Raja Porus as an ancient Saini warrior

Colonel James Tod had concluded that Porus was a Yadava or Yaduvanshi king and he further added that this conclusion was not based on any superficial similarity of names but based on a host of other available facts.

His view is worth a mention in this regard:

"To convince the reader I do not build upon nominal resemblance , when localities do not bear me out, he is requested to call to mind,that we have elsewhere assigned to Yadus of the Punjab the honour of furnishing the well known king named Porus; although the Puar, the usual pronunciation of Pramar, would afford a more ready solution."

-Annals and Antiquities of Rajasthan, pp 283, By James Tod, Edition: 2, Published by Asian Educational Services, 2001

Tod went on further to specifically point out Shoorsainis as the Puru tribe whose king was called Porus, the legendary Indian adversary of Alexander the Great:

“ Puru became the patronymic of this branch of the Lunar race. Of this Alexander's historians made Porus. The Suraseni of Methoras (descendants of the Soor Sen of Mathura) were all Purus, the Prasioi of Megasthenes... ”

- Annals and Antiquities of Rajast'han, James Tod, pp 36, Published by Higginbotham and co., 1873

This theory of Tod enjoys a general consensus in academc community. Dr. Ishwari Prasad, Dr. Pritam Saini et al and a number of other history scholars from Indian History Congress either have backed this theory in entirety or strongly indicated a link of his army with the Shoorsainis of Mathura.

The Sourasenoi of Megesthenes

Ancient Greek traveller and ambassdor to India, Megasthenes, came across Saini clan in its glory days as the ruling tribe with its capital in Mathura.

Megasthenes described this tribe as Sourasenoi and their patron deity and ancestor as Herakles:

"..This Herakles is held in special honour by the Sourasenoi, an Indian tribe, who possess two large cities, Methora and Cleisobora" Arrian, Indika, viii, Methora is Mathura ; Growse (Mathura, 3rd ed. 279) suggests Cleisbora is Krisnhapura , ' city of Krishna'..."

-ANNALS AND ANTIQUITIES OF RAJASTHAN, James Tod, Vol. 1, pp 36, Oxford University Press, 1920

In this article we make a bold claim that Raja Porus was a Saini. We back up this claim with a solid textual theory developed by Colonel James Tod and accepted well in the academy. Dr. Pritam Saini, an eminent historian and literary critic of Punjab, a research fellow at Punjabi university , Patiala , a notable journalist and a life long member of prestigious academic bodies like Punjab History Conference and Indian History Congress, had concluded that Raja Porus was was a Saini and was in the line of Maharaja Shoor Sen and Krishna-Balram Yadava warrior duo.

Meaning of Porus as King of Easterners, or Prachayas, the migrants from East to Punjab and Afghanistan

The interpretation of 'Prasioi' as 'Prachaya' , which is an interpretation no historian of repute is able to disregard, also perfectly jives with the narratives of descendants of Shoorsen having migrated westward to Punjab and Afghanistan after Mahabharata war and the fact that Porus' army carried an effigy of Balarama or Krishna, the traditional deities of Shoorsainis who originated from Mathura. A migrant form eastern states is called "Poorvi" even to this date in Punjab.

To recapitulate all the points discussed so far, it did not surprise Col. Tod and other historians of repute who adopted his analysis to observe that:

1) Some of the descendants of Shoorsen , i.e. Shoorsainis had moved to Punjab after Mahabharata war;

2) The Shoorsainis were called 'Prasioi' or 'Prachaya', or 'Easterners' because they had migrated to Punjab from Mathura which is in the east of Punjab;

3) The etymology of 'Porus' is derived from 'Prasioi' or 'Pracahaya', or 'Easterner', not from 'Paurava', or the descendant of Puru.

4) The frontline soldiers of Porus carried an effigy of either Balarama or Krishna, i.e Indian Herakles, who were both ancestors and patron deities of Shoorsainis;

5) Megesthenes had clearly noted that Herakles was held in special regard by 'Sourasenoi' or Shoorsainis of Mathura when he had visited the place after in around 300 BC as the ambassdor of Seleukos Nikator.

All of the above facts lined up perfectly to support the conclusion that Porus was a Yadava, or Shoorsaini, the descendant of Maharaja Shoorsen of Mathura. When Col Tod makes the observation that Porus was a Shoorsaini , he has been through an arduous process of synthesizing epical references , local etymologies , traditional legends and situational issues with the accounts left by the Greek observers.