 |
| Alexander dreamed of a Brotherhood of Man in a world torn by conflicts. This may forever remain an unattainable goal yet he is the finest symbol of our vision of a United Nations. It was due to his initiative that the East and West first met and this led not only to an unprecedented rise in the cross-cultural exchanges but also ushered in a new era in world trade. In this respect he can be called the first champion of globalization. He was aware of his unique role in history and had included in his train expert writers to chronicle his mission |
| Sir William Jones
greatly loved India but his 'discovery' of Megasthenes' Palibothra at
Patna is a blunder that does not have a single archaeological
proof.
Writers like R. Thapar and D. Chakrabarti do not mention that no relics of
Chandragupta have been found from Patna or anywhere else. Another fraud
that has derailed history is the false discovery of Lumbini by Dr. A.
Fuhrer. Historians, cautioned Ranke, have to root out forgeries and
falsifications from the records and test documents on the basis of their
internal consistency and that with other documents originating from the same
period.
They have to stick to primary sources whch are coeval and lay less
stress on later secondary sources. In plain defiance,
archaeologists like Martin Carver and D. Chakrabarti boldly justify Jones'
decrepit theory of Palibothra using the Chinese records written about a
thousand years later. Chakrabarti misses that the most damaging legacy of
Colonial Indology is Jones' blunder which has destroyed the chronological
framework of Indology and banished figures like Rama, Manu and
Chandragupta. This has falsified the histories of Gotama, Zoroaster, Jesus
and Alexander the Great. A key figure, Moeris, remains unmasked.
A new image of Alexander, as seen from the east, emerges from Non-Jonesian Indology. Palibothra was at Kohnouj in Iran-Baluchistan where Alexander came. This throws new light on his death, the Gedrosian voyage, and many other episodes. A Palibothra in Iran-Baluchistan shows that Ur from where the Patriarch Abraham started his journey was in south-east Iran, not south Iraq. THE PRESENCE OF ALEXANDER AT KOHNOUJ (PALIBOTHRA) DISPROVES JONES' HYPOTHESIS Even a great scholar like Sir William Tarn naively imagined that ancient India was British India. Stephanus |
 |
| categorically described Carmania as 'a country of India'. The absurdity of the Jonesian idea can be seen from Herodotus' report about the tribes under Cyrus, " The rest of the Persian tribes are the following: the Panthialaeans, the Derusiaeans, the Germanians, who are engag-ed in husbandry, the Daans, the Mardians, the Dropicans and the Sagartians ". The Derusiaeans and Panthialaeans were clearly the Druhyus and the Panchalas and the Sagartians were the people of King Sagara who seem to be linked to Sogar in the Gulf area which was 'India'. The Dropicans echo Drupada. The Daans remind one of Gotama Buddha whose name, according to Al-beruni, was Buddho-dana. Another decisive refutation of Jones comes from the history of Alexander. Arrian wrote (VI.28), ".. while he was in Carmania, |
 |
| Alexander offered
sacrifice in gratitude to heaven for his conquest of India and the escape
of his army from the desert of Gedrosia, and that he held a festival with
public competitions in athletics and the Arts." This is usually linked to
the victory over Porus 18 months back but this is absurd. The victory over
the Indians at Kohnouj shows that this was India. A. B. Bosworth writes
that the festivities took place at Khanu or Kohnouj but misses that the
name tells a story, hoary figures like Gadhi and Visvamitra were
from Kanauj. Although writers like R. Thapar and D. Chakrabarti accept
Kanauj in eastern India as ancient Kanauj, Vincent Smith noted the absence
of ancient structures at Kanauj. Contrarily the recent discoveries at
Jiroft near Kohnouj prove its great antiquity. Kohnouj must have been the
Kanauj of Visvamitra. Djiroft (Jiroft) may in fact be a transform of
Dvaravati, capital of Kamboja. Relics of Alexander may be found here.
Ancient Magadha must have been Magan which is mentioned in the Sumerian texts together
with
Dilmun and Melukkha. Writers like D. Chakrabarti
have run from pillar to post in search of the Sisunagas and Kakavarnas of
Magadha but have missed that they were the Susinaks and Kak-kings of Magan.
