How Did India Fall to the Europeans? | EAST vs. WEST
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 26 сен 2024
- European colonial history in Asia -- from the British in India to the Dutch in Indonesia -- is often misunderstood. We're (incorrectly) taught that the East India Companies dominated Asia early, giving rise to more direct European control over their newfound colonies.
The truth is much more interesting. In this video, I focus on India to tell the story of the West vs. the East in the "Age of Discovery."
European dominance of imperial Asia really only began in the mid-1700s, and that too is a poorly explained phenomenon. In reality, the factors giving rise to European dominance were mostly luck-based, and were the inevitable result of late medieval military-social change in Europe: the Military Revolution.
Enjoy!
--
Further reading:
"Empires of the Weak: the Real Story of European Expansion and the Creation of the New World Order," by J.C. Sharman
"Why Europe Grew Rich and Asia Did Not," by Prasannan Parthasarathi
"The Great Divergence: China, Europe, and the Making of the Modern World Economy," by Kenneth Pomeranz
Thanks for watching! If you'd like to support the creation of more Asian history content, check out my CreatorGuild page at creatorguild.co/oddcompass, where you can make custom requests, leave tips, join pools, purchase offers, and more!
Awesome! We’ve all been waiting for this for a while, we wanna support you.
Well i don't know if you have read any of my previous requests or not but please consider making a video on the Gupta empire(the golden age of India)
Awesome video but those aah.... sound was not wanted
Arnav Pandey Nice video suggestion. I think his CreatorGuild page is where we can send in requests and also participate in pools for trying to get him to cover certain topics.
we need more and detailed scientific analysis of historical events of Asia especially of india. As we are going through a phase of the 1920s Italy or Germany of mixture of both in current indian politics. Please help us to not being 1930s Europe in near future.
BTW you can check out sand roman history channel.
Super work 👌👌
The reason India was so decentralised was because of how diverse it was. Its easier to control a region by recruiting a local warlord/chieftain/clan leader than earn the trust of the completely different community.
For example, Bengal always claimed indepence, whenever Central power in North India grew weak
@ABHISHEK RAJU i abhor discrimination based on religion and caste too. Heck I hate religion. But India has this thing were individual communities were segregated based on tribalistic leanings due to which they only favoured their community members. The Caste System is a direct extreme result of that. Social Darwinianism favors traits that allow self propogation or survival of idealogies as well. This allowed the wholly different communities within the subcontinent. There are segregations based on religious, casteist, racial, ethnic, cultural and linguistic lines as well. In a lot of other parts of the worlds the differences were not along as many lines as here. The only reason this diversity exists is because they closed of any genetic breeding between communities which typically cultminates into a single group identity. Not saying its a good thing. Heck, a common identity would have made things a lot easier (but bloodier) for us. But it is what it is.
@ABHISHEK RAJU Europe was diverse, just like us. And Europe is not a country. India you can say is a rare sight or exception where so much versatile population group was able to unite under one banner and called a nation.
@ABHISHEK RAJU that's true
@ABHISHEK RAJU source
"The rebellion was in great measure put down by turning the races of India against each other. So long as this can be done, the government of India from England is possible. But, if this were to change and should the population be moulded into a single nationality, we would have to leave.”
- Sir John Seeley
TA Da Dannn! (Anon 1947)
Sounds lovely ke a fake qoute to me. The British United India and created a united nation.
@@mudra5114 you're been sarcastic right?
@@arnavpandey3823 No.
@@mudra5114 stop reading the British propaganda then i guess
Japan was the only Asian country that saw the rise of European powers and quickly industrialised their country and by ww1 to ww2 became a great power in the east that rivalled even the British empire.
Bengal mysore tried
Yeah, in Asia Arabia and Persia declined, while Ottoman's started declining, China was ununited and India fell to brit. Japan understood the assignment
Japan was like not even 10% of what British achieved,
They just got lucky they captured some part of china mainly cuz china was going through civil war and weakened by European,
Other countries like veitnam and other were like colonies and their people actually supported Japanese
To fight against European in asia.
Japan Fighting Britain in Asia would be like Britain Fighting Japan in Europe. Most island nations are built for defense and the Japanese and the British were lucky that most of the world is traversable through water.
@@wolverine9377 Then they got brutal repressed because Japan was actually a colonial power.
I once read that Bengal had all the necessary conditions to industralize, and that the Brits, not wanting competition, dismantled their economy, thus reducing them to poverty.
The Bengali people have a disorganized society. That's why the conditions being there doesn’t matter, most aren’t going to change their behaviors to match with the requirements for industrialisation.
@Md Miah The key here is 'complicated' and that they weren’t disloyal to their country whilst the Bengalis ( my people) did not even have any loyalty to our country or whatever local leader. This incentivised disloyalty and still does.
@@rejoanbary2155 There is no concept of country in the context of nation state in 18th century bengali society. Thousands of bengalis have sacrificed their lives in the freedom struggle of India, more than any other ethnicities of India. Who tf are you to talk shit about bengalis?
What you read was complete nonsense Bengal was far more poor, was far less technologically advanced, had backwards political organisation, lower agricultural productivity, and was always being attacked from outside powers.
It’s likely that industrialization of Britain happened because of the annexation of Bengal
An excellent video, but a small nitpick is that most of Britain's coal reserves aren't actually near London. They are in places like South Wales and the North of England. This is partly why the North developed a separate industrial base outside of London.
Thanks! Many of the academic sources I read insisted upon coal reserves near London, so I wonder if there were small initial reserves near London during the early industrial revolution era.
@@OddCompass sikh empire please
@@OddCompass king porus as well please
@@OddCompass Woooow What an Utter Complete Garbage History you have put in front of whole world...
One Simple Question for you!!!!
Britian didnot have any Logistics, the Infantry were less in Numbers How those 5000 British Soldiers Defeated More than 5 Crore Soldiers of a Different Geography Terrain???
@@JokerJoker-xc7xb Wow thats the most ignorant statement I have read in 2022 so far
A few other really interesting points that the author didn’t touch: the invention of the joint stock exchange, which unlocked national wealth and fueled colonial projects that aimed at profitability instead of national pride or military show-off (and if the commercial project failed, the government and investors were protected from political liability), the durability of higher learning institutions in Europe (India universities like Nalanda were destroyed), the royal families in Europe were related (so there was a degree of stability among the states, such as Spain, Portugal, France, England, Russia, Austria, etc). Europeans fought many wars, but they usually left the important institutions and cities intact; few states disappeared completely like Vijaynagara.
Dang good point!
Current Vijayanagara empire became two different states Telangana and Karnataka.
Dude that IS the answer to this entire video.
Capitalism and Corporation
Europe was unified by Christianity, the Holy Roman Empire and academia by the Latin language. The fights between Catholics and Protestants did not result in stagnation.
Chinese and Indian Empires always were the Top Economies in past....
@@dhritishmandeka4371 both of them were by far the richest countries for many millennia, both of them suffered heavy decline, yet one of them is on its way to claim the top, and another is rising again. According to the world bank indian economy grew by 8.4%, according to RBI it grew by 9.5%. The GDP is predicted to overtake France next year. The future is bright, enough with the pessimism!
