yep u have a point there definately
QUOTE=nivren]
Originally posted by: shinningstar
i think the story is flase...becuase puru was a brave king so brave he refused to bow before alexander the only king who refused . if he was selfish he wouldn't have done what he did...he would have joined forces with alexander
No the story is absolutely true because the serial Chanakya which was aired on DD also showed this...Puru was brave...but bravery doesn't mean that that he wasn't selfish...
And if the story was false...the writer would have got a mouthful from historians ...for writing and getting published wrong information...and the publisher would not have published it at the first time...And I think the writer being a eminent writer on History...is mature enough to verify and write and get published correct information :))
I have read many books and also information posted on websites...it is quoted everywhere that Puru was a cunning person...he captured small kingdoms by using force or trickery...He did not bow before Alexander...because he had self-respect...And as you are telling that if he were not selfish he would have joined the forces of Alexander...that is not so...Puru was brave and valued self'respect...but he could have never given up his kingdom readily without a war...
Bravery does not mean that the person cannot be greedy or selfish...power can make a person do anything...Puru did not like to be under the subjugation of someone...that;s why he responded to Alexander's invasion...
And about Puru being the only king who did not bow down...there were lots of kings who did not bow down to Alexander...like King Hasti...who was the king of West Gandhara...and who bravely refused to accept Alexander's rule...and died bravely on the battlefield...:))