arrived at Kôkala, a place near Râs Kachar, where Nearchos landed, and
was joined by the division of the army under Leonnatus, from whom he
received a supply of provisions for his ships. From Kôkala, a course of
500 stadia brought him to the estuary of the Tomêros, or, as it is now
called, the river Hingol. All connection between the fleet and the army
was thenceforth lost until the district of Harmozia, in Karmania, was
reached. The coast of the Oreitai extended westward from the Arabios to
the great rocky headland of Malan, which still bears the name given to
it in Arrian, Malana—a distance of fully 100 miles. The desolate shores
of the Ichthyophagi succeeded, and inland lay the vast sandy wastes
of Gedrosia. Between Cape Malan and the mouth of the Anamis river in
Harmozia, from which Nearchos, with a small retinue, proceeded inland
to meet Alexander, no fewer than twenty-one names of places at which
the fleet touched are recorded in the narrative of the voyage. Most of
these have been identified by Major Mockler, the political agent of
Makrân. We can refer to only one or two of the more notable. From Cape
Malan the fleet proceeded to Bagisâra, which, Colonel Holdich tells us,
is likely enough the Dimizaar or eastern bay of the Urmara headland.
The Pasiris, who are mentioned as a people of this neighbourhood, have
left frequent traces of their existence along the coast. At Kalama, now
Khor Khalmat, which was reached on the second day from Urmara, there
can be traced a very considerable extension of the land seawards, which
would have completely altered the course of the fleet from the present
coasting tract. The island of Karbine, which was distant 100 stadia
from Kalama, cannot, our author points out, be the island of Astola,
but is probably a headland now connected with the mainland by a low
sandy waste. Astola, however, he takes to be the island sacred to the
sun, which Arrian calls Nosala, and places at a distance of 100 stadia
from the mainland. The nearest land to it is Ras Jaddi or Koh Zarên, in
the neighbourhood of which was Mosarna, where Nearchos took on board a
pilot, by whom thenceforth the course of the fleet was directed. The next
place of importance was Barna, called by others Bâdara, and this Mockler
identifies with Gwâdar. The following identifications succeed:—Dendrobosa
with the west point of Gwâdar headland, Kôphas with Pishikân Bay, Bagia
with Cape Brês, Tâlmena with a harbour in Chahbar Bay, Kanate with
Karatee, Dagasira with Jakeisar, near the mouth of the Jageen river,
Bâdis with Kôh Mubârak, and the mouth of the Anamis river with a point
north by east from the island of Ormus. The distances which Arrian
records as run by the fleet from day to day are generally excessive,
especially after it had left the mouth of the Arabios.
We must now resume consideration of the movements of Alexander himself.
When we left him he had reached the banks of the Arabios, at a point
distant some twenty miles from Sonmiyâni, or perhaps even higher up the
river. On crossing the stream he turned to his left towards the sea, and
with a picked force made a sudden descent on the Oreitai. After a night’s
march he came to a well-inhabited district, defeated the Oreitai, and
penetrated to their capital—a mere village called Rambakia, which Colonel
Holdich places at or near Khairkot. The Oreitai themselves are, in his
opinion, represented by the Lumri tribes of Las Bela, who are of Rajput
descent. From Rambakia Alexander proceeded with a part of his troops to
force the narrow pass which the Gadrôsoi and the Oreitai had conjointly
seized with the design of stopping his progress. This defile was most
probably the turning pass at the northern end of the Hala range. The
Gadrôsoi seem to owe their name to the Gadurs, one of the Lumri clans,
from which, however, they hold themselves somewhat distinct. Alexander,
after clearing the pass, pushed on through a desert country into the
territory of the Gadrôsoi, and drew down to the coast. He must then, says
our author, have followed the valley of the Phur to the coast, and pushed
on along the track of the modern telegraph line till he reached the
neighbourhood of the Hingol river, where he halted to collect supplies
for the fleet. On this part of the route were the tamarisk trees which
yielded myrrh, the mangrove swamps, the euphorbias with prickly shoots,
and the roots of spikenard.
