away from India? Me: Cause he wasn't great.

[@sourabhslb4275]

Alexander was a great warrior but he and his army may have got exhausted when they entered India plus they underestimated the local kings might. They may have been defeated while trying to enter India. Since, no concrete evidence is available why Alexander retreated it should not be presented in a distorted manner by Western historians.

[@captainhighbury1806]

well then why we are taught in the textbooks that Alexander treated Porus like "king should treat other kings like a king"? Why was it treated like a line on the stone that only reason for Alexandre's turning back was the exhaustion of his soldiers and not considering the possibility that he may have lost against Porus or he was sh!t scared to move forward?

[@LexDomo]

Except Alexander stays another year defeating the mallian and went south along the Ganges after defeating Porus. If Alexander were defeated, he would've retreated immediately but he didn't. I guess that's one proof showing him winning the war.

[@captainhighbury1806]

@@LexDomo do you even know the location of river Ganga what some calls Ganges? You are way way far off saying he went along Ganga. Your western historians are filling garbage in your brain

[@Trampoukosss]

His generals and soldiers was tired of endless wars they wanted to enjoy what they have achieved.India for Alexander was an easy conquer

[@captainhighbury1806]

@@Trampoukosss LOL, You are funny.

[@knightheart3482]

Their are only two possibilities of that event. First , Alexander won but suffered heavy losses and his army lost motivation so instead of marching forward he made truce and left, if he would have decided to go farther king porus would have been killed but would have been defeated by Nanda empire. Second, he lost the battle but instead of killing him king porus spare his life and let him go. In either case it would have been a shame on Rome, so to hide this truth Roman historians wrote this event in a way we study todays.

[@Murlileo]

What has Rome got to do with it!!!

[@knightheart3482]

@@Murlileo sorry I got confused to Macedonian empire with Roman.

[@Yogis_BitterTruth_Nirvan]

you are probably brainwashed by western communists racist historiens. if porus had lost, today at least some of us might have greek looks and hair. so its clear it was just a lie to glorify greeks. by your logic alexander cheated Ambi. he promised him to have porus kingdom when defeated. Ambi would start another war with alexander because he was cheated. alexander never defeated porus there is no such records in India . their histories are paid to write lies. both in ancient times and today. it is in their same genes tha lied in the past.

[@diyworld4462]

@@Yogis_BitterTruth_Nirvan It's not easy to defeat him plus he had the support of greeks, Egyptians, Persians and some indian kingdoms.

[@knightheart3482]

@@Yogis_BitterTruth_Nirvan bro I'm not brainwashed and I said there are two possibilities and if you look at Alexander's war tactics it is not easy to defeat him but again his opponent was King porus with war elephants so there is good chance that he lost against king porus. There are facts that provides weight to both possibilities like cruel man like Alexander wouldn't let k porus live after winning or he won but couldn't March farther due to heavy losses and hugs army waiting for him ahead. King porus is also one of my favourite King.

[@vCLOWNSHOESv]

Alexander won in India but his men refused to keep fighting. They had accomplished what they set out to in conquering the Persian empire. His men wanted to see home again and enjoy their wealth.

[@elgonm289]

He and his army were getting their arses kicked you ignoramus ..the fights were getting fierce and the Indian Kingdoma were powerful.

[@6souravgupta]

Even in that time India's population was much bigger than the Greeks at that region. Alexander's total number of aarmy was around 30k and poros/puru/parvateshvar had 20k for a small kingdom in India. After facing adverse climate and terrain and seeing his demoralised army (he also got injured and severely ill) he decided to return. The war was stalemate,he died in Babylon due to injury and illness.

[@JanXXVI]

Alexander had the whole of Persia, with millions of people in it, he could raise much larger armies than what he used, but the larger the army, the more logistic problems you have, and the slower it moves. At the Battle of Hydaspes there were 47000 Greeks and some persians, but he did'nt cross the river with the whole army, but once the battle had started, the rest crossed upstream, and they captured thousands of indians who ran, and surrounded the rest. The war wasent a stalemate, Alexander vassalised Porus kingdom, and conquered all the lands south along the Indus, thus restoring lands that had belonged to Persia. India wasent a country back then, there were several indepent kingdoms, so Alexander wasent at war with whole of India, only the very western part of it, boarders back then were often along rivers, and so to was this boarder established, with a conquest of the same lands that Darius the great had owned. Alexander took an arrow to his left side during a siege battle, it nearly killed him. But his army saved him and took the city violently in anger. Alexander was operated on, and he recoverd. The campaign was finished, and half the army sailed back home, and the rest walked. It's not fully clear what Killed him in Babylon, but he had strained his body greatly, a dusin wounds, and perhaps malaria, along with heavy drinking.

[@clyde3237]

@@JanXXVI Having travelled unopposed along the bank of the Indus, Peithon arrived at Pattala and reported that new cities were springing up, with colonists settling contentedly in them. The second branch of the delta was found to broaden into a lake containing sea fishes, proof that it communicated with the Ocean. As this arm had no strong tidal current, Alexander decided that here was the site suitable for the harbour whence he proposed to send a naval expedition from the mouth of the Indus to the Persian Gulf. Now the serious problem of the selection of the Admiral for the Fleet demanded consideration. Alexander could not be spared; he alone could guide the troops over the Gedrosian desert and retain the confidence of the men during what might be a terrible ordeal. As the crews were obliged to land frequently for provisions, the ships must sail close to the shore, where they would find depots with special markings to ensure safe collection. The Admiral must possess exceptional qualities; he must be of equable temper, resourceful in the event of storms or other disasters, experienced in the handling of subordinates, energetic, keen to explore and undaunted by the perils of a probably long voyage. Many names were passed in review, but all, for one reason or another, were discarded. Then Nearchus begged to be permitted to undertake the task: "With the help of God", he said, he would conduct the ships to Persia. Alexander knew that in Nearchus he had the right man, but hesitated to expose his old friend to so dangerous an adventure, but the sailors were delighted when they heard that Nearchus would be in charge; that selection ensured success.

[@clyde3237]

As conditions on the voyage deteriorated, the crews were on the point of mutiny when they recognized the vegetation of the Carmanian coast and knew that their suffering would soon be ended. Nearchus conducted the fleet to Harmozia, on the mouth of the river Anamis, and made enquiries about the position of the army. Marching inland, he caught sight of a man in Macedonian uniform; all wept when they discovered that he was a Greek who had left the King some five days' march ahead. Nearchus was led to the Governor of the didtrict and together they mapped out the route to the camp. Whilst Nearchus returned to moor and protect his ships, the Governor hastened to break the glad news to Alexander. Days passed; doubting the reliability of the Governor, Alexander placed him in custody. Having ensured the safety of the fleet, Nearchus, with Archais and five officers, set out to find the camp. On the way they met messengers whom Alexander had despatched to seek the fleet, but his emissaries did not recognise Nearchus when they passed strangers, emaciated, unkempt, with ragged clothing, straggling bears and dishevelled hair. Archais suggested that these men might help them to find the Macedonians. Overcome with joy when they learned that the apparent beggars, whom they had scarcely noticed, were the very men for whom they were searching, the soldiers told how Alexander had been tortured with anxiety; his countenance had betrayed his distress when, after a lapse of several days, he had received no confirmation of the Governor's report. With cries of delight the soldiers conducted Nearchus and his officers to the tent of his King. Fortunately his narrative of his meeting with Alexander was preserved for posterity; it reads like an epic poem. At first Alexander did not recognise the friend of his boyhood. Overcome with emotion he wept, continuing to hold the hand of Nearchus, but unable to utter a word. Believing that the men before him were the sole survivors of the naval expedition, he strove for self control; when he could regain his voice he expressed his relief to find that Nearchus and Archais were safe. Again words failed; then, hesitatingly, he asked them to tell him how the ships and their crews perished. To which Nearchus answered that the fleet, all except four vessels, were now securely moored at the mouth of the river. Overjoyed, Alexander shed more tears, and swore by the Zeus of the Hellenes and the Libyan Ammon that this good tidings had given him more happiness than the conquest of the whole of Asia. - Alexander the Great and his Time by Agness Savill

[@dabidmaurice6578]

Alexander and his army suffered many losses after 10 years of conquest. Not to mention that they were far, far away from their rear base, and that many Macedonians had to return to their homeland. If you don't put these things in perspective, then you can't grasp the whole story. The kingdoms were probably powerful, but I don't see the point of Alexander pushing any further. The video and comments compare the Macedonian army to the German army. Without the support of the Macedonian phalanx, nothing was possible. The fatigue, the distance, the climate with which the Greeks were not familiar. Many factors explain the Macedonian withdrawal. There is a reason why the Indian kingdoms were able to resist, but there are also other reasons, which explain why there was no conquest of the Persian Empire by the small Indian kingdoms, divided and which would also have failed because of the distance, the geography and the totally different climate, and exposing the elephants to the same risks as Alexander in unknown territory. All of these factors are ignored in this video which seems more interested in establishing the superiority of a non-existent nation at the time without recounting and describing the conditions of the Macedonian expedition while ignoring the ideology, and the reasons why the Macedonians did or did not do so. It would seem that Alexander pushed the envelope too far and fell victim to his desire for greatness without considering all of his factors, but it is quite possible that the forces at play, the terrain, and the tactics of the opposing military art overcame his "madness" of excessive conquest.

