Subject: AH Challenge: Indian Empire Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 19:42:01 GMT From: vdemosthenes@my-deja.com Organization: Deja.com Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if What would be the best POD in making an Indian Empire, including Pakistan, Bangledesh, Sri Lanka, Burma, and possibly Nepal and Afghanistan with a large industry, but not larger then US, and independent of Britain in the year of 1939, how would the World war fair with a poewrful India? Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Indian Empire Date: 02 Jan 2001 21:13:14 +0100 From: Steve Holland Organization: University of Aarhus, Department of Computer Science (DAIMI) Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 vdemosthenes@my-deja.com writes: > What would be the best POD in making an Indian Empire, including > Pakistan, Bangledesh, Sri Lanka, Burma, and possibly Nepal and > Afghanistan with a large industry, but not larger then US, and > independent of Britain in the year of 1939, how would the World war > fair with a poewrful India? India would have needed to be united when thje British arrived, and would have had to have had the military power to keep the British (and any other Europeans) out. If India had undergone its own Industrial Revolution in the early 1800s then perhaps an Indian Empire would have been possible. Alternatively, a united India could have tried to do what Japan did and adopt European military and industrial ideas. An Asia dominated by industrial independent Japanese and Indian empires in the early 1900s would have been an interesting place, and one where Europeans would not have been very welcome. ===================================================================== To find out who and where I am look at: http://www.nd.edu/~sholland/index.html ===================================================================== Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Indian Empire Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 21:21:20 GMT From: "Blaine Manyluk" Organization: Gordon Enterprises Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 Steve Holland wrote in article ... > India would have needed to be united when thje British > arrived, and would have had to have had the military power to keep the > British (and any other Europeans) out. If India had undergone its own > Industrial Revolution in the early 1800s then perhaps an Indian Empire > would have been possible. Alternatively, a united India could have > tried to do what Japan did and adopt European military and industrial > ideas. An Asia dominated by industrial independent Japanese and > Indian empires in the early 1900s would have been an interesting > place, and one where Europeans would not have been very welcome. India is a large diverse country, and traditionally, more of a subcontinent than a country. Most of the kings and emperors of a united India (e.g. Mughals) held India together through force. If these rulers homogenized India, like China's did with China, then true Indian nationalism might result, followed by modernization. Of course, Britain would have to leave India alone long enough. ====================================================================== [To reply, remove the S's from my address, and change the R's to N's.] An infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters will eventually come up with a good _Voyager_ script. Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Indian Empire Date: Tue, 02 Jan 2001 23:46:48 GMT From: vdemosthenes@my-deja.com Organization: Deja.com Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 , 3 In article <01c07502$5c2225a0$c2e7b8a1@desktop>, "Blaine Manyluk" wrote: > Steve Holland wrote in article > ... > > > India would have needed to be united when thje British > > arrived, and would have had to have had the military power to keep the > > British (and any other Europeans) out. If India had undergone its own > > Industrial Revolution in the early 1800s then perhaps an Indian Empire > > would have been possible. Alternatively, a united India could have > > tried to do what Japan did and adopt European military and industrial > > ideas. An Asia dominated by industrial independent Japanese and > > Indian empires in the early 1900s would have been an interesting > > place, and one where Europeans would not have been very welcome. > > India is a large diverse country, and traditionally, more of a > subcontinent than a country. Most of the kings and emperors of a > united India (e.g. Mughals) held India together through force. > If these rulers homogenized India, like China's did with China, > then true Indian nationalism might result, followed by modernization. > Of course, Britain would have to leave India alone long enough. > Would this work: 1689 India is conquered by a Sihk Army, which has hindu and Sihk troops to unite India and keep out Muslims. 1700's they meet British. Things just go as normal but with independent India. 1800's come and India jumps aboard the Industrial Revolution. Since no European country would consider Japan or India as an equal the 2 find themselves in an alliance. 1900 Japan along with India defeat Russia, give Japan OTL victory and gains, while India gets control of Afghistan. Everything goes OTL. Then in 1939 what happens? We know Japan will probably sign treaty with Germany, but is India? Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Indian Empire Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 00:04:45 GMT From: k385@my-deja.com Organization: Deja.com Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 In article <92tp95$qs0$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, vdemosthenes@my-deja.com wrote: > In article <01c07502$5c2225a0$c2e7b8a1@desktop>, > "Blaine Manyluk" wrote: > > Steve Holland wrote in article > > ... > >Europeans) out. If India had undergone its > Would this work: > > 1689 India is conquered by a Sihk Army, which has hindu and Sihk troops > to unite India and keep out Muslims. 