Beyond this he could no longer pursue his march along the coast in order
to keep in touch with the fleet. The huge barrier of the Malan range,
which abutted direct on the sea, stopped his way. There was no goat track
in those days, such as, after infinite difficulty, helped the telegraph
line over. He was consequently forced into the interior. Taking the only
route that was possible, he followed up the Hingol till he could turn the
Malan by the first available pass westward. Nothing here, we are told,
has altered since his days. The magnificent peaks and mountains which
surround the sacred shrine of Hinglaz are “everlasting hills,” and it
was through these that he proceeded to make his way. The windings of the
Hingol river he followed for 40 miles up to its junction with the Parkan.
The bed of this stream leads westward from the Hingol, and skirts the
north of the Taloi range. Alexander had thus for the first time a chance
of turning the Malan block, and directing his march westward to the sea.
He therefore pushed his way through this low valley, which was flanked
by the Taloi hills, that rose on his left to a height of 2000 feet. All
the region at their base was a wilderness of sandy hillocks and scanty
grass-covered waste, which could afford his troops no supplies and no
shelter from the fierce autumn heat. All the miseries of his retreat,
which are so graphically depicted by his historians, were concentrated
into the distance between the Hingol and the point where he regained
the coast. The Parkan route should have led him to the river Basol, but
having lost his way, he must have emerged near the harbour of Pasnî,
almost on the line of the present telegraph. The distance from the
Hingol to Pasnî our author estimates at about 200 miles; but in Curzon’s
well-known map of Persia it appears as if only 150.
From Pasnî Alexander marched for seven days along the coast till he
reached the well-known highway to Karmania. He could only leave the coast
near the Dasht river and strike into the valley of the Bahu, which would
lead him to Bampur, the capital of Gadrosia. This part of the march
probably occupied nearly a month. It has been doubted whether Bampur was,
in Alexander’s time, the capital of Gadrosia, rather than the place on
the edge of the Kirman desert, called indifferently Fahraj, Purag, and
Pura, where there are extensive ruins of a very ancient date. Colonel
Holdich, however, adduces arguments which suffice to set aside the claims
advanced in favour of Fahraj. Bampur is as old as Fahraj, and has in its
neighbourhood the site of a city still older, and now called Pura and
Purag. Besides, in order to reach Fahraj, Alexander must have passed
Bampur, since there is no other way consistent with Arrian’s account.
With regard to the route pursued by Krateros with the heavy transport
and invalids, our author points out that it was probably by the Mulla
(and not the Bolan) pass to Kelat and Quetta. Thence he must have taken
the Kandahar route to the Helmund, and followed that river down to the
fertile plains of lower Seistan, whence he crossed the Kirman desert by a
well-known modern caravan route and joined Alexander at or near Kirman.
Since the publication of his lecture, of which we have thus summarised
the contents, Colonel Holdich has contributed to the _Journal of the
Royal Geographical Society_ (January 1896), an article on “The Origin
of the Kafîr of the Hindu-Kush,” which contains some very interesting
notices regarding Alexander as he fought his way from the Hindu-Kush to
the banks of the Indus. The route by which the conqueror himself advanced
with one division of his army, while the other division, which was more
heavily armed, advanced by the Khaibar Pass, is thus described by our
author:—
“The recognised road to India from Central Asia was that which
passed through the plains of Kabul, by the Kabul river, into
Laghmân or Lamghân, and thence by the open Dasht-i-Gumbaz into
the lower Kunar. From the Kunar valley this road, even to the
time of Baber’s invasion of India (early in the sixteenth
century), crossed the comparatively low intervening range
into Bajour; thence to the valley of the Panj-Kora and Swat,
and out into India by the same passes with which we have now
(after nearly 400 years) found it convenient to enter the same
district.”
