Here the great road to the Hydaspês parts into two, one leading to
Jalâlpûr, and the other to Jhelam. It is the sixth of the Alexandreias
mentioned in Stephanos Byz.” _v. Ind. Alt._ ii. 165, n. The Chenab here
has a width of about a mile and a half.
[142] Arsakês, to judge from his name and what is here said of him, was
probably the king of Uraśa. This district, the Arsa of Ptolemy, the
W-la-shi of Hwen Thsiang, and now Rash in Dantâwar, included all the hill
country between the Indus and Kaśmîr as far south as Attak.
[143] _v._ Strabo (XV. i. 29). Between the Hydaspês and Akesinês ...
is the forest in the neighbourhood of the Emodoi mountains, in which
Alexander cut down a large quantity of fir, pine, cedar, and a variety
of other trees fit for shipbuilding, and brought the timber down the
Hydaspês. With this he constructed a fleet on the Hydaspês near the
cities which he built on each side of the river where he had crossed it
and conquered Pôros. “The timber,” says Sir A. Burnes, “of which the
boats of the Panjâb are constructed is chiefly floated down _by the
Hydaspês_ from the Indian Caucasus, which most satisfactorily explains
the selection of its banks by Alexander in preference to the other
rivers.” Bunbury, citing this passage, adds: “The navigation of the Indus
itself for a considerable part of its course below Attock is so dangerous
on account of rapids as to render it wholly unsuitable for the descent of
a flotilla such as that of Alexander.”
[144] This is the _nelumbum speciosum_, or Cyathus Smithii, the sacred
Egyptian or Pythagorean bean. The use of its fruit was forbidden to the
Egyptian priests (_v._ Herod. ii. 37).
[145] “It is remarkable to see how in this respect the geographical
information of the Greeks seems to have retrograded since the time of
Herodotus. No allusion is found to the voyage of Scylax related by that
historian, while the just conclusions derived from it by Herodotus had
fallen into the same oblivion. But absurd as was this identification (of
the Indus with the Nile), the general resemblance between these rivers,
which are constantly brought into comparison by the Greek geographers
(Strabo, XV. p. 692, etc.), is certainly such as to justify their
observations. The resemblance of the lower valley of the Indus from the
time it has received the waters of the Panjab with Egypt is dwelt upon
by modern travellers. One description (says Mr. Elphinstone) might serve
for both. A smooth and fertile plain is bounded on one side by mountains,
and on the other by a desert. It is divided by a large river, which forms
a Delta as it approaches the sea, and annually inundates and enriches
the country near its banks. The climate of both is hot and dry, and rain
is of rare occurrence in either country.”—_v._ Bunbury’s _Hist. of Anc.
Geo._ p. 510.
[146] Arrian in the 19th chapter of the _Indika_ states that the number
of men conveyed in the fleet was 8000, and that the whole strength of
his army was 120,000 soldiers, including those whom he brought from the
shores of the Mediterranean, as well as recruits drawn from various
barbarous tribes armed in their own fashion. In the preceding chapter
he gives a list of the great officers whom Alexander appointed to be in
temporary command of the triremes. Of these, thirty-three in number,
twenty-four were Macedonians, eight were Greeks, and one a Persian.
Seleukos is the only officer of note whose name does not appear in this
list.
[147] Diodôros and Curtius, as has been pointed out (in Note M), place
the dominions of Sôpeithês between the upper Hydraôtês and the Hyphasis,
but here we find them transferred to a more western position. Strabo was
unable to decide where they lay. “Some writers (he says) place Kathaia
and the country of Sôpeithês, one of the monarchs, in the tract between
the rivers (Hydaspês and Akesinês); some on the other side of the
Akesinês and of the Hyarotis, on the confines of the territory of the
other Pôros, the nephew of Pôros who was taken prisoner by Alexander,
and call the country subject to him Gandaris.... It is said that in
the territory of Sôpeithês there is a mountain composed of fossil salt
sufficient for the whole of India. Valuable mines, also, both of gold
and silver, are situated, it is said, not far off among other mountains,
according to the testimony of Gorgos the miner.” Strabo then describes
(as do also Diodôros and Curtius) the fight between a lion and four dogs
which Sôpeithês exhibited to Alexander. To account for the discrepancy
in these statements one is almost tempted to believe that as there were
two princes of the name of Pôros, each ruling dominions of his own, so
there were also two chiefs of the name of Sôpeithês or (as Curtius more
correctly transcribes it) Sôphytês. General Cunningham would identify
_Gandaris_ with the present district of _Gundulbâr_ or _Gundurbâr_, and
fixes the capital of Sôphytês on the western bank of the Hydaspês at _Old
Bhira_, a place near Ahmedabad, with a very extensive mound of ruins,
and distant from Nikaia (now Mong) three days by water. His rule must
have extended westward to the Indus, since the mountain of rock-salt
which Strabo includes in his territory can only refer to the salt range
(the Mount Oromenus of Pliny, xxxi. 39) which extends from the Indus to
the Hydaspês. The transcription of the name _Sôphytês_ will be found
discussed elsewhere.