Kak-Siwe
Tempti
may be the Rishi Kaksivant of the Rigveda and the Atharvaveda. Manu is the first sacrificer in the Rigveda. Writers like Chakrabarti and Thapar have no idea that Manu was Mannu or Manium who was also from Magan. A. L. Basham and R. Thapar of the London school have boldly written that Rama was a relatively insignificant tribal chief whose story was exaggerated in the Great Epic Ramayana. This is a lie. As great scholars like Prof. Sukumar Sen indicated, Rama (Rama Margaveya) was also associated with the Magan area. This reveals only partly how severely Indian ancient history has been disfigured by Jones' false hypothesis. Reconstructing the geography of ancient India is a daunting task yet it is likely to open up new vistas of research in the history of not only Indo-Iran but the whole of the ancient East. Iranian scholars have justly celebrated the archaeological finds at Djiroft near Kohnouj but seem to be unaware that the history of this region cannot be understood without considering the large body of evidence from the Indian texts. As the reconstruction Djiroft = Dvaravati shows, the Djiroft area was the ancient Kamboja of the Indian texts. The present author pointed out the importance of the Djiroft area before Madjidjadeh and others. AN ANCIENT SECRET - ORONTOBATES WAS CHANDRAGUPTA E. Badian and P. Green have rightly stressed the need to demythologise the story of Alexander but their neglect of the non-European sources has obscured the identity of many figures including the chameleon-like Moeris whose world collided with that of Alexander in diverse ways. Orontobates is said to be just another faceless Persian who fought against Alexander in Caria and, together with Ariobarzanes, led the Persians, Mardians and Sogdians at the battle of Gaugamela but this is a travesty. Together with him Alexander rewrote history. The name Ariobarzanes offers a clue. Asoka's clan-name was Vardhana. In some manuscripts of the Sanskrit drama Mudrarakshasa, Rantivarma takes the place of Chandragupta which shows that it was another name of the latter. As Varma (like Bates) is a title, Rantivarma can be seen to be the same as Orontobates who was from the Gulf area (Arrian, III,8). Alexander must |
 |
 |
 |
| have known him long before he clashed with him and Memnon in Caria. Olmstead wrote that the name Orontes corresponds to the name Arunadas. The word 'Aruna' in Sanskrit means the 'charioteer of the Sun'. Thus the Sun's quadriga in Andragoras' coin can be read as Arunadas or Orontes. E. Badian notes the great importance of Sasigupta in Alexander's camp but has no clue to the dramatic turn of events that followed. The words 'Sashi' and 'Chandra' stand for the 'Moon' in Sanskrit. Thus Sasigupta was the same as Chandragupta or Orontobates. That Moeris could have been Maurya Chandragupta was |
| widely suspected but
due to a slanted perspective and Jones this was forgotten. The equation
Moeris=Sasigupta=Chandragupta=Orontobates is an important key to a
proper study of the history of Alexander. Moeris played a silent role in
many of Alexander's victories. The surrender of Persepolis marks a high
point in world history. From a careful analysis of Diodorus' report it can
be seen that Tiridates who handed over the Persepolis
treasury was also Moeris. Other aliases of Chandragupta were Orontes (of
Armenia), Diodotus of Erythrae and
Andragoras. SISINES WAS SISICOTTUS The trail of Sisicottus/Orontobates leads to another mystery figure, Sisines. Curtius wrote that Sisines was sent on an embassy to Philip by the Persian Satrap of Egypt and was induced to remain in Macedonian service. He is said to have accompanied Alexander on his expedition to Asia and while the Army was in Cilicia he received a letter from Nabarzanes assuring him of rewards if he could kill Alexander. The letter, however, had fallen into the kings hands, who had re-sealed it and had it delivered to Sisines to test his fidelity. Sisines intended to brief Alexander about the letter but several days passed without his finding an opportunity of doing so and Alexander, thus feeling sure about his treachery ordered him to be put to death. Sisines is usually thought to be a Persian agent but R. Lane Fox sees him as an ally of Alexander. He is clearly the same as Siscottus/Orontobates. He may have fled to Egypt and then to Macedonia to escape from the murderous clutches of Ochus and his minister Bagoas. ONE PRINCESS AND TWO SUITORS - ALEXANDER AND ORONTOBATES Only Plutarch narrates an incident which has almost a cinematic touch. The Carian Satrap Pixodarus is said to have offered the hand of his eldest daughter Ada-II to Arridaeus, Alexander's half-brother. A discontented Alexander contacted Pixodarus through his friends and offered himself as a suitor which was eagerly embraced by the Satrap but an indignant Philip put an end to the affair. Incidentally a daughter of Pixodarus, probably Ada-II, was married to Orontobates whose true identity is revealed by the Indian texts. This gives a new twist to whole of the Alexander saga. The king certainly did not forget Ada-II, but there seems to be no warrant to invent a love triangle here. Whatever the truth is, Ada-II adds a fascinating but unknown dimension to Alexander's life history. Where did the two first meet? If one accepts Curtius' story this could have been at Pella. Were they friends to start with or were they adversaries before the battle of Tyre, we do not know. MAZAEUS AND HIS SONS - COLLABORATORS PAR EXCELLENCE Alexander was one of the greatest military commanders of all times but all his victories were not won in the battlefield. There is strong indication that Mazaeus, the Cilician Satrap, had become a collaborator |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| from a very early stage. No wonder he was allowed to mint coins in his own name even when Alexander was alive. When Mazaeus offered to liberate Darius' mother Sisygambis, she is said to have refused which also indicates that he was seen as a traitor. Sisygambis may have been related to Sisicottus. Dr. Rani Iyer of Pullman, USA, points out that Sasigupta may have been one of the sons of Mazaeus who surrendered Babylon. Sasigupta is said to have briefed Alexander about the feasibility of unseating the Nanda king. According to Arrian, Antibelus, a son of Mazaeus, together with Bagistanes, is said to have made a similar representation. As 'M' and 'B' are often interchanged, Bagistanes can be seen to be Megasthenes |
| who later became
Seleucus' envoy in Chandragupta's court. That Seleucus' relations with
Chandragupta had covert dimensions can be surmised.