@N Gaming if per capita mattered, then Switzerland would have been leading the world
@N Gaming the video mentions a centralised system with systematic taxation system combined with a innovative industry, per capita has no place here. If anything, up until the heavy tax barriers imposed by the British, indian textiles still maintained a good foothold, and was actually prefered by European nobles for being finer and better quality, contrary to mass produced factory goods of early industrial period. The de-industrialisation of India had to be very much forced upon by imposing huge tax barriers on indian exports, and not something that was a direct effect of free market. And talking about pre-industrial world, indian factories maintained the top position, and the producers earned more than their European counterparts. Even the farmers of india fared better than Europe (not talking about UK here) because India has bigger and more rivers than Europe, and gets an yearly rain in the form of monsoon. The indian agricultural poverty only happened due to forced opium plantation by East india company, as opium was neither something anyone other than the British brought, and it basically destroys the soil fertility
@N Gaming go ahead and redo middle school
@N Gaming my guy had to edit a 5 word sentence
Spanish trade went via Mexico so there was two big trading bases in the empire: Seville (Spanish and American trade) and Mexico city (America and the Asia). Most Asian commodities other than spices or silk rarely made it to Spain but were rather common to encounter in Mexico city. The trading elite and their families had a lot of Asian furniture decorations etc which lead to a syncretic kind of living style of a kind of hispano Asian interior design. America's connection with Asia is often ignored because Spanish involvement in Asia and the pacific is often overshadowed or underestimated compared to England Dutch and Portuguese
Acapulco was the main trading port between Asia and The Americas as it was right next to the Pacific Ocean, but then those goods from Acapulco would enter Mexico City as Mexico City is inland.
@@zakaryloreto6526 yes but Acapulco was just the harbor like Ostia for Rome. The trading exchanging sending off etc all happened in Mexico city
I remember learning from another RUclips comment that Spain used Mexico as a launchpad into Asia.
@@maYTeus Yes after they realised there's a continent between Europe and Asia they retook from the americas the original Asia goal
@@bnb6868 the Only Trading Ports of Spain in Asia is the Philippines. The Galleon Trade between Manila, Philippines and Acapulco, Mexico. Had two round trips per Year.
2:48 I remember reading this part of the story, and its very interesting. The Portugese didn't know how to navigate the Arabian sea to reach India. That knowledge was a safely guarded secret of the Arabian sailors. Fortunately, they found a shipwrecked sailor who belonged to the South Indian state of Kerala, and they agreed to provide him the security and safe passage in exchange for the secret knowledge. He then told the Portuguese that the trick is to simply follow the Monsoon Trade Winds, which head straight to India. Without this knowledge, the Portuguese may or may not have reached India since it was hard to navigate those seas without any experience.
Early in the 15th century, the Portuguese had instituted a generations-long programme of exploration, each voyage building on the knowledge gained by the previous ones. They were playing the long game, and would inevitably have reached India sooner or later
That's the trick, follow the winds? That's a very old trick. They were guided on the trip but it wasn't a closely guarded secret. The guide just told them where to go.
Who do you think the portuguese are ? The portuguese were one of the well organized and highly developed maritime power since the roman era even before the arabs started seeing the ocean . But they didn't navigated both the west and east until the colonization . All their navigations were to the places in the european and african continents . Even the Roman empire itself had well established trade networks with the east especially india . The Rome even had it's own port in the exact same indian state of kerala called Muziris where they also had a roman temple and garrisons for the Roman Military . And after the collapse of Rome , the informations about the trades where passed on to the newly formed kingdoms and later to portugal . And there is no surprise that the portugal became the first global sea power in the history . There is no secret for arabs , all they did the job of middle person or an agent between europe and asia . Even without arabs or their knowledge the portugal will find its way to india but takes a bit more time and efforts for them that's all . The exact same portugal reached the brazil and cape of good hope without other's help . Ferdinand magellan , who is the first person to prove the earth is spherical by navigating from one place and circled the globe to reach the starting point is from portugal , and there was no arab or chinese to help him . Even the Portugal is named after port , this shows the influence of oceans has on Portugal and influence of Portugal on all the oceans .
My Indian brother, please widen your reading before you make these broad generalizations. "Without this knowledge , the Portuguese....without any experience" is a statement that reeks of ignorance and points towards your tendency to quote from dubious sources instead of actually reading up.
@@sca8217 If you wish to debate, present your arguments and win it like a professional. No ad hominems please.
Main Lesson: don’t underestimate or look down on others. The Asian powers with all their awesome stuff took no interest in seeing what the Europeans were up to or even fathom that they could produce anything of worth. The Chinese emperor famously rejected British technology for trade. Imagine how different their last few centuries would have gone if they had had the foresight of the Japanese and used the leverage they had at the time to learn from the Europeans. Hindsight is 20/20 but makes me really wonder who is being underestimated right now.
Wrong. Indian Kingdoms like Mysore, Maratha and Sikh empire for example were trying to modernize. And Mysore gunpowder technology compared to British at that time. But that time it was too late
@@knowledgedesk1653 how am I wrong though? They were too late, doesn’t mean they would have fared better doing nothing.
So well said. Even during the 1857 mutiny the last Mughal simply didn't bother seizing the opportunity to oust the EIC. The Japanese were smarter in that regard, leading to the Meiji Restoration.
As old Greek and Arab records say
Indians were disinterested and ignorant of the outside world and anything outside the subcontinent was nothing to them
Just like modern Americans who live in their own bubble
Guess wealth is the culprit rich States do grow ignorant overtime
@@knowledgedesk1653 Wrong. Marathas did nothing and never tried to modernise. Hindu cast system was very strong among marathas and they were weak.
The because downfall for Indians at the hands of the Europeans were Indians themselves.. the growing infighting and disunity led them all to eventually get subjugated, ofcourse before this they didn't even consider themselves as One people (India). They just went on being individual kingdoms who went warring with each other.
All of these empires were ruled by clans who did claim common ancestry but it's true that they were fighting amongst each other. That was the Kshatriya culture of India then.
Sounds like Europe post Western Roman Empire collapse
British are good they provide English education and connected india western scientific research institute They develope india as Modern India They provide open school for Dalit community and also give scholarship to dalit community .Dalit had face 3000 year atrocities by Brahmins kshatriya hindu religion. But when British came india they gives dalit to hope live life a equal men British destroy caste system of Brahmins Hindu culture now I am also dalit we thank to British came india to independent Dalit from Brahmins Hindu religion atrocities Dalit are not allowed get education before British But Now Every Dalit Become Doctor Engineer Scientific Research Scholar it provide Under by British Empire Rule
Why does everyone body want fake news against British Rule because it is a fake news by Brahmin Hindu religion higher caste . Brahmin hindu have fake god fake religion book Brahmins rape Dalit women but British Empire Rule destroy Brahmins Hindu Culture. British are great People
British textile industry did not outperform Indian textile industries. Even when Britain was churning out low quality low cost textile, there was huge demand for eastern handloom textiles which were of far superior quality. To compete, the British actually put heavy taxes on Indian textiles, even in India itself. They sought to systematically destroy the industry, rather than outperform it.
I appreciate you making quality content on Indian history as it is a vastly untouched topic by many youtubers! Hope you grow to a million subs soon!
The British Conquest of India was an amazing look into European and Indian history, and there was so much drama, thrill and twists among all the people who were involved in this. From the traitorous intrigue among Indian courts, to the deceitful British Merchants and Company Officials who were given landowning rights by the Mughals, and fooled, divided and conquered the numerous kingdoms and duchies. The British had subsidiary alliances with everyone from Punjab to Travancore. This video is awesome, and really goes into the detail on this invasion. The British conquest could've been ended at any time if the native kingdoms like Mysore, Hyderabad and Marathas banded together to repel them. This is definitely one of my most favorite periods in history.