[148] Arrian in his _Indika_, where he apparently follows Nearchos
instead of Ptolemy as here, gives the whole number of ships at only 800,
including both ships of war and transports. Schmieder and some other
editors would correct this to 1800, but it seems more probable, Bunbury
thinks, that the basis of the two calculations was different. Ptolemy, he
says, distinctly includes the ordinary river boats which would doubtless
have been collected in large numbers to assist in transporting so great
an army and its supplies; while the terms of Nearchos would seem to imply
only ships of war or regular transports. Krüger would correct the 2000 of
the text to 1000, which is the number of the vessels as given by Diodôros
and Curtius. The fleet began the downward voyage at the end of October
326 B.C.
[149] Alexander deduced his pedigree from Ammôn, just as the legend
traced the pedigree of Heraklês and Perseus to Zeus. He accordingly made
an expedition to the oasis in the Libyan desert where Ammôn had his
oracle for the purpose of more certainly learning his origin. His mother,
Olympias, according to Plutarch, used to complain that Alexander was for
ever embroiling her with Juno.
[150] “The Indians (says Arrian in his _Indika_, c. 7) worship the other
gods, and especially Dionysos, with cymbals and drums, which he had
taught them to use. He taught them also the Satyric dance, called by the
Greeks _Kordax_.”
[151] See Note O, Voyage down the Hydaspês and Akesinês to the Indus.
[152] This halting-place was at Bhira or Bheda, if Cunningham is right in
fixing the capital of Sôphytês in its neighbourhood.
[153] Diodôros carelessly represents these rapids as occurring at the
confluence of the two rivers with the Indus. The dangers of their
navigation seem to have been exaggerated by the ancient writers, though
their accounts have some foundation in fact. Sir A. Burnes, the first
European known to have visited the spot, says there are no eddies and no
rocks, nor is the channel confined, while the ancient character is only
supported by the noise of the confluence, which is greater than that of
any of the other rivers. The boatmen of the locality, however, still
regard the passage as a perilous one during the season when the river
is swollen (v. _Travels_, i. p. 109). Thirlwall thinks the principal
obstructions have been worn away. According to Curtius, Alexander’s own
ship was here in imminent danger of being wrecked.
[154] These barbarians were probably the Sibi (_v._ Diodôros, xvii. 96).
[155] Hêphaistiôn by this arrangement would beset the banks of the
Hydraôtês, Ptolemy those of the Akesinês. The former probably marched
to the Hydraôtês by way of Shorkote, which Cunningham thinks may be the
Sôrianê of Stephanos Byz.
[156] The Hydaspês loses its name as well as its waters to the Akesinês.
The junction of the latter with the Hydraôtês (Râvi) occurs at present at
a point more than thirty miles above Multân, but in Alexander’s time it
occurred some miles below that city.
[157] See Note P, The Malloi and Oxydrakai.