[@noahrothschild137]

​@@JanXXVI what's the source of this info?

[@alexandrupreda1994]

India did not defeat Alexander. Even with the battle historically won, Alexander's army was tired and exploring new and different lands. In the battle with Porus, many people had not even seen an elephant alive and they were considered in the true sense of the word "monsters" when they were seen. However, Alexander managed to impose himself in front of Porus's army, even with a "Pirusian victory".

[@Smileton]

Why did he gift his conquered territories to the enemy then? Something is definitely fishy. Western historians only believe in Greek sources which seems to be very biased.

[@najarvmt]

There were other text which had mentioned about Alexander and of the battle with King Purushotaman; where he at the battle ...was injured by poisonous arrows which did not allow him to further his conquest.

[@brianemmanuelleon]

Mentira, deja de engañar a la gente, Alejandro murió invicto, deja de mentir

[@Chhhottaaadonn]

​@@brianemmanuelleonran away from India after fighting small king 😂😂

[@deepdungeon8465]

​​@@Chhhottaaadonnlol what? Do you believe this video? 😂. Or should i tell you why Chandragupta has to reclaim the northern Indus with his massive army and fight Seleucus and won? Because on early years Alexander won against smaller kings but his army was afraid to go to Nanda and great Indian Kings in inner Ancient India. Alexander won against Porushittan but was to forced to go back and conscript massive force that could fight the Nandas and other Kings. 😂

[@Blastizor]

@@deepdungeon8465 Seluceus is another fiction by western, it never fucking happened, there's is literally no source of it in India lol

[@mikem5105]

And again what do the historians know?! When we have here youtube experts taking about history 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

[@ahsanzahir100]

Right..let us change history..Alexander ran away..wow..he was afraid of Porus..right..next let us write Porus conquered Europe..it is one thing to hate Mughal and Delhi Sultanate (together they ruled for 700 years)..but now we want change for Porus..good..

[@elgonm289]

Says a Muslim who want to be an arab

[@sunil1008]

Actually Alexander figured out that pouras a little king gave so much trouble what would a powerful king like charagupta under the guidance of Chanakya be capable of .He thought better to leave.

[@__sankarapandian_23]

Nanda rulers during his time

[@sarthakyadava]

Chandragupta rose to power during the time of Alexander's death , there was no such famous thing as "Chandragupta" during his time , all credit goes to king Porus ( Purushottam )

[@devingoggins7159]

There was no Chandragupta at that time

[@VivekKumar-yy8ie]

Dhanananda Was the Magadh king king that time

[@musicstaroffl]

"run away"? In your dreams. How did Greek language come into India? Greek historian in your court? Greek architecture in your cities? Greek kings names, the Maurya describes as their lords in prakrit inscriptions. Hadn't India escaped because of compromise, the whole India including the south (fyi - which the 'Great' Maurya couldn't even capture) would've been under his control.

[@musicstaroffl]

@Musashi Merchant or Ambassador?

[@ronnin.1uke]

Looks like someone is butthurt

[@musicstaroffl]

@@ronnin.1uke Yes, of fake assumptions.

[@Pro_studios]

they have made their own history full of lies ! they got beaten by every empire they lost every battle ,,, plus their history is full of shame and loses thats why they have to make this crap >

[@Pro_studios]

@@musicstaroffl bro I am not from India nor from Greece. But we know what is real history we are not believing that crap. Plus this channel has 90 of views and subs from India. That's why to get their attention and spread lies to earn money they come up with this crap.

[@mango4558]

Run away is a poor choice of words considering Alexander still wanted to push further but it was clear that moral was so low that he was going to experience an attrition so difficult to sustain. It was clear his only motive then was to retreat, at this point and moment of death is a bit muddled but again he didn't really run, it's just the situation called for a retreat against Alexander's will. Maybe cite your sources in the description? I would like to read them.

[@cinema6444]

You forgot to mention that mainland indian empire was major reason of his demotivation.

[@dimitrismarkos2466]

Greeks and Indians may have once fought but have always respected each other two nations with a vast history trading for thousands of years now have to make a new alliance.. The enemy of my enemy is my friend.. 🇮🇳🇬🇷🇮🇳🇬🇷🇮🇳🇬🇷🇮🇳🇬🇷

[@shirazqasim2932]

He died of septicemia from a wound he sustained in India for which he got all men, women, and animals of the area killed. There are different versions of his death i.e he died around Iraq but one thing the historians have failed to mention is that on his death bed he kept on wailing from sheer pain from infested wound and repeatedly kept on saying '' is there anyone but anyone who can exchange few more days of their life so that he can die in Macedonia and in return that person can have the whole of his kingdom''.

[@aravshastri2411]

No he was not injured in india alexander was injured in battle of issue which happened in Afghanistan

[@babbiking1]

@shiraz dont cinema baga chusinav bidda

[@dynamitebsb4520]

​@@aravshastri2411 that was India...the area was part of ancient India and was inhabited by pakthuas an indo aryan clan mentioned in vedas

[@aravshastri2411]

@@dynamitebsb4520 brother it was not indians who did it it was Persians and still alexander won that fight

[@johnking6252]

Wonderful death bed quote, reminds me hearing a similar quote from a separate reference. Thx. Food for thought.✌️

[@stanmarsh5093]

I can smell the nationalistic bias of this video but that's pretty normal for any historical narrative. The narration is ok but comparing Alexander's army of 300BC to the German Army of WWII doesn't make any sense. Unlike in WWII, logistics was a huge problem in the time of Alexander. Maps don't even show the entire world. Information was too slow and flew only fast as the fastest messenger bird. Also the travel time was too slow, 100% on foot. Alexander, with the technology of his time, took years to conquer an amount of land that the Wermacht took in weeks using airplanes, trucks, trains, and tanks. The vast area of unknown land and the length of campaign all contributed to the sense of uncertainty that had already been hovering over his soldiers' heads for a long time. The war weariness due to the unusually long years of violence all took a huge toll on his men's mental health. Thus, mutiny is a top reason of Alexander giving up on his dreams of marching deeper into India and the Battle vs Purus was the last straw.

[@rdestination]

The thing is that it makes sense why Alexander let Porus maintain his position and celebrate his battle performance. The reason that this makes sense is that this is what he did with all the previous kingdoms he defeated. He did not want to destroy or take people off their positions, he wanted to spread the greek culture and language and be named as the biggest kingdoms’ conqueror who made it to connect all these areas and people and reach the end of the world. This is not just Western history. Alexander had a team of history writers with him who were writing down the battle outcomes and highlights. There are actual scripts found that worked as proof for this. Alexander showed respect to all the advantages of the Indian culture and act of war according to the scripts.

[@skylord6477]

No... One Russian historian written that.... He was defeated badly.... Why just he about entering the country , he left 😅back. Illogical 🤡 theory that his Army personal want to go home 😂😂.... , IF HE WON WHY DON'T HE CAPTURE ALL INDIA AND MOVE FORWARD TO SOUTH INDIA 💀💀... --- Scene he came to capture all world ...😂 --- Reality is porus docked💀 him so badly , he died before entering INDIA 🇮🇳🔥..... TRUTH IS BITTER . India is reclaiming again.. Jai shree Ram.

[@Blastizor]

I think u have brain damage from believing so much western propaganda for all these years. Try reading an Indian history book for other accounts rather than blindly believing westerners who are known to spread lies and falsehoods about history. Why was there no record of Alexander or Porus in Indian texts when there were a literal Indian university right next door which documented accounts of war, even losses and casualties suffered, but none of Alexander, nor a Porus ever existing? If Alexander defeated Porus whilst convincing local king to aid in helping him defeat Porus with the promise that his kingdom would be the king's own, why let Porus live and then break your promise to the king who helped u defeat Porus, by giving Porus back his kingdom. Furthermore Porus killed Alex's favorite horse that he had for over a decade, yet Porus was granted mercy? This entire story is fraudlent and constructed by disingenuous western propagandists.

