Probably not that different
Most Indian Muslims overall stayed in India. East Punjab and Jammu went from being like 30-40% Muslim to almost 0-1%, Delhi/West UP/West Bengal probably had huge declines as well, I think the 1941 census said Delhi was like 1/3 Muslim now its only like 10%
If I had to guess, maybe only like 15-20% max of Pakistanis (both Urdu-speaking Muhajirs + East Punjabi Muslims) can trace their origin to the Indian side, but that community is quite powerful and influential in Pakistan today despite the small population.
A lot of the educated/elite Muslims of North India went to Pakistan
The UP part is definitely true. Massive Muslim parts of india like Aligarh, Khurja, Bulendshahr, Delhi, Fatehpur, and Agra lost tons of Muslims. I mean the Pakistan movement came from AMU.
Half my family from Khurja ended up leaving for Islamabad, we ended up staying.
Was your family already pretty educated/well off when they lived in India?
I’m Indian Muslim and some people from my dads side (grandparents siblings/cousins) went to Karachi during the partition, his side of the family was “ancestrally” wealthier/educated than my moms side where almost everyone stayed in India
Yeah we all had plenty of mango farms and pre independence the patriarch of the family was a British appointed deputy.
If you've heard of the story of Sir Syed saving British civilians our patriarch was the deputy that assisted him. We were gifted a ton of land and money by the British. Land we still own today.
More Muslims, probably. And less Sikh and Hindu. Both of these due to the violent expulsions from both sides of the border not happening yet. Perhaps more tribal religions and less Christianity in the Northeast. Also less Buddhists due to the lack of Dalit Buddhism.
> less Buddhists due to the lack of Dalit Buddhism
Dalit Buddhism isn't a thing in the north and the northeast, it has always maintained a strong presence in those areas.
No. Dalit Buddhism started after Dr Ambedkar converted to Buddhism along with 500,000 of his followers in 1956, almost a decade after partition. It didn't exist during the partition.
No,Dalit Buddhism started after partition.Most Buddhists of North and North-East India are either Tibetan Buddhists,Newar Buddhists or Theravada Buddhists.
How did the northeastern half become and stay so Christian? I obviously know how Christianity was introduced, but I expected it still to be more in the minority.
It started when the British introduced it, and then as time went on, missionaries of all kinds, but especially Indian ones preached in that region a lot, expanding the Christian population in the Seven Sisters and Sikkim a lot.
There are a lot of Catholics too. If my knowledge is correct. In Meghalaya, Catholics and Protestants (mainly Baptists and Presbyterians) are the main sects and all 3 of them occupy 1/3rd. In Arunachal too Catholics are comparatively the largest sect among the Christians. While Catholics though small have a good presence in Manipur and Nagaland too. So in 2 of the states there is kind of a Catholic plurality among the Christians.
Again Im not sure of this info. I remember reading this somewhere
Having a hard time seeing splits, but looks like it's biggest Christian faith indeed in Arunachal, though I'm not sure how it ranks as a whole. Meghalaya it seems more or less 1/3
Massive conversions by Christian missionaries & in many cases the central government didn't do anything to stop them & even helped them indirectly by banning some others
There's also a lot of census rigging in those regions
Tfr stats & population growth don't match in many districts
In 2001 census the state of nagaland was overcounted so much that the state government rejected the state & in 2011 census it became the only state to actually lose people
Lots of churches bribe census officials to increase their population so they can get benefits from the governments for the population
It's actually Northeastern India. I know Eastern India is more appropriate but almost everywhere it is called Northeastern India. Instead the term Eastern India is reserved for the Eastern part of mainland India which ironically is West of the Northeastern states.
yeah every medium or major city in India has an area "where a lot of the local Muslims live"
And then sometimes within those Muslim areas, it will be split into an area where the lower-class Muslims live, where the middle-class Muslims live, where the upper-middle class Muslims live etc
Well the mughal empire spread Islam to the subcontinent so it makes sense that the whole of India has a Muslim presence. I think it's alot more interesting that Christianity has taken a hold of the eastern portions of the nation. Does anyone know why that happened?
Mughals didn't spread Islam to India. Earliest evidence of Islam in India was from Arab traders in Kerala in the early 7th-8th century as well as Rashidun invasions in Sindh/western Gujarat. The oldest mosque in India was built around 629CE in Kerala. Even before the Mughals, the spread of islam (through both conquests and trade) pre-dates Mughals for about 500-1000 years.
To put it into context, Portuguese arrival and rule in India happened earlier than the start of Mughal rule. By the time the first Mughal emperor Babur established the empire, Spain already controlled Mexico and the Carribbean.
As for Christianity in the Northeast, British and other christian missionaries spread that. The NE regions is mainly tribal and significantly different from the rest of India (and less populated too) so it was easier to convert.
There is a difference between the origin of something and then the mass spread of something.