Actually the Peshwa of Maratha confederacy, Nizamate of Hyderabad and Kingdom of Mysore did planned to make an anti-british allience but that allience didn't came to reality and failed.
@@SafavidAfsharid3197 The British outplayed and pitted the rulers against each other.
this video is actually all over the place, the very main reason India fell, was because the Mughal Maratha wars left no one central power and complete collapse of socio-economic factors, which the British saw as opportunity and used it very well, simple.
@@SafavidAfsharid3197 I dont actually see them ever being together as these powers are polar opposites of each others
@@harshitjaiswal5529 then you should look into anti-british allience of Nizam-mysore-maratha. Because history is complicated. Ex- Maratha allying with Mughal to invade rajputs or rajputs attacking jatts.
Excelllent analysis of European advantages versus Indian and Asian disadvantages. This is an excellent channel
“Necessity is the mother of invention”
And the longer timeframe of political stability helps with innovation.
What about cold blooded mass murdering ? Savage blood thirsty minds ?
Not very detailed and precise (with Indian power struggle and socio-economics) but still far better interpretation and explanation than many others.
Point 3, 4, 5 are hypothetical
Yea, they also for some reason did not bring up the needed wealth and resources from the americas in their points, despite bringing up silver earlier.
@Md Miah he glossed over the systemic deindustrialization of India and acted like it was a natural phenomenon rather than deliberate European policy - Europeans knew what they were doing when they encouraged colonies to become raw material producers but actively discouraged any form of vertical integration. Also did not touch upon cultural factors like akbar banning the printing press to preserve jobs for scribes, and the nature of caste in preventing broad based education in India. European societies got better organized through conflict but also because of social changes that accompanied it
@@echosmith5256 true. britain was lucky it conquered bengal.
@@echosmith5256 yes you are right they always encouraged importation rather than locally manufacturing or helping to bring more technology
just realized the British actually CREATED modern India 🇮🇳
Pakistan 🇵🇰 and East Pakistan 🇧🇩 too. All love ❤️
@@ReekyCheeks Pakistan is Afghanistan
@@ReekyCheeks no love
Hey, thanks for making this content. It's hard to find quality content about the Indian history in RUclips. Really appreciate it!
FANTASTIC as usual. Could you recommend some additional reading on the Asian silver shortage and the crises it spawned please?
@@walterwhite9520 he is the real one
@@walterwhite9520
Still better than the shit they publish in The Hindu or The IE lmao
@@walterwhite9520 Nah bro he isnt he would know more about this time period than anyone else
Highly recommend Kenneth Pomeranz for more information on the silver shortage!
@@OddCompass thanks matey
I love how the identity of being Indian was invented in basically Oxford/ London. So much for Indian nationalist.
And Hinduism.
India came from word indus which from sindhu so these 3 words along with hindu are related so it's proud being hindu indian sanatani Hindustani etc
@@siddharthjain9611 that's correct and if it wasnt for our people the english wouldnt have english language examples juggernaut jagganath trigonometry trikonamitti geometry gyamitti mother madda shampoo champo.
Man! Quality content. As an Indian, I am grateful. Thanks a lot and a very Happy New Year!
This was a great breakdown of an almost always oversimplified topic
Hope in Another 300 years, India will become prosperous again!
We’ll be dead by then
Only 80 years is enough
50 years
Lol...no... Only 50 years more is enough.... India is already going to have 3rd largest GDP by 2035.... After that, to beat US, it would take another 30 years
@@peterparker9954 they should try to stop their toxic academic standards
Recommend reading "Unwanted Neighbours: The Mughals, the Portuguese, and Their Frontier Zones" for an understanding of how the early communications were like, between the european and the indian powers
The curious thing about the Mughals and the Portuguese is that the Portuguese established their power in south-west India years *before* Babur's Mughal forces arrived from the north-west.
@@marksnow7569 yep!
@@marksnow7569 just a few years of difference I guess
All happened during the reign of Emperor Shri Krishna Devaraya of Vijayanagaram
@@dv9239 Yes, Goa celebrated its 450th anniversary as a Portuguese colony in 1960
Just a factual clarification, it has been corrected time and time again how Indian textiles served a completely different- high quality market which is why it couldn't be brought down even by the industrial revolution (like kings weren't gonna switch to lower quality when they could get that sweet sweet indian gucci) What ended up being the final nail in the coffin was the insanely high taxes imposed on exporting these textiles, while buying up indigenous cotton subsidized, and then destroying the looms of the workers. When taxes, high costs of cotton and destroying looms weren't enough, they just resorted cutting off thumbs. Woo! England amiright!
Yess! Thanks for the clarification mate!
That's the bloody history.
"When taxes, high costs of cotton and destroying looms weren't enough, they just resorted cutting off thumbs"
That's a myth, which was refuted by Gandhi himself in the 1920s. The thumb-cutting was done by Indian workers themselves to avoid being forced to do skilled work for minimum wages.
@Unknown All the non-hearsay evidence indicates that the British and their agents did not cut thumbs, though they did a lot of other bad things to Indian workers. Gandhi followed the evidence, and I suggest you do too.
@Unknown And your mum slept with Godse . I learnt it from whatsapp university
What fascinates me is the European's historical ability to adapt and overcome
It's definitely fascinating, but the constant warfare between different nations and empires over time led them to refine everything from military technology to societal changes while other powers continued to worship their kings like gods.
True OP, True.
Western Dominance in India is a long process that started out with the Portuguese in around 1500 and progressed for many years, it eventually ended due to WW2.
Thank to Japanese Empire kicking European out of Asia. The first time in history European was so scared shitless
Thats the reason i love russia ukaine war
It next ended, the dominance still exists in globalisation
@@maheshrathod5593 pathetic, you birng shame to your name.
All thanks to Axis powers
so basically india and other asian powers had everything and became lazy in there own world and west was not as powerful and had needs so it work more harder
It is a recurring theme
Bro relax. You have commented so many times already. Don't you have anything better to do?
@N Gaming Lol you need to cope. You have over 100 comments on this channel😂😂😂🤣🤣
Rent free
I think it was because India was very decentralized.
The only part I didn’t like is that calling industrial revolution a luck.They had the technological level to capatilize on that luck.Europe had the costitutional, scientific and cultural edge by centuries of trial and error, philosophic approach and respect for innovations and discovery.High numbers of literate people also helped bigger portion of their societies contribute to intellectual activities.
west relies on reason and trust in human thought to reach the truth, meanwhile east relies on outdated traditional dotrines like religion or thought processes
😂😂 It's not just luck it's indian loot and deindustrialization of india that financed it
Necessity is the mother of all inventions, Europeans were having an energy crisis so they figured out better ways to produce energy
i like how you analysed the militrary and social revolutions that enabled the west to dominate asia for centuries
@Unknown they mainly used it to compete with each other. They were not competing just for global dominance
@Unknown because that is how all of human history has worked
@Unknown because if you don't make them others will and they will attack you
@Unknown True
14:15
I call absolute bullsh*t. They didn't outcompete anything. It was the discriminatory tax regime that outcompeted the Indian textiles. European Factory made textiles were brought tax-free, whereas taxes as heavy as 95% were imposed on Indian weavers.
That is true, but it is even more complex than that. The only reason that European markets had access to enough cotton to even produce enough textiles to compete at the ridiculous advantage you just cited is because of colonialism and slavery in the new world. So there is also an element of exploitation and genocide fueling Europe's rise at this time.
That's literally how UK got almost everything, they had the jackpot.
