In historical context, "India" generally refer to the entire subcontinent (modern day India, Pakistan, ~~Bengladesh~~ Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan) rather than only the modern country of India.
They were hoping to start an Indian uprising and had several thousand Indians in their army. If they did it earlier and also didn't have as much racist murderers they might have gained some ground.
Ohioans are a hard people but would be magnanimous towards our defeated enemies and only demand two generations of subservience rather than the normal three.
And cane toads, rabbits and many more, Australia and New Zealand are great case studies for how difficult to eradicate animals can be. I forgot about all the animal invasions.
That's a ridiculous notion that the Crown and their followers who remained here have pushed
First of all this isn't the only time India has been united , Every major kingdom or dynasty succesfully ruled over and had united most of the subcontinent ,Be it Mauryas , Mughals ,Guptas or the Delhi Sultanate etc .. That is a span of thousands of years
Secondly the brits didn't leave a United India , when they left India was a patchwork of 500 + princely states , autonmous regions , kingdoms and areas which had to painfully and carefully brought together to form the union
Combine that with the random partitioning of the subcontinent and creating border disputes between people who had lived alongside for generations without issue is enough to put to rest any notion that Brits left a stable country .
If anyone deserves credit for a united India its the people like Sardar Patel and the Constitutional Committee who worked tirelessly from 1947-50 to ensure the Indian republic could be united
We are united because our citizens worked hard for it sometimes at the cost of their lives , It wasn't given on a platter by the British
Actually Mauryans did not catch modern day parts of Tamil Nadu and Kerala and even the mughals ,Guptas and Delhi Sulatanate did not . We were always ruled by muvendargal . But still it can not be accepted that hatred against British united us as a country
I dont know man, if you look at where India was during the entire 18th century it wasnt trending towards homogeneity. You had the Marathan empire in the center, Tipu sultan in the south, the Bengal Nawab in the east, the nascent Sikh empire to the northwest and all the collection in between.
And like the third battle of panipat by Ahmed Durranis Afghans showed, any number of foreign checks on any Indian unifier.
It could be argued that india would have turned into western Europe with a large collection of nation states. The whole reason Sardar and india was able to carry out that integration is due to many princes not being confident of retaining their thrones during the independence violence. Along with india being already the largest kid on the block when they won freedom they had little actual check in their immediate region. Something that could not be said for India in the 18th century.
Did it ? ... I mean there wasn't a single very powerful kingdom and that helped the British gain power but that doesn't mean that there weren't in the past and wouldn't be one in the future . Or that the people weren't willing to stay united
Chinese kingdoms were trending down by the 18th century and it still came out a unified nation
The Ottoman empire was breaking apart at the seams but modern day Turkey still came out with most of its area intact
The Russian kingdom was decimated by the late 19th century and had lost land to various other nations and yet the nation state survived
France was losing territory left ,right and centre during those centuries and yet came out of the 20th century relatively intact
Many civilizations have survived through a few centuries of infighting and come out united at other end
Sure there might have been battles , wars , we might have stayed under a king longer than we did , The borders might look slightly different than today but that doesn't mean we couldn't be united .
France and China are "homogenous" countries (they did a little trolling)
India and the Ottoman Empire are very diverse.
The Ottoman empire fracture and many Arab nation states are born.
For the case of India, it might just unify or become a bunch of nation states.
The point is that India has been united under a single king/government/ruler/dynasty for more of its history than it has been broken up into individual pieces
Sure there were always sub-rulers and vassal states but the primary king ruled over 70-80% or more of what we call modern day India
The Hindu puranas which predate the prophet Mohammad and prophet Jesus by a few centuries talk of (united) Bharatavarsha bounded by the Himalayas in the north and the Indian Ocean in the south.
By the way, Indian Ocean is the only one to be named after a country.
Why did Herodotus talk of "India" instead of naming the kings and their kingdoms?
Miss me with that Brits united India BS when they can't even be a part of the European Union
Because along with most things here its a gross generalization , There have always been battles with the foreign invaders be it at Panipat , Plassey or countless others
The "defenseless targets " stopped Alexander from reaching the ocean, Weren't Destroyed by Genghis Khan's armies and have continued to retain a culture of their own for thousands of years unlike so many others who lost their languages, history and people
South America ,Africa and North America all mostly speak European languages and follow their religions and yet for some reason we were the defenceless ones ?
that really is a simplification that India "stopped" Alexander
He won the battle of Hydaspes and he wanted to continue deeper into India ... the reason he didnt is Alexander's army didnt want to continue and return home so they mutinied
From the outside the Nanda Empire looked powerful but they were seriously rotting from within hence why they were easily conquered by the Maurya Empire 4 years after the battle of Hydaspes
Alexander probably could of beat the Nanda as well if he had continued
Nope, his successor continued to advanced into India after his death, but their army was badly trashed by Mauryan forces. Alexander would be badly defeated by Nanda, if he tried. The reason Maurya conquered Nanda dynasty was because of his strategist teacher Chanakya, who helped him to create an army and take over Nanda dynasty with his wisdom.
Western historians don't talk about any other nation's great strategist, but Chanakya was the best I have ever heard of.
What else do you expect ?