Islam did first came to Kerala through Arab travellers, but the islamic invaders from the north, Mughals and many muslims rulers were actually responsible for mass conversion to Islam.
That's true, but my point was about the timeline. The islamic invasions and mass conversions were happening for 500 years (almost 900 years if you include the Rashuddin caliphate invasion/raids) prior to the founding of Mughal empire so my point is that it wasn't the mughals who spread islam in India.
>By the time the first Mughal emperor Babur established the empire, Spain already controlled Mexico and the Carribbean.
Knew about both of the evens but never thought about both being in the same timeline. What a massive difference in the research and technology.
Yeah I was surprised too. Portugal also colonized and controlled Goa before Babur even came to India.
What's surprising is that not only was it in the same timeline, the establishment of Spain rule in the New World and Mughal empire in India was only 5 years apart. (1521 vs 1526), almost the same time as between the start of covid 19 and now.
True about the mughal empire but the conquest of the majority of the subcontinent by a unifying Muslim power greatly helped to spread the religion.
Portuguese colonies like goa helped spread catholicism in that area on the western coast of the peninsula but it doesn't really account for the widespread acceptance of Christianity in the far non-coastal east. That's why I think it's interesting
> True about the mughal empire but the conquest of the majority of the subcontinent by a unifying Muslim power greatly helped to spread the religion.
Correct to an extent, but didn't some Delhi sultantes like Tughluq and Khilji rule over a large parts of the subcontinent too? They also did it a few hundred years prior to Mughals.
As for Northeast, it was because of missionaries + tribals + way lower population than rest of India.
the british didnt introduce christianity. indians had christianity considerably longer than it arrived in england. hell christianity was in india before muhammed receved a vision from god. When the portugese first came into india they expected the whole sub continet to have several large christian tribes.
i pity these xtian ndians. from all the versions of christiniaty they were brainwashed with the two cults that express mental illness and heathenry in full force
I do find it strange how India hasn’t abolished Puducherry, the Union territory surrounding Gujarat/Maharashtra and Goa. They’re like of an aberration that has existed for half a century that they forgot to get rid of. Also surprised to see Goa remain so Christian, although also had no idea Kerala was so diverse.
I think you are referring to Daman, Diu, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, because Puducherry is on the east coast. And the reason it is a UT is largely political since it joined the union alongside Goa in 61 but when Goa was made a state in 87. When they held the status referendum in 67 it was voted that Goa wouldn't merge with Maharashtra and Daman and Diu would not join Gujarat.
For puducherry(& the union territories near Gujarat/Maharashtra which were part of goa then) had a referendum if they should merge with the other states or not & it was rejected
The 2 union territories near Gujarat & Maharashtra were merged into 1 union territory in 2020
For Puducherry there were some suggestions by politicians in the nearby states & that caused some violence & protests from people in puducherry who didn't want that
>Also surprised to see Goa remain so Christian
The numbers are declining after colonalism was over the Christians lost a lot of the privileges they had & many started to migrate to Portugal/other western countries
For a long time I thought highest percentage of Christians in India would be in Goa, Malabar and maybe Pondicherry.
Then about 5-6 years ago I realised that the eastern regions between Moslem Bangladesh and Buddhist Burma and close to also non-Christian Laos and China have the highest proportion of Christians and I still do not understand how come.
I mean: OK, missionaries come. Why do you abandon your old traditions for the sake of someone who came from far away?
>I mean: OK, missionaries come. Why do you abandon your old traditions for the sake of someone who came from far away?
In Goa and some parts of south India the Portuguese led an inquisition to convert the native Hindus and muslims and people who followed the 'wrong' form of Christianity.
In the northeastern part of India, Christianity Has a very unique history among the tribes. Christianity was first introduced by Scottish and American missionaries who set up educational institutions in tribal areas. As the Colonial government encroached further into tribal areas, the tribes came into frequent contact with the agricultural civilisation of the plains which were either Hindu or partly Hinduised. The tribes had contact with the plains in pre colonial times too but that interaction was limited to raiding and trade. The State polities of the plains neither had the need nor the technology to encroach and conquer the dense forested hills inhabited by the Animistic tribals and would usually have non aggression pacts with the tribes after they manage to defeat them. The British were the first to have the technology to conquer and administer the tribal hills.
As the colonial government encroached into the hills the question of administering the aggressive tribals became important. One of the ways they achieved this was with the help of Christian missionaries. See the mainstream indian society of the Hindus and Muslims were resilient towards Christian conversion and missionary activities were one of the reasons for the 1857 Rebellion. As a result the British weren't keen on encouraging missionary activities in the plains. There were convent institutions of course but conversion wasn't that encouraged. In the tribal areas it was different however. The tribals were tired of the constant conflicts they were having with one another and many of those areas had dangerous traditions like Head Hunting. Christian missionaries brought an end to that and convent schools provided education to the tribals. The only way to achieve education in these areas was via convent institutions and a lot of tribals were sending their kids to these schools in hopes of a better life. In these institutions the tribals were influenced by the missionary ideas and were quick to adopt Christianity.
