AHC: Indian Colonial Empire

[Orsino]

I'd wager a crisp twenty-pound note that upon hearing the words “India” and “Empire” most people would think of the British Raj, and yet of course India has been home to many large and powerful native empires that have exerted influence over a pretty wide area. So the questions is, just how large could an Indian colonial empire get and how could it survive? Could we see Pala or Mughal colonies in Madagascar? Somalia? Australia? What are the obstacles to true Indian domination of the Indian ocean and which of the sub-continent's historical empires would be the likeliest candidate?

So the challenge: Given a POD not before the founding of the Gupta Empire in 320 CE what is the largest possible extent for an empire based on the Indian subcontinent?

[Herzen's love-child]

Historically, there was a lot of Indian cultural influence extending through Burma & into Indochina & Indonesia for centuries after the Gupta Empire. The South Indian Chola Dynasty even launched military raids into the Sumatran based Srivijaya empire in the 9th Cent. The many Indianized kingdoms of Southeast Asia might have been possible areas of expansion by a suitably aggressive Indian empire before the Islamic expansion began threatening core Hindu areas. I would say the Palas of Bengal or the Tamil Cholas might have the best opportunities for overseas expansion. Which they did in fact act on historically in the 8th thru 11th centuries at their most powerful. The Pala Empire had colonies in the Malaya peninsula, I believe.

The Muslim successor empires had enough on their plates already to participate in adventures far from the subcontinent.

I think a longer term stable Pala Empire could have pushed colonization further eastwards than Java. How far, I don't have a clue. They certainly were great cultural colonizers---spreading Mahayana Buddhism into Tibet & into SE Asia.

[Iori]

I started a TL in which a different Mongol conquest (less bad for Asia, worse for Europe) lead to an Asian-lead colonialism, primarily from the Subcontinent, the below is the height of colonialism showing the Subcontinent and the Empires of the three states their;

[Codae]

Originally Posted by Iori

I started a TL in which a different Mongol conquest (less bad for Asia, worse for Europe) lead to an Asian-lead colonialism, primarily from the Subcontinent, the below is the height of colonialism showing the Subcontinent and the Empires of the three states their;

So what's in North America at this point? Native states, postcolonial states, or both?

[Iori]

Originally Posted by Codae

So what's in North America at this point? Native states, postcolonial states, or both?

The majority is Portuguese, while most of the rest is Japanese with the remainder slit into three native states (two of which are amicable Japanese protectorates) an internationally created 'Canal State' and English and Scottish posessions.

I would've just posted the whole map, but I figured I'd just post the topic-worthy part, plus it's on an out of dat Basemap.

[Colonel Troutstrangler]

What? Beat the achievements of the Raj? Impossible.
Bi gad the Old Queen would be turning in her grave at the very thought. Balderdash, that's what it is-- Balderdash.
Let's not have any more of this nonsense - please?

[Anaxagoras]

The idea of an Indian colonial empire such as you describe is impossible for the very simple reason that religious traditions generally forbade ocean travel and most Hindus would have been unwilling to do such a thing, as it would mean breaking their caste.

[eliphas8]

Originally Posted by Anaxagoras

The idea of an Indian colonial empire such as you describe is impossible for the very simple reason that religious traditions generally forbade ocean travel and most Hindus would have been unwilling to do such a thing, as it would mean breaking their caste.

Then what stops a Muslim empire from attempting it?

[Elfwine]

Originally Posted by eliphas8

Then what stops a Muslim empire from attempting it?

The lack of Muslims within such an empire.

[Iori]

Originally Posted by Anaxagoras

The idea of an Indian colonial empire such as you describe is impossible for the very simple reason that religious traditions generally forbade ocean travel and most Hindus would have been unwilling to do such a thing, as it would mean breaking their caste.

Before the introduction of Islam Indonesia was Indianized and Hindu, I can't imagine they had much issue with it, living in an archipelago.

But even for mainland India, well things change, social institutions and belief are'nt static, I mean even IOTL the Castes were'nt as important in the past (you can thank the British for cementing things and over-emphasizing their importance).

