What if India was never colonized?

[Brahman]

I do not understand your insistence that the Marathas are the Castilians of the Indian subcontinent when they were not

Basically, it was proven that Hindavi Swarajya is not true at all, as historian Setumadhavarao Pagadi, who is the most famous Maratha historian, said.

He said that much of the historical material on Shivaji is in fact bogus

Along with James Grant Duff Alth and Jadunath Sarkar refute the opinions of Marathi historians about Shivaji

The Sardars are right on the Marathas, not to be loved by anyone outside their home regions

And where has it actually been disproved really ? Even as liberal as one could be with tge interpretation, it did meant swaraj of Hindavi, which could be seen as Indian or Hindus against foreign military occupation, especially what Mughals were seen at the time.

And no, Marathas actually had amazing staying power, infact they outlasted the Mughals in gey areas across Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and their decendants are still powerful politically across the Country. They would no doubt stay and prosper once they are able to take out Afgans

 

[Sardar]

No really, because People like Shivaji themselves mention Hindavi Swaraj, literally it is one of the things he used as causes of rebellion. And no, Marathas were extremely successful for that even in OTL as they did as I mention before uproot most of Muslim noblity across the places they conquered. They didn't get rid of Mughals in Delhi because they were not stable enough at that point and after Panipat, never had a chance to do so. They will Hinduize the population and considering it would be less than 10% at this point who would be Muslims, it would be a much bigger success

But they also expelled the Hindu nobility, and looted and terrorized without much regard to religion.

 

[Brahman]

But they also expelled the Hindu nobility, and looted and terrorized without much regard to religion.

That much is certain, but they also integrated into the local areas far better than even Mughals, and as I mentioned before in previous reply to @ahmedali , their dynasties had more staying power in OTL across India

 

[Sardar]

And where has it actually been disproved really ? Even as liberal as one could be with tge interpretation, it did meant swaraj of Hindavi, which could be seen as Indian or Hindus against foreign military occupation, especially what Mughals were seen at the time.

Mughals were NOT seen as foreign, especially in the 18th century in the North. It is a rather modern invention and modern geopolitics which has caused many to view the Mughals as purely foreign.

And no, Marathas actually had amazing staying power, infact they outlasted the Mughals in gey areas across Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and their decendants are still powerful politically across the Country. They would no doubt stay and prosper once they are able to take out Afgans

Yes, they were able to establish Kingdoms, but again they looted and terrorized much of the North to establish these Kingdoms.

 

[Sardar]

That much is certain, but they also integrated into the local areas far better than even Mughals, and as I mentioned before in previous reply to @ahmedali , their dynasties had more staying power in OTL across India

That is because the Mughals were much more centralized and did not allow their nobles to establish client kingdoms. In the South where the did their staying power was also strong.

 

[Brahman]

Mughals were NOT seen as foreign, especially in the 18th century in the North. It is a rather modern invention and modern geopolitics which has caused many to view the Mughals as purely foreign.

Yeah no doubt, should have rephrased it. Mughals were mot seen as foreign at all in 18th century, however, Mughal staying power was much less than Maratha staying power as seen from how Mughals got wiped out while Marathas were able to survive and thrive, even as princely states

, they were able to establish Kingdoms, but again they looted and terrorized much of the North to establish these Kingdoms.

And what's not to say they wont establish kingdoms later in North as well omce things are more stable ? Something that was actually a goal of theirs. It would have resulted in the same thing

That is because the Mughals were much more centralized and did not allow their nobles to establish client kingdoms. In the South where the did their staying power was also strong.

Again, does not explain how their entire line was wiped out across North India. Even the Nizam in south owes more to Deccan Sultanate traditions than Mughal ones

 

[ahmedali]

And where has it actually been disproved really ? Even as liberal as one could be with tge interpretation, it did meant swaraj of Hindavi, which could be seen as Indian or Hindus against foreign military occupation, especially what Mughals were seen at the time.

And no, Marathas actually had amazing staying power, infact they outlasted the Mughals in gey areas across Rajasthan, Tamil Nadu, Gujarat, Madhya Pradesh and their decendants are still powerful politically across the Country. They would no doubt stay and prosper once they are able to take out Afgans

But I don't remember him basically trying to do Isabella of Castile and make everyone Hindu

Just because their enemies are weaker than him doesn't make them stronger

(They could not defeat Mysore had it not been for the British, and in the middle of the Napoleonic Wars, the British defeated them and ended them by 1819)

It is refuted because half of the information about Shivaji is contributed by various influential families in Maharashtra to show how close their ancestors were to Shivaji which is often questionable.

