In the period from 1600 until independence in 1947, why didn't the Indians rally together to push out the British and other European colonial powers from the subcontinent?

从1600年到1947年独立，为什么印度人始终没有团结起来把英国和其他欧洲殖民势力赶出次大陆？

以下是Quora网友的评论：

Dr. Balaji Viswanathan

Even to this day caste structures, local landlords, religious rituals and social systems have a far bigger impact on people’s life than political systems. This is why India has always been considered as one nation both by outsiders and insiders, regardless of its varied empires and kingdoms.

直到今天，种姓结构、地方地主、宗教仪式和社会制度对人们生活的影响都要远远大于政 治制度。这就是为什么印度一直被外人和内部人士视为一个国家，但事实上印度有着太多不同的帝国和王国的原因。

Because, the political structures mattered little - at least people didn’t notice as many changes. Whether the country was ruled from Delhi or London was not cared as much about the common populace until the Congress movement built a national conscience.

因为，政治结构无足轻重—至少印度人不会发现太多不同之处。在国大党运动终于塑造起民族意识之前，普通民众并不关心这个国家是由德里统治还是伦敦统治。

The different rulers over the centuries often skated on the surface and had very little success penetrating deep into Indian structures. Indians rallied only when their systems were impacted. After the initial failures, the British were very careful to not upset the applecart. They stayed mostly off religious imposition, restored long forgotten Manudharma for legal use and strengthened rather than weakening the caste systems. It was in British rule that the caste system and untouchability was at its strongest.

几个世纪以来，不同的统治者如同走马观花，几乎从未深入到印度内部。印度人只有在他们的系统受到影响时才会团结起来。一开始遭遇滑铁卢后，英国人开始非常小心，不打破这一局面。他们在很大程度上没有干涉宗教，加强了种姓制度。在英国的统治下，种姓制度和贱民制度的势力达到了顶峰。

Some Indian leaders, especially in Bengal, welcomed the British rule as the colonial masters were often more mindful of Indian structures than even some insiders.

However, India was getting to a long term damage that people didn’t notice immediately. Its economy was hollowed out, its traditional cities decayed, its farming was screwed and the trade was completely decked in favour of Britain. It required a lot of effort to help people think through that for the long term.

一些印度领导人，尤其是孟加拉的领导人，对英国的统治表示欢迎，因为殖民统治者往往比有些本土统治者更关心印度的社会结构。

但印度开始遭受人们没有意识到的长期损害。印度经济被掏空了，传统城市开始衰败，农业生产被搞垮，贸易完全向英国倾斜。我们需要付出很多努力来帮助人们从长远的角度正视这个问题。

One reason Gandhi was so successful in building a national conscience was that he cared less about political systems and focused more on social and religious systems. If India has to be changed that is the only way.

甘地在建立民族意识方面大获成功的原因之一是，他不太关心政治制度，更关注社会和宗教制度。如果印度必须改变，这就是唯一的办法。

Soumitra Dabholkar

In the 1600s Indians had absolutely no incentive to push out colonial powers like the British whose strength was negligible vis-à-vis the Indian powers back then.

They were what they claimed to be - traders of various goods who brought along with them not only items of luxury but armaments and ammunition, weapons and technology and most importantly news about the rest of the world.

在17世纪，印度人绝对没有动力驱逐英国这样的殖民大国，因为英国的实力是当时的印度完全无法比拟的。

他们就是自己所宣称的那样—他们是各类商品的贸易商，他们带来的不仅是奢侈品，还有武器和弹药，武器和技术，最重要的是关于世界其他地方的消息。

From the 1600s till 1750s, Indian rulers had healthy trade relations with all these colonial powers. They were necessary for the Indian economy because Europeans were not only sellers as we might today imagine - but they were also major buyers of Indian goods and India was a huge exporter.

The only colonial power that the Indians hated was that of the Portuguese and they fought multiple times against it. The Portuguese with their wanton religious bigotry invited hostility from Indians.

从17世纪到18世纪50年代，印度统治者与这些殖民大国都有健康的贸易关系。他们对印度经济而言是必要的伙伴，因为欧洲人不单是卖家，也是印度商品的主要买家，印度是一个大型出口国。

印度人唯一讨厌的殖民势力是葡萄牙人，印度人多次与葡萄牙人作战。葡萄牙人恣意的宗教偏执招致了印度人的敌意。

Chhatrapati Shivaji invaded Portuguese Goa in later part of his reign to put an end to their religious bigotry. His son Sambhaji followed his father's suit. Finally in 1739, the Portuguese power was permanently crippled by the Marathas after the battle of Vasai. Even earlier, the Portuguese had conflicts with the Vijayanagar rulers.