@@kairyumina6407 the cotton also came from india
@@mint8648 my understanding was that Indian grown cotton for the most part was processed into textiles in India, whereas it was American cotton (and eventually also Egyptian cotton) that was being used in the industrial revolution in Britain. It has been a long time since I was in college looking at those primary sources. I do know that a big reason the cobfederacy expected Britain to bail them out was British dependence on southern cotton, but the British had the ability to replace their southern sources with Egyptian options. Though I suppose by that point they had large stakes in India too so they were likely also importing either cotton or textiles or both from india
@UC8S63luqkDOBlEksakwkBZA no lol. Go and see a timeline. Industrial revolution in Britain and Conquering of India took place at the same time. Bengal was de-industrialised so that Britain could industrialize
I like to study about the British diplomacy in India. It is filled with lessons on Colonization , Domination and Longevity of rule. Interestingly it also teaches how unstable such rules are. I also like to study about China and cannot help drawing similarities between it and British Empire.
Yeah who would've guessed communism's high corruption is still leaching the life out of that country
Interesting video. I think you portrayed India as a very chaotic place while ignoring the chaos in Europe. The chaos in Europe lead to bigger boats, better cannons, etc. Indian chaos led to more chaos and being conquered by Europe. So something else must be the reason and not chaos in India
European chaos eliminated feudatories and forged nation states ,easier to Make alliances with stable governments while indian chaos caused more divisions and political fragmentation,also among religious and cultural lines.
@@44krishnan79 European chaos didn't always forge nation states. Germany, the biggest European economy, was a bunch of duchies till 1870. Switzerland, the richest macrostate in Europe is still a confederation of 40 cantons of 3 different ethnicities. Europe never had anything like the Mughal empire. Chaos in western Europe existed till 1945 and that didn't hinder their world domination or technological development in any way, while Indian chaos didn't give rise to anything benefitting Indians. There is some other reason than chaos
@@shamtradtam3769 True brother it could be that they developed heavier artillery for siege warfare and penetrating heavy cavalry armour.Since indians had to face mostly steppe nomads which western europeans didn't face which requires lighter armour and troops ,Moreover better beaurocracy when a British general died more will replace him but if a great general or ruler like peshwa bhaji rao or Maharaja ranjeet singh died there remains a lack of leadership.British had a much more stable political system so they just outlived and waited out the indian empires like Mughal,maratha and Sikh empires.Moreover there was infighting among Sikhs ,Marathas and same community which could be exploited.
@@44krishnan79 I agree that the British have been stable and didn't have a foreign invasion since 1068. It doesn't explain why France, Belgium, Germany, Spain and Portugal were also colonizers. Belgium came into existence just in 1830 and still became a colonizing power. Germany became as soon as it unified. As you said Europe had better technology than India in the 18th century. I'm still looking for the reason behind that
@@shamtradtam3769 By stability I mean political stability not invasions,they had officials and much more advanced political structure based on meritocracy.The 2. question only 1 answer.-the industrial revolution.Just like how Japan became all powerful after the Meiji restoration into a world power.India had huge man power and didn't find the need to industrialize,moreover it was caught off guard by this drastic changes in the 18th century.
This is a great detailed info .. this content prep would have taken months to compile and present. Thank you for all the pains taken to give us such quality content!
I wonder if Sri Lanka, as an island, would have had the best potential to centralize and build a European style navy if history had gone differently.
Yes, probably. We have decent natural harbors, proximity to sea lanes and a strategic location within the south asia. But the incentive to look outward and venture into the unknown was never there.
@@malithaw not just that, the powerful South Indian states always breathing down the neck of Sri Lanka, and the internal divisions between religion and ethnicity likely brought that on too
I can see that but I think it will be impossible since they have a big neighbor to them
i don't remember any powerful ceylonese naval ventures, the tamils, gujaratis, and bengalis had better navies
@@THE_VARUN_EDITZEE I’m not saying no powers on the Sub-continent had navies, just, as the video discusses, they were not able to pour as many resources into them as the European powers. As an island, Sri Lanka could have concentrated on their navy more, as the UK and Japan did in our history.
This video quality is equal to that of Kings and Generals. Your quality has improved a lot.
Thank you very much!
Calling the Industrial Revolution "luck" doesn't seem quite right. Sure, they didn't predict all those technologies, but entrepreneurs had to actually see and utilise the power and potential of coal.
There was a little too much emphasis on luck
The Black Death that caused it and a lot of other things was pretty lucky though.
It was very conviently timed too.
Seems popular these days to call european success always to be the result of "luck", woke culture really destroying an objective point of view.
@@savioblanc just like every piece of media that touches on European and American dominance made in the last 20 or so years. I've seen so many RUclips videos that worship Asian for discovering but never really using or developing a lot of technologies... but blame dumb luck for any technology Europeans develop into something actually useful.
Since the Industrial Revolution started in the UK it is "luck". Had it started in India, he would have used "talent". 😁
Great video!!! 👍👍
Bro any chance of us getting a video atleast once a month.🤗
This channel is the next 'Kings and Generals' mark my words💪💪
We are always there to support you😎😎
Nice video! I have been thinking myself about this topic for a while, so your explanation hinging on artillery is quite interesting. And I agree that the greater stability and institutionalization of European states, especially England, was a big advantage for them. There are still many blanks to fill though. Did you investigate why artillery did not lead to the development of more long-lived and institutionalized states in India? Perhaps it's to do with the organization of society being very different compared to England, which would in turn have to do with history further down, and ultimately differences in geography and climate.
Thanks, Aditya! And in fact I did investigate the military revolution in India. I did an entire video on it, actually - check out my gunpowder empires of India video for more details! It led to some centralization initially, but the dissemination of raw iron artillery revived the power of feudal lords and decentralized imperial power once again.
@@OddCompass It wasn't just for economic reasons that the Westerners went exploring (and conquering), they were also generally more curious & interested about the world outside of Europe compared to other peoples of the world.
@Autodidact And they European were cruel as hell when they invaded and started taking advantage of local weak people .But they were also lucky because they came in good time when India had no Strong or Brutal rulers, if India had a nationalist rulers like emperor Aurangzeb or Ashoka these European would have no chance .
@@mhassan8439 Wrong....nothing could stop the industrial revolution from happening in Europe manly GB...The british smoked the indian subcontinent at the same time they were fighting Napolean just to put in perspective...even China was humilliated in the opium wars decades later not even facing the main british fleet
@@mhassan8439not at all, European technology of war was far superior than what India possessed and no amount of ferocity of any Indian king could have changed the outcome of the war. This isn't a Bollywood movie we're talking about.
Thank you for the information. It's always a pleasure to learn from history. Best regards to all, from Portugal
Defeat of nawab of bengal should be a classic case study for as to why and how the Indians lost to the British.
because of betrayal
@@mint8648 and bad weather
Mir Jafar, Manik Chand , Omi Chand and Krishnachandra Rai supported the British!
Lack of will to fight for one's land and group.
@@basantprasadsgarden8365 jagat seth,ghosheti begum too.
The analysis show how deep your study is..... the 5 points were so accurate
The fact that a small nation from afar was able to control a population many times its own points towards a more deep rooted divide in Indian society that could be exploited. Whether it was linguistic divide, hierarchical societal divide , or spiritual divide is not clear, but it wasn't like the Europeans we're offering anything precious either. I sometimes wonder why did we go under so easily . But then again, the fact that Britain was able to conquer lands all over the world may be testament to its own war worthiness, strategic acumen and the readiness to exploit societal divides.
