AH Challenge: A Hindu Europe

Isaac Beach

Banned
A thought that popped in to my head, here's for something a little unique. I realise that this would require an enormous POD but it's ANZAC Day so here's to 'giving it a fair shake of the sauce bottle', as a former Prime Minister once said.

In any event, I would like to see a Hindu Europe, for the sake of curiosity given I've been studying it.
What'd it take? What religions would it have to punish? How would it need to augment itself? It doesn't need to be all of Europe, of course, but a sizable portion of it at least.
 
I think the best way to approach this is to work on two basic concepts:

- First, Europe absolutely, without question, needs to remain pre-Abrahamic pagan. The Greek, Roman, Celtic, and Norse pantheons need to remain the pre-eminent faiths. The general sphere of Indo-European pantheons were relatively in line with each other, which is only logical, considering that they all ultimately derived from a common culture, way back in pre-history.

- Second, India needs to be much more developed than Europe. However you do this, whether it be a powerful Empire, an economic, agricultural, and/or industrial revolution, the point is that it needs to be Indians that are planting their flag in Europe, and at a relatively early date.

This would result in a ruling elite that is Hindu, and given that there is not too drastic a difference (at least, when you compare to Abrahamic faiths vs. Dharmic faiths) between the rulers and the ruled, you can see some very easy syncretism.

Another avenue, related, would be if Buddhism made some in-roads in Europe, paving the way for Hinduism to come along for the ride.
 
Indian law defines everyone in India who isn't Muslim, Zoroastrian, Christian, Jewish, or foreign as Hindus. Sikhs, Buddhists, and Jainists are specifically included. Really, Hinduism is just an umbrella term for the various religions of the Indian subcontinent and their eventually combination with Shiva, Devi, or Vishnu being the top god. If you do get deities to Europe I expect they would be changed enough by the sheer distance to be more like those used domestically. That or the Hindus simply do what the Romans did. Slap the name of their deity into those locals used, even if the locals keep using the old name anyways. And then they probably add some stories of Shiva dancing atop Tyr, Cerunnos, Apollo, or something. I noticed that a lot of old mythologies liked rubbing things in and insulting other deities. though partially because they symbolized cultures, hence why Zeus of the Cretans had his way with so many women. Some were apparently the personification of tribes, cities, etc.
 
I don't believe they left much of an imprint on culture or religion. Outside of hating and fearing Mongols.

Actually they had a major impact on culture and religion. I'm presuming you meant importing specifically Mongolian culture and religion, which is more debatable. The norms of gunpowder empires, enhancing of theology through competitive debates, a lot of what we take for granted RE trading norms are very Mongolian inspired.

However saying that, India never had the opportunity nor could really have the opportunities of a Nomadic steppes tribe.
 
Europe stays pagan, and then an Indian power colonises Europe over the course of decades during an analogue of an imperialist era. Indigenous European faiths become blended into Hinduism, resulting in a sort of "reunion" of Indo-European traditions.

Alternatively, nuclear war happens, and the International Society for Krishna Consciousness (aka Hare Krishna) under skilled leadership exploits the disarray in European society and gain massive amounts of converts. Decades after, ISKCON gains control of governments across Europe, and enforces conformity to ISKCON doctrines and teachings. A century later, Hinduism is by far the majority religion in Europe and Europe is effectively culturally Hindu as opposed to its historic cultural Christianity or Islam (for Bosnians/Turks/Albanians).
 

Isaac Beach

Banned
Cool, thanks. Basically just have to keep Europe pagan. Which I suppose would simply require them being stable, but stagnant, yes? Say the Roman Empire never really reaches the heights of OTL, leaving more independent pagan tribes and nations toddering about? That way even if Christianity or similar religions don't get butterflied away the likelihood of it permeating across the entire continent is a lot less without a unifying force to enforce it.

Then we just cross our fingers and hopes industrialisation hits India first, which isn't too far fetched, and then colonialism happens. Neato! :D Might do a map on that.
 
