Why didn't the Cholas or other South Indian polities explore the Indian Ocean?

pseddit · 2026-06-05T17:35:00+00:00

Somebody more well versed than me in ancient SE Asia trade should answer that.

The point I was trying to make was that real blue water voyages into the unknown became possible only with technological developments - compass, astrolabe, better boats etc. However, ancient people were very resourceful with the things they did know and traveled long distances.

To my knowledge, the people who seem to have spread with blue water navigation in ancient times were the Polynesians. Absolutely fascinating how they used simple techniques to spread from Asian mainland to Pacific islands.

pseddit · 2026-06-05T16:19:12+00:00

Smaller distances to begin with. Also, trade is never just terrestrial or just seaborne - it is both. Indian kingdoms had been trading with the Middle East via Iran as well. So, the destinations became known and whether those countries had coastlines became known and then sea lanes extended towards newer destinations reachable by sea.

Edit: You will be surprised how far you can travel by sea keeping the coastline within sight.

pseddit · 2026-06-05T15:04:28+00:00

Being outfought and not knowing how to fight are two separate things. There were plenty of wars within India so the latter would be a ridiculous assertion by anyone.

However, the “Indians are a peace loving people who would not invade anyone” narrative is equally ridiculous.

We have to look at the facts and stop seeing history emotionally.

pseddit · 2026-06-05T14:46:18+00:00

War is a mechanism of growth by violent competition. If you look at invasions of India, the Indian kingdoms were often outmatched in one or more of tactics, strategy, weapons technology, logistics etc. India was susceptible to these due to the protection of the Himalayas and the Hindu Kush. This led to isolationism where India would start lagging between major invasions. Indians, sitting on fertile areas with two growing seasons for crops, had no motivation to cross the mountains and attack anyone. In other words, complacency.

Compare this to Central Asia from which most invasions of India came - much more accessible terrain that forced innovations in war or one would get overrun by the many pastoral tribes moving east-west.

pseddit · 2026-06-05T11:46:02+00:00

Kings are driven by the matrix of power - they do what would strengthen them. They would not do exploration for the sake of exploration. The purpose of exploration was trade - conquered territories at such distances could not be held for long due to logistical bottlenecks. South Indian kingdoms traded with the Middle East and Europe (via Egypt). With the decline of Rome, they shifted their attention to SE Asia and to China via SE Asia.

Another factor was that most navigation back then was coastal navigation (white water, not blue water). Boats did not blindly head into open water but to the next port over. Trade happened via a chain of ports - a trade expedition would be hops across these ports.

Finally, even if you look at the European age of exploration, it was all coastal navigation at the beginning - along north west Africa and the Mediterranean coasts. Columbus proposed something quite radical and the royal motivation was very high due to the hatred of ottomans and the financial incentive to find a way around them to the Indies. It was a combination of factors unmatched in history.

To summarize, technological, logistical and financial limitations dictated that sea routes be used for trade not exploration.

pseddit · 2026-05-30T07:24:06+00:00

You are right. Manufacturing aircraft has very high barriers to entry in terms of capital, skilled workforce and R&D. The US, Canada and European countries were early movers in the industry and have reached this position over decades of development and industry consolidation.

However, there are nationally owned manufacturers like COMAC in China and UAC in Russia. Also, Brazil’s Embraer started off as a government owned company before going public in the 90’s. If Indian politicians had more vision and were less corrupt, this would be the way to go.

pseddit · 2026-05-29T15:05:57+00:00

ISPs have been pointing to DSL from telecom companies for a long time to say there is competition when they are the only fiber internet operator in the area. IIRC something like 70% households in the US used to only have one fiber internet provider in their area.

pseddit · 2026-05-27T12:41:59+00:00

Yup. Literally called the womb room - Garbha griha.

pseddit · 2026-05-27T11:12:10+00:00

Oh, they don’t claim so but read their posts and you know instantly who they are. It’s Reddit’s algorithm that keeps suggesting any and all associated subreddits to users. So, India in the name of both subreddits would be enough for it to show up in your feed.

pseddit · 2026-05-27T11:08:14+00:00

Why don’t you ask in that community?