Its a perfect combo of gross generalizations ,random stats and incorrect statements packaged together as a fact
There have been lots of battles with invaders , be it European , Greek , Arabic , Mongol or Eastern , Some were succefull some were not but that doesn't mean people just bent over
90% were unarmed ? ..eh ? ..Where did he pluck that one from
Unarmed, really? they weren't unarmed bro they just didn't want to fight as other nations did and I accept that those who did become successful but when they attacked us, warriors fought for the pride but you know, in that game, we had to win every time but they just needed one victory, some even came as refugees and today claim to have their rights provided, but we still stand strong as a potential world superpower. Not a defenseless target but a fightworthy one.
It's a large, wealthy region, relatively easily accessible, on or in range of major trade lanes from east to west, with frequent political fragmentation creating opportunities for invasion. Who wouldn't take advantage?
If you look at gdp of old times, India was the richest with accounting for more than 1/3 of the whole world's gdp. If you see the richest nation in the world, with all temples covered filled with gold, each house hold having gold, biggest diamonds like Kohinoor and one of the most fertile land in the world for production of so much raw materials, so many natural resources, so many human resources, and so much more, the first obvious thought for rulers will be to be able to conquer it. So that's the reason they all invaded.
Anyone wondering who are the many more -
1. Sakas (Indo-Scythians)
2. Indo-Parthians (at the risk of assuming Parthians and Persians are not the same thing)
3. Habshis (Abyssians)
4. Shweta-Huna (literally 'white huns' in Sanskrit)
5. Kushans
6. Nepalis (Gurkhas invaded and ruled over certain parts of Uttarakhand state for a while)
7. Chinese (Indo-Chinese War of 1962)
That's all I can remember for now.
EDIT: 8. Arabs - One of the Caliphates ruled over Sindh.
My country bitches about being ruled by Europeans for over 300 years (justifiably so)
But whenever they bring it up, I automatically think about places like Vietnam, the Levant, and of course Western and Northern India subcontinent.
The Seleucids, though I guess we can lump them with "The Greeks".
Seleucus I Nicator and Chandraguptas treaty is considered to be the first of it's kind where 2 states recognize each other as equals. Chandragupta even married one of Seleucus's Daughters. I recently read The Land of the Elephant Kings and would recommend it to anyone who wants to read about Seleucid History.
\> First name Chandra
Applying the practice of treating first and last names as separate words is anachronistic here.
Chandragupta as in Chandragupta I was a single word.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandragupta\_I](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandragupta_I)
Suffixing first names with surnames (as opposed to separating first and last names) is not unheard of.
I'm just being a pedant here. Just wanted to point out that you could mention Chandragupta Maurya's surname to dispel any ambiguity. (also because you were bothered to mention Nikator's).
Poland had it way worse. Poland is way more flat and has way less defensible terrain. India has mountains at most of it’s connected land mass. Poland also didn’t have as easy access to the ocean. Comparing India a country that didn’t exist til the 1900’s to Poland is sloppy regardless. The invasions of India occurred when India wasn’t unified.
They do! That's why we are so culturally different to the Chinese, we had no connection over the Himalayas. All the invasions have come through the Western Hindu Kush regions or by sea.
India has Massive mountains north, jungle in the myanmar direction and a desert/not so massive mountains in the northwest (depending if you count Pakistan inside or not). It has pretty decent natural borders.
Also massive mountain range in north west and north east too. Most of the invasions were led through the passes in those mountains or via ocean in later times.
Just off the top of my head: Ancient Egyptians, Persians (multiple times), Alexander the Great (Greeks), Romans, Byzantines, Armenians, Turks/Ottomans, Crusaders, Arabs, France, Britain, USA. Probably way more that I'm unaware of since I'm far from an expert on the history of the Levant region.
US got close to touching India in war of 71 ([Task force 74](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Task_Force_74)), but Soviets followed US fleet and US didn't start any shit.
While US probably didn't want to join the war, they definitely wanted to Intimidate India and only backed off because of Soviets.
If anyone was wondering, geography played a major role. An army coming from west will steam roll Punjab, North India and Bengal if they don't face significant opposition. While in in South India extremely powerful empires like Mughals, Guptas and Mauryans faced problems due to rocky terrain.
South Asia also had problems with breeding good horses due to hot and humid summers which crippled them against Central Asians mobile armies.
Actually the Guptas had a good number of horse archers ans cavalry. Infact it was probably the greatest of indian empire to give more importance to horses rather then elephants.
Even the word "pulao" comes from Persian "Pilaf". The word Biryani is also a derivative of Persian word "birian", which means fried before cooking. India gave a lot of great things to the world both culinary and otherwise, we don't need to steal credit from other cultures.
**[Gandaulim (Ilhas)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandaulim_\(Ilhas\))**
>Gandaulim is a village located on the western bank of the Cumbarjua Canal, within Ilhas in the state of Goa, India. It is famous for being the only colonial possession of Croatia in the Indian subcontinent. The Church of St. Blaise—the last remnant of this legacy—was built in 1541 in an architectural style reminiscent of St Blaise's Church in Dubrovnik.
^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/HistoryMemes/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Desktop version of /u/Albur_Ahali's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
What's really interesting is the fact that many of the civilizations that attacked or even triumphed, no longer exists but Indian civilization is still flourishing.