A reference to our notes, B. C. D. E., in the Appendix, will show that
this view of the route is that which we ourselves had adopted. His views
with regard to the position of Massaga, Aornos, and Embolima are also
coincident with those at which we had arrived. Dyrta he takes to have
been the place now known as Dir. That opinion was held by such great
authorities as Court and Lassen, but we have pointed out an objection to
it in p. 76, n. 3. To Nysa, which, as will be seen by a reference to our
long note pp. 338-340, we have identified with the Nagara or Dionysopolis
of Ptolemy (B. vii., 43), thus placing it at a distance of four or five
miles west of Jalâlâbâd and near the Kabul river, Colonel Holdich assigns
a different locality.
“The Nysaeans,” he says, “whose city Alexander spared, were the
descendants of those conquerors, who, coming from the west,
were probably deterred by the heat of the plains of India from
carrying their conquests south of the Punjab. They settled
on the cool and well-watered slopes of those mountains which
crown the uplands of Swat and Bajour, where they cultivated the
vine for generations.... It seems possible that they may have
extended their habitat as far eastward as the upper Swat valley
and the mountain region of the Indus, and at one time may have
occupied the site of the ancient capital of the Assakenoi,
Massaga, which there is reason to suppose stood in about the
position now occupied by the town of Manglaor.”
The hill in the neighbourhood of Nysa called Mount Mêros, which was clad
with ivy, laurel, and vine-trees, he identifies with the Koh-i-Mor or
Mountain of Mor, and gives this account of it:—
“On the right bank of the Panj-Kora river (the ancient Ghoura),
nearly opposite to its junction with the river of Swat
(Suastos), is a very conspicuous mountain, whose three-headed
outline can be distinctly seen from the Peshawar cantonment,
known as the Koh-i-Mor or Mountain of Mor. On the southern
slopes of this mountain, near the foot of it, is a large
scattered village called Nuzar or Nasar. The sides of the
mountain spurs are clothed with the same forest and jungle that
is common to the mountains of Kafiristan, and to the hills
intervening between Kafiristan and the Koh-i-Mor. Amid this
jungle are to be found the wild vine and ivy.”
In note B.—Nikaia—page 332, some remarks will be found regarding the
Kafîrs. Colonel Holdich describes them similarly, but upholds the view,
rejected by Elphinstone, of their Greek origin. The best known of them,
he points out, are the Kamdesh Kafîrs from the lower valley of the
Bashgol, a large affluent of the Kunar river, which it joins from the
north-west, some forty miles below Chitral. He then continues:—
“In the case of the Kamdesh Kafîr, at least, the tradition
of Greek or Pelasgic origin seems likely to be verified in a
very remarkable way. Scientific inquiry has been converging
on him from several directions, and it seems possible that
the ethnographical riddle connected with his existence will
be solved ere long. In appearance he is of a distinct Aryan
type, with low forehead, and prominent aquiline features,
entirely free from Tartar or Mongolian traits; his eyes, though
generally dark, are frequently of a light grey colour; his
complexion is fair enough to pass for Southern European; his
figure is always slight, but indicating marvellous activity and
strength; and the modelling of his limbs would furnish study
for a sculptor.”
Colonel Holdich subsequently calls our attention to certain strange
inscriptions found in the valley of the Indus east of Swat, and engraved,
most of them, on stone slabs built into towers which are now in ruins.
These inscriptions, on being subjected to a congress of Orientalists,
were pronounced to be in an unknown tongue. They may possibly, he adds,
be found to be vastly more ancient than the towers they adorned, it
being, at any rate, a notable fact about them that some of them “recall a
Greek alphabet of archaic type.” He concludes his observations regarding
the Kafîrs in these terms: “I cannot but believe them to be the modern
representatives of that very ancient western race, the Nysaeans—so
ancient that the historians of Alexander refer to their origin as
mythical.”