A FOCUS ON CILICIA-CARIA Was Alexander in Caria during his estrangement with Philip? Carians and Cilicians played unusually |
| important roles in
his life. Mazaeus was the Satrap of Cilicia. Sisines also came into
prominence in Cilicia. Eumenes was a Carian and Diodotus of Erythrae also
had Carian links. G. Waddingham has described a Cilician coin bearing the
legend AGR and depicting a king slaying a lion which is similar to
SNG-Paris-Cilicie#209. This may be a coin of Agramesh who, according to
Curtius, was the ruler of the Gangaridae and Prasii. Agramesh may be a
Nanda king or Sandrocottus, The lion may symbolise the Macedonians. It can
be seen that the Mauryas were the traditional rulers of
Pontus. In the little polis of Amyzon in north-west Caria a decree from the time of Philip Arrhidaeus granted citizenship to a man named Bagadates and his son Ariaramnes and on the advice of the oracle at Delphi, appointed the former as the priest of the local goddess Artemis. As 'Baga' is the same as 'Deva', Bagadates may be the same as | |
| Diodotus of Erythrae. Whether this was done in consultation with Arrhidaeus is not known but this little piece of information sheds light on the murky state of affairs and bolsters the conspiracy theories. | |
| King slaying a lion |
|
ALEXANDER IN THE SANSKRIT DRAMA MUDRARAKSHASA One common cliche' is that Alexander is ignored in the Indian literature. From this learned scholars like Tarn and Rostovtzeff drew the sweeping conclusion that his influence on Asia was trivial. This is false. The ancient Sanskrit drama Mudrarakshasa offers invaluable clues in the history of Alexander. The drama has been dated to the 9th century by Sir A.B. Keith but this is baseless and is a result of the Jonesian goof-up. The present form of the drama is emended but its core belongs to a much earlier date. It is only due to an undue European bias and Jonesian muddling that scholars have missed that Chandanadasa in the drama is a ghost of Alexander. Alexander was known to many of his Asiatic subjects as Ale-Khan-Der. 'Khan' corresponds to the ancient word 'Kana' which means great. Kana may be linked to the names like Kanika, Qarnain and Ai-Khanum. King Kanika to whom Matrcheta addressed his 'Maharaja Kanika Lekha' is Alexander, not Kanishka. The 16th century historian Taranatha cautioned that Kanika was not Kanishka but scholars have not realised the importance of this warning. Taranatha also wrote that Matrcheta was Asvaghosa. THE PURSUIT OF MOERIS THROUGH GEDROSIA Alexander's return to Susa through the burning Gedrosian desert has perplexed all as there were safer routes. Following some ancient sources (not contemporary), Badian ascribed it to his growing megalomania bordering on insanity but this is baseless. Among the later writers only Diodorus and Justin had some knowledge of the East and Justin gave the crucial information that Alexander had defeated the Prasii but due to Jonesian delusions this was ignored by all. Even a great scholar like J.B. Bury wrote that the Gedrosian expedition was to support the Navy but the reverse may have been true. The navy carried provisions, troops and even horses to back up the Army which was engaged in a grim struggle against the Prasii, ruled by Moeris or Maurya whose lurking presence at Pattala clearly shows that the Gedrosian expedition was dictated by the military compulsion to defeat the Prasii. THE
OPIS BANQUET WAS A KIND OF A FEAST OF MITRA | |
| and
appears credible at first sight but he relied on only the Greek and Latin
writers and in contrast to Tarn, had limited knowledge of the East. P.
Green and A. B. Bosworth also take a similar view but the Opis feast took
place in the month of Mithra and was probably a kind of a Feast of
Mitra which is celebrated on the day of Mithra i.e. 8th October. This
reminds one of the feasts of Gudea, a Mitra on earth who advocated
Brotherhood. That Alexander would be interested in the doctrines of Mitra
(not quite the Persian God) which influenced Buddhism and resemble
Hellenic doctrines is natural. His call for amity is echoed in the Edicts
of Asoka who maintains a measured silence on Alexander. In the 7th Edict
he writes; "In the past, kings searched for means whereby people's
interest in Dhamma would increase ...". This king can only be
Alexander on whose Altar he was writing. Badian missed that Alexander had
great respect for Nebuchadrezzar. Plutarch wrote that the Altars were
venerated by the Prasiians. This must have been related to Dhamma. |
|
| millennia and signalled the ascendancy of the West, yet the expedition was far from an Imperial conquest. The Nobel laureate Wole Soyinka has highlighted the exploitive role of both Christianity and Islam in Africa but notwithstanding the bloodletting it caused, Alexander's expedition had a very different outcome. The resurgence in Indian civilisation in the 4th century BC cannot be explained without noting the colossal impact of his voyage. Like Buddhism, Hellenism also recognised no national boundaries and as the Son of Ammon, Alexander |
| Sitting on a throne
once used by Gomata, it was natural that Alexander would eschew violence
and call for Brotherhood and love. His adoption of the Persian Royal dress
in place of the Macedonian attire has been seen as a mark of degeneration
but this may have been the dress of Gotama (Gaumata) who shared the
Persian throne with Bardiya (Bhaddiya of the Pali texts). This adds a new
dimension to his call for amity which is the central plank of Buddhism.