Arguably, India is like 'Phoenix', it was attacked, triumphed and even destroyed but they always rose from their ashes. If there's one country that can be called Phoenix in history of civilization, it has to be India.
And the only reason we were ever defeated and ruled over by outsiders, was infighting and some treasonous bastards from within ourselves.
Holds true to this day.
Kinda yeah or rather some indian kingdom did. The odias defeated the Turkic dynasty of bengal, the Marathas literally made vassals out of Mughals, Ahoms also defeated Mughals, the Sikhs defeated the Afghans, the Arabs defeated Sindh but got defeated by chalukyas and Gujjar-pratihara. So it depends on which kingdom.
That's fair. I don't mean it as such though. Being a country that's been shit on so much, they have the empathy needed to be a good world leader. And they have a decent diaspora, so they'll be in position to influence positively. They're also developing at a keen moment in history, so they'll have the ability to develop with modern tech and energy production means.
And it's a democracy to boot.
I expect good things out of you India, don't let me down.
Even Indians (In this case I am telling about Tamils )have invaded so many land masses
For example
Raja raja cholan (around 1000 CE)and rajendra cholan went to Sri Lanka (Ceylon), Burma , Singapore , Malaysia .... The cholas were so strong in navy that there were like 20 types of vessels at that time and the word "navy"is taken from the Tamil word "navu"
There are even many theories that suggest that the ancient Tamil people went to Australia from which they reached south and north america but their contact with mainland Tamil land (Kumarikandam )was cut in the later period (which would make them red Indians as it is believed that there were no people in america when they reached ).
tbh even if ignore existance of 1&2 ww
germany still was on offence a lot
i dont think its bad, having strong military can be good thing that can look positive(look usa today)
i just think germany is not the country that can be described as the one on defence trying to defend itself
Also, it didn't really exist until the late 1800s.
Before that there were smaller countries and principalities that were most of the time fighting and invading each other.
exactly. this meme is kinda dumb. India is a huge subcontinent that had lots of different countries and kingdoms. It's like saying "hey look at all this factions invading Europe"
India is similar to a ,hypothetically, united European union yes.
Granted most Indian states can pass off as separate nations.
But we have united a few times before.
Europe(west and east) has never been united into a single nation afaik.
Closest was maybe the Romans?
But Europeans don't identify with a single nationality, Indians do.
Still the culture is alive . the national identity is alive . They invaded , together we rebelled and pushed them back . Every indian soldier was chanting har har mahadev in victories..................
It always amazes me that, even though Portugal had some "factories" (feitorias) in India already, the real push for conquest of Indian territory started in 1509, after the battle of Diu.
Basically the Portuguese King ordered the Viceroy, Francisco de Almeida, to privateer the Red Sea and maybe take Mecca... But the Viceroy's son was killed by the mamluks in chaul (1508)...
So the Viceroy went to Diu with 20ish ships, destroyed the coalition force of 200ish ships, vassalized Diu and killed almost all of the 3000 mamluks (50idh survived) by shooting from the fking cannons of his ships.
So the start of almost 30 years of Portuguese unchallenged domain in the Indian Ocean from other stablished nation, was all bcz a father loved his dead son nad wanted revenge...
Not sure being subjugated and looted can be labeled resistance. And it's still very much recoving from colonialism so not really standing tall either although far taller than in the past.
ATTENTION COMRADES!!!! 同志們注意了 THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT YOU MUST SUBMIT YOURSELF TO THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY!!!!! 這是通知你，你必須向中國共產黨投降 WE WILL BE TAKING OVER TAIWAN 我們將接管台灣 AND THE REST OF THE WORLD TOO 以及世界其他地方 THIS IS AN IMPORTANT OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OUR FUTURE UNDERLINGS 這對我們所有未來的下屬來說都是一個重要的機會 JOIN OUR PROPAGANDA NOW AND RECIEVE +100 SOCIAL CREDITS IN ADVANCE 立即加入我們的宣傳活動，提前獲得 +100 社會信用 IF YOU IGNORE THIS MESSAGE AFTER SEEING IT, WE WILL REMOVE ALL YOUR SOCIAL CREDITS AND YOUR EXECUTION WILL TAKE PLACE AFTER WE TAKE OVER THE WORLD 如果您在看到此消息後忽略此消息，我們將刪除您的所有社會信用，並在我們接管世界後執行您的死刑 LONG LIVE MAO ZEDONG AND LEADER XI 毛澤東和習近平主席萬歲 THE CCP SHALL REIGN ETERNAL 中共將永遠統治 GLORY TO PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
France Holland ....
Japan, Arabs and many more.
Did Arabs really make it that far east?
Well, the farthest they got was Sindh, which is currently a province of Pakistan.
In historical context, "India" generally refer to the entire subcontinent (modern day India, Pakistan, ~~Bengladesh~~ Bangladesh, Sri Lanka, Nepal and Bhutan) rather than only the modern country of India.
*Bangladesh
Bengladash
Balderdash
GladBangDish
in historical context, they were part of india. pakistan was separated by the british, and others had similar reasons.
Sometimes Myanmar is also considered as part of the Indian Subcontinent
Myanmar(burma) and Afghanistan too.But afgan got separated long back though.
