ndia is FAR more geographically bound than China, with an ocean to the south, heavily forested mountains to the east, world's tallest mountains to the north, an arid mountain range to the west, through which South Asia is linked to the rest of the world.
india has access into the silk road. it's oceans to the south exposed it to greek and arab traders since before recorded history. china is landlocked except to the east. india has a whole peninsula exposed to the ocean. also, within india, the land is more broken by rivers and mountains. isolating people within india from each other, whereas within china, people can travel with relative ease.
Also sea invasions became popular in the late 1800's, when all the European countries were competing for large navies.
[–]bananagee123 151 points 20 hours ago
The northern and southern parts of India are actually separated by shorter mountain ranges that gave ancient armies a difficult time. That’s part of the reason why south India almost always had its own kingdoms
[–]Netturaan 84 points 20 hours ago
This is an interesting point .I remember a professor once telling us that these historical effects can be seen in the way festivals are celebrated in South and north .Southern festivals are usually "in-house" events and do not have too much of community celebrating together , out in the open etc. , Whereas the North Indian festivals are more community based and obvious (such as navratri dance , or Holi etc.) . Apparently this is due to the fact that since norther parts were historically invaded from time to time and were always under threat , festivities were a show of strength of the communities .
[–]LD_in_MT 28 points 19 hours ago
I'll add that China has two large navigable rivers and multiple smaller ones that help unify parts of the interior with the coastal regions.
India certainly has navigable rivers, but nothing that connects the north and the south, say the way the Mississippi river system does in the US.
[–]MFillon 13 points 18 hours ago
Sorry, when I say Chinese identity, I mean it in a loose sense: i.e. that a person living in China at a given time identified himself as a subject of the ruling dynasty rather than of a tribe or a village (and I do understand that not everyone did). From a language standpoint, if I remember correctly, modern Chinese characters were formed post-Shang, and many elements of the culture like architecture and philosophy that would last for centuries to the modern day were set in place by the time of the Han. I would say a Chinese identity (again, in the broadest sense) was strongly in place by the golden age of the Tang.
I'm no professional historian, but I am an avid reader of Chinese history (and have lived in China previously). It's such an amazing subject, Chinese history. But please, take my posts as my own opinion and analysis, not fact.
[–]DaBIGmeow888 4 points 18 hours ago
Southern China was fully sinicized during the Song/Tang dynasties due to massive migration from Northern China.
There were rivalries between Yue and Hakka in some regions, that's all I know of.
[–]sf_davie 17 points 18 hours ago
Before the Mongols, there were significant periods of time where the place we call China today was split into many states. China was only really a unified entity for about 4 dynasties and they are often followed by centuries of turmoil (See Spring-Autumn after the Chou, Warring States before the Qin, Three Kingdoms and North and Southern Dynasties in between of Han Tang, and not to mention the drawn out instability of the later Song) . The people in the central plains were under constant invasion threats. That's why they build walls and developed archery.
[–]Sikindar[🍰] 39 points 19 hours ago
I believe the heterogeneous view of India came forth due to a mixture of several factors.
For example, when one observes Northern India you see a sense of homogeneity and a similarity in the culture which can be attributed to the Ganges water system which is shared throughout the north. This led to trade and the spreading of culture throughout Northern Indi