The presence of Gotama in Persia was suggested by Dr. Spooner in 1915 but
his voice was drowned by Jonesian unreason.
THE DJIROFT AREA WAS ANCIENT KAMBOJA While rejoicing the victory over the Indians at the Palace at Kohnouj, Alexander may or may not have learnt about the hoary antiquity of the place. A careful study shows that this area was the ancient Kamboja the capital of which was Dvaravati or Djiroft. That the term Indo-Iran is preferable to India or Iran was known to scholars like Hillebrandt, Tucci, |
 |
| Brunnhofer, Herzfeld,
Toynbee and Tarn but modern historians like E. Badian and R. N. Frye have
lost sight of that part of modern Iran was once within greater India. This
makes it impossible to write a history of Persia without taking into
consideration the vast Indian tradition. Alexander has been likened to
Spanish conquistadors without proper warrant. To do justice to Alexander
in the East it is essential to clear the mess created by Jones' false
discovery and probe into the name Alexandria Prophthasia.
ALEXANDRIA PROPHTHASIA WAS AN ABODE OF PROPHETS The straightforward meaning of the Greek word 'Propthes' is Prophet but owing to Dr. Fuhrer's forgery, Tarn failed to locate any Prophets in the area and linked it to Alexander's 'intuition'. Although this found wide acceptance it is clearly a figment of imagination. However, Tarn correctly located Prophthasia in the Hamun Lake area in Seistan or Sakastan which is associated with Prophets. The problem of Zoroaster's homeland has been endlessly debated but scholars like I. M. Diakonoff and G. Gnoli have suggested that the Prophet belonged to Seistan. Incidentally Sir Aurel Stein discovered a Buddhist monastery at Kuh-i Khwaja in Seistan in 1916. Ghirshman pointed out that the art of Kuh-e Khwaja predates Gandhara art which disproves the widely accepted notion that Buddhism spread from Nepal or Eastern India. Once the fraud of Dr. Fuhrer in Nepal which was backed by the British colonial administration, is taken note of, it becomes clear that Kuh-e Khwaja was Kapilavastu, the birthplace of Gotama. Stein's work clearly shows that Buddhism was born in Iran but was later nurtured in modern India, Afghanistan and Pakistan. The name Gomata in Sanskrit and Persian means 'one whose mother is a cow' and in Sumerian language this corresponds to Gut-Ama or Gotama in Sumerian. As Gotama was was called a Sakya his abode would be Sakyavati which appears to echo Sikayavatish, the abode of Gomata in the Behistun inscription. Even the name Hamun Lake can be an echo of Saman which was the name of Buddhists. Place-names like Kabul in Afghanistan and Zabol, Vast etc. near Kuh-i Khwaja are echoes of Babil and Kapilavastu. DAHAN-E GHOLAMAN AND GOTAMA A clear echo of Gotama comes from the name of the site of Dahan-e Gholaman which is about 44 kilometres from Zabol but just as Prophthasia was assigned to Alexander's intuiion, slaves from Africa have been conjured up to turn it into a 'Slaves entrance'. R.N. Frye has suggested that the Daivas against whoim Xerexes led a famous expedition may have been the Indians inside Iran and Sir Aurel Stein wrote about a Buddhist monastery in Seistan but owing to the havoc wreaked by Dr. Fuhrer, the great Buddhist heritage of Iran has been totally ignored. The question of religion of the people of Dahan-e Gholaman has been at the centre of many discussions and scholars are of the opinion that the people of the locality were fire-worshippers but were not Zoroastrians. One has to recall that one of the points of contention between Zoroaster and Gomata was regarding the type of sanctuaries. Gomata had destroyed the Zoroastrian sanctuaries which were later restored by Darius-I. This clearly indicates that the Buddhism was the religion in question as there are references to fire worship in Buddhist literature. Al-beruni also clearly indicated that Zoroaster had driven away the Buddhists from Iran. ALEXANDER, GRECO-IRANIAN ART AND INDIAN GRECO-BUDDHIST ART D. Schlumberger, who succeeded Foucher, boldly stated that Greco-Buddhist art was the Indian descendant of Greco-Iranian art. The first patron of this Greco-Iranian art may have been Alexander. Ghirshman also stated that the murals of Kuh-e Khwaja are the precursor of Gandhara art, This clearly |
| hints that Buddhism was born in Iran-Baluchistan. Curiously it has escaped the notice of all that whereas North-West India (or Iran) has an ancient religious, artistic and literary tradition that fits with Buddhism, barring Fuhrer's so-called discovery, Nepal has no place in the early history of Buddhism. The same is true of eastern India. R. Conningham's work on the location of Kapilavastu is an attempt to divert attention from the hideous forgery of Dr. Fuhrer. No early Buddhist text has been found from India or Nepal. No Buddhist relic from India (or Nepal) is older than the Asokan era, i.e. 3rd century BC. In fact scholars like R. E. Emmerick and Pratapaditya Pal have no idea about pre-Asokan Buddhist art and confuse early Buddhist Art with Indian Buddhist Art which is in fact Greco-Buddhist Art. Only a great scholar like Sir Aurel |
| Stein realised that
to study sixth century BC Buddhist art one has to turn to the the
North-West. Klaus Fischer was also aware that early Buddhist Art was
different from Indian Buddhist Art. Sir Charles Eliot noted that the monks
