HOW WOULD IT CHANGE

HOW WOULD IT CHANGE IF- 

THE BRITISH DID NOT COLONIZE INDIA

The British or the English East India Company came to India in the early 1600's after Vasco De Gama discovered the sea route to India. The English East India Company had received exclusive rights for trading in the Indian subcontinent from the Queen of England. The British merchants visited the courts of both the powerful Mughal Emperors Jahangir and Shahjahan. After the reign of the last powerful Mughal Emperor Aurangzeb in the 18th century the British seeing the dissolution of power in India being divided among many regions took it's advantage and with no superior power except for France which it had fought three wars but none of them were deciding but with the French Revolution taking it's grip in France itself so for a period of few years the France had to withdraw from India and as The British already held Bengal and parts of modern day Bangladesh using it as it's strong hold and with the use of superior artillery's and weapons it conquered kingdom of  Mysore or modern day Karnataka and parts of Andhra Pradesh in modern day India. Britain remaining sole power in India until the beginning of 19th century unopposed worked for strengthening it's rule.

NAPOLEON-  in the timeline we come to the first part of modern world which could have prevented the British rule in India. French under Napoleon Bonaparte was the greatest threat to British and not only it's overseas dominance and ambition but the British Mainland itself and the British crown. Napoleon even before taking the control of France had tried to engage himself in Egypt and capture the Suez Canal to block Britain from India. Napoleon was ruling the continental Europe and posing a big threat to the United Kingdom. Britain won 2 major victories out of countless losses which decided the fate of Southern Asia especially India. The first being Battle Of Trafalgar just outside the Spanish borders the only sea battle throughout the Napoleonic Wars. Admiral Nelson defeated the combined Franco-Spanish fleet in the battle and British gained naval superiority for almost a decade until WW1. 

The second being the most important battle throughout the Napoleonic Wars which is also termed as "The Battle of Nations". It was the battle of Waterloo which saw a full out European war if Napoleon and France won, UK could fell so as a good portion of Europe. British General Lord Of Wellington who also served as the Governor-General of India with the help of Prussia(Germany modern day), Austria-Hungary and Russia defeated the French army thus ending Napoleon's campaign. 

What would have happened if the results would have been other way round and French would have won what would have it's impact on India. Some sources say that the French were more gentle and respectful towards Indian rulers rather than the British and even they treated the Indian Soldiers during the both World Wars fighting on the Eastern Front and in Battle of France. But the major change would have been in the culture as the official language would have been French instead of English and the collapse of French during the franco-prussian war in the later part of the 19th century would may have let Germany be the new power in India or else maybe the French would still be playing a power struggle in India as the French had a bad economy after the Napoleonic wars unlike the British and they may enter a power struggle and would have divided India into 2 parts which till date would have remained the same. 

THE EUROPEAN POLITICS -

Europe in from the middle of 18th century to all the way up to the second world war, European powers were totally engaged in multiple wars and colonial empires, especially the UK and the French were engaged to total wars throughout the globe in almost all the continents including India and surrounding territories. The downfall of France in India began when the French Revolution began in France itself. Even after the Revolution and under Napoleon's rule the whole of Europe was engaged in wars and UK was at more relative peace due to it's geography and it emerge victorious against Napoleon by defeating not only France but also Spain in the Battle of Trafalgar this itself gave the naval supremacy to UK and defeated two major colonial powers right of the bat. During the mid of 19th century Germany and France began wars and rivalry among them which grew deep and as there was no peace on country's borders itself so there were problems for both the countries to expand their sphere of influence and UK again took the opportunity and not only annexed the full length of the Indian Subcontinent but also good parts of South East Asia and Central Asia as far as the Arab lands and also establishing their sphere of influence over a good coastal region of China. UK was at peace until the latter part of 19th century when Germany was developing a powerful State in itself and French and UK had aligned themselves and with the dissolution of many countries which resulted in the formation of Baltic States such as Serbia and others which were in the backing of Russia which led Russia enter into Europe with a major power to oppose the Germans and as a result of wars the Turkish or the Ottoman Empire took active part in the European Politics and as it had oil under it's occupation the British colonies in Asia provided them with a direct front of attack ever if needed so British began to add it's Asian colonies directly under the British Crown such as what happened to India after the revolt of 1857.

