This is also not completely true. India was broken up into several states, for the longest of time. It is, however, true that the Brits did their “divide and conquer” along the lines of ethnic and regional groups.
The Bengalis, for example, were vastly empowered when compared to other Indians, because they integrated the British Raj so well.
2 Likes
That’s because the British inherited an extremely fragmented India after centuries of Islamic rule which tried it’s very best to assimilate India into an Islamic nation by devouring almost every identity of it’s unified past.
Being one myself I would say guilty as charged but it was also Bengal from where the movement for freedom originated. Also even though our culture is different from the Tamils, Marathis, Rajputs I would never go as far as calling us a different civilization, different factions of the same civilization perhaps.
I personally have greater respect for the Tamils than I have for the people of Bengal but I would never call them a separate civilization either.
3 Likes
Why would you consider everyone indian that would be like having teutons to cover franks vikings italian spanish.During the medieval time there was no unified india nor did everyone speak north indian hindi.dravidian culture was the original indian culture that got pushed down by invaders so they should get represented as a civi.
2 Likes
unified past ? … remember the time when palas, rashtrakutas and gujara-pratihara fought for kannauj? also when cholas, kakatiyas, cheras, pandiyas fought for control in south? just because they were not recorded properly doesnt mean they werent there… Even now India is culturally, ethnically diverse
3 Likes
As far as I know the new added Burgundians represent the medieval Burgundians. Not those of Dark Age. So these medieval were Catholics like French, Brits, Germans etc…
And British in AoE2:DE represent more English culture than Norman or Anglo-Saxon. It is the fusion of both. Good infantry, cavalry, excellent archers and above average navy.
2 Likes
SotL made a very interesting video on that, check it out.
2 Likes
He does have a point that several Indian kingdoms did fight amongst themselves.
When the portuguese started making Feitorias in India, we chose hindu areas because the muslim areas did not want to trade with us.
Because of the Moor occupation, we also had a vendetta against Islam, and would often back anti-muslim groups with weapons and training, or even just straight up military action, against muslim kingdoms.
There being several states with some sort of internal attrition, is exactly what allowed us to establish ourselves, since weaker kingdoms were interested in having a Fortress build close to their cities, even if mostly built and garrisoned by foreigners.
We also did it in Japan, when they were in the middle of their civil war, but could not do it in China, since it was a highly centralized state, and they would not let us build bases of operations within their borders (only in Macau, which the Emperor gifted to us, after we removed the pirates that used the island as a base).
1 Like
not all true… in bengal portugal was able to take chittagong as sea port because bengal sultanate agreed to it… but then mughals came and took back the port… i dont think all muslims, just delhi sultanate as they were influenced by ottomans
The bengalis did not mind that we created a fort nearby, but in general, muslim kingdoms would not accept it, and without a Feitoria, the trade line was not secure, and there was no real safe harbour for ships that came from literally the other side of the world, were sailing in unknown waters, where almost everyone tried to attack us.
It was just the way of seafaring, back then.
1 Like
Wish we could have discussed this somewhere else because these are extremely contentious topics and will surely lead to a lot of toxicity.
1 Like
People have to be exposed to the Truth, some way or the other.
If they are allowed to be kept in Darkness, then dangerous ideas fester, and start to cause problems later on.
" and you will know the truth, and the truth will make you free!"
-John 8:32
2 Likes
I would like to see an Orthodox themed DLC. Serbs, Romanians, Armenians and Georgians.
And then a Slav theme, Poles, Bohemians and Croats.
1 Like
tamils had their golden age in 11th century. read about imperial cholas. its right in the medieval age.
1 Like
Im starting to understand why official China would not allow Tibetans or Jurchens even if I want to see them in the game. While these esp Tibetans seem to be much more different from Han Chinese compared to the factions in India.
2 Likes
Even though I would really love Tibetans.
This conversation is making me think that large Asian nations will just implode in the future, and fragment into tiny states.
1 Like
tibetans were never chinese. tamils, bengalis, marathis, rajputs are all indians. comparing an umbrella term indians with chinese is not logical.
1 Like
Trust me these guys are a minority, a loud minority albeit. If that was not the case we would’ve already disintegrated and a nationalist Prime Minister would not have been elected with overwhelming majority. Most Indians are just sick and tired of these morons as are everyone else in every other nation where people like these exist.
1 Like
Fair enough but I can see the political implications this might bring. Its just not worth it for them.
2 Likes
Democracies can be easily shattered by “loud minorities”. It is one of the worst features of Democracy as a whole.
A loud, small group can vociferate enough that they look like a large group with a national consensus.
2 Likes
It’s all a matter of choice. You could move to Venezuela, you left wing paradise if you so choose. No one will stop you, heck I’ll even book your ticket for you. Howbout?
1 Like