They will not be able against Dost Mohammad Khan

So you are really exaggerating

 

[SuaveRan]

Same as Indonesia if she didn't get colonized by the Dutch. The nation of India, Pakistan and Bangladesh would never exist in begin with. In it's place was a dozens of Lords vying for power. She will be fragmented into different pieces. Like China when she's broke again. Because, before British, the whole sub-continent was never United. It almost United for one or two generations of great king, like chandragupta. But, the child of this alt great ruler of never colonized India will definitely kill each other or fragments India again. Power is terrifying. Power trip is an illness of people with power.

 

[Brahman]

But I don't remember him basically trying to do Isabella of Castile and make everyone Hindu

Just because their enemies are weaker than him doesn't make them stronger

(They could not defeat Mysore had it not been for the British, and in the middle of the Napoleonic Wars, the British defeated them and ended them by 1819)

It is refuted because half of the information about Shivaji is contributed by various influential families in Maharashtra to show how close their ancestors were to Shivaji which is often questionable.

They will not be able against Dost Mohammad Khan

So you are really exaggerating

I mean, I never said they would go against an Anti Muslim policy, just more Hindu Centric ones and employ more Hindus than Muslims.

Their military showing was also one of the best in the British India and were seen as a real danger to British

And no, ot is not refuted, only thing is of doubt it whether he meant Hindavi as in Indians or Hindus. He very clearly meant Swaraj, which literally was taken and used as a slogan for independence.

And again, it they had won in Panipat, Abdali would have either died or ran away and died to sikhs, but that would be the end of Afghans.

 

[ahmedali]

I mean, I never said they would go against an Anti Muslim policy, just more Hindu Centric ones and employ more Hindus than Muslims.

Their military showing was also one of the best in the British India and were seen as a real danger to British

And no, ot is not refuted, only thing is of doubt it whether he meant Hindavi as in Indians or Hindus. He very clearly meant Swaraj, which literally was taken and used as a slogan for independence.

And again, it they had won in Panipat, Abdali would have either died or ran away and died to sikhs, but that would be the end of Afghans.

real danger? truly

They couldn't even destroy Mysore and needed the British to finish them off after four wars

Independence, yes, has not been refuted, but Hindu nationalism is highly questionable and may just be a lie


The British, who are much stronger, could not defeat the Afghans, so why do you think the Marathas will do better?

I can see the expansion of the Afghans and their unification of the Indian subcontinent more real than the Marathas

 

[ahmedali]

Yeah no doubt, should have rephrased it. Mughals were mot seen as foreign at all in 18th century, however, Mughal staying power was much less than Maratha staying power as seen from how Mughals got wiped out while Marathas were able to survive and thrive, even as princely states

And what's not to say they wont establish kingdoms later in North as well omce things are more stable ? Something that was actually a goal of theirs. It would have resulted in the same thing

Again, does not explain how their entire line was wiped out across North India. Even the Nizam in south owes more to Deccan Sultanate traditions than Mughal ones

Yeah no doubt, should have rephrased it. Mughals were mot seen as foreign at all in 18th century, however, Mughal staying power was much less than Maratha staying power as seen from how Mughals got wiped out while Marathas were able to survive and thrive, even as princely states

And what's not to say they wont establish kingdoms later in North as well omce things are more stable ? Something that was actually a goal of theirs. It would have resulted in the same thing

Again, does not explain how their entire line was wiped out across North India. Even the Nizam in south owes more to Deccan Sultanate traditions than Mughal ones

Regarding the mughal

They are weaker than the Marathas, but they outlived them by forty years

 

[Brahman]

real danger? truly

They couldn't even destroy Mysore and needed the British to finish them off after four wars

Independence, yes, has not been refuted, but Hindu nationalism is highly questionable and may just be a lie


The British, who are much stronger, could not defeat the Afghans, so why do you think the Marathas will do better?

I can see the expansion of the Afghans and their unification of the Indian subcontinent more real than the Marathas

They did defeat British in the first Anglo Maratha war decisively so yes and no, their fights with Mysore seem to not refute this at all.

And their Independence was solely linked to Hindavi, whether it was Indians or Hindus is debatable

And no, Afghans got obliterated by the Sikhs and actually were beaten by the British as well. There is a reason why Peshwar is in Pakistan and more Pashtuns live in Pakistan than in Afghanistan. All thanks to Sikhs and British.

