3 Review(s)

We grew up listening to the stories of ‘Alexander the Great’ and watching films dedicated to his valor and magnanimity towards the Indian King Porus. It has been claimed that impressed by Porus’ bravery, Alexander returned his entire kingdom to him but do we also know that Alexander also handed over each territory he subsequently won to Porus. Why? The known history tells us that Porus became richer after this war while the victorious Alexander had to trek back with his army in two groups traversing a desert and the sea losing thousands of men in the process. Why did Alexander take this route? Was he under some pressure? Why did the victorious army not march back triumphantly through their original entry point into India, Taxila? Was it the march of a victorious army or the escape of an army that lost badly to Porus? What I am presenting is not history but the journalistic scrutiny of a historical event as it transpired. History was distorted to reveal selective information and project the legend of Alexander. The history has presented only one view while ignoring completely and without a debate, the other. The sole objective of this journalistic scrutiny is to examine both sides including the circumstantial evidence.