There's one more aspect to this which shouldn't be forgotten - these colonial powers were active observers of contemporary politics and played their cards well to ensure their own survival and harm their enemies. For example when Chhatrapati Sambhaji invaded Goa, the Portuguese allied with Sambhaji's enemies, the Mughals.

贾特拉帕蒂·希瓦吉在其统治后期入侵葡萄牙殖民地果阿，终结了他们的宗教偏执。他的儿子桑巴吉继承了父亲的衣钵。最后在1739年的瓦萨伊战役中，葡萄牙人的势力被马拉地人永久地摧毁了。早些时候，葡萄牙人就和维查耶纳加尔的统治者爆发过冲突。

还有一点不应该被遗忘—这些殖民大国是当代政治的积极观察者，他们通过精明的手段保全自己，并痛击敌人。例如，当贾特拉帕蒂·桑巴吉入侵果阿时，葡萄牙人就和桑巴吉的敌人莫卧儿结盟了。

Now let's turn to the 18th century. I shall limit myself to the British so as to not go too haywire.

Even till the Battle of Plassey (1757), the Indian rulers didn't consider the British to be a threat. In fact they found in them useful allies who could help them with their armies in domestic settlements.

现在我们说回18世纪，只谈英国人避免混乱。

在普拉西战役(1757年)之前，印度统治者从不把英国视为威胁。事实上，他们认为英国人是有用的盟友，可以在殖民地内用军队帮助印度。

Before we start judging Indian rulers, it's important to remember that the relative power of Indian rulers was so much more than that of the British, that the British could easily be kept in check. Moreover you don't expect anyone to predict history and its outcome especially given how the advent of British rule in India was all an accident. We know today that the British were a threat - at that time any Indian ruler would have laughed at such a proposition.

在我们开始评判印度统治者之前，我们要记住，印度统治者的权力远远超过英国统治者，英国人很容易被控制住。此外，你不要指望任何人能预测未来，英国在印度的统治本就是个意外。我们今天知道，英国人是一个威胁—但在当时那个时候，印度统治者只会嘲笑这种说法。

The British consolidated their hold on Bengal and Awadh after the Battle of Buxar in 1764, and we see that by 1771 the wiser men in India had noticed the nefarious designs of the British to conquer whole of India.

In 1771, the Marathas placed Shah Alam on the Mughal throne

1764年伯克萨尔战役爆发后，英国人进一步加强了了对孟加拉和阿瓦德的控制，1771年时已有印度智者注意到英国人征服整个印度的邪恶计划。

1771年，马拉地人将沙阿拉姆推上莫卧儿王朝的宝座

till 1803 the English couldn't control the politics at Delhi or North India.

Verily, unlike what is often imagined, Indian rulers were not oblivious to the British threat - British power grew steadily and slowly, and Indians had enough time to think and act.

So atleast on one occasion, a pan Indian alliance was indeed formed to kick out the British.

With the outbreak of the First Anglo Maratha War, the Maratha regent Nana Phadnavis saw wisdom in uniting all independent rulers of India against the British.

直到1803年，英国人都无法控制德里或北印度的政治。

事实上，和人们的想象有所不同，印度统治者并没有忘记英国的威胁—英国的力量稳步缓慢地增长，印度人有足够的时间进行思考和行动。

终于，泛印度联盟成立了，目标就是驱逐英国人。

随着第一次英马拉战争的爆发，马拉地摄政王娜娜·帕德纳维斯看到了联合印度所有独立统治者对抗英国的好处。

Consequently, around 1780, an alliance of Indian powers was formed - the Marathas [including the house of Nagpur], Hyder Ali of Mysore and the Nizam of Hyderabad to take on the British. All other rulers were very small and were either the vassals of the Marathas or the British. [Marathas even saw the Nizam and Hyder as their vassals - but these were bigger fish in the pond].

It was decided that Hyder Ali would attack the Madras Presidency, Nizam would attack the Northern Circars and the Marathas would launch attacks on both Bombay and Calcutta - the Raja of Nagpur was to advance into Bengal while the Poona Ministry would take care of Bombay.

于是1780年左右，印度各方势力组成了一个联盟—马拉塔人(包括那格浦尔家族)、迈索尔的海德尔·阿里和海得拉巴的尼扎姆联手对抗英国人。其他统治者的势力太弱，要么是马拉塔人的附庸，要么是英国人的附庸。

联盟决定让海德尔·阿里进攻马德拉斯的总统府，尼扎姆进攻北方的北四府，马拉塔人同时进攻孟买和加尔各答—那格浦尔的拉贾攻到了孟加拉，普那部对付孟买。

This allied war effort continued till 1782, when British diplomacy bought off and broke the allies.