Also many of the missionaries were willing to endanger their lives by going into tribal areas, where stuff like headhunting was prominent, to convert the people there. The fact that these people willingly endangered their lives to provide education and give a better life to the tribals made a significant mark in their attitude towards Christianity.
In the later part of the colonial period when Indian nationalism reached its peak, the tribals also felt the pressure to form their own identity. Regions like the Naga hills literally had no common identity. There are like 30 different tribes all with their own subdivisions and neither of them had much in common with one another. They were only called Naga by their neighbouring agricultural cultures. The only common identity these people had was Christianity. Something similar could be said about Zo tribes like the Mizos. Christianity was hence was very essential in the formation of a common identity for those people.
Thus all these factors together explain the popularity of Christianity among the tribals of northeastern India.
Goa a hundred years ago was majority Christian, ranging roughly 80%. A combination of emigration (which is the source of the large Goa diaspora more numerous than Goans in Goa) and internal migration to Goa led to the current makeup. The invasion/liberation also contributed a lot with Christians often leaving more in proportion afterwards (although they were already leaving in droves during the Portuguese colonial period) with their easier opportunities for obtaining citizenship from Portugal or some other western country.
Its because of Portuguese citizenship laws, all those who were born in Goa during the Portuguese rule and upto 3 generations of descendants qualify for Portuguese citizenship so most of them left India and moved to the EU.
Fun fact: The former prime minister of Portugal Antonio Costa is of Goan descent.
For Macau residents it was similar, but perhaps not as straightforward. I believe (not sure, but I think I remember it so) one of your parents had to have been born in Macau, not just your mother coming on a birthing tourism trip.
> Goa a hundred years ago was majority Christian, ranging roughly 80%.
It was never that high, after Goa Inquisition it was mostly around 60%. It could have been 80% but Catholics also killed non-Catholic Christians during Goa Inquisition.
The regions in the northeast region are inhabited by Sino-Tibetan tribal peoples who practiced a variety of animist and shamanistic faiths and weren’t converted to any of the major religions. Missionaries spread Christianity to the area and were convincing enough to convert a large amount of the population, including some related groups in neighboring Myanmar. For many people it’s become part of their people’s cultural and ethnic identity which has further led to more conversions and the cementing of the faith.
In regards to your missionary question, it’s can be multifaceted since after all the vast majority of many major faiths converted to faith that wasn’t originally present amongst their people. A big part of it is that the beliefs are more convincing or more appealing. From one story that I’ve heard is that people liked that the Christian God wasn’t greedy and gave blessings for free without costly sacrifices. It’s also important to remember that syncretism is a thing and many of the Christians in these regions might also still hold some beliefs and do some practices from their old faith simultaneously.
Thanks for taking the time and effort to write back.
I appreciate some of your insights as they clarify things but some other ones are not as convincing, though still worth being aware of as people's impressions.
>I mean: OK, missionaries come. Why do you abandon your old traditions for the sake of someone who came from far away?
In many cases they used many ruthless methods & tactics to do it for example in Mizoram after there was a brutal famine then a lot of the missionaries came
There's also a lot of census rigging in those regions Tfr stats & population growth don't match in many districts
In 2001 census the state of nagaland was overcounted so much that the state government rejected the state & in 2011 census it became the only state to actually lose people
Lots of churches bribe census officials to increase their population so they can get benefits from the governments for the population
In many cases there have been movements to stop the missionaries as well
Interesting, all regions seem to be leaning heavily towards one religion except the eaternmost one which seems very balanced. Is there a reason it's different from the others?
AP is extremely mountainous and inhabited primarily by Sino-Tibetan tribal groups, if it weren't for Christian missionaries it would've been majority Donyi-Polo today. Also internal migration has resulted in Hindus from the plains moving into the state.
Btw this is probably based on outdated data from 2011 census. We havent had another census because the state has been delaying the census. Most people speculate its so that the ruling party could maximise ita gain wrt delimitation
Official reason is that it happened because of the pandemic. Also we will have a delimitation of seats in our parliament in 2026, so the government will conduct both of them simultaneously.
Its not common in India. Barely 1% of the population distinctly identifies as irreligious, and even the non-practicing people still identify with their parents' religion/religion at birth.
With some such heavily Christian areas, was there any talk of giving them their own country like with the Muslims?
Or are these areas sparsly populated? Or did they became heavily Christian after independence?
>was there any talk of giving them their own country like with the Muslims?
Yes but on ethnic lines, not religious - which would've resulted in multiple small countries. NE India was marred with insurgency until the early 2000s but now things are pretty chill.
