Historum - History Forums  

Go Back   Historum - History Forums > World History Forum > Asian History
Register Forums Blogs Social Groups Mark Forums Read

Asian History Asian History Forum - China, Japan, Korea, India, Australia, New Zealand, and the Asia-Pacific Region


Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old December 6th, 2012, 09:47 PM   #1
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610
Why India was outsmarted by china for 2200 years ?


as the topic tells i am curious to know that why despite having larger arable lands, greater forest resources and a similar population , indian civilization could not compete with chinese in technology, economy and military for last 2200 years that is since han era ?

please i request the posters to adopt a dispassionate attitude to this and it is central question as this is indeed intriguing that nation with such vast resources could not attain same level as china.


there would be some posters who would feel offended but the fact is

1. chinese were a lot better in technology than indians at any point of time

2. they created largest empires of humanity in pre modern age whereas india lacked such super large empires

3. chinese were never ruled by foreign people who could impose their language on their administration like indians saw in their history

and this is my earnest request to all that please do not make it an india bashing thread with cows, caste curry etc.

the reasons are much deeper than such external things and i would like to have them analysed in detail.



thank you.
avantivarman is offline  
Remove Ads
Old December 7th, 2012, 01:46 AM   #2
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

is everybody afraid that this topic may get derailed?

i have never seen any india china topic being derailed so fears are completely unfounded.
avantivarman is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 01:51 AM   #3

Jake10's Avatar
Guardian Knight
 
Joined: Oct 2010
From: Canada
Posts: 11,107
Blog Entries: 3

I honestly haven't studied India enough to say for sure, but the impression I get of India is that of a divided nation. China was united through text as far back as the Qin dynasty. There was a central government which dictated units of measurement, national projects and a unifying culture existed. When did India become united this way?
Jake10 is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 02:03 AM   #4
Baldgustus of Baldistan
 
Joined: Aug 2009
From: Londinium
Posts: 2,191

Many religions came from India, perhaps this divided their populations as opposed to a state imposed order, from a central authority?
Baldtastic is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 02:09 AM   #5
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

Quote:
Originally Posted by Baldtastic View Post
Many religions came from India, perhaps this divided their populations as opposed to a state imposed order, from a central authority?
the only thing that united and unites indians to some extent is their religion or religions.

nice to got your remark though.
avantivarman is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 02:11 AM   #6
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake10 View Post
I honestly haven't studied India enough to say for sure, but the impression I get of India is that of a divided nation. China was united through text as far back as the Qin dynasty. There was a central government which dictated units of measurement, national projects and a unifying culture existed. When did India become united this way?
india became united in 300 bc some 70 years earlier than china.

but after that it could not remain united .

anyway, so do you think it was division that hampered indian competence ?
avantivarman is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 02:22 AM   #7

HackneyedScribe's Avatar
Historian
 
Joined: Feb 2011
Posts: 2,266

This is a sweeping generalization. I am unfamiliar with Indian history, but the lack of records compared to Chinese ones may explain why things would seem, at first glance, offset for India. Indian archeology too may be in its infancy as compared to Chinese ones. Anyway, just because the list of "Indian inventions" is shorter than the list of "Chinese inventions" on wikipedia don't speak to the amount they actually invented. Not everything is on wikipedia, after all. Much depends on the amount of work people are willing to put in it. I'm sure there are plenty of Indian historians who could add to the list, but simply never bothered.

Last edited by HackneyedScribe; December 7th, 2012 at 02:31 AM.
HackneyedScribe is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 02:31 AM   #8

Jake10's Avatar
Guardian Knight
 
Joined: Oct 2010
From: Canada
Posts: 11,107
Blog Entries: 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by avantivarman View Post
india became united in 300 bc some 70 years earlier than china.

but after that it could not remain united .

anyway, so do you think it was division that hampered indian competence ?
I'm honestly basing this on the impression Indian modern history has given me. The recent split with Pakistan tells me that many people there lived together for many generations but never felt they were one. The fact that a foreign language unites the country makes me wonder why none of the local dialects ever did. Now, when you say that India became united in 300 BC, to what extent was this? China split at times as well, but only geographically. Everyone still shared a common culture, which helped bring them together again. So, culturally, when did India unite?
Jake10 is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 02:32 AM   #9
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

Quote:
Originally Posted by HackneyedScribe View Post
This is a sweeping generalization. I am unfamiliar with Indian history, but the lack of records compared to Chinese ones may explain why things would seem, at first glance, offset for India. Indian archeology too may be in its infancy as compared to Chinese ones. Anyway, just because the list of "Indian inventions" is shorter than the list of "Chinese inventions" on wikipedia don't speak to the amount they actually invented. Not everything is on wikipedia, after all. Much depends on the amount of work people are willing to put in it.
nice that scholars like you are interested in this .

while I agree that there is lack of records but we have positive evidence to show that

1. paper was unknown in india till 1200 ad

2. printing was unknown in india till 1400 ad by any way

3. gunpowder was unknown to indians as Babur thoroughly smashed Rana Sanga who in 1526 had no cannons .


apart from these, though records are lacking but we do have great literature and though we know about everything in common life from them, we do not get evidences for map making, compass and even military items like catapult.

also, there was no reason why indians did not mention mechanical clocks in works which neatly dealt with time .
avantivarman is offline  
Old December 7th, 2012, 02:37 AM   #10
Suspended indefinitely
 
Joined: Sep 2012
From: varanasi uttar pradesh, india
Posts: 1,610

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jake10 View Post
I'm honestly basing this on the impression Indian modern history has given me. The recent split with Pakistan tells me that many people there lived together for many generations but never felt they were one. The fact that a foreign language unites the country makes me wonder why none of the local dialects ever did. Now, when you say that India became united in 300 BC, to what extent was this? China split at times as well, but only geographically. Everyone still shared a common culture, which helped bring them together again. So, culturally, when did India unite?
there is nothing to doubt you sir.

i am placing a unique fact before you

indians in 300 bc ( 60 percent of them ) had one language and there was not much difference between dialects at that time.

apart from language, india was always united culturally and this language thing was there with dravidians only meaning the south indian people.


one thing i wonder is why people from peshawar to mumbai spoke one langauge in 300 bc to 600 ad, and yet could not form empires like chinese.
avantivarman is offline  
Reply

  Historum > World History Forum > Asian History

Tags
2200, china, india, outsmarted


Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
india china avantivarman Asian History 147 October 25th, 2012 05:01 AM
China and India Thessalonian Asian History 15 September 22nd, 2011 10:00 AM
India - China Lord Keviv Asian History 2 September 21st, 2011 01:27 AM
China Vs. India Isoroku295 Speculative History 25 August 31st, 2011 05:34 PM

Copyright © 2006-2013 Historum. All rights reserved.