[158] General Cunningham has identified this place with Kot-Kamâlia, a
small but ancient town situated on an isolated mound on the right or
northern bank of the Râvi, marking the extreme limit of the river’s
fluctuations on that side. The small rivulet on which Alexander encamped
at the end of his first march he believes to be the lower course of
the Ayek river which rises in the outer range of hills and flows past
Syâlkot towards Sâkala, below which the bed is still traceable for some
distance. It appears again, he says, eighteen miles to the east of
Jhang, and is finally lost about two miles to the east of Shorkot. Now
somewhere between these two points Alexander must have crossed the Ayek,
as the desert country which he afterwards traversed lies immediately
beyond it. If he had marched to the south he would have arrived at
Shorkot, but he would not have encountered any desert, as his route
would have been over the Khâdar, or low-lying lands in the valley of
the Chenâb. A march of forty-six miles in a southerly direction would
have carried him also right up to the bank of the Hydraôtês or Râvi,
a point which Alexander only reached after another night’s march. As
this march lasted from the first watch until daylight, it cannot have
been less than eighteen or twenty miles, which agrees exactly with the
distance of the Râvi opposite Tulamba from Kot-Kamâlia. The direction of
Alexander’s march must therefore have been to the south-east; first to
the Ayek river, and thence across the hard, clayey, and waterless tract
called Sandar-bâr, that is the bâr, a desert of the Sandar or Chandra
river. Thus the position of the rivulet, the description of the desolate
country, and the distance of the city from the confluence of the rivers,
all agree in fixing the site of the fortress assaulted by Alexander with
Kot-Kamâlia.—_Anc. Geog. of India_, pp. 208-210.
[159] The city to which Perdikkas was sent in advance of Alexander,
Cunningham has identified with Harapa. “The mention of marshes (he says)
shows that it must have been near the Râvi, and, as Perdikkas was sent
in advance of Alexander, it must also have been _beyond_ Kot-Kamâlia,
that is to the east or south-east of it. Now this is exactly the position
of Harapa, which is situated sixteen miles to the east-south-east of
Kot-Kamâlia, and on the opposite high bank of the Râvi. There are also
several marshes in the low ground in its immediate vicinity.” Cunningham
then gives a description of Harapa as it now exists. He had encamped at
the place on three different occasions. It had been visited previously
and described both by Burnes and Masson. Its ruined mound forms an
irregular square of half a mile on each side, or two miles in circuit
(_Anc. Geog. of India_, pp. 210, 211). It seems to me a serious objection
to this identification that Kot-Kamâlia and Harapa (Harup, in Ainsworth’s
large map) lie on _opposite_ sides of the Râvi, while Arrian’s narrative
leads us to suppose that they both lay to the west of that river. No
mention is made of Perdikkas crossing it, and had the fortress he
attacked lain beyond it, he could easily have intercepted the inhabitants
in their flight to the marshes of the river.
[160] Cunningham identifies this well-fortified position with Tulamba.
“A whole night’s march (he says) of eight or nine hours could not have
been less than twenty-five miles, which is the exact distance of the Râvi
opposite Tulamba from Kot-Kamâlia.” It was defended by brick walls and
enormous mounds of earthen ramparts. Tulamba lies on the high road to
Multân, to which, as the capital of the Malloi, Alexander was marching.
[161] The Brachmans, as is well known, formed a religious caste, and were
not a distinct race or tribe. Their city Cunningham has identified with
the old ruined town and fort of Atâri, which is situated twenty miles to
the west-south-west of Tulamba and on the high road to Multân, from which
it is thirty-four miles distant. The remains consist of a strong citadel
750 feet square and 35 feet high. On two of its sides are to be found the
remains of the old town. Of its history there is not even a tradition,
but the large size of its bricks shows that it must be a place of
considerable antiquity. The name of the old city is quite unknown, Atâri
being merely that of the adjacent village, which is of recent origin.
Curtius states that Alexander went completely round the citadel in a
boat, and Cunningham thinks this is probable enough, as its ditch could
be filled at pleasure with water from the Râvi. Curtius must, however,
be romancing when he says that the three greatest rivers in India except
the Ganges (Indus, Hydaspês, and Akesinês) joined their waters to form
a ditch round the castle (v. _Anc. Geog. of India_, pp. 228-230). The
mention of a special city of the Brachmans, Lassen observes, shows that
but few priests lived in this part of the country, and that they had
established themselves in particular cities to protect themselves against
those people by whom they were held in but small esteem.
[162] See Note Q, The capital of the Malloi.
[163] Arrian (i. 11) relates that Alexander, after crossing the
Hellespont, proceeded to Ilion, where, after sacrificing to the Trojan
Athênê, he placed his own armour in the temple of that goddess, and took
away in exchange some of the consecrated arms which had been preserved
from the time of the Trojan war.
[164] Called in Greek a _dimoiritês_ in Latin a _duplicarius_.