I may, in conclusion, advert, in a word, to an article of great ability,
contributed to the _Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society_ for October
1894, in which the writer endeavours to show that Alexander reached the
Indus by a widely different route from that which is indicated in our
pages, although it is also the route which, in its main outlines, has
been determined by the best authorities—men of high military rank,
personally acquainted with the country, and scholars of the greatest
eminence. As the selection of the route advocated was mainly based
on the opinion which the writer had formed as to the point whereat
Alexander had effected his passage of the Indus, it will suffice to
refute his theory if we prove that his opinion is altogether untenable.
In his view, the Indus was crossed, not at Attock, but much higher up
stream, at a point between Amb and the mouth of the Barhind river, the
Parenos of the Greeks. Now, while the passage at Attock is that which,
from time immemorial, has been used as the easiest means of access
into India from the west, the passage higher up is much more difficult
and dangerous, for though the river is not there so wide, its current
is much more impetuous, while the banks are, at the same time, much
steeper. Had Alexander notwithstanding attempted to cross at that point,
he would have had to encounter a desperate resistance on the part of
his determined enemy Abisares, in whose dominions he would have found
himself on reaching the eastern bank. He made, however, no such foolhardy
attempt either here or afterwards at the Hydaspes. We find, as a matter
of fact, that when he made the passage he met with no opposition, but
was most hospitably received by his vassal, the King of Taxila, in whose
dominions Attock was situated. The writer, it would appear, has been
led to his erroneous assumption by applying to the Indus _specially_
the remark in Strabo (quoted at page 64, note 4) regarding the rivers
of Northern Afghânistân _generally_, that Alexander wished to cross
them as near their sources as possible. The remark, we may be certain,
had no reference to the Indus at all, for Alexander could not but have
learned from Taxiles, who had joined him at Nikaia before the two
divisions of his army separated, where the Indus could best be crossed.
Taxiles, moreover, accompanied the division which advanced towards the
Indus by the Khaibar Pass, with instructions to make all the necessary
preparations for the passage of the whole army. Could such instructions
have been given if the point where the passage was to be made had still
to be discovered? A reference to Baber’s _Memoirs_ will show with what
ease that other great conqueror transported his army into India by using
the Attock passage.
_A sixth volume, containing descriptions of India by Strabo
and Pliny, together with incidental notices of India by other
classical writers, is in course of preparation, and will
complete the series._
PREFACE TO FIRST EDITION
En inventant l’histoire, la Grèce inventa le jugement du monde,
et, dans ce jugement, l’arrêt de la Grèce fut sans appel.
A celui dont la Grèce n’a pas parlé, l’oubli, c’est-à-dire
le néant. A celui dont la Grèce se souvient, la gloire,
c’est-à-dire la vie.—_Discours de M. Ernest Renan du 5 Mai
1892._
This work is the fifth of a series which may be entitled _Ancient India
as described by the Classical Writers_, since it was projected to supply
annotated translations of all the accounts of India which have descended
to us from classical antiquity. The volumes which have already appeared
contain the fragments of the _Indika_ of Ktêsias the Knidian, and of
the _Indika_ of Megasthenês, the _Indika_ of Arrian, the _Periplous of
the Erythraian Sea_ by an unknown author, and Ptolemy’s _Geography of
India and the other Countries of Eastern Asia_. A sixth work, containing
translations of the chapters in Strabo’s _Geography_ which describe
_India and Ariana_, is in preparation, and will complete the series.
I cannot at present say whether this work will appear as a separate
publication, or will be included in a volume containing new and revised
editions of the three _Indikas_ mentioned above, which are now nearly out
of print, as are also the other two works of the series.
