Two simultaneous 18th and 19th century AHCs

How can the French of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars retain the Rhine border and possibly the Netherlands, Catalonia, and Savoy? Also, can Bonapartes remain on the throne?

How could India be Briticized (linguistically and partly ethnically) and Britain be Indianized (partly culturally and partly ethnically)? (I'd imagine the latter would come much later, though the other colonies could easily be flooded by settlers from India.) Is it possible that the British aristocracy could take an interest in Indian culture, and it trickles down from there?
 
How can the French of the French Revolutionary and Napoleonic Wars retain the Rhine border and possibly the Netherlands, Catalonia, and Savoy? Also, can Bonapartes remain on the throne?

How could India be Briticized (linguistically and partly ethnically) and Britain be Indianized (partly culturally and partly ethnically)? (I'd imagine the latter would come much later, though the other colonies could easily be flooded by settlers from India.) Is it possible that the British aristocracy could take an interest in Indian culture, and it trickles down from there?

I belive the second one is still in process.
Afterall we Brits eat curry and wear pajamas :D
 
IOTL the British aristocracy did take an interest in Indian culture and it did trickle down from there. There was a period when Brits were absolutely mad for all things Indian.
It however came at a time when the working class were concerned with little more than having food on the table so like most upper class fads was a flash in the pan unlike many modern fads where you've enough people dedicated enough to keep even the craziest thing going.
(anyone happen to know of any decent books on such fads? Victorian/pre-ww1 culture just fascinates me. Recently I've been reading of the Japanese fad they had, pretty cool stuff.)

Its pretty ASB to turn Britain Indian without doing a years of rice and salt type thing with an Indian nation taking over Britain as its base for trade with the European barbarians and all that.
 
Its pretty ASB to turn Britain Indian without doing a years of rice and salt type thing with an Indian nation taking over Britain as its base for trade with the European barbarians and all that.
Well the hypothetical Indianized Britain would speak English. They would just have a lot of influences from the colonies. And in the 20th century, a lot of immigrants from the colonies.
 
Where I live people would say Britain is indianised well at least pakistaini and afghaniised

And believe me they are generally great people but cultures and religions do clash sometimes
 
The problem with settlers is that it will provoke a nativist backlash among English workers who would be facing increased competition for employment. Similar to racial backlashes in the United States (see Chinese Exclusion Acts in California that created a Jim Crow-esque state).
 
How could India be Briticized (linguistically and partly ethnically) and Britain be Indianized (partly culturally and partly ethnically)? (I'd imagine the latter would come much later, though the other colonies could easily be flooded by settlers from India.)

That would only happen if Britain were ruled for many decades by the Empress of India.

Cheers,
Nigel.
 
Sorry, I thought that Britain had been ruled by the Empress of India for many years.

Cheers,
Nigel

Hahaha that's a good one

Do u fond it strange that the first two emperor/ess of India never even went to India

But seriously in those two places their is a extremely high population of indian subcontinentiants in the whole of the country
 
Top