[@anushrisalunke878]

Puru 💙💙💙❤️❤️❤️ This is what we need to learn as a citizen of india Hatts off to Indian Monk 😘😘😘 Love you ❤️

[@cernunnosthehornedone3336]

Why do you want to learn fake history?

[@anushrisalunke878]

@@cernunnosthehornedone3336 what is fake

[@cernunnosthehornedone3336]

@@anushrisalunke878 there is archaeological evidence that the Greeks ruled north west India after the conquest. Their King was called Demitrius.

[@scottdenoncour6418]

because the woman were so homely

[@AbhinavKumarSrivastava.]

Hey chandragupta the indian king also fought againt Alexander with the help of his guru Chanakya

[@N0Xa880iUL]

Where did you read this? That's debatable. Chandragupta came to power after Alexander. They probably did not even meet.

[@immortalyama698]

Chandragupta Maurya fought a war against Selucus Nicator Alexendar’s military general

[@raminybhatti5740]

Another example of Indian Parallel Dimension History.

[@arundhatichatterjee9396]

Chandragupta Maurya fought Selucus Nicator, a general of Alexander in 356 BC, after the death of Alexander the Great ( in 336 BC)

[@rhythmkhandelwal2940]

Chandragupta wasn't even in power during Alexander's invasion

[@roys8870]

Alexander the Great ran away from India? Anybody who understands military logistics and administration should understand why Alexander did not venture deeper into India. The points that Von Clausewitz enumerated on his treatise "On War" also apply during Alexander's time, except with a lot more complications. Even Genghis Khan did not bother to waste his time and energy to conquer India. The "Anabasis of Alexander" by Arian would be a good start to understand why Alexander did what he did.

[@RajeshGupta-jg4mf]

Lol that's why Britishers came to loot India. India was rich in minerals resources. Every kings dream was to invade India.

[@RajeshGupta-jg4mf]

Illogical justification

[@roys8870]

@@RajeshGupta-jg4mf The logistics were different when the British conquered India. And Queen Victoria sat comfortably in her throne in England while her people conquered India for her. India is not only full of treasures. It is also full of diseases. The question is, why did Queen Victoria became the Empress of India while the only territory they got in China is Hongkong? What is the difference between India and China during that time?

[@siddharthsharma2730]

There are many questions to the theory presented in the video. 1. If Alexander really lost, who & how Selecus Nikator came to throne in Gandhar (now Kandhar)? He was a Greek. If Alexander lost he too must have returned along rest of greek forces. 2. It is widely accepted that Chandragupta Maurya used the chaos ans opportunity to over throw the great Nandas of those times. If Alexander lost in battle of Hydaspes, how such opportunity came to being. And why would the Nandas which were so powerful (as told) would ever care about Alexander? 3. Later, there were coins issued in name of greek kings of western India. Marriage alliances, trade & commerce, cultural entanglement..... If Alexander was really defeated and probably the greeks were driven out or left by themselves, how such developments are possible? I'm not entirely convinced by the video.... Though, I admire this channel a lot.

[@souravfartyal7342]

Hey my friend The so called Alexander never came to India because he never existed. No evidence to Alex have ever been found except few books . The battle against Porus happen near takshashila but no mention of him found but why not? May be he was real may he never existed just some myths made by Westerners to make the look superior now it's on you we have more evidence of our Bhagwaan than Alex, Jesus and that creep allah Thank you🌹

[@mrreal3853]

Very rightly pointed out! Totally agreed! We should stop Self- glorifying and talk falsely just because Porus was part of Indian Subcontinent! Alexander conquered whole of Persian empire and Porus was nothing to him. Moreover Alexander maintained allies with Persians even after defeating them. Totally biased Content!

[@souravfartyal7342]

@@mrreal3853 And how could Geeks have never seen elephant when persians already had elephant

[@siddharthsharma2730]

@@souravfartyal7342 What about self glorification? Alexander never existed, Huns never existed, Shakas, Ghori, Ghazni, Changez Khan, Lodhi, Babar, Timur Lame.... Nobody existed. Why? Because they all at some point of times succeeded to invade India? And what is India? More than just a country I believe it's the 'melting pot' of the world. There are 198 countries. But none of them can be called a 'melting pot'. So I believe everyone, every culture, ethnicity has its own sets of contribution. Besides, invasions has always occurred when (i) central power was weak. (ii) socio-cultural conditions on decline. So for those who simply refuse to accept history, just because they accept nothing but fake glorification and carry huge ego. Here is my advice, accept the history and learn from it. Otherwise, history has a reputation of repeating itself. 🤔

[@NightmareOfEurope]

Alexander defeated Porus. Here are the evidences for you • Alexander's army did conquer most of Punjab. It is evident in the existence of the Indo-Greek kingdom and the development of Greco-Buddhist culture • India had an excellent medical culture, which is mentioned in Greek records. It also records the existence of Yogis. This reflects that Alexander's army really did enter India. • It is evident that Alexander's territory extender well into Punjab, due to the existence of Greco-Bactrian Kingdom and Greco-Indian Kingdoms which had fought multiple wars with later Indian Kingdoms • The river Hydaspes was flooded because of Monsoon. This was a disadvantage to Porus' chariots. • The elephant reinforcement ordered by Porus arrived late. They only arrived after the battle had ended. • Alexander did not appoint Porus as King of Punjab, nor did he return Porus' kingdom. He appointed him as Satrap of Punjab. • Alexander advanced till the Hyphasis (Beas) river after defeating Porus, while he fought the battle near the Jhelum river. Porus would have not let Alexander advance to such distances within his Kingdom if he had won the battle. • Moreover, the sons of Porus were killed in the Battle. So it is likely that Porus must have been extremely angry at Alexander. If he had won the battle, he would have ordered the death of Alexander, or, at least would have captured him. • The cities Boukephala and Nikaia were founded by Alexander on either side of the Hydaspes river. If Porus had won, he wouldn’t have let Alexander build cities in his kingdom. • The battle of Hydaspes was in May 326 BC. Alexander ended his Indian campaign close to February 325BC. This indicates that Alexander spent more than half a year in India after the battle, defeating local kings and administrating the conquered territories. • Alexander moved south to reach the mouth of the Indus. He sent a fleet under Nearchus to explore the Persian Gulf. It is evident that he didn’t 'Run Away' from India. If Alexander had lost the battle, he would have retreated from India, but it is evident that he spent quite a long time there. • He didn't leave India empty handed. He appointed an army under Eudemus to stay in India. After the Porus' death, Eudemus became the ruler of Punjab. So Alexander didn't leave India. He conquered west India and incorporated it under his empire. • Although there are no India sources referring to the battle, Indian polymath Chanakya took the battle of Hydaspes as a lesson and highlighted the need for military training before the battle.

[@NightmareOfEurope]

@Rajnasya There are no Indian Sources mentioning Alexander. Arthashastra is written by Chanakya, who acknowledged the defeat of Porus at Hydaspes and stressed the Importance of military planning before battle. Porus did not genocide the Greeks. He gave Alexander a tough battle, but Alexander still won. Alexander did not retreat. He established 2 cities at the site of the battle and advanced till the Beas river. Only then, he moved south to the mouth of the Indus which indicates that Alexander did not lose the battle, as a lost enemy would retreat directly, but Alexander advanced, because he won the battle. Porus did not get more lands, he lost his kingdom and was made a Satrap in the Macedonian empire The kangra state was ruled but the katoch royal family. Although they do not rule now, the ruled the princely state of Kangra under the British. The first mention of Kangra state is in the 11th century and have no relations with porus.

[@NightmareOfEurope]

@Rajnasya Eudemus was not in Afghanistan, he was in India, and ruled along with Taxiles (Ambhi). He was appointed to take care of the region after the death of Philip, son of Machatas.

[@NightmareOfEurope]

@Rajnasya I don't understand which sources you are talking about. Alexander never encountered Chandragupta Maurya in battle and he only battled Porus and other Local Chieftains of the Punjab Region. Alexander died in 323 BC in Babylon, not in India and the fact that Alexander established satraps and Generals to rule over the Region itself proves that Alexander won that battle. It would be nice if you could mention the sources you are talking about.