The Treaty of Salbai which concluded the war in 1782 had an explicit clause that the Marathas would prevent their vassals [Nizam and Hyder] from harming British interests and that the British would likewise reign in their vassal, the Nawab of Awadh from harming the Marathas.

Even in 1804 when Yashwantrao Holkar fought the British, we see that the Jat ruler was allied with him.

So in the 18th century, it wasn't that Indian rulers did nothing - they indeed tried to kick out the British. However, politics is a dynamic and ever changing game - and British knew well how to play their own hand.

这场战争一直持续到1782年，当时英国通过外交手段买通了盟友，使盟约破裂。

1782年终结了战争的《萨尔巴伊条约》明确规定，马拉塔人应约束其属国(尼扎姆和海德)，不得损害英国的利益，英国人也应同样约束其属国—阿瓦德的纳瓦布，不得损害马拉塔人的利益。

1804年当亚什万特劳·霍尔卡和英国人作战时，贾特统治者也与他结盟。

所以在18世纪，印度统治者并非毫无作为—他们确实努力过。但政治是一场动态的、变幻的游戏—英国人很清楚如何施展手段。

Now let's come to the 19th and 20th century ie from 1818–1947.

Lots of information about this period is widely known and needs no further elaboration.

Be it the uprising in 1857 or our freedom struggle led by the Congress, INA or any other organisation - Indians did finally unite to drive out the Britishers.

Mahatma Gandhi turned our freedom struggle into a mass movement, while many revolutionary leaders before him like Tilak, Savarkar, Lala Lajpat Rai, Netaji Bose or prolific writers like Bankim Chandra Chattopadhyay created awakening among Indians.

Ultimately, we were tasted success in 1947 with our independence. Some colonial powers like the French and Portuguese were made to leave little later.

现在再来看看19世纪和20世纪，比如1818年至1947年。

这一时期的许多信息被大众所熟知，无需进一步阐述。

不管是1857年的起义，还是国大党、国联或其他组织领导的自由斗争，印度人最终团结起来赶走了英国人。

圣雄甘地把我们的自由斗争变成了一场群众运动，在他之前的许多革命领导人，如提拉克、萨瓦卡尔、拉拉·拉杰帕特·拉伊、内塔吉·博斯和班吉姆·钱德拉·查特吉等多产作家，也在印度人中间传播了觉醒的意识。

最终印度在1947年独立，尝到了成功的滋味。一些殖民大国，如法国和葡萄牙都在不久之后被迫离开印度。

Li Jianx 黎建熙

While there are many good answers from Native Indians on this, lets hear this from a NON Indian.

There was no such thing as India back in 1600. There were many SEPARATE princely States in a place what is now know as South Asia. There was NO such thing as what we now known as India. Too many different religions, languages, geographical divides and worse of all a particularly unique social division known as “caste” that divide people by the status through birth. The people of South Asia were vertically divided and then cut across horizontally into minute cubes.

虽然印度人给出了很多很好的答案，但也让我们听听一个非印度人的回答吧。

1600年的时候世界上压根都没有印度这个国家呢。在如今被称为南亚的地方，当时存在着许多独立的王公国家，但没有我们现在所说的印度。这片土地上有太多不同的宗教、语言、地理差异，更糟糕的是，还有一种被称为“种姓”的独特的社会划分制度，通过出身来划定人们的地位。南亚人的社会地位先被垂直划分，再水平切割成一个个族群。

This divisions means that “South Asians” cannot rally together. In fact many Princely States choose to work with the Westerners. They see these Westerners not as enemies but “friends”, by association with foreigners one gains more power and wealth.

In fact this divide is still very much here today in the Sub-Continent of India. From Raj India we have three major pieces (not to mentioned the minor pieces) - India, Pakistan, Bangladesh and don’t forget Burma which was once part of Raj India.

这种分裂意味着“南亚人”无法团结。事实上，当时许多君主国都选择和西方人合作。他们认为这些西方人不是敌人，而是“朋友”，他们和外国人交往可以获得更多的权力和财富。

事实上，这种分歧今天在印度次大陆仍然存在。印度有三个主要的组成部分—印度、巴基斯坦、孟加拉国，另外别忘了，缅甸也曾是印度的一部分。

Joaquín Soria Montealegre

Because there weren’t indians, they were subjects of a kingdom or a sultanate which obey the British empire and the British were quite fonded to massacring people and burning villages and promote a fear policy in which putting under custody was the nicest thing you could wish. The divide and conquer policy was as succesuful as that one.

因为当时并不存在印度人，他们当时只是某个王国或苏丹国的臣民，服从大英帝国，英国人喜欢屠杀，烧毁村庄，还推行一种可怕的政策，被羁押已经是最好的结局。分而治之的政策和这个政策一样大获成功。