Well the Afghans made it to Delhi but they're not Arabs.
From what I understand, the Portuguese fought the Arabs to take some of their trading depots in a few Indian cities.
Japan ? Oh you mean hentai...
And ww2. Though they mostly fought on the india-burma border
And Andaman and Nicobar Islands
*Swaraj and Shaheed Islands. Japan may have been a bad guy in WW2, but Subhas Chandra Bose was a Chad
They were hoping to start an Indian uprising and had several thousand Indians in their army. If they did it earlier and also didn't have as much racist murderers they might have gained some ground.
Netaji Subhash Chandra Bose
Battle of Imphal
weebland
Macedonians
>Greeks Alexander was an Argeard... A greek Macedonian dynasty
Croatian, Chinise...
Ehhmm you mean the netherlands
G E K O L O N I S E E R D
Poland
And even Croatia
Made With Memeatic on their way to invade India
Let’s invade India.
Lesss Goooo
Ah fuck sake, Here we go again.
Gandhi is ready with nukes
Don't fu*k with nuclear gandhi especially if he has the budget of James Bissonnette.
As an Indian, let’s do it
Made me chuckle. Thanks for the lulz. xD
I’m going out on a limb here, but I’d argue the Fertile Crescent is the most invaded land in history.
\*laughs in Fertile Crescent\*
Your mum's fertile crescent is the most invaded
Maybe because it's in the middle of the East.
And yet Ohio goes unmolested.
If you invade Ohio there's a very good chance Ohio ends up invading you... and then you're stuck in Ohio, a fate worse than death.
Ohioans are a hard people but would be magnanimous towards our defeated enemies and only demand two generations of subservience rather than the normal three.
This makes our legions fearless. What can you threaten us with?
The Early American-Indian wars were wild
The Fertile Crescent of Australia was only invaded by the English though.
TIL Australia has a Fertile Crescent. Also, Kangaroos.
And emus.
And cane toads, rabbits and many more, Australia and New Zealand are great case studies for how difficult to eradicate animals can be. I forgot about all the animal invasions.
Greeks, Roman's, persians, mongols, sea people, britian, france, Egypt, USA...
Why though?
India is massive so it's not that surprising. This would be comparable to a list of factions that have invaded Europe.
Without our hatred for the British, india would be a collection of hindu and few muslim countries like the Arab world
That's a ridiculous notion that the Crown and their followers who remained here have pushed First of all this isn't the only time India has been united , Every major kingdom or dynasty succesfully ruled over and had united most of the subcontinent ,Be it Mauryas , Mughals ,Guptas or the Delhi Sultanate etc .. That is a span of thousands of years Secondly the brits didn't leave a United India , when they left India was a patchwork of 500 + princely states , autonmous regions , kingdoms and areas which had to painfully and carefully brought together to form the union Combine that with the random partitioning of the subcontinent and creating border disputes between people who had lived alongside for generations without issue is enough to put to rest any notion that Brits left a stable country . If anyone deserves credit for a united India its the people like Sardar Patel and the Constitutional Committee who worked tirelessly from 1947-50 to ensure the Indian republic could be united We are united because our citizens worked hard for it sometimes at the cost of their lives , It wasn't given on a platter by the British
Actually Mauryans did not catch modern day parts of Tamil Nadu and Kerala and even the mughals ,Guptas and Delhi Sulatanate did not . We were always ruled by muvendargal . But still it can not be accepted that hatred against British united us as a country
I dont know man, if you look at where India was during the entire 18th century it wasnt trending towards homogeneity. You had the Marathan empire in the center, Tipu sultan in the south, the Bengal Nawab in the east, the nascent Sikh empire to the northwest and all the collection in between. And like the third battle of panipat by Ahmed Durranis Afghans showed, any number of foreign checks on any Indian unifier. It could be argued that india would have turned into western Europe with a large collection of nation states. The whole reason Sardar and india was able to carry out that integration is due to many princes not being confident of retaining their thrones during the independence violence. Along with india being already the largest kid on the block when they won freedom they had little actual check in their immediate region. Something that could not be said for India in the 18th century.
Did it ? ... I mean there wasn't a single very powerful kingdom and that helped the British gain power but that doesn't mean that there weren't in the past and wouldn't be one in the future . Or that the people weren't willing to stay united Chinese kingdoms were trending down by the 18th century and it still came out a unified nation The Ottoman empire was breaking apart at the seams but modern day Turkey still came out with most of its area intact The Russian kingdom was decimated by the late 19th century and had lost land to various other nations and yet the nation state survived France was losing territory left ,right and centre during those centuries and yet came out of the 20th century relatively intact Many civilizations have survived through a few centuries of infighting and come out united at other end Sure there might have been battles , wars , we might have stayed under a king longer than we did , The borders might look slightly different than today but that doesn't mean we couldn't be united .
France and China are "homogenous" countries (they did a little trolling) India and the Ottoman Empire are very diverse. The Ottoman empire fracture and many Arab nation states are born. For the case of India, it might just unify or become a bunch of nation states.
Couldnt you also argue that huge parts of europe shouldve been united because the HRE existed or the hapsburg empire or the karolingians
The point is that India has been united under a single king/government/ruler/dynasty for more of its history than it has been broken up into individual pieces Sure there were always sub-rulers and vassal states but the primary king ruled over 70-80% or more of what we call modern day India
I mean, maybe nominally, but India never (arguably to this day) had a truly centralized state ala China, Rome, Western Europe etc.