Indian law defines everyone in India who isn't Muslim, Zoroastrian, Christian, Jewish, or foreign as Hindus. Sikhs, Buddhists, and Jainists are specifically included. Really, Hinduism is just an umbrella term for the various religions of the Indian subcontinent and their eventually combination with Shiva, Devi, or Vishnu being the top god. If you do get deities to Europe I expect they would be changed enough by the sheer distance to be more like those used domestically. That or the Hindus simply do what the Romans did. Slap the name of their deity into those locals used, even if the locals keep using the old name anyways. And then they probably add some stories of Shiva dancing atop Tyr, Cerunnos, Apollo, or something. I noticed that a lot of old mythologies liked rubbing things in and insulting other deities. though partially because they symbolized cultures, hence why Zeus of the Cretans had his way with so many women. Some were apparently the personification of tribes, cities, etc.

This, really.
 
Cool, thanks. Basically just have to keep Europe pagan. Which I suppose would simply require them being stable, but stagnant, yes? Say the Roman Empire never really reaches the heights of OTL, leaving more independent pagan tribes and nations toddering about? That way even if Christianity or similar religions don't get butterflied away the likelihood of it permeating across the entire continent is a lot less without a unifying force to enforce it.

Then we just cross our fingers and hopes industrialisation hits India first, which isn't too far fetched, and then colonialism happens. Neato! :D Might do a map on that.

Why would Indian powers want to colonise Europe? What's the payoff? Colonisation was an extremely expensive venture
 
Last edited:
Why would Indian powers want to colonise Europe? What's the payoff? Colonisation was an extremely expensive venture

Yeah, that's kinda the thing. Maybe Indian powers do a "scramble for Europe" for one reason or another? Let's try and figure this out. First, backwards Europe would be depleting its natural resources a lot slower, after all. Some parts of India might run low on coal earlier than others. These guys would start the colonisation of Europe (probably by grabbing Great Britain, Asturias, or other close to the sea coal-rich area), then other powers might get concerned by this power grab, then everyone grabs a piece of Europe and takes stuff from it while dumping their industrial goods on the populace and religiously Hindu and European pantheons end up fusing in Europe so Europe becomes culturally Indian in some fashion or another?

This really isn't an easy one.
 
Yeah, that's kinda the thing. Maybe Indian powers do a "scramble for Europe" for one reason or another? Let's try and figure this out. First, backwards Europe would be depleting its natural resources a lot slower, after all. Some parts of India might run low on coal earlier than others. These guys would start the colonisation of Europe (probably by grabbing Great Britain, Asturias, or other close to the sea coal-rich area), then other powers might get concerned by this power grab, then everyone grabs a piece of Europe and takes stuff from it while dumping their industrial goods on the populace and religiously Hindu and European pantheons end up fusing in Europe so Europe becomes culturally Indian in some fashion or another?

This really isn't an easy one.

Rather than a colonisation procedure, if you want a Hindu Europe, I think you need to look much deeper into the past. After all even if you want to talk about coal etc, there are much closer sources to the Indian subcontinent than Western Europe

Have the Indo-European paganisms endure- then you need some sort of a cultural influence, bringing Indianised culture to Europe (in the same way it influenced SE Asia).

I think Buddhism is your vector. Historically it's not as if Hinduism and Buddhism were distinct- Hinduism is just the catchall term for the "shared universe" and philosophy of the various Indian folk religions (it was really in response to Islam that you saw a more unified identity develop, and even then, across modern India folk beliefs and practices tend to be very divergent from the "standard" North Indian kind of Hinduism).

So have buddhist ideas permeate West much more successfully. Under this influence, European paganisms develop conscious ties to Indian thought and there is conscious identification of local beleifs with Hindu theology. Thus Jupiter just becomes interpreted as the Roman version of Dyaus Pitar (which he is- it's just that Dyaus Pitar lost any and all significance in India), Apollo as Surya, the Aesir and Vanir as Asuras and Devas etc.

After all since there isn't one standard Hinduism, there's nothing to say that European paganism can't also be a part of it.
 
Rather than a colonisation procedure, if you want a Hindu Europe, I think you need to look much deeper into the past. After all even if you want to talk about coal etc, there are much closer sources to the Indian subcontinent than Western Europe

Have the Indo-European paganisms endure- then you need some sort of a cultural influence, bringing Indianised culture to Europe (in the same way it influenced SE Asia).