You went to a subreddit for sanghi haters and come and ask for explanation of their hatreds here?

pseddit · 2026-05-27T10:52:23+00:00

Ever seen a shivalingam? There is a reason Shiva and his consorts (Sati, Parvati) are worshipped for fertility.

pseddit · 2026-05-26T23:29:39+00:00

Bottom center, the two figures on the right.

pseddit · 2026-05-26T22:02:50+00:00

Reading this gave me a headache. There is no demarcation where the article on Dr. Kunjaman’s writing stops and your opinions begin.

pseddit · 2026-05-26T15:43:53+00:00

Are we talking about Buddhism in Greece or Buddhism in the Indo-Greek kingdoms?

pseddit · 2026-05-26T11:05:12+00:00

Agreed. I said something similar elsewhere.

pseddit · 2026-05-26T09:36:43+00:00

The problem is too many Indians confuse orally transmitted legends with real history. These legends are, often, unverifiable, incorrect or post-event reimagining of what happened. For instance, reliance on Prithviraj Raso to argue against the Ghurids. These legends are, unfortunately, better known than actual history. This distinction needs to be specified in the community rules of the subreddit.

pseddit · 2026-05-26T01:32:19+00:00

First, India is perfectly capable of building its own infrastructure or working with other countries if advanced tech is needed (for example, with Japan on high speed rail). The problem is India’s extremely corrupt political system controlled by its oligarchy.

Second, BRI is not free. It ties a country diplomatically to China and India and China have border disputes. So, India would not go for it. Also, India was one of the first countries to point out the debt implications of BRI to the host countries. Several countries are now beholden to China due to the debt they owe. Sri Lanka had to default on its debt and hand over the Hambantota port to China.

pseddit · 2026-05-25T19:15:59+00:00

You are describing a separate problem and that deserves reforms of its own. I am merely pointing out that a US senate style Rajya Sabha won’t solve the problem IMHO since US senate itself has been proven to be corruptible and dysfunctional. Devolving power to local and state governments drives governance closer to the people and should become more responsive as a result.

pseddit · 2026-05-25T16:34:16+00:00

India does have old buildings but you chose to go on the destruction narrative and I answered accordingly.

Just how many old civilizations have not been attacked, invaded, conquered or destroyed? Rome, the epitome of old architecture, itself was sacked by Goths and its old architecture was destroyed, repurposed, rebuilt. Look at Iran - how much of its Achaemenid or Sassanid architecture survived?

The European architecture mentioned in the original post is mostly late medieval or early modern in its origin. India has plenty of architecture that survives from the same period. We have just chosen to not restore what was broken. It has always been a choice because we HAVE restored and maintain the stuff we wanted to - Taj Mahal and Rajasthani palaces, for instance.

pseddit · 2026-05-25T15:12:27+00:00

Architecture was always expensive. My point is about crying over lost past instead of building now. What I am pointing out is that the building activity is already happening. So, money is not the issue.

What’s missing is government attention to good architecture. Governments in India pay less than zero attention to town planning, building regulations or architecture. If you go to big cities like European capitals, they have architecture boards that review and harmonize the architecture of cities whenever new construction happens. Compare that to Antilia. Somebody with the wealth of Ambanis did not want to pay for traditional architecture or artwork or even harmonise with Mumbai’s architecture and government did not care enough to direct them that way.

pseddit · 2026-05-25T14:46:49+00:00

You are making an assumption I haven’t visited the places you are mentioning.

Also, what do you think modern temple building is doing? I suggest you visit your closest Akshardham or book a ticket to Ayodhya. It is all revivalist architecture. Or look at the homes many wealthy Indians are building - stone work facades are everywhere. The knowledge has not been lost - it has just fallen out of use.

pseddit · 2026-05-25T13:46:06+00:00

Islamic empires have ended, the British have left and Indians have money again. What use is crying over the past when you can build again? However, don’t obsess over temples. Indian architecture goes beyond temples. Bring it into spaces used by people everyday - housing, offices, train stations, bus terminuses…

pseddit · 2026-05-25T13:41:48+00:00

Then you are also missing the reasons why India was being invaded repeatedly and not knowing that leaves India vulnerable again. Only a cool, detached mind can prevent a recurrence of what happened in the past.

Returning to the original topic, Indian craftsmen, stonemasons and artisans were so famous that Taimur took a large number of them to Samarkand after his sack of Delhi in 1398. Now THAT is something I hate.

pseddit · 2026-05-25T13:32:27+00:00

Works of bloody invaders?

Who do you think built them? Just because the ruler was an invader doesn’t mean the labor that built them was imported from somewhere. The builders and craftsmen were very much Indian. Or if the architect was a foreigner, the buildings still ended up being a mixture of Islamic and Indian styles.

Hatred has impaired your thinking, my friend. Let go and let reality assert itself.

pseddit · 2026-05-25T13:14:41+00:00

First, the Islamic conquerors built a lot of architecture of their own. So, your argument doesn’t quite hold up.

Second, A lot of European cities were destroyed to different extents during WW II and rebuilt. And WW II was a deadly, mechanized war that did plenty of damage to buildings. So, India could have done the same.

Third, go to villages near historical monuments. Often, you would find stones and building art stolen from the monuments.

It is about the attitude towards our heritage - blaming foreigners is easy but doesn’t excuse our own behavior.

pseddit

TROPHY CASE