[@NightmareOfEurope]

@Rajnasya The Bhagavata Purana and Markandeya Purana are 2 of the major 18 Puranas in Hinduism. These Sanskrit texts are religious and do not contain any relevance to military history or the Greek Invasion of India. The Bhagavata Purana worships lord Krishna and derives its ideas from the philosophy of Monism. The Markandeya Purana is a Sanskrit Text, which is the centre of Shaktism and it too does not give any reference to Alexander, as it is completely unrelated. All the 18 Puranas are filled with legends(mythical stories) and traditional lore, worshiping the Hindu gods, but contains no mentions of Porus.

[@NightmareOfEurope]

@Rajnasya The Bhagavata Purana worships lord Krishna The Markandeya Purana is the central text of Shaktism. Both of these Sanskrit texts are among the 18 Puranas of Hinduism, which contains legendary stories and worships the gods of Hinduism. There is no relevance between the Puranas and the Greek Invasion of India. No peace treaties were signed between Porus and Alexander, as Porus was defeated and had to surender his kingdom to Alexander. Alexander had advanced till the Beas river, which is not a safe passage. It is INSIDE ENEMY TERRITORY. Moreover, he moved south, not west. So none of the things you mentioned happened.

[@manbirdadwal9864]

Alexander never defeated " Porus ". He made good his escape after surrendering Ambhi kingdom of Taxila. ASTONISHINGLY, we Indians don't even know who Porus was- what was his name ? Why not refer to Hydespes by its local name ? Our left leaning Brit taught historians faithfully follow what one court historian of Alexander wrote. Local tradition identifies Porus as " PARMANANDA CHANDRA KATOCH " the Katoch ruler of a dynasty recognized internationally as the oldest in the world and holding sway from the kangra hills upto Multan for considerable period of time

[@nik4bros]

If you don't know...don't plaster your inferior opinion

[@JanXXVI]

Strange that this so called escape saw him conquering lands along the whole of Indus river to the sea. Which Porus was made Satrap of. Alexander's Historian did not write of the invasion into india. As he had fallen from favor and he concluded the history with Alexander's conquest of Persia, 5 years after the invasion started. There are 4 others that wrote the stories: Ptolemy, Nearchus, Aristobulus and Cleitarchus, along with soldiers stories. From these sources there are 4 historians that have written and based their history on those first hand sources. Arrian, Plutarch, Curtius Rufus and Diodorus, which are the surviving text that we have.

[@xCestLaVie1]

@@JanXXVI all European bias in their versions of history. Funny that an Indian perspective isn't respected or even glanced at.

[@JanXXVI]

@@xCestLaVie1 It's not bias, it's the sources we have. I would gladly look att indian sources too, but they would need to be from historians of that time. But do we have any?

[@xCestLaVie1]

@@JanXXVI well didnt you hear, India conquered Macedonia... you dont believe me, where's your source? Alexander didn't even make an impact where he was recorded, the king they mention doesn't have much of a record (we can only guess which king, which was a small king), plus the British and portuguese had a habit of going around burning records of things that weren't European approved. Logic dictates that if the British didn't like what they found about that portion of history so they burnt it (Alexander being defeated). Otherwise why burn any parts of history if it wasn't for a malicious intent. It's either that or logical that Alexander didn't actually conquer anything but needed to have an excuse for turning back or retreating so a story was invented. If you knew much about India at the time, you'd realize it's like me saying that Rome was conquered but Roman's never kept a record of it, which is ridiculous. So you telling me, give me proof it didn't happen is ridiculous. That means anyone can claim that something happened, like Europeans do for Alexander, which the whole situation is ridiculous when you actual examine whats factual. Especially doing everything an army would do while they're retreating, and then blaming it on sickness and fatigue.

[@taiyeebmuhtadi]

He didn't run away from India. The soldiers launched a mutiny, which forced him to leave the region. And he did conquer a part of India, the northwestern region and even defeated Porus.

[@DemonicEmbrace]

According to Grainger, the details of the conflict are unclear, but the outcome clearly must have been "a decisive Indian victory," with Chandragupta driving back Seleucus' forces as far as the Hindu Kush and consequently gaining large territories in modern-day Afghanistan.

[@dynamitebsb4520]

Yeah right, he and his soldiers were afraid of elephants...maybe they were afraid of the other bigger animals inside india

[@normanbraslow7902]

Sounds like an Indian version of " out of Africa" that is a bogus attempt to piggy back of Alexander's greatness.

[@krishnamohanrao4191]

He didn't run away. He fell sick and his soldiers rebelled

[@Issacnewton_]

Yes

[@Lmao69]

Typical class 4th history book knowledge

[@priyadarshsingh6256]

Please if possible make videos on great kings of medivial and ancient history of India like Samudragupta , Harshvardhana Rajputs and many more Which is not taught us that well in school as they mainly focus on British and mugals 🥲🥲🥲

[@anasaftab2342]

i think you should have piad attention in histoory because all of this was taught

[@priyadarshsingh6256]

@@anasaftab2342 but it was not elaborated as much as mugals (In CBSE board)

[@ashwinramani6696]

Truly great to have you guys back. Any chance you could do a post on the Asur Sashara Kavach and how he and Suria Dev became Karn in Mahabarath?

[@JanXXVI]

Indian Monk, read the tactics, Alexander's army wasent mauled by the indian army, it was a decisive victory, the indian army was tacticly beaten and surrounded, the whole indian army could have been slaugthered, instead they were captured by the thousands those who ran, the rest along with Porus was surrounded on all sides, had Porus not surrendered it would have been a massacre, still many thousands of Indians died, Alexanders losses were small compared to the indian army. If it was Alexanders hardest, is debatable, the Elaphants were the only real threat, and they did have an effect, and caused the most losses, but they did not break Alexanders lines, and Alexander's army dealt with them the the way that is most effective, proving that they knew how to deal with Elephants. And once the Elephants broke and ran through their own men, it was all over for Porus. Alexander saw a fellow warrior spirit in Porus, who did not want to surrender, he was thinking of fighting to the death, but was eventually persuaded. This conduct impressed Alexander, who made Porus into a Vassal, meaning: He did not lose his throne or Kingdom, but lost it''s indepence, as it was now Part of Alexanders Empire, and Alexander was his overlord. Porus accompanied Alexander on the southern conquest, aiding him and richly rewarded by adding the lands conquered to Porus domain. It is often a wise move to have a local chief that is respected to administer the lands for you, as a Greek ruler would probably not be popular among the Indian's who had a much diffrent culture and religion compared to the Greek's and Persians. Alexander's mission in india, could have been to add the territories lost to Persia, back to it, which he did, but the Greeks belived that the end of the world was there, at that great River. The plan was to sail back home from it. One also must understand that Alexander's army wasent solely macedonians, it was comprised of Several greek states, who had formed a League, which Alexander was the Leader of. The League's mission was to defeat the Persians and revenge the Persian invasion and Burning of Athens. I don't think anyone expected that Alexander would conquer the whole of Persia as that would have been viewed as almost sheer impossible. The 12 year campaign took these men far away from home and family, and they had done way more than was expected of them and the League's mission. That, and coming to a strange land to them, that had monsoons, malaria, hostile population and turned out to be a large continent that would have taken many years more to have conquered, wasent very appealing to men who were already very rich and been through enough fighting for a lifetime, yearning to see their families again. Thus the invasion ended with the conquest of the western parts of india, down to the Ocean along the Indus, which had been part of Persia, and thus Alexander as the new Persian king of kings had claim to it, half the army sailed back home, and the rest walked.

[@ArmageddonIsHere]

All this is surmise. The ONLY sources that mention any battle with a "Porus" are Greek. There is NO mention of a "Porus" or Purushottam by Indian sources. Guess work at best, told by sources with vested interest in flattering Alexander.

[@johnirby8847]

How Alexander, Muslims, and British defeated elephants: Alexander: force elephants to group in center from left and right flank..missile fire...elephants inflict more casualties on thier own people as they attempt to flee. Muslims: Oblique attack at an angle...force elephants to push into flanks...elephants inflict more casualties on their own people as they attempt to flee. British: fireworks...rockets that explode but do not cause damage but scare elephants...artillery at flanks to force elephants in center...elephants inflict more casualties on their own people as they attempt to flee.

[@ConmouZ]

He conquered a specific part of India one Indian kingdom. He didn’t run away 😂.