If Marathas did win in Panipat, Afghans are no longer a threat, with their real Threats being Sikhs, British and Mysore

 

[Brahman]

Regarding the mughal

They are weaker than the Marathas, but they outlived them by forty years

And Maratha dynasties lasted in all the places I mentioned and were still successful whereas Mughals basically died out, this does marathas more integrated fo local regions than the mughals

 

[ahmedali]

They did defeat British in the first Anglo Maratha war decisively so yes and no, their fights with Mysore seem to not refute this at all.

And their Independence was solely linked to Hindavi, whether it was Indians or Hindus is debatable

And no, Afghans got obliterated by the Sikhs and actually were beaten by the British as well. There is a reason why Peshwar is in Pakistan and more Pashtuns live in Pakistan than in Afghanistan. All thanks to Sikhs and British.

If Marathas did win in Panipat, Afghans are no longer a threat, with their real Threats being Sikhs, British and Mysore

In the second, the British defeated them harshly, and this is while they were distracted by Napoleon

Geography still greatly favors the Afghans, and there is a willingness of the Sikhs to put aside their differences with the Afghans to crush the Marathas

So your points are weak

 

[ahmedali]

And Maratha dynasties lasted in all the places I mentioned and were still successful whereas Mughals basically died out, this does marathas more integrated fo local regions than the mughals

I'm talking about the actual empire finished by 1819

Only Kolhapur remains

For example the Tamil Maratha Kingdom ended in 1855 and

 

[Brahman]

In the second, the British defeated them harshly, and this is while they were distracted by Napoleon

Geography still greatly favors the Afghans, and there is a willingness of the Sikhs to put aside their differences with the Afghans to crush the Marathas

So your points are weak

I mean yes, I am not disagreeing, Marathas were a husk of themselves and did lose to British, Though British did invest heavily into defeating them, Wellington was in India fighting Marathas, which he considered his most difficult fight.

And no, Sikhs again decisively beat Afghans and Took Peshawar and its surrounding areas, Basically the modern day KPK areas. And no geography helped Afghans as Sikhs did win despite overwhelming odds, though were exhausted. And no, it is laughable tp think Sikhs will team up with Afghans, they hated each other to the core

 

[Brahman]

I'm talking about the actual empire finished by 1819

Only Kolhapur remains

For example the Tamil Maratha Kingdom ended in 1855 and

List of Maratha dynasties and states - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

If you look through this, Marathas were able to spread out over a wide region and stay as a Princely state at the very least till 1947

 

[ahmedali]

I mean yes, I am not disagreeing, Marathas were a husk of themselves and did lose to British, Though British did invest heavily into defeating them, Wellington was in India fighting Marathas, which he considered his most difficult fight.

And no, Sikhs again decisively beat Afghans and Took Peshawar and its surrounding areas, Basically the modern day KPK areas. And no geography helped Afghans as Sikhs did win despite overwhelming odds, though were exhausted. And no, it is laughable tp think Sikhs will team up with Afghans, they hated each other to the core

The British and the French hated each other to the core for ten centuries and eventually allied themselves against the Germans, so it is not impossible that an Afghan-Sikh alliance

The Sikhs could not take Kabul

Britain is still distracted, so Maratha is preferred

 

[ahmedali]

List of Maratha dynasties and states - Wikipedia

en.m.wikipedia.org

If you look through this, Marathas were able to spread out over a wide region and stay as a Princely state at the very least till 1947

And they were no longer really Marathas, they became Gujaratis and Northerners

Rather, only Kolhapur is the actual core of Maratha and ended in 1819 and is just a princely state

 

[Brahman]

The British and the French hated each other to the core for ten centuries and eventually allied themselves against the Germans, so it is not impossible that an Afghan-Sikh alliance

The Sikhs could not take Kabul

Britain is still distracted, so Maratha is preferred

British and French took centuries to come around, especially after the last wars they fought. Sikhs and Afghans will take a long while to get along, especially since Sikhs and Marathas were actually in more talking terms.

Sikh empire also literally emerged out of a rebellion took most of Afghan territories such in their 5 phases of war, and pushing Afghanistan into instability

And if British are distracted, Marathas will attack them first over any Sikh empire, which would rcpamd more into Afghanistan without British if not allied under Marathas

And they were no longer really Marathas, they became Gujaratis and Northerners

Rather, only Kolhapur is the actual core of Maratha and ended in 1819 and is just a princely state

And that is precisely the pointz they were able to seamlessly integrate into the local areas with their own distinct flair which is why they survived in OTL can survive in an ATL where Marathas are successful