For me this lesson can be turned around: Europeans today have to learn what horrible prices you as a society can pay if you allow such divisions to do damage within Europe.
Maybe because India wasn’t a country but dozens of small states.
3Lines, You are 100% right. India was never a united country. It was bunch of many small countries like Europe. It was British which gave a shape and direction to modern united India. Without british, Today's india would still remain as 25 small states.
It is simply because Indians were super divided
Look at how when the British tried to fight Aurangzeb, the last major Mughal emperor, they were finished brutally, and the British commander had to bow down to his feet in shame
The British waited for several decades after Aurangzeb's death to finally win territories because of constant infighting and civil wars among Indian kingdoms and empires following Aurangzeb 's death
@@KKJ0214 Brits left a huge mess after they left India especially after the horrific partition .... It was sardar Patel and v k Menon who united over 500 princely states into one whole India !!!!
"Europe vs India"
European nations other than western Europe and Russia: wut?
0:47 As a Bangali living in London,that would be a dream come true.
are you from west bengal or bangladesh
@@narendrasule5822 Bangladesh
@@noelgrippen4707 I don’t hate it but “ London is a failed society “ ( Andrew Tate ) I was born here and I’m still in school
Bengal destroyed britain by sending all the commies it produces to british universities. 😂
The way this ancient history documentary explains complex topics is truly remarkable.
I'll miss the old cartoon characters but these new graphics are gorgeous.
Thanks! I’ll try and hybridize both, constantly experimenting haha
A mujarabad star fort French style built by tippu in Mysore kingdom to counter Europian techniques
Correct! Sadly, the swarming of Tipu by allied English/Maratha/Hyderabadi forces was too much for him to repulse.
Great Video 👍What topics are u thinking about next ? I recommend Indian Urban Architecture and planning. Cities like Vijayanagara, Delhi, Agra, Gangaikonda Cholapuram, Pataliputra, Manyakheta, Ahmedabad, Anahilapataka, Gauda, Kharjuravahaka, Kanyakubja, Parihaspura, Jaipur etc had really interesting layouts
India was and still is very diverse. Diversity is the biggest wound on a nation's health and survival.
Only for idiots
I love the smooth animation and good narration, keep it up!
Good presentation, but felt missing missing some fundamental points. Papal Bulls driving catholic Spain , Portugal to colonize and enslave natives. The Europeans saw themselves as part of Christian civilization, the British under Charles II authorized the East India Company to make war / peace with non-christian nations essentially equivalent to the Papal Bulls. So religion played a great part in the colonization of Asia, Africa and America. It never was about race until the 19th century when less religious Europeans needed other theories to explain their domination.
The East India Company maintained a very strict policy of not allowing its facilities to be used for the promotion of Christianity or the suppression of other religions until well into the 19th century, when it came under too much influence from British politicians. It only took about a quarter-century from the change of policy to the 1857 uprising and the consequent abolition of the Company.
Not really. Brits wanted the resources and they loot. Remember there were Christians in India before the west. Syrian christians of Kerala have jewish /Assyrian ancestry (dna test) and they were in India before the western conquer. It wasn't the religion that motivated ,it was the resources
I think the French and the Spanish were driven by religious zeal more than the British. In Quebec and the Philippines, the Catholic Church was either dominant in politics or tried to convert as many as possible.
@@freedom_fight I was talking about the European Christians, christians in Kerala did not fight religious wars with Hindus. The christians you talk about were themselves persecuted by Portugese catholics as heretics. Brits wanted to loot , agreed, but they looted non-christians not non-whites, they targetted people for their religion not race. It became about race much later.
@@CuriousAlien nope.. Europeans Targeted mostly non whites and looted non whites. And they looted non white Christians . Race was always their reason 💀. And it's common sense and history. They looted asia for wealth and that's the main reason. And if religion were their main agenda all of the asia would be Christians lol. Hindus never did a thing and the religious high caste hindus assisted with europeans . You need more history class rather than your religious class 💀
Um prazer ver o nascimento de um grande canal! 🤓
This is one of the best videos so far. When I first saw the title I thought this might be just another video about how Britain colonized India, but this showed the strengths and drawbacks of both the countries for what they are. Thank you for such a beautiful and thorough videos mate.
(just one history nerd to another mate) In the end you said the East is now raising again , but isn't the growth of the East in the modern times built on the systems that are borrowed from West. If the East had employed the same traditional methods or developed better systems then we could say that east is challenging west, isn't it. (I get this doubt every time I hear the East and west comparison in modern times, not challenging your view mate.)
1- Does the west use guns, HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST
2- Does the west drink tea, HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST
3- Does the west use 0?, HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST
4- Does the western military have martial art?, HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST
5- Does the west have art, HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST
6- Does the west literally drink water? , HOW CAN YOU COPY EAST/AFRICANS
Look pal i am not saying that Asians are challenging the Europeans because they discovered things first, i'm saying that we are challenging you because we are now doing your stuff better than you.(not challenging your views :>)
Does the west have industrialized so fast if not from the loot they gained by conquering North America ,Australia then later Africa and Asia?
Also Have the west created everything on its own . No . It learned many things from East . It's just they won in last Millenia . 1 Millenia hardly matter sin how long Humnas have stood on Earth.
The West copied a lot from Indian, Chinese and Arab knowledge to create these modern institutions
So stop bifurcating knowledge into east or west
They are multidisciplinary in nature and has various facets to it..... Knowledge is not an isolated entity
The West should be thankful to the East for their knowledge in mathematics, alchemy, architecture, food imports, spices, tea, gunpowder, firearms, etc
That was an excellent explanation, here some people complaining about the details but the details that they are complaining about are already in their books but the details that didn't covered in the books are in this video that's special
This video entails a certain number of gross misconceptions and errors :
- The choice of images and illustrations regarding Europe is random at best. It feels like you just picked the ones that looked good (portraits and other historical pictures) without paying heed to their historical and chronological relevance with regards to the information you're saying at the moment they appear on the screen.
- There is a confusion between industry and artisanal production. Industry produces standardised goods with the help of machinery. A process is industrial when each worker or machine is in charge of a specific portion of it. Thus, one cannot say that India was de-industrialized for there was no industry anywhere in the world before it first started in England mid 17 hundreds. Artisanal production in India, though, has been negatively impacted by competition with Britain.
- Finally, you completely "forgot" about the French who held half of India before losing it to the British.
The video is pretty to watch but these critical errors make it very misleading.
British conquest came after brutual Islamic invasions and devastating Islamic Mughal empire which had weakend India and Indians . Similarly with Bengal Sultanate. Marathas had re-captured the territory back from Mughals but that didn't leave us with enough time to get ready and sense new dangers. Lots of Infighting among Peshwas of Maratha Empire led them to allow British ,Portugese ,Dutch to gain a hold on our lands.
A Hindu can never accept his inferiority and must always avoid blame/responsibility.
- Winston Churchill
Yes it is sad and we should learn from it
The main reason for these events was the contrasting approach of Europeans, who were explorers and conquerors, always seeking opportunities for capturing or looting, while India, abundant with resources, became complacent and lacked exposure to diverse tactics due to limited travel and warfare experience.