[@ConmouZ]

@Goner416 Nahhh he conquered specific part of India the Indian kingdom of king Porus and after Porus made the Malian campaign which also won after that his soldiers force him to return and Alexander left for his side some officers that he trusted in the Indian territories of Greek occupation. Alexander died before conquered the rest of India. He recruited his power to take the rest of India but he died. History is history pal it is what it is. Indian forces couldn’t compare against the Greek technology and tactics in that time. The Greeks they were more much more developed from the Indians.

[@ConmouZ]

@Goner416 🤣🤣 Hey pal where you learn history ? In McDonald’s ? Ancient Greeks and later Romans Created all the western world. USA is a country with an Ancient Greek constitution with Roman structure. The legacy of Ancient Greece inherited spiritually and culturally in the period of renaissance after medieval in North America and Northern Europe. In all north America and Europe we see Greek revival architecture of Corinth and Ionian style. Come on , i wI’ll not participate in this low level conversation. You are stupid go open book son go educated is never too late. The official worldwide historical academical community have a different opinion with you. But you in McDonald’s and in KZbin you know better 🤡💩

[@harshilpachchigar4756]

All the background works was done by the Great Chankya "Kautilya" and Changragupta Maurya. To unite the Indian subcontinent into the One undivided Empire...🚩 Jo jeeta wahi Chandragupta Maurya (not sikander)

[@sarthakyadava]

Bhai Chandragupta ka yuddh Selucus ki army se hua tha naaki Alexander se , kuch bhi mat bola karo 💀

[@peacemaker7075]

@@sarthakyadava seleucus is one of the warrior under foolish Alexander

[@harshilpachchigar4756]

@@sarthakyadava Yes absolutely , but before being a Samrat , Chandragupta appointed as a solider in greek army by Chankya to decisively defeat Alexander, because Proposal of chankya to the DhanaNanda ( last king of Nanda empire) to unite India against greek invasion was rejected by dhanananda. Then chankya begins his "KootNeeti" to Unite India into the One Undivided Empire. Then fought with Selucus and Chandragupta defeated him and restricted selucus to the bectria region.. Thoda NCERT ke alava authorized book pdhke aaya kro..😊👍

[@sarthakyadava]

@@harshilpachchigar4756 So at the end you said the same thing i said 💀✌🏻

[@AdityaSharma-gf8zs]

You are reaching way harder than those same western philosophers you criticize. Even before invading India Alexander's army was close to mutiny because they hated Alexander adopting Persian way of life which was unacceptable by the Greeks. Before reaching India, Alexander had already executed one of his generals in a heated drunk argument. After leaving India Alexander executed 13 of his ringleaders too. At the same time though, Alexander clearly lost a lot of his Macedonian army at the war near jhelum river so even if he marched forward he would've faced defeat for the first time. Right now, no one can actually tell what happened because this was around 400-300bc. I do believe that if Alexander wouldn't have died at 32 he would've eventually taken over the entire Asia too.

[@ojomohemeka4087]

That's true, the man had already made plans to invade Arabia before he died 😄

[@vetiarvind]

This is so wrong. it's doubtful alexander could have taken over India, he could barely punch through pakistan. Even india in the gupta period had elephant archers with iron arrows and stuff.

[@AdityaSharma-gf8zs]

@@vetiarvind Alexander took down the great Persian Empire and in all his big wars against them he was always outmatched in number. I said that he would face defeat in India if he marched further in India but if he had time to prepare things could be completely different. The man was clearly way ahead of his time.

[@ronlawrence342]

This is very interesting - but way to much speculation here for this to be taken as history . Alexander had been at war for 13 straight years. His supply lines were dangerously extended , he was a good 2,000 miles plus from Macedonia. Obviously they didn’t have barges and C-130 airplanes to carry them supplies , his whole Greek army from top to bottom was sick of fighting by the time they got to India . I do believe he defeated Porus , because Porus would’ve kept Alexander and his army as slaves if Porus had won. Alexander more than likely gave Porus his kingdom back because he knew that he ( Alexander ) had not set up the infrastructure to hold onto a territory so far away . He conquered a territory almost the size of the U.S. in 13 years . He was well aware that to supply military and administrative people in newly conquered territory was impractical . He conquered in that short time what it took Rome 200 or more years to conquer , and Rome had plenty of time to build , infrastructure, military out posts and acclimate the populace to a new culture . Way to much ancient evidence that he won against Porus . Neither the Persians , Arabs , Greeks , Jews or anyone else ( even after his death) spoke of him being defeated - ever. Many people grew to hate him as he began to be a egomaniac , if Porus had won we would’ve known about it. One way his men tried to nullify the elephants was to chop at their legs with battle axes - this caused the elephants to go mad with pain and trample both friend and foe alike . Anyway , when the west was defeated by the Muslims or the mongols they didn’t lie about that . Why would so many western historians conspire to lie about Alexander , whom they have little attachment to from 2,300 years ago . If he was retreating , it wasn’t from the Indian army it was from weariness, homesickness and the heat and his men.

[@AmirHamza-km7ug]

Some shameless Illiterates likes to lie about history because of their emotions.

[@ojomohemeka4087]

Well said, even as far and weary the Macedonian army was, everyone knows that if it wasn't for the elephants Alexander would have easily conquer India with 40,000 men

[@AmirHamza-km7ug]

@@ojomohemeka4087 I don't know about conquering bro as I don't know every bit of the story but one thing which is for sure is that King Porus got defeated. Some of these people who comment about these things are of people of low class, in society who have little to no education and mostly speak with their emotions.

[@ronlawrence342]

@@ojomohemeka4087 It would’ve been interesting to see how that would’ve turned out. By the time of Alexander the Greeks had been fine tuning war and battles for many many years , the Spartans had lived ate and breathed the art of war from birth up . It is very interesting how the Athenians used mathematics , and scientific principles to bolster their fighting techniques and technology . We will probably never know everything they had in the way of ancient mechanics . They had an ancient projectile apparatus that has powerful ropes attached to gears and a crank handle . When the latch was released the kinetic energy was shocking . I think I read the projectile would go through like 30 or more men in line. The Macedonians would’ve had access to this as well as other lost military art forms , and techniques. These were probably lost in the Alexandrian , Egypt library when it was burned down with millions of ancient books and scrolls . They claim until the advent of modern canons nothing could compare to this invention on the battlefield . I have no doubt a direct hit from this invention could penetrate an elephants skull. Anyone that doubts some of the Greeks impressive inventions should look up the antikythera machine found in an Ancient Greek ship . It has shocked historians . Anyway thank you for the kind comments. I don’t want to sound like a Mr. Know-it-all, but I think we should try to be objective as possible about history and try not to let our emotions cancel out the truth. It’s a learning process and we’re all trying to figure out what went on back then . As that one mane said : In many ways : we the people of earth are afflicted with amnesia about our past.

[@thendino1]

Hindus did not practice slavery during warfare.....

[@nuralibolataev4474]

Alexander won. If his men weren't exhausted from a 10-year-long campaign he would have conquered all of northern India.

[@muhammadsafi4489]

@Ex buddhist Khushal Singh Maurya no, he is right, watch king and generals alexander conquest

[@eekks]

Lol, ever heard of the Mauryan Empire ?

[@PotatoEngineer]

Wow, a winning king is leaving such a big land.. just ask yourself.. He was defeated brutally 🤓

[@nuralibolataev4474]

@@PotatoEngineer He didn't retreat. Alexander conquered all along the Indus. Tell me, how can someone who lost win more land as a result?

[@PotatoEngineer]

@@nuralibolataev4474 okay Sir then please tell me how one who wanted to conquer everything, all of sudden including his army decided to stop fighting and later on his army chief cellucus married his daughter Helena to Chandragupta Maurya and given present day Afghanistan to him.. basic understanding says that they lost and been hopeless so did that.. otherwise no such king and his army will stop his quest until achieving the ultimate goal. 😊

[@avigupta8741]

I have my own take on this one If we look closely into the history the famous takshshila university had no such records of alexander's campaign in india. It could mean that alexander after battling a local cheiftain and getting a taste of war elephants would have backed up gone to macedonia because if he actually did something very significant it would have been recorded in the takshsila university

[@MorallyDubiousFrog]

There was no effort towards historical record keeping in India until after the rise of the Maurya Empire. Even the Nanda empire, the Maurya’s direct predecessor, is known through either contemporary Greek sources or Mauryan sources written centuries later.

[@avigupta8741]

@@MorallyDubiousFrog bro read about taxila university first then say these things

[@MorallyDubiousFrog]

@@avigupta8741 Taxila, the city that was under Alexander’s control during the battle of the Hydaspes. The city that would later be used as capital of the Indo-Greek kingdom for roughly a century. Maybe make an actual argument instead of “mAyBe ReAd aBoUt iT”

[@gasiamis123]

There is no remaining history books or any kind of books from takshshila university ..... Unfortunly everything was destroyed. Actually the first history book from ancient India is Indica from Megasthenes...