[WhatIsAUserName]

Can we even talk about an "Indian colonial empire" unless there's a unified Indian state? Isn't this akin to saying "European colonial empire"? It's not difficult to talk about a colonial empire of the Chola or the Pala, but they're only a small segment of India. Perhaps colonial empires would be more appropriate, in the plural.

Originally Posted by Anaxagoras

The idea of an Indian colonial empire such as you describe is impossible for the very simple reason that religious traditions generally forbade ocean travel and most Hindus would have been unwilling to do such a thing, as it would mean breaking their caste.

I think somebody (Flucculencio?) said that it was Hindus in North India who adhered to this the most, and Hindus in Southern India were more okay with it. Historically, I think it was the Chola who occupied parts of Sri Vijaya, but I'm not sure if we can talk about Chola colonies, or whether these were temporary occupations.

However, Indian cultural influence doesn't mean conquest is necessarily going to be easy. Just because the Khmer or Chams adopted Hinduism doesn't mean that they'll like being part of an India-based polity.

[Doctor Imperialism]

Originally Posted by Iori

I started a TL in which a different Mongol conquest (less bad for Asia, worse for Europe) lead to an Asian-lead colonialism, primarily from the Subcontinent, the below is the height of colonialism showing the Subcontinent and the Empires of the three states their;

That grey state should control Tangiers and Gilbraltar to ease access into the Med - unless there's a powerful European state stopping them from doing so.

[PulkitNahata]

You could have had the Chola Empire continued by the Pandiyas and later the Vijaynagara Empires. That could have colonies as far as Indoesia and Somalia.

[Iori]

Originally Posted by Doctor Imperialism

That grey state should control Tangiers and Gilbraltar to ease access into the Med - unless there's a powerful European state stopping them from doing so.

The closest to Grey would be the North Indian state, in which case they entered the Med. first from Arabia and then from a much earlier re-build Suez Canal; the Strait of Gibraltar is controlled by the Christian-Muslim Andalusian Empire.

[Kooluk Swordsman]

Originally Posted by Elfwine

The lack of Muslims within such an empire.

The Caliphates would disagree with you. Unless you're arguing semantics and mean to say "There was no Muslim empire, but there were Arab empires".

[eliphas8]

Originally Posted by Kooluk Swordsman

The Caliphates would disagree with you. Unless you're arguing semantics and mean to say "There was no Muslim empire, but there were Arab empires".

Did the Caliphate have signifigant power in India ever? Im pretty sure the Delhi sultanate came later (unless they became caliph at some point.

[Elfwine]

Originally Posted by Kooluk Swordsman

The Caliphates would disagree with you. Unless you're arguing semantics and mean to say "There was no Muslim empire, but there were Arab empires".

What caliphates were there in India?

There aren't very many Muslims in India, and Muslims coming from say, Iran, in alt-empires are coming as a thin overland trickle, not enough to provide a meaningful change.

And "So you have Iranians within Iran as the sailors etc." - well, that's another story than having a Muslim, Indian (and not except for its colonizing outside the subscontinent) empire.

So no, Arabs have nothing to do with it.

[Hrvatskiwi]

Originally Posted by Elfwine

What caliphates were there in India?

There aren't very many Muslims in India, and Muslims coming from say, Iran, in alt-empires are coming as a thin overland trickle, not enough to provide a meaningful change.

And "So you have Iranians within Iran as the sailors etc." - well, that's another story than having a Muslim, Indian (and not except for its colonizing outside the subscontinent) empire.

So no, Arabs have nothing to do with it.

You do know that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan, right?

[Elfwine]

Originally Posted by Hrvatskiwi

You do know that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan, right?

Which has what to do with the number of Muslims relative to the number of Hindus, and even more to the point, the number of Muslims in the area we're talking about up to ~1800 or so (the point by which the Europeans are making India part of one of their colonial empires)?

This: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Ma...in_265_BCE.jpg (picked because it illustrates what I'm imagining we're looking as "India", aka including areas outside modern India but within historical definitions of "Indian states" - this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Br...r_of_India.jpg seems too far) is just not a largely Muslim area.

[Clandango]

Originally Posted by Hrvatskiwi

You do know that there are more Muslims in India than in Pakistan, right?

And would have had half a billion altogether if India hadn't been partitioned. Centuries difference, though.