There was no India then. It was a scatter of various kingdoms, all separate managing their own affairs
Spain had plans during the the reign of Felipe II to start an Invasion an conquest of southern China as China was having at the time a momentary inner crisis and weakness. An army and Fleet was ready in the Philippines to start it but was continously delayed due to bureaucracy and the time for messages to travel. In the end it was canceled cause China stabilized and got suspicious of the Spanish and to ensure and not endanger trade with China. The commander leading the army in the Philippines which would have done it blamed the ministers though as he thought their weakness and indecision to seize the moment (which tbh would have been typical of Spanish ministers) and let it slip away.
spain also invaded cambodia but failed
@@mint8648 huh didn't know that only know of Formosa and the almost conquest of Brunei.
Got the name of it so I can read the wiki?
@@bnb6868 Spanish lostt war with Brunei, they got cannon, body armor too, in 1400-early 1700s, european only operates in coast and small island in Peninsular Malay, Sumatra, Java, Bali, Sulawesi and Borneo, the weak tribe like philpines are the 1st to fall same with non iron America natives.
@@safuwanfauzi5014 what are you talking about Spain won. Brunei went from biggest regional naval power to irrelevance till they discovered oil in the past century. Spain just didn't end up conquering it with that soap drama with the Brunei princess and shit. The main goal of the expedition was to destroy the Brunei navy though because of their piracy
@@safuwanfauzi5014 The hell you're talking about?
Great content! Just a quick note, the bigger vessels refered in the video which allowed portugal to venture south and west were the technological development that enabled that to happen, but that wasn't the motive. I would say the motives were both religious and economic, more religious than economic. Portugal had just a few years before the conquest of Ceuta in 1412 - this date marks the beginning of the portuguese Colonial Empire - conquered the last portion of the southern territory from the Mourish, ending the "Reconquista" in their Kingdom.
West: I've got something you don't.
East and the Americas: What?
West: Ships.
And boats. With guns. Gunboats.
did you not watch the video
@@mint8648 Did you not understand the video?
@@THE_VARUN_EDITZEE But did we use our navy (except for Chola Empire), to expand our territory, or control important routes? We were familiar with the Strait of Malacca, and the Horn of Africa. If we'd just taken the two of those, boom, we control trade in the Indian Ocean. Either we were too busy in fighting ourselves (there were multiple kingdoms in India most of the time), or we had stopped advancing our naval power, and stopped technological progress in that particular area (example, navigation tools, ship designs, new materials, compasses etc). The Khmer isn't even Indian, it's South East Asian, same with Srivijaya, which was promptly invaded by the Chola empire.
Wrong, at that time, the East had more advanced shipbuilding technology, a larger fleet, and a large-scale and technologically advanced artillery production industry than the West. You don’t have to know more details, but you should at least know about Zheng He’s fleet. You should at least know about watertight cabins, anti-corrosion coating technology, compass technology related to warships, as well as blast furnace iron-making technology and gunpowder technology related to artillery were all spread from China to the West. You say these words is like India mocking Britain for not having English
Not a Chinese empire
It's TIBET above INDIA.
PLEASE DONT MISLEAD.
By that time the Chinese had colonised tibet
It’s an old map made by the British - at that time, the Qing had conquered Tibet and administered it semi-autonomously. That control was short lived however.
yea i think tibet should be marked as separate but with china in parentheses
TRUTH WILL PREVAIL.
BHOE GYALO 💪
Dont Worry Tashi, Tibet Will be Intendent one day
Problem with India and China in the recent past is that they reached peak civilization and then degraded into stagnation/pride coupled with more oppressive/rule bound religion plus no navy because they didn't feel the need to expand..
Meanwhile the Europeans kept on evolving their gun technology, had an enlightenment age, navy and had social mobility which we did not due to our social systems like caste and things.
Hi
Great Summary, but I feel you could have expanded more in new world crops like Potatoes and Maize, which increased food production in Europe and freed up more workforce for industry.
I don't get why you've put some random sound effects throughout the video - they kinda distracted me from the content but I still enjoyed your video
The saying, ‘History repeats itself’ comes to mind as far as the reemergence of the East as the global economic powerhouse.
An excellent video btw👏👏👍
I feel like the advantages to European economies by colonialism in the Americas and eventually Africa are also big contributors in this. The genocidal and exploitative systems set up in the Americas vastly increased the resource wealth of European powers, which in turn gave them many of the raw materials to make the Industrial Revolution possible. Where do you think all the cotton for European textile manufacturing came from? The timber for those ocean going ships? (certainly by the time of the British Colonies in North America). Obviously all the silver you mentioned, but also gold and other metals. Those two centuries of European global dominance were acquired through yet more centuries of genocide, slavery, and exploitation. This doesn't mean that Europe or Europeans are "evil", people of all races and cultures have committed similar crimes against humanity at different points in history, but we should always be aware of context and history behind these global events/ trends so as to avoid the violence and inhumanity of the past.
I think it would help to not see a certain race as evil based on history, but learn from history to see what humans are capable of. Its to easy to think white people from Europe are inheritly evil dismissing with that that the same reasons that made them commit those terrifying deeds. It makes you vunerable to repeat the same mistakes. I remember reading this quote that anyone denying they could be a nazi soldier would be far morel likely to actually be one then the ones aware that they could be. Doing good being aware of being capable of doing evil is much safer then having the ignorant idea that you are good by default and incapable of evil. Its were the saying comes from that the way to hell is paved with good intentions.
Many wars have existed over all of history, kingdoms, races and continents. If one thing is sure is that if a group of humans gets the upper hand over another there is a good chance they will wield that advantage. No matter your race or culture. The industrial revolution combined with the enormous ammount of free resources in the new continent meant powerbalances were completely off for quite a while.
Ironically if we see India as a continent, the thing that became their downfall was the wars among each other. Europe had it all, but brought itself down by fighting among each other. The two world wars basically ended the domination of the world. They nerfed themselfs in the end.
@@swamidude2214 very well said. As such we should be consciously, as a society, trying to build institutions and structures that level the playing field as much as possible, and dismantle systems of unfair advantage (systemic racism, sexism, lgbt phobia, ageism, ableism etc). We see our greatest strides forward when we behave inclusively and cooperatively. The more people have access to education, healthcare, shelter, and food, the more potential innovators we have to solve the major problems we face as a society, especially as scientific progress has the potential to render scarcity a far less pressing concern. If we use it that way.
Or we can keep building up our capacity to destroy one another and continue acting like we aren't all the same species sharing the same single planet together.
despite the colonialism, china and indian states were still individually richer than european kingdoms.
Kairyu& Mina:you are totally right! there have been good and bad Europeans and good and bad Asians and etc.etc. etc.all over the world for centuries.people of all races and nationalities have committed here and there throughout history.that has been the human condition and we humans of all races and nationalities have got the ability to learn from those mistakes from the past so as to avoid making them again.this youtube channel Odd Compass whatever they're called is really stupidly biased!
When the American colonies were still loyal to the Crown a third of the ships in the British Empire were built in New England.
I don't know anything about China or Ottomans, but the conservative thinking of the India was the reason for our doom.
Our kings where more interested in Past's rivalry, then Cooperation desparatley needed to protect the Present and their Sovernity.
Our people where plagued by misbelieves and evil practices, and those who will try to challenge there have to face the wrath of the Contractors of religion , who where bakings there breads by burning the Society for centuries.
Now , India is in modern era, but the Business of Superstition is still booming, thanks to a crowd , ready to protect these evils.
expecting indian kings to cooperate is the same as expecting medieval european kings to cooperate
@@mint8648 , but still they have co-oprated during cursades, atleast
@@basantprasadsgarden8365 and so did the Deccan sultanates cooperate to defeat Vijayanagara.
That is the stupidest claim I've ever heard.... Are you mentally handicapped ?