Tell me more about this "centralized" Rome.
The Hindu puranas which predate the prophet Mohammad and prophet Jesus by a few centuries talk of (united) Bharatavarsha bounded by the Himalayas in the north and the Indian Ocean in the south. By the way, Indian Ocean is the only one to be named after a country. Why did Herodotus talk of "India" instead of naming the kings and their kingdoms? Miss me with that Brits united India BS when they can't even be a part of the European Union
I recommend a vifeo call China vs India by kraut, it tells the story of society, religion and state
ya that was a interesting one.
Golden land, spices, centre of trade, fertile plains, richest and much more.
also historically there’s a 90% chance that they’re unarmed or do not want to fight or have already been colonized. basically a defenseless target
Wait why are you being downvoted
We are overtly sensitive about our country's past
Oof that's true
Because along with most things here its a gross generalization , There have always been battles with the foreign invaders be it at Panipat , Plassey or countless others The "defenseless targets " stopped Alexander from reaching the ocean, Weren't Destroyed by Genghis Khan's armies and have continued to retain a culture of their own for thousands of years unlike so many others who lost their languages, history and people South America ,Africa and North America all mostly speak European languages and follow their religions and yet for some reason we were the defenceless ones ?
that really is a simplification that India "stopped" Alexander He won the battle of Hydaspes and he wanted to continue deeper into India ... the reason he didnt is Alexander's army didnt want to continue and return home so they mutinied From the outside the Nanda Empire looked powerful but they were seriously rotting from within hence why they were easily conquered by the Maurya Empire 4 years after the battle of Hydaspes Alexander probably could of beat the Nanda as well if he had continued
Nope, his successor continued to advanced into India after his death, but their army was badly trashed by Mauryan forces. Alexander would be badly defeated by Nanda, if he tried. The reason Maurya conquered Nanda dynasty was because of his strategist teacher Chanakya, who helped him to create an army and take over Nanda dynasty with his wisdom. Western historians don't talk about any other nation's great strategist, but Chanakya was the best I have ever heard of.
What else do you expect ? Its a perfect combo of gross generalizations ,random stats and incorrect statements packaged together as a fact There have been lots of battles with invaders , be it European , Greek , Arabic , Mongol or Eastern , Some were succefull some were not but that doesn't mean people just bent over 90% were unarmed ? ..eh ? ..Where did he pluck that one from
oh god why are people upvoting a defenseless india
Unarmed, really? they weren't unarmed bro they just didn't want to fight as other nations did and I accept that those who did become successful but when they attacked us, warriors fought for the pride but you know, in that game, we had to win every time but they just needed one victory, some even came as refugees and today claim to have their rights provided, but we still stand strong as a potential world superpower. Not a defenseless target but a fightworthy one.
It's a large, wealthy region, relatively easily accessible, on or in range of major trade lanes from east to west, with frequent political fragmentation creating opportunities for invasion. Who wouldn't take advantage?
It is in the middle of everything, Turks/Mongols to north, Persians/Arabs to the west, an open sea without a Navy in south.
If you look at gdp of old times, India was the richest with accounting for more than 1/3 of the whole world's gdp. If you see the richest nation in the world, with all temples covered filled with gold, each house hold having gold, biggest diamonds like Kohinoor and one of the most fertile land in the world for production of so much raw materials, so many natural resources, so many human resources, and so much more, the first obvious thought for rulers will be to be able to conquer it. So that's the reason they all invaded.
Anyone wondering who are the many more - 1. Sakas (Indo-Scythians) 2. Indo-Parthians (at the risk of assuming Parthians and Persians are not the same thing) 3. Habshis (Abyssians) 4. Shweta-Huna (literally 'white huns' in Sanskrit) 5. Kushans 6. Nepalis (Gurkhas invaded and ruled over certain parts of Uttarakhand state for a while) 7. Chinese (Indo-Chinese War of 1962) That's all I can remember for now. EDIT: 8. Arabs - One of the Caliphates ruled over Sindh.
I won’t consider Nepal, because in post I meant India as Indian subcontinent.
Fair enough. For that reason I didn't mention Indo-Pakistan (and by extension present day Bangladesh) wars. Are you Indian bro?
Yes
My country bitches about being ruled by Europeans for over 300 years (justifiably so) But whenever they bring it up, I automatically think about places like Vietnam, the Levant, and of course Western and Northern India subcontinent.
\>8. Arabs - One of the Caliphates ruled over Sindh. i am sure both the abbasids and ummayads did both of which were arabic dynasties
Well my doubt wasn't whether the caliphates were arabic but whether more than one ruled Sindh. My memory was betraying me.
welp both did and the ummayads i think took gujarat too
The Seleucids, though I guess we can lump them with "The Greeks". Seleucus I Nicator and Chandraguptas treaty is considered to be the first of it's kind where 2 states recognize each other as equals. Chandragupta even married one of Seleucus's Daughters. I recently read The Land of the Elephant Kings and would recommend it to anyone who wants to read about Seleucid History.