> Or are these areas sparsly populated? Or did they became heavily Christian after independence?
Other than Assam most of the NE is mountainous and not as heavily populated as the rest of India. British and American missionaries did their thing and turned them Christian.
Not true Most Assamese descended from Tibeto-burman amd Tai groups that switched to Indo-aryan languages (why I am getting down voted I am literally Assamese and from Ahom ethnic group)
Ik but many pepole ignorantly think that Assamese is a ethnicity which is very wrong it is a Nationality not a Ethnicity that's why Ahoms And Koch aswell as Kalita and Bamuns are considered Assamese but they orginate from different places
> With some such heavily Christian areas, was there any talk of giving them their own country like with the Muslims?
Christians already got their own country, its Pakistan. Most Christians supported/voted for Pakistan but didn't leave.
Protestant missionaries do teach you how to read and write so you can read the Bible. In Europe Protestant areas became fully literate long before the Catholic/Orthodox ones.
in europe nobody takes protestantsor orthodox ssriously as they are heretics and untouchables. good luck to them trying to find a job among the civilised.
>On 20 June 1947, the Bengal Legislative Assembly met to decide the future of the Bengal Province, as between being a United Bengal within India or Pakistan or divided into East Bengal and West Bengal as the home lands for the Bengali Muslims and the Bengali Hindus respectively. At the preliminary joint session, the assembly decided by 126-90 that if it remained united it should join the new Constituent Assembly of Pakistan. Later, a separate meeting of legislators from West Bengal decided by 58-21 that the province should be partitioned and that West Bengal should join the existing Constituent Assembly of India. In another separate meeting of legislators from East Bengal, it was decided by 106-35 that the province should not be partitioned and by 107-34 that East Bengal should join Pakistan in the event of Partition.
>On 6 July 1947, the Sylhet referendum decided to sever Sylhet from Assam and merge it into East Bengal.
Many Muslims in the then East Bengal were sympathetic towards the idea of an Islamic nation.
Actually there's a fun story behind that
It was a close race depending
Pakistani ships were heading to lakshadweep to get it & upon hearing this our deputy prime minister asked some people he believed that could beat them & in the end when the Pakistani shop reached it found an Indian flag so it went back
https://youtu.be/q9DdxBH4wG8?si=uwgyLZts_EmPCzLc
When I see that Islam is spreading in most countries, I feel happy about this beautiful and peaceful religion that has been distorted by the Western media. Praise be to God.
Contrary to popular belief, India was established as a **secular** republic, it was Pakistan that was created on the basis of religion, something the world hadn't seen before.
Created on basis of religion but still intended to be a secular republic practically identical in function to India with religious rights for all, it was created because there was a fear that the muslims would be opressed or marginalized by the other natively indian religions (which formed the overwhelming majority within the subcontinent and still do) were the British Raj to become a single country.
> Created on basis of religion but still intended to be a secular republic practically identical in function to India with religious rights for all
Maybe, but then Zia Ul Haq happened.
Small critique. I think it would have been better if you made the size of the pie charts corresponding to the number of inhabitants.
lol yeah like those election result maps
Depends, some of them would be nearly invisible and some massive. It would depend on the classification used.
I wonder what it looked like before the partition
Probably not that different Most Indian Muslims overall stayed in India. East Punjab and Jammu went from being like 30-40% Muslim to almost 0-1%, Delhi/West UP/West Bengal probably had huge declines as well, I think the 1941 census said Delhi was like 1/3 Muslim now its only like 10% If I had to guess, maybe only like 15-20% max of Pakistanis (both Urdu-speaking Muhajirs + East Punjabi Muslims) can trace their origin to the Indian side, but that community is quite powerful and influential in Pakistan today despite the small population. A lot of the educated/elite Muslims of North India went to Pakistan
The UP part is definitely true. Massive Muslim parts of india like Aligarh, Khurja, Bulendshahr, Delhi, Fatehpur, and Agra lost tons of Muslims. I mean the Pakistan movement came from AMU. Half my family from Khurja ended up leaving for Islamabad, we ended up staying.
Was your family already pretty educated/well off when they lived in India? I’m Indian Muslim and some people from my dads side (grandparents siblings/cousins) went to Karachi during the partition, his side of the family was “ancestrally” wealthier/educated than my moms side where almost everyone stayed in India
Yeah we all had plenty of mango farms and pre independence the patriarch of the family was a British appointed deputy. If you've heard of the story of Sir Syed saving British civilians our patriarch was the deputy that assisted him. We were gifted a ton of land and money by the British. Land we still own today.
More Muslims, probably. And less Sikh and Hindu. Both of these due to the violent expulsions from both sides of the border not happening yet. Perhaps more tribal religions and less Christianity in the Northeast. Also less Buddhists due to the lack of Dalit Buddhism.