“One cup luck, and one pinch policy”.
So Britain was the first country to industrialise by almost entirely luck? Nothing to do with its culture and institutions?
British: we are easy won wars
Mysore :-🤫
Man love your channel. Btw please consider making a video on the Gupta empire. On how sakandgupta defeated the huns, the same huns who had defeated the Romans.
West divides Huns as brown huns & white huns.....LOL.
Brown huns came to india & today , they are known as rajputs , gurjar , pratihar.....
@@deveshsonam oh did not know about that. Thanks for letting me know
@@arnavpandey3823 that's bullshit. Nothing like brown Huns exist.
I suggest you to read the Wikipedia article on Huns and watch Kings and General's video on them.
Side-note: In their video where they talk about India wasn't well researched Imo. Their videos do have a certain bias for which many people don't like them.
Also, colonial theories like Jatts are descendants of Indo-Scythians and Rajputs are descendants of Huns ( vice-versa ) are just LARPS!
don't listen to randos on the internet, especially people like Paul Arya.
Paul Arya. Rajputs possess the same R1a lineages as most of the subcontinent males. It doesn't make sense to bring up such fake narratives . Not everything you read is true. Genetics defies all such theories
For your information,there is no country by the name india exist before the arrival of British or the mugals or the aryans..
The name india was given by british and areas ruled by british given independence and called a india..
You should definitely make a video about the 3 south Indian tamil kingdoms (cheras, cholas and the pandyas)and about their golden age called the "Sangam age" where a lot of tamil literature and grammar was composed. They are rarely talked about outside of tamilnadu even in india. It's such an underrated piece of history.
I disagree. I clearly remember Sangam Age being described in my history textbook.
Sangam Age was present in 7th class History. You should have ppayed attention in class.😆
@@DrArnabSahoo brother I know all about the Sangam age. I'm just saying this so that it may raise awareness about the Sangam age to people from other regions or different countries.
This is the most nuanced and accurate multiple-lens analysis of the topic I have yet to see on RUclips. Keep up the fantastic content!
I wanna add one point too, a small kingdom called Travancore ( in India) completely defeated the Dutch power from India ( In those days Dutch was said to be more powerful than Brits) . I wish if you could make a video on this topic.
People of Kerala did not work or farm like in other parts of your country. Kerala people made their money from taxing foreign traders from the Middle East & the West for 2000 yrs. Their sole job was to fight with sword, shield, musket & cannon. Young boys aged 6 went to their martial schools (Kalaris) & seldom came home. The women took over the land, assets & inheritance because the men were constantly in battle. The Kerala native people survived on the lands given to them by their kings to collect tax or the smaller ports given to them, that straddled the coast, to collect tax from. The foreign merchants settled down, intermarried local women & did all the rest of the work. Native Kerala men's role was to protect that extremely lucrative market & economy. Without stability, foreign merchants would have disappeared. And because native Kerala males needed to make the Kerala coast a welcoming hub of stability for all foreigners, they also formed navies to prevent different foreign powers or merchant ships from fighting each other. Market stability = lucrative tax collections. In a nutshell for 2000 years, Kerala Native men were trained from young just to be the security forces for the trade hub. Kerala was the biggest trade hub in India with the epicentre in Calicut. As such Kerala men achieved mastery in the martial arts, naval warfare, and in the use of muskets & cannon. Also with 2000 years of intermarriage with Romans, Greeks, & pre-Islamic & pre-Christian Arabs, Kerala natives become physically bigger in stature than the rest of India. Even today according to your Indian Census records, Kerala men are the second tallest, on average, in India after Punjab. Kerala women are the tallest on average compared to any other community in India. Hence, it is no wonder that the Kerala people defeated the Dutch & the Sultan Tippu. In fact the British never really conquered Kerala. Even to this day, this state produces, the highest proportion of Air Force & Naval Officers compared to any other community in India. But with regard to rank-and-file soldiers, very few are Kerala people. Maybe because of their education, they prefer becoming Officers.
@@krishnamurti2436 Yup so true. But the thing is that our Indian education system never showed these things of Kerala , I am damn sure many North Indians don't even know about this war.
@@sreejithsiva7885 That depends on the political landscape of your country & who your government needs to appease. I dont think there are more than 20 million odd people of your state who are of voting age. Therefore the government has to appease the Hindi-speakers first, I guess.
@@krishnamurti2436 might be true , Kerala's history is so long and vast but neglected by the nation . We can even find Kerala's history in king Solomon's temple to king Ramsees mummy. btw how do you know about Kerala despite being a non Indian.
@@sreejithsiva7885 I enjoy martial arts & Kerala has got the best martial arts in India - Kalaripayyattu
All of India fell to not even all of Europeans, just to one of the countries. Great Britain.
The real reason is simple. India faced close to 700 years of brutal islamic caliphate invasions and Britain came right at the end of just as the Indian Marathas started to liberate their land. It was basically the right place at the right time and the rest is history. Doesn't get much simpler of an answer than that.
Maybe Portuguese could have conquered India, but religious intolerance towards Hindus & Muslims, etc limited their expansion. Port. had military tactical superiority. British always showed religious tolerance in India. Port. in India 110 years ahead of British & 28 years ahead of Mughals. Although Portugal had only 1 million pop, they could have recruited more native troops. British never had more than 100 000 troops in India & Mughal invasion was just 12 000 troops from Uzbekistan.
amazing video, i'm a MA history student currently learning a lot of this stuff, you have summarised it all brilliantly (great divergence etc). animations are also getting better too, what software do you use?
Sadly it has not stopped with trading , they caused damaged to the culture , heritage and religion; persecution , force conversions and killing Hindu's , famines , India had to go through a lot, thank you for the video!!
And the main cause of everything is because of selfish indian kings....who sold their land too Britain....we could have been easily overthrow Britain in 1857 but due to some nawabs and kings we never succeeded....the nawab of hyderabad, Scindia of gwalior everyone supported British
@Siddharth Sriram amen
Diversity was the reason for India's fall at that time. Even now the proud diversity we talk about weeken us to the core. In time we will get to know how much damage it has cost us.
Could these things have played a role too..
1. Spread of Christianity in Europe and the advantage of a common belief system and worldview...
2. Education system in Europe..
3. The invention of printing press and its role in documention and transmission of new ideas..
4. Social structure in Europe..
5. European powers establishing Chartered Trading companies as early as 16th century..
Yep! Though you’ll notice that most of these uniform changes occurred after the military-social revolution!
The little sound effects were really funny👍. Can you cover Chandragupta Maurya he was a brilliant star in Indian history.
I’ll look into it! And thanks haha, I tried to incorporate some humorous sound effects this time around :p
@@OddCompass Chandragupta Maurya by Purushottam Lal Bhargava was a pretty enlightening book for me😁
@@OddCompass do not cover imaginary gupta
There is a very subtle or very noticeable western thought on that video rather than an objetive look at colonialisation.
For eg. He talks about the battles between Indian kingdoms and the incoming European companies/capitalists as same. Indian armies and royals always followed rules of war etiquette. They will always choose a date time and place away from civilization and during day etc and always a mark of excellence and showcase of bravery. Even poets sat along sidelines to compose poems to record such battles as history.
Europeans however had no qualms to bomb and ravage civilian homes and cities where families live and thrive. It is something absolutely vile in world history that the europeans exported everywhere. They will taste their own medicine during the world wars but they have not learned from this.
damn right that's a very good point
The British Museum is the only place where stealers present their steals with pride and boast about their history.