[@stephengallets8805]

The real reason for the retreat was just the exhaustion his men had. Alexander begged them to give him one month and he ended it with the Battle of Hydaspes, which was one of his bloodiest battles and he was wounded. My estimate is that after 11 years of fighting 2000 miles from home, his men were tired and wanted to go home. His retreat was a mistake in that he took a desert route versus going back to Babylon by sea or through Pakistan/Afghanistan. He also knew that India was a massive country and he would have required many new troops to fill his ranks which he did not have after Hydaspes.

[@thendino1]

So he wins a battle against Porus and then gifts him land and allows him to retain his kingdom....mmmmm.....to my knowledge he did not do anything like that throughout his short span of life?

[@ashoktara7936]

For 11 long years they tasted victory, they massacred, looted, raped people and destroyed kingdomes, still they were not tired . They reached India, conquered small kingdomes, still they wer not tired. Just before confronting Porus the great king they realized that they wer tired and mentally drained, some what difficult to understand. Macedonian army new that they wer going to fight n equally brave and valiant king and may b they got discouraged.

[@rishikeshvashishtha7347]

Yes what a coincidence for his whole conquest none of the time he spared his enemies, and his army got tired but suddenly the barbaric Alexander became saint and spared his enemy and also an army whose moral was on high heaven after continously winning suddenly got tired after reaching india even after conquering certain regions of it .What a believable story. Really...

[@jatutube123]

@@ashoktara7936 You nailed it. They were exhausted after the defeat by 7 feet Porus.

[@b.m.5068]

It's not your "estimate". It's what was told in the Greek accounts which you are parroting. And Greek accounts have lied considerably about him. Persian accounts of Alexander tell about him as a bloodthirsty tyrant who enjoyed killing people whereas Greek accounts describe him as a complete opposite - one who loved people and blah blah blah. I don't care about Greek description which was again written a couple of centuries later his campaign. Shut up and get out

[@rahuljain5441]

Please make video on hanuman immortality and where is he now

[@rahuldevsingh2911]

It's not easy

[@N0Xa880iUL]

😄

[@Yogis_BitterTruth_Nirvan]

avatar of Shiva, immortal Hanuman is a cheeranjivi and is master of nirman kaya, 8 powers and 9 nidhis. he exists in his sukshma sharira (astral body). when he wants and according to dharma he can manifest his physical body (sthula sharira). he highest yogis like Taulsi das was able to meet him kaliyuga. i doubt any hight level yogis exist today.

[@rahuljain5441]

@@Yogis_BitterTruth_Nirvan 🙏🙏 धन्यवाद ।

[@rahuljain5441]

@@Yogis_BitterTruth_Nirvan can you guide where can I learn more about this

[@ksks2086]

Alexander turned back because his soldiers wanted go home not because India was particularely impressibe

[@shivaprasad6303]

And that happend only he entered India, at least make good execuses Dude.

[@Adventurer-Rikth]

There is no record of a king named Porus at all... The truth is that Alexander never reached India at all... they made a fictional character named Porus and defeated him in a story.

[@LoneWolf-tk9em]

King Porus & his dynasty are so underrated that u can't find them in indian history books 🤦🏻 they defended india like a wall from invaders for centuries, they get attacked more than any other kings in india because if their geographical location. But our history books r filled with invaders Moghals & how great they were 😠 then British, that's it. What an irony

[@elfrad1714]

I am fairly familiar with Alexander the Great having learned about him in history class in Germany. However, I have never learned that Alexander won the battle against King Porus or even took him prisoner. I did learn that Alexander's army suffered so many losses that he deemed it unwise to continue. Moreover, his soldiers mutinied shortly thereafter because they were sick and tired of war and wanted to go home.

[@photosokratis]

You must rethink.about it and read Arrian and Plurarch them Greetings

[@elfrad1714]

@@photosokratis I merely discussed WHAT I LEARNED in MY History classes in highschool some 40 years ago.

[@photosokratis]

@@elfrad1714 you're teacher was wrong my friend

[@LexDomo]

Alexander actually stayed another year in India after the battle. He went south and defeats the mallian. He would've continued into India if not for his army begging him to turn back.

[@singh-hj5bv]

@@LexDomo why only in india Alexander army wanted to return?? It is only westians concern that Alexander greatness may shatter 🥲 therefore they polished it!😑😆

[@jaiprakashsethi5604]

4:42 That's what everyone call savage 😎😂

[@ahmedashfan7794]

"Ran Away" ? Seriously ? Heights of simping to current propaganda.

[@varaprasadn]

don't spread lies. he didn't run away. he appointed Porus as King on behalf of Macedonia

[@riomaxsvideos1657]

True

[@nazmulhuda3944]

Thank you for a truth reveling fact. Till the date European thinks they are the leading race for democracy, education and civilisation. Loved your clip. Keep going

[@xCestLaVie1]

Europeans weren't even close to advanced as Indians were back then. They always considered Indians as mythological in a lot of ways.

[@harshavardhan4153]

Alexander didn't wanted to continue invading india because he knew even after porus there were other strong kingdoms which also had elephant troops with a much more large army..so even his soldiers afraid to continue after hearing this.....

[@matthijs_de_ligt]

If Alexander training a big size army india whould be Conquest

[@eekks]

​@@matthijs_de_ligtdo you know about Chandragupta Maurya?

[@matthijs_de_ligt]

@@eekks yes

[@matthijs_de_ligt]

@@eekks Alexander better than chandragupta

[@eekks]

@@matthijs_de_ligt Alexander ran like a pu$$y after the war with Porus, Chandragupta was 100x more powerful than Porus. I'm from Pakistan but i must accept the fact that Chandragupta>>>>Alexander

[@jedus007]

Alexander might never have seen an elephant and must have thought these Indians are still keeping dinosaurs as pets 🤣🤣

[@jjjr.1186]

They saw elephants. Tigers. Lions and more. Nothing they hadn't seen in Africa.

[@vyshzzzz]

I dont know if porus was defeated or not but he gave alexander heavy casualties with his small army, alexander feared elephents army because he had never seen elephants used in war so seeing bigger troops in india and their huge army he might have moved on the dream of conquering india

[@dennisantony6754]

This is how the history of TAMILNADU and TAMILIANS erased by HINDIANS.

[@benweb1105]

Alexander did not fear nothing, but his compatriots were to tired to fight and only fight.... while their families were waiting for their return home! They were anxious to share the vast world they have gained already.

[@rakeshsaigal8071]

Are you sure he "ran away" from India? The reasons are well documented. But if you insist on reading history through 21st century political lens then there is no history. It is "my story".

[@sushilamalanathans5523]

I see one gentlemen here, who understood the meaning of education. Hope others will see from his point of view. It is wise to learn from mistakes rather than blemish it with false pride.

[@xCestLaVie1]

Sounds like another European bias. His army retreated because he was merciful? Europeans tend to exaggerate. Who at the time was wiser, not like Indians were close enough to correct them on that. Is there proof he conquered India? None at all. There's more evidence he retreated because he over reached. Here's some "well documented" reasons he left: King Poros was a good man and Alexander felt merciful. Yes, makes total sense for Alexander who killed and burnt down every city who didn't surrender to suddenly on a whim feel merciful. Someone who had literally thought he was a god, who had such a giant ego for conquering a region of the world that was unstable.

[@gaudiyawarriors87]

The ancient civilization of Bengal named *Gangariddhi* , it had an elephant cavalry of 50000 active _Dantis_ . Alexander with his Massidonian army feared to hear about the military power of Gangariddhi (Bengal) & never dared to move forward.

[@ranvijayrao4209]

May be they are exhausted+ powerful Kingdom both are the reasons

[@cernunnosthehornedone3336]

Yes, brave Indian elephants 🤣

[@dynamitebsb4520]

​@@cernunnosthehornedone3336 your homas is in comic books friend...ur ancestors were humiliated and defeated by Semitic people

[@Indiantiger000]

​@@cernunnosthehornedone3336 with great kings even a small king like porus threats alexander😂😂😂

[@aryadharmasanatanam]

@@cernunnosthehornedone3336 yes only Brave warrior can use brave elephants

[@Mothernature-i9g]

Thank God I'm not her student in the school teaching about alexander the great.... Rip those who think alexander the great ran away because he was afraid 😳.... Think 💬🤔 what if India was alexander the great neighbour country... Sooo rip rip 😔 man India kings.... He defeated many powerful kings on his way ...