> less Buddhists due to the lack of Dalit Buddhism Dalit Buddhism isn't a thing in the north and the northeast, it has always maintained a strong presence in those areas.
I know, that it is mostly Tibetan Buddhism in Ladakh and Sikkim and Arunachal Pradesh but Dalit Buddhists wouldn't be there before partition right?
No. Dalit Buddhism started after Dr Ambedkar converted to Buddhism along with 500,000 of his followers in 1956, almost a decade after partition. It didn't exist during the partition.
No,Dalit Buddhism started after partition.Most Buddhists of North and North-East India are either Tibetan Buddhists,Newar Buddhists or Theravada Buddhists.
How did the northeastern half become and stay so Christian? I obviously know how Christianity was introduced, but I expected it still to be more in the minority.
They are mostly tribal regions and you know missionaries and their love for tribes.
It started when the British introduced it, and then as time went on, missionaries of all kinds, but especially Indian ones preached in that region a lot, expanding the Christian population in the Seven Sisters and Sikkim a lot.
Tribes with nature religions are easier to convert than Hindus.
Mother Theresa
Mostly Protestants up there, Catholicism is mostly the southwest.
There are a lot of Catholics too. If my knowledge is correct. In Meghalaya, Catholics and Protestants (mainly Baptists and Presbyterians) are the main sects and all 3 of them occupy 1/3rd. In Arunachal too Catholics are comparatively the largest sect among the Christians. While Catholics though small have a good presence in Manipur and Nagaland too. So in 2 of the states there is kind of a Catholic plurality among the Christians. Again Im not sure of this info. I remember reading this somewhere
Having a hard time seeing splits, but looks like it's biggest Christian faith indeed in Arunachal, though I'm not sure how it ranks as a whole. Meghalaya it seems more or less 1/3
Massive conversions by Christian missionaries & in many cases the central government didn't do anything to stop them & even helped them indirectly by banning some others There's also a lot of census rigging in those regions Tfr stats & population growth don't match in many districts In 2001 census the state of nagaland was overcounted so much that the state government rejected the state & in 2011 census it became the only state to actually lose people Lots of churches bribe census officials to increase their population so they can get benefits from the governments for the population
Crazy how eastern India doesn’t seem to have any consistency
Tribal population go brrrr
It's actually Northeastern India. I know Eastern India is more appropriate but almost everywhere it is called Northeastern India. Instead the term Eastern India is reserved for the Eastern part of mainland India which ironically is West of the Northeastern states.
Nice map
Remarkable how Muslims are spread out
Well, the parts that were mostly Muslim became Pakistan...
yeah every medium or major city in India has an area "where a lot of the local Muslims live" And then sometimes within those Muslim areas, it will be split into an area where the lower-class Muslims live, where the middle-class Muslims live, where the upper-middle class Muslims live etc
Well the mughal empire spread Islam to the subcontinent so it makes sense that the whole of India has a Muslim presence. I think it's alot more interesting that Christianity has taken a hold of the eastern portions of the nation. Does anyone know why that happened?
Mughals didn't spread Islam to India. Earliest evidence of Islam in India was from Arab traders in Kerala in the early 7th-8th century as well as Rashidun invasions in Sindh/western Gujarat. The oldest mosque in India was built around 629CE in Kerala. Even before the Mughals, the spread of islam (through both conquests and trade) pre-dates Mughals for about 500-1000 years. To put it into context, Portuguese arrival and rule in India happened earlier than the start of Mughal rule. By the time the first Mughal emperor Babur established the empire, Spain already controlled Mexico and the Carribbean. As for Christianity in the Northeast, British and other christian missionaries spread that. The NE regions is mainly tribal and significantly different from the rest of India (and less populated too) so it was easier to convert.
There is a difference between the origin of something and then the mass spread of something. Islam did first came to Kerala through Arab travellers, but the islamic invaders from the north, Mughals and many muslims rulers were actually responsible for mass conversion to Islam.
That's true, but my point was about the timeline. The islamic invasions and mass conversions were happening for 500 years (almost 900 years if you include the Rashuddin caliphate invasion/raids) prior to the founding of Mughal empire so my point is that it wasn't the mughals who spread islam in India.
>By the time the first Mughal emperor Babur established the empire, Spain already controlled Mexico and the Carribbean. Knew about both of the evens but never thought about both being in the same timeline. What a massive difference in the research and technology.
Yeah I was surprised too. Portugal also colonized and controlled Goa before Babur even came to India. What's surprising is that not only was it in the same timeline, the establishment of Spain rule in the New World and Mughal empire in India was only 5 years apart. (1521 vs 1526), almost the same time as between the start of covid 19 and now.