Or any palace built by any of the infinite number tyrants who ruled in India before the British ever set foot on it... You'll find a lot of loot in those. Or do you think they asked the people nicely unlike the mean British
@@MA-go7ee this does not justify the Brits' actions lol. Yes the Islamic rulers were tyrants, but their tyranny is no justification for what the British did.
They are also selling
@@arnavpandey3823 I didn't say it was justified though, I was replying to someone who claimed *only* in the British museum can one see plunder proudly displayed.
And you make a similar mistake by specifying Islamic.
They were *all* tyrants. They conquered and plundered. Some came from the seas some from the next village. The force they used was equally illegitimate.
@@MA-go7ee no the guptas and mauryans were not tyrants.
Very informative!
Thank you for producing this. Excellent storytelling. I'm watching it over and over again
This is why no one messes with us on full scale war today and the goal of every enemy of ours is balkanisation of India.
Are we taking lessons from history ?
If not we will lose at full scale as well.
The Indian subcontinent has always been balkanized, with small periods of unity before it goes back to its natural state.
This is the history of India
The current Indian Republic is merely the latest united nation/empire in existence and if history is any teacher, it too will eventually balkanise
@@savioblancI don't think so , it is because people are more aware and any secessionist movement will be brutally crushed by the Indian Army one of the most powerful armies in the world
Gajapati empire next plz or a small series on mughal-rajput-jatt-maratha relationship as this always confuses me.
yes
Aurengzeb Alamgir the great gave east India company such a defeat that britishers never looked back on India with blood thirsty eyes , well , until Aurengzeb died .
Europeans were able to colonize because of better integration of their poplulation with economic supply chain,plus scientific advancements, great institutions, stock market trading etc. All of these were the causes.
Yes, but these flowed from the military-social revolution!
no they weren't
This is what constant fighting with each other gives you..... Advancements in war and weaponry
No wonder the Europeans developed....their warring mentality was what triggered colonialism and racism
@@peterparker9954 don't hate the players, hate the game. They adapted and overcame and the World resents them for it
@@rki7068 hate both the game as well as the players.... India has never colonized another nation....India used to be so huge which included present day Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan.... Indian rulers even went to Indonesia, Malaysia and Thailand as well but they never colonized those nations instead they only spread their culture and integrated with the local cultures there .... Ruling another country is not the same as colonialism.... Colonialism is when you are heavily exploiting other nations for the development of your home nation and that is an evil capitalist practice
The diverse india gave british advantage so they could use the policy we call "divide and rule policy" that's the actual reason
Great work …!!
Deep research and quality documentary
Thank you 🙏🏻
A fresh Odd Compass? Woohoo. Its a Christmas gift.
Haha glad I could provide some holiday cheer!
How did India fall to the Europeans?
Easily. It fell easily.
You missed the mindset thing,
> Dharmic philosophy compared to Abrahamic religions played a vital role
> Dharmic instituitions, feelings and its people were already crumbled during Islamic Dark Age
?
Although as interesting as this video may be, I feel that it somewhat glosses over the Portuguese period in India, and is somewhat too Anglo-Centric. To say that during the 16th century the Portuguese aggressions in India was not a problem for the great Indian powers is an understatement to say the least, especially when you consider the War of the League of the Indies, where 5000 Portuguese soldiers and 140 vessels defeated a Muslim coalition force of 160.000 men, 70.000 cavalry, 2370 elephants and 300 vessels in a 5 year war backed by the Sultanate of Bijapur, Ahmadnagar and Aceh.
In addition, by the mid 16th century the Portuguese influence was already widespread in numerous regions of Asia, so much that it became the lingua franca of the area, 300 years before English.
Even in India, the Portuguese influence was far more widespread than what this video gives credit. A lot of people have no idea how powerful Portugal was in India, or even forget that Portugal had an empire in India apart from Goa, Daman and Diu, but the reality is that Portugal had more than 60 cities, 20 factories, and dominated 3/4 of the entire coast of India, which made Portugal a powerhouse in India in the mid 16th century. Every year for almost 100 years, set sail an armada from Lisbon with 15 - 20 ships bound to India at that time.
At first I thought it was merely ignorance, since in the US people have no knowledge of Portuguese history, but now I have the feeling that the creator of this channel might be a little bit biased towards Portugal. I have seen previous videos, such as the fall of Malacca, where he presents the impression that the Portuguese conquest of Malacca was more due to internal problems than Portuguese merit, or the Goa Inquisition, where he paints the Portuguese as worse colonizers than the Dutch, (even though the Portuguese actually mixed with the locals, something the Dutch didn't do, and even the Jesuits in Brazil mentioned that the Africans and Natives chose to fight alongside the Portuguese due to the cruelty of the Dutch).
Nevertheless, an interesting video that shows the rise to power of the British in Asia, who were indisputably the most influential European nation in Asia, but the fact remains that 200 years before them, the Portuguese held a lot more power in the region than this video gives credit for.
Did Dutch also resort to measures like Goa Inquisition in India? Can you cite any historical examples for this?
@@JaagUthaHaivaan That's because the Dutch were merely interested in trade, whilst the Portuguese were interested in expanding Christianity as well. Merely talking about the inquisition and forgetting everything else is selective.
May I remind you that the Portuguese supported mix race policies in India and Africa, and abolished the practices of sati. The mix raced children were considered such aberrations by the locals, that they would have been slaughtered if it weren't for the protection of the Portuguese.
In Brazil once again, the Portuguese were the only ones who properly mixed and interacted with the natives and Africans, something the Dutch never did during their brief rule of North East Brazil, who chose to neglect them instead and were instead completely callous and indifferent towards them. It is a known fact that the Jesuits mentioned this numerous times, read about Padre António Vieira and what he has to say about the "Calvinists",as they were called back then. In addition, let's not forget that both the Dutch and the English considered other races, such as Africans for instance, to be of a different species, let alone a different race, until the 19th century. They dehumanised other races far more than the Portuguese.
If the Portuguese had not defeated the Dutch in Brazil, it would be today a country of just white, red headed people, and not the multi-ethnic country that it is known for today. Not only that, members of other races could rise to social positions like no other country in Europe at the time. There is a very famous painting of Rua Nova dos Mercadores in the early 1500's that depicts just that; an African knight, member of the order of Santiago, riding his horse in broad daylight. When you consider that 450 years later, in the 1960's in the US, the beacon of democracy and freedom in the world, Africans were not even allowed in buses, it's quite a remarkable achievement.
www.google.com/search?q=lisboa+seculo+xvi&client=ms-android-wiko&prmd=inmxv&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwjQ4pn_6oj1AhU07rsIHRcsATAQ_AUoAXoECAIQAQ&biw=360&bih=511&dpr=2#imgrc=sq5p5BbNvTdxsM&imgdii=wlgbXo6jwvqUXM
Now, I am not arguing that the Portuguese did not commit their fair share of atrocities, both when it comes to slavery and the inquisition, they surely did, but they certainly were not worse colonizers than the Dutch.
@@Omerath9 @oldcompass he speaks of betrayal in the beggining of the video (as the English here supposed to be an allied of Pt). Still I guess he would have a lot to gain with a partnership with you!
here just to leave the suggestion ;)
@@Omerath9 Thank you for your enlightening answer!
@@Omerath9 firstly, banning sati is over hyped and a classical example of demonising of indigenous people by biased writers . it was an extremely rare practice.
"The mix raced children were considered such aberrations by the locals, that they would have been slaughtered if it weren't for the protection of the Portuguese.".. could you cite a source?