Any Indian kingdom that could have been a colonising invading power

Jinit

Ad Honorem
Jun 2012
5,274
India
#91
They would not have the access to the Elephants like their other counterparts and that is why they appeared weak [ on the plains] .

And mentioning about Rashtrakutas' inefficiency to go beyond India , I was talking in the NW side [ crossing the modern Pakistan ] not on seas. [ As i said , all the SOuth Indian empires had that capaccity to impose will on the surrounding island kingdoms :)]
And it is not a surprise for Rashtrakutas collecting tributr from ceylon

I agree with you. Rashtrakutas never had capcity to cross the Hindukush. However they might have conquered SE asia if they would have wanted to do so. (I assume that they had large powerful navy just like their army)

On the other hand Gurjara pratihara never had capacity to conquer the SE asia. However they are one of the very few dynasty who could have crossed the traditional north west border of India. Just yesterday I read that Arab chronicle mentions that Mahipala I of Gurjara pratihara dynasty maitained 4 armies with the strength of 700000 to 900000 in each army. And the area was rich in mineral resources especially Gold and silver. Even one army is enough to start an efficient campaign outside the India!!!

Besides I realized one thing. Studying & restructuring the Indian history from western point of view isn't doing any justice to our history. Millitary might wasn't given as much importance as the public welfare in our history compared to non Indian history. Most of the famous household names like Ashoka, Buddha, Mahavira, Vikramaditya, Raja bhoj, Siddhraj jaysinh are famous not because of their millitary might. Infact some of them achieved nothing if we look from that point of view. However our history remembered them (irrespective of their caste, religion and origin) because they did something good for the people. Even Raja bhoj is more famous name in Indian household than his contempory Rajendra chola who conquered the SE Asia and in comparision Bhoj's millitary achievement were insignificant. (Note: I don't mean to decrease the imporatance of Rajendra chola's achievements however in common household Bhoj is still more famous than Rajaraja). Even the later famous kings like Akbar, Shivaji and Krishnadev raya are remembered because they were loved by the people. And thats one of the main reason why India never expanded the territory outside the traditional boudries as wellfare was given more importance than the millitary achievements.
 

Jinit

Ad Honorem
Jun 2012
5,274
India
#92
I could think of three empires which controlled some part of North India .
The first being Satavahanas , 2nd being Rashtrakutas and the third being Cholas .

It is a coincidence that , one is Andhra-centered , one is Karnataka centered and the otehr , a tamil centered ... :D

I said majority of North India. As far as I know they ruled the portions of north India( which in itself is a significant achievement) but they never conquered the north India from Gujrat and Punjab to all the way upto Bengal and Assam or atleast major portion of North India.
 

Jinit

Ad Honorem
Jun 2012
5,274
India
#93
The Rashtrakutas kicked the Gurjaras out of Kannauj and the only reason for not conquering the North West might have been their traditional Mlechcha status and lack of riches.

By the North west are you trying to impose north west India or the area that lies to outside the north west India?
 
Jun 2012
1,780
chandigarh
#94
Look at the map. In case of SE asia Andaman Nikobar islands can be used as a base to launch the attck while in case of eastern Africa there isn't such land in the middle of the sea that can be used as a launching pad.
actualy they could have if by chance they could control present day balochistan they could have easily launched an attack into oman
 
May 2012
1,628
On a chain of Extinct Volcanoes
#96
so you started to think you were "pan-Indian" right. That's sounds quite irritating, as if non central employees sons were not Indian as you. And I think that's the source of my rants against people like you.)


The phrase 'I starting feeling' does not mean ' others would never feel' . Stop cherry picking and do not start over .

More the people are exposed to a wider variety of environments and cultures , more would be their chances of learning those things easily [ than others who do not visit places ]
Does this mean that people who only travel can learn ? IT just increases your chances to learn because you are exposed to much more broader phases than the others .

And certainly you know nothing about me and stop pooh poohing about someone whom you are not aware of !
About my thoughts of English speaking [ or hindi speaking populism ] , the members here know about it pretty well .

When you guys speak English or Hindi you think you were above all.:sick: We Indians will teach you one or two lessons my friend.:)
What ?? So you think that I feel good speaking english :lol: .
About my thoughts of English speaking [ or hindi speaking populism ] , the members here know about it pretty well .

And you have already taught me a lesson . :sick:
 
May 2012
1,628
On a chain of Extinct Volcanoes
#97
I agree with you. Rashtrakutas never had capcity to cross the Hindukush. However they might have conquered SE asia if they would have wanted to do so. (I assume that they had large powerful navy just like their army)
I meant the same ! SE Asia was always a spot for most of the Sourh Indian empires which had navies.
On the other hand Gurjara pratihara never had capacity to conquer the SE asia. However they are one of the very few dynasty who could have crossed the traditional north west border of India. Just yesterday I read that Arab chronicle mentions that Mahipala I of Gurjara pratihara dynasty maitained 4 armies with the strength of 700000 to 900000 in each army. And the area was rich in mineral resources especially Gold and silver. Even one army is enough to start an efficient campaign outside the India!!!
I do not know the reason , but the Gurjara-Pratiharas were one of the most undermined empires of the India [ along with Palas ] .

In a military perspective [ who fended off the foreign invasions] , the Pratiharas were as important as the Mauryas , the Satavahanas , the Guptas .
To be precise , the three powerful empires of India in the 8th - 10 th centuries were altogether skipped and their military [ and other achievements ] marginalized .
I guess it would be a good idea to ope a thread about this tripartite struggle of thiss three mighty empires

Besides I realized one thing. Studying & restructuring the Indian history from western point of view isn't doing any justice to our history. Millitary might wasn't given as much importance as the public welfare in our history compared to non Indian history. Most of the famous household names like Ashoka, Buddha, Mahavira, Vikramaditya, Raja bhoj, Siddhraj jaysinh are famous not because of their millitary might. Infact some of them achieved nothing if we look from that point of view. However our history remembered them (irrespective of their caste, religion and origin) because they did something good for the people. Even Raja bhoj is more famous name in Indian household than his contempory Rajendra chola who conquered the SE Asia and in comparision Bhoj's millitary achievement were insignificant. (Note: I don't mean to decrease the imporatance of Rajendra chola's achievements however in common household Bhoj is still more famous than Rajaraja). Even the later famous kings like Akbar, Shivaji and Krishnadev raya are remembered because they were loved by the people. And thats one of the main reason why India never expanded the territory outside the traditional boudries as wellfare was given more importance than the millitary achievements.
Agree to every point .
I guess the Indians did not attribute much greatness to the wasting resources in the name of glory , but India had exceptions too :D
 
Nov 2012
282
Forum
#98
I meant the same ! SE Asia was always a spot for most of the Sourh Indian empires which had navies.


I do not know the reason , but the Gurjara-Pratiharas were one of the most undermined empires of the India [ along with Palas ] .

In a military perspective [ who fended off the foreign invasions] , the Pratiharas were as important as the Mauryas , the Satavahanas , the Guptas .
To be precise , the three powerful empires of India in the 8th - 10 th centuries were altogether skipped and their military [ and other achievements ] marginalized .
I guess it would be a good idea to ope a thread about this tripartite struggle of thiss three mighty empires
http://www.historum.com/speculative...gle-problem-have-been-solved.html#post1347621
 

Similar History Discussions