True about the mughal empire but the conquest of the majority of the subcontinent by a unifying Muslim power greatly helped to spread the religion. Portuguese colonies like goa helped spread catholicism in that area on the western coast of the peninsula but it doesn't really account for the widespread acceptance of Christianity in the far non-coastal east. That's why I think it's interesting
> True about the mughal empire but the conquest of the majority of the subcontinent by a unifying Muslim power greatly helped to spread the religion. Correct to an extent, but didn't some Delhi sultantes like Tughluq and Khilji rule over a large parts of the subcontinent too? They also did it a few hundred years prior to Mughals. As for Northeast, it was because of missionaries + tribals + way lower population than rest of India.
British introduced christianity.
the british didnt introduce christianity. indians had christianity considerably longer than it arrived in england. hell christianity was in india before muhammed receved a vision from god. When the portugese first came into india they expected the whole sub continet to have several large christian tribes.
I was talking about how christianity came to north eastern India.
You should have made that clearer. Your statement was an absolute, and with the way it was written, was a false statement.
I think I was replying to someone asking how come north east India have so many Christians. That's why. But yeah it looks absolute statement.
I understand. Thanks for the clarification either way.
Maybe the portuguese traders?
Church and their love for tribals.
Christianity was in England before the foundation of islam. The Romans introduced it in the 200s.
Christianity was introduced in India in 52AD by Thomas the Apostle, so about 150 years prior to England
It was the Americans who spread Christianity to the Northeast.
American Baptists and Scottish Presbyterians yes. There are a bunch of Catholics in Meghalaya.
In Manipur, the first missionary was a Welshman
i pity these xtian ndians. from all the versions of christiniaty they were brainwashed with the two cults that express mental illness and heathenry in full force
Very high birth rate, with some objective
[удалено]
Didn't the Muslims rule over you for +1000 years?? The subjection for so long made you a bitter loser
I don't know. If I look at non-muslim countries vs muslim ones I don't think I'm the loser hamdulillah
I thought Sikkim was plurality Buddhist.
It was before the massive migration of Nepalis in the last century.
Are there any social tensions between the 2 groups there?
No, nothing serious. Just some minor news headlines as who is indegenous and who is immigrant.
Actually most of the Nepalis migrated during the Gorkha conquest era as well as during British.
I do find it strange how India hasn’t abolished Puducherry, the Union territory surrounding Gujarat/Maharashtra and Goa. They’re like of an aberration that has existed for half a century that they forgot to get rid of. Also surprised to see Goa remain so Christian, although also had no idea Kerala was so diverse.
I think you are referring to Daman, Diu, Dadra and Nagar Haveli, because Puducherry is on the east coast. And the reason it is a UT is largely political since it joined the union alongside Goa in 61 but when Goa was made a state in 87. When they held the status referendum in 67 it was voted that Goa wouldn't merge with Maharashtra and Daman and Diu would not join Gujarat.
For puducherry(& the union territories near Gujarat/Maharashtra which were part of goa then) had a referendum if they should merge with the other states or not & it was rejected The 2 union territories near Gujarat & Maharashtra were merged into 1 union territory in 2020 For Puducherry there were some suggestions by politicians in the nearby states & that caused some violence & protests from people in puducherry who didn't want that >Also surprised to see Goa remain so Christian The numbers are declining after colonalism was over the Christians lost a lot of the privileges they had & many started to migrate to Portugal/other western countries
For a long time I thought highest percentage of Christians in India would be in Goa, Malabar and maybe Pondicherry. Then about 5-6 years ago I realised that the eastern regions between Moslem Bangladesh and Buddhist Burma and close to also non-Christian Laos and China have the highest proportion of Christians and I still do not understand how come. I mean: OK, missionaries come. Why do you abandon your old traditions for the sake of someone who came from far away?
>I mean: OK, missionaries come. Why do you abandon your old traditions for the sake of someone who came from far away? In Goa and some parts of south India the Portuguese led an inquisition to convert the native Hindus and muslims and people who followed the 'wrong' form of Christianity. In the northeastern part of India, Christianity Has a very unique history among the tribes. Christianity was first introduced by Scottish and American missionaries who set up educational institutions in tribal areas. As the Colonial government encroached further into tribal areas, the tribes came into frequent contact with the agricultural civilisation of the plains which were either Hindu or partly Hinduised. The tribes had contact with the plains in pre colonial times too but that interaction was limited to raiding and trade. The State polities of the plains neither had the need nor the technology to encroach and conquer the dense forested hills inhabited by the Animistic tribals and would usually have non aggression pacts with the tribes after they manage to defeat them. The British were the first to have the technology to conquer and administer the tribal hills. As the colonial government encroached into the hills the question of administering the aggressive tribals became important. One of the ways they achieved this was with the help of Christian missionaries. See the mainstream indian society of the Hindus and Muslims were resilient towards Christian conversion and missionary activities were one of the reasons for the 1857 Rebellion. As a result the British weren't keen on encouraging missionary activities in the plains. There were convent institutions of course but conversion wasn't that encouraged. In the tribal areas it was different however. The tribals were tired of the constant conflicts they were having with one another and many of those areas had dangerous traditions like Head Hunting. Christian missionaries brought an end to that and convent schools provided education to the tribals. The only way to achieve education in these areas was via convent institutions and a lot of tribals were sending their kids to these schools in hopes of a better life. In these institutions the tribals were influenced by the missionary ideas and were quick to adopt Christianity. Also many of the missionaries were willing to endanger their lives by going into tribal areas, where stuff like headhunting was prominent, to convert the people there. The fact that these people willingly endangered their lives to provide education and give a better life to the tribals made a significant mark in their attitude towards Christianity. In the later part of the colonial period when Indian nationalism reached its peak, the tribals also felt the pressure to form their own identity. Regions like the Naga hills literally had no common identity. There are like 30 different tribes all with their own subdivisions and neither of them had much in common with one another. They were only called Naga by their neighbouring agricultural cultures. The only common identity these people had was Christianity. Something similar could be said about Zo tribes like the Mizos. Christianity was hence was very essential in the formation of a common identity for those people. Thus all these factors together explain the popularity of Christianity among the tribals of northeastern India.