[165] Alexander’s dress and arms on the day of Arbêla are thus described
by Plutarch: “He wore a short tunic of the Sicilian fashion, girt close
round him, over a linen breastplate strongly quilted; his helmet,
surmounted by the white plume, was of polished steel, the work of
Theophilos; the gorget was of the same metal, and set with precious
stones; the sword, his favourite weapon in battle, was a present from a
Cyprian king, and not to be excelled for lightness or temper; but his
belt, deeply embossed with massive figures, was the most superb part of
his armour; it was a gift from the Rhodians, on which old Helikôn had
exerted all his skill. If we add to these the shield, lance, and light
greaves, we may form a fair idea of his appearance in battle.”
[166] The descendants of Asklêpios (Aesculapius) were called by the
patronymic name _Asklêpiadai_. They were regarded by some as the real
descendants of Asklêpios, but by others as a caste of priests who
practised the art of medicine, combined with religion. Their principal
seats were Kôs and Knidos.
[167] Plutarch writes to the same effect: “The great battle with
Darius was not fought at Arbêla, as most historians will have it, but
at Gaugamêla, which, in the Persian tongue, is said to signify _the
house of the camel_, so called because one of the ancient kings, having
escaped his enemies by the swiftness of his camel, placed her there, and
appointed the revenues of certain villages for her maintenance.”—_Life of
Alexander_, c. 31.
[168] Kleitarchos, who accompanied Alexander to Asia, and wrote a history
of the expedition, and Timagenes, an historian in the reign of Augustus,
gave currency to this fiction, which Curtius is at one with Arrian
in rejecting. Ptolemy received his title of Sôtêr (saviour) from the
Rhodians, whom he had relieved from the attacks of Dêmêtrios Poliorkêtês
(_v._ Pausanias, I. viii. 6).
[169] Thirlwall has noted that this line is found in Stobaeus. It is a
fragment from one of the lost tragedies of Aeschylus, δράσαντι γάρ τι καὶ
παθεῖν ὀφείλεται.
[170] The Hyphasis is here probably the Satlej, though the application
of the name so far down as is here indicated is contrary to Sanskrit
usage. Several arms of the Hyphasis may have anciently existed which
went to join the Hydraôtês or perhaps the lower Akesinês. Megasthenês
was the first who made the existence of the Satlej known. Pliny calls it
the Hesydrus, and Ptolemy the Zaradros. The united stream which joins
the Indus, called the Panjnad, has before the confluence a width of 1076
yards. The Indus after the confluence is augmented to 2000 yards from 600
yards only above the confluence. From the present confluence to the sea
the distance is 490 miles.
[171] The _Abastanoi_ are more correctly designated by Diodôros (xvii.
102) the _Sambastai_, under which form of the name the _Ambashtha_,
who are mentioned as a people of the Panjâb in the _Mahâbhârata_ and
elsewhere in Sanskrit literature, can be recognised. It is evident from
the text that they were settled on the lower Akesinês. They appear to be
the people called by Curtius the _Sabarcae_, and by Orosius _Sabagrae_.
[172] The Xathroi are the Kshâtri of Sanskrit mentioned in the Laws of
Manu as an impure tribe, being of mixed origin. In Williams’s _Sanskrit
Dictionary_ a _Kshâtri_ is defined as “a man of the second (_i.e._
military) caste (by a woman of another caste?).”
[173] V. de Saint-Martin suggests that in the _Ossadioi_ we have the
Vasâti or Basâti of the _Mahâbhârata_, a people whom Hematchandra in his
_Geographical Dictionary_ places between the Hydaspês and the Indus, on
the plateau of which the Salt Mountains form the southern escarpment. If
the Vasâti were really so placed, it can scarcely be supposed that they
would have sent offers of submission to Alexander, who had already passed
through their part of the country, and was now marching homeward, leaving
them far in his rear. Cunningham prefers to identify them with the
_Yaudheya_ or _Ajudhiya_, now the _Johiyas_, who are settled as formerly
along the banks of the lower Satlej. _Assodioi_ or Ossadioi seems a
pretty close transcription of _Ajudhiya_.