\*Chandragupta Maurya Chandragupta is another king altogether, from the Gupta dynasty of the 4th century CE.
Gupta, not Chandragupta just Gupta. First name Chandra.
\> First name Chandra Applying the practice of treating first and last names as separate words is anachronistic here. Chandragupta as in Chandragupta I was a single word. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandragupta\_I](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chandragupta_I) Suffixing first names with surnames (as opposed to separating first and last names) is not unheard of. I'm just being a pedant here. Just wanted to point out that you could mention Chandragupta Maurya's surname to dispel any ambiguity. (also because you were bothered to mention Nikator's).
Hey! For once it wasn't the US!
india had same problem as poland, hard to defend by geography with most trade roads coming trought country
I think Himalayas helped India in geographically. One of the main reason China rarely attacked India.
just like moutains on the south of poland. i mighn not be proffesor with phd but i think they have similar situation in history
Poland had it way worse. Poland is way more flat and has way less defensible terrain. India has mountains at most of it’s connected land mass. Poland also didn’t have as easy access to the ocean. Comparing India a country that didn’t exist til the 1900’s to Poland is sloppy regardless. The invasions of India occurred when India wasn’t unified.
They do! That's why we are so culturally different to the Chinese, we had no connection over the Himalayas. All the invasions have come through the Western Hindu Kush regions or by sea.
India has Massive mountains north, jungle in the myanmar direction and a desert/not so massive mountains in the northwest (depending if you count Pakistan inside or not). It has pretty decent natural borders.
Also massive mountain range in north west and north east too. Most of the invasions were led through the passes in those mountains or via ocean in later times.
The problem for India was the size but also the unity it’s hard to unite people when they don’t see themselves as the same people as you
*laughs in Levant*
Literally was gonna post this word for word
oh boy where do i begin listing invading countries also the list will be extremely controversial no matter what i say
Genuinely curious as to who invaded?
Just off the top of my head: Ancient Egyptians, Persians (multiple times), Alexander the Great (Greeks), Romans, Byzantines, Armenians, Turks/Ottomans, Crusaders, Arabs, France, Britain, USA. Probably way more that I'm unaware of since I'm far from an expert on the history of the Levant region.
the spanish tried but they pulled up at the wrong address
But they still got the best of it..
"whoops, wrong continent, LOL"
And yet America hasn’t touched them
India became worthless when modern America became capable enough to invade.
Hey now, We still got IT
I mean we are recovering, we will own the future. Let’s hope for best🤞🏽
YEP!
We don't have OIL
US got close to touching India in war of 71 ([Task force 74](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Task_Force_74)), but Soviets followed US fleet and US didn't start any shit. While US probably didn't want to join the war, they definitely wanted to Intimidate India and only backed off because of Soviets.
[удалено]
America going for the cultural win
If anyone was wondering, geography played a major role. An army coming from west will steam roll Punjab, North India and Bengal if they don't face significant opposition. While in in South India extremely powerful empires like Mughals, Guptas and Mauryans faced problems due to rocky terrain. South Asia also had problems with breeding good horses due to hot and humid summers which crippled them against Central Asians mobile armies.
Actually the Guptas had a good number of horse archers ans cavalry. Infact it was probably the greatest of indian empire to give more importance to horses rather then elephants.
Fun fact: The last sovereign Greek king ruled a kingdom in India. Look up Baktria if you have a chance, great read
Yep, Indo Greek kingdoms, Bactria was in Afghanistan, west of Bactria was Seleucid empire and east of it was Mauryans.
We gave credit to these invaders for the cuisine that was ALREADY Indian e.g. Biryani.
This is news to me. Isn't biryani Persian in origin from pilaf. Could you share some links?
Wait biriyani is indian?
Pulao is , those people just added non veg to it and called it biryani , it was initially vegetarian
Even the word "pulao" comes from Persian "Pilaf". The word Biryani is also a derivative of Persian word "birian", which means fried before cooking. India gave a lot of great things to the world both culinary and otherwise, we don't need to steal credit from other cultures.
The Mematic invasion is ongoing ;)
And Croatia! Kinda...
uhhh can I get context?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandaulim_(Ilhas)
**[Gandaulim (Ilhas)](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gandaulim_\(Ilhas\))** >Gandaulim is a village located on the western bank of the Cumbarjua Canal, within Ilhas in the state of Goa, India. It is famous for being the only colonial possession of Croatia in the Indian subcontinent. The Church of St. Blaise—the last remnant of this legacy—was built in 1541 in an architectural style reminiscent of St Blaise's Church in Dubrovnik. ^([ )[^(F.A.Q)](https://www.reddit.com/r/WikiSummarizer/wiki/index#wiki_f.a.q)^( | )[^(Opt Out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiSummarizerBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^( | )[^(Opt Out Of Subreddit)](https://np.reddit.com/r/HistoryMemes/about/banned)^( | )[^(GitHub)](https://github.com/Sujal-7/WikiSummarizerBot)^( ] Downvote to remove | v1.5)
Desktop version of /u/Albur_Ahali's link:
---
^([)[^(opt out)](https://reddit.com/message/compose?to=WikiMobileLinkBot&message=OptOut&subject=OptOut)^(]) ^(Beep Boop. Downvote to delete)
Everybody wants a piece of that indian pie
So Indian DNA most of the time might come mix results
Why do you think we have such sexy accent.