In the present work I have translated and annotated all the earliest
and most authentic records which have been preserved of the Macedonian
invasion of India under Alexander the Great. The notes do not touch on
points either of grammar or of textual criticism, but are mainly designed
to illustrate the statements advanced in the narratives. When short, they
accompany the text as footnotes, and when of such a length as would too
much encumber the pages, they have been placed together in an appendix
by themselves. Such notes again as refer to _persons_ have been placed,
whether short or long, in a second appendix, which I have designated a
_Biographical Appendix_.
In preparing the translations and notes I have consulted a great many
works, of which the following may be specified as those which I found
most useful:—
Droysen’s _Geschichte Alexanders des Grossen_.
Williams’s _Life of Alexander_.
Sainte-Croix’s _Examen Critique des Anciens Historiens
d’Alexandre le Grand_.
C. Müller’s _collection of the remaining fragments of the
Historians of Alexander the Great_.
Thirlwall’s _History of Greece_, vols. vi. and vii.
Grote’s _History of Greece_, vol. xii.
Duncker’s _History of Antiquity_, vol. iv., which treats of
India exclusively.
Talboys Wheeler’s _History of India_.
Le Clerc’s _Criticism upon Curtius_, prefixed to Rooke’s
Translation of Arrian’s _Anabasis_.
Lassen’s _Indische Alterthumskunde_.
General Sir A. Cunningham’s _Geography of Ancient India_.
V. de Saint-Martin’s _Étude sur la Géographie Grecque et Latine
de l’Inde_, and his _Mémoire Analytique sur la carte de l’Asie
Centrale et de l’Inde_.
Rennell’s _Memoir of a Map of Hindoostan_.
Bunbury’s _History of Ancient Geography_.
Abbott’s _Gradus ad Aornon_.
_Journal Asiatique._ Serie VIII.
_Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society._ New Series.
Mahaffy’s _Alexander’s Empire_ and his _Greek Life_ and
_Thought from the Age of Alexander to the Roman Conquest_.
Professor Freeman’s _Essay on Alexander the Great_.
General Chesney’s _Lecture on the Indian Campaign of Alexander_.
Wesseling’s Latin Translation of Diodôros.
Translations of Curtius by Digby, Pratt, and Vaugelas
respectively.
The Notes to the Elzevir edition of Curtius.
Chinnock’s Translation of Arrian’s _Anabasis of Alexander_, and
Notes thereto.
Chaussard’s Translation of Arrian into French.
Moberly’s _Alexander the Great in the Punjaub_, from Arrian.
Book V.
Burton’s _Sindh_.
Weber’s _Die Griechen in Indien_.
Dr. Bellew’s _Ethnography of Afghanistan_.
Sir W. W. Hunter’s and Professor Max Müller’s Works on India.
The Translations are strictly literal, but though such, will, I trust, be
found to give, without crudeness of diction, a faithful reflex not only
of the sense, but also of the spirit, force, fluency, and perspicuity
of the original compositions. I have at all events spared no pains to
combine in the translations the two merits of being at once literal and
idiomatic in expression.
In translating Arrian I adopted the text of Sintenis (2nd edition,
Berlin, 1863); and with regard to Curtius, I found the work entitled
_Alexander in India_, edited by Heitland and Raven, very serviceable,
containing, as it does, exactly that portion of Curtius which it was
my purpose to translate. Both the works referred to contain valuable
_prolegomena_ and notes, to which I must here acknowledge my obligations.
The Introduction consists of two parts. In the first, I have pointed out
the sources whence our knowledge of the history of Alexander has been
derived, and discussed their title to credibility; while in the second,
I have sketched Alexander’s career, and added a very brief summary of
the events that followed his death till the wars for the division of his
empire were finally composed.
In the transcription of Greek proper names I have followed as hitherto
the method introduced by Grote, which scholars have now generally
adopted. A vindication of the method which, to my thinking, is
unanswerable, has appeared in the preface to Professor Freeman’s _History
of Sicily_, a work which the author unfortunately has not lived to
complete.