who first brought the message of Gotama to China were from the North-West,
not Nepal. The fact that Gotama's mortal remains were brought from the
North-West again implicate Dr. Fuhrer. The largest number of Buddha images
have been found from the Gandhara area not Nepal or eastern UP where one
should expect them in the Jones-Cunningham
theory. ALEXANDER AND ASOKA (DIODOTUS-I) Hard on the heels of Alexander followed another great Indo-Greek king, Asoka, without whom Alexander's role in history cannot be assessed. Frank Holt has written much about Diodotus-I but |
| Mahayana spread from the North-West, not Nepal |
| owing to an one-sided perspective has missed that he is the great Asoka. Diodotus-I was not only a contemporary of Asoka but also a namesake. Both were fierce warriors in their youth but later turned into saviours. Asoka never refers to Diodotus-I who should have been his neighbour because he was Diodotus himself. The bilingual Kandahar Edict of Asoka shows that he was the master of the area whereas the evidence from coins indicate that Diodotus was the ruler here. Asoka's Edicts stop exactly in the year Diodotus-I died. The first Arsakes 'is sometimes a Parthian, sometimes a Bactrian, sometimes even a descendant of the Achaemenids', wrote a perplexed Sir George McDonald. Curiously the same is true of Asoka. In the Nittur record Asoka calls himself the 'King of Pathavi' which shows that he was the ruler of Parthia (Parthava of the Achaemenians). Asoka's grandfather Chandragupta was a descendant of the |
| Nanda kings and
Darius-II was called No(n)thos which shows that he was a Nanda king.
One crucial factor that seems to undermine Alexander's legacy is that there the archaeological evidence of his expedition is scanty. In particular nothing is known about the twelve splendid Altars that he is said to have erected to commemorate his expedition to India. An analysis of the Greek, Latin and Sanskrit sources reveals that the Altars were overwritten by Asoka (Orontobates' grandson). There |
| remains the
possibility, which cannot be proven, that the four-lion emblem of
India, which is taken from the so-called Asokan Pillar from Sarnath may be
a timeless relic of Alexander. It is not easy to explain why Asoka
maintains a measured silence on his grandfather and Alexander who were the
two great figures of the fourth century BC. It appears that it was due to
the latter's influence that Asoka, who led a violent early life, later
became a
missionary. It was Diodotus-I Soter who turned Alexander's dream into reality. He not only re-inscribed the Altars - even his message of tolerance and love was a continuation of Alexander's call for homonoia. His missionaries spread the message of Brotherhood far and wide and altered the destiny of mankind. It has been suggested that the Sun-god of the Colossus of Rhodes was modelled after Alexander. If this is true then Alexander lives in the Statue of Liberty in the USA. He was often depicted with ram's horns like the Egyptian Sun-God Amon who was depicted with a ram's head. It is possible that while the charioteer in the Sun's quadriga is Andragoras himself, the Sun-God may be Mitra |
ALEXANDER, ARISTOTLE AND CALANUS "It is nonsense to report on the politicians without informing the reader on the philosophers with whom they studied and consorted, or to discuss Jesus without reference to the politics of Roman Judea.", writes F.E. Peters. Indeed, what differentiates Alexander from a despot like Tamerlane who also ruled a vast empire is Aristotle and also Calanus. His debt to Aristotle has been questioned but this is baseless. Although his scientific bent is generally underrated, his excellence in military engineering and flair for geography are clearly traceable to Aristotle. Tamerlane's fury was fired by his teacher whose vision of |
| absolute truth guided him throughout his life and who was buriedbeside him. Alexander's greatness lies in that he could see through Aristotle's notion of innate superiority of the Greeks and Macedonians over the non-Greek Barbarians and was guided by the egalitarian views of the Indian sage Calanus or Aspines (Spines of Plutarch) who was none other than the great Buddhist scholar Asvaghosa. 'Asva' in Sanskrit stands for the 'horse' and Calanus was famous for his horse which is mentioned by the Greek sources. It is fitting that the greatest thinker of the East influenced Alexander who was a student of the greatest thinker of the West. The affection of the sage Asvaghosa towards Alexander as |
| Seistan is the locale of of the Epic Shahnama and the cradle of all ancient Iranian tradition. It is in fact a fallen Paradise which was once a very fertile country and was known as the granary of ancient Iran. As the Iranian civilisation was once closely allied to the Indian civilisation, Seistan must have been of great importance in Indian history as well. It was called a country of India in the Christian sources. Although scholars like Frye and Renfrew attach little importance to Seistan, its great significance was known to E. Herzfeld and Sir Aurel Stein. Herzfeld went so far as identify the home castle of Caspar who followed the star to Bethelhem with Kuk-e Khwaja in Seistan. H.C. Raychaudhuri and others have suggested that the Helmand river, which was called Harahuvaiti, was the original Saraswati river which is frequently alluded to in the Rigveda. Seistan was known as Sakastan but the name can also be a variant of Shivastan, the |