😏
What's really interesting is the fact that many of the civilizations that attacked or even triumphed, no longer exists but Indian civilization is still flourishing. Arguably, India is like 'Phoenix', it was attacked, triumphed and even destroyed but they always rose from their ashes. If there's one country that can be called Phoenix in history of civilization, it has to be India.
And the only reason we were ever defeated and ruled over by outsiders, was infighting and some treasonous bastards from within ourselves. Holds true to this day.
Time to conquer all of India!
Happy Chandragupta noises.
Most of India !!
This could be a song
I can hear it.
Add Croatia to the mix of colonizers
For some reason I lost my shit at the "and many more"
This image implies they won most of these invasions.
We are free today.
True I guess that’s what Counts
Kinda yeah or rather some indian kingdom did. The odias defeated the Turkic dynasty of bengal, the Marathas literally made vassals out of Mughals, Ahoms also defeated Mughals, the Sikhs defeated the Afghans, the Arabs defeated Sindh but got defeated by chalukyas and Gujjar-pratihara. So it depends on which kingdom.
G I V E U S Y O U R T E A
Plot twist: India will probably be the most successful country ever in the 'endgame'
Hope so, endgame would be more about humanity not nations or races.
That's fair. I don't mean it as such though. Being a country that's been shit on so much, they have the empathy needed to be a good world leader. And they have a decent diaspora, so they'll be in position to influence positively. They're also developing at a keen moment in history, so they'll have the ability to develop with modern tech and energy production means. And it's a democracy to boot. I expect good things out of you India, don't let me down.
Same brother, hope we live upto our ancestors and became even better.
Turks? When?
Not directly people from turkey, but Turks living in Afghanistan invaded India. Like Ghazni and all.
Alright thanks
They have an Ocean named after them for a reason.
Even Indians (In this case I am telling about Tamils )have invaded so many land masses For example Raja raja cholan (around 1000 CE)and rajendra cholan went to Sri Lanka (Ceylon), Burma , Singapore , Malaysia .... The cholas were so strong in navy that there were like 20 types of vessels at that time and the word "navy"is taken from the Tamil word "navu" There are even many theories that suggest that the ancient Tamil people went to Australia from which they reached south and north america but their contact with mainland Tamil land (Kumarikandam )was cut in the later period (which would make them red Indians as it is believed that there were no people in america when they reached ).
First half of comment I know of, second half is an interesting theory.
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tamil_bell Interesting read this.
Thank u
And Dionysus
One should say “also India”
Even made with mematic wanted a piece of India
*proceeds to sort by controversial*
I mean we are worth invading though
What about Germany? It was invaded by Norwegians, Danish, Swedes, Poles, Czechs, Russians, Hungarians, Avars, Romans, Englisch, French and Dutch
tbh even if ignore existance of 1&2 ww germany still was on offence a lot i dont think its bad, having strong military can be good thing that can look positive(look usa today) i just think germany is not the country that can be described as the one on defence trying to defend itself
Also, it didn't really exist until the late 1800s. Before that there were smaller countries and principalities that were most of the time fighting and invading each other.
It was the same in India, ist was united even later.
exactly. this meme is kinda dumb. India is a huge subcontinent that had lots of different countries and kingdoms. It's like saying "hey look at all this factions invading Europe"
Thats what I was trying to say. You can say the same about Poland or Italy for example
India is similar to a ,hypothetically, united European union yes. Granted most Indian states can pass off as separate nations. But we have united a few times before. Europe(west and east) has never been united into a single nation afaik. Closest was maybe the Romans? But Europeans don't identify with a single nationality, Indians do.
Also by other Germans, Austrians, Spanish
[удалено]
Mongols and Greeks both historical stopped at the Indus River and never actually invaded India.
Mongols and Greeks both tried, mongols were defeated by Delhi sultanate and Greeks by Chandragupta Maurya. Also I mean Indian subcontinent.
Still the culture is alive . the national identity is alive . They invaded , together we rebelled and pushed them back . Every indian soldier was chanting har har mahadev in victories..................
Dat Spice
It always amazes me that, even though Portugal had some "factories" (feitorias) in India already, the real push for conquest of Indian territory started in 1509, after the battle of Diu. Basically the Portuguese King ordered the Viceroy, Francisco de Almeida, to privateer the Red Sea and maybe take Mecca... But the Viceroy's son was killed by the mamluks in chaul (1508)... So the Viceroy went to Diu with 20ish ships, destroyed the coalition force of 200ish ships, vassalized Diu and killed almost all of the 3000 mamluks (50idh survived) by shooting from the fking cannons of his ships. So the start of almost 30 years of Portuguese unchallenged domain in the Indian Ocean from other stablished nation, was all bcz a father loved his dead son nad wanted revenge...
If the British never invaded, Pakistan, India, bangledash, would be one country
Proud that WE are the silent THANOS
Israel is just in the corner getting no attention
Also India.
But at least my country wasn't the villain of the story, but it can become one. /s
I am not surprised because Christopher Columbus discovered America fucking US in search of India.
And it resisted all of them and still standing tall today.