[@CCLow-jr7um]

Stupid question. Alexander did not run away from India. He turned back home because after many years of conquests away from home his soldiers were on the verge of mutiny. My advice - Do more proper research first before presenting an alternative view.

[@spirodoukas]

This is Extremely incorrect. Please learn about the Greek kingdoms left behind hundreds of years after Alexander died. Such as the Greco Bactrian kingdom and the Indo Greek kingdoms. This video is an apparent attempt to cover a serious complex held by some extreme Indians. Most areas of the world have been conquered by others at some point in time. There is no shame in this.

[@watcher805]

Alexander didnt run from India he and his men beat over 100 war elephants. He defeated the 7 foot tall king Porus and left him territories but told him to fight for him now

[@Sarcasmunlimited1987]

that's what your are taught with and you learnt it well. Kudos

[@snvsravan7835]

Kid go play

[@watcher805]

@@snvsravan7835 I dont play

[@snvsravan7835]

@@watcher805 then study

[@watcher805]

@@snvsravan7835 I do that every day. You're not going to make me feel ignorant. Go away and shut up.

[@fidodido664]

Alexander won more than 20 battles and covered a huge area of land. He and his companions were taught by the greatest teachers of that time including Aristotle. They were superior even to Spartans. Other tha profit and glory he did what others couldn't. He defeated the tyranny of Persians and you should be greatful about it. I thought Indians would be less arrogant. He did what your ancestors couldn't.

[@charlesdarwin5185]

The Persians separated from the Indians after the Saraswati River dried up soon after the Mahabharata War. Those that migrated east became Hindus to the Ganges. Those who moved west were Persians. Glad to educate

[@fidodido664]

@@charlesdarwin5185 still under Persian rule. The war you mention is back in 3000bc. The Persia was not the same in 330bc. Persians were the tyrants of the east and west of their empire. The fact you posted is useless. Does not change the facts i wrote. Great educator "Darwin". Do you also believe you evolved from reptiles and chimps ahahaha. If you brag about your "education" then you should get educated more.

[@charlesdarwin5185]

@@fidodido664 there are two dates for the war 1. 3100 bc. Is based on hydrology. 2. 1950 bc. Based on astronomy. The Persians of Alexander's time had already separated.

[@charlesdarwin5185]

@@fidodido664 you don't understand evolutionary theory at all. 1. Survival vs. Altruism 2. Xenophobia vs Assimilation 3. Transmission vs retention. Even Gods undergo this process.

[@charlesdarwin5185]

@@fidodido664 Don't be ignorant. Everything undergoes evolutionary change. It is not goal directed. DNA and many biological processes are common in all forms of life.

[@polaris1985]

The ancient Kings of India were very powerful, had the British or Mughals dared to come at that time they would have been annihilated, Kings had standing armies of 500 thousand to 1 million in those times.

[@iwannisbalaouras1687]

Greeks new how to fight elephants , persia had elephants too. The soldiers of alexander where fighting a constant war for 10 years wwii was for 4-5 years.

[@teeb944]

Mah he befriended the wrong tribes... If he would've sided his kingdom w the. Punjab or whatever they're called I think history might have a different tune. Still my favorite leader all time I still believe in his visions of a single empire of people and diverse culture. My theory is he's buried first to the valley of the kings. Now a casino....and then was later split to relics and shipped throughout the empire from Greece to past India to other tribes that may have been linked to alexander. but I have no true evidence. Just a hypothetical assumption.

[@numismatist]

Well explained. Thank you.

[@vickyuzumaki]

A man with Alexanders character will never run... He may left because his soldiers were not willing to fight

[@LGARIS3]

Alexander the Great was a military genius, he hadn't lost a battle since he was 16 years old. His battlefield tactics are taught to this day in top military schools around the world. At the Battle of the Hydaspi River, Alexander not only won but wiped out the Poros army as about half of the Indian king's soldiers were killed. After the battle, Alexander and his soldiers remained for a month in the region and made war campaigns against other Indian tribes. He also founded two new cities in India. One he named Nikaia, in order to commemorate his victory in India and the other Bucephala, in honor of his favorite horse that he rode as a child, had it in every battle and finally died in India at the age of 30 due to heat and suffering. However, Alexander was impressed by the pride and dignity of Poros and granted him the new territories he conquered in India. He also made sure to make King Porus a friend of King Taxilus, in order to have two reliable allies at his back. In fact, Alexander's chivalrous behavior towards Poros made the Indians consider him Dharmavijai or a conqueror through morality. In general, such was his genius that he always took care to grant privileges to the conquered and to treat them with respect. Before each battle, he communicated with the opposing king or general and in this way in several cases he became the conqueror without even giving battle and suffering losses. In 326 BC, Alexander the Great's army approached the borders of the Nanda Empire, whose troops according to the historical accounts of the time were much stronger than anything Alexander had faced so far and very well trained. The Nandas had been informed of Alexander's advance and were waiting for him with 80.000 cavalry, 200.000 infantry, 6.000 chariots and 6.000 war elephants. Alexander's desire was to continue his advance into India and face them, however he met with strong reaction from his army. His physically and mentally exhausted soldiers gathered in the camp and protested loudly saying that they did not want to continue. Also the summer monsoons which were raging at that time must also have had a negative effect on the morale of the army, which had probably never experienced such a phenomenon before. It has been raining non-stop for the past 70 days. Alexander the Great finally decided at this point to turn south along the Indus River, securing the banks of the river as the border of his empire by establishing yet another Alexandrian city. This is Alexandria under Hyphasis, which was founded in July 326 BC on the eastern borders of Alexander's empire. It is also located in the Punjab region, which in 1947 was divided between India and Pakistan. Thus the Federal State of India, Punjab, with Chandigarh as its capital, and the Pakistani province with Lahore as its capital, are essentially declared under the same name. After returning from India to Babylon, Alexander demobilized about 10.000 soldiers, whom he sent back to Greece, giving them gold and large indemnities.

[@Saurabh20000]

source - trust me bro 😆😆😆😆😆 , porus was small king in punjab area , his rule was less 1% land area of that time India and you wrote all that shit originated from either tiktok or same random street historian.

[@drewpaupanekis4710]

⁠@@Saurabh20000Blah blah, OP said nothing but facts.

[@hridayeshtejasjha4909]

Half of Indian armies were killed..bruh..that was not even 1%..he would have been crushed if had faced the mighty magadha empire 😂

[@ellidominusser1138]

I don't get the comment section. Alexander's army was depleted and exhausted over the course of like a decade going from macedon, thousands of kilometres to the east to india and fought porus and defeated him, yet people think porus is the real winner?

[@mintooji1100]

Because Alexander knew that " his lentils will not boil here" 😁🤣🙏🏽

[@lopetta4077]

AAA Parippu evideh Vevooolaaa monnaaaa Alexander

[@sumuqh]

I'm 23 years old and today i have learnt about kingdom of Porus.

[@Mrinfinite010]

thanks for indian text books

[@ariebazhar7948]

I find your theory about the truce between Alexander and King Porus compelling. However Greek influence in the Gandhara culture that followed is obvious, no? The two cultures obviously influenced each other very much.

[@MrPoornakumar]

Arieb Azhar That (the two cultures obviously influenced each other very much) was outside India & in the present-day Afghanistan. In fact, in the post-Alexandrian war with Seleucus Nicator (who was Alexander's general & king after the former's death), entire Afghanistan & Baluchistan (Gedrosia) were given to Chandra Gupta Maurya who became the son-in-law of Seleucus (for a 500 elephant force in return, to defeat the recalcitrant Persians, that was done). After that, Indo-Greek kingdoms were thriving in Afghanistan with many Greeks settling there (may be they found the terrain similar to theirs) whose armies made occasional forays into India (particularly into Gujarat under the Gurjara Pratihara kings ) - after the fall of Maurya Empire & before the Kushana Empire based at Purusha`pura (Peshawar) rose in NW India. In so far as cultural exchanges is concerned there were many. Indian Astronomers & Greek Astronomers streamlined their systems to the 12-segment (Raashi) zodiac, in addition to the Indian 27-star (Nakshatra) system. They compared notes on the five (visible-to-the-naked-eye) planets - Mars, Mercury, Jupiter, Venus & Saturn as well as their paths along with that of Sun & Moon in the sky. May be the "week" & naming of weekdays was the result - as the week (half of a fortnight, between Full Moon & New Moon) is more convenient than the month. It is significant that the Raashi names are the same in both systems. The Astrology part continued even after this prelude, as Romaka (Roman) & Paulisa (Paul) methods. Greek classic "Iliad" has the same theme as Ramayana (stealing the other king's wife) & Mahabharata war.