| While the country owes to the abundant alluvium its wealth and fertility, it also contains more ruined cities and habitations than perhaps to be found within a similar space of ground anywhere in the world. |
| Our geographical and political phraseology about India and Persia obscures the fact that in many periods the frontier between the two countries was uncertain or not drawn as now. |
| yet there is little
in his life history that is beyond dispute. This
is due to two reasons,
inability to distinguish between and facts and lies spread by his own
generals, who succeeded him (and who probably poisoned him) and more
importantly, bungling in geography. The archaeologist who turns the soil also becomes a part of the land, wrote Sir Max Mallowan. The historian also has to be attuned to the time and space of the people under discussion. This is nowhere more important than in ancient Indo-Iran which had a complex multilingual and multiethnic background. The job of the historian is not only to collate the literary and archaeological data at hand but also to fit it to common sense and intuition. Revisionism in history is an ongoing process, but there is always the danger of hyperactivism. Instead of rushing to a bandwagon, the historian has to be circumspect and wary of misjudgment. The philiosopher-poet T.S. Eliot cautioned, 'History has many cunning passages, contrived corridors and issues,/ Deceives with whispering ambitions, Guides with vanities,/ Think now.' THE DISASTROUS FALLOUT FROM THE BLUNDER OF PALIBOTHRA Chronology and geography are said to be the two eyes of history yet there is little awareness in the academic circles of the pitfalls of false geography. Before 1947 Baluchistan was within India but was it the westernmost part of ancient India? Incidentally the eastern extremity of Iran is also known as Baluchistan and may have been within early India. This is missed by R. N. Frye but not Sir Charles Eliot, |
|
The Usinara area was probably the Sineru of the Buddhist texts which
corresponds to Shinar of the Bible. Although Assyriologists equate Shinar
with Sumer, their linguistic argument is far from convincing. The 19th
century Biblical scholars considered Shinar to be different from Sumer.
Prof. Ran Zadok also denies that Sumer was Shinar. The name Sakastan
corresponds to Sakadvipa of the Indian texts. The Magas of Sakadvipa are
referred to in the Agnipurana which reminds one of Gomata who was called a
Maga. Gomata was from Seistan.
Alexander's stay in the Helmand area for some sixty days, where he is said to have enjoyed the hospitality of the Ariaspians, appears unusual as he was still chasing Bessus. Arrian writes, |
| abode of God Shiva of Hinduism. During Alexander's time the Sibi tribes (Sibai of the Greeks) may have been in the Punjab area but the Mahabharata groups them with the Sakas, Kiratas, Yavanas, and Vasatis. The Sakas were in Seistan and the Vasatis may have been the people of the Vasht area in Seistan. This imples that the Sibi tribes were once in the Seistan area. According to the Mahabharata the kingdom of the Sibis was ruled by King Usinara. This shows that Seistan was once known as Usinara. The Queen of Sheba who went to meet king Solomon may have been from Shivastan or Seistan. The Rigveda mentions a Queen of Usinara (Usinarani) who may be the Queen of Sheba herself or another Queen of her line. Kapilavastu in Seistan appears to have been the holiest religious centre of the ancient world. |
 |
| His treatment of the
Ariaspians sheds light on his personality and certainly does not indicate
a vain conqueror. Incidentally the Ariaspians correspond to the
Hariasvas of the Indian texts who are
also described as noble. It is said that King Hariasva never ate animal
food. Piety is not a familiar keyword associated with modern
terrorist-infested Seistan but King Sivi Ausinara became a legend in the Indian
tradition for his exemplary humanity and piety. This ancient tradition of
piety of Seistan was carried on by the Ariaspians and contributed to
Alexander's call for Homonoia. ALEXANDER'S FASCINATION FOR BABYLON WHICH WAS THE HEIR TO PROPHTHASIA Alexander's fascination for Babylon has not been satisfactorily explained by writers like Badian and Bosworth who have missed that his desire to make Babylon his world capital is linked to homonoia. He died at the Palace of Nebuchadrezzar who was a mighty conqueror eulogised in the Bible, but later dedicated his life in spreading a religion that stressed brotherhood. Babylon was a concourse of religions and as Sir Leonard Woolley realised the E-sangila was a great centre of religious reforms. Bagapa, who was probably the head of the E-sangila, a kind of a Sangha, was none other than Gotama Buddha whose title was Bhagava. The name Babylon is a Greek transform of the true name Babil. Joan Oates writes that the usual explaination of the name as 'the gate of God' is incorrect. The American linguist I. J. Gelb pointed out that 'Babil' is an echo of the name of an older city which had the same name. If one recalls that Babylon was often in conflict with the Assyrians for religious reasons but was usually closer to the Elamites, it can be guessed that this older 'Babil' was in the East. E. Herzfeld wrote about the city 'Bawer' in Iran, which is said to have been founded by Jamshid. Herzfeld also noted that the only ancient structures of Eastern Iran are at Kuh-e Khwaja near Zabol which is an echo of Babel. Bawer is cognate with Baveru of the |
