WI- India resists the British

Anaxagoras

Banned
What if the Martha Confederacy was strong enough to stand against the British? Maybe with another European faction help (France?)?

For all practical purposes, the Maratha were allied with France. Their European-officered regular battalions were largely commanded by Frenchmen, and French soldiers helped train the Maratha forces.

I think the POD must be something involves a better technology of the Indians

Not a factor. The Indians had pretty much the same technology as the British.

I was under the impression the Martha had quite modern weaponry (especially in artillery). Their military weakness was more a lack of Western discipline (what could be overcome with French assistance) and politically a lack of centralisation.

While most of the Maratha forces were undisciplined cavalry useful only for raiding, the core of their forces were European-trained infantry battalions lead by European officers. They were probably just as good as the EIC battalions in India at the time.

Your last point is the key one. The Marathas were a confederation, not a state, and its higher political echelons were always plotting against one another and willing to make alliances with the British, or at least stay neutral while the British stomped on their rivals.
 
Well, don't you think that a strong, centralized, independent Marathans would not be involved in the colonial race? This map is from ATL 1900.

clendor

If a Maratha state properly organised itself so it became co-herent and stable it could well rule most of India. If it did it early enough to quickly replace the Maghuls it would probably be able to stop or at least keep to the margins the European rivarlies and conflict that occurred OTL.

However it would still have serious problems:
a) Internal Muslim rulers, the Sikhs and probably some other elements would seek to maintain their independence.
b) the caste system which greatly impedes social flexibility and hence economic development. Along with the highly fragmentary nature of India which was more of a collection of vaguely related groups than an actual nation.
c) To develop into a modern technological state needs more than imported weapons or even importing the factories to build those weapons. This is vastly more difficult as it requires major social changes. You not only need to act like a European but also think like them. Several fairly powerful groups sought to do this in OTL but many failed [Egypt, China, Burma, Vietnam, to a lesser degree the Ottoman empire and Persia]. Those are the more well known but there were a lot of others. Only Japan really became a 'proper' industrial state before the modern age, and arguably India under the Raj.

As such I can see a Maratha state becoming dominant and probably holding most of India together. However without overcoming the problems mention above they are unlikely to become a modern industrial state by say about 1900. In that case they will stay play 2nd fiddle to the European powers and if they start trying to expand outside their basic sphere they are likely to come a cropper.

Afghanistan, unless you're planning on the ethic cleansing route is virtually impossible to control in any meaningful way, as various super-powers have shown.:) Thailand and Burma where reasonably powerful and co-herent states and are likely, if threatened by a large and meanacing India, to look to a more distant protector. So even if they done't defeat any Indian pressure they can probably look to offer trade concessions to a European state who will do the job. The states in the Malayan peninsula have the extra factor of being Muslim, who wouldn't look on an Hindu conqueror very friendlily.

As such, while I could see a Maratha India under very good [and lucky] leadership, staying co-herent and largely independent it would have a huge task modernising the state in a way to compete with the other industrial powers and that would probably preclude it taking part in any colonisation of neighbouring regions because just about everywhere would be snapped up before it become powerful enough to do so.

I think you would need an earlier and possibly more dramatic POD to enable an Indian state to become a major colonial power in this time period.

Steve
 
clendor


I think you would need an earlier and possibly more dramatic POD to enable an Indian state to become a major colonial power in this time period.

Steve

Any suggestions about what POD will be needed? I already suggested an extremely powerful and charismatic Raj.
 
What if the Martha Confederacy was strong enough to stand against the British? Maybe with another European faction help (France?)? What POD would cause it?
I think the POD must be something involves a better technology of the Indians, leading to a quicker defeat of the Mughals, and being involved in European politics. An alliance with France+better technology+more united Martha Federacy would do the job, I think.

There is no India to resist the British. If there was it would have been impossible for a small island like Britain to conquer such a vast country with (until the end of the 18th century at least) a comparable military technology.

India was divided and the Maratha confederacy had already started to show weakness after their defeat by an Afghan dominated force at the Battle of Panipat in 1761.

If they had won a victory there then there would have been an ATL and the Marathas momentum could have made a difference but I think the British were becoming more secure in India by this time and the Industrial Revolution was just starting. The British may have still got stronger and the Marathas would have crumbled as the nineteenth century developed.
 
So... A later conquest of India you say.... That sounds logical... How would such a later conquest affect the world? It will surely weaken the Brits, all this long fighting in India (and believe me, the Indians are as stubborn as the Afghans). It makes me thinking about WWI... :)
And still- No POD that will make Maratha a strong, maybe Colonial, nation?
 

Keenir

Banned
So... A later conquest of India you say.... That sounds logical... How would such a later conquest affect the world? It will surely weaken the Brits, all this long fighting in India (and believe me, the Indians are as stubborn as the Afghans). It makes me thinking about WWI... :)

probably throwing teh Australians and Kiwis at India....which means no assault by the UK on the Ottomans.

And still- No POD that will make Maratha a strong, maybe Colonial, nation?

do the Maratha have any reason to be colonial? I mean its like Hungary and Poland....where are their attempts at overseas possessions?

(now, if hte Maratha are emulating Japan's attempt to join the world stage as equals to the Great Powers, then I can see how they'd try to get colonies)
 
probably throwing teh Australians and Kiwis at India....which means no assault by the UK on the Ottomans.

Do I smell here a TL? This must be developed more. How do you think no British assault would affect the outcome of WWI? Allies would still win, but maybe Ottoman Empire will keep existing?

(now, if hte Maratha are emulating Japan's attempt to join the world stage as equals to the Great Powers, then I can see how they'd try to get colonies)

But the question is- Will they succeed at becoming a major power, or will they end up like Japan?
 

Keenir

Banned
Do I smell here a TL? This must be developed more. How do you think no British assault would affect the outcome of WWI? Allies would still win,

why? maybe it encourages Galipolli-like strategies in places that encounter Flanders Fields-like outcomes.

But the question is- Will they succeed at becoming a major power, or will they end up like Japan?

Japan was a major power. as was the UK. (some say they both still are)

as was China (which is a major power once again)

i said it before, i say it again - you seem to be looking for a way to make India into a place that's never defeatable, never loses power, etc.
 
Top