[@TJ-wg3ud]

India destroyed the reputation of Alexander THE GREAT? More than 2000 years after he died he is still known as one of the greatest generals to ever live.

[@the98themperoroftheholybri33]

The world's militaries still teach his battle tactics today. Meanwhile barely anyone outside India know who this Indian king was

[@castafioreomg]

It's a Eurocentric narrative whereas there are no traces of Hellenic influence left in the East.

[@sanjoyghose1952]

It is nothing but deliberate attempt to distort history. Alexander defeated King Porus and made him his satrap (agency) to rule an area, which is now Punjab, as it was difficult for him to do so from far away Greece. Exhausted by years of campaigning and fearing the prospect of fighting with Nanda Empire of Magadha, and Gangaridai Empire of Bengal Alexander's army mutinied at the Hyphasis River (Beas), refusing to march farther east. This river thus marks the easternmost extent of Alexander's conquests.

[@josephkool8411]

He didn't run away his army was exhausted and wanted to go home to see their families after a decade of conquest

[@elgonm289]

No!!! he and his army got their arses kicked, he died from a slow working poison during one of these fierce fighting, you westerners can believe or make yourself believe whatever you want whatever your history says...

[@mrcool2107]

Triggered westerners cant accept that Alexander lost the battle . Ok let us assume that Alexander won the battle. Even if he wins still there be no use he wants to conquer to get gold but most of the gold is in northern part of india . Even if he invades he would have to face even more larger armies with powerful elephants which is nanda empire. Also one more thing is that battle of hydaspes ended at 325BC and Alexander dies at 323BC . So even if he wins it he would die 2 years later so there would be no use winning it if he dies so early

[@Steyr32]

India didn't exist, India only exists thanks to Muslim/British domination of the subcontinent. Also it's literally proven that soldiers would have revolted against Alexander if he kept going to some "unknown" land east of a river. This was the 300 BC not today they where walking and had to walk back home.

[@mrcool2107]

@@Steyr32 are you an idiot? India existed since 2500BC . 2nd oldest country in the world. It has nothing to do with Britain or mughals. India was created by indus . Way before mughals 1000 years back mauryans United entire India . Soldiers revolted against Alexander because they to face even more powerful empire called nanda empire the Nanda force included 200,000 infantry; 80,000 cavalry; 6,000 elephants; and 8,000 chariots. Alexander literally suffered badly against porus which was just a small kingdom. But if Alexander faced nanda empire his army would be crushed and Alexander would be killed on the spot

[@rudra4972]

Not only Alexander every foreign invaders empire who entered India after some time loosing in Indian land lost from world map . 1. Achaemenid Empire lost from puru kingdom and Sauvira kingdom. 2.Alexander empire lost from Rajanka Parmananda Chandra ( Porous) . 3. Seleucus Nicator empire lost from Chandragupta Maurya . 4. Yavana ( Indo- Greek) lost from king Arjunayana , Yudheyas and Vasumitra Sunga . 5.Scythian empire lost from King Vikramaditya . 6. Yuezhi Kingdoms lost from Kujula kadphises ( Hindu gujjar king) 7. Bactria lost from king Vima Takto. 8. All silk Road Kingdoms lost from Kanishka The great . 9. Parthian empire ,Pahlavas empire and Western Scythian empire lost from Gautmiputra Satakarani. 10. 21 foreign kingdom lost from SamudraGupta of Gupta empire . 11. Huna Empire lost from king Sakandgupta , Yashodharman . 12. Umayyad Caliphate empire lost from king Nagabhata , Bappa Rawal, Lalitaditya muktipida . 13. Turk Sahi lost from Lalitaditya muktipida . 14. Chola Empire Navy controlled Arabians sea , Bay of Bengal , Indian oceans , south China sea all major Island . 15. Mongol empire lost from Malik kafur , Jafar khan , Malik Naik , Balban. 16. Gazanavi empire lost from Raja Suheldev . 17. Gauri empire lost from king Bhimdev ll. 18. Tuglaq dynasty lost from Rana Hammir Singh . 19. Delhi Sultanate lost from Rajputana king Rana Sanga and Hemu Vikramaditya completely Distroyed . 20. Mugal empire lost from Maratha empire . 21. Durrani empire lost from Sikh empire . 22. British empire lost from Subhash Chandra Bose and Thousands of freedom fighters. Final victory always belongs to Indians . Jai Hind.

[@PastaGuns]

King Vikramaditya conquered 40% of Earth's land. That makes more than Asia, probably even covered large part of Africa. Not Europe maybe cuz of cold climate.

[@diyworld4462]

@@PastaGuns There was no civilization other than Egypt in Africa. Who he conquered? People who don't even have proper cloths and use stone tools? That is a brainwash. Chandragupta and Ashoka were great but don't make up fake things. It's impossible to conquer more than 40% world without going to North and South America and australia.

[@PastaGuns]

@@diyworld4462 Imagine thousand years from now, when history is rewritten and there's no mention of british empire, there will be people then who would say britishers conquered a vast area and some saying that's fake just like you. You are of those people who think West invented everything, may I ask do you even know what was going on in the rest of world 3-4 centuries earlier or even 10 centuries earlier? Nope u don't.

[@rudra4972]

@@PastaGuns Vikramaditya invaded the Roman Empire also Whole world . That's why western historian Distroyed many Script of Vikramaditya and Created puzzles in his Scripts .

[@PastaGuns]

@@rudra4972 oh ty for knowledge

[@kennythecritic1439]

Alexander was not able to sub due all of India but he did already have several vassals there. It was only because his army was tired and ready to return home

[@krishnachaithanya7824]

Good joke😂

[@kennythecritic1439]

@@krishnachaithanya7824 This is similar to the death of Genghis Kahn. If both of these individuals did not die of illness, they would have eventually returned to finish their campaign.

[@Smileton]

that's cap lol. Alexander never entered India. He only defeated Porus at the banks of Hydaspes (Indus River) in present day Pakistan. He had only 2 vassals Porus and the King of Takshila. When he never entered India then how can he have vassal states? Plus India at that time was ruled by Nanda empire which was the second strongest empire after the Macedonians at that time period.

[@mavjudaochs8802]

When I hear comments like "India was not a great battleground for Alexander", this causes a confusion, to say the least...the guy, under barely 30, manages to conquer the biggest Empire in the World (of that time), founded more than 12 cities across his empire, and in his thirties (with much experience and in full maturity) was unable to win a battle in India, seriously? Approx. less than two thousand years later Babur (great great grandson of Timur Lang), at the age of barely 20 (following several failed attempts to consolidate his power in his home country) instead manages to build his Kingdom in India (which lasted until Britain took over India). Babur's grandson is known for building the "legendary" Taj Mahal (UNESCO masterpiece) that among other things today's India is known for...)... Babur could not become a king in his country of origin, could not win any significant battle...but he managed to take India at the speed of light (1526, battle of Panipat, 1527, Battle of Khanwa, 1528, Battle of Chanderi)... and in contrast, the experienced warrior such as Alexander could not take India because the climate or the battelground were not favorable for the guy? My advice, think over your hypothesis one more time and try to critically look at your work that you are producing for masses! And by the way, Alexander left India because he was simply "poisoned" ... I guess you clearly know who poisoned him, the easiest way to liquidate an adversary when you have no b"all to fight the battle! His reputation did not get destroyed! Quite on the contrary, he went in histroy by the name Megas Alexandros - Alexander the Great! There was no such a King like him, and will never be one ever! This was a great King who was able to unite nations under the Hellenistic culture...Enslaving people, much like GB is easy, creating Art Houses under Hellenistic Flag is "mission impossible" - there is so much Anglo-saxons could have learned from this guy- the true Alexander the Great!!

[@ashleysilver5594]

Alexander invaded during the 4th century BC at the height of the Nanda Empire. The most powerful ruler of the Nanda Dynasty is Mahapadma Nanda who was on the throne of Magadha when Alexander the Great invaded India. Mahapadma Nandas army numbered over 400000 including 4000 plus elephants. Alexanders army was only around 40000 which is one tenth the size. Alexanders army was severely thrashed by Indian and had to return with a mortally wounded Alexander. So much for The Great name.