Originally Posted by Pusyamitra
Tell me if we had firepower than why were we lacking when fighting the Muslims. A few scattered literary references is no proof that something existed as the ancients of those days believed in lots of fantastical ideas.
As I said it is fact that for over 90% of history China has exceeded India in every way possible.
not in every way possible but well yes in most of the things that matters.
despite being an indian nationalist by core, I have no shame in accepting that china was better technologically, militarily, economically etc. for most of the time.
infact I believe that among the four regions which had great civilizations till 1300 ad, like india, china , middle east ( i mean from egypt to uzbek borders ) and europe, it was India that was least developed in technology.
my own scheme of things is that india really outclassed only persian and north african region in terms of originality of technologies but since they had great interaction with both china and europe, they also outsmarted indians.
to elaborate, let us take a look at 700 ad world.
I really think that in maths( nearly all branches of it ), medicine, logic, arts and architecture and metallurgy, India was better than Persia and north africa and much of today's arab world.
but we do know that Tang china was better than India in technology and so what happened was that arabs got paper, compass and printing from chinese and maths from indians and greeks.
the region from morocco to uzbekistan left back india by 900 ad in technology
and this was solely due to their interaction with greek, indian and chinese world a thing we lacked pretty much so when an turk uzbek invader babur invaded us, it was not that uzbek areas were better for most of history than any indian small province ( take kashmir for instance ) , but that he had adopted cannon technology from Ottomans and so he was successful in genociding us.
had our short sighted rulers acquired technology by importing it from china, i assure you that we would have been much better as we had a very good institutionalized system of education but without printing and paper, you can not become a great power.
finally i present my own views on this advancement ( economically and technologically ) aspect of india
1. from 600 bc till 200 bc the areas which were more advanced than india were perhaps iraq, iranian areas, syria, egypt, and a small part of south europe and asia minor.
frankly, I do not think that china was more advanced than india in this period no matter how much list of inventions i am supplied with.
2. from 200 bc to 400 ad - in this period, I think the only area that india was more advanced was the areas ruled by sassanian and parthian empires.
i maintain that both han and roman areas were more advanced than india in this age.
3. from 400 ad to 700 ad - this is the time when India made great contributions to world civilization like maths, algebra and steel as well as great works in medicine which were translated in chinese, arabic and even uighur languages.
but we certainly were not more advanced than china in this age.
4. from 700 ad till 1200 ad- it was china and islamic world that were leading and the only thing i know is that Indians were better than europeans in this period.
from 1200 ad till today - india least advanced region out of these civilized areas of middle east, china, europe and India.
it is bitter to say this but even if you are born to poor mother and fathers, they are the only ones who would care you and so I will remain a patriotic indian without being ashamed of being an indian with full knowledge that india in last 2500 years was a notch behind than other three great regions.