I think Buddhism is your vector. Historically it's not as if Hinduism and Buddhism were distinct- Hinduism is just the catchall term for the "shared universe" and philosophy of the various Indian folk religions (it was really in response to Islam that you saw a more unified identity develop, and even then, across modern India folk beliefs and practices tend to be very divergent from the "standard" North Indian kind of Hinduism).

So have buddhist ideas permeate West much more successfully. Under this influence, European paganisms develop conscious ties to Indian thought and there is conscious identification of local beleifs with Hindu theology. Thus Jupiter just becomes interpreted as the Roman version of Dyaus Pitar (which he is- it's just that Dyaus Pitar lost any and all significance in India), Apollo as Surya, the Aesir and Vanir as Asuras and Devas etc.

After all since there isn't one standard Hinduism, there's nothing to say that European paganism can't also be a part of it.

What you said about Hinduism is true (and should be more commonly known, but I guess lumping Indian religion under one term is more convenient for most people), but I'm not entirely sure Buddhism is the way to go. Japan, Mongolia, Korea, and China aren't culturally Indian. Would Buddhism really be able to culturally Indianise Europe?

The analogue might be pre-Islamic Indonesia (mostly just Bali today, though) with the Hindu-Buddhist-indigenous religion fusion, but would that really work for Europe?
 
I think Buddhism is your vector. Historically it's not as if Hinduism and Buddhism were distinct- Hinduism is just the catchall term for the "shared universe" and philosophy of the various Indian folk religions (it was really in response to Islam that you saw a more unified identity develop, and even then, across modern India folk beliefs and practices tend to be very divergent from the "standard" North Indian kind of Hinduism).

Buddhism and Hinduism were notably distinct, namely as a Nastika philosophy/religion which like Jainism meant that it did not follow the Vedas. Even by the time of Nagarjuna, there is enough differences to clearly delineate the two, even to the point of common epistemology. Although there were a lot of similarities, they were far greater and more pronounced than the comparitively minor differences in the abrahamic religions.

This is all taking into account early buddhism too. By the time of Islam's coming, buddhism had radically altered itself to fit East Asian culture.
 
Buddhism and Hinduism were notably distinct, namely as a Nastika philosophy/religion which like Jainism meant that it did not follow the Vedas. Even by the time of Nagarjuna, there is enough differences to clearly delineate the two, even to the point of common epistemology. Although there were a lot of similarities, they were far greater and more pronounced than the comparitively minor differences in the abrahamic religions.

This is all taking into account early buddhism too. By the time of Islam's coming, buddhism had radically altered itself to fit East Asian culture.

By not distinct I did't nean theologically. I meant that they often seem to have been practiced side by side (much like Shinto and Buddhism in modern Japan)
 
What you said about Hinduism is true (and should be more commonly known, but I guess lumping Indian religion under one term is more convenient for most people), but I'm not entirely sure Buddhism is the way to go. Japan, Mongolia, Korea, and China aren't culturally Indian. Would Buddhism really be able to culturally Indianise Europe?

The analogue might be pre-Islamic Indonesia (mostly just Bali today, though) with the Hindu-Buddhist-indigenous religion fusion, but would that really work for Europe?

Hindu dieties have been assimilated into East Asian traditions as the result of Buddhism, though, even taking on new life beyond India - For example, there are temples dedicated to Brahma in Thailand and Cambodia, whereas temples specific to Brahma worship are rare in the Insian Subcontinent. The Japanese Buddhist guardian dieties are all based on the Vedic gods that have mostly fallen out of worship in their land of origin.

Of course a Buddhist or Hindu Europe would take on its own Europeanized expressions and imagery and probably do a lot more tweaking of the Indian ideas than vice versa, but what would make the situation in Europe different is that pagan European traditions and Hindu beliefs, for the most part, have a common ancestry (give or take some assimilating of religious ideas from other cultures, such as the Etruscans and the Dravidians respectively, that likely occured in both regions along the way). There is a lot of common ground to find between European pantheons and Hindu ones, particularly the Vedic pantheon, because they have similar origins. East and Sputheast Asian Buddhists, on the other hand, adopted Hindu gods and fit them next to their established dieties.
 
Top