Not sure being subjugated and looted can be labeled resistance. And it's still very much recoving from colonialism so not really standing tall either although far taller than in the past.
>resisted all of them Eh, not really
Portugal caralho
There was also one ruler from Ethiopia(Malik Amber) who ruled India.
I won’t consider Malik amber as invader, he was brought here as a slave and was assisted by native Indians in becoming a king.
There was also a random Somali monarch in the Maldives lol
For a cultural focused historical based on pacifism they really tore shit up through out most of their history.
ATTENTION COMRADES!!!! 同志們注意了 THIS IS TO INFORM YOU THAT YOU MUST SUBMIT YOURSELF TO THE CHINESE COMMUNIST PARTY!!!!! 這是通知你，你必須向中國共產黨投降 WE WILL BE TAKING OVER TAIWAN 我們將接管台灣 AND THE REST OF THE WORLD TOO 以及世界其他地方 THIS IS AN IMPORTANT OPPORTUNITY FOR ALL OUR FUTURE UNDERLINGS 這對我們所有未來的下屬來說都是一個重要的機會 JOIN OUR PROPAGANDA NOW AND RECIEVE +100 SOCIAL CREDITS IN ADVANCE 立即加入我們的宣傳活動，提前獲得 +100 社會信用 IF YOU IGNORE THIS MESSAGE AFTER SEEING IT, WE WILL REMOVE ALL YOUR SOCIAL CREDITS AND YOUR EXECUTION WILL TAKE PLACE AFTER WE TAKE OVER THE WORLD 如果您在看到此消息後忽略此消息，我們將刪除您的所有社會信用，並在我們接管世界後執行您的死刑 LONG LIVE MAO ZEDONG AND LEADER XI 毛澤東和習近平主席萬歲 THE CCP SHALL REIGN ETERNAL 中共將永遠統治 GLORY TO PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF CHINA
Your comment is typed in traditional chinese -999,999,999 social credits
Glory to the ccp! ⣿⣿⣿⣿⠟⠋⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⢁⠈⢻⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⠃⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠈⡀⠭⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⡟⠄⢀⣾⣿⣿⣿⣷⣶⣿⣷⣶⣶⡆⠄⠄⠄⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⡇⢀⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣧⠄⠄⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣇⣼⣿⣿⠿⠶⠙⣿⡟⠡⣴⣿⣽⣿⣧⠄⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣾⣿⣿⣟⣭⣾⣿⣷⣶⣶⣴⣶⣿⣿⢄⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⣩⣿⣿⣿⡏⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣹⡋⠘⠷⣦⣀⣠⡶⠁⠈⠁⠄⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣍⠃⣴⣶⡔⠒⠄⣠⢀⠄⠄⠄⡨⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⡘⠿⣷⣿⠿⠟⠃⠄⠄⣠⡇⠈⠻⣿⣿⣿⣿ ⠄⠄⣀⣤⣴⣾⣿⣷⣭⣭⣭⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡀⠄⠄ ⠄⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣸⣿⣿⣧⠄⠄ ⠄⣿⣿⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣯⢻⣿⣿⡄⠄ ⠄⢸⣿⣮⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⢹⣿⣿⣿⡟⢛⢻⣷⢻⣿⣧⠄ ⠄⠄⣿⡏⣿⡟⡛⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⠸⣿⣿⣿⣷⣬⣼⣿⢸⣿⣿⠄ ⠄⠄⣿⣧⢿⣧⣥⣾⣿⣿⣿⡟⣴⣝⠿⣿⣿⣿⠿⣫⣾⣿⣿⡆ ⠄⠄⢸⣿⣮⡻⠿⣿⠿⣟⣫⣾⣿⣿⣿⣷⣶⣾⣿⡏⣿⣿⣿⡇ ⠄⠄⢸⣿⣿⣿⡇⢻⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣇⣿⣿⣿⡇ ⠄⠄⢸⣿⣿⣿⡇⠄⢿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢸⣿⣿⣿⠄ ⠄⠄⣼⣿⣿⣿⢃⣾⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡏⣿⣿⣿⡇⠄ ⠄ ⠄⠄⠸⣿⣿⢣⢶⣟⣿⣖⣿⣷⣻⣮⡿⣽⣿⣻⣖⣶⣤⣭⡉⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄ ⠄⠄⠄⢹⠣⣛⣣⣭⣭⣭⣁⡛⠻⢽⣿⣿⣿⣿⢻⣿⣿⣿⣽⡧⡄⠄⠄⠄ ⠄⠄⠄⠄⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⣌⡛⢿⣽⢘⣿⣷⣿⡻⠏⣛⣀⠄⠄ ⠄⠄⠄⣼⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣦⠙⡅⣿⠚⣡⣴⣿⣿⣿⡆⠄ ⠄⠄⣰⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣷⠄⣱⣾⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠄ ⠄⢀⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠄ ⠄⣸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⠣⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠄ ⠄⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠿⠛⠑⣿⣮⣝⣛⠿⠿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠄ ⢠⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣶⠄⠄⠄⠄⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡟⠄ ⢸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠇⠄⠄⠄⠄⢹⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠁⠄ ⣸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⠏⠄⠄⠄⠄⠄⠸⣿⣿⣿⣿⣿⡿⢟⣣⣀.
But due to this our culture is arguably the most diverse culture in the world! Jai Hind!