Thank you. Very informative and well presented. TIL. Appreciated.
Wonderful explanation very informative
Goa a hundred years ago was majority Christian, ranging roughly 80%. A combination of emigration (which is the source of the large Goa diaspora more numerous than Goans in Goa) and internal migration to Goa led to the current makeup. The invasion/liberation also contributed a lot with Christians often leaving more in proportion afterwards (although they were already leaving in droves during the Portuguese colonial period) with their easier opportunities for obtaining citizenship from Portugal or some other western country.
I see. Was not aware of the huge Goan diaspora and just checked and it seems to match what you said. Thanks for the hint.
Its because of Portuguese citizenship laws, all those who were born in Goa during the Portuguese rule and upto 3 generations of descendants qualify for Portuguese citizenship so most of them left India and moved to the EU. Fun fact: The former prime minister of Portugal Antonio Costa is of Goan descent.
For Macau residents it was similar, but perhaps not as straightforward. I believe (not sure, but I think I remember it so) one of your parents had to have been born in Macau, not just your mother coming on a birthing tourism trip.
> Goa a hundred years ago was majority Christian, ranging roughly 80%. It was never that high, after Goa Inquisition it was mostly around 60%. It could have been 80% but Catholics also killed non-Catholic Christians during Goa Inquisition.
Because they were more convincing than the old traditions.
The regions in the northeast region are inhabited by Sino-Tibetan tribal peoples who practiced a variety of animist and shamanistic faiths and weren’t converted to any of the major religions. Missionaries spread Christianity to the area and were convincing enough to convert a large amount of the population, including some related groups in neighboring Myanmar. For many people it’s become part of their people’s cultural and ethnic identity which has further led to more conversions and the cementing of the faith. In regards to your missionary question, it’s can be multifaceted since after all the vast majority of many major faiths converted to faith that wasn’t originally present amongst their people. A big part of it is that the beliefs are more convincing or more appealing. From one story that I’ve heard is that people liked that the Christian God wasn’t greedy and gave blessings for free without costly sacrifices. It’s also important to remember that syncretism is a thing and many of the Christians in these regions might also still hold some beliefs and do some practices from their old faith simultaneously.
Thanks for taking the time and effort to write back. I appreciate some of your insights as they clarify things but some other ones are not as convincing, though still worth being aware of as people's impressions.
>I mean: OK, missionaries come. Why do you abandon your old traditions for the sake of someone who came from far away? In many cases they used many ruthless methods & tactics to do it for example in Mizoram after there was a brutal famine then a lot of the missionaries came There's also a lot of census rigging in those regions Tfr stats & population growth don't match in many districts In 2001 census the state of nagaland was overcounted so much that the state government rejected the state & in 2011 census it became the only state to actually lose people Lots of churches bribe census officials to increase their population so they can get benefits from the governments for the population In many cases there have been movements to stop the missionaries as well
Oh! Sad.
It looks like India got black hair lol
Interesting, all regions seem to be leaning heavily towards one religion except the eaternmost one which seems very balanced. Is there a reason it's different from the others?
AP is extremely mountainous and inhabited primarily by Sino-Tibetan tribal groups, if it weren't for Christian missionaries it would've been majority Donyi-Polo today. Also internal migration has resulted in Hindus from the plains moving into the state.
shit stats representation : \
Btw this is probably based on outdated data from 2011 census. We havent had another census because the state has been delaying the census. Most people speculate its so that the ruling party could maximise ita gain wrt delimitation
>Btw this is probably based on outdated data from 2011 census Well yes, it says so on the image, in the location a source is normally placed
Why gov is delaying census?
Official reason is that it happened because of the pandemic. Also we will have a delimitation of seats in our parliament in 2026, so the government will conduct both of them simultaneously.
