That’s a fascinating “what if” scenario that delves into alternative history!

The premise suggests that if Hindu kings had adopted the political, military, and administrative strategies of the Mughal Empire, the course of Indian history would have been significantly different.

Here are some key areas where such a change could have led to a radically altered historical outcome:

👑 Centralized Power and Administration

The Mughals, particularly under Akbar, established a highly centralized administrative structure (the Mansabdari system) and a uniform tax system.

• What if Hindu Kings adopted this? Instead of the often-fragmented regional kingdoms, a larger, more unified Hindu empire could have emerged. This would have meant:

• Less Internal Conflict: Fewer wars between Hindu states (Marathas vs. Rajputs, etc.).

• A Stronger Tax Base: A more consistent flow of revenue, allowing for a larger, professional standing army instead of relying heavily on feudal levies.

• Early Modern Bureaucracy: A sophisticated administrative machine to govern a subcontinent-sized territory.

⚔️ Military Technology and Strategy

The Mughals were masters of gunpowder artillery and cavalry tactics.

• What if Hindu Kings adopted this?

• Consolidated North India: A unified, gunpowder-equipped Hindu power could have potentially prevented or quickly repelled earlier Turkic or Afghan invasions, leading to a much earlier “golden age” of indigenous rule.

• Naval Power: If this drive for professionalism extended to the coasts (an area the Mughals often neglected), a strong indigenous naval force could have challenged European incursions (Portuguese, English) much earlier.

🤝 Religious and Cultural Policy

Mughal emperors like Akbar famously instituted policies of religious tolerance (like the abolition of the jizya tax and marrying Rajput princesses) that helped secure the loyalty of non-Muslim subjects.

• What if Hindu Kings adopted this?

• Inclusion: A unified Hindu empire would have had to govern large populations of Muslims, Jains, Buddhists, and Sikhs. Adopting a secular or highly pluralistic code (similar to Akbar’s Din-i Ilahi approach to statecraft) would have been key to stability, preventing the sectarian conflicts that later plagued the Mughal state under Aurangzeb.

• Cultural Synthesis: The “Mughal style” was a fusion of Persian, Turkic, and Indian elements. A powerful Hindu empire adopting this style would have likely created an even richer synthesis, perhaps incorporating more Central Asian and indigenous Deccani artistic and architectural forms.

💰 Economic and Infrastructure Development

The stability of the Mughal Empire facilitated extensive trade routes and the establishment of massive cities (Delhi, Agra, Lahore).

• What if Hindu Kings adopted this?

• Unified Economic Zone: The creation of a single, massive free-trade zone under one political entity would have accelerated economic development and urbanization throughout the subcontinent, perhaps leading to an earlier industrial revolution.

• Architectural Legacy: Instead of Red Forts and Taj Mahals, the landscape would be dominated by colossal temple-fort complexes, palaces, and public works built in a uniquely pan-Indian, centralized style.

In summary, a history where Hindu kings were “like the Mughals” would likely be one of early, massive, and stable unification under an indigenous power, potentially making the European colonization of India far more difficult, if not impossible.

If Hindu kings ruled till now and never been defeated by Mughal and British would India would be the richest country now

That is one of the most compelling “what if” questions in world history!

It is highly plausible that a continuously ruled and unified India, never subject to Mughal or British colonial rule, could have become the world’s richest country, or at least one of the top two.

This is primarily because pre-colonial India was already an immense economic powerhouse.

💎 The Argument for Wealth

1. Pre-Existing Global Economic Dominance

• World’s Largest Economy: For most of the period between the 1st and 17th centuries CE (long before the British and even during the Mughal era), India’s economy was estimated to be the largest or second largest in the world.

• Share of Global GDP: At the start of the 17th century, the Indian subcontinent (including the area under Mughal rule) accounted for an estimated 24-25% of the world’s Gross Domestic Product (GDP)—a staggering share, surpassing even China and Europe at the time.

• “Sink” for Precious Metals: India had a massive favorable balance of trade for centuries. It exported far more than it imported, largely in finished goods (especially textiles). Europeans, to buy these goods, had to pay in gold and silver bullion, meaning India was the “sink” where the world’s precious metals accumulated.

2. Avoiding Colonial Economic Drain

The single biggest factor supporting this “richest country” hypothesis is the avoidance of colonial wealth extraction.

The British Drain: Historians estimate that the British colonial rule led to a massive and sustained “drain of wealth” from India to Britain, which is conservatively valued in the tens of trillions of dollars in modern terms. This drain effectively de-industrialized India, converting it from an exporter of finished goods (fine textiles, steel) into an exporter of raw materials (raw cotton, indigo, opium).

Continuous Industrialization: Without this drain and de-industrialization, a powerful, unified, Hindu-ruled state could have had the capital to transition directly from its advanced proto-industrial economy (textiles, shipbuilding, metalworking) into the Industrial Revolution much earlier.  This continuity would have maintained India’s massive share of global manufacturing

3. Unified and Stable Indigenous Power

Assuming the Hindu kings successfully unified the subcontinent (perhaps under a powerful post-Vijayanagara, Rajput, or Maratha empire) and modernized their administration, they would have provided:

• Political Stability: A unified empire (like the stable phases of the ancient Mauryas or the later Mughals) is essential for large-scale economic activity, trade, and infrastructure investment.

• Infrastructure & Currency: Policies like the Mughals’ standardized currency (the silver rupiya) and extensive road networks (which the search results credit to the Mughals) could have been adopted and expanded by an indigenous power, facilitating trade and commerce across the vast subcontinent.

⚠️ The Crucial Caveat: The Industrial Revolution

The path to becoming the modern world’s richest country depended on whether this hypothetical state could successfully manage the transition into the Industrial Age (18th-19th centuries).

India’s traditional wealth was based on a combination of highly productive agriculture and advanced handicraft manufacturing. To retain its economic dominance, the indigenous rulers would have needed to:

1. Adopt Technology: Invest heavily in steam power, machinery, and mass production (like Britain did) to stay competitive with the industrializing West.

2. Maintain Trade: Secure their coastal and maritime trade routes (which the Mughals largely neglected) to prevent European naval powers from throttling their commerce.

If an ambitious indigenous dynasty implemented a unifying, centralized, trade-focused, and technologically-innovative government (a kind of Indian Meiji Restoration), then yes, India’s inherent economic potential—its massive population, fertile land, and established trade networks—would likely have made it the dominant global economy.

This video explores the reasons why India was considered the richest country for a long period of history. Why India Was The Richest Country?

Please like subscribe comment your precious comment on universe discoveries

Full article source google

https://www.amazon.in/b?_encoding=UTF8&tag=555101-21&link

https://www.buymeacoffee.com/Satyam55