The most noticeable change resulting from this method is the substitution
of _K_ for _C_ in the spelling of Greek names. This should be borne in
mind by those who may have occasion to consult either the Biographical
Appendix or the General Index. I may further note that in transcribing
Sanskrit or other Indian names I have in all cases used the circumflex
to distinguish the long _â_, which is sounded as _a_ in _fall_, from
the short _a_, which is sounded as _u_ in _dumb_. In Sanskrit and its
derivative dialects this short vowel (अ) is never written unless it begin
a word, for it is supposed to be inherent in every consonant. The letter
_ś_ with the acute accent represents the palatal sibilant (श), which is
sounded like _sh_.
Two maps accompany the work, the larger of which shows the entire line
of the route which Alexander followed in the course of his Asiatic
expedition, while the smaller shows more distinctly that part of his
route which lay through the northern parts of Afghânistân and the
Country of the Five Rivers. For both I consulted the latest and most
authoritative maps, both British and German, in which these routes have
been laid down, and I found them in pretty close agreement, except with
regard to that part of the route which is traced in the smaller map. Here
I have generally followed the sketch map of the Panjâb which is given
in General Cunningham’s _Ancient Geography of India_, but have ventured
to differ from him with regard to the position of the Rock Aornos, of
Alexander’s bridge over the Indus, of Sangala, and of the Oxydrakai, whom
I have placed, as in Sir E. H. Bunbury’s map, to the south of the Malloi.
The frontispiece to the volume, reproduced from a fifteenth-century
French MS. of the Life of Alexander, may, it is hoped, appeal to many as
a quaint rendering of a widely “popular” incident.
I cannot conclude without expressing my great obligations to Mr.
Archibald Constable, by whose firm this work is published, for all the
trouble he has taken in connection with its passage through the press,
and especially with the preparation of the illustrations. I have also
to thank Dr. Burgess for supplying the photograph from which the Aśôka
inscription on page 373 has been reproduced, and for sundry valuable
suggestions besides.
J. W. M’C.
9 WESTHALL GARDENS, EDINBURGH, 1892.
INTRODUCTION
“Of the life of Alexander we have five consecutive narratives,
besides numerous allusions and fragments scattered up and down
various Greek and Latin writers.... Unluckily, among all the
five there is not a single contemporary chronicler.... The
value of all, it is clear, must depend upon the faithfulness
with which they represent the earlier writings which they
had before them, and upon the amount of critical power
which they may have brought to bear upon their examination.
Unluckily again, among all the five, one only has any claim
to the name of a critic. Arrian alone seems to have had at
once the will and the power to exercise a discreet judgment
upon the statements of those who went before him. Diodôros we
believe to be perfectly honest, but he is, at the same time,
impenetrably stupid. Plutarch, as he himself tells us, does
not write history, but lives; his object is rather to gather
anecdotes, to point a moral, than to give a formal narrative of
political and military events. Justin is a feeble and careless
epitomizer. Quintus Curtius is, in our eyes, little better
than a romance writer; he is the only one of the five whom we
should suspect of any wilful departure from the truth.”—From
_Historical Essays_, by Professor Freeman, 2d series, third
edition, pp. 183, 184.
INTRODUCTION
The invasion of India by Alexander the Great, like the first voyage of
Columbus to America, was the means of opening up a new world to the
knowledge of mankind. Before the great conqueror visited that remote and
sequestered country, which was then thought to lie at the utmost ends of
the earth, nothing was known regarding it beyond a few vague particulars
mentioned by Herodotos, and such grains of truth as could be sifted from
the mass of fictions which formed the staple of the treatise on India
written by Ktêsias of Knidos. A comparison of this work with the _Indika_
of Megasthenes, which was written after the invasion, will show how
entirely all real knowledge of the country was due to that event. It may
even, we think, be asserted that had that invasion not taken place, the
knowledge of India among the nations of the West would not have advanced
much beyond where Ktêsias left it, until the maritime passage to the East
by the Cape of Good Hope had been discovered.