| These people Alexander treated with every courtesy; he honoured them for the service rendered to Cyrus in the old days and also for the fact, which he observed for himself, that their political institutions were different from those of other tribes in that part of the world: like the best of the Greeks, they claimed to know the distinction between right and wrong. He accordingly allowed them to retain their freedom, and offered to give them as much of their neighbours' territory as they wanted - and they asked only for a small slice. |
| Jatakas and Kapil
(vastu). The Lalitavistara states that Gotama's
birthplace Kapilavastu (Prophthasia) was the abode of many earlier
Prophets and was near the Paradise. Babil is cognate with Kapil of the
Indian texts, Kabil of the Quran and Havilah of the Bible. Kapilavastu or
Babil was once the holiest religious centre of the world. Babaylon later
inherited the holy legacy of
Babil. As the Lalitavistara indicates, Babil was near the ancient Paradise. It appears that the ancient Ur from where Abraham started his westward trek was also in this area. Woolley's identification of a city in south Iraq as Abraham's Ur was once hailed as a great discovery but this now appears to be a mistake. This was was rejected by W. F. Albright and appears outdated in the light of recent discoveries at Shahr-i Shokhta and Jiroft. E.A. Speiser |
| wrote that Sumerians city-names echo the names of older Elamite cities. Ur agrees with Urva of the Vendidad and Uruvela (Bala=Kala=city) of the Indian texts. Islamic historians wrote about the Indian city Ubbula in the Gulf area which is clearly an echo of Uruvela or Ur. After enlightenment Gotama preached at Uruvela which is clearly Ur. It was only Jonesian insanity that led scholars to imagine that Uruvela was in Eastern India. Babil was near the lost Paradise mentioned in the Bible and also alluded to in the splendid art of Ajanta and Sanchi. It is likely that like Abraham Jesus Christ also had links with Ur and the Paradise in the East. |
ALEXANDER MAY HAVE BEEN POISONED Aelian reported that Alexander had met Bagoas a few days before his death. Who was this Bagoas and why did the king meet him? Bagoas and Ochus poisoned numerous princes and nearly obliterated the Persian Royal line. Plutarch wrote about the rumours about Alexander's poisoning. Usually the prime suspects are the Generals, the Royal cup-bearer, Arrhidaeus and even his wife Roxane, but Bagoas, the poison-man par excellence, is left out as he is presumed to have died earlier. Diodorus reported that Bagoas attempted to poison Darius-III but was forced to drink his own cup of poison. Did the Greeks know the full truth? The Sanskrit drama Mudrarakshasa, on the other hand, indicates that Chanakya, who is clearly Bagoas, helped Chandragupta to defeat his rivals and ascend to the throne. As the core of the Mudrarakshasa, a story of poison-maidens and intrigue, appears to belong to a period just after Alexander's death, it is natural to suspect that Alexander was poisoned and that Bagoas was a major player in the plot. Significantly, in the drama Abhayadatta dies after drinking his own cup of poison. Chanakya who boasts of decimating the Nanda line in the drama is clearly a shadow of Bagoas. It is rather simplistic that a fiend like Bagoas who poisoned so many people could be eliminated so easily. Chanakya made Chandragupta drink small doses of poison daily to get immunity and it is natural to presume that he had taken the same precaution himself. Only Lane Fox suspects Diodorus' version. Chandragupta's rise coincided with Alexander's fall and it is judicious to suspect a link. Asoka hints in his Edicts that his ancestors also adopted the name Diodotus. This crucial data clarifies one of the most intriguing mysteries linked to Alexander's death - the presence of the name of Diodotus of Erythrae as co-editor of the Royal Diary. This Diodotus must be the lurking Chandragupta. His name in the Diary can only point to his involvement in Alexander's poisoning. Seleucus' special relations with Chandragupta and the presence of the mysterious go-between Bagistanes, implicates him. Although most of the Greeks and Macedonians abandoned their Persian wives, Seleucus remained faithful to Apame, the daughter of Alexander's bitter enemy Satibarzanes. In fact his rise was due to the support he received from Alexander's enemies, the Zoroastrians. This was probably also true of Perdiccas who married Atropates' daughter. The latter may have had a hand in the poisoning of Hephaestion which was the prelude to the final murder of Alexander. In the drama, Chandragupta joins hands with Rakshasa, a shadow of Oxyartes. This hints that the latter may also have betrayed at the end. This points at a grand coalition of all the Persian nobles, Oxyartes, Sasigupta and Apame to eliminate Alexander. Even Ptolemy may have played a part in the conspiracy. Michael Wood also suspects poisoning. The lone female character in the drama mimics Roxane who may also have betrayed. |
| known from his letter to Alexander (Maharaja Kanika Lekha) is a glowing testimony of that he was not a homosexual maniac as painted by some modern scholars. |