UK was a major power in Europe or else it was the world's no 1 economy right up to WW1 when it was replaced by USA. If the European conditions of the 19th century would have not suited the UK then it was most likely that it would have faced a great amount of resistance in order to establish colonies and the whole Europe had it's eyes on Indian Subcontinent as even when the British ruled India, Goa was still a colony of Portugal. So the majority of chances would have been that some areas for eg the Bengal province would have been ruled by the British due to it's agriculture and maybe the French would have the southern region of India as it already had diplomatic ties with kings of south before the French Revolution took place. The Portuguese already controlled Goa so maybe they would seize important ports such as Mumbai and territories upto the city of Ahmadabad in Gujarat roughly 500km from Mumbai and 750 from Goa. Basically there would be chances that today there may be more of a many different countries which would have varied not only in culture but also other aspects of language and society. Some more developed then other.

INDIAN FACTORS-

MUGHAL EMPIRE- 

The Mughal Empire which was established by Babur in 1526 after his victory of Delhi Sultanate in the First battle of Panipat. The Empire was not stable before the year 1556 when Akbar ascended to the throne of the Mughal Empire. The European powers came at the courts of these Mughal Emperors according to some Historians at around 1600. The British knew there position in the Subcontinent as they could only gain trading rights and nothing else till the 18th century. The decline of the Mughal Empire after the death of Aurangzeb was a point were for safety and to impose power the later Mughal rulers took aid from the European powers. This exposed the weakness as they did not have a navy and other equipment which could help them keep up with the world throughout the age of colonization. The Empire ended officially in 1857. 

If the empire had never ended or in other words if the unity and rule of the later Mughals would have been a better one and with the use of their vast treasures if they had not given the Europeans a chance then what would have happened. A similar comparison can be made to the Ottoman Empire which ended itself after their defeat in first World War. India if ruled by Mughals and their heirs then as world evolve more and more plus with the conflict of democracy and communism and the events such as  World Wars, this would have affected the Empire and like the Ottomans, If the Mughal rulers hated the British and joined against USA and the USSR during the early 20th century it was likely that a defeat was inevitable and they could have been divided among the allies like the Ottoman Empire and more in the modern world as monarchies have been in a state of abolition right after the Second World War. A single mistake would have been kept the Mughal Empire at the bad looks of major world powers such as USA and Britain. So even if the Mughal Empire would have survived, still looking at the modern world and oppositions such as made in terms of prospects such as the majority Hindus ruled by a family of Muslims, This concept would arouse major conflict and whole India would be on the beam balance which would be delicate and as in the late and early 19th and 20th century respectively shown the demolition of Monarchies in many European countries, The Mughal Empire would have been likely be it's victim too. Moreover a complete authority of the Mughals over subcontinent would have been subjected to many oppositions when the Indian people would have been exposed to the world 

it would have been a constant oppose to the rulers and a weak ruler would not only have to face revolts but then it would have been questioned on international level. A major possibility would have been that the Mughal rulers would follow the policy of constitutional monarchy which exists in UK for eg. 

STATES OF INDIA DURING THE MID 17TH TO EARLY 18TH CENTURY-

The Indian Subcontinent after the dissolution of the Mughal Empire was divided among many small and big empires and rulers. The Subcontinent was divided as the north western portion under Afghan rule. Modern day province of Punjab in both India and Pakistan was ruled under the Sikhs. The central India was divided among various small States such as Mughals in Delhi and Agra, Awadh in modern day Uttar Pradesh and Bihar. The Maratha in modern provinces of Maharashtra, Gujarat and parts of Madhya Pradesh. Modern day Karnataka and Andhra Pradesh were ruled by Nizams such as Tipu Sultan and his father Hyder Ali. Finally the eastern part of Subcontinent which made up modern day West Bengal, Bangladesh and parts of Jharkhand were under the rule of English East India Company and then under the British Crown. These kingdoms were under the constant wars with one another and after some years it showed civil wars especially in the Maratha territories and non corporation with one another which ultimately led each and every kingdom one by one falling and ultimately leading the takeover of the Subcontinent under the rule of UK. Starting with capture of Bengal in 1757 and by early 1800's the whole of Indian Continent was under the rule of UK until the year 1947. 

The British forces with their European modern techniques and army one by one in a span of 50 years subdued the entire Indian Subcontinent but what would have happened if the British were not been able to defeat this regional kingdoms.

A major result would have been that this regional kingdoms would continue to rule and conflict among themselves and divide Indian Subcontinent in many different regions and all of this one major possibility would have been that there would have been many countries not an united India. As discussed in earlier as the modernization of  world would have happened more and more this ruling classes would have been in the public eye as mentioned earlier in the impact of the Mughal Empire.

THIS IS MY POSSIBILITIES AND EVENTS WHICH COULD HAVE CHANGED INDIAN HISTORY IF THEIR OUTCOMES WOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFERENT.

                                                                                                                              DHWANIT MADRASI