1700's they meet British. Things > just go as normal but with independent India. 1800's come and India > jumps aboard the Industrial Revolution. Since no European country would > consider Japan or India as an equal the 2 find themselves in an > alliance. 1900 Japan along with India defeat Russia, give Japan OTL > victory and gains, while India gets control of Afghistan. Everything > goes OTL. Then in 1939 what happens? We know Japan will probably sign > treaty with Germany, but is India? Try this instead. POD: Dar Shokoh succeeds Shah Jehan instead of Aurungzeb. A tolerant emporer, much like Akbar, Dar Shokoh, who takes the imperial name Shah Alam, promotes Brahmins to high levels in the bureacracy, and marries a hindu rajput princess. he recognizes the British commercial threat, and commercial contacts are limited to Surat and Dhaka. Company agents are prohibited from the rest of Mughal india. Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Indian Empire Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 01:01:38 GMT From: vdemosthenes@my-deja.com Organization: Deja.com Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 Won't work, has to be either Hindu or Sihk controlled India. Since Hindus and sihks dispise Muslims, and Hindus consider Sihks break off from them and would work better, unlike with muslim run which would cause continue fighting. In article <92tqao$ro9$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, k385@my-deja.com wrote: > In article <92tp95$qs0$1@nnrp1.deja.com>, > vdemosthenes@my-deja.com wrote: > > In article <01c07502$5c2225a0$c2e7b8a1@desktop>, > > "Blaine Manyluk" wrote: > > > Steve Holland wrote in article > > > ... > > >Europeans) out. If India had undergone its > > > Would this work: > > > > 1689 India is conquered by a Sihk Army, which has hindu and Sihk > troops > > to unite India and keep out Muslims. 1700's they meet British. Things > > just go as normal but with independent India. 1800's come and India > > jumps aboard the Industrial Revolution. Since no European country > would > > consider Japan or India as an equal the 2 find themselves in an > > alliance. 1900 Japan along with India defeat Russia, give Japan OTL > > victory and gains, while India gets control of Afghistan. Everything > > goes OTL. Then in 1939 what happens? We know Japan will probably sign > > treaty with Germany, but is India? > > Try this instead. POD: Dar Shokoh succeeds Shah Jehan instead of > Aurungzeb. A tolerant emporer, much like Akbar, Dar Shokoh, who takes > the imperial name Shah Alam, promotes Brahmins to high levels in the > bureacracy, and marries a hindu rajput princess. he recognizes the > British commercial threat, and commercial contacts are limited to Surat > and Dhaka. Company agents are prohibited from the rest of Mughal > india. > > Sent via Deja.com > http://www.deja.com/ > Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Indian Empire Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2001 01:17:41 GMT From: "Blaine Manyluk" Organization: Gordon Enterprises Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 , 2 , 3 , 4 vdemosthenes@my-deja.com wrote in article <92tp95$qs0$1@nnrp1.deja.com>... > In article <01c07502$5c2225a0$c2e7b8a1@desktop>, > "Blaine Manyluk" wrote: > > India is a large diverse country, and traditionally, more of a > > subcontinent than a country. Most of the kings and emperors of a > > united India (e.g. Mughals) held India together through force. > > If these rulers homogenized India, like China's did with China, > > then true Indian nationalism might result, followed by modernization. > > Of course, Britain would have to leave India alone long enough. > Would this work: It might. > 1689 India is conquered by a Sihk Army, which has hindu and Sihk troops > to unite India and keep out Muslims. That's assuming Hindus and Sikhs can get along. Against Muslims, maybe. But Sikhs are such a minority, they are not likely to keep control of India. Hindus would likely rule, and maybe give Sikhs privileged status for their military prowess (cf. Russia and the Cossacks). > 1700's they meet British. Things just go as normal but with independent > India. 1800's come and India jumps aboard the Industrial Revolution. Japan, unlike India, really had nothing that anyone else wanted, such as minerals and other raw materials. Thus the Europeans pretty much left Japan alone, and Japan had to look outside for such resources. That was a factor causing industrialization. > Since no European country would consider Japan or India as an equal Russia might. > the 2 find themselves in an alliance. If desparate enough, they might ally. Japan considered everyone else to be inferior, but might swallow pride and join with India if no other partners available. If India supports Japan's claims to China/Korea, this might work. > 1900 Japan along with India defeat Russia, give Japan OTL victory > and gains, while India gets control of Afghistan. Everything > goes OTL. Then in 1939 what happens? We know Japan will probably > sign treaty with Germany, but is India? Possibly. After all the original "Aryans" were from India. A powerful, independent, anti-British India might be a naturally ally for Germany. What about oil? Could India help supply Japan's requirements? ====================================================================== [To reply, remove the S's from my address, and change the R's to N's.] An infinite number of monkeys on an infinite number of typewriters will eventually come up with a good _Voyager_ script. Subject: Re: AH Challenge: Indian Empire Date: 03 Jan 2001 02:02:52 GMT From: atamhankar@aol.com (ATamhankar) Organization: AOL http://www.aol.com Newsgroups: soc.history.what-if References: 1 how about this What if the indian army mutiny of 1857 was succesful and kick the british out. india then could expand the already built industry and railroad. come 1900s india would probably aly with japan and "share" other asian countries that were dominated by the europeans. example indochina etc