[174] The name of this city is not given by any of the historians, but in
all probability it bore the name of its founder. Its site has generally
been referred to the neighbourhood of Mithânkôt, a town situated on the
western bank of the Indus a little below the junction of that river
with the united streams of the Panjâb. V. de Saint-Martin identifies it
more precisely with Chuchpûr or Chuchur, an ancient fort standing on
the eastern bank of the Indus right opposite Mithânkôt. This fort bore
formerly the names of Askalanda, Askelend, and Sikander, which are but
variant forms of Alexandreia. The great confluence, however, did not
anciently take place at Mithânkôt, but at Uchh, an old city lying forty
miles to the north-east of the confluence at Mithânkôt. The place is
called by Rashed-ud-din _Askaland-usah_, which, as Cunningham points
out, would be an easy corruption of _Alexandria Uchha_ or _Ussa_, as
the Greeks must have written it. The word _uchha_ means “high” both in
Sanskrit and in Hindi, and Uchh seems to owe its name to the fact that
it stands on a mound. “Uchh is chiefly distinguished (says Masson) by
the ruins of the former towns, which are very extensive, and attest the
pristine prosperity of the locality.” _v._ V. de Saint-Martin, _Etude_,
pp. 124, 125; Cunningham’s _Anc. Geog. of India_, pp. 242-245.
[175] _v._ Note R, Alexander in Sindh.
[176] In Strabo (XV. i.) we find several references to the country of
Mousikanos. These were based on information supplied by Onesikritos, who
expatiates in praise of its fertility, on the virtues of its people, and
the goodness of the laws and government under which they lived. It seems
now generally agreed that Alôr, which was anciently and for many ages
the metropolis of the rich and powerful kingdom of Upper Sindh, was the
capital of Mousikanos. Its ruins were visited by M’Murdo and Lieutenant
Wood, and afterwards by General Cunningham, who thus describes their
site: “The ruins of Alôr are situated to the south of a gap in the low
range of sandstone hills which stretches from Bhakar towards the south
for about twenty miles until it is lost in a broad belt of sandhills
which bound the Nâra, or old bed of the Indus, on the west. Through this
gap a branch of the Indus once flowed, which protected the city on the
north-west. To the north-east it was covered by a second branch of the
river, which flowed nearly at right angles to the other at a distance
of three miles.... In A.D. 680 the latter was probably the main stream
of the Indus, which had gradually been working to the westward from its
original bed in the old Nâra.” With regard to the name of the king it
appears to be a territorial title, since Curtius designates the people
_Musicani_. Lassen (_Ind. Alt._ ii. 176) takes this to represent the
Sanskrit Mûshika (which means _a mouse_ or _a thief_), and points out
that a part of the Malabar coast was also called the Mûshika kingdom.
Saint-Martin thinks that the Mûshika still exist in the great tribe of
the Moghsis, which forms the most numerous part of the population of Kach
Gandâra, a region bordering on the territories of the ancient Mûsikani
(_Etude_, p. 162).
[177] Curtius calls the subjects of Oxykanos the Praesti, a name which
would indicate that they inhabited a level country, since the Sanskrit
word of which their name is a transcript—_prastha_—denotes _a tableland_
or _a level expanse_. The name, Saint-Martin thinks, is in Justin altered
to _Praesidae_; but Justin, it appears to me, means the Praisioi thereby.
Oxykanos is called both by Strabo and Diodôros _Portikanos_, representing
perhaps the Sanskrit _Pârtha_, “a prince.” It is not easy to determine
where his dominions lay. They were not on the Indus, for Alexander left
that river to attack them. Cunningham places them to the west of the
Indus in the level country around Larkhâna, which, though now close
to the Indus, was in Alexander’s time about forty miles distant from
it. Their capital he identifies with Mahorta, a place about ten miles
north-west from Larkhâna, where there are the remains of an ancient
fortress on a huge mound, whence perhaps its name _Mâhaurddha_, “very
high.” Lassen, on the other hand, followed by Saint-Martin, places the
country of Oxykanos to the east of the river, and therefore in the vast
Mesopotamia (the Prasiane of Pliny) comprised between the old or eastern
arm of the Indus and the present channel (_v._ Lassen, _Ind. Alt._ ii.
177; Saint-Martin, _Etude_, p. 165; Cunningham, _Anc. Geog. of India_,
pp. 259-262).
[178] See note S, Sindimana.
[179] See Note T, City of the Brachmans, Harmatelia; also Note H_h_,
Indian Philosophers.