|
ALEXANDER IN SEISTAN Seistan, today a playground of ignorance and terrorism, has sadly been relegated to the backyard of history. Although Colin Renfrew includes Seistan in his theory of Aryans streaming out of Turkey, he does not mention it in his textbook on archaeology. Seistan, in fact, holds the key to a proper understanding of world history, including that of Alexander. I. M. Diakonoff and G. Gnoli have held that Prophet Zoroaster's homeland was Seistan but owing to Jonesian misconceptions, Gnoli misses the link with another Prophet - Gotama Buddha. An analysis of the history of Seistan throws a flood of light on Alexander's life history. His stay in Seistan for about two months leaves many unanswered questions. "In Persian legend, Alexander was said have soon sent Roxane away to Seistan, where he gave her its citadel as a wedding present..", writes R. Lane Fox. Klaus Fischer writes with great insight, |
THE HUMANE FACE OF ALEXANDER The shadows of Orontobates and Mazaeus show that Alexander was a highly gifted individual who had his share of human weaknesses. Tarn's flawless portrait of Alexander appears biased but even after making the amends Alexander still appears as a hero whose greatness has been acknowledged through the ages. Whether he played a role in Philip's murder cannot be ascertained and his slaying of Clitus and his estrangement with Callisthenes stain his character yet a closer look does not show him as an inhuman dictator. Homosexuality was common among Macedonians and Greeks yet the reports in some sources of his homosexual liaison with Hephaestion appear to be tainted. Lane Fox writes that while later gossip claimed that Alexander had a love affair with Hephaestion, no contemporary history states this. Furthermore, one has to consider that probably there was an extensive smear campaign launched by the Generals and Sasigupta to cover up their treachery. Sadly although there is much in his relationship with Hephaestion that is worth emulating, this has been underplayed by modern writers who abet the unlimited thirst and tolerance for sensational falsehood in today's media-dominated world. His frenzy after Hephaestion's death has been given a sexual slant but this is unjustified. He suspected that Hephaestion was poisoned and executed the physician. Bosworth refers to the prevailing 'heavy atmosphere of distrust and suspicion around the king', and it is likely that his frenzy was due to his fear that the noose was tightening on his own neck. Moreover, it was Hephaestion who alone shared his new-found religious sentiments which had alienated old allies like Cleitus, Callisthenes and perhaps even Parmenio. His enthusiasm for Buddhism, which like Hellenism, favours the Middle Way, is consistent with his hatred for Zoroastrianism which is a priestly religion having absolutist traits. His treatment of Sisygambis, Porus, Apame and above all his association with the Indian sages reveal an enlightened person, not a drunken despot. He was fervent an occasionally even impetuous, but on the whole he appears humane and magnanimous. |
 |
 |
| adopted Buddhism which not only reflects Hellenistic ideals but has greatly benefitted from Greek participation. This was not only due to Asoka but also Alexander. As Droysen wrote, Hellenistic culture was Greek in essence but was greatly enriched by the eastern cultures. From this mixing of cultures in which the great Indo-Hellenic king Diodotus-I played a large part, arose not only the mighty wave of Mahayana that swept Asia but also Christianity and Islam. According to Plutarch Mithraism came to the Roman world in the 1st century BC |
| could not circumscribe himself within narrow national confines. Groomed by such great thinkers as Aristotle and Asvaghosa, Alexander embodied not only Western science but also Eastern religiosity - he had become a world-citizen (Anagarika) in the true sense of the word. It was due to his wisdom and dynamism that Hellenistic culture emerged as a significant factor in the old world. Koine, a colloquial form of Greek, became widely accepted as the language of the cultured people. The Old Testament was translated into Greek by about 285 BC. The New Testament was also written in Koine and is a typical Hellenistic document. Significantly, the first Buddhist texts are from the 4th century BC and Gotama's biography Buddhacharita was written by Asvaghosa. Tarn wrote that most of the Bactrian Greeks |
|
THE LEGACY OF ALEXANDER The links between Europe and Indo-Iran, forged by precursor of the Susa-Sardis road, go back to the 6th millennim BC, but in the 4th century BC Alexander gave a new dimension to this kinship. His voyage ended the world-domination of the East for almost three |
| Alexander's legacy can be seen as much in the Seleucid Empire or the culture of Alexandria as in the Greek icon of the Buddha, or the immortal art of Ajanta or Gandhara. As the last Titan of the Heroic Age he saw the sword as a means to further righteousness but at the end of his career he seems to have mellowed and realised the futility of violence. He was not always above sin, but his greatness lies in that even Sisygambis, the mother of Darius-III, and the Prasiians saw him as a Holy Sinner. |
| ********************* |
| 12th cent. depictation of St. Josaphat preaching Christianity |