British India

I had an idea a while back and I was just wondering if it would even be possible. So my idea is this, What if some how the British east India company managed to be better administrators of there Indian territory and the Indian rebellion of 1857 was never to take place? Would this lead simply to a later nationalization of the company or could the company gain more and more autonomy until it became its own nation? I like the sound of the second outcome but Im just not sure if its plausible so I was wondering what you all thought.
 
I think the problem of the Indian mutiny was not so much the East India Company, but the arrival of floods of British missionaries aiming to "anglicize" India that provided most of the ammunition to the mutiny. Could be wrong though...
 
Yeah, it wasn't so much a question of nationalism as much of culture. India broke away from Britian on those grounds, as did Pakistan from India on the very same.
 
I think the problem of the Indian mutiny was not so much the East India Company, but the arrival of floods of British missionaries aiming to "anglicize" India that provided most of the ammunition to the mutiny. Could be wrong though...

While you are correct, it is a symptom of the EIC no longer being a public company but a government arm. You will have to reduce the influence of Parliament in the governance and operations of the Company.
 
I'd think the British empire would come about in some way or other eventually (though not nessesarily as the Victoria ruled Indian Empire).
The world was shrinking and India was no longer quite so different, to have western capitalists running around there without a government to keep them under control...even if they don't commit any serious abuses there will be the fear that they will.
The EIC had just gotten too powerful, it was increasingly obvious to anyone that they really ran the country not the mughals (a big part in causing the mutiny). The British public would not be happy about a company being allowed to exploit a country completely free of the government.
 
So assuming you could butterfly away the problem with British missionaries trying to convert Indians do you think it would be possible for the company to reduce parliament's control, I suppose what Im saying is that would it be possible for the company to break with England and for basically an Indian nation controlled by them or is this just completely out of the question?
 
Up until the turn of the 1800s the East India Company promoted inter-marriage, and its higher ups happily adopted many aspects of Indian life and culture.

Then came a moral backlash, and well it had the usual effect such conservative revanchism has on history and screwed it all up

Best Regards
Grey Wolf
 
Up until the turn of the 1800s the East India Company promoted inter-marriage, and its higher ups happily adopted many aspects of Indian life and culture.

Then came a moral backlash, and well it had the usual effect such conservative revanchism has on history and screwed it all up

Best Regards
Grey Wolf

...which provides an excellent blueprint for an Independent EIC. If it becomes a Republic (with de facto control by a shareholding class) that can honestly speak for Indian interests rather than British ones, then the EIC becomes not the opponent to Indian Independence but rather the path.
 
...which provides an excellent blueprint for an Independent EIC. If it becomes a Republic (with de facto control by a shareholding class) that can honestly speak for Indian interests rather than British ones, then the EIC becomes not the opponent to Indian Independence but rather the path.

That's a little bit backwards.
IOTL it was the East India company and the successor capitalist interests that opposed Indian reform.
The British empire was the institution pushing for reform and towards eventual independance in India.
 
Top