I- is that Elvis doing a kick or throwing something with his left hand?
Now overlay literacy rate and education
Where are the atheist?
Less than 0.5%
India is a very religious country.
scrolling quickly past the thumbnail i thought this was a map of orange production
Too much green infection
too much orange
Not if you're a woman
why doesn't this map include irreligiosity
Because they make up a quarter of a percent in India, it wouldn’t be worth it
Its not common in India. Barely 1% of the population distinctly identifies as irreligious, and even the non-practicing people still identify with their parents' religion/religion at birth.
Unofficially 3% of India is Atheist but the census is really bad at capturing it. Atheist appears only as quarter of percent in the census.
With some such heavily Christian areas, was there any talk of giving them their own country like with the Muslims? Or are these areas sparsly populated? Or did they became heavily Christian after independence?
>was there any talk of giving them their own country like with the Muslims? Yes but on ethnic lines, not religious - which would've resulted in multiple small countries. NE India was marred with insurgency until the early 2000s but now things are pretty chill.
> Or are these areas sparsly populated? Or did they became heavily Christian after independence? Other than Assam most of the NE is mountainous and not as heavily populated as the rest of India. British and American missionaries did their thing and turned them Christian.
And the Assamese are mostly Indo-Aryan speaking Hindus lol
Not true Most Assamese descended from Tibeto-burman amd Tai groups that switched to Indo-aryan languages (why I am getting down voted I am literally Assamese and from Ahom ethnic group)
Cool info but doesn't contradict what I've said
Ik but many pepole ignorantly think that Assamese is a ethnicity which is very wrong it is a Nationality not a Ethnicity that's why Ahoms And Koch aswell as Kalita and Bamuns are considered Assamese but they orginate from different places
> With some such heavily Christian areas, was there any talk of giving them their own country like with the Muslims? Christians already got their own country, its Pakistan. Most Christians supported/voted for Pakistan but didn't leave.
Surprisingly there's a correlation with the presence of Christianity and a higher level of literacy rate!
Protestant missionaries do teach you how to read and write so you can read the Bible. In Europe Protestant areas became fully literate long before the Catholic/Orthodox ones.
in europe nobody takes protestantsor orthodox ssriously as they are heretics and untouchables. good luck to them trying to find a job among the civilised.
🤡
How did mascara score
Why weren't the Lakshadweeps given to Pakistan? 🤔
Why would it? It's nowhere near them and the people there didn't want to join Pakistan either, they are culturally similar to Keralites.
>It's nowhere near them East Pakistan?
> and the people there didn't want to join Pakistan either
So didn't Bangladesh.
>On 20 June 1947, the Bengal Legislative Assembly met to decide the future of the Bengal Province, as between being a United Bengal within India or Pakistan or divided into East Bengal and West Bengal as the home lands for the Bengali Muslims and the Bengali Hindus respectively. At the preliminary joint session, the assembly decided by 126-90 that if it remained united it should join the new Constituent Assembly of Pakistan. Later, a separate meeting of legislators from West Bengal decided by 58-21 that the province should be partitioned and that West Bengal should join the existing Constituent Assembly of India. In another separate meeting of legislators from East Bengal, it was decided by 106-35 that the province should not be partitioned and by 107-34 that East Bengal should join Pakistan in the event of Partition. >On 6 July 1947, the Sylhet referendum decided to sever Sylhet from Assam and merge it into East Bengal. Many Muslims in the then East Bengal were sympathetic towards the idea of an Islamic nation.
[удалено]
Yes, you too. East Pakistan (now Bangladesh) was nowhere near Pakistan.
Actually there's a fun story behind that It was a close race depending Pakistani ships were heading to lakshadweep to get it & upon hearing this our deputy prime minister asked some people he believed that could beat them & in the end when the Pakistani shop reached it found an Indian flag so it went back https://youtu.be/q9DdxBH4wG8?si=uwgyLZts_EmPCzLc
hahahahaa great one
When I see that Islam is spreading in most countries, I feel happy about this beautiful and peaceful religion that has been distorted by the Western media. Praise be to God.
Another one?
What is the (mostly Christian) add-on in the North East actually? And why is it part of the country as opposed to on its own?
Contrary to popular belief, India was established as a **secular** republic, it was Pakistan that was created on the basis of religion, something the world hadn't seen before.
Created on basis of religion but still intended to be a secular republic practically identical in function to India with religious rights for all, it was created because there was a fear that the muslims would be opressed or marginalized by the other natively indian religions (which formed the overwhelming majority within the subcontinent and still do) were the British Raj to become a single country.
> Created on basis of religion but still intended to be a secular republic practically identical in function to India with religious rights for all Maybe, but then Zia Ul Haq happened.
Yes, India and Pakistan are like observing divergent evolution. Same starting point, different circumstances, different results.