Maybe this is the wrong place, but why do people say Alexander

>>1787017
There's a difference between defeat and failure. Mutiny is a failure of leadership, not a military defeat.

>>1787017
>I feel like people are just biased in this because they don't want to ruin the myth of the unbeatable conqueror, who could only be defeated from the inside.

See also: German stab in the back myth, German excuses for being absolutely BTFO on the Eastern front

>>1787030
>Mutiny is a failure of leadership, not a military defeat.

Why was his army even homesick in the first place? Didn't the Greeks have a system of rotation to avoid this?

Old soldiers being sent back with gold and slaves replaced constantly by the new ones. So, this excuse seems weird.

He wasn't known to spare any kings as well. Why would he spare Porus?

>>1787017
I'll take the bait. He battled against several indian kingdoms or satrapies and defeated all of them. How did he lose? By not starting a war with every single petty kingdom in the subcontinent?

>If the enemy or situation can cause such fear that your own soldiers refuse to obey you- then isn't that just a defeat on your abilities as a warlord?

They were tired of marching and warring for more than ten fucking years. You know that most campaigns in antiquity lasted from spring to autum at best, right? Alexander forced people used to this kind of war to go with him to the butthole of the world for more than a decade.

Not even one of these faggots who masturbate thinking about Alexander being the perfect man and the greatest general ever, by the way.

>>1787048
What makes you think they had this system and what makes you think it could be put to use when the army is months away from home?

>>1787053
>He battled against several indian kingdoms or satrapies and defeated all of them.
Those were just small puny little kingdoms. He was making his way to meet the Porus i.e the one of the few who actually mattered

>>1787048
>Didn't the Greeks have a system of rotation to avoid this?
No, obviously. This was never a thing during military expeditions abroad until very fucking recently. Not even napoleonic armies had this.
Soldiers clamoring to be released was a very common thing until very recently.

>>1787061
>What makes you think they had this system
I read it on /pol/

> and what makes you think it could be put to use when the army is months away from home?
Shouldn't he have had soldiers stationed in Persia?

>>1787077
>Shouldn't he have had soldiers stationed in Persia?
How does this help your point? If anything, the soldiers are even more angry because a lot of them are not gonna return for a long time. And, if staying in Persia or the Panjab is already bad enough, imagine staying in Bengal. It's basically a promise that you won't see your home ever again.

>>1787105
Righty-oh.

What were the main problems he faced in his conquest? Why couldn't he conquer it as easily as others?

I read that his battle with Porus was his (allegedly) his toughest and most narrow one.

>>1787110
>Why couldn't he conquer it as easily as others?

Because he had several years to conquer the Persian empire and only one or two to fuck around India. Because India was not an unified place and therefore defeating Porus or any other Indian petty king gave him way less gains and prestige than defeating Darius. Because he had to replenish the troops lost in battle and garrisons with asiatic men and this caused conflict amongst his ranks. Because he was now the ruler of a multicultural empire and behaved as such, enraging his elite greeco-macedonian troops who followed him to tak revenge on the persian invasions (remember that Alexander's main strenght was his charisma).

The battle against Porus was the one that caused most casualties in Alexander's army, but he still gained a decisive victory and completely crushed Porus. But this is just one battle, there's no sign that he had more difficulty in the rest of India than he had for example in Afghanistan and central Asia that were also very difficult to subdue.

>>1787142
Could he have taken the Nanda Empire if he had some more troops?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nanda_Empire

How legit are the sources of this anyway? It states Porus was 7 feet which is something people barely reach today with amazing nutrition. As well as leaving Horus alive (very unalexanderlike)

>>1787017
i mean he had his men fighting with him for over 10 years if I remember correctly, it is nearly impossible to keep your soldiers fighting that long

>>1787067
>making his way to meet porus
says here in jewipedia that alex lost 1k and porus lost 23k then became a satrap and gave alex some land, yeah seems like a defeat to me

File: kingmilinda.jpg (170KB, 800x600px) Image search: [Google]

170KB, 800x600px

When Alexander and his people entered India, they discovered Buddhism. They put aside their mission to conquer land and decided to conquer their own minds instead. This was the first bridge between Western Thought/Philosophy and Eastern Thought/Philosophy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greco-Buddhism
You can read the diologue between Menander I (Milinda in Pali) and Nagasena (buddhist monk) here: http://www.sacred-texts.com/bud/milinda.htm

>>1787376
>Greek sources
Lmao. If Alexander lost that many soldiers, there's no way his men would have allowed him to let Porus live.